ABSTRAK

Penerapan Systemic Functional Linguistics (SFL) sebenarnya hampir tidak terbatas. Namun, bagi mahasiswa, cakupan penerapan SFL yang luas nampak kabur. Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk menemukan trend analisis mahasiswa yang menggunakan SFL dalam berbagai media. Dengan menggunakan metode kualitatif, penelitian ini difokuskan untuk membandingkan hasil penelitian mahasiswa pada media massa dan media sosial menggunakan pendekatan SFL. Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa mahasiswa yang mengaplikasikan pendekatan SFL pada media sosial memiliki lebih banyak pembahasan dibanding mahasiswa yang mengaplikasikan SFL pada media massa. Beragamnya pembahasan yang ditulis oleh mahasiswa yang menerapkan SFL pada media sosial berbeda dari mahasiswa yang menerapkan SFL pada media massa, terkait dengan beberapa poin: pertama, mahasiswa yang menganalisis media sosial mengeksplorasi lebih banyak fenomena kebahasaan dibandingkan mahasiswa yang menganalisis media massa; dan kedua, mahasiswa yang menganalisis media sosial menggunakan sebagian besar pendekatan SFL dalam mengeksplorasi fenomena kebahasaan yang terdapat pada media sosial, sementara mahasiswa yang menganalisis media massa hanya menggunakan setidaknya dua pendekatan dalam mengeksplorasi fenomena yang terjadi pada media massa.

kata kunci: systemic functional linguistics, media sosial, media masa, penerapan

INTRODUCTION

As a relatively new approach to language study, systemic functional linguistics –or systemic functional grammar– is considered a complete package of approach because systemic functional linguistics can be used to explore diverse language phenomena.

This possibly happens because systemic functional linguistics approach is different from other linguistic, especially traditional and formal grammar. While traditional and formal grammar can only cover formal language phenomena, systemic functional linguistics can do its best to analyze informal language

phenomena. Systemic functional linguistics sees language as the resource of making meaning (Gerot & Wignell, 1995), and therefore, systemic functional linguistics as a grammatical approach works to describe language in actual use and focuses not only on the text, but also on the context. This results in various discussions of language phenomena coming from text-context relations. On the other hand, traditional and formal grammar sees language as a pack of grammatical rules which should be applied properly in order to form a correct arrangement of words (Lock, 2008). Thus the discussions using this approach revolve around standard and non-standard English evaluated from grammatical accuracy.

Halliday, the founder of systemic functional linguistics, (2004) includes context in his approach as he sees language can only run well and have its meaning if it is used within a context. Basically, Halliday's approach looks at the clauses as representing simultaneously three different types of meaning (Deterding & Poedjosoedarmo, 2001). Thus, in his approach, any language phenomena can be observed through his three-differentmodel analysis to attain language's real meaning: transitivity, mood system, and thematic structure. Transitivity works in exploring ideational meaning which deals with the meaning about phenomena and how people represent experience in language (Eggins, 2013). Using this model, you can really understand "what is going on" and "what happens" on the phenomena. Mood system can be used in finding out interpersonal meaning which expresses speakers' or writers' attitudes and judgment. With this model, you can figure out the social relationship between speakers and listeners, or between writers and readers. Meanwhile, thematic structure is employed to explore textual meaning which expresses the relation of language to its environment, such as, verbal, non-verbal, and contextual environment. Using this model, you can

clearly observe the ways of language used in various ways.

Since systemic functional linguistics has a fairly complete model to analyze various language phenomena, the application of systemic functional linguistics is actually almost broader compared to both traditional and formal grammar. You can use it to explore formal and informal language, written and spoken language, and even grammatical and ungrammatical language. However, this broad scope of systemic functional linguistics is considered to be not really special by students who are new to systemic functional linguistics. Most students –especially undergraduate students– employ systemic functional linguistics in the grammatical, formal, and written texts by only applying its principles without having some efforts to include contexts which become the main characteristics of systemic functional linguistics. Thus, other aspects which clearly differentiate systemic functional linguistics and traditional or formal grammar are not explored more. The students may still think that the application of systemic functional linguistics is the same as the application of traditional or formal grammar which analyzes language phenomena based on textual level; and therefore, the informal, ungrammatical, and spoken texts which can only be discussed using systemic functional linguistics seem left uncovered. Moreover, some students may think that systemic functional linguistics can only be applied on the mass media; and therefore, the application of systemic functional linguistics revolves around mass media, grammatical texts, formal texts, and written texts. This situation results in the same tedious discussion of systemic functional linguistics application. It can be clearly seen from several undergraduate studies written in some Indonesian universities; take for an example, some research starting from 2010 to 2014. The first research is written by Putri (2010), a student of Universitas

Andalas, Padang. She conducted a research on systemic functional linguistics regarding metafunctions of texts published on the Jakarta Post. The second research is written by Marhamah (2014), a student of Universitas Negri Yogyakarta. She did a research on Muse's song lyrics in Black Holes and Revelations album using interpersonal meaning. The third research is written by Fikmawati (2012), a student of Universitas Muria Kudus. She conducted a systemic functional linguistics research regarding the speech function on the movie script of Confession of a shopaholic by P.J. Hogan. The same things exactly happen in Universitas Al-Ghifari in which the researcher regularly gives lecture on systemic functional linguistics class. In this university, the researcher found that students' researches are conducted on a relatively same pattern: focusing on formal, grammatical, and written text; majority on the mass media.

Based on the problem above that the students' application of systemic functional linguistics tends to repeat the same monotonous discussion, this study focuses on two research questions: (1) what kinds of language phenomena discussed by students on the mass media and social media? (2) what approaches of systemic functional linguistics are used to discover those language phenomena?

METHOD

This research employed qualitative approach and descriptive method. Qualitative approach was used in this research as this research begins with assumptions and the study of research problems inquiring into the meaning of individuals or group which ascribe to a social or human problem (Creswell, 2007: 37). Meanwhile, descriptive method was used because this research asks questions about the nature, incidence, or distribution of variables and describes the variables without manipulating the variables (Ary, Jacobs, Sorensen, & Walker, 2006: 640). To collect the data, the researcher used purposive sampling with homogenous sampling strategy. Purposive sampling is a technique of selecting persons or sites for study as they can purposefully notify an understanding of the research problem and central phenomenon in the study (Creswell, 2007: 125). This sampling technique can be further specified by some specific sampling strategies. One of them is homogenous sampling strategy. In homogenous sampling strategy, researcher selects participants from a particular subgroup who share some important experience which is relevant to the study. This strategy allows you to conduct an in-depth analysis to identify common patterns in a group with similar characteristics (Dörnyei, 2007: 127).

Research Site and Participants

Using purposive-homogenous sampling, the researcher purposively chose 14 students of English department in Universitas Al-Ghifari, Bandung as the participants. The students chosen were homogenously seventh-semester students who equally had completed systemic functional linguistics course taught by the researcher. The 14 students consisted of seven students completing systemic functional linguistics course on 2016 and seven students completing systemic functional linguistics course on 2017.

Source of Data

Source of Data in this research comes from the students' final projects. The 14 students had been officially required to conduct a mini research for their final projects. Seven students of 2016 were asked to apply systemic functional linguistics on the mass media –this group is further called mass-media students–, while seven other students of 2017 were asked to apply systemic functional linguistics on the social media –this group is further called social-media students. Their mini researches then were compared one another to find out

TABLE 1 DISCUSSIONS COVERED BY SOCIAL-MEDIA STUDENTS AND MASS-MEDIA STUDENT USING SYSTEMIC FUNCTIONAL LINGUISTICS APPROACH

the outcomes coming from systemic functional linguistics application toward the mass media and the social media.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

The study shows that students who applied systemic functional linguistics on the social media have more various discussions than students who applied systemic functional linguistics on the mass media. It means that the social media contributes greatly to enhance students' creativity in applying systemic functional linguistics approaches to language phenomena. The varying discussions which were written by students applying systemic functional linguistics on the social media (further called social-media students) differed from students applying systemic functional linguistics on the mass media (further called mass-media students), related to some points: first, socialmedia students explored more language

phenomena than did mass-media students using systemic functional linguistics ; and second, social-media students employed majority of the approaches of systemic functional linguistics in exploring language phenomena which were occurred on the social media while mass-media students only used at least two approaches of systemic functional linguistics in exploring the phenomena which were occurred on the mass media.

Language Phenomena Discussed by the Students

Compared to mass-media students applying systemic functional linguistics on the mass media, socialmedia students explore more language phenomena using systemic functional linguistics approaches on the social media. While mass-media students tend to conduct the same tedious researches, social-media students explore language phenomena which could not possibly be found on the mass media. Below is the table summarizing students' researches on the social media and the mass media (table 1).

Based on the table above, we can clearly see that social-media students have more language phenomena to be analyzed. The first two researches of both social-media students and massmedia students explore register of language variation. Focusing on textual meaning, social-media students analyzed formal and informal registers while mass-media students analyzed only formal register in different mass media. The first social-media student discusses formal language in Facebook, and the second social-media student describes informal language in Twitter. Formal and informal registers can be analyzed using textual meaning as textual meaning deals with the relation of language to its environment, such as verbal, non-verbal, and contextual environment. Using this model, students can obviously observe the ways of language used in various ways. Moreover, formal and informal registers are covered within social-media students' research as the social media can provide more language variations than mass media does.

On the other hand, the first massmedia student analyzes formal language on newspaper, and the second massmedia student discusses the same formal language, but he uses a different focus of analysis: news release in TV station. The four researches obviously indicate that the language phenomena on the social media are more various than the language phenomena on the mass media in which the mass media does not provide informal register since the language which is used on the mass media should be always in formal ways. In this case, mass-media students only have the opportunity to explore formal register on the mass media, and therefore, the students conduct the same discussion on different media: newspaper and television. However, in relation to the usage of textual meaning, mass-media students have an extra discussion, in which a student conducts a research discussing types of theme used by newspaper journalists (the third massmedia students' research), while socialmedia students only have two researches which employ textual meaning.

When students explore language phenomena using ideational meaning, both social-media students and massmedia students observe some relatively same discussions: ideational meaning and ideology. However, there are only two mass-media students who explore ideational meaning on the social media. The third social-media student describes the ideology of online mass media on the social media, and the fourth social-media student discusses the ideational meaning constructed by political opponents in describing political movements on the social media. Although ideational meaning is mostly used for discussing ideology, at least, social-media students have different focus in their research: ideology and ideational meaning.

In contrast, there are four massmedia students who explore ideational meaning on the mass media. The four mass-media students conduct their research in order to explore the ideology of different topics based on particular language phenomena. The fourth massmedia student discusses the ideology of newspaper regarding political situation in Indonesia; the fifth mass-media student analyzes ideology of mass media regarding Islam in Indonesia; the sixth mass-media student describes ideology of mass media regarding Habib Riziq Shihhab; and the seventh mass-media student depicts ideology of TV station journalists. Easily, it can be concluded that the majority of mass-media students using ideational meaning in their analysis to find out the ideology in particular language phenomena because four of seven mass-media students conduct their research about ideology using ideational meaning. It may seem boring because the four students use the same approach, pattern, and analysis in exploring different topics: newspaper regarding political situation in Indonesia, mass media regarding Islam in Indonesia, mass media regarding Habib Riziq Shihhab, and TV station journalists.

Furthermore, social-media students are considered to discuss more language phenomena because they also make use of interpersonal meaning in their analysis. Interpersonal meaning which expresses speakers' or writers' attitudes and judgment can figure out the social relationship between speakers and listeners, or between writers and readers. Actually, it can be used in various ways, based on their contexts. It can be utilized in formal and informal language, written and spoken language, and grammatical and ungrammatical language. However, unfortunately, mass-media students do not realize that interpersonal meaning is applicable to formal, written/spoken, and grammatical language which exists on the mass media. Thus, there are no massmedia students who conduct a research applying interpersonal meaning. On the contrary, social-media students conduct two researches using interpersonal meaning. The fifth social-media student explores writers' interpersonal meaning in finding out political "buzzers". This is an interesting research as the fifth social-media student tries to find out political "buzzers" on the social media based on their attitudes and judgment toward language phenomena. So, based on their attitudes and judgment, people can be evaluated whether they are political "buzzers" or not. Meanwhile, the sixth social-media student discusses writing styles of kids, teenagers, and adults in responding viral phenomena using interpersonal meaning. It is also an interesting discussion because the sixth social-media student provides another dimension of analysis. Writing styles which are usually covered using textual meaning, in fact, are able to be discussed using interpersonal meaning.

Moreover, the last social-media

student conducts another interesting discussion which makes this group considered to have more language phenomena to be discussed. The seventh social-media student discusses logicosemantics comparison of mass media on the social media and newspaper. Logico-semantics in systemic functional linguistics deals with how clauses are linked one another to form the meaning (Halliday & Matthiessen, 2004: 363). In this case, logico-semantics is used to find out how mass media works –based on the meaning constructed by the mass media– by comparing the news release of the mass media on the social media and on the newspaper.

Students can have more diverse language phenomena to be discussed on the social media because they are less exposed to the mass media. When the researcher asked the students to conduct some researches on the mass media, what comes into their minds are only Metro TV and the Jakarta Post as the mostly analyzed mass media. Apparently, this situation is experienced not only by the students of Universitas Al-Ghifari, but also by majority of students of Indonesia, due to the fact that Metro TV and the Jakarta Post are analyzed frequently by the students when they conduct some researches on the mass media using systemic functional linguistics. On the other hand, the students are very exposed to the social media since the social media has become the part of students' life. Thus, when the researcher obliged the students to conduct some researches on the social media, they gladly accepted the challenges without any complaints.

Systemic Functional Linguistics Approaches Used by the Students

To a n a l y z e t h e l a n g u a g e phenomena found on both social media and mass media, the students use various systemic functional linguistics approaches. Generally, systemic functional linguistics approaches can be divided into three level of analyses

based on the assumption that clauses can simultaneously have three different types of meaning (Deterding & Poedjosoedarmo, 2001). Thus, in this approach, any language phenomena can be observed through three-differentmodel analysis to attain language's real meaning: transitivity, thematic structure, and mood system. Transitivity works in exploring ideational meaning which deals with the meaning about phenomena and how people represent experience in language (Eggins, 2013). Using this model, the students can really understand "what is going on" and "what happens" on the phenomena. Thematic structure is employed to explore textual meaning which expresses the relation of language to its environment, such as verbal, nonverbal, and contextual environment. Using this model, the students can clearly observe the ways of language used in various ways. Meanwhile, mood system can be used to find out interpersonal meaning which expresses speakers' or writers' attitudes and judgment. With this model, the students can figure out the social relationship between speakers and listeners, or between writers and readers.

The findings of this study show that social-media students employ the majority of the approaches of systemic functional linguistics in exploring language phenomena which occurred on the social media while mass-media students only use two approaches of systemic functional linguistics in exploring language phenomena which were occurred on the mass media. The first and the second social-media students use thematic structure which is the set of language analysis used to figure out the textual meaning. In their research, thematic structure is utilized to analyze textually the formal and informal language occurred in Facebook and Twitter. The third and the fourth social-media students apply transitivity which is generally used to figure out the ideational meaning. In their research, transitivity is applied to analyze ideationally the ideology of online mass media and the meaning constructed by political opponents in describing political movements. The fifth and the sixth social-media students utilize mood system which is the set of language analysis used to figure out the interpersonal meaning. Mood system is employed in their research to analyze interpersonally the netizens' communicative pattern that are suspected to be political "buzzers" and the writing styles of kids, teenagers, and adults in responding viral phenomena on the social media. Meanwhile, the seventh social-media student uses logico-semantic relations which cover the analysis of clause relations in constructing the meaning. This complicated discussion is essentially able to be collaborated with transitivity, thematic structure, and mood system to attain a more detailed result, but the seventh social-media student employs this approach individually to find out how mass media works –based on the meaning constructed by the mass media– by comparing the news release of the mass media on the social media and on the newspaper.

Contrary to the social-media students, the mass-media students only employ two approaches of systemic functional linguistics in exploring language phenomena occurred on the mass media. Mass-media students only use thematic structure and transitivity as their tools of analysis. Thematic structure is employed by the first and the second mass-media students to discover the formal language occurred on the newspaper and the news release in TV station. Additionally, the third mass-media student uses a part of thematic structure to find out the kinds of theme which are mostly used by newspaper journalists. Meanwhile, transitivity is applied by the majority of mass-media students because four of seven mass-media students make use of transitivity in their researches. Transitivity is employed to find out the ideology of particular topics based on their language phenomena. The fourth mass-media student explores the ideology of newspaper journalists; the fifth mass-media student digs out the ideology of mass media regarding Islam in Indonesia; the sixth mass-media student investigates the ideology of mass media regarding Habib Riziq Shihhab; and the seventh mass-media student finds out the ideology of TV station journalists.

Since mass-media students only employ thematic structure and transitivity in their analyses, it means that they only employ systemic functional linguistics to figure out the textual meaning and ideational meaning of language phenomena. Interpersonal meaning which discusses the relationship between speakers and listeners, or writers and readers is not utilized in their discussion because the mass media does not provide the sufficient data to conduct this type of research. It makes sense due to the fact that the backgrounds of speakers or writers, who construct the language on the mass media, are homogenous: reporters. The homogenous background of speakers or writers results in the same communicative pattern built by the speakers or writers on the mass media. So, it does not generate interesting topics to be discussed by the students using interpersonal meaning. Things are different with what happens on the social media. Distinct people with various backgrounds exist on the social media to deliver their idea in different language styles. This situation results in diverse language phenomena which generate various interesting topics to be discussed by social-media students using interpersonal meaning.

CONCLUSION

The social media has proven to be very effective in enhancing students' creativity of employing systemic functional linguistics toward its applications. The findings show that students who applied systemic functional

linguistics on the social media have more various discussions than those who applied systemic functional linguistics on the mass media. The varying discussions which were written by students applying systemic functional linguistics on the social media differ from students applying systemic functional linguistics on the mass media, related to two points.

First, social-media students explore more language phenomena than did mass-media students using systemic functional linguistics on the mass media. Students can have more diverse language phenomena to be discussed on the social media because they are less exposed to mass media. When the researcher asked the students to conduct some researches on the mass media, what comes into their minds are only Metro TV and the Jakarta Post as the mostly analyzed mass media. Apparently, this situation is experienced not only by the students of Universitas Al-Ghifari, but also by majority of students of Indonesia, due to the fact that Metro TV and the Jakarta Post are analyzed frequently by the students when they conduct some researches on the mass media. On the other hand, the students are very exposed to the social media since the social media has become the part of students' life. Thus, when the researcher obliged the students to conduct some researches on the social media, they gladly accepted the challenges without any complaints.

Second, social-media students employ majority of the systemic functional linguistics approaches in exploring language phenomena which were occurred on the social media while mass-media students only apply at least two approaches of systemic functional linguistics in exploring the phenomena which were occurred on the mass media. Interpersonal meaning which discusses the relationship between speakers and listeners, or writers and readers is not utilized in their discussion because the mass media does not provide the sufficient data to conduct this type of research. It makes sense due to the fact that the backgrounds of speakers or writers, who construct the language on the mass media, are homogenous. The homogenous background of speakers or writers results in the same communicative pattern built by the speakers or writers on the mass media. So, it does not generate interesting topics to be discussed by the students using interpersonal meaning. Things are different with what happens on the social media. Distinct people with various backgrounds exist on the social media to deliver their idea in different language styles. This situation results in diverse language phenomena which generate various interesting topics to be discussed by social-media students using interpersonal meaning.