Language experts decry political doublespeak

JAKARTA (JP): Linguists renewed their resistance on Tuesday against interference by political vested interests in the formulation of Indonesian, charging it obstructed the function of the language as a means of communication.

Prominent writer Ajip Rosidi told the second day of the congress at Hotel Indonesia that Indonesian had experienced "chaos" in recent years. The congress will close on Friday.

The 60-year-old writer recounted how the national seminar on language politics in 1975 decided the establishment of standardized spelling.

"I objected to this standardized spelling from the beginning because, in reality and in daily conversation, it would not work that way."

He cited an example of Indonesians' variant pronunciations of ide, using either "e" as in "suffer" or "e" as in "make".

The first pronunciation was decided by the government following the national seminar, which Ajip said was a political gesture on the part of the nation's leaders in efforts to strengthen ties with Malaysia at the time.

The 1975 seminar also concluded that foreign names were prohibited from use by companies or institutions here. "But up to now, many still use foreign terms and the government has let that happen for years."

Inconsistency in language policies, often resulting from use of the language to further political interests, must be eliminated, Ajip said.

"In this reform era, we have to learn to gradually reduce such (political) influence."

He also called on the state Language Center -- whose function is to develop Indonesian through research -- to be "less tyrannical" and let the Indonesian language grow and develop naturally.

Historian Taufik Abdullah said the remnants of New Order regime's political influence must be wiped out of Indonesian.

Lingering evidence, he said, included excessive use of euphemisms. He also cited kramanization in which the democratic nature of Indonesian was erased for hierarchical placement of value on the speaker.

For instance, a common person is described as "giving a speech", a minister as "giving an instruction" while the president is described as "giving guidance".

Sociologist Ignas Kleden urged reform in the teaching of the language.

"Students become good in grammar but not in practice. I think the textbooks provided are too difficult, they are more suitable for linguists and too technical, but inappropriate for students."

Ignas also said the New Order regime under Soeharto was marked by rampant misuse of language. Grammatical blunders committed by Soeharto were parroted by officials because they were considered symbols of the ruling political system. (edt)