The Title 'Gus' The Title 'Gus' from the Perspective of X Social Media Users in Indonesia: A Cognitive Linguistics Study and Its Implementation in Critical Literacy Learning
Abstract
His study examines emerging perspectives on the term Gus on social media, particularly on the X platform in Indonesia. Traditionally, Gus carries a positive connotation within Indonesian Islamic culture, symbolizing individuals of moral integrity and religious devotion. However, this perception has shifted following a viral incident involving Gus Miftah, who was accused of insulting a tea seller during a religious event. The controversy sparked public debate and criticism, reshaping how the title is viewed online.Using a qualitative descriptive method, this research collected and analyzed posts containing the keyword Gus to explore how the term’s meaning has evolved. The study is grounded in cognitive linguistics, focusing on imaginative processes such as model manipulation, cognitive planning, image schemas, and semantic interpretation.Findings reveal that Gus is no longer universally regarded as a symbol of piety, but increasingly perceived as a title used for personal or political interests. Public discourse now questions the legitimacy and moral authority of individuals bearing the title, reflecting broader skepticism toward religious figures.The results contribute to the development of teaching materials for Critical Discourse Analysis, helping students identify power dynamics and ideological bias in language. This study highlights how digital platforms shape public perception and demonstrates the role of language, power, and ideology in constructing meaning in online spaces
Abstract View: 0 
PDF Download: 0
SIMILARITY CHECK Download: 0
References
Allan, K. & Burridge, K. (2006). Forbidden Words: Taboo and the Censoring of Languange. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511617881
Amant, R. S., Morrison, C. T., Chang, Y. H., Mu, W., Cohen, P. R., & Beal, C. (2006). An Image Schema Language. DTIC North Carolina State Univ at Raleigh Dept of Computer Science, 1, 1–7. https://doi.org/ADA458943
Andersson, L. G. & Hirsch, R. (1985). Prespectives on Swering. Gothenburg: Univeristy Of Gothernburg, Departement of Linguitics.
Andersson. (1987). Becoming a Nation of Readers: The report of The Commission on Reading. Washington, D. C: The National Academy of Education.
Arimi, S. (2015). Linguistik Kognitif: Sebuah Pengantar. Yogyakarta: A Com Press.
Bellanca, J., & Brandt, R. (2010). 21st-Century Skills: Rethinking How Students Learn. Solution Tree Press.
Chilton, P. (2005). Missing Links in Mainstream CDS: Modules, Blends and the Critical Instinct. In R. Wodak and P. Chilton (eds.), A New Research Agenda in (Critical) Discourse Analysis: Theory, Methodology and Interdisciplinarity. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. pp. 19-52. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1075/dapsac.13.05chi
Chiluwa, I. (2021). Introduction: Discourse, conflict and conflict resolution. In I. Chiluwa (Ed.),Discourse and conflict: Analysing text and talk of conflict, hate and peacebuilding (pp. 1–16).Palgrave Macmillan. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009064057.002
Cruse. & Croft, W. (2004). Cognitive Linguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511803864
Fairclough, N. (1995). Critical Discourse Analysis. Longman: London and New York.
Ghaderinezhad, B. (2015). On the Relationship between Language and Ideology Represented in the CDA Texts. International Journal of Humanities and Cultural Studies, December 2015 (Special Issue), www.ijhcs.com/index.php/ijhcs/index.
Hämäläinen, E. K., Kiilli, C., Marttunen, M., Räikkönen, E., González-Ibáñez, R., & Leppänen, P. H. T. (2020). Promoting Sixth Graders’ Credibility Evaluation of Web Pages: An Intervention Study. Running Head: Promoting Students Credibility Evaluation, 110, 1–52. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2020.106372 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2020.106372
Hart, C. (2014). Cognitive Linguistic Critical Discourse Studies. London: Routledge. pp.77-91. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315739342-6
Haula, B. & Nur, T. (2019). Konseptualisasi Metafora dalam Rubik Opini Kompas Kajian Semantik Kognitif. Retorika: Jurnal Bahasa, Sastra, Dan Pengajarannya, 12(1), 25–35. https://doi.org/10.26858/retorika.v12i1.7375 DOI: https://doi.org/10.26858/retorika.v12i1.7375
Hermina. (2014). Analisis Wacana Berita Kisah-Kisah Dari Perbatasan Negara (Liputan Khusus Edisi Minggu 12 Juni 2011 Kaltim Post). Ejournal Ilmu Komunikasi, 2 (3): 229-243. Dirujuk dari https://ejournal.ilkom.fisip-unmul.ac.id/site/.
Holtgraves, T. M. (Ed.). (2014). The Oxford handbook of language and social psychology. OxfordUniversity Press DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199838639.013.011
Jorgensen, M., Louise, J., & P. (2010). Analisis Wacana Teori dan Metode. Yogyakarta: Pustaka Pelajar.
Kovencses, Z. (2005). Metaphor in Culture: Universality and Variation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511614408
Kovencses, Z. (2010). Metaphor: A Practical Introduction. Edisi Kedua. New York: Oxford University Press.
Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. (1980). Metaphors We Live By. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. (2003). Methapors We Live By. London: The University of Chicago Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.7208/chicago/9780226470993.001.0001
Lyra, H. M., Sobarna, C., Djajasudarma, F., & Gunardi, G. (2016). Citra Haté “Hati” dalam Metafora Orientasional dalam Bahasa Sunda. Metalingua, 14(2), 167–176.
Machin and Mayr, (2012). How to do critical discourse analysis: A multimodal introduction. Sage, London, UK
Mahsun. (2005). Metode Penelitian Bahasa. Jakarta: PT Raja Grafindo Perseda.
Mullis, I. V. S. & Martin, M. O. (2019). PIRLS 2021 Assessment Frameworks. TIMSS & PIRLS International Study Center. Boston College: TIMSS & PIRLS International Study Center, Lynch School of Education, Boston College and International Association for the Evaluation of Educational Achievement (IEA).
Mulyadi. (2010). Dari Gerakan ke Emosi Perspektif Linguistik Kognitif. Jurnal Ilmiah Bahasa dan Sastra (online). Logat: Jurnal Ilmiah Dan Sastra, 6(1), 17–24.
Nurdin. (2012). Pengantar Komunikasi Massa. Jakarta: Rajawali Press.
Oetzel, J. G., & Ting-Toomey, S. (Eds.). (2013). The SAGE handbook of conflict communication:Integrating theory, research, and practice (2nd ed.). Sage DOI: https://doi.org/10.4135/9781452281988
Payuyasa, I. N. (2017). Analisis Wacana Kritis Model Van Dijk dalam Program Acara Mata Najwa Di Metro TV. Jurnal Segara Widya, 5. Hal 14-24. DOI: https://doi.org/10.31091/sw.v5i0.188
Rasse, Carina & Alexander Onysko. (2020). Conceptual Metaphors In Poetry Interpretation: A Psycholinguistic Approach. Language and Cognition, 310–342. doi:10.1017/langcog.2019.47 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/langcog.2019.47
Rohman, S. (2017). Membangun Budaya Membaca pada Anak Melalui Program Gerakan Literasi Sekolah. Terampil: Jurnal Pendidikan Dan Pembelajaran Dasar, 4(1), 151–174.
Subhan, R. F., Nur, T., & Nugraha, T. C. (2019). Konseptualisasi Sifat dan Perbuatan dalam Metafora Berunsur Tubuh “Tangan” pada Al-Quran. Kandai, 15(1), 61–74. https://doi.org/10.26499/jk.v15i1.1287 DOI: https://doi.org/10.26499/jk.v15i1.1287
Triadi, R. B. (2017). Penggunaan Makian Bahasa Indonesia pada Media Sosial (Kajian Sosiolinguisik). Jurnal Sasindo Unpam, 5(2), 1–26. https://doi.org/10.32493/Sasindo.V5I2
Ungerer, F.,&Schmid, H.J. 1996. An Introduction to Cognitive Linguistics. London: Longman.
Copyright (c) 2025 Rai Rai Bagus Triadi, hilda Hilaliyah, hilda Hilaliyah (Author)
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Abstract viewed = 0 times
PDF downloaded = 0 times
SIMILARITY CHECK downloaded = 0 times
