LINGUISTIC EXPRESSIONS WITH REFERENCE TO SEMIOTIC PRINCIPLE OF NGEMBAH BELO SELAMBAR.

(1)

LINGUISTIC EXPRESSIONS WITH REFERENCE TO SEMIOTIC PRINCIPLE OF NGEMBAH BELO SELAMBAR

A THESIS

Submitted to Partial Fulfillment of the requirements for the Degree of Sarjana Sastra

By :

NURJANA

REG NUMBER : 2123220026

ENGLISH AND LITERATURE DEPARTMENT

FACULTY OF LANGUAGES AND ARTS

(2)

(3)

(4)

(5)

(6)

i

ABSTRACT

Nurjana. 2123220026. Linguistic Expressions With Reference to Semiotic Principle of Ngembah Belo Selambar. A Thesis. English and Literature

Department. Faculty of Languages and Arts. State University of Medan.2016

This research focuses on semiotic used in utterances of Ngembah Belo Selambar. The research was conducted by using descriptive qualitative research method. The data were collected from compact disc about Ngembah Belo Selambar and also listening the utterances. The findings of the research show that utterances in Ngembah Belo Selambar consist of three semiotic elements that devided into 9 types of semiotic which is Qualisign (0), Legisign (6), Sinsign (6), Icon (0), Index (0), Symbol (1), Rheme (2), Decisign (0), Argument (0). The most dominant type is Sinsign and Legisign, which is means Ngembah Belo Selambar try to show the universe sign and Ngembah Belo Selambar just want to create the every sign that are in Ngembah Belo Selambar is easy to understand by everyone.

(7)

ii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

First of all, the writer would like to thanks to Allah SWT and the Prophet

Muhammad SAW for the blessings during her academic year at English and

Literature DepartmentFaculty of Languages and Arts (FBS) State University of

Medan in completing the thesis. The writer is also very grateful to the following

people:

 Prof. Dr. SyawalGultom, M.Pd, the Rector of State University of Medan.  Dr. IsdaPramuniati, M.Hum, the Dean of Faculty of Languages and Arts

(FBS) State University of Medan.

 Prof. Dr. Hj. Sumarsih, M.Pd, the Head of English and Literature Department as well as Dra. Meisuri, M.A, the Secretary of English and

Literature Department for their encouragement and motivation during the

writing of the thesis. SyamsulBahri, S.S, M.Hum, the Head of English

Literature StudyProgramand Nora Ronita Dewi,S.Pd.,S.S., M.Hum,the

Head of English Education Programfor their encouragement to complete

the thesis.

 Eis Sri Wahyuni, M.Pd, the Administration Staffof English Department, who much helped her to fulfill this thesis.

 Prof. Amrin Saragih, M.A, Ph.D, her Consultant, who had already motivated her to finish the thesis by giving advices, supervising, giving

comments and corrections during completing this thesis and also for Prof.

Dr. Busmin Gurning, M.Pd, as her Consultant and Academic Advisor for giving advices and supervising during her academic years.

 All the Lecturers of English and Literature Department, during her

academic years at State University of Medan, especially for Ariatna, who

have taught and given knowledges to her encouragement and invaluable

advices to complete this thesis.

 Herbeloved parents, Jumarta Kaban, BA and Junita br. Perangin –

(8)

iii

support, their endless love and their prayers, as well as herbeloved sister

Sri Wahyuni Feramita S.Pd, who have been good siblings all the time.  Rahmatsyah Panggabean, S.Kom, who gave her motivation until

finished the thesis. Thanks for his time and support.

 Moses Hirja Sembiring, S.S, who gave her a lot of support, suggestion,. Thanks for his time, motivation and care about the thesis.

 Her all beloved friendsand classmates in English Literature 2012, especially for Farida, Dara, Nina, Nuzulianda for the support and time

in motivating and accompanying her during the academic years.

Medan, September 2016

The writer

Nurjana

(9)

iv

9. Procedure in Ngembah Belo Selambar ... 15

a.Ngembah Belo Selambar ... 15

b.NgantingManuk ... 16

(10)

v

C. Conceptional Framework ... 18

CHAPTER III RESEARCH METHOD ... 20

A. Research Design ... 20

B. Source Of the Data ... 20

C. The Technique of Collecting Data ... 20

D. The Technique of Analyting Data ... 21

CHAPTER IV DATA AND DATA ANALYSIS ... 22

A. Data ... 22

B. Data Analysis ... 22

1. Representament ... 23

2. Object ... 33

3. Interpretant ... 33

C. Research Findings... 36

D. Discussion ... 37

CHAPTER V CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTION ... 39

A. Conclusion ... 39

B. Suggestion ... 39

(11)

vi

LIST OF TABLE

Table 4.1 Pierce’s Theory ... 12

Table 4.2 Analysis of Kuta ... 7

Table 4.3 Analysis of Kampil ... 8

Table 4.4 Analysis of Belo ... 8

Table 4.5 Analysis of Kurumah ... 9

Table 4.6 Analysis of Nakan ... 10

Table 4.7 Analysis of Sekin ... 10

Table 4.8 Analysis of Pengalon ... 13

Table 4.9 Analysis of Runggun ... 13

Table 4. 10 Analysis of Kerja ... 14

Table 4. 11 Analysis of Nganting Manok ... 14

Table 4. 12 Analysis of Batang Unjuken ... 16

Table 4. 13 Analysis of Amak ... 17

Table 4. 14 Analysis of Manok... 19

Table 4.15 Analysis of Isap ... 20

Table 4. 16 Analysis of Simada jabu ... 22

Table 4. 17 Analysis of Mata Kerja ... 24

(12)

vii

LIST OF PICTURE

Picture 4.1 Kuta ... 23

Picture 4.2 Kampil ... 25

Picture 4.3 Belo. ... 25

Picture 4.4 Nakan ... 27

Picture 4.5 Sekin ... 28

Picture 4.6 Community belief ... 29

Picture 4.7 Kerja ... 30

Picture 4.8 Amak ... 32

(13)

viii

LIST OF APPENDIX

(14)

vi

LIST OF TABLE

Table 4.1 Pierce’s Theory ... 22

Table 4.2 Analysis of Kuta ... 24

Table 4.3 Analysis of Kampil... 25

Table 4.4 Analysis of Belo ... 26

Table 4.5 Analysis of Kurumah ... 26

Table 4.6 Analysis of Nakan ... 27

Table 4.7 Analysis of Sekin ... 28

Table 4.8 Analysis of Pengalon ... 28

Table 4.9 Analysis of Runggun ... 29

Table 4. 10 Analysis of Kerja ... 30

Table 4. 11 Analysis of Nganting Manok ... 31

Table 4. 12 Analysis of Batang Unjuken ... 31

Table 4. 13 Analysis of Amak ... 32

Table 4. 14 Analysis of Manok ... 32

Table 4.15 Analysis of Isap ... 33

Table 4. 16 Analysis of Simada jabu ... 34

Table 4. 17 Analysis of Mata Kerja ... 34

(15)

vii

LIST OF PICTURE

Picture 4.1 Kuta ... 23

Picture 4.2 Kampil ... 25

Picture 4.3 Belo. ... 25

Picture 4.4 Nakan ... 27

Picture 4.5 Sekin ... 28

Picture 4.6 Community belief ... 29

Picture 4.7 Kerja ... 30

Picture 4.8 Amak ... 32

(16)

viii

LIST OF APPENDIX

(17)

1

CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION

A. The Background of the Study

Every country or region has different characteristics and identity embodied in

the form of traditional or typical clothing, customs, folk songs, ceremony and

language. It can be used as a characteristic of each country or region that is generally

intended to be easily recognized by the public. One of the identity of region that

related to culture is marriage ceremony. According to Kottak, Conrad Philip ( 1186 -

1190 ) Culture is a term used by social scientists for a way of life. Every human

society has a culture. Culture includes a society’s arts, beliefs, costums, institutions,

invention, language, and values.

Every human has a culture. In every country or region also has a different

culture. Tradition is idea of culture that consists of the value, norms, costums,

institutions, and customary law is commonly done in a region. Culture is not

genetically inherited, and cannot exist on its own, but is always shared by members of

a society (Hall 1976, p. 16). Hofstede (1980, pp. 21-23) define culture as the

collective programming of the mind which distinguishes the members of one group

from another, which is passed from generation to generation, it is changing all the

time because each generations adds something of its own before passing it on.

(18)

2

Culture is a set of shared and enduring meaning, values, and beliefs that characterize

national, or other groups and orient their behavior (Mulholland 1991).

Especially in culture, as we know Indonesia as a country that has many kinds

of culture that we have to develop and protect. So as young generation we must

protect our culture and do it event in modern era. So, we need the language in culture

to share the culture to the world and our young generations, in culture so many text,

sign, art, and image, sounds, gesture, and event an object that have meaning. So, we

have to know the symbolic in every aspect of language, by knowing the symbolic and

meaning so we don’t miss understanding to interpret the meaning of text, sign, word.

In this condition, so many Karo’s people from the old man, adult, and young

generation don’t know what is the meaning of Ngembah Belo Selambar. When I

asking some people about Ngembah Belo Selambar they are confuse to explain it.

They only know it’s a culture of karonese. Thats why the writer want to analysis the

semiotics. Ngembah Belo Selambar is one of culture of Karonese. And this is one of

(19)

3

( We are your relatives that come from the same village, come here to give mat and

knife to our child the Ginting surname.)

From the utterances, the writer will identify the semiotics, for instance from

above, the semiotics are amak (mat) and sekin (knife). And the author will

categorize these words to the types of semiotics.

In this proposal, it is important to study semiotics. Semiotic is the study of

signs. Signs is important role in human life because life is filled with and covered by

the signs. Elements meaning of the expressions is realized by the form of words or

sounds, writing, or sign in language. Both of these elements are major components of

semiotics. This suggests that language is semiotic. Roman Jakobson (1990, 6) wrote

that ‘Language is a purely semiotic system, the study of signs, however must take

into consideration also applied semiotic structures, as for instance, architecture, or

cuisine. Saussure argued that ‘nothing is more appropriate than the study of language

to bring out the nature of the semiological problem’ (Saussure 1983, 16). Semiotics

draws heavily on linguistic concepts, partly because of its influence, and also because

linguistic is a more established discipline than the study of other sign-systems. The

linguist and semiotician Roman Jakobson( 1970,455) was in no doubt that ‘language

is a system of signs, and linguistic is part and parcel of the science of signs or

semiotics’ (Roman Jakobson 1949a, 50; cf. 1970, 454). A LinguisticExpression is

any physical form (sound, visual image or sequence thereof) used to represent a

(20)

4

expression is distinct form the actual process (speaking, writing, signing) that

produces the expression.Meanings are objects. Linguistic expressions are objects.

Linguistic expressions have meanings. Semiotics approaches meaning by studying

the signs that make up sign system. In communication, a speaker sends a fixed

meaning to a hearer via the linguistic expression associated with that meaning.

(Lakoff& Johnson 1980:206)

Semiotics is the study of signs, the function of the sign and the production of

meaning ( SumboTinarbuko, 2008:12). And the sign convey information that is

communicative. He was able to replace something else that can be thought or

imagined. This branch of science is progressing in the field of language later

developed also in the field of art and visual communication design (SumboTinarbuko,

2008:16). Refering to the theory of Pierce (North, 1995:45), based on the object.

Pierce divides the signs in the image and can be seen from the types of sign that are

classified in semiotics.

By knowing and understanding semiotic, people can easily know what is

meaning and function of Ngembah Belo Selambar.

B. The Problems of the Study

The problem of the study from linguistic expression with reference to semiotic

principle of the Ngembah Belo Selambar can be stated as follows :

(21)

5

2. What is the most dominant type of semiotic expression in Ngembah Belo

Selambar?

C. The Objectives of the Study

Relative to the problem of the study, the objectives of this study are :

1. To describe types of semiotic expression are used in Ngembah Belo Selambar.

2. To find out the most dominant type of semiotic expression in Ngembah Belo

Selambar.

D. The Scope of the Study

There are many various events in wedding ceremony of Karonese such as

Narohken, NgulihkenTudung. But in this proposal just examine about Ngembah Belo

Selambar which is one of the events that Karonese do in Jambur (outlying place).

Ngembah Belo Selambar is also an event in Karonese culture before wedding

ceremony. This study will describe about semiotic in Ngembah Belo Selambar.

E. The Significances of the Study

It is very interesting to discuss the semiotics of Ngembah Belo Selambar,

because in modern era so many young generation begin to forget their culture. The

findings of study are expected to be useful in some respects as the following :

1. The students especially the students of English Department to enlarge their

(22)

6

2. It can be useful for all peoples , who wants to know about the meanings of

(23)

40 CHAPTER V

CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTION A. Conclusion

After analyze the data, conclusions are

1. There are three kind of semiotic form use of semiotic in Ngembah Belo

Selambar as the sign, namely : (a) representament is kind of outer face of sign

only can see but not known yet the meaning by the human, (b) object is

something which is present or is within cognition a person or group of people

(c) the interpretant is Interpretan is an interpretation of someone based on the

object it sees fit with the fact that links between representamen with objects.

2. There are nine types of semiotic such as qualisign, sinsign, legisign, icon,

index, symbol, rheme, decisign, argument with the legisign and sinsign is

dominantly occures in these research.

B. Suggestion

Based on the conclusion above, it’s advisable that:

1. In learning a language as the social semiotics will give us contribution to find

much more system of using sign in society.

2. For the readers, it is better to understand the semiotic analysis that is used in

Ngembah Belo Selambar, so they will know the semiotics meaning of

Ngembah Belo Selambar.

3. _{For other researchers, this thesis can be used as reference when they dicide to}

(24)

41

REFERENCES

Backer, Aboo B.M. 2007. A Thesis: “Signs and Meaning in Contemporary Dance

in Malaysia”. Malaysia : University Sains Malaysia

Chandler, Daniel. 2002. The Basic Semiotic. London and New York:Routledge

Cobley, Paul. 2001. The Routledge Companion to Semiotics and Linguistic. London and New York : Routledge

Dines, Jorgen J. 2002. Sign in Use :“An Introduction to Semiotics. London and New York : Routledge

Ginting, Ukur M. 2008. Adat Karo Sirulo. Kabanjehe

Pierce, Charles S. 1986. Logic as Semiotic : The theory of Sign. Bloomington: Indiana University Press

Purba, Parentahen. 2007. Melestarikan Adat Nggeluh Kalak Karo. CV. RG Pinem Medan

Ranjan, Sri. 2010. A Journal: Science of Semiotic Usage in Advertisements and

Consumer’s Perception. Sri Lanka: University of Colombo

Sebeok, Thomas A. 2001. Signs: An Introduction of Semiotics. London: Toronto Buffalo

Short, T.L. 2007.Pierce theory of sign. New York: Cambridge University Press

http://linguistics-ontology.org/gold/LinguisticExpression/ Accessed on April 14, 2016 at 19.30

http://id.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mbaba_Belo_Selambar/ Accessed on Mei 15,2016