BAHASA & KEKUASAAN: PERAN BAHASA SEBAGAI INSTRUMEN SIMBOLIK MEMPEROLEH KEKUASAAN (LANGUAGE & POWER: THE ROLE OF LANGUAGE AS A SYMBOLIC INSTRUMENT TO POWER)
Article Sidebar
Read Counter : 1305
Download : 7144
Main Article Content
Abstract
Banyak ilmuan memosisikan atau cenderung kepada salah satu dari dua posisi yang bertentangan dalam diskursus epistemologi, seperti idealisme-materialisme, rasionalisme-empirisme, subjektivisme-objektivisme, mikro-makro, agensi-struktur, kebebasan-determinisme. Bourdieu -ilmuan sosial Prancis- keluar dari perdebatan tersebut dan mengadirkan konsep habitus yang meleburkan agensi dan struktur. Habitus mencakut bahasa, yang berperan sebagai sistem simbolik dan kapital. Ia bukan hanya bagian dalam transmisi pesan saja tetapi juga sebagai instrumen/mekanisme simbolik untuk memperoleh kekuasaan dan mempertahankan dominasi. Artikel ini akan membahas bagaimana bahasa digunakan sebagai instrumen simbolik untuk memperoleh kekuasaan. Artikel ini juga mendiskusikan bahasa sebagai kapital dan habitus, selain sebagai mekanisme kekuasaan, yaitu sistem instumental simbolik yang mencakup struktur-yang-menstruktur, struktur-yang-distruktur, instrumen dominasi. Mekanisme ini menghasilkan dua sintesa tentang sistem simbolik: “structuring symbols” dan “structured symbols”. Kami menyimpulkan bahwa walaupun tidak menekankan aspek ekonomi, kapital Bourdieu mempunyai peran penting dalam pertarungan kelas dan perbedaan kelas. Kapital ekonomi memegang perang penting karena dapat dikonversi ke kapital lainnya. Perkembangan teknologi internet memberikan implikasi bahwa kapital ekonomi tidak selalu dominan. Kapital sosial justru menjadi kapital yang dominan dan dapat dipertukarkan dengan kapital lainnya.
Many scientists position and tend to one of two opposing positions in epistemology: idealism-materialism, rationalism-empiricism, subjectivism-objectivism, micro-macro, agency-structure, freedom-determinism. Bourdieu escaped out of the debate by introducing habitus which agency and structure merge with. It encompasses languages, which are important as a symbolic system and capital. Languages don’t only transmit message but also make-up symbolic instrument to power and keep dominating. We deals with the usage of language as an instrument to power, and discusses about languages as capital and habitus besides as power mechanism, namely symbolic instrument system i.e., structuring-structures, structured-structures, domination instrument. This mechanism results in two syntheses regarding symbolic system: structuring symbols and structured symbols. We conclude, Bourdieu’s concept of capitals have key role in class differentiation and class strugle although don’t emphasize economic capital. Economic one is important because of its conversability into other capitals. New technology (internet) gives an implication that economic capital is not always dominant anymore. Social capital can be dominant and important one because it can be changed into other capital.
Article Details
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
- Copyright on any article is retained by the author(s).
- Author grant the journal, right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work’s authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal’s published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work.
- The article and any associated published material is distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License
References
Anonim. (Tanpa Tahun). Capital. Retrieved January 9, 2017, from Marxists Internet Archive: Encyclopedia of Marxism: https://www.marxists.org
Bourdieu, P. (1984). Distinction: A Social Critique of Judgment of Taste . (R. Nice, Trans.) Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Bourdieu, P. (1986). Handbook of Theory and Research for the Sociology of Education. (J. Richardson, Ed.) Westport, Conn: Greenwood Press.
Bourdieu, P. (1990). The Logic of Practice. (R. Nice, Trans.) Stanford, CA, California: Stanford University Press.
Bourdieu, P. (1991). Language and Symbolic Power. (G. R. Adamson, Trans.) Cambridge UK: Polity Press.
Bourdieu, P. F., & Wacquant , L. (1992). An Invitation to Reflexive Sociology. Chicago, Illinois: University of Chicago Press.
Ealy, S. (1981). Communication, Speech, and Politics: Habermas and Political Analysis. Washington, DC: University Press of Amcrica.
Hall, S., Evans, J., & Nixon, S. (2013). Representation. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publication Inc.
Haryatmoko. (2010). Habitus dan Kapital Dalam Strategi Kekuasaan. Paska-Sarjana Sosiologi UI pada tanggal 26 Agustus 2010. Jakarta.
Haugaard, M. (2008). Power and Habitus. Journal of Power, 1(2), 189-206, ISBN: 1754-0291; ISSN: 1754-0291; DOI: 10.1080/17540290802227593.
Hillier, J. (1999). Habitus: A Sense of Place. Urban Policy and Research, 17(3), 177-178, DOI: 10.1080/08111149908727803.
Jenkins, R. (2004). Membaca Pikiran Pierre Bourdieu. (Nurhadi, Trans.) Yogyakarta: Kreasi Wacana.
Littlejohn, W. S. (2002). Theories of Human Communication (7 ed.). Belmont, California: Wadsworth Group.
Littlejohn, W. S., & Foss, K. A. (2005). Theories of Human Communication (8 ed.). Belomont, California: Wadsworth Group.
Lodge, D., & Wood, N. (2008). Modern Criticism and Theory: A Reader 3rd edition. London & NY: Routledge.
Lubis, A. Y. (2014). Filsafat Ilmu, Klasik Hingga Kontemporer. Jakarta: PT Raja Grafindo Persada.
Lyotard, J.-F. (1984). The Postmodern Condition: A Report On Knowledge (Vol. X). (G. Bennington, & B. Massumi, Trans.) Minneapolis: The University of Minnesota Press.
Marx, K. (1887). Capital A Critique of Political Economy Volume I Book One: The Process of Production of Capital. (F. Engels, Ed.) Moscow: Progress Publishers.
Mulder, N. (2001). Mistisisme Jawa: Ideologi di Indonesia. Yogyakarta: PT LKiS Pelangi Aksara.
Natoli, J., & Hutcheon, L. (1993). Posmodern Reader. NY: State University of New York Press.
Poespowardjojo, S., & Seran, A. (2015). Filsafat Ilmu Pengetahuan. Jakarta: PT Kompas Media Nusantara.
Poespowardjojo, S., & Seran, A. (2016). Diskursus Teori-Teori Kritis: Kritik Atas Kapitalisme Klasik, Modern, dan Kontemporer. Jakarta: PT Kompas Media Nusantara.
Radford, G. (2005). On the Philosophy of Communication. Belmont-CA, USA: Thomson Wadsworth.
Robison, L., Schmid, A., & Siles, M. (2002). Is Social Capital Really Capital? Review of Social Economy, 60(1), 1-21, DOI: 10.1080/00346760110127074.
Setiawan, A. (1998). Perilaku Birokrasi Dalam Pengaruh Paham Kekuasaan Jawa. Yogyakarta: Pustaka Pelajar.
Silva, E. (2016). Habitus: Beyond Sociology. The Sociological Review Publication Limited, 64, 73–92, DOI: 10.1111/1467-954X.12345.
Swartz, D. (1997). Culture and Power: The Sociology of Pierre Bourdieu. Chicago & London: The University of Chicago.
Throsby, D. (1999). "Cultural Capital and Accounting". Journal of Cultural Economics Accounting, Auditing & Accountability, 12(4), 394-412; ISBN: 0885-2545; ISSN: 14702738; PMID: 18572429; DOI: 10.1108/09513579910283440.
Wintle, J. (2002). Makers of modern Culture. London. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
Zarkasyi, H. F. (2009). Hermeneutika Sebagai Produk Pandangan Hidup. A Two Day Workshop: On Islamic Civilization Studies (pp. 1-15). Bandungan-Jawa Tengah: Universitas Islam Sultan Agung (UNISSULA).