Speech Function and Presupposition in Indonesia Courtroom Discourse

Abstract

This research aims at describing the speech functions used by the judge to the defendants and witness in the process of trials at courtroom and the realization of presupposition in the trials to get the functions of presuppositions. In particular, the research aim at What are types of of speech function and presupposition are used by judges in the courtroom investigation? There are some theoretical framework used by the reseacher such as Jan Svartick (1968), Zhang (2015), Fairlough (2004) This research is a descriptive qualitative research that describes the types of presupposition at the courtroom investigation. The data is the transcription of the investigation between the judge and defendant, witness and lawyer with various case of trial process at the courtroom. The case was taken from Kantor pengadilan Negeri Medan (Pengadilan Tinggi Medan) Kelas I A which is located on Jln Pengadilan no 10 Medan (Sumatera Utara). The subject of this research is the judges who will be involved at investigating the defendants’ case in the proceeding courtroom in Pengadilan negeri Medan. The object of the research is the utterances of the judge while in the process of the trial at the courtroom. In this research, the data is acquired by doing an observation, recording and interview. The data is recorded by using video mobile phone type OPPO F9. The technique of data collection here is referrred with Miles, Huberman and Saldana (2014) whose mention that data collection is obtained through the process of criminal case recording at courtroom. The result of the research are described as follows: (1) There are 9 types of speech function used by the judge in the courtroom investigation (2) There are 6 types of presupposition used by the judge in the courtroom investigation. (3) There are 3 functions of the speech function used by the judge in the courtroom investigation (4) There are three result of the function presupposition used by the judge in the courtroom (5). Based on the research findings, the conclusions are drawn as below: (1) Language has a power in the trial of the courtroom investigation because the judge is one person who has a controll to give question among all the participants in the courtroom. investigation, (2) The judge has a strategy to investigate the defendant and witness in the courtroom investigation.