The Reconstruction of Etymon Proto of Sambori and Teta Isolects Spoken
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
I Gede Budasi/ Jurnal Arbitrer - Vol. 8 No. 1 (2021) Online version available in : http://arbitrer.fib.unand.ac.id JURNAL ARBITRER | 2339-1162 (Print) | 2550-1011 (Online) | Articles The Reconstruction of Etymon Proto of Sambori and Teta Isolects Spoken in Bima Regency-NTB-Indonesia I Gede Budasi1 1English Language Education, Universitas Pendidikan Ganesha, Singaraja, Indonesia SUBMISSION TRACK A B S T R A C T Recieved: January 30, 2021 The previous studies that describe the phonological system of the isolects Final Revision: April 02, 2021 and the description of their differing and uniting linguistic features have Available Online: April 25, 2021 not yet answered the doubts among Indonesian linguists whether or not the KEYWORD Proto of Sambori-Teta (PSm-Te) were descended from Proto Austronesia Reconstruction, types of sound change, proto Austro- (PAn). Thus, this article aims to describe the interrelatedness of the two nesia, proto Sambori-Teta protoes and to describe the types of sound changes from the PAn to PSm- CORRESPONDENCE Te etymons. This descriptive study applied a comparative method by E-mail: [email protected] implementing bottom-up and top-down analysis in reconstructing the PSm- Te. The linguistic features as the evidence of the interrelatedness of the two protoes were identified and analyzed using sound change theories. This study found 1691 (99.35%) definitive etymons of PSm-Te among 1702 etymons of Sambori and Teta Isolects identified in this study, and the types of sound change from PAn to PSm-Te etymons showed addition, deletion, metathesis, diphthongization, fusion, fortition, lenition, fronting, and backing. The definitive PSm-Te and the identified types of sound changes can be used as the linguistic evidence to determine that PAn descend PSm- Te. Therefore Sambori and Teta isolects reflect PSm-Te. I. INTRODUCTION in the regency, were not involved in Budasi and Sudirma’s study Budasi and Inriani (2019) proved The subgrouping languages in Indonesia, including the two isolects’ status as two dialects of the in Bima Regency, NTB Indonesia, has not yet same language. So, in this regency, there are four been done completely though some isolects in the languages include Sambori. In this study, Sambori region have been determined as languages. Budasi and Bima quantitative kinship language relatedness and Sudirman (2018) found that Bima, Sanggar, was found 38.8%. Referring to Swadesh’s language and Kolo isolects were quantitatively determined classification, they are two languages of the same as different languages of the same family using family. Budasi and Inriani’s study also found lexicostatistic analysis. In contrast, Taloweri and that the kinship relationship between Teta and Mbojo isolects involved in the study were found as Sambori is 98%. Based on the Swadesh language two dialects of Bima language. Previously, based on classification, the kinship relatedness (81%-100%) quantitative and qualitative analysis, Syamsuddin should be classified as two dialects of the same (1996) identified that Bima language was descended language. from Proto Austronesia (PAn). If Sanggar, Kolo, and Bima isolects were quantitatively determined So far, it is not known yet whether or not Sambori as three different languages of the same family, language is also descended from PAn. Based on rationally, it means that Kolo and Sanggar the researchers’ prior observation, most Bimanese languages are also inherited from PAn. However, people mentioned that Sambori language does not Sambori and Teta isolects, which were also spoken belong to Bima language subgrouping. It was even said as the original language of Bimanese before DOI: https://doi.org/10.25077/ar.7.2.14-24.2021 Under Liscense of Creative Commons Attributioni-NonCommercial 4.0 International. 14 I Gede Budasi/ Jurnal Arbitrer - Vol. 8 No. 1 (2021) the speakers of Bima, Kolo, and Sanggar languages by the qualitative ones (Bynon, 1979; Dyen, 1975; were spoken in this region. They stated that their Nothofer, 1975). The assumption that underlies mutual intelligibility with Sambori speakers was this method is the number of vocabularies in one not so strong. language can be differentiated into two big groups: (a) the basic words which are not easy to change, The subgrouping of Sambori isolect as one of the that is, the ones which are related to the human languages spoken in the area has been conducted body, pronounce, emotion, feeling, weather and by some researchers. However, their interpretation nature, number as well as the words related to of their lexicostatistic analysis results is still household tools. They are grouped as basic words; questionable since the cognate percentage between (b) the words that are easy to change, include Sambori and Bima language was controversially loaned ones to or from other cultures. They are the interpreted. Arafiq (2016), for example, stated that ones like chairs, table, and lamp. They are easy to the status of Sambori isolect is a dialect of Bima diffuse (Crowley, 1997; Dyen, 1975). language for their cognate lexicostatistic analysis showed that the two reached 61% dissimilarity (or The quantitative data are used to determine the 39% similarity). Yusra, Lestari, Ahmadi, Asyhar, & percentage of relatedness and determine the family Soemerep (2016), who also did a lexicostatistical tree of language. The result of quantitative-based analysis of the two, declared that Sambori is a language subgrouping is usually used as the dialect Bima (61.2% dissimilarity or 38,8 % working hypothesis for further exploration of the similarity). When we see the levels of language qualitative subgrouping languages (Anggayana et classification by Swadesh (1952) mentioned al., 2020; Dyen, 1978; Mbete, 1990). The next step earlier, the percentage of 38.8% is between 36% is to count separating the period of two isolects and 81%, which means that their status should be or language by applying glottochronological two different languages of the same family. Rosadi statistics (Keraf, 1997). The assumption based on and Hermanto (2018) examined the fundamental that calculation is a set of words with universal differences of the dialects of the indigenous people characteristics and remain constant along the years of Sambori Village with the Bima Community. around (Adhiti, 2016). They concluded that Sambori only a dialect of Bima The language classification from the quantitative language. If we connect the figure of 38.88% with analysis may be measured using Swadesh’s theory the language classification by Sawadesh (1952), it (1952), as mentioned in the following. is no doubt aware of saying that Sambori and Bima should be two different languages. Tabel 1. Language classification Time of separa- Level Cognate % Based on the discussion above, no study yet has tion in a century been done to determine whether or not Sambori and Language 0-5 100-81 Teta Isolects are inherited from Proto Austronesia, Language Family 5-25 81-36 such as the one mentioned by Samsyuddin Stock 25-50 36-12 (1988) as mentioned earlier. Therefore, further Microfillum 50-75 12-4 investigation urgently needs to be done. The branch Messofillum 75-100 4-1 of linguistics which can be used to overcome the Macrofim 100- above >1% matter is historical-comparative linguistics (HCL). It can identify the two isolects’ kinship and their In an attempt to investigate the kinship relationship historical developments (Adhiti, 2016; Anggayana among isolects, Nothofer (1975) suggested et al., 2020; Campbell, 2013; Ino, 2013). researchers apply bottom-up analysis in examining The research in HCL tends to apply a comparative the early stage of their proto-language and apply method, a study to observe the development top-down one to check the linguistic evidence of of isolects or languages by comparing their phonological or lexical retention, and phonological characteristics. Its quantitative data in the form and lexical innovation that happen to the compared of 200 Swadesh Word List were analyzed using isolects. The two approaches are known in lexicostatistics. Its results were usually confirmed reconstructing proto-language. To identify the 15 I Gede Budasi/ Jurnal Arbitrer - Vol. 8 No. 1 (2021) interrelatedness between PAn to its descendant described the phonological system of Teta Isolect, languages, historical-comparative linguists used while Allan (2019) described the phonological of to describe the phonological correspondences Sambori Dialect. Lately, Mitta (2019) successfully by mentioning the types of sound changes from described the linguistic features which differentiate PAn etymons to its descendant languages. Some and unite the two dialects. However, the qualitative linguists such as Crowley (1997), Anttila (2009), linguistic evidence determining the interrelatedness and Cser (2014) mentioned different types of sound of PSm-Te to PAn assumed as the proto of all changes. Crawley (1997) mentioned 11 types; languages in Bima regency was not yet discussed lenition, fortition, sound addition, metathesis, in the three studies. fusion, unpacking, vowel breaking, assimilation, Based on the study background and the theories haplology, and paragoge, abnormal change; Cser mentioned earlier, determining the language (2014) underlies nine types; lenition, fortition, classification of the two isolects is not only deletion, insertion, metathesis, assimilation, important to research, but it must be done as soon dissimilation, diphthongization, and raising; as possible since the success of categorizing their and