Language Without Character

Soekarno's use of language, similar to that of Hatta, always upheld the nation, possessed character and glorified his paragons. The political language of the two founders of this nation was never a betrayal.

The areas of thought, experiences, and expressions that present-day Bahasa Indonesia (Indonesian language) can serve to communicate with subtlety, grace, and exactness is remarkable. Nothing could be more misleading than to imagine contemporary Bahasa Indonesia as a kind of superimposed lingua franca without an organic vitality of its own. –Anthony H. Johns, 1963

Kompas' headline report (28/10/2022), "Menjaga Bahasa, Menjaga Bangsa Indonesia” (Protecting the language, protecting the Indonesian nation), reminds us about the central correlation between language and the nation.

This is a very relevant reminder of the potential seeds of inequality and feudalism, as well as the dissolution of social solidarity, through how language is used. It deserves further analysis.

It has probably been three decades that countless Indonesian people have stopped caring about they are speaking proper and correct Indonesian. In the “reform era”, under the cover of amnesia and indifference on the part of the state, government officials, celebrities, media sources, and millions of young people who have lost their orientation, role models, and vernacular discipline, our national language is being increasingly treated as a medium of communication devoid of character and respect.

Also read:

> Protecting the Language, Protecting the Indonesian Nation

> Language Style and Tricks

Many contemporary expressions in the spoken language that Kompas has raised are not only telling, but also touches on, the most inappropriate behavior towards Bahasa Indonesia.

These include phrases like “Basic banget, ya” (It’s very basic, yeah), “Jujur-ly, saya lupa” (To be honest, I forgot), “Boring banget tadi” (How boring it was), “Lebih better itu sih” (That’s much better), “This way mister ... terus ke sini” (This way, sir … then straight this way). Add to these the phrase spoken by a commentator during the recent grand even of the G20 Bali Summit: “Soalnya tergantung resources” (The point is, it depends on resources).

All of these phrases are examples of the insertion of just a few of the English words that have been largely absorbed into Indonesian, even though the corresponding words or phrases have long been available in the Indonesian lexicon. This can be called the “malin” use of language.

The term “malin” derives from Si Malin Kundang, a folklore character who, after he becomes a rich merchant, refuses to acknowledge his mother. Just as Si Malin Kundang became a nobody despite his wealth richness, the above spoken phrases demonstrate linguistic betrayal, in any language. We are engaging in countless examples of vernacular that can be categorized as “bahasamalin”. They have become pervasive in formal speeches, discussions, news reports, advertising, and entertainment TV programs, and especially in the linguistic jungle of social media.

This phenomenon may be reminiscent of what Manfred Henningsen (1988) called Ueberfremdung, referring to the use of language among a country’s people becoming overpowered by foreign words. There are many examples of the twisted use of Bahasa Indonesia, but negligence towards linguistic anchors in communication appears to be the most damaging. It infringes the soul of the languages used. The coinage of “jujur-ly” clearly violates the rules of both the Indonesian and English languages simultaneously.

Subservience mentality

The flood of bahasa malin is actually a revelation. Such a linguistic practice accumulate negativity. Not only are the practitioners devoid of spoken character and rationality, they also demonstrate wild, abusive, and impudent behavior in their communication, as well as a diminished sense of nationalism. Nation and language are simultaneously being cast aside.

The use of bahasa malin also implies a subservient mentality and loss of individual and national dignity. This can erode the social fabric and open the door to the seeds of feudalism, inequality and social discontent. As the nation moves towards becoming completely free from illiteracy, the practice of bahasa malin is suddenly sending millions of its citizens back to a form of illiteracy.

This criticism stems from an intention to vilify. Our criticism of using bahasa malin is an expression of love for our language and nation. Anger may be part of it, but in referring to John Stuart Mill’s term of “righteous indignation”, this anger is justified.

Also read:

> Protecting the Indonesian Language Together

It is also a call to recapitulate awareness of language and nationalism. It is an awareness driven by three historical layers that uphold both character and rationality. The first layer is Providence, or being the result of divine work and will, manifested in the centuries-long existence of Malay as the lingua franca that gave birth to Bahasa Indonesia.

The second layer is the struggle of the founding fathers of Bahasa Indonesia and the Indonesian nation. And the third layer is the compliance with the discourse on communicating character, broad perspectives, and language authority, the antithesis to the practice of bahasa malin.

Providence

The decaying character and rationality in language use stems from how little we are aware of Bahasa Indonesia as Providence, a divine gift in the form of the vital characters of equality and freedom inherent in the use of Malay as lingua franca across the archipelago.

It is the character of the Malay language that Bahasa Indonesia has been grafted with extra vitality that gave impetus for the rise of and movement towards the independence of our nation. In addition to growing literacy, agility and creativity, the nation has also become increasingly anti-feudal and anti-colonial.

What is called the Malay language no longer belongs only to Malays. It has [also] become the property of all people across Nusantara.

It is the essence of Providence that A.A. Teeuw (1979) raised when he pointed to the strong "appeal" of the Malay language to all speakers among the tribes and ethnic groups of the archipelago. Similar testimonies also came from Ki Hadjar Dewantara, Selo Soemardjan, and Pramoedya Ananta Toer.

Huygen van Linschoten, a young Dutch explorer in the archipelago in the 16th century, said that anyone who could not speak Malay in this part of the world did not have the chance to progress.

“Throughout the centuries”, wrote Sutan Takdir Alisjahbana, “what is called the Malay language no longer belongs only to Malays. It has [also] become the property of all people across Nusantara [Indonesian archipelago].”

Denys Lombard testified most fervently about the values of the Malay language over the centuries: Fransiscus Xaverius “translated several Christianity texts into Malay”; Frederick de Houtman "compiled the first Dutch-Malay dictionary" at the end of the 16th century. These were followed by the publication of similar dictionaries in the Netherlands, as well as a series of translations of the Bible, serving to stimulate early orientalism.

Teeuw emphasized that from the western to the eastern parts of the archipelago, "Malay is used as the language of educated people", and that Protestant missionaries who translated the Bible into a variety of regional languages had recognized the supremacy of Malay. In terms of Providence, the Malay language was destined to grow and become closely intertwined with the trend towards inclusive and impartial cosmopolitan Islam.

Of course, the supremacy of the Malay language and the transformation of Bahasa Indonesia are not the results of the work of Providence in a simple sense, because God's work is manifest in human work. Here, historical figures played a role. The works of Hamzah Fansuri and Raja Ali Hadji had not a few merits and influences.

Also read:

> Build International Language Road Map

The rise of Bahasa Indonesia is also inseparable from the struggles of figures such as Muhammad Yamin, Mohamad Tabrani, Yus Badudu, Anton Moeliono, and Harimurti Kridalaksana. It also owes its developed to independence fighters who were publishers as well as contributors to various periodicals, such as Daoelat Rakjat, Suluh Indonesia Muda, Pandji Islam, and Fikiran Ra'jat, all media forms that generated the spirit of independence.

We must not forget the contributions of Balai Pustaka, which can be said to be the product of the Dutch ethics policy that had a significant and positive impact. Through the Commissie voor de Inlandsche School en Volkslectuur (1908), especially under G.A.J. Hazeu and D.A. Rinkes, Balai Pustaka laid the foundation for standard Bahasa Indonesia, as well as drove the literacy fever among youths in all major cities of the archipelago. Perhaps that is the greatest contribution from the Netherlands’ Eereschuld to our country.

The combined spirit of independence and equality in the Malay language had a huge impact on the progress of two main determinants: multiethnic/racial collectivism and egalitarian ideologies, the latter germinating and spreading in the archipelago from the early decades of the 20th century. The combination of these two determinants in turn developed human beings with character and rationality, from which the founding fathers and mothers of the nation were born.

Thus, Bahasa Indonesia shows the trace of rare yet intense historical integration between the medium and the message, both upholding the principles of independence and equality (Pabottingi, 1991).

It became a cross-ethnic, cross-individual, and cross-dimensional community of character. The national awakening movement began by benefiting from the intense combination of these two historical determinants. Anthony Johns' sincere testimony stems from this revolutionary integration.

Finally, Bahasa Indonesia has been enriched and developed through its incorporation with egalitarian ideologies, such as socialism, liberalism, reformist Islam, and nationalism in the midst of global modernity.

This was in turn facilitated by the spread of native publishing houses, not as part of the “print capitalism” pointed to in Benedict Anderson's thesis (1983), but rather as a means to struggle for nationalism and independence. These publications were essentially a form of nonprofit diametrical resistance against the twin horses of capitalism: colonialism and imperialism.

Regarding the discourse about strengthening character and rationality, Soekarno rose staunchly to the fore, as evidenced through his classic treatise, “Dibawah Bendera Revolusi” (under the flag of revolution). At first glance, Soekarno was both a linguist and writer who indulged in using blended language. However, Soekarno's strong sense of nationalism was impermeable to Ueberfremdung. He indeed sided with his nation’s struggle and independence.

In the case of Soekarno’s approach, the diametrical contrast with bahasa malin is attributable to none other than his intense activity in rich reading materials, references, mastery of multiple languages, and wealth of knowledge, all being imperative for analysis. It was a manifestation of the cerebral calling of a primal intelligence.

Broken umbilical cord of language

Just as Sjahrir has freely expressed in “Pantai Bandaneira” (Bandaneira Beach), Soekarno gained freedom in discussing the national movement. Like surfing the wave of thoughts full of dynamics, revelations, dangers, and opportunities, Soekarno's linguistic limbs continued to grow strong, flexible and innovative.

From a young age, Soekarno felt obliged to seek and display original and enlightened linguistic expression. Therefore, the limbs of his Bahasa Indonesia became swift and powerful with electrifying expressions.

Also read:

> Language and Indonesian Nationality

In one of his works penned during his exile in Ende, Soekarno wrote: “Meskipun sebagai seorang interniran ... artikel-artikel saja akan ’neutrale onderwerpen’ sahadja, maka toch djiwa Sukarno, faham-faham Sukarno, tjara-tjara berpikirnja Sukarno, kesenangan dan kebentjian Sukarno akan terbajang di dalam artikel-artikel itu.... Kalau tidak begitu, artikel-artikelku akan menjadi karakterloos, dan dari semua tjatjat maka karakterloosheid itulah jang paling saja takuti!”

(Despite being an internee ... my articles will simply be ‘neutrale onderwerpen’, after all, Sukarno's spirit, Sukarno's ideas, Sukarno's way of thinking, Sukarno's love and hatred will be reflected in those articles. ... Otherwise, my articles would lose character, and this is what I fear most.)

Soekarno's use of language, similar to that of Hatta, always upheld the nation, possessed character and glorified his paragons.

Reflecting on Hatta's tough character, Soekarno also rejected feudalism in the form of "aristocratic nationalism". He rejected feudalism, political dynasties and clans from their very roots.

In his "Birth of Pancasila" speech, Soekarno said, for example, if Ki Bagus Hadikoesoemo became the head of the Indonesian state one day and then died, his son would not automatically replace Ki Bagus Hadikoesoemo.

Soekarno's use of language, similar to that of Hatta, always upheld the nation, possessed character and glorified his paragons. It would impossible for either to follow, let alone approve, the use of bahasa malin. The political language of the two founders of this nation was never a betrayal.

As Jean Baudrillard (2013) pointed out: “The problem is not general apathy or indifference, but the broken umbilical cord of language.”

KOMPAS/YUNIADHI AGUNG

Mochtar Pabottingi

Mochtar Pabottingi, Political philosopher, democracy and nationalism

This article was translated byMusthofid.