Slips of Tongue in Net TV Talkshow

Agustini

, Lisnu Afiah

and Rohmani Nur Indah

Universitas Islam Negeri Maulana Malik Ibrahim Jalan Gajayana 50 Malang, 65145 Indonesia

Keywords: slip of tongue, television talkshow; features of error

Abstract: Slip of the tongue occurs as common mistake when a speaker unintenionally produced error in speech. It is

identified from several sides of the phonemes, syllables, and words. In a talkshow the host is required to

speak properly and straightly but in practice there are many mistakes in speech, as in the “pagi-pagi” at Net

Tv. The purpose of this study is to identify and explore their slip of the tongue at the event, remembering

slip of tongue is a reasonable error and frequent. The data were obtained through observation on video

recordings published in Youtube. The slips of tongue on the show “pagi-pagi” at Net.tv showed several

types which include errors on distinctive features, phonetic feature, syllable error, and errors on diction.

1 INTRODUCTION

Slips of tongue is a common phenomenon in speech

where the speaker produced speech comprising

unintended words. (Dardjowidjojo, 2008). It may

happen in any occassion including in talkshow.

Talkshow is a television or radio program that is

guided by a moderator impressing audience, both

personal and group to discuss various topics in a

relaxed but serious atmosphere. Guests are

sometimes presented to share their great experiences

(Hendra, 2009).

During the talkshow sometimes a moderator can

experience speech errors without realizing it,

because in the talkshow they are required to explain

something spontaneously. In this case the production

of utterances expressed can experience speech

errors. The speech error may be light, occurring

from the exchange of the word place to the

distinctive feature of a sound. Broadly speaking,

these units are distinctive features, phonetic

segments, syllables, and words (Ahmadi, 2015).

Talkshow events often lead to speech errors but

in this case the speaker can overcome the error by

repeating his words correctly. Such a slip in speech

production often occurs, therefore speech errors

need to be studied in depth. Because every human

being has a different speech production system,

there are those who can express utterances correctly

and some who experience disruption in the process

of issuing the speech. Then the speech errors can

occur at the Talkshow.

The study of speech errors has been done in

several context including the political speech in

debate of president candidate. The study showed that

the slips of tongue may occur during the

replacement of vowel phoneme as well as consonant

phoneme. The speaker also produced several

syllable exchange and word replacement (Sari, 2016).

While in the context of job interview, the slips may

cover phoneme anticipation, affix deletion, phoneme

deletion, word exchange and substitution (Poulisse,

2002)

. On slips in talkshow, it needs more empirical

bases. Therefore, this study concerns with the slips

of tongue in talkshow Net TV particularly on the

Morning show pagi-pagi Tv Net program released in

2015.

2 THEORITICAL REVIEW

2.1 Language Production

Speech production is the process that expresses

uterances or sentences. There are four levels in the

process of producing speech, namely message level,

functional level, positional level and phonological

level.

Encoding level is to process the message to be

delivered. An example in the sentence Tutik is

feeding her child. In this sentence, a message can be

retrieved. first, Tutik as a mother, second, she has

child and is feeding her child, etc. The next level is

1820

Agustini, ., Aﬁah, L. and Indah, R.

Slips of Tongue in Net TV Talkshow.

DOI: 10.5220/0009935918201824

In Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on Recent Innovations (ICRI 2018), pages 1820-1824

ISBN: 978-989-758-458-9

functional where the lexical form is selected and

given the role and semantic function. Tutik is the

subject and the word her child is an object. Next is

the positional level of forming constituents and

affixing. This level has the purpose of sorting the

lexical form for the utterances to be issued. To be a

hierarchical meaning. In the example, the utterance

word is formed so that it can be meaningful. Next is

the level of phonology, which is to realize the

structure of phonology (Ahmadi, 2015).

The details of speech production are divided into

three: discourse production planning, sentence

production planning, constituent production

planning. Discourse production planning has several

parts. First is dialogue discourse, which has some

elements, namely: personnel (in dialog discourse

there must be a speaker and the person to talk to),

shared background (between the speaker and the

person invited to speak has the same knowledge),

and the same act (the speaker and the person invited

to speak has the rules they know together (Ahmadi,

2015).

In addition, dialogue discourse is influenced by

the structure of the conversation where someone

knows when he must speak, answer or be silent.

Second, monologue discourse generally has one

participant, namely the speaker himself. There are

several factors that must be considered by a

participant, namely the amount of time available, the

level of knowledge of the audience in that field,

paying attention to the relationship between one

element and the other, and the order of presentation.

These four factors will realize appropriate discourse

in terms of meaning. The main difference in of

discourses lies in whether there is an interaction or

not. If the dialogue contains interaction with other

people, the monologue does not.

Sentence production planning concerns with

three categories that need to be processed, namely:

propositional content, in this phase the speaker

determines what proposition he wants to state.

Illocution act, in this stage the speaker determines

the meaning and form to be conveyed and the

method chosen. It involves several factors, namely:

social position, differences in age, kinship, and

degree of familiarity between the speaker and the

person invited to speak. While in thematic structure,

it is related to grammatical/semantic functions in

sentences.

After planning the sentence is carried out, it is

then continued to the level of the constituents that

will form the sentence. Here a word is chosen which

has the exact meaning as desired. For example, if the

reference is a man, and he hates the man, then the

choice of the word he may be is a jerk or that bastard

(Dardjowidjojo, 2008).

2.2 Speech Errors

Speech error is a phenomenon in the utterance of

speech in which the speaker may have slips of

tongue so that the words produced are not the

intended words (Dardjowidjojo, 2008). This fact is

found more in mother tongue than in foreign

languages. This is because a stronger language

monitor is found in the process of producing foreign

languages so as to suppress the appearance of

flashes (Chen, 1999). There are two kinds of slips of

tongue caused by wrong selection of words and slips

caused by assembling words.

Slips of tongue caused by erroneous selection are

divided into three, namely semantic errors, mistakes

at this stage are based on a group of names of

objects, for example in vegetables there are cabbage,

cabbage, mustard greens, spinach. Then the error

here comes from the same semantic field. For

instance, please buy me mustard in the market, I

mean spinach. Malaproprism, which is described as

someone who wants to look high-class by using a

grandiose word, but the words that he forms are

wrong. For example, the word anticipation becomes

antisisapi. Mixed words (blends), this type of error

appears when someone is in a hurry so he takes one

or more syllables from the first word and one or part

of the tribe again from the second word then

becomes one.

The slips of tongue caused by assembling words

is a form of error where the words chosen are

correct, but the assembling is wrong. This kind of

mistake is to move the word or sound from one

position to another. For example: I need a glass of

water, but it is said to be a water of glass.

2.3 The Units on Slips of Tongue

There are various units in the slips of tongue, from

exchanging the place of the word to the distinctive

feature of a sound. Broadly speaking, these units are

distinctive features, phonetic segments, syllables,

and words. The error of the distinctive feature is

theslips of tongue whose unit is a distinctive feature

occurs when the dislocated is not a phoneme, but

only the distinctive feature of the phoneme. Like the

example of Paris becomes Baris. Errors that occur

as a result are due to errors in distinctive changes.

The fallacy of phonetic features, ie errors that are

more than one or many are common mistakes.

Sound errors that are more than one distinctive and

Slips of Tongue in Net TV Talkshow

1821

interchangeable feature are called phonetic features.

For instance ring is read into wing. Syllable errors,

in this case syllables are also not impossible if

exchanged or mistaken as the first consonant of a

tribe with the first consonant of another tribe.

Example: pa-la becomes la-pa. Word errors,

mistakes at this level occur if the place is exchanged

is the word. Like the example of a tank of gas being

a gas of tank (Ahmadi, 2015).

Errors or flashes of the tongue in each language

have their own peculiarities. For example, in

Mandarin there are moreslips of tonguees in

segmental phonemes or phonemes in syllables as

well as stressing the pronunciation of the English

lexicon (Chen, 1999). Furthermore, the slips remains

acceptable for listeners or readers in a variety of

contexts, whether social, cultural or political.

Opponents talk assuming the flash is out of the

speakers' will. In the era of information technology

that helps the process of translating or grammar

examinations, lapsus can still be found (Brancher,

2016).

3 METHOD

The research method used is the observation method

to obtain the data accurately and factually about the

real events of the phenomenon as the focus in this

study. Further, this research is categorized as group

observation and unstructured observation (Bungin,

2007).

This study aims to reveal and identify the host’s

speech errors at the pagi-pagi program at Net.tv in

2015. This study used a qualitative approach for

analyzing and identifying speech errors in the actual

speech production. The TV program consisted of

four sessions of pagi-pagi, namely: part 1, extreme

weather. part 2, detergent & milk. part 3, predicting

characters. and part 4, the largest photo in the world.

Research The data on slips in speech production are

in the form of words, sentences, phonemes, and

syllables.

In this study the observation on speech errors is

not done on live Talkshow, but it is carrried out by

observing the video recordings of the Talkshow

published in Youtobe. This study also uses the

referring method, namely the method used in the

study by listening to the use of language (Mahsun,

2012).

The validity of research data needs to be done to

obtain objective data so that the results of this study

is accountable. The researcher conducted three data

checking techniques, namely, the first research

persistence that researchers observed and identified

carefully and listened repeatedly to video recordings,

to obtain accurate data needed. Second,

triangulation, the researcher observes by

documentation and observation on video recordings.

Third, reference adequacy is the existence of

reference books and reference sources that are in

accordance with the focus of this study (Moleong,

2002).

The steps used in this study are: first, analyzing

the problems related to phonemes, syllables, and

words. Second, discuss the results of the analysis.

Third, conclude and describe the problem. Fourth:

report the results of the study.

4 FINDINGS AND DISSCUSSIONS

The hosts of the Talkshow program are Hesti and

Andre Taulani with a guest star named Sule. Based

on the observation on the sessions of Pagi-pagi, the

finding shows there are some types of speech errors.

4.1 Errors of Distinctive Features

The error of the distinctive feature is the slips of

tongue which has a distinctive feature occuring

when the dislocated part is not a phoneme, but only

the distinctive feature of the phoneme. The utterance

having slips of distinctive feature is:

“Aku juga pernah sih pasang kuku aklirik “

The speaker utters the sentence "I have also had

the acrilic nails". This error is not as clear / vague as

the speaker was not not aware, nor making

correction. It occurred in fast speech that tends to

cause errors. As for the closeness of the letters

between Aklirik - Acrylic has a very thin difference,

therefore it is called the distinctive feature error.

Another utterance shows distinctive feature:

“Ternyata kalau kita demeng apa seneng”

The speakers says the phrase "it turns out if we

are fond of it or like it" The word demeng is a

mistake from the word liking, this error has a very

thin letter closeness so it belongs to distinctive

feature. This mistake occurs when the speaker is

explaining about a young man's pleasure when

having selfie with an elephant. As for the efforts

made by speakers to overcome this mistake by

repeating the correct word, that is, seneng. As with

speakers in English, this error was immediately

corrected and followed by an apologist because they

thought that tongue flashes were a natural

phenomenon that anyone could experience (Rice,

2017). This awareness of speaking (self-detection) is

ICRI 2018 - International Conference Recent Innovation

1822

commonly encountered especially in the context of

public speaking.

Speaker’s awareness for doing self repair mostly

concerns with lexical, grammatical or prosodic

coherence of the produced discourse (Podlesskaya,

2015). It is as shown in the television talkshow pagi-

pagi. Such awareness is basically dependent upon

ones ability to use language-specific links among

auditory processing and linguistic prosody

awareness (Chung, 2017). This is due to the fact that

during speech, speaker applies high or low self

monitoring. More slips occur whenever the speaker

implment low self monitoring such as those happen

in the context of informal conversation. In this case,

the speakers in the live talkshow regard their

conversation as casual as everyday discourse that

need less self monitoring.

Another example of the slips in this feature is:

Gak sadar kamera yang dia fegang itu diambilnya

(He didn't realize that the camera he was holding

was taken).

The speaker uttered the word fegang is a slip

from the word grasp, this error occurs when the

speaker explains quickly, but the speaker does not

make improvements to overcome this error, perhaps

the error occurred which is not fatal or not repaired

the listeners understand. The proximity of the letters

between the words fegang to grasp has a very thin

difference, therefore it is called the distinctive

feature error.

Errors that occur due to fast speaking are very

common in the first language compared to slip of

tongue in foreign languages. When talking fast there

is a decrease in self monitoring in the first language

speech. As for when speaking in a foreign language,

monitoring is higher so as to minimize the

occurrence of slip of tongue flashes (Broos, 2016).

In bilingual context verbal monitoring often causes

conflict as the person might think in mother tongue

but then produce the word in second language

(Acheson, 2012).

4.2 Errors of Phonetic Features

The slips of phonetic features, ie errors that are more

than one or many phonemes which are common

mistakes. The phonetic errors may have more than

one distinctive and interchangeable feature. For

example:

“Jadi seandainya dicetak”

The speakers uttered "if it is printed". The sound

/e/ in dicetak should be pronounced /é/..In this error

the speaker does not make improvements to justify

the phoneme of this error, because the speaker is not

aware of this error. This kind of error often occue as

the speaker has particular regional background using

unique phonetic variation in native language

concerning the sound /e/ (Risdianto, 2017).

Another utterance showing this type of error is:

“Ada yang mau nonton bolo malah berantem”

The host uttered "anyone who wants to watch

Bolo actually fights". Bolo was said that it was

actually means bola or ball, this error occurred when

the speaker explained the incident on the topic of the

conversation about football. While the error

occurred because the speaker was too eager to

explain the topic. Therefore the speaker does not

justify the error. The mistakes that occur in the word

bolo is called the error of phonetic features. In this

case speech error on phonetic feature occurs as a

result of the rapid spontaneous error contributed by

the retrieval of the word phonological property

(Levelt, 1999). The preserved /o/ from nonton bo-

results in this kind of error.

1. Syllable errors.

The syllable error occurs when the first

consonant of a syllable is changed with the first

consonant of another syllable. The example is in the

following:

Iya lagi rame banget diomongongin

The speakers wanted to say the phrase "yes,

people are busy talking about it". The error was

obvious inpronouncing diomongin into the syllable

error diomongongin but the speaker left it without

word repair. The word may be felt not too fatal, no

wonder if you leave it alone.

2. Word error.

Errors at this level occur if the place is

changed. The example found in the data is the

following.

Jadi air-air Artikel air mata darah

The host repeat the word air-air instead of

pronouncing Artikel air In this sentence the speaker

anticipates air mata but it seems that the speaker

focuses on the word air so that it is firstly repeated .

As the speaker is aware of the error, so that it is

repaired and pronounced immediately slowly

correctly with the word "Artikel air mata darah" or

article on blood tears.

5 CONCLUSION

The presenters of Pagi-pagi TV program had several

patterns in conveying the speech in the Talkshow.

They intended to present the shown to be relaxing,

Slips of Tongue in Net TV Talkshow

1823

describing and expressing an event related to the

topic aired on Net.tv. However, as it is presented

live and the hosts might utter the dialog fastly, some

slips of tongue occured.

Speech errors in the Net.Tv morning program

occur several times, which include errors in

distinctive features, for example: Aklirik (Acrylic),

phonetic features, for example: Demeng (Seneng),

syllable errors, for example Dicetak and mistakes in

repeating word for anticipation, for example Air-air

Artikel Air

Speech errors in the Net.tv pagi-pagi program

occurred due to several factors, including: the

speaker was too enthusiastic and too fast in

explaining the topic. While the effort carried out by

the speaker is to repeat the word to improve his

speech errors. Yet, there are also some words that

are not corrected because they are considered slight

error and still understandable.

Further studies can explore more the variety of

speech orrurs in spontaneous speech context by

emphasizing on several aspects such as the

perceptual confusion among consonants

(Christiansen, 2012) where in Indonesian context as

bilingual community can show different pattern of

slips compared to other contexts. As shown in this

study, correct production require phonetic planning

to eliminate the occurrence of slips of tongue

(Lange, 2016). Therefore, as the implication public

speaker especially those performing in media like

television should concern with high self monitoring

in their speech to avoid segmental phonetic errors or

errors in distinctive features.

REFERENCES

S. Dardjowidjojo Psikolinguistik Pengantar Pemahaman

Bahasa Manusia. Jakarta: Yayasan Obor Indonesia

2008.

Hendra. Pengertian Talkshow.

http://www.hendra.ws/pengertian-talkshow/. 2009.

A. Ahmadi & M. Jauhar, Mohammad. Dasar-Dasar

Psikolinguisti. Jakarta: Prestasi Pustaka Publisher

2015.

N. S. Sari, S. Saman, & A. Syahrani, “Selip lidah terhadap

produksi ujaran dalam debat capres dan cawapres

menggunakan pendekatan Psikolinguistik” Journal

Pendidikan & Pembelajaran vol. 5 no.4, 2016, pp.1-1.

K. D. Estadha, & M. A. Syukri “Slips of the tongue

produced by interviewees during the job interview at

PT. Bimasakti Multi Sinergi” Anglicist vol. 5 no.1,

2016, pp. 40-46.

N. Poulisse “Slips of the tongue in first and second

language production” Studia Linguistica vol. 54 no.2,

2002, pp. 136-149

J. Y. Chen ”The representation and processing of tone in

Mandarin Chinese: Evidence from slips of the tongue”

Applied Psycholinguistics vol. 20 no.2, 1999, pp.289-

301.

D. Brancher “When the tongue slips it tells the truth’:

tricks and truths of the Renaissance lapsus

Renaissance Studies vol. 30 no.1, 2016, pp.39-56.

B. Bungin Penelitian Kualitatif. Prenada Media Group:

Jakarta. 2007

Mahsun. Metode Penelitian Bahasa Tahapan Strategi,

Metode, dan Tekniknya. Jakarta: Rajawali Pers. 2012

L. J. Moleong, Metode Penelitian Kualitatif. Bandung:

Pemuda Rosda Karya. 2002

R. Burford-Rice & M. Augoustinos ”I didn't mean that: It

was just a slip of the tongue: Racial slips and gaffes in

the public arena” British Journal of Social Psychology

vol. 57 no. 1, 2017, pp. 21-42

V.I. Podlesskaya “A corpus-based study of self-repairs in

Russian spoken monologues” Russian Linguistics vol.

39 no. 1 2015, pp 63-79

W.L. Chung, L. Jarmulowicz & G. M. Bidelman

“Auditory processing, linguistic prosody awareness,

and word reading in Mandarin-speaking children

learning English” Reading and Writing vol. 30no.7,

2017, pp 1407–1429

W. P. J. Broos, W. Duyck & R. J. Hartsuiker “Verbal self-

monitoring in the second language”. Language

Learning vol. 66 no.2, 2016, pp. 132-154

D. Acheson, L. Ganushchak, I. Christoffels, P. Hagoort

“Conflict monitoring in soeech production:

Psychological evidence from bilingual picture

naming” Brain & Language vol. 123 no. 1. 2012, pp.

131-136

F. Risdianto “A phonological analysis on the English

consonants of Sundanese EFL speakers” Jurnal

Arbitrer vol. 4 no. 1 2017, pp.27-37

W. J. M. Levelt “Models of word production” Trend in

Cognitive Sciences vol. 3 no. 6. 1999, pp.223-232.

T. U. Christiansen “Percepetual confusion among

consonants, revisited: cross-spectral integration of

phonetic-feature information and consonant

recognition” IEEE Transactions on Audio, Speech and

Language Processing vol. 20 no. 1 2012, pp 147-161

V. M. Lange, P.P Cheneval, G. Python, Goire & M.

Laganaro “Contextual phonological errors and

omission of obligatory liaison as a window into a

reduced span of phonological encoding” Aphasiology

vol 31 no. 2 2016, pp. 201-220

ICRI 2018 - International Conference Recent Innovation

1824