Language and unity<\/p>\n
This is in response to Mr. Stephen G. Krecik's comments (The
\nJakarta Post, Dec. 28, 1998) on my letter dated Dec. 8, 1995
\nconcerning efforts towards a more unified Indonesia.<\/p>\n
Mr. Krecik states that I: \"...call for not only the exclusion
\nof words from other Indonesian ethnic languages, but also foreign
\nterms (chiefly English, though curiously not Arabic) and even
\nSanskrit words. His call to defeat the dilution of Bahasa
\nIndonesia reveals itself to be confusing because of the limits he
\nwishes to impose on its natural evolution.\"<\/p>\n
Obviously Mr. Krecik has overlooked the crucial word
\n\"unnecessarily\" in my letter. I wrote, \"...any effort to
\nunnecessarily dilute Bahasa Indonesia with words or phrases from
\nthe various dialects should be discouraged...\" For further
\nclarification, I suggest that he reads again my letters published
\non June 15 and 26, 1995, since he claims to have read many of my
\nprevious letters. In any event, for other readers who may be
\ninterested, I quote here some pertinent experts from those two
\nletters:<\/p>\n
(1) \"What I am very much opposed to is the unnecessary
\nadoption or attempted adoption of English, Sanskrit, Javanese or
\nother words for which Bahasa Indonesia equivalents are already
\navailable. If this substitution process (or 'linguistic
\nenrichment' as some people would euphemistically describe it)
\ncontinues much longer, we could easily end up with our language
\nbeing so much Anglicized, 'Sanskritized' or 'Javanized' no
\nIndonesian with truly national interests in mind could possibly
\naccept it.\"<\/p>\n
(2) \"I think Bahasa Indonesia should and will continue to
\nborrow foreign words for some time in the future, to represent
\nideas or concepts for which, strictly speaking, Bahasa Indonesia
\nequivalents do not yet exist. I would suggest that the great
\nmajority of this new borrowing, perhaps as much as 80 percent,
\nshould be taken from English in view of its preeminent standing
\nas the international language.<\/p>\n
\"No Indonesian in his right mind would want to eliminate
\ncertain Sanskrit and other foreign words from Bahasa Indonesia
\nbecause those words have been deeply entrenched in our vocabulary
\nand certainly no Indonesian thinks of them as foreign anymore.\"<\/p>\n
As I indicated in my letter of Dec. 8, 1995, what is even more
\nimportant than the issue of unnecessary dilution of Bahasa
\nIndonesia, is to promote its primacy in both public and private
\nuse, while at the same time gradually allowing the regional
\nlanguages\/dialects to languish.<\/p>\n
Regarding Mr. Krecik's assertion about another primordial
\nelement, namely power to control resources whereby some advanced
\nstates are stealing the resources of the less developed
\ncountries, it is evidently applicable to an international
\nsituation. But as far as Indonesia is concerned (since we are
\ntalking about Indonesia), agricultural and other resources are
\nbeing used for the benefits of all Indonesians. There is no
\nquestion of stealing or international conflict involved. Thus,
\nthe basic primordial elements for Indonesia still remain three:
\nrace\/ethnicity, religion and language.<\/p>\n
In conclusion, may I take this opportunity to thank Mr.
\nStephen G. Krecik for having taken the trouble to comment on my
\nletter and wish him and other readers as well as the editors of
\nThe Jakarta Post a very happy 1996.<\/p>\n
MASLI ARMAN<\/p>\n
Jakarta<\/p>", "url": "https:\/\/jawawa.id\/newsitem\/language-and-unity-1447893297", "image": "" }, "sponsor": "Okusi Associates", "sponsor_url": "https:\/\/okusiassociates.com" }