{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.05555555555555555, 'fraction_numerical': 0.011839708561020037, 'mean_word_length': 5.911949685534591, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
The Symbolic Forms of Indonesian Language Teaching’s Discourse at IAIN Palopo: A Critical Discourse Analysis

This research aims at revealing the functions of symbolic forms of Indonesian language teaching (PBI). The method used is qualitative descriptive with data source in the form of conversations between lecturer and students who produce words, phrases, and sentences obtained by recorder instrument (handycam) and interview guidelines. The data is analyzed using data reduction, data display, and verification technique. The results show that the symbolic forms used in PBI’s discourse reveals the idea of characteristics concerning motivation, strengthening, competence, sharpening, and awareness. In line with that, the functions of the symbolic forms include (1) statements with "challenging" characteristic and its development; (2) direction, guidance, and advice; (3) praise; (4) threat (fear); (5) question and correction; (6) inadequacy and weakness; (7) sanction (discipline); (8) counseling and training service; (9) instruction or command; (10) honesty; and (11) request or demand.