Main Factors Affected by the Threat of Extinction and Damage to the Betawi Language for Society
Main Article Content
Abstract
The Betawi language, like other languages in the world, is in danger of extinction caused by many things, including the dynamics of civilization. This situation threatens many contexts of indigenous Betawi culture and civilization. Therefore, the maintenance and preservation of the Betawi language is a necessity that must be carried out. The problem is the breadth of the Betawi text and linguistic context. For this reason, it is necessary to formulate an approach strategy that is more focused on what are the main factors that must be studied from the impact of damage and the endangerment of the Betawi language on the Betawi people themselves. This study formulates these factors by conducting research and field testing for more than 1 year of intensive observation 24 hours a day. Sociological qualitative analysis in particular observing the social assessment of society is the most effective method found during this research process. As a result, at least 5 segments were found that must be studied to see the impact of damage and the endangerment of the Betawi language, namely linguistic factors, personal identity, communication between generations, transfer of knowledge and knowledge, and economics.
Article Details
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.Penulis.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (Refer to The Effect of Open Access).
References
Barthes, R. (1964). The Structuralist Activity, From Essais Critiques, trans. R. Howard in Partisan Reviews 34 (Winner) 82 – 88.
Barthes, R. (1964/1967). Elements of Semiology, trans. A. Lavers and C. Smith. (10, 12) 1964; rptd, New York, Hill and Wang.
Berlin, B., Dennis, E. B. & Raven, H. P. (1973). General Principles of Classification and Nomenclature in Folk Biology. American Anthropologist, New Series, 75(4), 214-242. Wiley on behalf of the American Anthropological Association. American Academic Scientific Research Journal for Engineering, Technology, and Sciences (ASRJETS) - Volume 94, No 1, pp 58-66
Berlin, B. (1972). Speculations on the Growth of Ethnobotanical Nomenclature. Language in Society,1(6), 51-86. Cambridge University Press.
Christine, S. V. & Todd, L. V. (2009). The Semantics of Local Knowledge: Using Ethnosemantics to Study Folk Taxonomies Represented in the Archaeological Record. Journal of Anthropological Research, 65, (8), 529-554. The University of Chicago Press.
Fairclough, N. (1995 a). Critical Discourse Analysis, (12), London, Cambridge.
Gary, P. N., Patrick, P., & Tony, J. (2002). Safeguarding Species, Languages, and Cultures in the Time of Diversity Loss: From the Colorado Plateau to Global Hotspots. Annals of the Missouri Botanical Garden, 89, (7), 164-175. Missouri Botanical Garden Press.
Halliday, M. A. K. (1990, & 2001). New Ways of Meaning: The Challenge to Applied Linguistics. In Alwin Fill and Peter Mühlhäusler (eds.). The Ecolinguistics Reader: Language, Ecology and Environment. (2, 3) 175-202. London: Continuum.
Kristeva, J. (1986). Intertextuality in Critical Discourse Analysis, (14), London, Longman
Laferriere, E. J. (1987). Folk Definitions Influence the Acceptance of Technical Vocabulary. The American Biology Teacher, 49, (9), 149-152. University of California Press on behalf of the National Association of Biology Teachers
Lobner, S. (2002). Understanding Semantics, (16), London, Arnold.
Parry, H. (1984). Use of English course (for West African Students), London, Macmillan.
Maiwong, E. D. (2020). The Dynamism of the English Language in the Commonwealth of Nations and African Common Wealth Literature (Vol 1), A Teachers’, Learners’ and Researchers’ Guide, Dschang, Jewisco Printing House.
Siregar, I. (2020). Geografi Leksikon Betawi. Jakarta: LPU Unas
Siregar, I. (2021). Analysis of Betawi Language Interference on the Morphology of Adolescent Speech in Jakarta. Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences Studies, 3(8), 54-60. http://doi.org/10.32996/jhsss.2021.3.8.7
Siregar, I. (2022). Effective and Efficient Treatment of Regional Language Preservation Strategies in the Nusantara. Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences Studies, 4(2), 16–22. https://doi.org/10.32996/jhsss.2022.4.2.3
Widdowson, G. H. (1984). Explorations in Applied Linguistics 2, (15), Oxford, Oxford University.Press.
Wodak, R. & Meyer, M. (eds.) (2001). Methods of Critical Discourse Analysis, (13), London, Longman.