The Meaning of Love Language in Student Relations: Edmund Husserl's Phenomenological Approach

Authors

  • Afdi Maulfianti Communication Science Study Program, Faculty of Law and Social Studies, Mathla'ul Anwar University Banten Author
  • Pudja Lastari Communication Science Study Program, Faculty of Law and Social Studies, Mathla'ul Anwar University Banten Author

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.60036/qbgj1g73

Keywords:

love language, interpersonal communication, phenomenology, romantic relationship

Abstract

Romantic relationships among university students constitute a form of interpersonal communication that involves emotional expression, affection, and the construction of meaning through various communicative practices. One prominent form of affective communication in romantic relationships is the concept of love language introduced by Gary Chapman. This study aims to analyze the meaning of love language among student couples at Mathla’ul Anwar University Banten based on their subjective experiences and Islamic values. This research employed a qualitative approach based on Edmund Husserl’s transcendental phenomenology. The study applied a constructivist paradigm, while data were collected through in-depth interviews, observation, and documentation. Data analysis was conducted through data reduction, data presentation, and conclusion drawing. The findings reveal that the dominant forms of love language among student couples include words of affirmation, quality time, and acts of service. Love language is interpreted as a form of attention, emotional appreciation, presence, and psychological support within romantic relationships. Furthermore, the values of mahabbah and rahmah serve as moral foundations in maintaining relationships while adhering to religious boundaries and social ethics. This study demonstrates that affective communication in students’ romantic relationships is not solely emotional in nature but is also shaped by spiritual and cultural values that influence the subjective meaning of love.

References

Amiruddin, A. (2021). The relationship between commitment and relationship quality in young couples. Journal of Social Psychology, 19(2), 115–126.

Arnett, J. J. (2000). Emerging adulthood: A theory of development from the late teens through the twenties. American Psychologist, 55(5), 469–480. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.55.5.469

Chapman, G. (1992). The five love languages: How to express heartfelt commitment to your mate. Northfield Publishing.

Chapman, G. (2015). The 5 love languages: The secret to love that lasts. Northfield Publishing.

DeVito, J. A. (2016). The interpersonal communication book (14th ed.). Pearson.

Hafid, M., & Nurhasanah, N. (2023). Religiosity and self-control in premarital relationships of Muslim students. Journal of Islamic Counseling and Education, 8(1), 45–58.

Husserl, E. (1970). The crisis of European sciences and transcendental phenomenology: An introduction to phenomenological philosophy (D. Carr, Trans.). Northwestern University Press. (Original work published 1936).

Knapp, M. L., & Vangelisti, A. L. (2009). Interpersonal communication and human relationships (6th ed.). Pearson.

Miles, M. B., Huberman, A. M., & Saldaña, J. (2014). Qualitative data analysis: A methods sourcebook (3rd ed.). Sage Publications.

Prathama, R., & Mahadwistha, R. (2024). Mahabbah and rahmah are the foundation of interpersonal relations in an Islamic perspective. Journal of Islamic Communication, 14(1), 78–92.

Surijah, E. A., Putri, A. D., & Aryanata, N. T. (2020). Love languages in young Indonesian couples and their implications for relationship satisfaction. Journal of Behavioral Psychology, 7(2), 145–159. https://doi.org/10.24854/jpu107

Sternberg, R. J. (1986). A triangular theory of love. Psychological Review, 93(2), 119–135. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.93.2.119

Downloads

Published

2023-10-04

How to Cite

The Meaning of Love Language in Student Relations: Edmund Husserl’s Phenomenological Approach. (2023). Journal of Sustainable Community Development, 1(1), 26-39. https://doi.org/10.60036/qbgj1g73