4.1.1.3 Summons-Answer
Summon-answer in TBL is commonly used to open a conversation. Summon is realized in address terms such as people names, and address kinship terms. Kinship
terms in TBL are hierarchial which are centered on the basic philosophy of Toba Batak, Dalihan Natolu. Hula-hula, includes terms such as; tulang, nantulang, tunggane, lae,
ito, eda. The terms derived from boru are: amangboru, namboru, lae, ito, eda, and dongan tubu include terms such as; angkang, anggi, bapa udaamang uda, bapa
tuaamang tua, ampara. Among those terms, lae, ito, and eda can be both hierarchial and neutral. If it is
hierarchial there would be such a cultural constrain, and if it is neutral there is no suchcultural constrain, the terms are for a summon only.
In a mundane conversation, especially in summon-answer, lae, ito, and eda are commonly used for their neutral forms which do not have to do with kinship relation.
Lae is practised among males, ito between male and female, and eda among females. The three terms are realized in FPP in conversation with a greater prominent than the
SPP, as constructed in excerpt 12, 13, and 14 below.
Excerpt 12 1 A : lae
brother-in-law ‘guy’
2 B : aha i what it
‘what is it’
Universitas Sumatera Utara
Exerpt 13 1 A : ito
sister ‘miss’
2 B : aha ito what sister?
‘what is it?’
Excerpt 14 1 A : eda
sister-in-law ‘madam’
2 B : ou ou
‘what’
There are various forms of the SPP. As excerpt 12 shows, the first SPP is realized in ahai, functioning as to answer the summons in a more polite way than if it is
answered by aha. So, the answer can be replaced by aha and the result will be a bit rough or casual.
The second SPP in excerpt 13 is realized in aha ito by which the second part of this sequence indicate politeness, and in any answer to summon, the addition of the
address terms shows that what is stated in the first part as a casual answer is no longer considered or undeterminate. The answer to summon in excerpt 12, that is, ahai, can be
accompanied by the second repeated term like lae, as ahai lae, to show more emphatic to politeness, and the first part is pronounced less prominent than if it is without the
Universitas Sumatera Utara
second part. So the repeated second parts in answer to summon obviously emerge as politeness markers.
The different case from answer to summon in excerpt 12 and 13 in terms of the composition of the answer occurs in excerpt 14. The answer is shorter which is
reralized in backchannel, i.e., ou. This short answer is not followed by repeated second parts, as the forms ou lae, ou eda, etc, are not acceptable. Suppose that they be
acceptable, they would be on the other side, as summon, by which the second parts would be pronounced more prominently. An answer of this kind also differs from aha,
and ahai in that ou shows intimacy and another form is ong as showing the intimacy in family.
Another backchannel as answer to summon is realized in e.. which is pronounced longer, as seen in excerpt 15 below.
Excerpt 15 1 A : eda
sister-in-law ‘madam’
2 B : e… e…
‘e…’
If the answer is uttered shorter than the above case, it would be an agreement. The neutral use of kinship terms in summon-answer varies from place to place.
When the terms amang, amangboru, tulang sir, inang, namboru, nantulang madam are practiced as summons, each of them has its own realization based on the area where
Universitas Sumatera Utara
they are used. Amang and inang are used at the regency of Humbang Hasundutan, amangboru and namboru are used at the regency of North Tapanuli, and tulang as well
as nantulang are used at the area of Toba Samosir. The neutral use of these terms deploy into introductory conversation in the sense that one who summons does not
recognice the interlocutor, and the summon itself is an access to introduction and conversation opening. Excerpt 16, 17, 18 exemplify the summon for the three males
terms; amang, amangboru, tulang. Excerpt 16
1 A : amang father
‘sir’ 2 B : ou
ou ‘what’
Excerpt 17 1 A : amangboru
husband of father sister ‘sir’
2 B : ou ou
‘what’
Excerpt 18 1 A : tulang
mother’s brother ‘uncle’
Universitas Sumatera Utara
2 B : ou ou
‘what’
The AP of summon-answer in TBL is not hierarchial in the case that there is no relation between the summon-answer with ideological stance to which it should be
treated based on the three systems of Toba Batak family Dalihan Natolu. However, the relation lies only in ones who pass the summon and answer. The summoner would
be younger or of the same age with the answerer. So, the FPP in summon-answer both for males and females do not have to do with cultural practices.
The SPP of the AP in summon-answer realized in ou as the marker of intimacy is not as a result of the casual setting of the conversation but summoning people by
using such terms; amang, amangboru, tulang, inang, namboru, nantulang, are considered polite by the people who were summoned eventhough they are not in
acquaintance with those who sommoned. So the state of being unaquaintance does not influence the answerer to have responded with such appropriate terms such as, ahai or
aha, as what is common done. Those terms mentioned above can be said to be honorifics which are not related to kinship relation.
The kinship terms which are practised in conversation as in summon-answer are different from those terms treated in their neutral use, especially in the answer. These
can be constructed in the following excerpts.
Universitas Sumatera Utara
Excerpt 19 1 A : amang
father ‘sir’
2 B : aha i ninna hamu what it says you
‘what you say’
Excerpt 20 1 A : tulang
mother’s mother ‘uncle’
2 B : aha bere what sister’s child
‘what guy’
Excerpt 21 1 A : tulang
mother’s brother ‘uncle’
2 B : aha poang what T
‘what’
A in excerpt 19 was a man summoning his father-in-law, his wife’s father, by saying amang. The answer to this summon is ahai ninna hamu, a polite form which is
practised as an answer to the summon that is honorific in TBL. There is an obligation for a man of TB to summon all his relatives from his wife by using honorific terms.
He calls his wife’s father amang, and his wife’s mother inang. For his wife’s brother he calls lae and the wife of his wife’s brother is called inangbao. For his wife’s sisters
Universitas Sumatera Utara
he calls akkang or anggi in which the former refers to the older and the latter to the younger sister. The brother of his mother-in-law is called tulang, and the wife of his
mother-in-law’s brother is called nantulang. Both his mother-in-law’s father and mother are called oppung, and his mother-in-law’s sisters are called inang. His father-
in-law’s brothers are called amang, and their wives are called inang, and his father-in- law’s sisters are called inangtua or inanguda. As has been said, the relatives from the
wife’s family is categorized under one cultural term, that is, hula-hula. In the case of summon-answer, when one summons his hula-hula it is a constrain for hula-hula to
respond the summon in a polite way, as in excerpt 19, expression such ninna hamu is added to basic form of answer to summon and this makes the answer so polite.
The conversation in excerpt 20 contains a summon from a nephew addressed to his uncle by which this summon concerns with the cultural terms relating to kinship
relation embedded in dalihan natolu. The term tulang in the summon is addressed to one from the line of hula-hula, that is, from the wife’s relatives. By inserting the term
bere to the basic answer aha, becoming aha bere, it becomes polite. So in a conversation of this kind interlocutors should avoid using haphazard answer.
Unlike in excerpt 21, the terms tulang is addressed to one who derives from the line of husband’s mother, that is, the brother of husband’s mother. The answer to
summon in this case is more intimate that the term poang showing intimacy is added to the basic term aha, so as; aha poang.
Universitas Sumatera Utara
4.1.1.4 Offer-acceptancerefusal
Kategori