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