Abstract
Interjections are lexical units that express emotions, attitudes, or spontaneous reactions and can stand alone as independent utterances. In digital spoken language, primary interjections are intermingled with slang, hortatives, religious expressions, and code-mixing; therefore, the scope of the study must be categorically defined before their forms and functions can be analyzed. This study aims to describe (1) the categorical status of interjections as core or peripheral, (2) primary, secondary, and interjectional phrase forms, and (3) the functions of interjections according to Ameka, with Alwi’s subtypes limited to expressive-emotive functions. This study employs a descriptive qualitative approach. The data consist of interjection tokens from twelve videos from 2026 on the channels Tekotok, Windah Basudara, Nihongo Mantappu, and Deddy Corbuzier. The researcher collected data using the observe-and-record technique, then filtered it so that only tokens that met the analysis criteria were retained. The findings indicate that core interjections consist of primary exclamations such as “eh,” “wah,” “aduh,” and “wow,” while peripheral interjections consist of conversions, slang, hortatives, religious expressions, or code-mixed utterances, such as “anjay,” “gila,” “yuk,” “alhamdulillah,” and “oh my God.” Primary forms appear to be more ready-to-use, whereas secondary forms can be understood as the result of function shifts, and interjectional phrases as units that are uttered in their entirety. The research findings indicate four functions—expressive-emotive, expressive-cognitive, conative, and phatic—which do not appear to be one-to-one tied to specific lemmas. Admiration or satisfaction appears to be the most dominant in the corpus, while “wah,” “eh,” “aduh,” “yuk,” and “anjay” can shift functions depending on the context of the token. These findings suggest that digital spoken interjections need to be categorized, analyzed at the primary–secondary–phrase level, and interpreted contextually.
References
Ameka, F. K. (1992). Interjections: The universal yet neglected part of speech. Journal of Pragmatics, 18, 101–118. https://doi.org/10.1016/0378-2166(92)90048-g
Andini, F., & Agustina. (2023). Karakteristik Interjeksi Dalam Serial Animasi Nussa Dan Rarra: Kajian Morfologis. Persona., 2(4), 703–715. https://doi.org/10.24036/jpers.v2i4.190
Aryaningsih, C. (2020). Interjeksi pada video penilai makanan (food vlogger) dalam saluran YouTube Ken&Grat: Suatu kajian struktur dan semantik. Universitas Padjadjaran.
Borchmann, S. (2019). Non-spontaneous and communicative emotive interjections. Scandinavian Studies in Language, 10(1), 7–40. https://doi.org/10.7146/sss.v10i1.114668
Keraf, G. (1984). Tata bahasa Indonesia untuk sekolah lanjutan atas. Nusa Indah.
Kridalaksana, H. (1986). Kelas kata dalam bahasa Indonesia. Gramedia.
Licup, M. D., Ramos, R. R., & Jr., R. P. D. (2026). Syntax in reddit comments: An analysis of responses on coping with life’s lowest points. Journal of Language and Pragmatics Studies., 5(1), 36–48. https://doi.org/10.58881/jlps.v5i1.146
Mahsun. (2005). Metode penelitian bahasa: tahapan strategi, metode, dan tekniknya. RajaGranfindo Persada.
Mao, A. (2017). Conceptuality and Context-Sensitivity of Emotive Interjections. Open Journal of Modern Linguistics, 7(1), 41–51. https://doi.org/10.4236/ojml.2017.71004
Meinard, M. E.-M. (2021). Le défi définitoire de l’interjection et de l’onomatopée : une étude contributive, axée sur l’anglais contemporain. In HAL (Le Centre pour la Communication Scientifique Directe). Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique. https://theses.hal.science/tel-03608244
Moeliono, A. M., Lapoliwa, H., Alwi, H., Tjatur, S. S., Sasangka, W., & Sugiyono, S. (2017). Tata bahasa baku Bahasa Indonesia. Edisi ketiga. Badan Pengembangan dan Pembinaan Bahasa, Kementerian Pendidikan dan Kebudayaan
Nugroho, R. A., & Setyaningsih, N. (2019). Interjections In Semarangan Javanese: A Sociopragmatic Approach. HUMANIKA, 26(2), 10. https://doi.org/10.14710/humanika.v26i2.22184
Ponsonnet, M. (2023). Interjections. In SPIRE - Sciences Po Institutional REpository (pp. 564–572). https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198824978.003.0047
Rachmah, F. (2023). Interjeksi dalam konten YouTube food vlogger Farida Nurhan. UIN Madura.
Rahardi, R. K. (2019). Pragmatik: konteks intralinguistik dan konteks ekstralinguistik. Amara Books.
Rahmadani, R. A. D. N. H. (2023). Interjeksi dalam video ulasan barang aneh pada kanal YouTube Gadgetin: Kajian morfosintaksis dan semantik. Universitas Padjadjaran.
Rismaya, R., & Sofyan, A. N. (2020). Interjeksi dalam komentar terhadap cuitan akun twitter @Asknonym: Kajian Morfologi. MABASAN, 14(2), 181–194. https://doi.org/10.26499/mab.v14i2.354
Shalika, M. P., & Mulyadi, M. M. (2019). Cognitive interjection In Indonesian and Japanese. HUMANIKA, 26(1), 32. https://doi.org/10.14710/humanika.v26i1.22053
Tobing, R. M. L. A. L., Wagiati, W., & Kadir, P. M. (2023). Interjeksi sebagai strategi tuturan imperatif dalam tayangan youtube “umay shahab karirnya hancur dan juga sukses semua karena iqbaal!”: Kajian sintaksis pragmatik. Pena Literasi, 6(1), 65. https://doi.org/10.24853/pl.6.1.65-77
Widiatmoko, B., & Waslam, W. (2017). Interjeksi Dalam Bahasa Indonesia: Analisis Pragmatik. Pujangga, 3(1), 87. https://doi.org/10.47313/pujangga.v3i1.330

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Copyright (c) 2026 Fauzan Syafa'ad, Siti Ainim Liusti (Author)