Kearifan Dalam Bahasa Sebuah Tinjauan Pragmatis Terhadap Profil Kebahasaan Media Massa Pada Masa Pascaorde Baru

Abstract

Abstrak"Reformasi Total", demikianlah sebuah slogan yang dihadirkan dalam wacana publik pada masa pascaorde baru. Kecaman, keluhan, atau kemarahan itu pun hadir di berbagai media wacana, baik dalam dialog formal maupun informal. Pada masa pascaorde baru, memori yang ada pada masyarakat adalah memori tentang peristiwa-peristiwa yang tidak terkendali. Memori itu kemudian terrepresentasikan dalam wacana yang berbunyi "Reformasi yang kebablasan". Sebuah kata, frasa, serta kalimat pada dasarnya berpotensi menampilkan makna referensial maupun kontekstual. Secara pragmatis, sebuah kata, frasa, atau kalimat memiliki kemungkinan untuk menyatakan maksud kearifan atau maksud ketidakarifan. Ketidakarifan -yang dimaksudkan dalam penelitian ini -merupakan tindakan pelanggaran terhadap etika dan etiket yang berlaku di masyarakat. Bagaimana mewacanakan gerakan reformasi secara arif? Perlukah memanfaatkan kosakata ketidakarifan secara produktif dalam wacana publik? Siapakah yang bertanggung jawab dalam menumbuhkembangkan kearifan masyarakat? Kearifan dalam bahasa tidak berkaitan dengan tindakan manipulatif dalam penyampaian informasi. Kearifan dalam bahasa berkaitan dengan strategi pemilihan satuansatuan bahasa. Kearifan adalah tanggung jawab bersama. Bahasa yang arif tidak akan hadir secara menyeluruh jika pihak-pihak terkait dan segala peristiwa yang dihasilkannya tidak menuju ke kearifan. Kearifan tidak memperdebatkan tuntutan hak dan kebebasan berwacana. AbstractThe Wisdom of Language A Pragmatic Study on the Profile of the Post-New Order Era Mass Media Language. "Total Reformasi!" is the slogan circulated in the public discourse of the post-New Order era. All kinds of condemnation, grievances, and anger have been raised in various discourses, from formal to informal dialogues. In such an era, people's collective memory is mostly associated with uncontrollable events, and it is eventually represented in the discourse of "the overdosed Reformasi" (Reformasi yang kebablasan). A word, phrase, and sentence basically have the potential of expressing both referential and contextual meanings. From a pragmatic point of view, a word, phrase, or sentence has a capacity to express either wise or unwise intentions. "Unwise intention" in the context of this research is defined as an act of transgressing or violating the ethics and etiquettes of a society. How can the discourse of Reformasi be constructed wisely? Is it necessary to appropriate unwise vocabulary in public discourses? Who holds the responsibility for fostering public wisdom? The wisdom of language has nothing to do whatsoever with manipulative acts in information dissemination. The wisdom of language relates to strategies of choosing certain linguistic features. Wisdom is a collective responsibility. A wise language would not be able to fully exist unless all of the related parties and resulting events make a concerted effort towards wisdom. Wisdom does not involve itself in the tug of war between the right and freedom of participating in discursive formations.

Pragmatic Perspective: A defamation case of Surya Paloh

“…First, referring to data (1) and 3, Rizal mention Enggar as the actor of the import, specifically, Enggar is addressed with the term biang kerok. In KBBI [14], biang kerok is defined as a source of problem 'sumber masalah,' thus, biang kerok has the negative meaning.…”

“…In the discourse of media, for example, the journalist began to diminish the use of wise words and words of greeting to address the state officials or community leaders. According to Rahyono, everyone nowadays creates a trend of using hyperbolic and abusive language in delivering the information [1]. He added that this phenomenon was caused by a loss of memory of wisdom or respect, therefore, the term "reformasi kebablasan" is the suitable term representing the recent era.…”