Taboo in Angkola Language: Prohibited Communication among Family Kinships

Jamaluddin Nasution(1*), Mhd. Pujiono(2), Tengku Silvana Sinar(3), Nurlela Nurlela(4)


(1) Universitas Sumatera Utara
(2) Universitas Sumatera Utara
(3) Universitas Sumatera Utara
(4) Universitas Sumatera Utara
(*) Corresponding Author

Abstract


The research is the performance and participation in communication prohibited in Angkola society, which is then referred to as taboo language in family relations in a sociopragmatics framework. This research aims to find personal communication patterns prohibited in Angkola Language (AL), to find out performance, communication patterns, values and reasons for the prohibition so that there is an effort in cultural sustainability. Another aim is to re-awaken the younger generation applying values and norms in AL amidst current developments, and the era of communication freedom. Qualitative approach using ethnographic methods was carried out within the sociopragmatics framework. Participants involved in AL considered taboo in communication are: 1) The wife/husband of the in-laws; 2) Siblings, especially siblings of different gender; 3) Daughter-in-law to her son-in-law; 4) Son-in-law to his daughter-in-law; 5) In-laws (husband’s father and wife's mother); 6) The wife of our younger brother; and 7) Our aunt's daughter. The performance patterns carried out by the participants: 1) being silent, not answering; 2) using indirect sentences; 3) coding (clearing throat, small cough); 4) using simple, short words; 5) mediating of surround objects; 6) leaving the conversation location; 7) not joking; 8) tending to be serious; 9) giving good, polite answers; 10) avoiding jokes, teases, and long conversations; 11) using a third person intermediary; and 12) making small talk. Reasons of the waning language taboo culture is due to globalization, the widespread use of social medias, the openness of information in current modern era.

Keywords


Angkola Language, prohibited communication, sociopragmatics, taboo

Full Text:

PDF

References


Burton, R. S. (1985). Principles of Pragmatics, Geoffrey N. Leech. London and New York: Longman, 1983. Pp. 250. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 7(1), 112–113.

Djajasudarma, T. F. (2006). Metode linguistik: Ancangan metode penelitian dan kajian.

Duranti, A. (1997). Linguistic Anthropology. Cambridge University Press.

Duranti, A. (2009). Linguistic anthropology: History, ideas, and issues. Linguistic Anthropology: A Reader, 1–60.

Humaeni, A. (2015). Tabu Perempuan dalam Budaya Masyarakat Banten. Humaniora, 27(2), 174–185.

Lafamane, F. (2020). ANTROPOLINGUISTIK (Hubungan Budaya dan Bahasa).

Leech, G. N. (2016). Principles of pragmatics. Routledge.

Lubis, T. (2019). Performansi Partisipasi Pembelajaran Bahasa di Politeknik LP3i Medan. Basastra, 8(1), 70–87.

Mahsun, M. S. (2005). Metode penelitian bahasa. Jakarta: PT Raja Grafindo Persada.

Nasution, Jamal, & Mulyadi, M. (2021). “I am a dog”, Verbal Taboo to Convince. Randwick International of Education and Linguistics Science Journal, 2(4), 560–567. https://doi.org/10.47175/rielsj.v2i4.342

Nasution, Jamaluddin, & Mulyadi, M. (2022). WORD ORDER IN ANGKOLA LANGUAGE: A STUDY OF SYNTACTIC TYPOLOGY. Language Literacy: Journal of Linguistics, Literature, and Language Teaching, 6(1), 167–176.

Nasution, Jamaluddin, Pujiono, M., & Iqbal, M. (2023). Verbal Taboos in Acehnese Language: Meaning, Function, and Euphemism. Randwick International of Education and Linguistics Science Journal, 4(1), 58–70.

Nickerson, A., Bryant, R. A., Brooks, R., Steel, Z., & Silove, D. (2009). Fear of cultural extinction and psychopathology among Mandaean refugees: an exploratory path analysis. CNS Neuroscience & Therapeutics, 15(3), 227–236.

Olabode, S. O., Olateju, O. I., & Bakare, A. A. (2019). An assessment of the reliability of secondary data in management science research. International Journal of Business and Management Review, 7(3), 27–43.

Schegloff, E. A. (2007). Sequence organization in interaction: A primer in conversation analysis I (Vol. 1). Cambridge university press.

Setiadi, E. M. (2011). Ilmu sosial dan budaya dasar.

Sibarani, R. (2004). Antropolinguistik: antropologi linguistik, linguistik antropologi. Poda.

Sibarani, R. (2015a). Pembentukan Karakter: Langkah-langkah Berbasis Kearifan Lokal. Jakarta: Asosiasi Tradisi Lisan.

Sibarani, R. (2015b). Pendekatan antropolinguistik terhadap kajian tradisi lisan. RETORIKA: Jurnal Ilmu Bahasa, 1(1), 1–17.

Spradley, J. P. (1997). Metode etnografi.

Spradley, J. P. (2016). Participant observation. Waveland Press.

Ullman, S. (2007). Pengantar Semantik: Diadaptasi oleh Sumarsono. Pustaka Pelajar.

Umar, H. (2013). Metode penelitian untuk skripsi dan tesis bisnis.

Vogel, C. (2014). Taboo Semantics. 5th IEEE International Conference on Cognitive Info Communications, 225–230.

Wortham, S., & Reyes, A. (2020). Discourse analysis beyond the speech event. Routledge.


Article Metrics

Abstract view : 89 times
PDF - 23 times

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


Copyright (c) 2024 English Language and Literature International Conference (ELLiC) Proceedings

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

Electronic ISSN: 2579-7263
CD-ROM ISSN: 2579-7549

Published by

FACULTY OF FOREIGN LANGUAGE AND CULTURE
UNIVERSITAS MUHAMMADIYAH SEMARANG
Jl. Kedungmundu Raya No.18 Semarang, Central Java, Indonesia
Phone: +622476740295, email: ellic@unimus.ac.id