JARGON USED BY POLICE IN NAMO RAMBE POLICE QUARTER.
ii
iii
ABSTRACT
Ginting, Robby Postanta. 2103220039. Jargon used by Police in Namo
Rambe Police Quarter. A Thesis. Faculty of Languages and Arts, State
University of Medan. 2014.
This study focused on Jargon used by Police in Namo Rambe Police
Quarter. The objectives of this study were to find out kinds of jargon used in
Namo Rambe Police Quarter, to describe the meaning of jargon related to
denotative and connotative meaning, and to find out the reasons of policemen
using jargon in their communications. The data were limited on Jargon used in
Namo Rambe Police Quarter. This study was conducted by using descriptive
qualitative method. The data were taken from the conversations of policemen in
Namo Rambe Police Quarter and gathered descriptively. The findings of this
study show that kinds of jargon used in Namo Rambe Police Quarter classified
into three categories, namely sandi huruf (Letter Codes), sandi angka (Number
Codes), and Sandi Pangkat Kesatuan (Corps Position Codes). There are 49 words
that are considered as jargon in Namo Rambe Police Quarter. 13 (26,53%) has
denotative meaning and 5 words (10,20%) has connotative meaning. Furthermore,
there are 31 words as jargon (63,27%) that can not be analyzed semantically
whether they have denotative or connotative meaning. The reasons of policemen
using jargon in their communications in order to keep the secret and the identity
of them, to keep communication short and concise, and to make easier in
delivering informations.
i
TABLE OF CONTENTS
ABSTRACT .......................................................................................................... i
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT.................................................................................. ii
TABLE OF CONTENTS.................................................................................. iv
LIST OF TABLES.............................................................................................. vi
LIST OF APPENDICES.................................................................................... vii
CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION........................................................................ 1
A.
B.
C.
D.
E.
Background of the Study...........................................................................
Problem of the Study.................................................................................
Objectives of the Study.............................................................................
Scope of the study.....................................................................................
Significance of the Study...........................................................................
1
5
5
5
6
CHAPTER II REVIEW OF LITERATURE .................................................. 7
A.
B.
C.
D.
Sociolinguistics ......................................................................................... 7
Language varieties .................................................................................... 8
Speech community ....................................................................................11
Sociolect ................................................................................................... 12
1. Acrolect ................................................................................................ 13
2. Basilect ................................................................................................. 14
3. Vulgar ................................................................................................... 14
4. Slang ..................................................................................................... 14
5. Colloquial ............................................................................................. 15
6. Argot .................................................................................................... 16
7. Cant ...................................................................................................... 16
8. Jargon ................................................................................................... 17
E. Code ....................................................................................................... 20
F. Register .................................................................................................... 20
1. Field ..................................................................................................... 21
2. Tenor .................................................................................................... 21
3. Mode .................................................................................................... 21
G. Denotative and Connotative Meaning .................................................... 21
H. Indonesian Police Institution................................................................... 22
I. Namo Rambe Police Quarter................................................................... 23
CHAPTER III RESEARCH METHOD .......................................................... 25
A. Research Design ....................................................................................... 25
B. Source of Data .......................................................................................... 25
C. Technique of Collecting Data .................................................................. 26
iv
D. Technique of Analyzing Data .................................................................. 26
CHAPTER IV DATA AND DATA ANALYSIS............................................ 27
A. Data........................................................................................................... 27
B. Data Analysis............................................................................................ 27
C. Research Findings..................................................................................... 43
CHAPTER V CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTION..................................... 45
A. Conclusion ............................................................................................... 45
B. Suggestion ................................................................................................ 46
REFERENCES ................................................................................................... 47
APPENDICES
v
LIST OF APPENDICES
APPENDIX A The Distribution of types of Jargon ............................................ 49
APPENDIX B The Distribution of Jargon related to semantic meaning........... 50
APPENDIX C The Script of the conversations ................................................. 52
APPENDIX D List of others Jargon ................................................................. 61
vii
CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION
A. Background of the Study
Language is a significant item in daily life. As human being who live in
society, people need language to communicate each other. Language plays an
important role to create relation among others even countries. Bloomfield as
quoted by Sumarsono (2013: 18) states that language is a code system like tone
which is arbitrer that used by society in doing interaction. Because it is a system,
the language has dependent rules each other, and the structure of substances that
can be analyzed separately. Language serves numerous uses in our daily
interaction with people. Human being is social creature. As social creature, human
beings need to interact with others. In doing interaction, people use language to
deliver what they mean. By using language people can deliver or express their
feeling, opinions, ideas, thought, emotion or message to others. Comrie (2006: 12)
says that language is the principal means used by human beings to communicate
with one another and primarily spoken, although it can be transferred to other
media, such as writing.
Language has a wide variety of language. The speakers are in
heterogeneous society. The differences of speakers’ background make the
variation of languages. The development and the alteration in form of the
language can not be avoided because language is human’s need that always
changes in movement based on its essential. Therefore language has the dynamic
1
2
alteration. Language as a reflection from society can create a social symptom that
can not be separated from its use. Social symptom in using of the language not
only determined by linguistics factors, but also non-linguistic factors namely
social and situational factors. Social factors that influence the use of language:
economic level, gender, age, level of education, ethnic, occupation etc. In
situational factors, namely who speak with what the language of, to whom, when,
where, and about what of the problem.
The study of language with various relationships with human being or
society is sociolinguistics. Sociolinguistic deals with the study of language in
relation to social factors, including differences of regional, class, and occupational
dialect, gender differences, etc. Furthermore, sociolinguistics is the descriptive
study of the effect of any and all aspects of society. It includes cultural norms,
expectations, and context. It is the way language used, and the effects of language
use on society.
If one thinks of language as a phenomenon including all the languages of
the world, the term variety of language can be used to refer the difference
manifestation of it. Language varies both in space and in time, as well as
according to the linguistic environment in which a form is used (Lucas, 2004:61).
Chaer and Agustina (2004: 62) distinguish language variety based on the criteria
of (a) the geographical and social background of speakers, (b) the medium used,
and (c) the subject of talk about. And then, language variety is also distinguished
based on the usage, namely dialect (user) and register, and the speaker’s variety.
3
In this study, kinds of language variety based on speaker’s variety, namely
idiolect, dialect, chronolect (temporal dialect), and sociolect.
Sociolect is one of language variety based on speaker case that deals with
status, group, and social class of the speakers (Chaer and Agustina, 2004: 62-64).
This variety related to all cases of the speakers, such as age, education, sex,
occupation, level of social and economy, etc. The difference of occupation and
profession of the speakers can affect social variety. The use of jargon in particular
group as an example language variety in sociolect. Jargon is part of the language
variations in a society or particular group.
Jargon as the specific word is used to describe the special terms of a
professional or trade group in language usage. The vocabulary of jargon is
sometimes unfamiliar by outsiders in different group. In a society, such as in
profession, social class or age has a tendency to create a language, and then it
becomes a jargon language in a particular group of people. Different groups have
different jargon. For example, Jargon in Police field, especially policemen in
Namo Rambe Police Quarter has their own words to communicate to each other.
It is a language that unpopular talk in common people, but used only by the
policemen.
Policemen create the words from the combination of Indonesian, and other
languages. Sometimes they create the words spontaneously and it become
continuously used by other of policemen. The languages and words that are used
in one region and others are actually same. The Policemen produce the different
variety of language in vocabulary, phrase, and abbreviation or acronym.
4
The previous research about Jargon had been conducted by others. Many
people are interested to conduct the research. The relevant research about Jargon,
for example: Setiawan (2011) analyzed kinds of Jargon used in Kaskus, the
meanings, and the word formation process of jargon. The data were taken by
interviewing the Kaskus member, observing directly to the member, and
downloading the data. Furthermore, a research about Jargons used by Waria in
Malang conducted by Susanto (2010). He analyzed about kinds of Jargons and the
word construction of Jargons used by Waria in Malang. The data were taken by
interviewing, and Observing the member of Waria. He found that jargons used by
Waria in Malang are borrowed from Indonesian, Javanese and English but they
change the form by adding prefixes or/and suffixes. The meanings of those
borrowing words also change. There is no specific rule or pattern in creating the
words of jargon. And then, there is also the research conducted by Ariyanto
(2009) with his analysis of Jargon used in discotheques. He analyzed about the
meanings, the classifications, and the word formation process of Jargon. The main
data were taken from three recorded conversations in the discotheques. The data
were also taken from a list of jargon words that the researcher knows. His research
gave the results that the meaning of jargon has both denotative and connotative
meaning.
Related to the previous studies, the researcher informed that the object of
this research is Policemen in Namo Rambe Police Quarter, located in Namo
Rambe big street, Namo Rambe village, Deli Serdang regency, North Sumatera
province. Jargon deals with the use of language variety in different group of
5
people. The use of jargon shows that language influenced by the difference of
place or environment, occupation, and profession itself, especially in police field
Therefore, the researcher choosed the topic about jargon in order to know the use
and the meaning of the words. This topic is interesting to be done because police
language or jargon used is unique and unfamiliar by common people. Actually,
Policemen use specific languages in order to other people do not know what they
are talking about and they want to have special identity in the community or
society. When people heard the conversation of police officers in police office
even any places in doing the duties, it made most of people confused about the
words, especially in Namo Rambe Police Quarter. Based on the phenomena, the
researcher was interested to explore more on jargon and the meaning of words that
is used.
B. Problem of the Study
Based on the background of the research, the problems of this research
were formulated as following:
1. What kinds of Jargon used by Police in Namo Rambe Police Quarter?
2. What is the meaning of Jargon used in Namo Rambe Police
Quarter?
3. Why do the policemen use Jargon in their communication?
C. Objectives of the Study
In relation to the problems, the objectives of this research were:
6
1. To find out the kinds of Jargon used in Namo Rambe Police
Quarter
2. To
describe
the
meaning
of
Jargon
used
in
Namo
Rambe
Police Quarter
3. To find out the reasons of policemen using Jargon in their communication.
D. Scope of the Study
This research was limited on Jargon used by police officers in Namo
Rambe Police Quarter. The researcher described and analyzed the meaning of
jargon that were used by the policemen that related to the semantics, a study of
meaning.
E. Significance of the Study
The findings of this research were expected to be useful:
1. For the researcher, this study as a beneficial contribution or additional
reference in conducting related study, especially jargon which is used by
police.
2. For students who want to learn about jargon, this study is expected to be
significant as source of study.
3. For the readers, this study is to enrich the knowledge in understanding
about jargon used by police.
CHAPTER V
CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTION
A. Conclusion
Based on the data analysis that presented in the previous chapter, the
conclusion can be drawn as following:
1. There were three kinds of Jargon that was found in Namo Rambe Police
Quarter, namely jargon related to Sandi huruf (letter code), Sandi angka
(number code), and Pangkat Kesatuan (Corps position code).
2. There were 49 words that are considered as jargon in Namo Rambe Police
Quarter. 13 (26,53%) has denotative meaning and 5 (10,20%) has
connotative meaning. Furthermore, there are 31 (63,27%) that can not be
analyzed semantically whether they have denotative or connotative meaning
because the jargon is constructed by initial of the word. For example, TSK is
taken from Tegal, Solo, Kupang.
3. The reasons of policemen using jargon in their communications or daily
conversations are to keep communication short and concise, to be easier in
delivering information, and to keep the secret in language so that people
around them or out of the group do not know what they are talking about.
45
46
B. Suggestion
Based on the conclusion above, the researcher would like to propose some
suggestions as following:
1. It is suggested to the readers who are concerned to this study, to continue
and get more details about analysis of jargon used by Police in Indonesian
Police Institution in other sides, for example morphological side.
2. It is suggested to other researchers who want to explore more about this
study, to conduct the research about jargon and make the depth analysis in
other objects.
3. The students who want to enhance the ability in speaking and writing
should know the use of jargon language or vocabulary that found in each
particular group of people.
REFERENCES
Adam, J.H. 1982. Longman Dictionary of Business English. London: Longman,
Harlow.
Akmajian, A. et al. 2010. An Introduction to Language and Communication 6th
edition. Cambridge: MIT Press.
Alwasilah, A. Chaedar. 1993. Pengantar Sosiologi Bahasa.Bandung: Angkasa.
Ary, Donald, Jacobs, L.C. & Sorensen, Chris. 2010. Introduction to Research in
Education. Canada: Wodsworth Cengage Learning.
Aslinda, dan Syafyahya, Leni. 2007. Pengantar Sosiolinguistik. Bandung: PT.
Refika Aditama.
Author’s Guide. Jargon. 2013. Journal of Columbia Electronic Encyclopedia 6th
edition. Vol. II (1).
Bayley, Robert. And Lucas, Ceil. 2007. Sociolinguistics Variation: Theories,
methods, and applications. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Carr, Sarah. 2006. Technical jargon: an approach, an idea and an offering. A
journal of Jargon. Vol. II (3).
Chaer, Abdul dan Agustina, Leonie. 2004. Sosiolinguistik: Perkenalan Awal.
Jakarta: Rineka Cipta
Chambers, J.K. 2009. Sociolinguistic Theory: linguistic variation and its social
significance. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing.
Comrie, B. 2006. Language. London. Microsoft Encarta.
Fishman, J.A. 1972. Sociolinguistics a Brief Introduction. Third printing.
Massachusetts: Newbury House Publishers
Fromkin, Victoria and Rodman, Robert. 1978. An Introduction to general
linguistic. New York: Hole, Rinehart and Winston Inc.
47
48
Fromkin, Victoria, Rodman, Robert & Hyams, Nina. 2011. An Introduction to
linguistics. 9th edition. New York: Wodsworth Cengage Learning.
Holmes, Janet. 2001. An Introduction to Sociolingustic: London And New York:
Longman.
Hudson, Richard A. 1991. Sociolinguistics. London: Cambridge University Press.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sociolect accessed on December 20th 2013
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Speech community retrieved on January 6th 2014
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/colloquialism retrieved on January 8th 2014
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/register retrieved on February 2nd 2014
Lucas, Ceil. 2004. The Sociolinguistics of Sign Language. New York: Cambridge
University Press.
Kreidler, C., W. 1998. Introducing English Semantic. London: Routledge.
Moleong, Lexy. 2010. Metodologi Penelitian Kualitatif. Bandung: PT Remaja
Rosdakarya.
Mouton, D.G. 2013. The Acquisition of Sociolinguistic Variation. Journal of
Linguistic 51(2): 255-284.
Nababan, P.W.J. 1993. Sosiolinguistics: Sebuah Pengantar. Jakarta: Gramedia
pustaka.
O’Leary, Zina. 2007. The social science Jargon Buster. London: SAGE
Publications.
O’Grady, W. 1996. Language in Social Context. Harlow: Longman
Spolsky, B. 1998. Sociolinguistics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Sumarsono. 2013. Sosiolinguistik. Yogyakarta: Pustaka Pelajar.
Wardhaugh, R. 2002. An introduction to Sociolinguistics. New York: Basil
Blackwell.
iii
ABSTRACT
Ginting, Robby Postanta. 2103220039. Jargon used by Police in Namo
Rambe Police Quarter. A Thesis. Faculty of Languages and Arts, State
University of Medan. 2014.
This study focused on Jargon used by Police in Namo Rambe Police
Quarter. The objectives of this study were to find out kinds of jargon used in
Namo Rambe Police Quarter, to describe the meaning of jargon related to
denotative and connotative meaning, and to find out the reasons of policemen
using jargon in their communications. The data were limited on Jargon used in
Namo Rambe Police Quarter. This study was conducted by using descriptive
qualitative method. The data were taken from the conversations of policemen in
Namo Rambe Police Quarter and gathered descriptively. The findings of this
study show that kinds of jargon used in Namo Rambe Police Quarter classified
into three categories, namely sandi huruf (Letter Codes), sandi angka (Number
Codes), and Sandi Pangkat Kesatuan (Corps Position Codes). There are 49 words
that are considered as jargon in Namo Rambe Police Quarter. 13 (26,53%) has
denotative meaning and 5 words (10,20%) has connotative meaning. Furthermore,
there are 31 words as jargon (63,27%) that can not be analyzed semantically
whether they have denotative or connotative meaning. The reasons of policemen
using jargon in their communications in order to keep the secret and the identity
of them, to keep communication short and concise, and to make easier in
delivering informations.
i
TABLE OF CONTENTS
ABSTRACT .......................................................................................................... i
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT.................................................................................. ii
TABLE OF CONTENTS.................................................................................. iv
LIST OF TABLES.............................................................................................. vi
LIST OF APPENDICES.................................................................................... vii
CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION........................................................................ 1
A.
B.
C.
D.
E.
Background of the Study...........................................................................
Problem of the Study.................................................................................
Objectives of the Study.............................................................................
Scope of the study.....................................................................................
Significance of the Study...........................................................................
1
5
5
5
6
CHAPTER II REVIEW OF LITERATURE .................................................. 7
A.
B.
C.
D.
Sociolinguistics ......................................................................................... 7
Language varieties .................................................................................... 8
Speech community ....................................................................................11
Sociolect ................................................................................................... 12
1. Acrolect ................................................................................................ 13
2. Basilect ................................................................................................. 14
3. Vulgar ................................................................................................... 14
4. Slang ..................................................................................................... 14
5. Colloquial ............................................................................................. 15
6. Argot .................................................................................................... 16
7. Cant ...................................................................................................... 16
8. Jargon ................................................................................................... 17
E. Code ....................................................................................................... 20
F. Register .................................................................................................... 20
1. Field ..................................................................................................... 21
2. Tenor .................................................................................................... 21
3. Mode .................................................................................................... 21
G. Denotative and Connotative Meaning .................................................... 21
H. Indonesian Police Institution................................................................... 22
I. Namo Rambe Police Quarter................................................................... 23
CHAPTER III RESEARCH METHOD .......................................................... 25
A. Research Design ....................................................................................... 25
B. Source of Data .......................................................................................... 25
C. Technique of Collecting Data .................................................................. 26
iv
D. Technique of Analyzing Data .................................................................. 26
CHAPTER IV DATA AND DATA ANALYSIS............................................ 27
A. Data........................................................................................................... 27
B. Data Analysis............................................................................................ 27
C. Research Findings..................................................................................... 43
CHAPTER V CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTION..................................... 45
A. Conclusion ............................................................................................... 45
B. Suggestion ................................................................................................ 46
REFERENCES ................................................................................................... 47
APPENDICES
v
LIST OF APPENDICES
APPENDIX A The Distribution of types of Jargon ............................................ 49
APPENDIX B The Distribution of Jargon related to semantic meaning........... 50
APPENDIX C The Script of the conversations ................................................. 52
APPENDIX D List of others Jargon ................................................................. 61
vii
CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION
A. Background of the Study
Language is a significant item in daily life. As human being who live in
society, people need language to communicate each other. Language plays an
important role to create relation among others even countries. Bloomfield as
quoted by Sumarsono (2013: 18) states that language is a code system like tone
which is arbitrer that used by society in doing interaction. Because it is a system,
the language has dependent rules each other, and the structure of substances that
can be analyzed separately. Language serves numerous uses in our daily
interaction with people. Human being is social creature. As social creature, human
beings need to interact with others. In doing interaction, people use language to
deliver what they mean. By using language people can deliver or express their
feeling, opinions, ideas, thought, emotion or message to others. Comrie (2006: 12)
says that language is the principal means used by human beings to communicate
with one another and primarily spoken, although it can be transferred to other
media, such as writing.
Language has a wide variety of language. The speakers are in
heterogeneous society. The differences of speakers’ background make the
variation of languages. The development and the alteration in form of the
language can not be avoided because language is human’s need that always
changes in movement based on its essential. Therefore language has the dynamic
1
2
alteration. Language as a reflection from society can create a social symptom that
can not be separated from its use. Social symptom in using of the language not
only determined by linguistics factors, but also non-linguistic factors namely
social and situational factors. Social factors that influence the use of language:
economic level, gender, age, level of education, ethnic, occupation etc. In
situational factors, namely who speak with what the language of, to whom, when,
where, and about what of the problem.
The study of language with various relationships with human being or
society is sociolinguistics. Sociolinguistic deals with the study of language in
relation to social factors, including differences of regional, class, and occupational
dialect, gender differences, etc. Furthermore, sociolinguistics is the descriptive
study of the effect of any and all aspects of society. It includes cultural norms,
expectations, and context. It is the way language used, and the effects of language
use on society.
If one thinks of language as a phenomenon including all the languages of
the world, the term variety of language can be used to refer the difference
manifestation of it. Language varies both in space and in time, as well as
according to the linguistic environment in which a form is used (Lucas, 2004:61).
Chaer and Agustina (2004: 62) distinguish language variety based on the criteria
of (a) the geographical and social background of speakers, (b) the medium used,
and (c) the subject of talk about. And then, language variety is also distinguished
based on the usage, namely dialect (user) and register, and the speaker’s variety.
3
In this study, kinds of language variety based on speaker’s variety, namely
idiolect, dialect, chronolect (temporal dialect), and sociolect.
Sociolect is one of language variety based on speaker case that deals with
status, group, and social class of the speakers (Chaer and Agustina, 2004: 62-64).
This variety related to all cases of the speakers, such as age, education, sex,
occupation, level of social and economy, etc. The difference of occupation and
profession of the speakers can affect social variety. The use of jargon in particular
group as an example language variety in sociolect. Jargon is part of the language
variations in a society or particular group.
Jargon as the specific word is used to describe the special terms of a
professional or trade group in language usage. The vocabulary of jargon is
sometimes unfamiliar by outsiders in different group. In a society, such as in
profession, social class or age has a tendency to create a language, and then it
becomes a jargon language in a particular group of people. Different groups have
different jargon. For example, Jargon in Police field, especially policemen in
Namo Rambe Police Quarter has their own words to communicate to each other.
It is a language that unpopular talk in common people, but used only by the
policemen.
Policemen create the words from the combination of Indonesian, and other
languages. Sometimes they create the words spontaneously and it become
continuously used by other of policemen. The languages and words that are used
in one region and others are actually same. The Policemen produce the different
variety of language in vocabulary, phrase, and abbreviation or acronym.
4
The previous research about Jargon had been conducted by others. Many
people are interested to conduct the research. The relevant research about Jargon,
for example: Setiawan (2011) analyzed kinds of Jargon used in Kaskus, the
meanings, and the word formation process of jargon. The data were taken by
interviewing the Kaskus member, observing directly to the member, and
downloading the data. Furthermore, a research about Jargons used by Waria in
Malang conducted by Susanto (2010). He analyzed about kinds of Jargons and the
word construction of Jargons used by Waria in Malang. The data were taken by
interviewing, and Observing the member of Waria. He found that jargons used by
Waria in Malang are borrowed from Indonesian, Javanese and English but they
change the form by adding prefixes or/and suffixes. The meanings of those
borrowing words also change. There is no specific rule or pattern in creating the
words of jargon. And then, there is also the research conducted by Ariyanto
(2009) with his analysis of Jargon used in discotheques. He analyzed about the
meanings, the classifications, and the word formation process of Jargon. The main
data were taken from three recorded conversations in the discotheques. The data
were also taken from a list of jargon words that the researcher knows. His research
gave the results that the meaning of jargon has both denotative and connotative
meaning.
Related to the previous studies, the researcher informed that the object of
this research is Policemen in Namo Rambe Police Quarter, located in Namo
Rambe big street, Namo Rambe village, Deli Serdang regency, North Sumatera
province. Jargon deals with the use of language variety in different group of
5
people. The use of jargon shows that language influenced by the difference of
place or environment, occupation, and profession itself, especially in police field
Therefore, the researcher choosed the topic about jargon in order to know the use
and the meaning of the words. This topic is interesting to be done because police
language or jargon used is unique and unfamiliar by common people. Actually,
Policemen use specific languages in order to other people do not know what they
are talking about and they want to have special identity in the community or
society. When people heard the conversation of police officers in police office
even any places in doing the duties, it made most of people confused about the
words, especially in Namo Rambe Police Quarter. Based on the phenomena, the
researcher was interested to explore more on jargon and the meaning of words that
is used.
B. Problem of the Study
Based on the background of the research, the problems of this research
were formulated as following:
1. What kinds of Jargon used by Police in Namo Rambe Police Quarter?
2. What is the meaning of Jargon used in Namo Rambe Police
Quarter?
3. Why do the policemen use Jargon in their communication?
C. Objectives of the Study
In relation to the problems, the objectives of this research were:
6
1. To find out the kinds of Jargon used in Namo Rambe Police
Quarter
2. To
describe
the
meaning
of
Jargon
used
in
Namo
Rambe
Police Quarter
3. To find out the reasons of policemen using Jargon in their communication.
D. Scope of the Study
This research was limited on Jargon used by police officers in Namo
Rambe Police Quarter. The researcher described and analyzed the meaning of
jargon that were used by the policemen that related to the semantics, a study of
meaning.
E. Significance of the Study
The findings of this research were expected to be useful:
1. For the researcher, this study as a beneficial contribution or additional
reference in conducting related study, especially jargon which is used by
police.
2. For students who want to learn about jargon, this study is expected to be
significant as source of study.
3. For the readers, this study is to enrich the knowledge in understanding
about jargon used by police.
CHAPTER V
CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTION
A. Conclusion
Based on the data analysis that presented in the previous chapter, the
conclusion can be drawn as following:
1. There were three kinds of Jargon that was found in Namo Rambe Police
Quarter, namely jargon related to Sandi huruf (letter code), Sandi angka
(number code), and Pangkat Kesatuan (Corps position code).
2. There were 49 words that are considered as jargon in Namo Rambe Police
Quarter. 13 (26,53%) has denotative meaning and 5 (10,20%) has
connotative meaning. Furthermore, there are 31 (63,27%) that can not be
analyzed semantically whether they have denotative or connotative meaning
because the jargon is constructed by initial of the word. For example, TSK is
taken from Tegal, Solo, Kupang.
3. The reasons of policemen using jargon in their communications or daily
conversations are to keep communication short and concise, to be easier in
delivering information, and to keep the secret in language so that people
around them or out of the group do not know what they are talking about.
45
46
B. Suggestion
Based on the conclusion above, the researcher would like to propose some
suggestions as following:
1. It is suggested to the readers who are concerned to this study, to continue
and get more details about analysis of jargon used by Police in Indonesian
Police Institution in other sides, for example morphological side.
2. It is suggested to other researchers who want to explore more about this
study, to conduct the research about jargon and make the depth analysis in
other objects.
3. The students who want to enhance the ability in speaking and writing
should know the use of jargon language or vocabulary that found in each
particular group of people.
REFERENCES
Adam, J.H. 1982. Longman Dictionary of Business English. London: Longman,
Harlow.
Akmajian, A. et al. 2010. An Introduction to Language and Communication 6th
edition. Cambridge: MIT Press.
Alwasilah, A. Chaedar. 1993. Pengantar Sosiologi Bahasa.Bandung: Angkasa.
Ary, Donald, Jacobs, L.C. & Sorensen, Chris. 2010. Introduction to Research in
Education. Canada: Wodsworth Cengage Learning.
Aslinda, dan Syafyahya, Leni. 2007. Pengantar Sosiolinguistik. Bandung: PT.
Refika Aditama.
Author’s Guide. Jargon. 2013. Journal of Columbia Electronic Encyclopedia 6th
edition. Vol. II (1).
Bayley, Robert. And Lucas, Ceil. 2007. Sociolinguistics Variation: Theories,
methods, and applications. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Carr, Sarah. 2006. Technical jargon: an approach, an idea and an offering. A
journal of Jargon. Vol. II (3).
Chaer, Abdul dan Agustina, Leonie. 2004. Sosiolinguistik: Perkenalan Awal.
Jakarta: Rineka Cipta
Chambers, J.K. 2009. Sociolinguistic Theory: linguistic variation and its social
significance. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing.
Comrie, B. 2006. Language. London. Microsoft Encarta.
Fishman, J.A. 1972. Sociolinguistics a Brief Introduction. Third printing.
Massachusetts: Newbury House Publishers
Fromkin, Victoria and Rodman, Robert. 1978. An Introduction to general
linguistic. New York: Hole, Rinehart and Winston Inc.
47
48
Fromkin, Victoria, Rodman, Robert & Hyams, Nina. 2011. An Introduction to
linguistics. 9th edition. New York: Wodsworth Cengage Learning.
Holmes, Janet. 2001. An Introduction to Sociolingustic: London And New York:
Longman.
Hudson, Richard A. 1991. Sociolinguistics. London: Cambridge University Press.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sociolect accessed on December 20th 2013
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Speech community retrieved on January 6th 2014
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/colloquialism retrieved on January 8th 2014
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/register retrieved on February 2nd 2014
Lucas, Ceil. 2004. The Sociolinguistics of Sign Language. New York: Cambridge
University Press.
Kreidler, C., W. 1998. Introducing English Semantic. London: Routledge.
Moleong, Lexy. 2010. Metodologi Penelitian Kualitatif. Bandung: PT Remaja
Rosdakarya.
Mouton, D.G. 2013. The Acquisition of Sociolinguistic Variation. Journal of
Linguistic 51(2): 255-284.
Nababan, P.W.J. 1993. Sosiolinguistics: Sebuah Pengantar. Jakarta: Gramedia
pustaka.
O’Leary, Zina. 2007. The social science Jargon Buster. London: SAGE
Publications.
O’Grady, W. 1996. Language in Social Context. Harlow: Longman
Spolsky, B. 1998. Sociolinguistics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Sumarsono. 2013. Sosiolinguistik. Yogyakarta: Pustaka Pelajar.
Wardhaugh, R. 2002. An introduction to Sociolinguistics. New York: Basil
Blackwell.