Cyberpragmatic Analysis of Illocutionary Acts and Communicative Functions in Sarcastic Instagram Comments on Zara Adhisty

Authors

  • Tessalonika Kristina Sitorus Department of English Literature, Faculty of Cultural Science, Universitas Sumatera Utara, Medan 20155, North Sumatra, Indonesia
  • Alya Aulia Siregar Department of English Literature, Faculty of Cultural Science, Universitas Sumatera Utara, Medan 20155, North Sumatra, Indonesia
  • Indah Nadine Silvana Situmorang Department of English Literature, Faculty of Cultural Science, Universitas Sumatera Utara, Medan 20155, North Sumatra, Indonesia
  • Zahara Saputriyani Department of English Literature, Faculty of Cultural Science, Universitas Sumatera Utara, Medan 20155, North Sumatra, Indonesia
  • Dian Marisha Putri Department of English Literature, Faculty of Cultural Science, Universitas Sumatera Utara, Medan 20155, North Sumatra, Indonesia

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.59011/austronesian.5.3.2026.955-969

Keywords:

Sarcasm, Illocutionary Acts, Communicative Functions, Cyberpragmatics

Abstract

Sarcasm in social-media interaction is pragmatically significant because its meaning cannot always be interpreted from literal verbal content alone, particularly when contextual and digital resources contribute to meaning construction. This study aimed to identify the types of illocutionary acts and the predominant communicative functions realized in sarcastic Instagram comments on Zara Adhisty from a cyberpragmatic perspective. A descriptive qualitative design was employed using 42 comments purposively selected from six Instagram posts. The data were analyzed using (Searle, 1969, 1979) classification of illocutionary acts and (Jakobson, 1960) communicative functions, while contextual information and digital resources were considered in interpreting sarcastic meaning. The result showed three types of illocutionary acts. The dominant acts were assertive acts with 23 comments (54.76%), expressive acts with 11 comments (26.19%) and directive acts with 8 comments (19.05%). Three major types of communicative functions, including emotive (18 comments, 42.86%), referential (15 comments, 35.71%) and conative (9 comments, 21.43%) were also identified in the study. These findings show that illocutionary force and communicative function are related but are different dimensions of sarcastic digital discourse. They also emphasize the importance of taking verbal expressions, digital cues, and socio-contextual information together when interpreting sarcasm in online communication. Further research on the topic might include the analysis of a larger sample with multiple raters in order to ensure higher inter-rater reliability.

References

Abdul, F., & Idrees, G. (2025). A socio-pragmatic study of speech act realizations through Arabic Twitter (X) discourse: Subjective perspectives of commenters. Journal on Interdisciplinary Studies in Humanities, 8(4). https://doi.org/10.34050/elsjish.v8i4.44959

Ahmadi F., Y., Syaifullah, A. R., & Hermawan, B. (2024). Speech acts on Instagram comments about G20 Indonesia. Diksi, 32(1), 76–92. https://doi.org/10.21831/diksi.v32i1.71227

Alharbi, A., & Mahzari, M. (2023). The pragmatic functions of emojis in Arabic tweets. Frontiers in Psychology, 13, Article 1059672. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.1059672

Alshakhanbeh, S., & Alghazo, S. (2022). A pragmatic analysis of criticism strategies against government policies on social media in Jordan: A gender-based investigation. Jordan Journal of Modern Languages and Literatures, 14(2), 263–286. https://doi.org/10.47012/jjmll.14.2.3

Aporbo, R. J. (2023). Sociopragmatic analysis of Filipino celebrities’ posts and fans’ comments. World Journal of English Language, 13(5), 544–558. https://doi.org/10.5430/wjel.v13n5p544

Armanda, R. (2024). Sarkasme pada komentar postingan Instagram @amburabdoel. Kajian Linguistik dan Sastra, 3(2), 323–331. https://doi.org/10.22437/kalistra.v3i2.42979

Ariasy, M. S., Radhiah, & Trisfayani. (2026). Sarcasm in the comments column of the MedanTalk Instagram account: A pragmatic study. Journal of Practice Learning and Educational Development, 6(1), 622–630. https://doi.org/10.58737/jpled.v6i1.740

Austin, J. L. (1962). How to do things with words. Clarendon Press.

Clara, E. D., Hutauruk, B. S., & Munthe, M. V. R. (2026). Forensic linguistics study: Online hate speech on social media Instagram (Indonesian government). Jurnal Ilmu Sosial dan Humaniora, 4(2), 578–587. https://doi.org/10.58540/isihumor.v4i2.1627

Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2018). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (5th ed.). SAGE Publications.

Cui, J. (2022). Respecting the old and loving the young: Emoji-based sarcasm interpretation between younger and older adults. Frontiers in Psychology, 13, Article 897153. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.897153

Dynel, M. (2020). Laughter through tears: Unprofessional review comments as humor on the ShitMyReviewersSay Twitter account. Intercultural Pragmatics, 17(5), 513–544. https://doi.org/10.1515/ip-2020-5001

Fadilah, I., & Wijayanto, A. (2024). Sarcasm in social media: A study of comments on Sam Smith’s Instagram posts. Jurnal Onoma: Pendidikan, Bahasa, dan Sastra, 10(1), 92–104. https://doi.org/10.30605/onoma.v10i1.3077

Fatmawati, F., & Ningsih, R. (2024). Tindak tutur ekspresif dalam perspektif cyberpragmatics. Jurnal Onoma: Pendidikan, Bahasa, dan Sastra, 10(1), 196–214. https://doi.org/10.30605/onoma.v10i1.3165

Fimulkillah, I. Q., Nurrifani, N., Riskiyani, N., & Rohbiah, T. S. (2026). The meaning and functions of sarcasm and humour in Gen Z netizens’ comments on viral issues on TikTok: A pragma-semantic analysis. Journal of English Language Teaching, Linguistics, and Literature, 6(2), 149–161. https://doi.org/10.47766/jetlee.v6i2.7650

Grover, V., & Banati, H. (2022). Understanding the sarcastic nature of emojis with SarcOji. In S. Wijeratne, J. Lee, H. Saggion, & A. Sheth (Eds.), Proceedings of the Fifth International Workshop on Emoji Understanding and Applications in Social Media (pp. 29–39). Association for Computational Linguistics. https://doi.org/10.18653/v1/2022.emoji-1.4

Irawati, R. A., Sujatna, E. T. S., & Yuliawati, S. (2023). Strategi ketidaksantunan sarkasme warganet pada kolom komentar Instagram Ganjar Pranowo. Diglosia: Jurnal Kajian Bahasa, Sastra, dan Pengajarannya, 6(3), 911–930. https://doi.org/10.30872/diglosia.v6i3.739

Jakobson, R. (1960). Closing statement: Linguistics and poetics. In T. A. Sebeok (Ed.), Style in language (pp. 350–377). MIT Press.

Juwita, A. A. R., & Ghaitsaa, C. O. (2025). Sarkasme di ruang digital: Analisis pragmatik tindak tutur netizen pada kolom komentar Instagram @fuji_an. Prosiding SENALA (Seminar Nasional Linguistik Indonesia), 2. https://senala.upnjatim.ac.id/index.php/senala/article/view/22

Nawakwulan, L., Lestari, N., Pujiani, L., & Agustini, L. (2026). When sarcasm fails: A pragmatic analysis of misinterpreted sarcastic comments in Instagram comment sections. Jurnal Pendidikan Tambusai, 10(2), 21665–21671. https://doi.org/10.31004/jptam.v10i2.41790

Palaniammal, A., & Anandababu, P. (2023). Robust sarcasm detection using artificial rabbits optimizer with multilayer convolutional encoder-decoder neural network on social media. SSRG International Journal of Electronics and Communication Engineering, 10(5), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.14445/23488549/IJECE-V10I5P101

Putra, V. G. R., Febriyatko, A., & Busri, H. (2024). Hate speech in Instagram comments of DPR RI: A forensic linguistic analysis. KEMBARA: Jurnal Keilmuan Bahasa, Sastra, dan Pengajarannya, 10(1), 173–196. https://doi.org/10.22219/kembara.v10i1.28128

Putri, D. M., Mulyadi, Saragih, A., Rangkuti, R., & Amri, Y. K. (2026). The meaning of cyber pragmatic context in the Indonesian election campaign texts. Studies in English Language and Education, 13(1), 556–571. https://doi.org/10.24815/siele.v13i1.201

Searle, J. R. (1969). Speech acts: An essay in the philosophy of language. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139173438

Searle, J. R. (1979). Expression and meaning: Studies in the theory of speech acts. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511609213

Weissman, B. (2022). Emoji semantics/pragmatics: Investigating commitment and lying. In S. Wijeratne, J. Lee, H. Saggion, & A. Sheth (Eds.), Proceedings of the Fifth International Workshop on Emoji Understanding and Applications in Social Media (pp. 21–28). Association for Computational Linguistics. https://doi.org/10.18653/v1/2022.emoji-1.3

Yus, F. (2011). Cyberpragmatics: Internet-mediated communication in context. John Benjamins Publishing Company. https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.213

Yusuf, A. B., & Firdhani Resha. (2025). Cyberpragmatics of politeness in netizens’ comments on the Indonesian president’s Instagram posts. Lingue: Jurnal Bahasa, Budaya, dan Sastra, 7(1), 144–156. https://doi.org/10.33477/lingue.v7i1.9455

Zeng, W. (2023). Pragmatic functions of emoji on Chinese social media. BCP Education & Psychology, 9, 26–32. https://doi.org/10.54691/bcpep.v9i.4604

Downloads

Published

2026-12-01

Issue

Vol. 5 No. 3 (2026): Austronesian: Journal of Language Science & Literature

Section

Articles

License

Copyright (c) 2026 Tessalonika Kristina Sitorus, Alya Aulia Siregar, Indah Nadine Silvana Situmorang, Zahara Saputriyani, Dian Marisha Putri

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

How to Cite

Cyberpragmatic Analysis of Illocutionary Acts and Communicative Functions in Sarcastic Instagram Comments on Zara Adhisty. (2026). Austronesian: Journal of Language Science & Literature, 5(3), 955-969. https://doi.org/10.59011/austronesian.5.3.2026.955-969

Most read articles by the same author(s)