Language and unity

Language and unity

This is in response to Mr. Stephen G. Krecik's comments (The
Jakarta Post, Dec. 28, 1998) on my letter dated Dec. 8, 1995
concerning efforts towards a more unified Indonesia.

Mr. Krecik states that I: "...call for not only the exclusion
of words from other Indonesian ethnic languages, but also foreign
terms (chiefly English, though curiously not Arabic) and even
Sanskrit words. His call to defeat the dilution of Bahasa
Indonesia reveals itself to be confusing because of the limits he
wishes to impose on its natural evolution."

Obviously Mr. Krecik has overlooked the crucial word
"unnecessarily" in my letter. I wrote, "...any effort to
unnecessarily dilute Bahasa Indonesia with words or phrases from
the various dialects should be discouraged..." For further
clarification, I suggest that he reads again my letters published
on June 15 and 26, 1995, since he claims to have read many of my
previous letters. In any event, for other readers who may be
interested, I quote here some pertinent experts from those two
letters:

(1) "What I am very much opposed to is the unnecessary
adoption or attempted adoption of English, Sanskrit, Javanese or
other words for which Bahasa Indonesia equivalents are already
available. If this substitution process (or 'linguistic
enrichment' as some people would euphemistically describe it)
continues much longer, we could easily end up with our language
being so much Anglicized, 'Sanskritized' or 'Javanized' no
Indonesian with truly national interests in mind could possibly
accept it."

(2) "I think Bahasa Indonesia should and will continue to
borrow foreign words for some time in the future, to represent
ideas or concepts for which, strictly speaking, Bahasa Indonesia
equivalents do not yet exist. I would suggest that the great
majority of this new borrowing, perhaps as much as 80 percent,
should be taken from English in view of its preeminent standing
as the international language.

"No Indonesian in his right mind would want to eliminate
certain Sanskrit and other foreign words from Bahasa Indonesia
because those words have been deeply entrenched in our vocabulary
and certainly no Indonesian thinks of them as foreign anymore."

As I indicated in my letter of Dec. 8, 1995, what is even more
important than the issue of unnecessary dilution of Bahasa
Indonesia, is to promote its primacy in both public and private
use, while at the same time gradually allowing the regional
languages/dialects to languish.

Regarding Mr. Krecik's assertion about another primordial
element, namely power to control resources whereby some advanced
states are stealing the resources of the less developed
countries, it is evidently applicable to an international
situation. But as far as Indonesia is concerned (since we are
talking about Indonesia), agricultural and other resources are
being used for the benefits of all Indonesians. There is no
question of stealing or international conflict involved. Thus,
the basic primordial elements for Indonesia still remain three:
race/ethnicity, religion and language.

In conclusion, may I take this opportunity to thank Mr.
Stephen G. Krecik for having taken the trouble to comment on my
letter and wish him and other readers as well as the editors of
The Jakarta Post a very happy 1996.

MASLI ARMAN

Jakarta