Pragmatik Forensik dan Ujaran Kebencian: Analisis Kohesi dalam Kasus Pencemaran Nama Baik Sri Rahayu

Abstract

One of the most widely discussed issues is defamation and hate speech, particularly on social media. The case of Sri Rahayu Ningsih serves as a clear example of how language that appears metaphorical can be legally contested. This study aims to analyze Sri Rahayu’s utterances using grammatical and lexical cohesion theories as well as a forensic pragmatic approach, emphasizing the illocutionary and perlocutionary forces of hate speech. The study employs a descriptive-analytic approach. Data were obtained from Sri Rahayu’s utterances circulating on social media, which were then analyzed through three stages: identification of grammatical cohesion, analysis of lexical cohesion, and interpretation of pragmatic force based on Austin’s and Searle’s speech act theories. The analysis reveals that Sri Rahayu’s utterances demonstrate grammatical cohesion in the form of references and antonyms, as well as lexical cohesion in the form of repetition and synonymy. However, the primary strength lies in the pragmatic dimension, namely utterances such as “Tumpul di atas, tajam ke bawah” dan “Mati satu tumbuh seribu”, which carry illocutionary force as sharp criticism and perlocutionary effects that potentially influence public opinion and create legal implications. Based on the findings, it can be affirmed that hate speech cannot be understood solely through literal meaning or linguistic structure; it must be analyzed from its pragmatic dimension. Defamation is essentially a pragmatic act that unites language, social context, and law. Therefore, forensic linguistic studies should consistently integrate pragmatic theories to explain the close relationship between language and legal accountability.