A SOCIOPRAGMATIC ANALYSIS OF SYMPATHY AND EMPATHY EXPRESSIONS ON INSTAGRAM: INSIGHTS FROM A VIDEO OF CHILDREN IN GAZA
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.22219/celtic.v11i2.37721Abstract
The genocide committed by Israel in Gaza is still ongoing to this day. This action has received enormous attention from people from all over the world because it has claimed many victims ranging from children, adults, to the elderly. The purpose of this study is to describe the types of expressions of sympathy and empathy and to clarify the intention of sympathy and empathy expressions given by Instagram users to videos of children in Gaza. This study used a qualitative descriptive method. This study used observation and documentation methods to find the data. Research reveals that there are 2 types of sympathy, namely passive sympathy and active sympathy. This study also reveals that there are 3 types of empathy, namely cognitive empathy, emotional empathy, and compassionate empathy. As for the type of intention, 13 speech acts were found in this study, namely requesting, begging, proposing, vowing, thanking, apologizing, regretting, lamenting, blaming, praising, wishing, condoling, and criticizing. The findings of this study can be used to broaden understanding and make it easier for readers to distinguish expressions of sympathy and empathy.
Downloads
References
REFERENCES
Alam, O. S. N. (2023). Illocutionary speech acts in the presidential speech regarding the relocation of the national capital city. Celtic : A Journal of Culture, English Language Teaching, Literature and Linguistics, 10(2), 156–171. https://doi.org/10.22219/celtic.v10i2.28172
Albashrawi, M., Asiri, Y., Binsawad, M., & Alqahtani, L. (2022). The effect of social media use on empathy and welling: a personality perspective in Saudi Arabia. Journal of Asia Business Studies, 16(2), 406–423. https://doi.org/10.1108/JABS-11-2020-0461
Albashrawi, M., Yu, J., Binsawad, M., & Asiri, Y. (2022). Moving to digital-healthy society: empathy, sympathy, and wellbeing in social media. Pacific Asia Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 14(2), 71–89. https://doi.org/10.17705/1pais.14206
Ariatmi, S. Z. (2023). Sympathy and empathy expressions given by social media users to the video of poverty (Doctoral dissertation, Universitas Muhammadiyah Surakarta).
Arnandita, M. B., & Ariatmi, S. Z. (2021). A sociopragmatics analysis of sympathy and empathy expressions given by social media users on the history of the auschwitz concentration camp. (Doctoral dissertation, Universitas Muhammadiyah Surakarta).
Basra, S. M., & Thoyyibah, L. (2017). A speech act analysis of teacher talk in an EFL classroom. International Journal of Education, 10(1), 73. https://doi.org/10.17509/ije.v10i1.6848
Beiraghdar, F., Momeni, J., Hosseini, E., Panahi, Y., & Negah, S. S. (2023). Health crisis in gaza: the urgent need for international action. Iranian Journal of Public Health, 52(12), 2478–2483. https://doi.org/10.18502/ijph.v52i12.14309
Boyatzis, R. E., Goleman, D., & Rhee, K. (2000). Clustering competence in emotional intelligence: Insights from the Emotional Competence Inventory (ECI). Handbook of emotional intelligence, 99(6), 343-362.
Buheji, M., & Hasan, A. (2024). Beyond Famine and Chaos–Case of Gaza. International Journal of Management (IJM), 15(2), 2024. https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/B6SPQ
Creswell, J. W. (2007). Qualitative Inquiry and Research Design. California: Sage Publication Inc.
Darwall, S. (1998). Empathy, sympathy, care. Philosophical Studies, 89(2–3), 261–282. https://doi.org/10.1023/a:1004289113917
Dey, M. D. (2023). Four main characteristics of English pragmatics. LLT Journal: A Journal on Language and Language Teaching, 26(2), 510-519. https://doi.org/10.24071/llt.v26i2.6202
Goleman, D. (2000). Emotions Intelligence. Gramedia Pustaka Utama
Ilie, C., & Norrick, N. R. (2018). Pragmatics and its interfaces. John Benjamin Publishing Company.
Ioannidou, F., & Konstantikaki, V. (2008). Empathy and emotional intelligence: What is it really about?. International Journal of caring sciences, 1(3), 118.
Lishner, D. A., Batson, C. D., & Huss, E. (2011). Tenderness and sympathy: Distinct empathic emotions elicited by different forms of need. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 37(5), 614–625. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167211403157
Majeed, M. (2024). The Palestinian issue: a humanitarian crisis. Al-Iman Research Journal, 1(02), 36-42. https://alimanjournal.com/ojs/index.php/home/article/view/12
Martinez, N. D. (2013). Illocutionary construction in English: cognitive motivation and linguistics realization: A study of the sytactic realizations of the directive, commissive, and expressive speech acts in English. Bern: Peter Lang AG.
McDougall, W. (2003). An introduction to social psychology. Dover Publications.
Rahayu, A. S., Syahrizal, T., & Sadikin, I. S. (2019). Speech act analysis of “Frozen” the movie script. PROJECT (Professional Journal of English Education), 2(5), 692. https://doi.org/10.22460/project.v2i5.p692-699
Rusda, M. A. M. N. S., & Ariatmi, S. Z. (2022). A sociopragmatic analysis of sympaty and empathy addressed to the care of dying patient of covid-19 by social media users (Doctoral dissertation, Universitas Muhammadiyah Surakarta).
Gupta, S. (2021). Impact of social media on the film industry. Samvakti Journal of Research in Information Technology, 2(2), 117–124. https://doi.org/10.46402/2021.02.24
Sari, I. D., Laila, M., & Ariatmi, S. Z. (2014). Sympathy and empathy strategies in the web page michael schumacher's news (pragmatic analysis) (Doctoral dissertation, Universitas Muhammadiyah Surakarta).
Searle, J. R., & Searle, J. R. (1969). Speech acts: An essay in the philosophy of language (Vol. 626). Cambridge university press.
Searle, J. R., &Vanderveken, D. (1985). Foundations of illocutionary logic. Cambridge university press.
Mangku, D. G., & Narayani, K. (2022). The dangers of the crime of genocide: international law review. Journal of Judicial Review, 24(1), 81. https://doi.org/10.37253/jjr.v24i1.6467
Svenaeus, F. (2015). The relationship between empathy and sympathy in good health care. Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy, 18(2), 267–277. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11019-014-9601-x
Vanderveken, D., & Kubo, S. (Eds.). (2002). Essays in speech act theory (Vol. 77). John Benjamins Publishing.
Vossen, H. G. M., & Valkenburg, P. M. (2016). Do social media foster or curtail adolescents’ empathy? A longitudinal study. Computers in Human Behavior, 63, 118–124. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2016.05.040
Yule, G. (1996). Pragmatics. Oxford university press.
Yulian, A. A., & Mandarani, V. (2023). A speech act analysis: illocutionary acts produced by teacher in esl classroom. Celtic : A Journal of Culture, English Language Teaching, Literature and Linguistics, 10(1), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.22219/celtic.v10i1.23276
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2024 Mawar Puspitasari, Siti Zuhriah Ariatmi
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
- Authors retain copyright to publish without restrictions and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement 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 acknowledgement 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.
