POLITENESS STRATEGIES IN GORONTALO SPOUSAL COMMUNICATION: A PRAGMATIC ANALYSIS
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.15575/call.v8i2.57355Keywords:
politeness strategies, marital communication, pragmatics, Gorontalo spousesAbstract
In Indonesia, marital instability is often linked to persistent disputes and communication breakdowns, yet the role of spouses’ everyday language in managing or escalating conflict remains underexplored. This study aims to examine how Gorontalo spouses employ Brown and Levinson’s politeness strategies in marital communication, focusing on the identification of strategy choices, their pragmatic realization, and the contextual and relational factors influencing these choices. This study adopts a qualitative descriptive design within a pragmatic framework, with data collected from April to May 2026 through in-depth interviews with 4 married individuals. Data were analysed using the interactive model of Miles et al. (2014), supported by Brown and Levinson’s (1987) politeness theory. The findings reveal that all four politeness strategies are used in spousal interaction, with positive politeness being the most dominant, particularly in cooperative contexts such as parenting and problem-solving, indicating a strong orientation toward solidarity and shared responsibility. Negative politeness appears in situations involving requests or emotional sensitivity, reflecting awareness of autonomy and interpersonal boundaries. Off-record strategies are used in delicate contexts such as criticism or reminders to avoid confrontation and maintain emotional stability, while bald-on-record strategies are applied in urgent situations requiring clarity and immediacy. In conclusion, Gorontalo spouses strategically adjust their politeness choices to the purpose and sensitivity of an interaction, suggesting that effective use of politeness helps sustain mutual respect, reduce potential conflict, and support harmony in marital communication.
References
Afful, P. K. (2017). Politic impoliteness: The use of bald on-record politeness strategy by hosts of adversarial discussions on radio. International Journal of English Language and Linguistics Research, 5(3), 28–38. https://eajournals.org/ijellr/wp-content/uploads/Politic-Impoliteness-The-Use-of-Bald-On-Record-Politeness-Strategy-by-Hosts-of-Adversarial-Discussions-on-Radio.pdf
Astuti, R. B. (2021). Negative politeness strategies in Collen McGuire’s utterances in the novel Savage Land. LADU: Journal of Languages and Education, 1(3), 97–105. https://doi.org/10.56724/ladu.v1i3.52
Borris, D., & Zecho, C. (2018). The linguistic politeness having seen on the current study issue. Linguistics and Culture Review, 2(1), 32–44. https://doi.org/10.21744/10.21744/lingcure.v2n1.10
Brown, P., & Levinson, S. C. (1987). Politeness: Some universals in language usage. Cambridge University Press.
Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2018). Research design (5th ed.). SAGE Publications.
DeJonckheere, M., & Vaughn, L. M. (2019). Semistructured interviewing in primary care research: A balance of relationship and rigour. Family Medicine and Community Health, 7(2), e000057. https://doi.org/10.1136/fmch-2018-000057
Dwijayanti, D., Nababan, M. R., & Wiratno, T. (2021). Translation techniques and bald-on-record politeness strategy. International Journal of Linguistics, Literature and Translation, 4(5), 154–161. https://doi.org/10.32996/ijllt.2021.4.5.15
Goffman, E. (1967). Interaction ritual: Essays in face-to-face behaviour. Anchor Books.
Ismath, N. H. M., Mokhtar, N. Z., Johari, A., & Abd Aziz, A. H. A. (2023). Politeness in marital relationship depicted from Holy Qur’an: Pragmatic study and cultural intelligence perspective. QURANICA: International Journal of Quranic Research, 15(2), 58–77. https://doi.org/10.22452/quranica.vol15no2.3
Karmila, N. S. C., Achdiani, Y., & Fatimah, S. N. (2025). Urgensi komunikasi efektif sebagai pondasi keharmonisan rumah tangga. Triwikrama: Jurnal Ilmu Sosial, 11(9), 1821–1830. https://cibinstitute.id/index.php/triwikrama/article/view/4028
Levinson, S. C. (1983). Pragmatics. Cambridge University Press.
Miles, M. B., Huberman, M. A., & Saldaña, J. (2014). Qualitative data analysis: A methods sourcebook (3rd ed.). SAGE Publications.
Nweke L.C. (2024) A Systemic Functional Linguistic Analysis of Spousal Conflictual Language in a Nigerian Play, European Journal of English Language and Literature Studies, Vol.12, No.2, pp.27-38
Nurul, L. (2025). Negotiating honor through indirectness: Off-record politeness strategies in Sasak elopement rites. Jurnal Arbitrer, 12(1), 45–58. https://doi.org/10.25077/ar.12.1.45-58.2025
Palinkas, L. A., Horwitz, S. M., Green, C. A., Wisdom, J. P., Duan, N., & Hoagwood, K. (2015). Purposeful sampling for qualitative data collection and analysis in mixed-method implementation research. Administration and Policy in Mental Health and Mental Health Services Research, 42(5), 533–544. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10488-013-0528-y
Patton, M. Q. (2015). Qualitative research & evaluation methods: Integrating theory and practice (4th ed.). SAGE Publications
Purnamasari, A., Juniarly, A., & Paradita, L. (2021). Komunikasi interpersonal dan kepuasan pernikahan pada partner phubbing. Jurnal Psikogenesis, 8(2), 153–163. https://doi.org/10.24854/jps.v8i2.1488
Taufani, (2024). 5 penyebab perceraian paling banyak di RI, ternyata bukan selingkuh. CNBC Indonesia. https://www.cnbcindonesia.com/research/20240615093818-128-546846/5-penyebab-perceraian-paling-banyak-di-ri-ternyata-bukan-selingkuh
Todd (2025). Why couples fight: Root causes and solutions. Mastering Conflict. https://masteringconflict.com/blog/why-couples-fight-root-causes-and-solutions-2025/
Worley, T. R., & Samp, J. A. (2018). Dyadic power, marital status, face concerns, and politeness in the context of relational complaining. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 36(4), 1237–1256. https://doi.org/10.1177/0265407518765988
Yergazy, N., & Denisenko, A. V. (2024). Implementation of positive and negative politeness strategies in Kazakh and Russian family discourse talk show. RUDN Journal of Language Studies, Semiotics and Semantics, 15(4), 1232–1244.
Yonatan, A. Z. (2026). Perselisihan menjadi penyebab utama perceraian di Indonesia pada 2025. GoodStats Data. https://data.goodstats.id/statistic/perselisihan-jadi-penyebab-utama-perceraian-indonesia-2025-y8Tgn
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
Citation Check
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Triza Hamani, Muziatun Mukadji, Hasanuddin, Rahman Taufiqrianto Dako, Usman Pakaya, Abdulqayyum Shaikh
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Authors who publish in CALL agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International (CC BY-SA 4.0) License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgment of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgment of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).
