The Use of Sign Language in Deaf Indonesian Classrooms in Surakarta

Authors

  • Siti Isnaniah UIN Raden Mas Said Surakarta, Indonesia
  • Tiya Agustina UIN Raden Mas Said Surakarta, Indonesia
  • Islahuddin Fatoni University, Pattani, Thailand
  • Faqih Annisa UIN Raden Mas Said Surakarta, Indonesia

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.22219/kembara.v9i2.25990

Keywords:

sign language, BISINDO, deaf

Abstract

Sign language is the language used by the deaf to communicate. In general, there are two types of sign languages used in Indonesia, namely SIBI (Indonesian sign language system) and BISINDO (Indonesian sign language). Of the two, the sign language most often used by the deaf is BISINDO, because BISINDO is considered easier to understand. This study aims to explain the use of BISINDO in Deaf Indonesian language classes in the Surakarta Gerkatin organization. The method used in this study is descriptive qualitative with data in the form of image documentation. The data source is in the form of sign language learning process. Data collection techniques are carried out through observation, recording and note-taking techniques. Data analysis techniques use interactive models. The results showed that the movements used in BISINDO learning at Gerkatin Surakarta involved the use of facial expressions, body language, arms and hands. There is a lot of vocabulary taught such as learning words, Indonesian, not yet, like, where, like, small, eat, alone, understand, don't know, work, sleep, words, healthy, black, fat, thin, color, about, purpose, lesson, early. If you look closely at the vocabulary taught, it has different conceptual sign languages. Like a like sign, demonstrated with the position of the hands in front of the mouth, then the palms open up plus the movement of the hands sticking from the chest towards the other person. Small gesture, in front of the chest with the tip of the thumb against the ring finger and the other three fingers open upwards, accompanied by a plucking motion of the two attached fingers. All the movements taught are made natural so that they are easy to understand according to the interpretation of the deaf. Thus, it is hoped that this variation of BISINDO's sign language will be increasingly recognized and widely used in teaching deaf sign language.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Alver, Fusun & Caglar, S. (2015). The Impact of Symbolic Interactionism on Research Studies About Communication Science. International Journal of Arts & Sciences, 1(1), 479–484.

Borman, Rohma Indra & Priyopradono, B. (2018). Implementasi Penerjemah Bahasa Isyarat pada Bahasa Isyarat Indonesia (Bisindo) dengan Metode Principal Component Analysis. Informatika: Jurnal Pengembangan IT, 3(103–107).

Borman, Rohmat Indra, Priopradono, Bentar, & Syah, A. R. (2017). Klasifikasi Objek Kode Tangan pada Pengenalan Isyarat Alphabet Bahasa Isyarat Indonesia (Bisindo). In Seminar Nasional Informatika dan Aplikasinya (SNIA). Yogyakarta: Unjani Yogyakarta.

Bunawan, L & Yumiati, S. (2000). Penguasaan Bahasa Anak Tunarungu. Bandung: Depdikbud.

Danesi, M. (2004). Pesan, Tanda dan Makna. Yogyakarta: Jalasutra.

Dwi, R. dkk. (2012). Komunikasi. Malang: Universitas Brawijaya.

Fauzan. (2018). Aktivitas Sosialisasi Bahasa Isyarat Indonesia di Organisasi Gerkatin Solo (Studi Deskriptif Kualitatif Aktivitas Gerkatin Solo dalam Mensosialisasikan Bahasa Isyarat Indonesia sebagai Bahasa Tunarungu). Universitas Sebelas Maret Surakarta.

Fisher, J. D. & Bell, P. (1984). Enviromental Psychology 2 edition. New York: College Publishing.

Griffin, E. (2012). A First Look at Communication Theory 8th Edition. Ne York: Me Graw Hill.

Gumelar, Gilang, Hafiar, Hanny & Subekti, P. (2018). Bahasa Isyarat Indonesia sebagai Budaya Tuli Melalui Pemaknaan Anggota Gerakan untuk Kesejahteraan Tunarungu. INFORMASI: Kajian Ilmu Komunikasi, 48(1), 65–78.

Hardjana, A. M. (2003). Komunikasi Intrapersonal Dan Interpersonal. Yogyakarta: Kanisius.

Isma, S. T. (2017). Signing Varieties in Jakarta and Yogyakarta: Dialect or Separate Languaiges? The Chinese University of Hongkong.

Isma, S. T. (2018). Meneliti Bahasa Isyarat dalam Perspektif Variasi Bahasa. In Kongres Bahasa Indonesia.

Isma, S. T. P. (2012). Signing Varieties in Jakarta and Yogyakarta: Dialect or Separate Languages? The Chinese University of Hong Kong.

Johnston, T. (2003). BSL, Auslan and NZSL: three signed languages or one? In Theoretical Issues in Sign Language Research Conference (7th: 2000) (pp. 47-69). Signum.

Lintangsari, A. P. (2014). Identifikasi Kebutuhan Mahasiswa Tuli dalam Pembelajaran Bahasa Tulis. Indonesian Journal of Disability Studies, 1(1), 60–70. https://doi.org/10.21776/ub.ijds.2014.01.01.08

Littejohn, Stephen W & Foss, K. A. (2011). Theories of Human Communication10th Edition. America: Waveland Press.

Mann, W. H. (2014). Teaching Signed Languages. The Encyclopedia of Applied Linguistic.

Maulinda, D. K. (2017). Bahasa Isyarat Indonesia di Komunitas Gerakan untuk Kesejahteraan Tuna Rungu Indonesia. UIN Syarif Hidayatullah Jakarta.

Mursita, R. A. (2014). Respon Sikap dan Perilaku Tunarungu terhadap Penggunaan Sistem Bahasa Isyarat Indonesa (Sibi) dan Bahasa Isyarat Indonesia (Bisindo) dalam Komunikasi. Universitas Sebelas Maret Surakarta.

Mursita, R. A. (2015). Respon Tunarungu terhadap Penggunaan Sistem Bahasa Isyarat Indonesia (Bisindo) dalam Komunikasi. Inklusi, 2(2), 222–232. https://doi.org/10.14421/ijds.2202

Nazir, M. (1988). Metode Penelitian. Jakarta: Ghalia Indonesia.

Nugraheni, Aninditya Sri, Husain, Alma Pratiwi & Unayah, H. (2021). Optimalisasi Penggunaan Bahasa Isyarat dengan Sibi dan Bisindo pada Mahasiswa Difabel Tunarungu di Prodi PGMI UIN Sunan Kalijaga. Holistika: Jurnal Ilmiah PGSD, 5(1), 29–33. https://doi.org/10.24853/holistika.5.1.28-33

Olvia, Vanny, Damajanti, Maria Nala, & Muljosumarto, C. (2018). Perancangan Media Informasi Tentang Bahasa Isyarat Indonesia. Jurnal DKV Adiwarna, Universitas Kristen Petra, 1(12), 2–9.

Padden, C. A. (2011). Sign Language Geography. In In Mathur, Gaurav, and Jo Napoli Donna eds.

Palfreyman, N. (2013). Form, Function, and the Grammaticalisation of Completive Markers in the Sign Language Varieties of Solo and Makassar. Nusa, 55(1), 153–172.

Palfreyman, N. (2014). Interview of “sign language.” Surakarta.

Samovar, L. A. et al. (2010). Communication between cultures. California: Wadsworth Publishing Company.

Sitepu, T. (2019). Cooperative Model in Language Reasoning: Indonesian Language Teaching Materials in Teacher Training and Education Faculty of Muhammadiyah Sumatera Utara University. Britain International of Linguistics Arts and Education (BIoLAE) Journal, 1(2), 51-59. https://doi.org/10.33258/biolae.v1i2.62

Soenjono, D. (2012). Psikolinguistik: pengantar pemahaman bahasa manusia. Jakarta: Yayasan Pustaka Obor Indonesia.

Stamp, R. et al. (2015). Sociolinguistic variation and change in British Sign Language Number Signs: Evidence of leveling? Sign Language Studies, 15(2), 151-181.

Susanto, H. N. (2014). Aplikasi Pembelajaran Bahasa Isyarat untuk Tuna Wicara dengan Standar American Sign Language. CALYPTRA, 3(1), 1-7.

Suwiryo, A. I. (2013). Mouth Movement Patterns in Jakarta and Yogyakarta Sign Language: A Preliminary Study. The Chinese University of Hong Kong.

Wood, J. (2013). Komunikasi teori dan praktik (komunikasi dalam kehidupan kita). Jakarta: Salemba Humanika.

Wasita, A. (2012). Seluk beluk tunarungu dan tunawicara serta strategi pembelajarannya. Yogyakarta: Javalitera.

Zuhir, Jannata & Amri, A. (2019). Penggunaan Bahasa Isyarat Indonesia (Bisindo) pada Siaran Berita dalam Pemenuhan Kebutuhan Informasi Penyandang Tunarungu di Kota Banda Aceh. Jurnal Ilmiah Mahasiswa FISIP Unsyiah, 4(3), 1–15.

Downloads

Published

2023-10-11

How to Cite

Isnaniah, S., Agustina, T., Islahuddin, & Annisa, F. (2023). The Use of Sign Language in Deaf Indonesian Classrooms in Surakarta. KEMBARA: Jurnal Keilmuan Bahasa, Sastra, Dan Pengajarannya, 9(2), 468–481. https://doi.org/10.22219/kembara.v9i2.25990

Issue

Section

Articles