Phatic and Politeness on Women’s Communication in Facebook: Humanistic Teaching Perspective of Being Polite in Social Media

Rosita Ambarwati, Joko Nurkamto, Riyadi Santosa


Technological developments have a wide impact on many things, one of which is the development of communication through social networking. The interesting thing about the Facebook phenomenon is that most of the users are women. Women who are identical with polite behavior are very interesting to study. This study aims to (1) Identify the form of women’s phatic speech acts on Facebook. (2) Describe the politeness strategy of women’s communication on Facebook, (3) to dig deeper into the extent of women politeness in Facebook through the humanistic teaching perspective. This research is descriptive qualitative research using pragmatic approach. The subjects of the study were women aged 25-50 years. Data is female speech on Facebook social networking. Data selection is done with certain consideration using purposive sampling. Data were collected using a method of referring and noting to a number of speeches containing a form of phatic expression. Test the validity of data is done through credibility test that is by extension of observation and member check. Data analysis was done based on Spradley's analysis model which was divided into 4 stages, namely domain analysis, taxonomic analysis, contextual analysis and cultural theme analysis. The results achieved are: (1) The form of phatic expressions seen from the analysis of speech acts in which the act of speech phatic ranked highest. (2) The characteristics of visible women language are, using polite expression, using indirect sentences, using adjectives, using question tags and humor. (3) The dominant function of the phatic is to maintain friendship and harmony of relationships. (4) Internet-based communication media provide flexibility for women to interact and establish relationships. (5) phatic communication on Facebook becomes dominant because the form of communication is not face to face directly so that the expression of the speaker cannot be seen and the comments that appear cannot be determined time so that the honesty of the less acceptable speech. This has a tendency as a form of introducing space. The women communication in Facebook through the phatic speech acts can be a source of learning approach to be polite in uttering utterances.


humanistic teaching perspective, phatic, politeness, speech acts, social media

Full Text:



Adler, A. (1927). Understanding human nature. - PsycNET. Retrieved from

Arévalo, C. M. (2014). A pragmatic and multimodal analysis of emoticons and gender in social networks.

Aries, E. J., & Johnson, F. L. (1983). Close friendship in adulthood: Conversational content between same-sex friends. Sex Roles, 9(12), 1183–1196.

Arndt, H., & Janney, R. W. (1985). Politeness revisited: cross-modal supportive strategies. IRAL - International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, 23(1–4), 281–300.

Arnold, R. D. (1998). The Politics of Reforming Social Security. Political Science Quarterly, 113(2), 213–240.

Assegaf, R. (2011). Filsafat Pendidikan Islam, Paradigma Baru Pendidikan Hadhari Berbasis Integratif-Interkonektif. Jakarta: PT Raja Grafindo Persada.

Attardo, S. (1993). Violation of conversational maxims and cooperation: The case of jokes. Journal of Pragmatics, 19(6), 537–558.

Aukett, R., Ritchie, J., & Mill, K. (1988). Gender differences in friendship patterns. Sex Roles, 19(1–2), 57–66.

Barbulet, G. (2013). Social Media- A pragmatic Approach: Contexts & Implicatures. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 83, 422–426.

Castells, M. (2000). The Rise of the Network Society (2nd ed.). Cambridge, MA: Blackwell Publishers, Inc.

Chaer, A. (2010). Sosiolinguistik Perkenalan Awal. Jakarta: Rineka Cipta.

Coates, J. (2016). Women, men and language : a sociolinguistic account of gender differences in language. London & New York : Routledge

Cockcroft, S., Bluett, J., & Shuttleworth, J. (2008). Living language and literature (2nd ed.). London: Hodder & Stoughton Educational.

Dewey, J. (1997). Democracy and education : An introduction to the philosophy of education.

Duggan, M., & Smith, A. (2013). Social Media Update 2013 | Pew Research Center.

Fardouly, J., Diedrichs, P. C., Vartanian, L. R., & Halliwell, E. (2015). Social comparisons on social media: The impact of Facebook on young women’s body image concerns and mood. Body Image, 13, 38–45.

Fardouly, J., & Vartanian, L. R. (2015). Negative comparisons about one’s appearance mediate the relationship between Facebook usage and body image concerns. Body Image, 12(1), 82–88.

Gage, N., & Berliner, D. (1991). Educational psychology ((5th ed.)). Mifflin: Boston: Houghton.

Hammersley, Martyn Atkinson, P. (1983). Ethnography: Principles in practice. London: Tavistock.

Hill, B., Ide, S., Ikuta, S., Kawasaki, A., & Ogino, T. (1986). Universals of linguistic politeness: Quantitative evidence from Japanese and American english. Journal of Pragmatics, 10(3), 347–371.

Holmes, J. (1995). Women, men and politeness. Retrieved from

Hopkins, K. (2014). The phatic nature of the online social sphere: Implications for public relations. PRism, 11(2), 1–12.

Jacobson, G. F. (1980). Crisis Theory. New Directions for Mental Health Services, 1980(6), 1–10.

Jensen, K. B., & Jankowski, N. W. (1991). A Handbook of Qualitative Methodologies for Mass Communication Research. London / New York.: Routledge.

Jespersen, O. (1992). The philosophy of grammar. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Johnson, D. P. (1986). Teori sosiologi klasik dan modern. Jakarta: Gramedia.

Khatib, M., Sarem, S. N., & Hamidi, H. (2013). Humanistic Education: Concerns, Implications and Applications. Journal of Language Teaching and Research, 4(1), 45–51.

Kivran-Swaine, F., Brody, S., & Naaman, M. (2013). Effects of gender and tie strength on Twitter interactions. First Monday, 18(9).

Leech, G. (1993). Prinsip-prinsip pragmatik. Jakarta: UI-Press.

Lei, P.-W., & Wu, Q. (2007). Introduction to Structural Equation Modeling: Issues and Practical Considerations. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 26(3), 33–43.

Locher, M. A. (2015). Interpersonal pragmatics and its link to (im)politeness research. Journal of Pragmatics, 86, 5–10.

Malmkjær, K. (2002). The linguistics encyclopedia (2nd ed.). Retrieved from

Maples, M. F. (1979). A humanistic educator: Basic ingredients. The Humanist Educator, 17(3), 107–110.

Maslow, A. H. (1943). A theory of human motivation. Psychological Review, 50(4), 370–396.

Mckenna, M. C., Kear, D. J., & Ellsworth, R. A. (1995). Children ’ s attitudes A national toward reading : Reading Research Quarterly, 30(4), 934–956.

Miller, V. (2008). New Media, Networking and Phatic Culture. Convergence: The International Journal of Research into New Media Technologies, 14(4), 387–400.

Nazir, B. (2012). Gender Patterns on Facebook: A Sociolinguistic Perspective. International Journal of Linguistics, 4(3), 252–265.

Obana, Y., & Tomoda, T. (1994). The sociological significance of ‘politeness’ in English and Japanese languages — Report from a pilot study. Japanese Studies, 14(2), 37–49.

Reisman, W. M. (1990). Sovereignty and Human Rights in Contemporary International Law. The American Journal of International Law, 84(4), 866–876.

Robin, L. (1973). Language and Woman ’ s Place. Cambridge University Press, 2(1), 45–80.

Ruckel, L. M. (2012). Self-Sexualization in Facebook Photographs, Self-Objectification, and Body Image. The State University of New York at New Paltz.

Simandjuntak, B. (1984). Pengantar psikologi perkembangan. Bandung: Tarsito.

Soekanto, S. (2001). Hukum Adat Indonesia. Jakarta: Raja Grafindo Persada.

Stenström, A.-B., & Jørgensen, A. M. (Eds.). (2009). Young speak in a Multilingual Perspective.

Tannen, D. (1991): You just don't understand. Women and men in conversation. Sintagma: revista de lingüística; Vol.: 4. 4.

Theodoropoulou, I. (2015). Politeness on Facebook. Pragmatics, 25(1), 23–45.

Tiggemann, M., & Slater, A. (2013). NetGirls: The Internet, Facebook, and body image concern in adolescent girls. International Journal of Eating Disorders, 46(6), 630–633.

Underhill, P. (2009). Why we buy : the science of shopping. Retrieved from

Valentini, C., & Kruckeberg, D. (2012). New Media Versus Social Media: A Conceptualization of their Meanings, Uses, and Implications for Public Relations. In New Media and Public Relations, 3–12.

Wang, R., Bianchi, S. M., & Raley, S. B. (2005). Teenagers’ Internet Use and Family Rules: A Research Note. Journal of Marriage and Family, 67(5), 1249–1258.

Wellman, B., & Hampton, K. (1999). Living networked in a wired world. IEEE Intelligent Systems and Their Applications, 14(1), 15–17.

Wood, J. T., & Inman, C. C. (1993). In a different mode: Masculine styles of communicating closeness. Journal of Applied Communication Research, 21(3), 279–295.

Wright, P. H., & Scanlon, M. B. (1991). Gender role orientations and friendship: Some attenuation, but gender differences abound. Sex Roles, 24(9–10), 551–566.

Wulandari, S. (2014). Speech Act Analysis on Facebook Statuses Used by Students of Muhammadiyah University of Surakarta. Universitas Muhamdiyah Surakarta, Surakarta.

Zegarac, V. (1998). What is “Phatic Communication”? In Current Issues in Relevance Theory (p. 327).

Zhang, L., & Atkin, C. (2010). Conceptualizing Humanistic Competence in the Language Classroom by TJP - A Chinese Case. International Education Studies, 3(4), 121–127.



  • There are currently no refbacks.

Creative Commons License
IJELTAL (Indonesian Journal of English Language Teaching and Applied Linguistics) by is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.


Abstracting and Indexing


Contact Us: IJELTAL (Indonesian Journal of English Language Teaching and Applied Linguistics;

Address: Faculty of Teacher Training and Education, State Islamic University Sultan Aji Muhammad Idris Samarinda

Jl. H.A.M. Rifadin, Samarinda, Kalimantan Timur, Indonesia. Email: