Education Journal, Vol. 2, Issue 3, Sep  2019, Pages 41-50; DOI: 10.31058/ 10.31058/

Ethnography of Communication Analysis in the Short Story of Romeo and Juliet

Education Journal, Vol. 2, Issue 3, Sep  2019, Pages 41-50.

DOI: 10.31058/

Herman 1* , Bloner Sinurat 1 , Ihsan Tanama Sitio 1

1 Department of English Education, Universitas HKBP Nommensen, Medan, Indonesia

Received: 3 August 2019; Accepted: 26 September 2019; Published: 21 October 2019

Full-Text HTML | Download PDF | Views 216 | Download 130


This research analyzes the ethnography of communication used in the short story of Romeo and Juliet using both S-P-E-A-K-I-N-G and Speech Event theories of Dell Hymes (1972). This research is aimed to explain the elements of ethnography of communication from the point of view of both Hymes’ model and describe the inference in the use of the elements of ethnography of communication within the short story of Romeo and Juliet. This research uses a descriptive qualitative research design. Based on the analysis of this research, the researcher finds; there are 4 settings and scenes, 12 participants, entertaning and amusing ends or purposes, 13 act sequences and content, 17 keys or tones, verbal and casual speech styles of instrumentatilites and channels, norms of loving people, and narrative as well as romance tragedy form of style.  


Ethnography of communication, Speech Event, S-P-E-A-K-I-N-G Model


© 2017 by the authors. Licensee International Technology and Science Press Limited. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.


[1] Ary, D.; Jacob, L.; Sorensen, C.Introduction to Research in Education. 8th. Edition. USA: WARDSWORTH Cengage Learning, 2010.
[2] Carbaugh, D. Talking American: Cultural discourses on DONAHU. USA: Publishing Corporation, 1988.
[3] Creswell, J.W. Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Method Approaches. 3rd. Edition. UK: SAGE Publication, 2009.
[4] Gee, J.P. An Introduction to Discourse Anlysis (Theory and Method). 3rd. Edition. New York: Routledge
[5] Herman. Affixes Analysis in a Bible at Philippians Scripture. Education Journal, 2018, 1,11-26.
[6] Horn, L.R. Pragmatic Theory in F.J. Newmeyer Linguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1988.
[7] Hymes, D. Models of the Interaction of Language and Social Life (Directions of Sociolinguistics). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press – Blackwell, 1972.
[8] Hymes, D. Ways of Speaking (Explorations in the Ethnography of Speaking). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1974.
[9] Paltridge, B. Making Sense of Discourse Analysis. Australia: Merino Lithographics, 2000.
[10] Searle, J.R. Speech Acts: An essay in the philosophy of language. Cambridge: Cambridge Univesity Press,1969.
[11] Sitorus, E.; Herman. A Deixis Analysis of Song Lyrics in Calum Scott “You Are the Reason”. International Journal of Science and Qualitative Analysis, 2019, 5(1), 24-28, DOI: 10.11648/j.ijsqa.20190501.14.