Language experts decry political doublespeak

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)