THE
DESCRIPT
U
DIP
TION
OF
T
DES
REG
UNIVERSIT
FACULTY
PLOMA
III
THE
EXTEN
SOCIET
A
PAP
BY
SMA
SARI
G.
NO.
08
TY
OF
NOR
Y
OF
CULT
ENGLISH
MEDA
JULY
20
NDED
KINS
TY
ER
BANGUN
2202061
RTH
SUMA
TURE
STU
STUDY
PR
AN
011
SHIP
OF
K
ATERA
DIES
ROGRAM
It has been approved by Supervisor,
Dra. Persadanta Br. Karo, M.Hum NIP. 19610204198601 2 001
Submitted to Faculty of Culture Studies, University of North Sumatera in partial fulfillment of the requirements for DIPLOMA (D‐III) in English
Approved by
Head of Diploma III English Study Program,
Dr. Matius C.A. Sembiring, M.A NIP: 19521126198112 1 001
Approved by the Diploma III of English Study Program Faculty of Culture Studies, University of North Sumatra
Accepted by the Board of Examiners in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the D‐ III of Examination of the Diploma III of English Study Program, Faculty of Culture Studies, University of North Sumatera.
The examination is held on……….2011
Faculty of Culture Studies, University of North Sumatera Dean,
Dr. Syahron Lubis, M.A NIP: 19511013197603 1 001
Board of Examiners Signature
1. Dr. Matius C.A. Sembiring, M.A. (Head of ESP) ______________
2. Dra. Persadanta Br. Karo, M.Hum (Supervisor) ______________
3. Drs. Siamir Marulafau, M.Hum (Reader) ______________
AUTHOR'S DECLARATION
I am DESMA SARI BANGUN, declare that I am the sole author of this paper. Except where the reference is made in the text of this paper, this paper contains no material published elsewhere or extracted in whole or in part from a paper by which I have qualified for or awarded another degree.
No other person’s work has been used without due acknowledgement in the main text of this paper. This paper has not been submitted for the award of another degree in any tertiary education.
COPYRIGHT DECLARATION
Name : DESMA SARI BANGUN
Title of Paper : THE DESCRIPTION OF THE EXTENDED KINSHIP OF KARONESE SOCIETY
Qualification : D-III/Ahli Madya Study Program : English
I am willing that my paper should be available for reproduction at the discretion of the Librarian of the Diploma III English Department Faculty of Culture Studies USU on the understanding that users are made aware of their obligation under law of the Republic of Indonesia.
Abstrak
Kertas karya ini membicarakan tentang hubungan kekerabatan yang
berlaku di kalangan masyarakat Karo, system kekerabatan yang
dimiliki oleh masyarakat Karo mempunyai suatu fenomena yang
bagus dan menarik, sesuai ideologisnya bahwa setiap anggota
masyarakat Karo dengan anggota lainnya pasti mempunyai hubungan
yang diikat oleh suatu konvensi tentang kekerabatan walau dimana
saja pun mereka berada. Masyarakat Karo mempunyai ciri khas yang
tidak dimiliki oleh suku lain yang ada di dunia ini. Secara umum
istilah kekerabatan yang dianut oleh masyarakat Karo ada sebanyak 24
dan hal ini dapat dibaca pada halaman 3, kemungkinan kekerabatan
tersebut ada sebanyak 8 dan dapat dilihat pada halaman 12 kertas
karya ini terdiri atas 30 halaman. Metode yang digunakan untuk
menulisnya adalah metode deskriptif dan penelitian lapangan. Data
diperoleh dari beberapa informan.
Abstract
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
Thanks to God for His mercy and glory to the Savior, Jesus Christ, for His love, guidance in leading me during my study as well asa the completion of this paper.
In this opportunity, I would like to express my sincere gratitude to my supervisor, Dra. Persadanta Br. Karo, M.Hum, for the support, encouragement, and for guiding me in finishing this paper. Her patience and welcome council have had many valuable constructive suggestion. And also I would give thanks to my reader Mr. Siamir Marulafau,M.Hum.
I would like to express my sincere gratitude to the Dean of Faculty of Letters, Dr. Syahron Lubis, M.A, and the head of Diploma III English Study Program, Dr.Matuius C.A. Sembiring, M.A. who had given me great deal of knowledge from the time I entered the faculty to the presence this paper. And I also would say thanks to my lecture for the valuables guidance, precious thoughts and knowledge throughout my academic years.
My hearties and deepest gratitude are due to my beloved mother, my father, and all my families for their endless love, advice, cares, prayers, materials, and supports during my study.
Finally, I realize that this paper is still far for being perfect. Therefore, advice, constructive-critics, and suggestion aimed at this paper will be warmly welcome and highly appreciated
Medan, September 2011 The writer,
Table of Contents
AUTHOR’S DECLARATION ... i
COPYRIGHT DECLARATION ... ii
ABSTRAK ... iii
ABSTRACT ... iv
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ... v
TABLE OF CONTENTS ... vii
1. 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5 1.6 INTRODUCTION Background Problems
Scope of Writing
Purpose of writing
Reasons for Choosing the Topic Method of Writing
1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2.. 2.1 2.1
REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE Kinship in General
Society 3 3 3 3. 3.1 3.2 3.2.1 3.2.2 3.2.3 3.2.4 3.2.5 3.2.6 3.2.7
KARONESE SOCIETY’S KINSHIP
Common Kinship
Extended Kinship
Sembuyak Sembuyak Sepemeren Sembuyak Siparibanen
Sembuyak Sepengalon/ Sedalanen Anak Beru
Anak Beru Menteri
3.2.8 Puang Kalimbubu 25
4. 4.1 4.2
CONCLUSON AND SUGGESTION Conclusion
Suggestion
27 27 28
Abstrak
Kertas karya ini membicarakan tentang hubungan kekerabatan yang
berlaku di kalangan masyarakat Karo, system kekerabatan yang
dimiliki oleh masyarakat Karo mempunyai suatu fenomena yang
bagus dan menarik, sesuai ideologisnya bahwa setiap anggota
masyarakat Karo dengan anggota lainnya pasti mempunyai hubungan
yang diikat oleh suatu konvensi tentang kekerabatan walau dimana
saja pun mereka berada. Masyarakat Karo mempunyai ciri khas yang
tidak dimiliki oleh suku lain yang ada di dunia ini. Secara umum
istilah kekerabatan yang dianut oleh masyarakat Karo ada sebanyak 24
dan hal ini dapat dibaca pada halaman 3, kemungkinan kekerabatan
tersebut ada sebanyak 8 dan dapat dilihat pada halaman 12 kertas
karya ini terdiri atas 30 halaman. Metode yang digunakan untuk
menulisnya adalah metode deskriptif dan penelitian lapangan. Data
diperoleh dari beberapa informan.
Abstract
1.
INTRODUCTION
1.1 Background
The title of this paper is ‘The description of the extended kinship of Karonese society’. This paper is talking about the extended kinship of Karonese society. The society of Karonese live mostly in one regency is in the regency of Kabupaten Karo in the Province of North Sumatera. Out of the North Sumatera Province the people of Karo can be found in some p art of Indonesia.
This writing is a qualitative writing. The data taken from some informants who are treated as the representative of the Karonese society. The village of those informants is Kabanjahe. This writing is different with the writing of a language, because the linguistic aspects are different with the terms kinship. Language can be influenced by the invironment, but the terms kinship are not. Kinship terms are used to addressed someone by someone.
1.2 The Problems
The problem in this writing is the extended family that practiced by the society of Karonese. The uniqueness of its extended kinship cannot be understood by the society of non-Karonese Society without studying it hard or reading this paper.
1.3 The Scope of Writing
the kinship that owned and practiced by other society. For example the kinship that owned by the European society.
1.4 The Purposes of Writing this Paper
There are some reasons in order to write this paper. Firstly, the writer wish and plans to finish her study from the Diploma III of the English Study of the Faculty of Culture Study of the University of North Sumatera a nd for any student who want to get the certificate for it, she is required to write and submit a paper to the Faculty and the Department. Therefore she wants to write this kind of paper. Secondly, she wants to apply the knowledge she gets from her lecturers during her study beside wishing to let the other people who has never known the extended kinship which is practiced by the society of Karonese in their daily lives.
1.5 Reasons for Choosing the Topic
According to the fact that there are a lot of topics to be discussed and to be written to be made as a paper in order to fulfill the requirement to get the certificate of Diploma III on the English study from the Faculty of Culture Study, but in remembering that the writer is one of the Karonese society’s member, she is very interested in writing and showing other people abouit the extended kinship that practiced by the Karonese society.
1.6 Method of Writing
2. REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE
2.1 Kinship in General
Kinship is a term used by the society who use as the linguistic aspect to address someone in their daily lives. Generally, it can be understood that any society in the world has its own system in using the kinship. For example, the English society uses the kinship terms as follows.
The terms of Karonese kinship are Husband, Wife, Father, Mother, Son, Daughter, Brother, Sister, Uncle, Aunt, Father in Law, Mother in Law, Brother in Law, Sister in Law, Grand Father, Grand Mother, Grand Son, Grand Daughter, Nephew, Cousin, Great Grand Father, Great Grand Mother,
Great Grand Son, and Great Grand Daughter.
2.2 Society
Languages, no doubt, are powerful and meaningful although they cannot be concretely be seen obviously when it is used as oval language, when we compare them to other tools of mechanics. They, the languages, however are used to differentiate human beings from animals. We can imagine how great and important a language is to the world in generaland to its society in particular. We really cannot guess what would happen to the world without languages.
We know that a language is a dynamic kind of phenomenon, or on the other hand we can say that a language is always developing or it never remains entirely static. Languages are always changing and the Karonese language is just as much subject to linguistic change as any other language.
Nichols (1984:23) says, "Every society and every living language is stratified in many different ways. People divide themselves and each other into groups along line of class, status, and power. In the study of language stratification, analysts find such as things as ‘high’ and 'low' varieties."
According to the statements in the above quote, the Karonese ethnic group and its language are stratified in their own ways. Thus they have groups along lines of class, status, and power such as things as 'high' and 'low' varieties. The classification of the stratification that the Karo ethnic group possesses are "Kalimbubu" [klimbubu] which means high, the orderer, and to be served;
Labov (1972 : XVI) says, "... that most important fact about language is its social function: the fact that it serves to establish and maintain socially prescribed patterns of behavior."
Again Patricia C. Nichols (1984:24) said "Language is one of the forms through which our social relationships are manifest, and is one of the primary vehicles through which our relative social status is shown."
It can be seen clearly that the relationships between a language and its society are meaningful because by applying the language's role to its society the relative social status of its society's members can be shown and understood. The same things will happen to the Karonese ethnic group.
For example Edwards (1985:19) said, "...that there will be no 'non-ethnic tomorrow”.
The Karonese ethnic group has a unique system which supports the idea of John Edwards. The system that the Karonese people use is that the Karonese people are a united group which consists of three different status groups and will be structured based on the five surnames elements (1 = 3 = 5). (See diagram 1).
It is hard for the outsiders to believe and understand how the Karonese ethnic group functions as one is three and so is five.
Now a question might be asked by the non-Karonese people.How does the Karonese people use the Karonese language as a means of interaction to validate our proposition that one is three or three is one or one is five or five is one?
that the possession of a given language is well-nigh essential to the maintenance of group identity."
Karonese people call themselves one in term of Karonese ethnic group which means that all of them are linked to one another as strongly as chains no matter where they are. This linking is concerned with the power and meaning of the Karonese language. On the other hand a person may belong to those three different status groups according to his/her context of situation. For instance he/she may belong to "Kalimbubu" at this time, and may belong to "Sembuyak" at that time, and also may belong to "Anak Beru" at another time. So his/her membership may change according to the context of situation.
When Karonese people say that they consist of three groups, they mean that all Karonese people no matter where they are, they will have to be a member of these three status groups. So the possibilities are only these three groups, i. e. "Kalimbubu", "Sembuyak", or "Anakberu". Then another question will be asked in order to know who is "Kalimbubu", "Sembuyak", or "Anak Beru".
Before I answer this important question, I would like to tell the readers of this paper about the idea of Nichols (1984:24) says, "The use of language is part of a social interaction that requires essential arrangements about meaning between the participants in the interaction and reflects the consensus among the participants about their relative social 'worth' as speakers and readers."
the categorizations. The members of the groups respect one another. This can be seen clearly when "Kalimbubu" gives an order to "Anak Beru" and the "Anakberu" will give the services. "Anak Beru" and "Sembuyak" will never give orders to "Kalimbubu" but they may ask requests.
As soon as the readers know the meaning of these three distinctive and significant words they will be eager to know the application of the words (to the extent that it can be made available) and ways how to make a decision about who is who to whom. In order to get a decision the two or more Karonese people have to find out by following the regulations. Firstly, asking the first surname and then followed by the second surname of the person. This will be done interchangeably.
John Edwards (1985:3) says, "The emergence of sociolinguistics reflects a desire to reform this situation and to acknowledge a renewed interest in context. It seems to me that, implicit in this, is a concern for group and individual identity, i. e. sociolinguistics is essential about identity, ..."
Karo ethnic group says that its members consist of five elements because they have five surnames in general, i.e. "Karo— karo", "Sembiring", "Ginting", "Tarigan", and "Perangin-angin".
Karonese people still believe, till now, that all the people, no matter who they are or where they are, if they have. Therefore, up to date no one is allowed to marry a person with the same surnames. The regulation that they may not marry a person with the same surname is fair enough because there are still four out of five possibilities to be chosen.
A society is a group of individual and the members of the group almost have the same used of goods. For example, Students and faculty have identified three principal features: a clear writing style with frequent use of meaningful examples, topical coverage that reflects the latest findings in the broad range of the family field, and consistenly interesting material.
This edition of the family, society, and the individual contains a wealth of new material because family texts must change-even as the family field it self changers-if they are to retain their relevance and vitality. Minority families and experimental family organization now receive even more appropriate attention. Because they rank as one of our largest and fastest-growing ethnic groups, a compherensive description .
3. KARONESE SOCIETY’S KINSHIP
3.1 Common Kinship
Husband is a married man who has a wife. Any man who has married a girl is called the husband of the woman who he has married. This system is called common. The situation of this thing happened to any man in the world of any society. For example, we can look at the chart of a family drawn in pages 15 and 16. A wife is a woman who has been married by a man. Any woman who has a husband is called the wife of the man who marries the woman. There will be no woman is called a wife of someone if she does not have a husband. For example, we can look at the chart of the family written on pages 15 and 16.
Father and Mother are the parents of their child or children. When the parents have the child or children with the sex of male they are called the son or sons of the parents, and for the female they are called the daughter or daughters.
Brother or brothers are addressed to the boy or boys among the children, and so sister or sisters will be called to the daughter of the same father and mother.
Uncle and Aunt are the brother and sister of our parents. Father in Law and Mother in Law are the parents of our wife or husband. Brother or brothers in Law and Sister or sisters in Law are the brother or brothers of our wife or husband.
Nephew or nephews are the son or sons and daughter or daughters of our sisters or brothers. We, the children who are of the same as the nephew of the uncle and aunt are called cousins.
Great Grand Father and Great Grand Mother are the parents of our grand father and grand mother, and so as the opposite that we are thedir Great Grand Son or sons and so Great Grand Daughter or daughters.
In order to understand the term Rakut si Telu or Daliken si Telu well we need to study the diagram drawn below. Let the writer pretends that the diagram or the kinship chart belongs to the writer of this thesis family. She is Desma Beeru Bangun.
When we look at the arrows which is showing the children of the family, we can see that the family’s names are also inherited by the children no matter the children are boys or girls. We can see the kinship chat that A.1 inherits his Bangun to all of his children and so to his grandsons and grand-daughters.
According to the chart that B.1 and B.2 family are the Kalimbubu of A.1 and A.2 family. Tomas Karo Sekali becomes the Kalimbubu of Kongsi Bangun because he marries the daughter and sister of B.1 and B.2. She is the sister of A.2 ois the sister of B.1. And then as its extension we can see on the kinship chart that Kongsi Bangun has three children, it means that all of the Kongsi Bangun has children are also the Anak Beru of B.1 and B.2 and as its opposite that all of the Kongsi Bangun generation become the Anak Beru of B.1 and B.2. The opposite of Kalimbubu is Anak Beru.
3.2 Extended Kinship
can be found in the world. Noone of the other ethnics use the family’s names as the Karonese’s family’s names.
The extended kinship which is leaded from the term Rakut Si Telu which means tied together or one to another are linked together or it may mean one to another cannot be separated. And so the term Daliken means stove which is made of stone. The term si Telu means the three, so Daliken si Telu means the three stones which are putting together in order to be used as a stove on which someone can use it to cook food. If one of those three stones is not present they cannot be used as a stove, because someone cannot put a saucepan or other pots to cook food. So those three stones cannot be used separatedly. They must be used at the same time. The society of Karonese uses the three elements tied together because it will not be called Rakut si Telu when one of them is absent. They named Rakut si Telu which are equal to Daliken si Telu because when they make the stove usually build by the members of Rakut si Telu. The constitutions of Rakut si Telu consists of three different constitutions. The constitutions are Sembuyak, Anak Beru, and Kalimbubu.
Acording to the data that Karonese know and practice the three different institutions (Anak Beru, Sembuyak, and Kalimbubu). In order to organized these three institutions they own some roles which is depend on the marriage, generation, and kinship.
Any wish of attempting to conceive a whole culture which is controlled by a single set of conditions did not solve the problems. The ideas to of trying to make a decision to grasp the meaning of a culture as a whole compels us to consider descriptions of standardized behaviour merely as a stepping stone leading to other problems. We must understand the individual as living in his culture; and the culture as lived by individuals. The intention in these socio-psychological problems is not in any way opposed to the historical approach. On the contrary, it revel dynamic processes that have been active in cultural changes and enables us to evaluate evidence obtained from the detailed comparison of related cultures.
On account of the characteristics of the material problems of cultural life presents itself often as that of the interrelation between various aspects of culture. In some cases this writing leads to a better appreciation of the intensity or lack of integration in various types of culture which prove that the relations between different aspects of culture follow the most diverse patterns and do not lend themselves provitably to generalizations. However it leads rarely, and only directly, to an uderstanding of the relation between individual and culture.
is not historical except in so far as the general configuration, as long as it lasts, limit the direction of change that remain subject to it. In comparison to the changes of the contents of the culture the configuration has often been stated a remarkable permanency.
3.2.1 Sembuyak
Sembuyak means brother. Sembuyak belongs to the same family names. For instance the Sembuyak of Ginting will be all the Gintings. This institution has sub-institutions. Its sub-institution written or will be discussed in points 4.3.4, 4.3.5, and 4.3.6. According to the tradition of Karonesenese that any ceremony applied usually owned by the Sembuyak or in other words it can be said that Sembuyak is the host of the ceremony. The member of the Sembuyak can not be included from different sub-family’s name. For example, as it has been written in chapter 2.1.4 that a family name has some sub-names, such as Ginting Suka, Ginting Munte, etc. So Ginting Munte can not be the Sembuyak of Ginting Suka, and so its opposite. So all the members of the Sembuyak has the same sub-name. 3.2.2 Sembuyak Sepemeren
3.2.3 Sembuyak Separibanen
Sembuyak Separibanen is one of the sub-institutions. This sub-institution happens because of the marriage. Someone becomes the member of Sembuyak Separibanen as he get married. The members will be called Separibanen because their wives are sisters. Therefore the members of the Separibanen can be owned different family’s names. For example, Ginting, Karonese-Karonese, Sembiring, and Tarigan become Separibanen because their wives’ family’s anme is Perangin-angin.
3.2.4 Sembuyak Sendalanen/ Sepengaloen
This sub-institution also caused by a marriage. It can be said Sendalanen or Sepengaloen because one of his nephews marries someone’s daughter. According to the wishes of Karonesenese that his daughter will be married with his nephew, but because they are not love to each other they marry the others. So this marriage makes the father in law of his nephew is the Sepengaloen or Sendalanen with him.
In order to understand the meaning of Rakut/ Daliken si Telu that the Karonese owns, he or she needs to understand the Karonese kinship in advaced. The kinship term will be produced by the marriage or in other words it can be said that the kinship term will be decided after the process of marriage happened. For the unmarried Karonese, the kinship will be linked to the marriage of his or her parents.
Separibanen, Sembuyak Sendalanen/ Sepengaloen, Kalimbubu, and Puang Kalimbubu. These eight different institution are linked one another. None of them can be escaped from. We can see that as a Karonese baby born to the world he or she has already possessed the eight sub-institutions. These systems are leading the kinship to have the extended family which is praticed by the Karonese society.
Kinship Chart
♂ B.1 ↔ B.2♀
♂ B.3 ↔ B.9♀
♀ B.4 ↔ B.10♂
♀ B.5 ↔ B.11♂ ♀ B.6 ↔ B.12♂
♀ B.7 ↔ B.13♂
♀ B.8 ↔ B.14♂ ♂ B.9↔B.15♀ B.1 is Tomas Karo Sekali. He is the husband of Diana Beru Tarigan. (B.2) B.1 is the brother of A.2 (Ngemat Beru Tarigan).
B.3, B.4, B.5, B.6, B.7, B.8, and B.9 are the children of B.1 and B.2.
B.3 is Marini Beru Karosekali. B.4 is Rosniati Beru Karosekali. B.5 is Plista Beru Karosekali. B.6 is Saltalina Beru Karosekali. B.7 is Rospita Beru Karosekali. B.8 is Novenda Beru Karosekali. B.9 is Rata Karosekali. B.10 is Markiano Tarigan. B.11 is Jaya Bangun. B.12 is Jesaya Pulungan. B.13 is Pranseda Pelawi. B.14 is Julius ginting. B.15 is Feriati Beru Ginting.
♂ A.1 ↔ A.2♀
♀ A.3 ↔ A.6 ♂ A.4 ↔ A.7♀ ♂ A.5 ↔ A.8♀
♀ A.9 ♂ A.10 ♀ A.13 ↔ A.16♂ ♀A.14↔♂A.17 ♂A.15
♀ A.18 ↔♂ A.23
♀ A.19 ↔♂ A.24
♀ A.20 ↔♂ A.25
♀ A.21
♀ A.22 ♂↔♀ Symbol used to show husband and wife.
A.1 is Kongsi Bangun. He is the husband of Ngemat Beru Tarigan.( A.2)
A.3, A.4, A.5, and A.6 are the children of A.1 and A.2. They are sisters and brothers.
A.7 is Sarwan Surbakti. He is the husband of Rina Beru Bangun.(A.3) A.5 is Jaya Bangun. He is the husband of Mia Beru Karo.(A.9)
A.4 is Abadi Bangun. He is the husband of Norma Beru Pelawi.(A.8) A.11 is Juanto Surbakti.
A.12 is Jointa Surbakti.
A.13 is Isma Beru Bangun. He is the wife of Wisata Tarigan (A.14) A.19 is Santa Beru Bangun. He is the wife of Henri Sitepu (A.24) A.20 is Eli Bangun. She is the wife of Mangkok Sinulingga (A 25). A.22 is Andi Bangun.
A.13 is Evi Beru Bangun. She the wife of Adi Sinuraya (A.16) A.14 is Lenti Beru Bangun. She is the wife of Musti Barus (A.17) A.15 is Teger Bangun.
A.21 is Desma Beru Bangun. 3.2.5 Anak Beru
While we are talking about Rakut si Telu, we cannot be escaped from discussing the eight different sub-institutions. The eight different sub-institutions are Anak Beru, Anak Beru Menteri, Sembuyak, Sembuyak Sepemeren, Sembuyak Separibanen, Sembuyak Sendalanen/ Sepengaloen, Kalimbubu, and Puang Kalimbubu. These eight different institution are linked one another. None of them can be escaped from. We can see that as a Karonese baby born to the world he or she has already possessed the eight sub-institutions. These systems are leading the kinship to have the extended family which is praticed by the Karonese society.
Now, before we go to discuss about the five different family’s names, Rakut/ Daliken si Telu (three institutions), and the eight different sub-institutions, it should be better if we look at the kinship chart or diagram that the Karonese families have. If we want to see the kinship diagram that Karonese families have soon we can see its uniqueness of the systems. The fathers generate their families’ names to all of their generations, no matter that their generations are boys or girls. And according to the Karonese system of marriage that they tend to engage their daughter to their nephews. This kind of engagement which the society of Karonese prefer very much. So, now, the writer of this paper tries to draw the kinship diagram which is owned and practiced by the members of Karonese from the past time till today.
pictured and made common property the religious scenes and dogmas which were fundamental in the outlook of that period. Modern Karonese aesthetics would have been quite different if mediaeval art had been purely decorative and had not made common cause with religion.
As a matter of history great developments in art have often been remarkably separate from religious motivation., and use. Art may be kept definitely apart from religion even where both are highly developed. In the past time or when Indonesian was under the Deutch colonist, art forms in pottery and textiles command the respect of the artist in any culture, but their sacred bowls carried by the priests or set out on the altars are shoddy and the decorations crude and unstylized. Museums have been known to throw out Karonese religious objects because they were so far below the traditional standard of workmanship. The people have to put a frog there, the people who believe in ghosts say, meaning that the religious exigencies eliminate any need of artistry. This separation between art and religion is not a unique trait of the society. The family’s names and so the sub-family’s names make the same distinction, though they motivate it in various ways. They do not use their artistic skill in the service of religion. Instead, therefore, of finding the sources of art in a locally important subject matter, religion, as older critics of art have sometimes done, we need rather to explore the extent to which these two can mutually interpenetrate, and the consequences of such merging for both art and religion.
be illustrated in one of the Karonese society who live outside the regency of Tanah Karo. Success in life, according to their beliefs, was due to personal contact with the supernatural. Each man's vision gave him power for his lifetime, and in some areal or villages the society was constantly renewing their personal relationship with the spirits by seeking further visions. Whatever the Karonese saw, an animal or a star, a plant or a supernatural being, adopted them as a personal protege, and they could call upon them in need. They had duties to perform for their visionary patron, gifts to give them and obligations of all kinds. In return the spirit gave them the specific powers they promised them in their vision.
genetically connected. They are locally merged, and in the merging both traits have taken special and characteristic forms.
Anak Beru is one of the three different institutions according to the Karonese culture. Anak Beru has one sub-institution. It is Anak Beru Menteri. The detail of Anak Beru Menteri can be on the kinship chart. Anak Beru happened when someone get married. For example, as it can be see on the kinship chart that A.1 marries the sister of B.1. The marriage caused A.1 is the Anak Beru of B.1, and its opposite the B.1 becomes the Kalimbubu of A.1. Thereefore whenever the B.1 wants to have a ceremony, he has to asked A.1 to organize it. The cost will be responsed by B.1, but to plan and manage must do by the Anak Beru. Other example, when the children of B.1 wanted to get married, he must let A.1 knew it first, and then A.1 organized a good planning for until the wedding was over. 3.2.6 Anak Beru Menteri
3.2.7 Kalimbubu
Kalimbubu of someone means the father or the brothers of someone’s wife. One example can be seen in the kinship chart that the father of B.2 and the brothers of B.2 are the Kalimbubu of A.1. In Karonesenese tradition, Kalimbubu has a high position in the community. For example, when they want to have lucnh at a party noone can start having the lucnh before the Kalimbubu. While the Anak Beru is countributing the meal, the members must give the food to Kalimbubu firstly. As anybody of the Kalimbubu’s members has got in turn then the Anak Beru can continue to countribute to the Sembuyak This is secondly, and at last or thirdly will be to the members of the Anak Beru. So in a meeting of ceremony can not be decided before has got the agreement from the Kalimbubu.
3.2.8 Puang Kalimbubu
4. CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTION 4.1 Conclusion
The diagra will be mo
4.2 Sugge As extended k and intere since her to be unde encourage other etchn
am of the K ore easy to r
estion s the writer
kinship that esting one. life she has erstood by a e the other s
nics. We re
Karonese Ex read and un
r of this pa t own by the The writer s never und any member students to w
alize that In
xtended Kin nderstand it
aper has fi e society of r of this pa derstood it. N
r of Karone write down ndonesia ha
nship can be
inished wri f Karonese , aper is one Now she re ese society. as their pap as a tremend
e drawn as f
ting the de , she finds t of the aron ealizes that
Therefore, pers about th dous traditio
following. A
escription o that it is a u nese Societ it is very cr
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Bell, Roger T. 1976. Sociblinguistics: goals, approaches and problems. London: B. T. Batsford Ltd.
Downes, William. 1984. Language and Society. London: Fontana.
Edwards, A. D. 1976. Language in Culture and Class. London: Heineman. Edwards, John. 1985. Language, Society and Identity. London: Blackwell. Fasold, Ralph. 1972. The Sociolinguistics of Society. London: Blackwell. Fishman, J. A. 1972. The Sociology of Language. Massachusetts: Newbury
House.
Gumperz, J.J. 1971. Language in Social Groups. California: Stanford University Press.
Hudson, R.A. 1980. Sociolinguistics. London: Cambridge University Press. Labov, William. 1972. Sociolinguistic Patterns. London: Blackwell.
Labovit, Sanford. 1983. Metode Riset Sosial. Jakarta: Erlangga.
Mahsun. 2005. Metode penelitian Bahasa: tahapan strategi, metode, dan tekniknya. Jakarta: Raja Grafindo Persada.
Maxwell, Joseph A. 1996. Qualitative Research Design: an introduction approach. London: Sage
Nasution, S. 1988. Metode Penelitian Naturalistik Kualitatif. Bandung: Tarsito
