Name : Meita Nurdini Lestari

Class : III-D (2109170098)

Analysis Data Qualitative (Dialogue)

1. Gilbertson : hi, hello. I am Mr. Gilbertson.

2. Margaret    : Ah!
3. Gilbertson : =you must be Andrew and you must be Margaret. Sorry about the late.
It’s a crazy day today.=
4. Margaret    : oh, of course, of course. We understand. And I can’t tell you how much
we appreciate you seeing us on such short notice.
5. Gilbertson : buh, buh, buh, buh, buh, buh, buh, buh. (singing while reading the
files)  So, I have one question for you. Are you both committing fraud to avoid her
deportation so she can keep her position as editor in chief at Golden Books?
6. Margaret    : that’s…that’s ridiculous, where did you hear that?
7. Gilbertson : we had a phone tip this afternoon from a man named …
8. Margaret    : would it be Bob Spolding?
9. Gilbertson : Bob Spolding.
10. Margaret    : poor Bob. I am sorry. Bob is nothing but a disgruntled former employee
and I apologize. But we know that you are incredibly busy with a room full of gardeners
and delivery boys to tend to. If you just give us our next step, we will out of your hair and
on our way.
11. Gilbertson : Miss Tate, please. = Let me explain to you the process that’s about to
unfold. Step one will be a scheduled interview. I’ll put you each in a room, and I’ll ask
you every little question that a real couple would know about each other. Step two, I did
deeper. I talk to your neighbors, I interview your coworkers. If your answers don’t match
up at every point, you will be deported indefinitely. And you, young man, will have
committed a felony … punishable by a fine of 250.000 dollars and a stay of five years in
federal prison. = So, Andrew. You wanna… you want to talk to me?
12. Andrew     : (move the head side to side)
13. Gilbertson : = No? =
14. Andrew     : (Nodding the head)
15. Gilbertson : = Yes? =
16. Andrew     : the truth is … (Andrew clear his throats) Mr. Gilbertson, the truth is …
Margaret and I … are just two people … who weren’t supposed to fall in love each other
… but did. We couldn’t tell anyone we work with because of my big promotion that I had
coming up.
17. Gilbertson : promotion?
18. Margaret    : your…?
19. Andrew     : we… we both felt… that it would be deeply inappropriate if I were to be
promoted to editor.
20. Margaret    : editor…?
21. Andrew     : while we were… uh, have relationship.
22. Gilbertson := Ok. Fine, I see how this is gonna go. I will see you both at 11:00 on
Monday morning for your scheduled interview, and your answer better match up on every
account.=
23. Andrew     : thank you.
24. Gilbertson : it’d be fun. I am gonna catch up on you!
25. Andrew     : you got it.

In analyzing the conversation above, it can be seen from several aspects:

1. System update
There are 2 systems discussed (verbal interaction) namely score notation and dramaturgic
notation. The score notation is the acquisition of a preferred conversation tone in the music
script that allows agreement of overlapping time and situations when the conversation takes
place. Medium dramaturgic notation is a conversation system based on the level of
conversation. Sentences are arranged in order / change of speech. Therefore, the writing of
the conversation is a dramaturgical notation which is a system that uses the common and
often used. Thus, the intonation and suitability of the conversation above can be seen even
though the video recording is also very important in processing a conversation. Because the
writing system does not show the speaker's expression and posture in the conversation.
2. Pragmatics
There are several sentences that indicate pragmatic use;
1. we will out of your hair and on our way = words in italics contain meaning meaning the
prnutur will leave or not interfere with the opponent's speech.
2. we appreciate you seeing us on such short notice. = The words above mean that they did
not make an appointment beforehand or in a sudden situation.
In the conversation above there are several types of illocution described by Searle. First, no
expressive illocution in sentence (4) maragaret implicitly thanks Mr. Gilbertson for making
time to meet. Acknowledgments are also literally mentioned in sentence (23). Second,
sentence (10) contains expressive illocution; apologize, which is then followed by assertive
illocution in the form of a proposal for their affairs to be processed immediately. In sentence
(6) Maragret does not choose to give a yes or no answer, but rather expresses his opinion that
the question does not make sense. Sentences (16) and (19) are statements stating Andrew's
personal opinion about his relationship with Margaret and the reasons why they did not
publicize their relationship. Sentences (6), (9), (19) are examples of assertive illocutionary
acts. Third is the declarative illocution in sentence (11) which states that Andrew will be
punished if he lies. In addition, directive illocutionary acts are also seen in sentence (22),
namely at the point that Mr. gilbertson implicitly gave orders to date on their interview
schedule. Then, in Kaliamat (24) there is a commissive illocution namely Mr. Gilbertson
promised to check their relationship.
If ... then is identified as a promising condition, which is stated when someone will get or
want an advantage over the other person. An example of the conversation above is: if you just
give us our next step, we will out of your hair and on our way. The statement states that if the
next step is given, then they don't bother anymore. In this case, both parties equally want
profit, the speaker will be able to settle his affairs quickly and the speaker does not need to
bother and spend a lot of time. Another example is in the sentence stated by Andrew, namely:
We ... we both felt ... that it would be deeply inappropriate if I were to be promoted to the
editor. In that sentence, it is clear that Andrew wants the benefit of being an editor.
Conclusion
             There are many aspects that can be used in analyzing a conversation related to the
meaning of language including: First, convert the form of the conversation in a good writing
system, complete with symbols that can reflect the intonation and purpose of the
conversation. In this case two ways are recommended, namely Score notation and
Dramaturgical notation. Second, the meaning of pragmatics is also very helpful in
understanding an implicit condition, in this report, more emphasis on the meaning of
illocution. For example, in the conversation above, there were indications of lies by Maragret
and Andrew during the visa extension process at the Immigration Office. Starting from the
statement from Bob Spolding and followed by a few sentences and the illocution explained
above, it can indeed be detected by the existence of ignorance, ranging from doubts when
Andrew was asked to speak honestly to an implicit agreement between Andrew and Margaret
to promote Andrew's position as an editor. But because this conversation has not yet been
completed, then the indications of a lie are in the form of allegations because there is not yet
complete evidence and literal recognition from Margaret or Andrew.