Structural Metaphor in Traditional Marriage Discourse of Manggarai Speech Community-East Indonesia: Cultural Linguistic Perspective
on
e-Journal of Linguistics
Available online at https://ojs.unud.ac.id/index.php/eol/index
Vol. 18, No. 1, January 2023, pages: 33--44
Print ISSN: 2541-5514 Online ISSN: 2442-7586
https://doi.org/10.24843/e-jl.2024.v18.i01.p04
Structural Metaphor in Traditional Marriage Discourse of Manggarai Speech Community-East Indonesia: Cultural Linguistic Perspective
Yohanes P. F. Erfiani
Kupang, Indonesia, [email protected]
Article info
Received Date: 20 Februari 2023
Accepted Date: 6 March 2023
Published Date: 31 January 2024
Keywords:*
Structural metaphor, Traditional
Marriage Discourse, Manggarai Speech Community (MSC), Cultural Linguistic Perspective (CLP)
Abstract*
This study is intended to investigate the structural metaphor expressions used in traditional marriage discourse of Manggarai Speech Community (MSC). It is also intended to uncover the cultural imagery of MSC expressed in structural metaphors. Thus, this study used Cultural Linguistic Perspectif (CLP) as the main theory and metaphor as the supporting theory. Those theories were combined with the qualitative research method. Based on the data, there were 43 structural metaphor expressions used in traditional marriage discourse of MSC. All structural metaphor expressions have the idiomatic meaning. It depends on culture imagery of MSC. Therefore, based on the structural metaphor expressions, it was also found the cultural imagery that is appearing in traditioanl marriage discourse of MSC such as; cultural, social, magical, ideological, mythical, and biological imagery. Those imageries that appeared in traditional marriage discourse of MSC prove that (1) MSC believe that the God has power to control, protect, guidance, curse ect the human being, (2) MSC believe that the ancestors have power to protect, guidance or even to curse the human being or their children, (3) MSC believe that ancestors are still alive like living human being, and (4) Like other ethnics, MSC desire good life condition when living in the world.
The basic purpose of using language is to create meaning (Eggins, 2004: 11). On the other hand, the use of language is to interpret the experiences and to interact with others (Haliday, 2004: 24). In other words, the interaction with other people requires a variety of languages. The language variety is applied based on the context and situation. Kridalaksana (2008: 206) states that language variety is a variation of language according to the usage, the topics discussion, the relationship between speakers, the interlocutors, the people being discussed and the medium of conversation.
The variety of languages is divided into several varieties, namely; the variety of languages in terms of speakers, usage, formality, and facilities (Chaer and Agustina, 2010: 82). By and large, this study discussed the variety of languages in terms of formality. One of the varieties of language in terms of formality is the variety of ritual language. It relates to the language and culture of the speech community. In other words, the variety of ritual languages is spoken in each ritual activity of a speech community.
The ritual language is a language that is uniquely different from everyday language (Fox, 1986: 102). It means that ritual language is the language used during traditional ritual activities and has its own characteristics that set it apart from everyday language. Fox (1986: 132-134) explained that most language rituals are characterized by systematic deviations from everyday language.
Basically, the ritual language also uses metaphors expressions that build certain meanings, which makes the ritual language charismatic and auspicious (Poedjosoedarmo, 2001: 160). This statement can be proven by a number of previous studies that conducted by a number of linguists who investigated the language and culture of Manggarai Speech Community (MSC). MSC used Manggarai language (ML) as their local language.
In other words, ML is a language which spoken by the MSC who live in the Manggarai regency (Verheijan, 1991: 1). This regency is located in Flores Island which includes in East Nusa Tenggara province- East Indonesia. The previous studies showed that the use of metaphor expressions and its relationship with cultural imagery in various traditional ritual activities of MSC. This phenomenon is also happened in marriage ritual of MSC. Hence, the marriage ritual in MSC contained many metaphor expressions.
It has generally known that MSC applied two marriage ceremonies, namely; traditional and religious wedding. Thus, the religious wedding ceremony is carried out at the church because the majority of MSC embraces the Catholic. Otherwise, the wedding ceremony that is carried out in a traditional is called Wagal. It is a wedding traditional ritual carried out for the bride and groom of MSC. Wagal is led and spoken by a traditional holder or elder in front of the groom, the bride and their family. The traditional elder spoke the ritual language in the ritual. The ritual language is addressed to God and ancestors. Therefore, the ritual language has a philosophical meaning that is quite difficult to understand by the people. Hence, the marriage ritual language has metaphorical meanings.
By and large, the metaphor is a figurative language. In line with this, there are some definitions of the metaphor that are guided the writers in conducting this study. First, according to Lakoff and Johnson (1980: 5), the definition of metaphor is the understanding and experiencing one kind of thing in terms of another. On the other hand, in cultural linguistic perspective (CLP), Palmer (1996: 224) argued that the metaphor is one thing stands for another or a thing is called by a name for something else. That is why metaphor would appear to offer a mechanism by which a complex system of new knowledge in a target domain could theoretically be fit onto the framework of old knowledge in a source domain (Palmer, 1996: 224). In CLP, Palmer (1996: 224-232) proposed three types of metaphor expressions. They are structural, ontological and orientational metaphors.
However, in this study, the writers only applied the structural metaphor as the subject of the study. The main reason why the writers did not concern to the other types of metaphors in CLP because the writers find out that almost all of the orientational and ontological metaphor expressions in several ritual discourses of MSC including in structural metaphor expressions. Therefore, the writers choose in concerning to the structural metaphor in traditional marriage discourse of MSC.
The big question is why this study only concerning on traditional marriage ritual than the others ritual? The answer is in nowadays there has not been a linguist who has investigated in traditional marriage ritual of MSC. In line with this, it becomes one of the novelty dimensions of this study. That is why the writers are very interested to investigate the structural metaphor expressions and culture imagery in traditional marriage discourse of MSC. Thus, the writers formulate the problem statement into two research questions. They are (1) what is the meaning of
35 structural metaphor expressions that is used in traditional marriage discourse of MSC? and (2) What is the culture imagery of MSC that revealed in traditional marriage discourse?.
Theoretical Framework
It cannot be argued that the theory is applied in this study can be divided into two, namely; the main and supporting theory. In line with this, the main theory of this study is cultural linguistic perspective (CLP). On the other hand, the supporting theory is metaphor. Those theories were adopted by the writers to uncover the structural metaphor expressions and cultural imagery that appeared in traditional marriage discourse of MSC.
Historically, CLP is a theory intended to approach human language which was proposed by a linguistic anthropologist, Gary B. Palmer (1996) in his book with the title “Toward a theory of Cultural Linguistics”. Henceforth, the CLP is the synthesis of cognitive linguistics with the Boasian linguistics, ethnosemantics, and ethnography of speaking (Palmer, 1996: 5). The synthesis of the three linguistic traditions is termed cultural linguistics (Palmer, 1996: 5).
Furthermore, Duranti (2009: 33) explained cultural linguistic is a theory may be used to refer to the general area of research on the relationship between language and culture. In line with this, Palmer stated that CLP is an interdisciplinary sub-branch of linguistics that explores the relationship between language and culture conceptualizations (Palmer 1996; Sharifian, 2015: 1). In line with this, Sharifian stated that CLP refers to a recently developed discipline with multidisciplinary origins that explores the relationship between language and cultural conceptualisations. Sharifian added that CLP engages with features of human languages that encode or instantiate culturally constructed conceptualisations encompassing the whole range of human experience (Sharifian, 2017: 2).
In general, CLP has two main concepts, namely; verbal symbol and cultural imagery. In line with this, the verbal symbol is related to the component of language itself, such as; word, phrase, sentence, discourse, etc. Otherwise, cultural imagery is what we see in our mind’s eye, but it is also the taste of a mango, the feel of walking in a tropical downpour, the music of Mississippi Masala. Our imaginations dwell on experiences obtained through all the sensory modes, and then we talk (Palmer, 1996: 3). On the other hand, imagery or images are mental representation that begins as conceptual analogs of immediate perceptual experience from the peripheral sensory organs (Palmer, 1996: 47). Sensory organs include eyes, ears, nose, tongue, and skin.
In other words, CLP more concerns toward imagery role in each language expression because all such language expressions are sourced from imagery. It proves by Palmer’s statement on the definition of language. He said that language is the play of verbal symbols that are based in imagery (Palmer, 1996: 3). Therefore, from those theoretical explanations of CLP, it can be seen that CLP emphasized four important things which relates with language entity, namely; verbal symbol, imagery, experience and five senses.
The supporting theory of this study is metaphor. It is the understanding and experiencing one kind of thing in terms of another (Lakoff & Johnson, 1980: 5). In line with this, Palmer (1996: 224) stated that in a metaphor, one thing stands for another or a thing is called by a name for something else. That is why metaphor would appear to offer a mechanism by which a complex system of new knowledge in a target domain could theoretically be fit onto the framework of old knowledge in a source domain (Palmer, 1996: 224). Therefore, the writers argued that the metaphor expression is a type of figure of speech that expresses something to something else based on similar characteristics.
In CLP, Palmer (1996: 224-232) proposed three types of metaphor expressions. They are ontological, orientational and structural metaphors. The ontological metaphor is a metaphor based
upon our experience of physical objects and substances, especially our own bodies (Palmer, 1996: 104). Thus, ontological metaphor is a metaphor used to analogize an activity, emotion, or thought with an existing entity. For example: This chapter explains the theory. The word chapter is analogized as an entity/someone who is able to explain something; that is similar to human.
The second metaphor is the orientational metaphor. It is a physical metaphor that organizes whole systems of concepts with respect to one another (Palmer, 1996: 104). In line with this, according to Lia (Palmer, 1996: 226), orientational metaphor is a metaphor that based in our physical and cultural experience and it gives concepts spatial orientation. For example: the spatial orientation of word “up-down” in sentence “I am feeling up”. This sentence explains about someone feeling. It means that the word “up” is happy. In other words, the sentence meaning of “I am feeling up” is “I am feeling happy”.
The structural metaphor is a metaphor that is used to map something complex and systematic from one concept as a source to another concept as a target. This statement proves that structural metaphor is a complex and mapping from the structure of one thing to the structure of other things. It can be seen on Basso studies (1990: 15-24), he explained about the structural metaphor of human body to the structure of a car. It means that the structure of the human body is the source and the structure of the car is the target of the metaphor. It can be stated that the process by which a concept from one conceptual domain is mapped to a concept from other domain. Thus, if both concepts are complex and there are systematic mappings from one to the other, the complex is termed a structural metaphor (Palmer, 1996: 103).
In analyzing this study, the writers only analyzed the structural metaphor on traditional marriage discourse of MSC. There is a main reason why the writers did not concern to the other types of metaphors in CLP. The reason is there some studies have conducted about the metaphor in several ritual discourses in MSC. Hence, the writers find out that almost all of the orientational and ontological metaphor expressions in those ritual discourses including in structural metaphor expressions. Therefore, the writers choose in concerning to the structural metaphor in traditional marriage discourse of MSC.
Based on the explanations of CLP and metaphor theories, it can be stated that this study applied the two theories to investigate the meaning of structural metaphor that is used in traditional marriage discourse of MSC. On the other hand, this study tried to uncover the cultural imagery that appeared in traditional marriage discourse of MSC.
This study is intended to investigate the structural metaphor expressions that used in traditional marriage discourse of MSC. In addition, this study also uncovered the cultural imagery of MSC that appeared in traditional marriage discourse. Thus, this study belongs to qualitative research method. According to Bogdan & Taylor (Moleong, 2017: 4), qualitative research is a research procedure that produces descriptive data in form of written or spoken words from people and observable behavior.
This study was conducted for six months in Cibal District-Manggarai Regency- East Indonesia. The local language that exists in Manggarai regency is Manggarai language (ML). It is a language which spoken by the Manggarai Speech Community (MSC) who live in the Manggarai regency area (Verheijan, 1991: 1). In addition, ML belongs to the Austronesian language. In line with this, the writers choose Manggarai regency as the research place of this study because there were many linguistic phenomena in ML. It proves by some previous studies and the other researchers in recent years.
In analyzing this study, the writers divided the types of the data into two, namely; primary and secondary data. On the other hand, the source of the data were obtained from the interviewees, traditional marriage ritual discourse (text) of MSC and written library. It means that the primary data of this study were gained from the interviewees. Thus, the interviewees are the native speakers of MSC. It has generally known that the data of this study were in forms of oral. The oral data were obtained from oral speech from traditional elder of MSC. In addition, the oral data were also obtained from the oral answers of interviewees to the written questions orally given to them.
The research instruments used to obtain the data were divided into two types, namely the main and supporting instruments. The main instrument of this study is the researcher himself as a human instrument. Otherwise, the supporting instrument is interview and observation items. Both of the suporting intruments are used to uncover the meaning of the structural metaphor expression and cultural imagery in traditional marriage discourse of MSC.
This study used observation participation, interview, note taking, and documentation study as the technique of data collection. Furthermore, all the data were analyzed by the techniques of data analysis proposed by Miles and Huberman (1992; Sugiyono, 2009: 338). The techniques of data analysis of this study were the data reduction, presentation, and verification (conclusion). On the other hand, the data of this study are presented using formal and informal methods (Sudaryanto, 2015: 144). It means that the formal method is intended to present the result of the research in form of symbols or signs. Otherwise, the informal method is intended to present all forms of speech in the form of numbers and description of words, phrases, group phrases, clauses, units of text, and text.
This sub chapter elaborates in detail toward the meaning of structural metaphor expression used in traditional marriage discourse of MSC. On the other hand, the analysis of this study is also intended to find out the cultural imagery that appear in the traditional marriage discourse of MSC. Therefore, the data composition of this study is written down on the table. The first line is the data in form of metafora. The second line is the glossed data. The third line is the gloss data which is translated into English. The fourth line is grammatical, idiomatic and/or metaphorical translation into English. The all data can be seen in the table below.
|
Table 1. Structural Metaphor Used in Traditional Marriage Discourse of MSC | |
|
No |
Items of Metaphor Expressions |
|
1 |
lonto torok = locé neki lonto Torok Locé Neki Sit in line Mat Unified ‘Sitting together (Being in agreement)’ |
|
2 |
nai ca anggit = tuka ca léléng Nai ca Anggit tuka ca Léléng Breath one Tide Stomach one Carry ‘One mind (We unite firmly)’ |
|
3 |
bantang cama paca pé’ang tana = jum curup oné lutur = akot jaong oné sapo Bantang Cama Paca pé’ang tana Jum Compromise Together bride price Outside garden Fit curup oné Lutur akot Jaong Oné Sapo speak inside House Tide Speak In Fireplace ‘Bride price agreement, such as animals outside and the things, like money inside |
Items of Metaphor Expressions the house’
bantang cama = réjé lélé
Bantang Cama Réjé Lélé
compromise Together Ask Armpit
‘Compromising together (Unifying).’
kopé olés = todo kongkol
Kopé Olés Todo Kongkol
chopping knife one twist Grow Cluster
‘One twist chopping knife grow cluster (Unity).’
raka cama gami ata raja =réjé lélé gami ata cé’é
Raka Cama gami ata raja Réjé Lélé
compromise Together with us human being Ajak Ketiak
Gami Ata cé’é
with us human being Here
‘Agree with us, human being, one heart with us, human being here (Human, Ancestors, and God unify).’
Morin agu Ngaran = Jari agu Dédék = Ciri agu Wowo
Morin agu Ngaran Jari agu Dédék Ciri agu Wowo
owner and Owner Creator and creator shaper and Bearer
‘God the Almighty’
asé ka’é léong béo = asé ka’é mai laki
asé ka’é Léong Béo asé ka’é mai Laki
younger brother Circle Village younger brother come get married
elder brother elder brother
‘Relatives in village and marriage relatives (Relatives)’
reweng ce (ca) gewek = curup ce (ca) rujut
reweng ce (ca) gewek curup ce (ca) Rujut
voice One Chunk speak one Grip
‘To tell a request (We ask a request).’
kamping ge Mori Jari = kéng ge Mori Dédék = tombo ge Mori Wowo
kamping ge Mori Jari Kéng ge Mori Dédék
Face to Owner Creator ask to owner Creator
tombo ge Mori Wowo
Tell to Owner Bearer
‘To tell the owner, the creator, and the bearer (We tell God)’
latangt mendi anak oné mosé ka‘éng kilo koéd
latangt Mendi anak oné mosé ka‘éng kilo Koéd
For Servant Child in Life live family Small
‘For your children in their family life.’
Duat nggere pé’ang uma néka cumang dungka =wé’é nggere oné mbaru néka pala cala.
Duat nggere pé’ang Uma néka cumang Dungka
go work To outside Farm not meet Right
wé’é nggere oné Mbaru neka pala Cala
go home To inside House not crash False
‘Not to get disturb when going to the farm and coming back home (The brides may
avoid from bad things when working).
|
13 |
Néka pangga oné salang = Néka paé oné paté = Néka dolong oné golo. Néka Pangga Oné Salang néka paé oné Paté do not Obscure In Way do not block In Way Néka do’ong Oné Golo do not Hinder In Hill ‘Do not hinder in the streets (Avoid them from difficulties in life).’ |
|
14 |
Néka pius pikul = Néka wéntong komong. Néka Pius Pikul néka wéntong Komong do not swing around Row do not turn Mouth ‘Casting face turn mouth (Do not swing around from the brides).’ |
|
15 |
Néka péléng nggere lé = Néka méla nggere pé’ang. Néka Péléng nggere Lé néka méla nggere pé’ang do not swing around To South do not sulk To Outside ‘Do not turn to south & outside (Do not turn around from the brides).’ |
|
16 |
Cir koé ici = Pua koé wua. Cir koé Ici Pua Koé Wua Get may Content Pluck May Fruit ‘To get the fruit (They (brides) may get success in working).’ |
|
17 |
Duat gula = Wé’é mané. Duat Gula wé’é Mane go to farm Morning come back from farm Evening ‘Going to the farm in the morning and going home in the evening (They may be safe, healthy, and success working in the farm).’ |
|
18 |
Tua hang gula = Paéng hang mané = Delék hang wié Tua hang Gula paéng hang mané delék Hang Get Food Morning Own food afternoon get Food Wié Tua Hang Duat ita hang ciwal Evening Get Food Work get food work ‘To get enough food (They may be prosperous)’ |
|
19 |
Wua raci weri = Ako kala po’ong. Wua raci Weri Ako Kala po’ong Fruit areca Plant Pluck Betel Plant ‘Areca bears fruit and pluck the betel (They may be prosperous).’ |
|
20 |
Téla koé galang pé’ang = Keté koé api oné. Téla koé Galang pé’ang keté koé api Oné Open may manger outside burn may fire Inside ‘The manger is open outside and the fire burns inside the house (They may have animals and foods = They may be prosperous).’ |
|
21 |
Ras ela na’ang = Jehar manuk pening. Ras ela na’ang Jehar manuk Pening Many pig Feeding Many hens Feeding ‘They may feed many pigs and hens (They may be prosperous).’ |
|
22 |
Néka curu buru = Néka dadang darap = Néka momang kolang = Néka ligot siong = Néka pedeng menes = Néka po’ong jongol. Néka Curu buru néka Dadang Darap do not pick up wind do not Take Hot Néka Momang kolang néka Ligot Siong do not Like Hot do not Keep cold wind |
|
Néka Pedeng menes néka po’ong Jongol do not Keep feel cold do not plant ill ‘They may be healthy.’ | |
|
23 |
Néka ragang tana = Néka kolang leso. Néka ragang Tana Néka Kolang Leso Jangan Kering Tanah Jangan Panas Matahari ‘They may escape from hot land and hot sun (They may be healthy).’ |
|
24 |
Pélé koé lé = Tadu koé lau = néka paé sale = néka along awo. Pélé koé Lé Tadu koé Lau block may South Close may North néka paé Sale Néka along Awo do not spy West do not open East ‘Block in the south, close in the north, do not spy in west, do not open in the east (They may be protected from directions).’ |
|
25 |
Temek kali wa = Mbau kali éta Temek Kali Wa mbau kali Éta Swamp Only below shade only Above ‘Cool below and shade above (May they be healthy).’ |
|
26 |
Gak tana nggere wa = Burut awang nggere éta. Gak Tana nggere Wa burut awang nggere Éta Terbelah Tanah Ke Bawah tembus langit ke Atas ‘May their possessions be full from earth to sky (May they be prosperous).’ |
|
27 |
Mboas waé woang= Kémbus waé téku. Mboas Waé Woang kémbus Waé Téku spout out Water bathing place spout out Water bathing place ‘May the water bathing place overflow (May they be prosperous).’ |
|
28 |
Ta’i cala wa’i = Borék cala bocél. ta’i Cala wa’i Borék Cala Bocél feces Unpurposive Foot Feces unpurposive Calf ‘Many feces on feet and calves (May they be given many children).’ |
|
29 |
Rés baling lélé = Ras baling recap. Rés Baling Lélé Ras baling Recap Busy Near Armpit Busy near Rib ‘Busy near armpits and ribs (May they be given many children).’ |
|
30 |
Rénték lobo kécép = Ra’ok lobo sapo Rénték Lobo Kécép ra’ok lobo Sapo Queue On cooker cover sit around on fire place ‘Sitting in a queue on the fire place (May they be given many children).’ |
|
31 |
Cing nggere sili, sili-sili wisi = Todo nggere olo, olo-olo lor = Wécak nggere pé’ang, pé’ang-pé’ang wéla. Cing Nggere Sili Sili Sili Wisi Bud to below Below Below Stretch Todo nggere Olo Olo Olo Lor Grow to front Front Front Spread Wécak nggere pé’ang pé’ang pé’ang Wéla raise seedling to outside outside Outside Bloom ‘May they bud, grow, and be in bloom (May they be given many children).’ |
32 Worok éta golo néka bowok = Paténg wa waé néka gaék
|
Worok |
Éta |
Golo |
Néka |
Bowok |
|
worok tree |
In |
mountain |
do not |
Moldy |
|
Paténg |
Wa |
Waé |
Néka |
Gaék |
|
pateng tree |
In |
River |
do not |
Break |
‘May worok tree in the mountain not become moldy and pateng tree at the bank of rivers not break (May the family be strong and persist for a long time).’
-
33 Wiko lé ulung = Jéngok lau wa’ing
wiko lé Ulung Jéngok Lau wa’ing
Wiko south Headwater Jengok north Estuary
‘Wiko plants in the upper reaches of the river, jengok plants in the mouth of the river (Hope they live healthy)’
-
34 Petu lé = Liwu lau
Petu lé Liwu Lau
Channel south store North
'Flow from the south and accommodate in the north (May they prosper)’
-
35 Saung bémbang nggere éta = Waké calar nggere wa
saung Bémbang Nggere Éta Wake calar Nggere
Leaf Thick To Above Root strong To
'Growth leaves up and strong roots down (May they live well)’
-
36 Acer nao = Wasé wunut, ndeng agu jerék
Acer Nao wasé Wunut ndeng Agu
stick in Nao rope palm fiber strong And
'The wooden stakes and the strong palm fiber rope (May their family be strong and last forever).
-
37 Torok ata kop = Pa’u ata patun
Torok Ata Kop pa’u Ata Patun
Speak That Proper fall That Proper
'Spoke fit and proper (This is our proper supplication)
-
38 Pinga tu’ung hitu lé méu sina =Séngét tu’ung hitu le méulé
pinga
tu’ung
hitu
Le
Méu
listen
Really
that
By
You
séngét
tu’ung
hitu
Le
Méu
listen
Really
that
By
You
'Listen beyond and south (Listen our hope, O Lord and Ancestors)
-
39 Hitus dé torok kali torok toé kop = Hitus dé pa’u kali pa’u toé patun = Hitus dé tura kali tura toé duhan.
Hitus
Dé
Torok
Kali
Torok
Toé
That
Part
Speak
But
Speak
Not
Hitus
Dé
pa’u
Kali
pa’u
Toé
That
Part
Speak
But
Speak
Not
Hitus
Dé
Tura
Kali
Tura
Toé
That
Part
Speak
But
Speak
Not
‘That is a request, but a request is not proper (If God and the Ancestors do not grant all the requests and do not approve the marriage of the two brides)’
-
40 Condo tombo reweng gewek soak jaong
condo Tombo reweng Gewek Soak Jaong
deliver Story Voice Chunk Whisper Speak
‘We deliver the story, chunk of voice, and whisper (We deliver the requests).’
-
41 Nomber agu rengas
nomber agu Rengas
sweat and Hot
‘To get sweat and hot (To get/undergo bad things, difficulties).’
-
42 Do’ong paté golo = Dungket paté béa
do’ong Paté golo Dungket paté Béa
Block On hill Block on Plain
‘To hinder in the hill and the plain land (To get/undergo bad things, difficulties).’
-
43 Waé lau = Leso sale
Waé Lau leso Sale
water North sun West
‘Water to the north and the sun to the west (All bad things flow with water to the north and with the sun to the west).’
Cultural Imagery of MSC that Expressed in the Structural Metaphor
The cultural imageries have been actually found in the data analysis. Those culture imageries that appear on structural metaphor expressions in traditional marriage discourse of MSC are cultural, sosial, magical, ideological, mythical, and biological imagery. From those imageries that appeared in traditional marriage discourse of MSC, it can be concluded and summarized that;
-
1. MSC believe that the God has power to control, protect, guidance, curse ect the human being. In other words, MSC believe that the God has power for the entire of human being in this world. Therefore, MSC have to ask, permit or pray to the God for everything that they do, including ask or permit for marriage.
-
2. MSC believe that the ancestors have power to protect, guidance or even to curse the human being or their children. That is why MSC also ask or permit or pray to their ancestors in every ritual including traditional marriage ritual ceremony.
-
3. MSC believe that ancestors are still alive like living human being. Like They have five senses that are still working. Their eyes still can watch life of the human being, their ears still can listen to the prayers, their noses still can smell the foods and drinks, their tongues can taste foods and drinks, and their skins still can touch the human being.
-
4. Like other ethnics, MSC desire good life condition when living in the world. This can be reached by some structural metaphorical expression that appeared in traditional marriage discourse of MSC. On the other hand, it can be reached by giving ancestors food (consisting of the vein, heart and crop of the cock or rooster, rice, salt, water, and tuak ‘traditional alcoholic drink’) on traditional mariage ritual ceremony.
By and large, this study investigated the relations on language and culture. That is why this study applied CLP. This theory uncovered two important concepts, namely; simbol verbal and imagery. In line with this, the symbol verbal relates to language that is used in traditional marriage discourse of MSC. In this study, the symbol verbal which is investigated is structural metaphor. Furthermore, the cultural imagery relates to the linguistic cognitive of MSC. It means that this study would like to uncover the main reason why MSC using the structural metaphor expressions in traditional marriage discourse.
Therefore, based on the explanation of structural metaphor expressions and cultural imagery of MSC that appeared in traditional marriage discourse, it can be concluded that there are some novelties dimension of this study. They are the existance of concrete information or guidelines of traditional marriage discourse of MSC. Furthermore, the result of this study is intended to obtain the information of structural metaphor used in traditional marriage discourse and culture imagery of MSC.
By and large, the novelties dimension of this study are found by several factors, namely; (1) Recent years, the research of ritual language in traditional mariage discourse of MSC is still little done by some linguists, (2) the researches on concerning toward metaphor expressions is referred from the literary theory even though those researches used CLP theory as the grounded theory. (3) in real fact, the studies which applied CLP as the main theory were not applied about culture imagery in detail.
The several chunks of structural metaphor expressions defenitely appeared in traditional marriage discourse of MSC. Those structural metaphor expressions had the idiomatic meaning. It is also uncovered the culture imagery of MSC. Therefore, the conclusion of this study is presented in detail below.
-
1. There are forty three (43) structural metaphorical expressions that appeared in traditional marriage discourse of MSC.
-
2. The imagery that appeared in traditional marriage discourse of MSC is cultural, sosial, magical, ideological, mythical, and biological imagery.
-
3. Those imageries that appeared in traditional marriage discourse of MSC prove that
-
• MSC believe that the God has power to control, protect, guidance, curse ect the human being.
-
• MSC believe that the ancestors have power to protect, guidance or even to curse the human being or their children.
-
• MSC believe that ancestors are still alive like living human being.
-
• Like other ethnics, MSC desire good life condition when living in the world.
6. Acknowledgements
On this occasion, the writers would like to express their deepest gratitude and gratefully acknowledge to all who have provided contributions and assistance in finishing this study. First, my great gratitude delivers to the Indonesia Endowment Fund for Education (LPDP) for their support and grant. Furthermore, the writers also wish to thank their family, friends and all those who have given valuable contributions to this study, especially to Prof. Dr. I Ketut Darma Laksana, M. Hum., Prof. Dr. I. B. Putra Yadnya, M. A., Prof. Dr. Drs. I Wayan Simpen, M. Hum., Dr. I Made Netra, S.S., M. Hum., Dr. Ni Luh Nyoman Seri Malini, M. Hum., Prof. Dr. Drs. I Nyoman Sedeng, M. Hum, Prof. Dr. Fransiskus Bustan, M. Lib, and Dr. Dra. Ni Wayan Sukarini, M. Hum, for their advices to improve the analysis of this study.
References
Basso, Keith. (1990b). Western Apache Language and Culture: Essays in Linguistic Anthropology. Tucson: University of Arizona.
Chaer, A. dan Agustina, L. (2010). Sosiolinguistik Perkenalan Awal. Jakarta: PT. Rineka Cipta.
Duranti, A. (2009). “The relevance of Husserl’s theory to language socialization. Journal of Linguistic Anthropology”, 19 (2), 205–226. doi: 10.1111/j.1548-1395.2009.01031.x
Eggins, Suzanne. (2004). An Introduction to Systemic Functional Linguistis, 2nd Edition. New York: Continuum.
Erfiani, Y. P. F. (2018). “A Study on Methaphors in Ti’I Ka Embu Nusi Discourse in Rongga Language”. Jurnal Pendidikan Bahasa dan Sastra, 18 (1), 123-135.
Fairclough dan Wodak. (1997). Critical Discourse Analysis dalam Teun A.Van Dijk (ed.). Discourse an Social Interaction: Discourse Studies a Multidisciplinary Introduction. London: Sage Publication.
Fox, James J. 1986. Bahasa, Sastra dan Sejarah: Kumpulan Karangan Mengenai Masyarakat Pulau Roti. Jakarta: Djambatan.
Haliday, M. (2004). An Introduction to Functional Grammar (Third Edition). London: Arnold.
Kridalaksana, Harimurti. (2008). Pesona Bahasa. Jakarta: Gramedia.
Lakoff, George. (1987). Women, Fire, and Dangerous Things: What Categories
Reveal about the Mind. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Moleong, Lexy. J. (2017). Memahami Penelitian Kualitatif. Bandung: PT Remaja Rosdakarya.
Palmer, G. B. (1996). Toward a Theory of Cultural Linguistics. USA: University of Texas Press.
Sharifian, Farzad. (2017). Cultural Linguistics: Cultural Conceptualisations and Language. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publshing Company.
Sharifian, Farzad. (2015). “Cultural Linguistics and World Englishes”, John Wiley & Sons Ltd: Word Englishes, 1-18.
Sudaryanto. (2015). Metode dan Aneka Teknik Analisis Bahasa: Pengantar Penelitian Wahana Kebudayaan secara Linguistik. Yogyakarta: Sanata Dharma University Press.
Sugiyono. (2009). Memahami Penelitian Kualitatif. Bandung: Alfabeta.
Suparwa, I Nyoman, dkk. (2021). Tiga Paradigma Analisis Wacana dan Aplikasinya. Denpasar: Swasta Nulus.
Verheijen, J. A. J. (1991). Manggarai dan Wujud Tertinggi, Jilid 1. Jakarta: LIPI RUL.
raphy of Author
Yohanes Paulus Florianus Erfiani, S. Pd, M. Pd is a Doctoral Student (PhD) of Linguistic Program in Udayana University, Bali, Indonesia since 2020. He received undergraduate degree of English Education program at Widya Mandira Catholic University in 2012 and post graduate of English Education Program at Nusa Cendana University in 2015. He is also a linguistic researcher. He has been interested in linguistic field, especially cultural linguistic perspective. He has participated in a number of national and international conferences and academic workshops. He has published many proceeding articles and journal articles. He also has published two books. Email: [email protected]
Discussion and feedback