Violation of Cooperative Principles and Its Connection to Logical Fallacies: Critical Discourse Analysis on the Third Debate of Indonesian President 2024
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.36312/jar.v4iSpecial%20Issue.3585Keywords:
Cooperative Principle, Logical Fallacies, Critical Discourse Analysis, Third Debate of Indonesian President 2024, Critical Discourse AnalysisAbstract
This research examines the violation of Grice’s Cooperative Principles and its connection to Logical Fallacies in the Third Debate of the 2024 Indonesian Presidential Election through a qualitative descriptive method framed within Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA). Using the Miles and Huberman model which consists of data reduction, data display, and conclusion drawing the study analyzed debate transcripts and video recordings to identify linguistic patterns of manipulation. The findings revealed 13 maxim violations (7 relevance, 4 quantity, 2 quality) and 39 logical fallacies, with straw man, red herring, and appeal to emotion as the most dominant. These violations were not random but deliberate rhetorical strategies used to deflect criticism, obscure weak arguments, and appeal emotionally to voters. The originality of this research lies in its integration of Grice’s Cooperative Principles and logical fallacy theory within the CDA framework, offering a more holistic linguistic approach to understanding persuasion in political discourse. Unlike previous studies that treated maxim violations and fallacies separately, this study explicitly links the two, showing how pragmatic violations produce fallacious reasoning that shapes ideological narratives. Theoretically, it enriches sociolinguistic and CDA perspectives by explaining how language functions as an instrument of power and persuasion, while practically it provides insights for election organizers to improve debate moderation, for journalists to conduct more critical reporting, and for educators to enhance media literacy and critical thinking.
References
Agustin, M., & Syaodih, E. (2024). Debate as a speaking scenario to develop critical and logical reasoning skills. Jakarta: Universitas Terbuka Press.
Brierley, S., Kramon, E., & Ofosu, G. K. (2020). The Moderating Effect of Debates on Political Attitudes. American Journal of Political Science, 64(1), 19–37. https://doi.org/10.1111/ajps.12458
Buddharat, C., Ambele, E., & Boonsuk, Y. (2017). Uncooperativeness in Political Discourse?: Violating Gricean Maxims in Presidential Debate 2016. Songklanakarin Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities, 23(3), 179–216. https://ssrn.com/abstract=3272625
Dewanta, A. (2018). Political discourse and violation of conversational maxims. In M. Mocanu (Ed.), Linguistic Strategies in Political Communication (pp. 14–25). Bucharest: Romanian Academy Press.
Fairclough, N. (1995). Critical discourse analysis: The critical study of language. London: Longman.
Grice, H. P. (1975). Logic and conversation. In P. Cole & J. L. Morgan (Eds.), Syntax and Semantics: Vol. 3. Speech Acts (pp. 41–58). New York: Academic Press.
Hadi, M. (2013). Pragmatics and language use in communication. Yogyakarta: Deepublish.
Jin, L., Zhang, T., & Li, X. (2022). The role of reasoning in logical argumentation: A cognitive approach. Journal of Pragmatics and Logic Studies, 14(2), 112–126.
McCarthy, M. (1992). Discourse Analysis for Language Teachers. Child Language Teaching and Therapy, 8(1), 96–100. https://doi.org/10.1177/026565909200800108
Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Mocanu, M. (2015). Pragmatics and political discourse: A study on conversational strategies. Bucharest: University of Bucharest Press.
Mouchel, A., Reynolds, D., & Krieger, S. (2024). Identifying logical fallacies in modern political rhetoric. Journal of Critical Thinking and Communication Studies, 22(1), 45–58.
Naveed, S., Zeeshan, A., & Malik, A. (2013). The importance of qualitative research in social sciences. International Journal of Humanities and Social Science Invention, 2(3), 2319–7722.
Nuruddin Hidayat, D., Nurhalimah, Defianty, M., Kultsum, U., Zulkifli, & Sufyan, A. (2020). Logical Fallacies in Social Media: A Discourse Analysis in Political Debate. 2020 8th International Conference on Cyber and IT Service Management, CITSM 2020. https://doi.org/10.1109/CITSM50537.2020.9268821
Rosyidah, D. (2020). The violation of cooperative principles in the conversation of Indonesian presidential debate 2019. Journal of Linguistic and Literary Studies, 8(2), 55–63.
Sari, Y. W., & Afriana, A. (2020). The Cooperative Principle Analysis in About Time Movie. Linguistic, English Education and Art (LEEA) Journal, 4(1), 66–76. https://doi.org/10.31539/leea.v4i1.1369
Waloyo, R., Mulyadi, A., & Hartono, E. (2023). Cooperative communication and pragmatic principles in Indonesian discourse. Indonesian Journal of Applied Linguistics, 13(1), 22–35.
Walton, D. N. (1995). A Pragmatic Theory of Fallacy Studies in.
Zebua, E., Siregar, M., & Manik, J. (2017). The cooperative principle in conversational pragmatics: A linguistic analysis. Language and Society Journal, 5(3), 214–225.
Zhou, C. (2018). A comprehensive guide to logical fallacies: Understanding flawed reasoning in daily life. Beijing: China Academic Press.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Adriyan Kholid Riyadi, Baharuddin Baharuddin, Ahmad Junaidi, Mahyuni Mahyuni
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Authors who publish with Journal of Authentic Research agree to the following terms:
- For all articles published in Journal of Authentic Research, copyright is retained by the authors. Authors give permission to the publisher to announce the work with conditions. When the manuscript is accepted for publication, the authors agrees to implement a non-exclusive transfer of publishing rights to the journals.
- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgment 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 acknowledgment 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 (See The Effect of Open Access).
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
