Exploring Local Wisdom in Buginese Ethnics: Language Politeness Phenomena of Tau Soppeng

  • Fiptar Abdi Alam Guidance and Counseling Study Program, STKIP Muhammadiyah Barru, Indonesia
  • Al-Muthmainnah Al-Muthmainnah English Education Study Program, STKIP Dampal Selatan, Indonesia
Keywords: Local wisdom, politeness, linguistic politeness


The objectives of this research are to explore and to reveals the form and the characteristics of linguistic politeness, politeness strategies, and the realization of local wisdom found among Soppeng people (to Soppeng) one particular Buginese ethnics. This research applied ethnolinguistics viewed from pragmatics, semiotics, and politeness theories. To capture the data, this study used purposive sampling and snowball among native in Soppeng regency which agrees to be a part of this study. The method used is the method of listening with free engaged, recording, documentation, elicitation technique, and interview. The results of this research show the characteristics and the forms of linguistic politeness through some morphemes marked (such as prefixes ta), suffix pronouns (ta, ki, ni), some honorific vocabularies (such as pung, andi, daeng), some lexemes (iye, tabe, taddampengenga), some maxims of politeness principles; generosity, approbation, modesty, and sympathy, and four strategies of linguistic politeness i.e., bald on record, positive, negative, off-record strategy. In addition, this study also found the realization and the implication of local wisdom as a primary value such as ethics and language politeness, self-image, courage, solidarity, and cooperation. 


Download data is not yet available.


Abdulrahman. (2007). Pelestarian kearifan lokal melalui pewarisan bahasa Bugis. Paper presented at the Kongres Internasional Bahasa-bahasa Daerah Sulawesi Selatan, Makassar.

Achmad, S. (2012). Strategi kesopanan berbahasa masyarakat bugis pinrang provinsi sulawesi selatan. Bahasa dan Seni: Jurnal Bahasa, Sastra, Seni, dan Pengajarannya, 40(1).

Brown, & Yule, G. (1983). Discourse Analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Brown, P., Levinson, S. C., & Levinson, S. C. (1987). Politeness: Some universals in language usage (Vol. 4). Cambridge university press.

Cumming, L. (2005). Pragmatics: A Multidisciplinariy Perspective. Edinburgh: Hewer Text Ltd. .

Eshghinejad, S., & Moini, M. R. (2016). Politeness strategies used in text messaging: Pragmatic competence in an asymmetrical power relation of teacher–student. SAGE Open, 6(1), 2158244016632288.

Fromkin, V., Rodman, R., & Hyams, N. (2003). An Introduction to Language. USA: Michael Rosenberg.

Haryanto, H., Weda, S., & Nashruddin, N. (2018). Politeness principle and its implication in EFL classroom in Indonesia. XLinguage" european Scientific Language Journal", 11(4), 90-112.

Lakoff, R. (1973). The logic of politeness; or minding your ps and qs Papers from the 9th Regional Meeting of the Chicago Linguistic Society. Chicago: Chicago Linguistic Society, 292-305.

Leech, G. N. (1983). Semantics 3: Speech Act. New York: Academic Principles of Pragmatics.

Mattulada. (1997). Kebudayaan Bugis Makassar. In Koentjaraningrat (Ed.), Dalam Manusia dan Kebudayaan di Indonesia. Jakarta: Djembatan.

Sulu, A. (2015). Teacher’s politeness in EFL class. Intenational Online Journal of Education and Teaching, 2(4), 216-221..

Watts, R. J. (2003). Politeness. Cambridge University Press.

How to Cite
Alam, F. A., & Al-Muthmainnah, A.-M. (2020). Exploring Local Wisdom in Buginese Ethnics: Language Politeness Phenomena of Tau Soppeng. REiLA : Journal of Research and Innovation in Language, 2(1), 14-18. https://doi.org/10.31849/reila.v2i1.3767
Abstract viewed = 334 times
PDF downloaded = 357 times