SOSIOLINGUISTIC

LANGUAGE AND CULTURE

KELOMPOK X

HIKMAWATI
MUSTAGFIRAH SYAHRIR
NUR ALFI LAELA
MUHAMMAD BUDYATNA SYAMSUL

ENGLISH LANGUAGE TEACHING

STATE ISLAMIC UNIVERSITY OF ALAUDDIN MAKASSAR

LANGUAGE AND CULTURE

Page 1

There are various theories on the relationship of language and culture. Some
say that language is part of culture, but there are also saying that the language and
culture are two different things, but it has a very close relationship, so it cannot be
separated. Some say that the language is strongly influenced by the culture, so that all
things that exist in the culture will be reflected in the language. Conversely, there is
also say that language is affected by culture, and human thinking or public speakers.
This chapter will discussed more about how real relationships between them.
A. The Nature of Culture
If we open the books of anthropology or books about culture, then we will find
a variety of definitions of culture are very different, and the conclusions that can be
considered to be true, or it could be considered complete rooms. This difference
occurs compiler-compilers usually the definition of the view that culture in terms of
different aspects. Kroeber and Kluckhom (1952) has collected dozens of definitions of
culture and breaks it down into six categories according to the nature of the definition,
namely (1) the definition of descriptive, is the definition that emphasize elements of
culture; (2) the historical definition, the definition of which emphasizes that it
inherited social culture; (3) the definition of normative is definition that emphasizes
the nature of culture as a rule of life and behavior; (4) the psychological definition,
namely the definition of culture that emphasizes the usefulness of the adjustment to
the environment, solving problems, and learn to live; (5) the structural definition, the
definition of which emphasizes the nature of culture as a system that is patterned and
regular; (6) the definition Genetic, namely the emphasis on the definition of culture as
a result of human work.
Without seeing how the formulation of definitions-definitions is collected it
one at a time was known from the grouping that culture pervades all aspects and
facets of human life. Then, if we look at the definition of class (6), it can be said any
act of culture. This is different from the concept of culture is covered and managed by
the Directorate-general named Direkrorat cultures that exist under the Ministry of
National Education, because it turns out that is maintained by the directorate only
matters relating to the arts. Directorate was walkin take care of the work and the
results of other work, such as economics, technology, law, agriculture, and housing.
Grouping definition-definition cultures made Nababan (1984) also indicate that
culture encompasses all aspect cultures of four categories, namely (1) the definition of
LANGUAGE AND CULTURE

Page 2

who see culture as a regulator and a binder society; (2) the definition of who see
culture as things that humans acquired through learning or education (nature); (3) the
definition of who see culture as the habits and behavior of humans and (4) the
definition of who see culture as a system and the survival of the community used to
obtain cooperation, unity and survival of human society. In line with the definition of
class (2) of the above Nababan Goodenaugh (1981) writes:
Looking at culture as a product of human learning, I once summarized as
follows content are:
(1) The ways in which people have organized Reviews their experience of the
real world so as to give it structure as a phenomenal world of forms, that is, their
percents and concepts.
(2) The ways in which people have organized Reviews their phenomenal
Reviews their experience of the world so as to give it structure as a system of cause
and effect relationship, that is, the propositions and beliefs by which they explain
events and design tactics for accomplishing Reviews their purposes. (3) The ways in
which people have organized Reviews their nominal Reviews their experience of the
world so as to structure its various arrangements in hierarchies of preferences, that is,
their value systems or sentiment. These provide the principles for selecting and
establishing purposes and for keeping oneself purposes, fully oriented in a changing
phenomenal world. (4) The ways in the which people have organized Reviews their
past experience of Reviews their Efforts to Accomplish recurring purposes into
operational procedures for accomplishing Reviews These purposes in the future, that
is a set of "grammatical" principles of action and a series of recipes for accomplishing
a particular ends. They include operational procedures for dealing with people as well
as for dealing with material things.
Culture, then, Consists of standards for deciding what is, standards for
deciding what can be, standards for deciding how one feels about it, standards for
deciding what to do about it, and standards for deciding how to go doing it.
Definition of class-definition (4) of the grouping made Nababan explicitly
states that all human systems of communication used, of course, also the language is
include in culture. That is why Nababan (1984: 49) in states that culture is a system of
rules of communication and interaction that allows a society occurs, maintained, and
long-lasting. Definition made Nababan is certainly not wrong, because the system or
rules of communication that is part of the culture but the culture system only course,
LANGUAGE AND CULTURE

Page 3

also other problems, class definition above. So, including the rule of law or in the
community (definition-definition of group) (1), the results of education (definitiondefinition group) (2), and habit and attitude (definition-definition group) (3) In other
words, the culture is all matters relating to human life, including the rule of law or in
the community, the results of which made man, customs, and traditions are wont to
do, and also iteration tools or other nonverbal communication.
Koentjaraningrat (1992) say that culture is unique to humans, and grow
together with the development of human society. To understand Koentjaraningrat,
using something called "cultural framework", which has two aspects of departure is
(1) a form of culture, and (2) the content of culture. The form of culture which is
mention is like (a) the form of ideas, (b) attitude, and (c) physical or objects. The third
form is called also (a) the cultural system, which is abstract (b) social system, which
is a rather concrete; and (c) cultural fission, which is very concrete. While the content
of the culture consists of seven elements that are universal, that is to say, the seven
elements in every society there are people who live in this world. The seventh element
is (1) language, (2) technological system, (3) system seems the economic livelihood
or, (4) social organization, (5) the system of knowledge, (6) the system of religion and
(7) art.
According Koentjaraningrat, language is part of the culture, or in other words
the language under the scope of the culture. But anyway Koentjaraningrat said, in
ancient times when people just consist of small groups scattered in a few places on
earth, the language is the main element that contains all other elements of human
culture. Now, after the other elements of human culture that has evolved, the language
is only one of the main elements of course.

B. Relationship of Language and Culture

According to Koentjaraningrat above that languages are part of the culture. So,
the relationship between language and culture is the relationship that subordinate,
where Language is under the scope of the culture. However, this is not the only
concept that is discussed, since besides there is another opinion that stated that the
language and culture have a relationship that is coordinative, i.e. equal relationship,
that his position is the same height. Masinambouw (1985) and even mentioned that
the language (the term he used literary) and the cultural system of "inherent" in
humans. If that culture is the one system that regulates human interactions within the
LANGUAGE AND CULTURE

Page 4

community, then the literary is a system that regulates human interactions within the
community, then the literary is a system which serves as a means of interaction during
it. In other words, the close relationships that apply as: culture is the system that
governs human interaction, while the literary system which serves as a means of
sustainability means it.
Masinambouw (1985) also questioned how the relationship between literary
and culture it, whether is coordinative, or subordinative. If a subordinate, which
became the main system's where also the subsystem, most experts say that culture is
indeed the main system, whereas the language just a subsystem, as we have discussed
in section later 11.1 above. There is nothing that says otherwise. Regarding the
relationship of language and culture that is coordinative there are two things that
should be noted. First, there is the literary and cultural relations say it like conjoined
twins, two phenomena that are closely tied to, such as the relationship between one
side and the other on a piece of metal currency. One side is the literary system and the
other side is the side of culture (see Silzer 1990). So, this literary and culture is to say
two different phenomena, but the relationship very closely, so that cannot be
separated. The second interesting thing in this coordinative relationship is a very
controversial hypothesis, the hypothesis of two well-known linguistic experts,
namely, Edward Sapir and Benjamin Lee Whorf. Therefore, the hypothesis is known
as the Sapir-whorf hypothesis, and is often also called the relativity of language.
Edward Sapir (1884-1939) was an American linguist who in respect and respected.
She is also very understanding of the concepts of linguistic and gives opinions that
have enriched the thoughts of linguistic. He and his teacher, Edward Sapir, many
learn the languages of Indians, and renders the results of his research widely.
Although the ideas expressed a second Bachelor's, Sapir and Whorf, is the
result of research that is long and deep, as well as advanced in the scientific weight of
bouquet is very high, but in fact their idea mentioned in his hypothesis highly
controversial with the opinion of the majority of scholars. The hypothesis put forward
in that Language is not just to determine the pattern of culture, but also determine the
manner and the way the human mind; and, therefore, affects the criminal act. In other
words, a nation whose language is different from the others will have the pattern of a
culture and the different thoughts. So, cultural differences and the way the human
mind that is sourced from the difference of language, or in the absence of human
language has no thoughts at all. If it affects the culture and language of the human
LANGUAGE AND CULTURE

Page 5

mind, the traits that exist in a given Language will be reflected on the speakers '
attitudes and culture. In the example there are joking around, he said, because in the
language of the West (the United Kingdom, the Netherlands, and so on) there is a
system of old (tenses), then the Westerners as the language speakers, it is noticed and
even tied up with time. Their activities are always bound by time. Likewise the
customs with regard to follow-up said always bound by time. In the summer the Sun
is still shining 21.00 with light, but their children (because it's already become a habit)
and sleep because he said the day is night. At 01: 00 (after 24.00 o'clock) Although it
is still pitch dark, when they've met each other greet by saying "good morning" as he
said yesterday morning already. In contrast, for Indonesia because the language does
not exist in the system, then everlasting, she said, would not be the time. The event
has been scheduled time could reverse one or several hours later. That is why, he says,
the phrase, "rubber clock" exists only in Indonesia, but there is nothing in the nation
the nation that there is language in the system time.
Sapir-Whorf hypothesis stating the differences of thinking caused by the
difference of the language, will cause the Arabs will see the reality (reality) are
different from the Japan. Whorf confirms the reality of it is not plastered casually in
front of us. Then later we and then we gave it the name one by one. According to
Whorf actually happened, is the opposite: we make a map of reality, which was made
on the basis of the language we use, and not for the reality of the doves. For example
some types of color around the world is the same, but why every different language,
people see it as something different. The United Kingdom, for example, know the
basic colors of white, red, green, yellow, blue, brown, purple, pink, orange, and grey;
but Hunanco language speakers in the Philippines only know four colors alone i.e.
mabiru, black and other dark colors, the color white and consistently high land prices '
bright ', ' red group meramar and malatuy' yellow, light green, and light brown '.
If the Sapir-Whorf is accepted, then the implication in science very, very
much, because for the human sciences it has a way of thought. In science, as has also
been expressed by Masinambouw (1985), the Language is simply a tool to express or
convey thoughts. A mind when expressed with a different Language is not going to be
different; that thought will remain the same. Only, because it is unique, then the
formula may be not being same. Compare, the United Kingdom asks the name with
the phrase "what is your name?" while the people of Indonesia with the phrase, "what

LANGUAGE AND CULTURE

Page 6

is your name?" so, in other words, the language does not affect the mind, let alone
determine as stated by the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis.
Many people ask, why does the Sapir and Whorf, two scholars linguistic
weighted, until be able to make such a controversial statement by saying that the
language was instrumental in determining the way the human mind, even he says is
absolute. Presumably, the study of anthropology, which provided a Foundation, has
pointed to a second Bachelor's degree, that the formations of the concepts are not the
same in all cultures. Whorf is steeped in research on Hopi Indians came to the
conclusion that the people do not think in the West think. In General were frequently
found among people who live in a culture has a different way of thinking with people
from other cultures. Experts reject the notion that we have the drafts first and then
find a new name for the concept, surely can accept Whorf-Sapir thought it, but
adherents of mentalist stream cannot accept the hypothesis at all. People who follow
Shapir-Whorf hypothesis was not much. The first reason is because;
People doubt that the human being has a difference that far
Whorf has made some technical errors in the study
Yet there are also scholars who, in principle, can justify the hypothesis, and maintain
the cultural relativity nature of mankind. Now, in the quotations are still often
mentioned people although it isn't controversy anymore among people.
If we follow the opinion of Silzer (1990) which says that language and culture
are two phenomena that are bound, like Siamese twins, or a coin which on the one
side is the form of the language system and on other sides is such as cultural system,
then what appears in the culture will be reflected by the language or vice versa. For
example, the British, and other Europeans, who are not familiar with the habit of
eating rice, so their language is only one word, namely rice, to express the concept of
padi, gabah, beras, and nasi. Instead there is a culture in Indonesian of eating rice, so
Indonesia has a different word for the fourth concept. English societies understand
that there is a difference concept among beras, padi, gabah, and nasi, but they do not
feel that they need to invent a new term for it. Another example, the British people is
familiar with equestrian sports. Therefore, they have the vocabulary horse, colt,
stallion, pony, and a mare.
The relationship acts of speaking with the mental attitude of the speakers
discussed by Koentjaraningrat, an Indonesian anthropologist. According him (1990)
LANGUAGE AND CULTURE

Page 7

Indonesian poor language skills most people of Indonesia, including the intellectual,
is because of the negative qualities inherent in most people mentally Indonesia.
According Koentjaraningrat (1990) most of Indonesian people is poor of language
skills of, including the intellectual, is because the negative mental inherent with them.
The negative traits are:
1. Usually underestimate the quality
This kind of attitude is reflected in the behavior of the language "pokoknya
mengerti". The attitude of "pokoknya understand" like this led to the language used
as disorganized. Regardless of the language used was right or wrong. Of course,
the desire to use proper grammar and correct, in accordance with the rules of
grammatical is lost. What is important is the language used was "understandable".
Matter of right or wrong it's language teacher or expert's problem.
2. Mental menerabas
Mental menerabas, according Koentjaraningrat, is reflected in language
behavior in the form of the desire to use the Indonesian language well, without the
desire to learn more. They are considered that Indonesian language is their nature
language which will be known or controlled without having to be learned.
3. Tuna Harga Diri
People who don't respect their own, but they appreciate others own called tuna
harga diri. Look at the evidence, out of respect for strangers, doormats in front of a
government office door was inscribed with the words "WELCOME" instead of
"Selamat Datang"; doors marked IN or EXIT, instead ''Masuk'' or ''Keluar''; and in
the two-way door, there are the instructions PUSH and PULL, and instead of
"Dorong" or "Tarik".
4. Avoiding discipline
Attitude that is away from discipline is reflected in language behavior that
does not want or lazy to follow the rules of the language. Utterances such as Dia
punya mau tidak begitu or Dia punya dua mobil are common to hear, besides
both the sentence structures are not in accordance with the existing rules of
indonesian language. It should say, "Kemauannya tidak demikian" and "Dia
mempunyai dua buah mobil".
5. Doesnt responsible
This attitude that is explained by Koentjaraningrat is reflected in behaviors
that do not speak as the right rule. We often hear sentences like "Uang iuran
LANGUAGE AND CULTURE

Page 8

anggota terpaksa dinaikkan karena sudah lama tidak naik". If you want be
responsible with your language, the reason for the increase was not because it's
never increase, perhaps, for example, because it is no longer appropriate to the
costs to be incurred. So, responsible in your language means that you can
responsibly for the truth of your sentence.
6. Suka Latah dan Ikut-ikutan
It is reflected in any language by always following what others say that are
grammatically incorrect. For example, the sentence "Memasyarakatkan olahraga
dan

mengolahragakan

masyarakat",

as

semantically

and

grammaticaly,

"Memasyarakatkan olahraga" is true. It means that we make sport as a habit in

society, but the expression, "Mengolahragakan masyarakat", isn't right. It's because
that expression will mean 'Masyarakat itu jadi olahraga''. If we have purpose to
say

''Menjadikan

masyarakat

itu

berolahraga'',

so

the

form

will

be

"Memperolahragakan masyarakat'.
If we go back to the early problem: the relationship language with culture,
then from the above descriptions that are given by Koentjaraningrat (1990), it turns
out that culture influences language behavior. The meaning of culture on this topic is
wide range. It includes characteristic and attitude that is had by the speakers.
There are some examples that show the relationship between language and
culture: In Indonesian society, when people praise, for example, by saying, "Bajumu
bagus sekali!" Or "Wah, rumah saudara besar sekali!", then someone who is touted
will answer it with refusing and condescending tone, for example by saying, "Ah, ini
Cuma baju murah, kok!", and,"Ya, beginilah namanya juga rumah di kampung!! ".
Another example, one day a young Englishman met with his girlfriend and said,
"Today you look so gorgeous!", then the girl will be answered by saying, "Thank
You!". It will be different in Indonesia culture, if you say to someone that "Hari ini
kamu tampak cantik sekali!. Then there is a possibility that women feel less happy
and may also be answered: "Jadi, pada hari-hari lain saya ini tidak cantik?.
C. Ethics Speak
Relationship between language and culture we have discussed extensively. Is
it coordinative relationship or subordinate are undisputed; But clearly both have a
very close relationship and mutual influence. If we accept the opinion Masinambouw
LANGUAGE AND CULTURE

Page 9

(1984) which says that the system has the function of language as a means of ongoing
human interaction in society, then it means that in the follow-language behavior must
be accompanied by the norms prevailing in the culture. Conduct follow-language
system according to cultural norms is called ethics ordinance language or language
(English: linguistc etiquette, see Geerzt 1976) .
This etics language is closely related to the election code of language, social
norms, and cultural systems prevailing in the society. Therefore, the ethics of this
language would be "rules" (a) what we had to say at the time and circumstances to a
particular participant with respect to social and cultural status in the community; (B)
range of what is most natural language we use in the sociolinguistic situation and
particular cultures; (C) when and how we use our turn to speak, and interrupting
others; (D) when we should be silent; (E) how the sound quality and our physical
demeanor in speaking it. A person can only be called proficient that he mastered the
ethics ordinance or speak it. The study of ethics is commonly called ethnography
speak the language. In anthropological studies ethnographic term used for the
examination of a culture. In this case it is not contradictory, because it is also the
language of ethics subsystem kebudayaan.
The items"rules" in the language of ethics mentioned above is not a separate
thing, but a thing that is embedded in the follow-speaking behavior. What is
mentioned in paragraph (a) and (B) is something that is at the core of sociolinguistic
issues: "Who speaks, the language of what, to whom, about what, when, where, and
with what purpose."For example, when we want to greet someone, then we need to
know who it was, where, when, and underwhat circumstances.
Item (c) and (d) which is also the rule in the language of ethics should also be
understood that we can be called as a person who can speak. We can not just interrupt
someone; to interrupt must be considered the appropriate time, and of course also
provide cues in advance.
Item (e) in the language of ethics rules regarding sound quality issues and
movements of the limbs when speaking. The sound quality with respect to the volume
and tone of voice. Every culture has different rules to regulate the volume and tone of
voice.
Physical gestures in ethics speak concerning two things that are called kinesik
and proksimik. What is meant by kinesik is, among other eye movement, facial
expression changes, changes in the position of the foot, hand gestures shoulders, head,
LANGUAGE AND CULTURE

Page 10

and so on. For example, eye movement is a very important tool in the language of
ethics. In America the individual interaction is common for listeners to pay attention
to the eyes and the mouth of the speaker, the speaker looked into the eyes or mouth,
then the speaker will feel that the listeners attention utterance. While the definition of
proksimik is the distance of the body in communicating or conversing. In a
conversation between the familiar and not familiar with the culture of other cultures is
usually different.
Separately, proksimik kinesik and this is also a communication tool that
nonverbal communication tool, or nonlinguistic communication tool. In direct contact,
usually both these communication tools are used to achieve the perfection of
interaction.

LANGUAGE AND CULTURE

Page 11