Pilihan Bahasa Remaja Sasak Kota Mataram

RETORIKA: Jurnal Ilmu Bahasa, Vol. 3, No. 2 Oktober 2017, Page 211-219 Available Online at https://ejournal.warmadewa.ac.id/index.php/jret P-ISSN: 2406-9019 E-ISSN: 2443-0668 Wiya Suktiningsih STIBA Bumigora Mataram [email protected] Received: 05-10-2017 Revised: 16-10-2017 Accepted: 21-10-2017 How to Cite: Suktiningsih.W. (2017) Language Choice Among Teenager Ethnic Sasak of Mataram. RETORIKA: Jurnal Ilmu Bahasa 3(2). 211-219 DOI: 10.22225/jr.3.2.334.211-219 Abstract The language aspects and social context outside of the language which are related effect the linguistic situation of a multilingual society. This study was conducted to see how the process of language choice among teens of Sasak and factors that influence it. Teen's of Sasak as Sasak speakers learn Bahasa when they started education. Second language acquisition in education domain influence the language choice among teen’s of Sasak. This situation are very interesting topic to reviewed by using theory in sociolinguistics approach. The research is aimed to identify the language choice factors among teen’s of Sasak in speech event. This research is qualitative research used the data were collected using the methods of observation, recording, and interview. The sample used is 70 teen's of Sasak were in the range of 18 to 24 years who live in Mataram city and a student. The findings out the research revealed that, First : The language situation of Mataram city society is the background of the Language selection process. Second: This research do observations in four domains of language used, family, neighbors, education and religion. Third: This research findings three major factors as affecting the speaker language in social interactions, (1) the setting (time and place) and the situation; (2) participants/audience in the interaction, (3) the topic of conversation. Keywords: Language choice ,language acquisition, domain and sosiolinguistics INTRODUCTION In heterogeneous community environment more than one language is used. It means that people able speak at least two languages, the native language of the speakers and the national language. in this situation speaker has linguistic repertoire when interacting with others. They can choose a code or a variety which is appropriate with participants, topic and location. These factors are known as domains of language use. These complexities of language choice form unique sociolinguistic situations. Sociolinguistics is a field of interdisciplinary science that consists of language used in society. Sociolinguistic complement the attention to the conditions of society that anticipate the use of language in the social environment (see chaer 2004). Mataram is the capital of West Nusa Tenggara province has an progressing economic growth every year and creating many employment opportunities. This situation became one of the factors the migration from other areas to Mataram looks for they fortune. The high number of migration population from various regions makes Mataram community as heterogeneous society, the composition of Mataram population is not derived from the ethnic Sasak as a native, but there are ethnic immigrants such as Samawa, Mbojo, Bugis, Bali, Melayu, Minang, Sundanese and Java. In addition there are also other ethnic living scattered such as ethnic Arab and Chinese and citizens who are awakened because of marital relationships with local people. People of Mataram at least able to speak Bahasa and Sasak language for communication process in social environment. Sasak teenagers learn speak Sasak from the family domain acquire and Bahasa they get when began to study. Teenager of sasak has to choose Sasak or Bahasa when they has to discuss something with they lecture. This research observed the language used in the context family domain, neighborhood domain, education domain and the religious domain. The language choice in bilingual or multilingual societies is an interesting situation to be studied with a sociolinguistic perspective. This kind of language behaviour of using one language rather than another in a specific context is known as language used (Fasold 1984: 180). Table 1 Dialects of Sasak Language Copyright © 2017, RETORIKA: Jurnal Ilmu Bahasa RETORIKA: Jurnal Ilmu Bahasa , Vol. 3, No.2 Oktober 2017, Page 212 No 1 2 3 4 5 Dialect Regional used Petung Bayan Dialect ( Kuto – Kete ) Suralaga Dialect ( Nggeto – Nggete ) Pejanggik Dialect ( Meno – Mene ) Selaparang Dialect ( Ngeno – Ngene ) Pujut Dialect ( Meriak - Meriku ) North of Lombok West of Lombok West of Lombok, Central of Lombok, West of Lombok West of Lombok South of Lombok It’s known that dialect of pejanggik is the most number of etnic Sasak speakers in Mataram. In addition to the geographical dialect, ethnic Sasak also has Sasak language used grouping based on social level, has two types of speech level namely Sasak Jamaq and Sasak Alus which in use view social status of the speech participant. Sasak jamaq used by common people or spoken by an older speaker to a younger participant. The used of Sasak Alus is spoken by speakers who has higher level status or someone who has a noble family or spoken to older participant than the speaker. Teenager According to Santrock (2007: 20) teenager is transitional period between childhood and adulthood, which involves biological, cognitive, and socio-emotional changes. The main task of teenager is to prepare themselves into teenager. A teenager, or teen, is a young person whose age falls within the range from 15-24 (WHO). The biological, cognitive and socio-emotional changes experienced teenager, include the development of sexual function to the process of abstract thinking to independent. Developmental experts distinguish teenager into early and late periods. Early teenager attending junior high school or high school and the highest pubertal changes on this period. The late teenager, occurs more or less in the second half of life. Career interests, courtship and identity exploration are often more prominent in late teenager, and in early teenager. Language acquisition Language acquisition is a process of perceive ability to understand the language and the ability to use language in communication process. First language acquisition is the mother tongue. The process of acquiring language is distinguished from language learning which is more directed towards how a person learns a second language once they gets the first lan- guage. There are two processes that occur when a child is getting his first language, namely the process of competence and the process of performance. The competence process is a process of grammatical acceptance that unconsciously happen. The competence process is requirement for the occurrence of performance processes are divided into two stages (1) understanding process and (2) producing sentences process (chaer, 2009). Person ability involves capacity to obtain the syntax, semantics and phonology of language, capability to observe and perceive a sentence that is heard as a person who has linguistic abilities. Bilingualism The concept of sociolinguistics is also review a language choice in multilingual contexts, the language used in communicative repertoire with different background, speakers must select the code and interaction strategy to be use in any specific context. In fact, there a phenomenon of language choice such decisionmaking to use appropriate language may depend on domain and participants (including their age, sex, and social status). According Suwito 1983 term of bilingualism is a term whose understanding relative. This relativity arises because of the limitations of a person called multilingual that is arbitrary and almost can not be determined with certainty. At first bilingualism is defined as the someone capability to use two languages well like speaker, but this opinion is increasingly unpopular because the criterion to determine the extent of a speaker can use language equally well has no base, so this situation difficult to measure and can hardly be do. In bilingualism there are two terms: bilingualism and bilinguality. Bilingualism is having the ability to speak two languages in Spoken or written in two different languages to communicating with others, while bilinguality is the ability to be bilingual. Bilingualism that exists in a society doesn’t mean in make the society also bilinguality. Bilingual deals with the used of two or more languages by a bilingual participant. In addition, there are many understandings of bilingual according to the expert. This because to difficulty of decided is a person a bilingualism or no. Its can be call as bilingualism because they has good capability to used the language and the implementation continuously (Alwasilah, 1993: 73). Language Choice Copyright © 2017, RETORIKA: Jurnal Ilmu Bahasa RETORIKA: Jurnal Ilmu Bahasa , Vol. 3, No.2 Oktober 2017, Page 213 In society, speakers will enter different social situations and play a role according to the circumstances that they want. That situation make speaker has communicative repertoire to be used in specific context. Repertoire is defined by Kridalaksana (2008: 210) as the variations of language that used by speaker to perform in certain social roles. That specific situations, makes the speaker do simply changes variations to other variations in the same language. However, a bilingual will use two or more languages in complex situation. The language choice among teenager of ethnic Sasak in community is an interesting dimension for investigation through a sociolinguistic perspective because language is not only understood as a sign system, but also as a social system, communication system, and part of a particular cultural society. Therefore, the study of language used in sociolinguistic perspective will take a time to see how the language used in society with the influence of various social and cultural factors in a community environment. Three factors in multilingual contexts determining domains may thus include the general subject area under discussion (e.g. religion, family, work), the rolerelationships between the participants (e.g. priest–parishioner, mother–daughter, boss– secretary), and the setting of the interaction (e.g. church, home, office) (see Saville-Troike 2003). Domain The concept of domain is used to describe language used behavior. The domains are defined as institutional contexts in the use of language (Fishman, 1968). The concept of domain developed by fishman 1971, domain is a sociocultural construct abstracted from topics of communication, relationships between communicators, and locales of communication, in accord with the institutions of a society and the spheres of activity of a speech community. Fishman (1968) mentions four domains, family, neighborhood, work, and religion. Parasher (1980) use in seven domains in his research language choice among educated people in the southern part of India: the domain is family, friendship, neighbourhood, transactions, education, government and employmant. The concept domain that he used is what Fishman 1968 point view. If the speaker as the buyer speaks in the market with the participant as a seller on a topic, the speaker is said in the transaction domain. The observed domain is to argue that domain is a theoretical concept that marks an interaction situation based on the same experience and is bound to make the same goals and obligations, such as family, neighborhood, religion, and occupation METHODS This research uses sociolinguistic approach and is a field research. This study uses quantitative data sources and qualitative data. Techniques of providing data using a survey methods, interviews and observation. The survey method collects preliminary data from the respondents to find out the respondent's background, the acquisition of the respondent's language and the language choice they use for communicate. Furthermore, researchers conducted interviews to confirm the data from the survey results. The observation method that use in this research using two advanced techniques to collecting data is Involved Conversation Observation Technique and Uninvolved Conversation Observation Technique. The involved conversation observation technique the researcher participate in the conversation, and observes the conversation. In this case, the researcher is involved directly in the conversation. The uninvolved conversation observation technique the researcher is just listen and observe the informant’s language and the researcher is not involved directly in conversation. In this observation method, the researchers conduct the basic technique is by tapping tehcnique, which colleting data by tapping or recording the language used. This research uses teenager as respondents aged 18-24 years with ethnic Sasak background and they status as student. DISCUSSION This section of the study deals with the analysis of data and discussion of the research findings. Language choice among teenager in four(4) domain: Family domain, neighborhood, religion and education. Three factors that researcher use to determining language choice is setting (include time and place), participant and topic. Language choice in family domain The research revealed that language choice in family domain is Sasak language as the dominant language used by Sasak teenager Copyright © 2017, RETORIKA: Jurnal Ilmu Bahasa RETORIKA: Jurnal Ilmu Bahasa , Vol. 3, No.2 Oktober 2017, Page 214 when they has conversation with they partici- pant like father, mother and brother/sister. Figure 1 Table of Sasak Language Used Intensity in Family Domain Figure 1 describes the language used intensity in family domain, that has close relationship. Out of total of 70 informants, 42 (60%) respondents speak Sasak “all the time”, 15 (21%) respondents “sometime” speak Sasak, 8 (11%) respondents speak Sasak “rarely” and 1 respondents never speak “Sasak”. Figure 2 Tabel of Language Acquisition According of Figure 1 and Figure 2, It was discovered that the language choice of Sasak language associated, because mostly of language acquisition comes from family domain. Table 2 present that teenager with the participant “brother/sister” get lowest percentage speak Sasak “all the time” than when the participant is father or mother, that because topic of conversation mostly about fashion, clothes trends, films and etc. The young people will be more comfortable using or mix they Sasak with Bahasa to communicate because they not necessary to Copyright © 2017, RETORIKA: Jurnal Ilmu Bahasa RETORIKA: Jurnal Ilmu Bahasa , Vol. 3, No.2 Oktober 2017, Page 215 consider the appropriate value. The language choice in family domain is influenced by setting factor, close relationship with the participant and the topic of conversation. In neighborhood domain researcher use participant friends or peer neighbors, older neighbors and younger neighbors as participant indicator of language choice. Language Choice in Neighborhood Domain Figure 3 Table of Sasak Language Used Intensity in Neighborhood Domain From Figure 3 age of partisipant effect the languge choice, its finding that intensity of Sasak language used has a lowest than other participant, 31 (44%) of respondents choose speak Sasak “all the time” with they older neighbors but when the participant its younger people 33(47%) respondents or same age 34 (49%) respondents speak Sasak “all the time”. The situation happen because teenager of Sasak not know what the approprieate word of Sasak language, they prefer to used Bahasa for politeness situation. There also phenomena if the topic of converation its daily activity teens will used Sasak e.g. greeting, to feel they has a close relationship with older neighbors. This context show that mihram always meet with Mrs.Isul when she going to campus everyday. This daily activity place the participant in close relationship and change the context become informal situation. Language Choice in Education Domain Factor age, sex, and social status, as well as differences in the relationship between speakers, affect their goals of interaction, and the settings in which communication takes place. The participant as indicator in Education domain is teacher/lecture, classmate and staff. Figure 4 Table of Sasak Language Used Intensity in Education Domain Copyright © 2017, RETORIKA: Jurnal Ilmu Bahasa RETORIKA: Jurnal Ilmu Bahasa , Vol. 3, No.2 Oktober 2017, Page 216 Figure 4 find out that intensity of Sasak language used has a lowest percentage. Only 3 (5%) respondents choose speak Sasak “all the time”, 16(22%) respondents get same percentage to choose “sometime” and “very rarely” speak Sasak, 18(26%) respondents speak Sasak “rarely”, and 17(25%) respondents “never” speak Sasak. The situation happen because teenager of Sasak not know what the approprieate word of Sasak language, they prefer to used Bahasa for politeness situation. Teens as student involving participant backgrounds factor and choose to speak Bahasa with lecturers and staff because it’s more appropriate and formal situation. Different when they should speak with Sasak they has to choose base alus Sasak, and thats not common language in young age generation. That’s conversation its different context when the participant classmate, because they on the same age and social status they will use Sasak because no need to think about appropriate word. This situation differs when the interaction occurs with the participants is "classmates" because the close relationship, social status and the topic of speech between speakers and participants, Sasak teenager do not pay much attention to the value of appropriate in verbal interactions. The used of Sasak by Sasak teenagers in a speech event with a classmate earn a low percentage, this is probably due to the topic of speech events about courses or foreign terms that are not owned by Sasak. In addition speakers know well the background of participant that not sasak or can not speak sasak. There also because the influence of the language instruction used in school is Bahasa and English. That became Sasak teenager behaviour to use both languages when they do communication. Here the result of the language choice of Sasak teenager in the education domain. Figure 5 Table of Language Choice in Education Domain When teenagers know their participants have same ethnic backgrounds and know that the participant is able to speak Sasak then the language choice is their mother tongues “Sasak”. Here is one simple speech event that researcher found during the observations of this study : Copyright © 2017, RETORIKA: Jurnal Ilmu Bahasa RETORIKA: Jurnal Ilmu Bahasa , Vol. 3, No.2 Oktober 2017, Page 217 Bro The situation will be different if Sasak teenagers know the participants is someone who can not speak Sasak. They will prefer to use Bahasa, even there is phenomenon of code mix Sasak, Bahasa with english when they communicate with the classmates. Here is the activities of Sasak teenager with classmates as the respondents in this study is Lalu Bayu Alami 19 years with Hendri Wathoni 19 years. : It’s slang language refer to “brother” means close friend JJ : It’s abbreviation for word "jalan jalan" means take a walk Refreshing : It’s English language that younger people used as slang language Juluq : It’s Sasak that means “dulu” in Bahasa From the conversations we can see the use of Sasak, Bahasa, English and slang languages. This situation take place in younger people community, that influence from drama television. When they using English and slang languages that will give prestige to the speakers. Figure 6 Table Of The Language Choice With Friends Language Choice in Religion Domain Many religious activities involve Sasak teenagers in their routine and form the character of Sasak teenagers more religious. commonly it's strongly supported by they parent. Participants as an indicator of the language in this domain divide in groups based on age, older groups, peer groups and younger groups. Copyright © 2017, RETORIKA: Jurnal Ilmu Bahasa RETORIKA: Jurnal Ilmu Bahasa , Vol. 3, No.2 Oktober 2017, Page 218 Figure 7 Table of Sasak Language Used Intensity in Religion Domain Figure 7 presents 10(15%) respondents speak Sasak “all the time”, 26(37%) respondents choose “sometime” speak Sasak, 22(31%) respondents speak Sasak “rarely”, 5(7%) respondents speak Sasak “very rarely” and 7 (10%) respondents “never” speak Sasak in this domain. This situation indirectly affected by the language instruction which is Bahasa in religius activities such as tausiyah/ speech, recitacion and etc. Figure 8 Language Intruction in Religion Domain Figure 8 present that language used in religion domain is 33(47%) respondents use Bahasa and Sasak, 30(43%) respondents use bahasa and 7(10%) respondents use Sasak. From the Table 9 it can be observed that 7 (10%) use Sasak it’s teenager who live in border line with distric of west lombok. Low precentage Sasak as language choice in the religious domain, it's caused by place of the religion activities took place outside their living enviroment. Ussually religious activities take place at school or public organization, if there activities arround their houses the speaker comefrom out side Mataram. Also the language choice teenager influenced by social and political identity people of mataram as multilingual “.....mun ite leq masijid bale jaq lueq kadu base sasak, soalkan selapuq an dengan kampung tono kan dengan sasak, laguq lamun leq masijid kampus ato leq masijid luah bale jaq keruan kadu base Indonesia, soalkan sak beng ceramah doang jarang sak dengan Sasak (Septiani Aryanthi, 22 tahun, kuliah, tanggal 20 Januari 2017) “......In the mosque in my neighborhood they language choice is sasak, because all the people in the neighborhood are ethnic Sasak. But if the mosque at campus or other mosque use Bahasa because lot of speaker of tausiah not Sasak ......” CONCLUSION In this study, the main findings of the research language choice among teenager ethnic Sasak of Mataram are presented. This research do observations in four domains of language used, family, neighbors, education and religion 1. Family Domain : The language choice in this domain still their mother tongue Sasak for communication with the participants who has close relationship with teenager. And Sasak teenagers proved regeneration of Sasak as their mother language is still very awake. This research present the language used intensity in family domain 42 (60%) respondents speak Sasak “all the time”, 15 (21%) respondents “sometime” speak Sasak, 8 (11%) respondents speak Sasak “rarely” and 1 respondents never speak “Sasak”. 2. Neighborhood Domain : The research revealed that in this domain they prefer to use Bahasa or Sasak depent of the participant and the topic. The researcher finding that intensity of Sasak language used has a lowest than other participant, 31 (44%) of respondents choose speak Sasak “all the time” with they older neighbors but when Copyright © 2017, RETORIKA: Jurnal Ilmu Bahasa RETORIKA: Jurnal Ilmu Bahasa , Vol. 3, No.2 Oktober 2017, Page 219 the participant its younger people 33(47%) respondents or same age 34(49%) respondents speak Sasak “all the time”. 3. Education Domain : Teenagers as student involving participant backgrounds factor and choose to speak Bahasa with lecturers and staff because it’s more appropriate and formal situation. Also because they not able to speak Sasak Base Alus thats not common language in young age generation. This domain present that intensity of Sasak language used has a lowest percentage. Only 3(5%) respondents choose speak Sasak “all the time”, 16(22%) respondents get same percentage to choose “sometime” and “very rarely” speak Sasak, 18(26%) respondents speak Sasak “rarely”, and 17(25%) respondents “never” speak Sasak. 4. Religion Domain : Low precentage Sasak as language choice in the religious domain influeced by setting and participant. The study finding that intensity of language choice in this domain is 10(15%) respondents speak Sasak “all the time”, 26(37%) respondents choose “sometime” speak Sasak, 22(31%) respondents speak Sasak “rarely”, 5(7%) respondents speak Sasak “very rarely” and 7 (10%) respondents “never” speak Sasak. This indirectly affected by the language instruction which is Bahasa in religius activities such as tausiyah/ speech, recitacion and etc. Three major factors as affecting the speaker language in social interactions is : a. Setting : The setting of the interaction include time and place and also formal or informal situation. b. Participant : The role-relationships between the participants and speaker, include the social status, ethnic background and age. c. Topic : Topic is often a primary determinant of teenager language choice in multilingual ACKNOWLEDGEMENT the authors would like to thank the reviewers for their input feedback for the improvement of this article. REFERENCE Chaer, Abdul/Leonie Agustina. 2010. Sosiolinguistik Perkenalan Awal. Jakarta : Rineka Cipta. Chaer, Abdul. 2009. Psikoinguistik Kajian Teoretik. Jakarta : PT Asdi Mahasatya. Definition of Youth. http://www.unesco.org/new/en/ social-and-human-sciences/themes/youth/ youth-definition Development Ethnologue. http:// www.ethnologue.com/language-development Fishman, Joshua.A. 1999. Handbook of Language and Ethnic Identity. New York : OXFORD University Press Hudson, R.A. 1980. Sociolinguistic. London : Cambridge University Press Indonesia Ethnologue. http://www.ethnologue.com/ Country/ID Keijzer, M. 2007. Last in first our? An investigation of the regression hypothesis in Dutch emigrants in Anglophone Canada. PhD dissertation, Universitiet Amsterdam. Kridalaksana, Harimurti. 2011. Kamus Linguistik. Jakarta :Gramedia Pustaka Umum NTB, Suara. (2013, Nopember 7). Penggunaan Bahasa Daerah Terancam Punah. Tren Bahasa Gaul, P.10 Mataram dala-m Angka Tahun 2015. Diakses di https://Mataramkota.bps.go.id Mahsun, Prof. 2011. Metode Penelitian Bahasa Edisi Revisi. Jakarta : Rajagrafindo Persada. Sudaryanto. 2015. Metode dan Aneka Teknik Analisis Bahasa. Yogyakarta : Universitas Sanata Dharma. Suktiningsih, Wiya. 2017. Pergeseran Penggunaan Bahasa Sasak di kalangan remaja etnis Sasak. Denpasar : Universitas Warmadewa. Saville, T. –M. (2003). The Ethnography of Communication. United Kindom: Blackwell Publishing. Wilian, Sudirman. 2010. Pemertahan Bahasa dan Kestabilan Kedwibahasaan pada Penutur BSs di Lombok. Dikutip dalam Linguistik Indonesia Jurnal Ilmiah MLI Tahun ke 28 Nomor 1, 1 Februari 2010. http:// www.linguistik-Indonesia.org/ Copyright © 2017, RETORIKA: Jurnal Ilmu Bahasa