Yendra / Jurnal Arbitrer - Vol.
7 No.
Online version available in : http://arbitrer.
JURNAL ARBITRER
| 2339-1162 (Prin.
| 2550-1011 (Onlin.
| Article Symbolic Functions of Graffiti in Padang City of Indonesia: Critical Linguistic Landscape Studies Yendra1.
Ketut Artawa2.
I Nyoman Suparwa3.
Made Sri Satyawati4 STKIP PGRI Sumatera Barat.
Padang.
Indonesia Faculty of Humanities and Arts.
Universitas Udayana.
Bali.
Indonesia
2,3,4
ion Track Submi Recieved: January 4, 2020 Final Revision: March 14, 2020 Available Online: April 26, 2020 orre pondence Linguistic Landscape.
symbolic functions.
Critical discourse Analysis.
Graffiti.
This study concerned with language in written form that is visible as graffiti in the Padang city.
Indonesia landscape.
The mushroomed of graffiti in Padang city landscapes increasingly has been a growing problem in society.
Even local government as the official authority has created some task to prohibit graffiti, but a new graffiti has always been emerging in public space.
Therefore graffiti has been considered a crime.
It is interesting to explore graffiti in Padang city landscapes from other perspectives, particularly the symbolic functions of graffiti.
The study uses qualitative approaches by applying Critical Discourse Analysis.
The result shows that graffiti in Padang city landscapes accomplished two principal symbolic functions.
first graffiti as a medium of demonstration in which providing space for marginalized expression with the opportunity to voice controversial ideas publically.
second graffiti as social critics in which providing input into the public discourse that is not concerned by other conventional media.
Phone:
E-mail: yendrastkip@gmail.
A B S T R A C T
INTRODUCTION
Padang is the capital city of West Sumatra province.
Indonesia.
The city located on the west coast of Sumatra Island until 2010 recorded as a city has received AoAdipuraAo award 17 times, which is an award for cities in Indonesia that have succeeded in cleaning and managing the urban environment.
Since 2016 the community shocked by the appearance of graffiti in public spaces.
Even though the Padang city government had erased the graffiti, then a new one appeared again.
The government emphasizes the graffiti is vandalism that ruins the beauty of the city.
Indeed, the government has issued to give legal sanctions for those found to create graffiti on public facilities.
However, it seems that the efforts made by the government have not been successful yet.
Some of PadangAos community members believe DOI: https://doi.
org/10.
25077/ar.
that the graffiti is a work of Aoprankster artists who do not have jobsAo.
Base on the previous study conducted.
Reeve .
has concluded that graffiti in Padang is an urban art cultural movement that influenced by global culture.
It is not a new issue, and it is already global and happening all over the On other perspectives, graffiti in Padang city public space is part of the linguistic landscape (LL) has known as public signs, the scene where the public space is symbolically constructed by various language signs (Artawa & Sartini, 2019.
Gorter.
Hernyndez et al.
, 2017.
Landry & Bourhis.
Thongtong, 2.
Graffiti in Padang city is bottom-up or nonofficial signs which often display more linguistic diversity and less regulated, or can be said as Aufreedom of speech rightsAy (Dixson.
Surely, all these signs communicated a basic informational function.
Furthermore, even signs of LL such graffiti in Under Liscense of Creative Commons Attributioni-NonCommercial 4.
0 International.
Yendra / Jurnal Arbitrer - Vol.
7 No.
Padang city have an informative function to the reader.
Besides, signs also have a symbolic function that represents an ideology.
The symbolic function of the LL sign is the implicit messages within a language in which these signs are written.
There is a deeper meaning below the surface.
ItAos mean that symbolic functions are more ways than to communicate information.
Beside represent linguistics function, signs also have social, cultural, political, and economic means (Dixson, 2.
The symbolic function also indicates significant symbolic meaning to the public in a territory.
therefore, the signs of LL may be considered as a powerful mechanism of inclusion and exclusion, and hence also of expressing creating identity (Kotze, 2.
Some aspects denote symbolic functions, such as culture, identity, power relations, and language status (Dagenais et al.
, 2.
It seems LL signs such graffiti in Padang city have symbolic markers that express the status and power which working within semiotic modes of social positioning and power relations (Torkington.
Scollon & Scollon, 2.
The signs can be considered to reflect the relative power, particularly those signs produced by the marginalized and to give way into the power relations in social communities, and also to contribute to the discursive construction within sociolinguistic context (Gorter & Cenoz, 2.
The producer of graffiti in Padang city may thus be acting based on their ideological orientations.
The graffiti in Padang city contribute to enhance the hegemonic ideologies by resembling a social representation.
can be assumed that graffiti in Padang city as part of a linguistic landscape bigger than just urban art culture trends.
maybe there something it wants to As stated as Auall signs are equally subject to critical reading, for no sign is innocentAy (Kress.
It means linguistic signs in public spaces one of the subjects of critical reading because there are no signs without an intention.
As Van Leeuwen .
Auno matter how ideologically innocent signs may seem, they may, in fact, be forceful instruments in the reproduction of the social world in which they form part of the landscapeAy.
II.
METHODS
This study designed qualitatively by combining basic investigation methods of linguistic landscape (LL) studies and critical discourse analysis (CDA) studies, called critical linguistic landscape (CLL) studies (Yendra, 2.
It is a new alternative concept move from the inclination of mostly first researches of LL to apply quantitative approach which usually only focus on calculating and analyzing signs in a particular region of a city based on the use of language and the producer of the sign (Blackwood, 2015.
Moriarty, 2.
to reveal the hierarchy of linguistic devices in multilingual contexts(Roig-Maryn, 2016.
Durk Gorter, 2.
to determine about the peoples who reside in a region, what ideologies are used, which languages have dominance and renown, and which are marginalized (Edelman, 2014.
Lamarre, 2014.
Papen, 2.
Therefore, this CLL concept broader than LL concept in applying a quantitative approach, which just only the documentation of signs.
The CCL concept moves beyond descriptive and distributional approaches, whereas local historical and symbolic means are used to recognize the distinctions of the given context.
It is because the LL is understood herein as a place where language, along with semiotic devices, involves in symbolic Hence, the qualitative aspect should include a critical approach to LL such CDA.
In collected the data, observation is done while photographing the graffiti in Padang city as much as possible with cell phone cameras.
The photographs were taken more than 500 photos and saved to a computer in digital image format, even though there are repeating photos with the same object.
Graffiti in public space communicates messages which often have a deeper meaning than what is seen on the surface, so that interview also conducted as complementary data.
The interview focused on social cognition toward language sign PadangAos graffiti by using the snowball technique.
Its support the claim discourse, as a social practice, is both socially conditioned and socially constitutive (Fairclough & Wodak, 1.
In this way, the PadangAos graffiti might be contributing to the reinforcing of hegemonic ideologies by the Based on the discussion above, the current research reproduction of particular social representations, focuses on the symbolic function of signs in and it may also reveal something about the social identities of the place in which it is embedded.
PadangAos graffiti.
Yendra / Jurnal Arbitrer - Vol.
7 No.
Figure 1.
CDA analysis Model (Adopted from Fairclough & Wodak, 1997.
van Dijk, 2.
In data analysis, this study specifically focuses on language in written form that is visible as graffiti in Padang city public space, which purposes exploring the symbolic functions, particularly the discursive construction through linguistic code preference.
Three paradigms had been applied in exploring the symbolic function of graffiti in this study:
firstly, the Positive-empirical paradigm: focused on analyzing the form of the language in which the sign as a text.
Secondly, constructive paradigm:
focused on analyzing the meaning of signs as discursive construction in which is a representation of social cognition.
Thirdly, critical paradigm:
focused on exploring discursive construction through linguistic code preference, and how it related to social context includes social knowledge and social power (Fairclough & Wodak, 1997.
Van Dijk, 2.
Figure 1 shows in which the Analysis Model is used.
On the dimension of the text, the sign on graffiti is described as a linguistic structure.
On the dimension of social cognition, the meaning of the signs is interpreted base on social cognition and discourse production process.
The last, on the dimension of social context, the constellations of the sign and the social context is explained as a discursive construction, as social cognition includes social knowledge and social power.
produced by various social groups of people and serve several social needs expressing in different social interests.
On some creation of graffiti, the producers mentioned a nickname, referred to as a tag or signature, sometimes the tag only created independently of the existence of graffiti.
While on some other, the producers not mentioned their signature as anonymous.
Therefore, graffiti in Padang city landscapes could be distinguished into a signature and anonymous graffiti.
Most of the signatures graffiti widespread in Padang city landscape is a creation as an appreciable work of art such as graffiti and mural street art .
Picture 1 and .
It is a decorative expression of the picture and writing that requires artistic skill and understanding of art painting.
Still, this kind of signature graffiti has labeling both vandalism and artistic expression of art within it.
Following (Dabbour, 2.
, accepting graffiti in the art word implies that if graffiti is in its proper place, it becomes acceptable and even profitable.
However, inversely graffiti in the city public space is a crime since it sometimes challenges hegemony and those who have authority over the public city space.
This duality created a dichotomy of meanings of scribbling that stemmed from the notion of space.
RESULT AND DISCUSSION
Kind of graffiti in Padang city landscape Graffiti in this study defined as writings scribbled, scratched, or sprayed illicitly on the city wall or other surface in a public space as part of linguistic On other terms, it is sometimes known as a mural, street art, or wall writing.
Padang city, graffiti has various forms that are Fig.
Sample of Street Art graffiti Yendra / Jurnal Arbitrer - Vol.
7 No.
that conveys within the language signs, such as sentences, phrases, and words.
Generally, it uses simple rhetoric and images to make the audience easier to catch and remember the messages.
Fig.
Sample of Street Art Mural The different of signature graffiti, anonymous graffiti seems simpler and mostly just a written scratch-made spontaneously by producers in a flash, without concerning any artistical aspect .
Figure 3 and .
The anonymity of this scribbling might afford the producers to challenge the normative values of the setting without risking caught in the act and get an impeachment.
Auhit and runAy (Johnston, 2.
might be proper words to describe the occurrences of these anonymous graffiti in Padang city landscapes.
Fig.
Sample of anonymous scribbling 1 Generalized base on contents or topics within linguistic code preference is found, graffiti in Padang city landscapes are classified thematically into: .
polices theme, .
investor theme, .
corruptor theme, .
save Gunung Talang theme, and .
other certain themes.
From all these themes, the most frequent theme repeatedly found in many ways and in many different places in Padang city is graffiti, which is signing Au#Save Gunung TalangAy.
Sometimes these signs are created signatory but mostly created anonymously.
Table 1 shows several samples of linguistic preferences that appear through graffiti in Padang city landscape Symbolic function of scribbling in Padang city PadangAos graffiti as social critics The perception of graffiti related to crime and vandalism is a basic reason for assessing bad attitudes towards such actions.
The basic motivation that drives to leave writing somewhere, including graffiti in public spaces, is human nature, as a quote AuIf you put a pen into any childAos hand, naturally, heAoll go to the wallAy (Reiss, 2.
This quote assumes graffiti is a part of individual desire or need to involve and relate to society as an effort to acknowledge or call attention to the mass system.
This involvement provides an opportunity to be part of the conversation that takes place in public spaces, especially for those who have little or no voice in the community.
According to Chaffee .
, graffiti in public space is a type of democratic in which there is universal access and a barometer that register the spectrum of thinking, playing and intricate role in ordering space, establishing and communicating codes of behavior, values, and beliefs, participating in the cultural reproduction.
As Kress .
noted as AuIdeological construction of spaceAy.
The meaning of signs contained PadangAos graffiti is an expression conveyed with a form of curse There are some distinctions between signature and and satire.
For example, the use of the word Anjing anonymous scribbling, but both kinds of scribbling (AodogA.
in graffiti .
ee Table .
Semantically, mostly carry a special oppositional message in it AodogAo are representations of four-legged mammals.
Picture 4.
Sample of anonymous scribbling 2 Yendra / Jurnal Arbitrer - Vol.
7 No.
Table 1.
Amount of samples of linguistic preferences of graffiti in Padang city landscapes Themes Polices Investor Corruptor #Save Gunung Talang Linguistic Preferences Polisi anjing Transliterations You are dog .
/ fuck the police Rajin Baca jadi pandai, malas baca jadi Reading much to be smart.
Less reading to be a police Semangat pak polisi, pelanggaran sama DonAot give up mister police, our mistakes is money for you dengan uang Jangan bangga jadi anjing.
polisi anjing DonAot be proud to be a dog.
Fuck the police Fuck the police (Minangkabau Languag.
Polisi Anjiang Indonesia is crying: investor Indonesia Menangis.
Place for children investor to play Tanah lahan bermain anak investor InvestorAos cruel intention Akal busuk investor Kami tidak menjual tanah kepada investor We are not sale out land to any investor Go green.
go green.
Go green.
go green.
Hang the corruptor until dry Gantung koruptor biar kering Indonesia cleans .
as no/ withou.
corruptor!! Indonesia bersih dari koruptor!! fuck Lenyapkan koruptor, bankit rakyatku.
Vanished corruptor, growing up my peoples, prosperous my nation sejahtera negeriku Ayo pemuda bangun gerakan Indonesia Come on guys make Indonesia without bersih dari koruptor Watch over and report the corruptor Awasi dan laporkan koruptor #Save Talang Mountain.
be careful of #Save Gunung Talang.
hati-hati tertipu #Save Gunung Talang.
tolak proyek #Save Talang Mountain.
refused geothermal May day #Save Talang Mountain May day #Save Gunung Talang #Save Gunung Talang dari proyek #Save Talang Mountain from geothermal #Save Gunung Talang.
Selamatkan #Save Talang Mountain.
ranslation in Indonesia languag.
Gunung Talang #Save Gunung Talang.
Sumbar tolak #Save Talang Mountain.
Sumbar (West Sumatera provinc.
refused the geothermal #Save Gunung Talang.
say no to geothermal #Save Talang Mountain.
say no to geothermal #Save Gunung Talang.
tolong, tolong, #Save Talang Mountain.
help, help, help but IndonesiaAos cultural repertoire full of diction related to animals, including a dog.
For Indonesian readers, expressions that use animal names tend to be vulgar and have negative connotations.
The negative implications of AodogAo are often related to other signs syntactically that can be interpreted There are various reasons related to the negative connotation of AodogAo, although dogs have more value and tend to be loyal to anyone who gives them food.
The opportunistic loyalty gives a negative connotation to a dog.
On another aspect, dogs have their theological roots with Islam as the majority religion in Padang.
Dogs are conceptual metaphors that more often symbolize uncleanness and humiliation.
Therefore, a graffiti signed Auanjing kota PadangAy shows that the author uses graffiti to express anger, curse, resentment or For another example, the phrase Autanah lahan Yendra / Jurnal Arbitrer - Vol.
7 No.
bermain anak investorAy as one main discourse on PadangAos graffiti (Figure .
Literally, the phrase meaning Aoplace for children to playAo.
When word anak (AochildrenA.
had crossed out changed by word investor, the meaning of the phrase coerced to change into Aoplace for the investor to playAo.
The sign shown in Picture 1 is conveying that underlined messages would create discursive construction with deep information.
The place is not a free public space anymore.
It has become a private and commercial place.
As a discursive construction, it is a creative way of communicating with the general public since the message was conveyed in figurative form, as an ironic social commentary or satire.
It can serve as a powerful means of reaching the public to raise awareness of investment issues and probably was demoralizing for a city administration.
conditions and public concern.
The dialectical process between critics and graffiti in PadangAos public spaces is more than evident with various individuals or communities who use urban space as a public forum, referred to as minor or small Graffiti in public spaces is another potential form of communication that provides open or more subtle social messages as expressions of Aosocial powerAo to controlled societies.
It is important when formal forms of communication are not possible contrary to Aohegemonic powerAo.
Relates to what Van Dijk .
the ways in creating discourse to consolidate power as social control: firstly, access to specific forms of discourse as a power resource.
secondly, do some action to influence peopleAos minds, knowledge or opinions.
and thirdly, find the discourse may at least indirectly control peopleAos actions as persuasion and manipulation.
In those Relates to social context, the investor had perceived ways, the group will have power if they can control badly as social cognition among societies in the actions and thoughts of other groups.
Padang city.
This assumption can be proved with PadangAos graffiti as a protest appearing a number of graffiti in public space talks As we mentioned before, graffiti in PadangAos about investor .
ee Table .
, such as AuIndonesia public spaces communicates messages.
From Menangis.
investorAy.
AuKami tidak menjual tanah various topics in PadangAos graffiti .
ee table .
, we kepada investor manapunAy.
Auakal busuk investorAy, are interested in investigating more specific topics and AuGo green.
go green.
pantekAy.
Those samples about AuGunung TalangAy because the mountain is writing give a portrayal that the investment issue in not even in PadangAos territory.
Mount Talang is in Padang city has been view as a growing problem the Solok region, a district in West Sumatra near in society.
The phase AuIndonesia MenangisAy Padang.
Initially, we assumed graffiti on the topic meaning AoIndonesia is cryingAo give presupposition of Mount Talang in PadangAos public spaces was the that Indonesian peoples suffer because of bad distribution of graffiti from Solok.
But, after we investment and they refuse or exclusions investor observed in Solok, we did not find any graffiti on from talking which is shown by crossed the lexical the topic of Mount Talang in Solok itself.
We began investor .
The phrase Aukami tidak menjual to ask: whatAos wrong with Mount Talang, and what tanah kepada investor manapunAy meaning Aowe not is the connection with PadangAos graffiti? sale our land to any investorAo gives presupposition that investor issue has trying to take resident Based on information from several Solok The phrase Auakal busuk investorAy meaning community members, in early 2016 the West Aocruel investor intentionAo give presupposition that Sumatra government, together with several private investment issue does not give a good impact to companies, built a megaproject that utilizes resident economically.
The phrase AuGo green.
go geothermal energy from Mount Talang.
However, pantekAy meaning AoGo green.
go green.
fuckAo the project was rejected by peoples who lived is the angry expression to the investor.
In short, the around Mount Talang.
They consider the geothermal discursive construction of oppressed identity is project has damaged the environment, which has an realized linguistically through the actual signs of economic impact on the peoples there who live as Eventually, local residents conducted some these graffiti.
of these demonstrations and blocked geothermal The exploration confirms that graffiti in public project activities.
In response to the actions, the space is a medium of social criticism that government was officially allowed to use military contains ideas or value as a reflection of the social force to restore the demonstrators directly.
In short.
Yendra / Jurnal Arbitrer - Vol.
7 No.
this Augeothermal warAy has been a long epic story between the local and the government since the geothermal project has begun.
The question is.
what to do with graffiti in Padang? To answer this question, we began to investigate information and messages contained in PadangAos graffiti.
demonstration in the urban landscape that appears presupposing that Mount Talang in Solok district is Auin dangerAy and must be saved.
Such conditions can be asserted that it is not easy for marginalized resistance to survive and struggle on their own, so their struggle requires non-involvement to From several data, graffiti with the topic of Mount be encouraged and to be involved by sending Talang mostly uses the phrase Au#Save Gunung messages through graffiti.
In this way.
PadangAos TalangAy .
or example, see Picture .
Expression graffiti can function as an abstract of protest ideas such Au#Save Gunung TalangAy on any graffiti inter- and constitutes a form of expression that wants to textually seems to be linked to and produced be heard.
However, looking further into each PadangAos graffiti is a micro-level AoAobottom-upAoAo writing style and linguistic form, it seems that of marginal voice, which may create the ability different producers created the graffiti.
It might be to challenge the state and other powerful actors.
said that people gathering around the same cause PadangAos graffiti also provides instruments in and common objective can establish a discursive creating a discourse that transmits sociopolitical partnership, despite being unaware of each other.
The messages.
Through graffiti, marginal voices have decentralized aspect of graffiti enables individuals the opportunity to make statements and be heard to act separately but simultaneously.
The graffiti about social problems that they cannot formally allows a variety of positions as AoAois a synchronic convey informal media.
It is a strong form of activity conducted by a range of uncoordinated marginal communication functions as an expression actors at different points in timeAy (Hanauer, 2.
, of thought, as a sociopolitical struggle, as the and relatively straight forward and shared by agent of power, and as a resistance to the power The use of symbol Au# Au .
ash-ta.
in with authority, which is a non-responsive government.
the linguistic sign gives some nuance that the sign The spreading of phrase such as Au#Save Gunung has to be concerned by the audiences.
It might be TalangAy in PadangAos public spaces give a portrayal some code of social cognition to influence audient, that the graffiti used as a medium of protest.
to support, or hopefully, they .
will share Just like a symbol used to make engagements Aulink to linkAy in the computer application program V.
CONCLUSION
eb/ interne.
It is an example of micro bottomThis study specifically focuses on language in up politics hoping to in uence the public.
Why in written form that is visible as graffiti in Padang Padang? Even in Solok itself where Mount Talang city public space, which purposes exploring the is located, there is no such graffiti like this.
symbolic functions, particularly the discursive Moving on from the last question, we assume that construction through linguistic code preference.
graffiti on the topic of Mount Talang in Padang The massively spreading of graffiti in Padang city is a protest because Padang is the capital city of of Indonesia landscapes became a new phenomenon West Sumatera, the center of Government and and increasingly growing problem in society since So, it makes sense that turning to it is perceived as a crime.
Even the official authority graffiti in the public spaces as a means of resistance had been created special task to combat those occurs after more conventional ways of protest fail graffiti.
However, the effort to prohibit act has failed to bring change.
Although the production process since a new graffiti has always been emerging to of graffiti is mostly spontaneous and anonymous, fulfill city landscapes.
This scribbling act provides the outcome might be expected to be noticeable in a unique insight into society and contributes to the which to attracting and presupposing an audience.
discursive construction through linguistic code It is an expressive resistance tactic that challenges preference in Padang city landscapes.
power relations where the aim is to influence public In conclusion, graffiti in Padang city landscapes opinion, policy, or government decision making.
at least accomplished two principal symbolic Therefore, this graffiti acts like a large-scale functions, including: first, graffiti as social Yendra / Jurnal Arbitrer - Vol.
7 No.
critics in which providing input into the public discourse of ideas that are not concerned by other common media.
Second, graffiti as a medium of demonstration in which providing space for marginalized expression with the opportunity to publically voice controversial ideas.
Therefore, the signs of LL appear on graffiti in Padang city landscapes to be valuables since linguistic preference, including code choice in public spaces as a broader representation of social cognitions.
Linguistic signs of LL in public spaces be symbolic markers of status and marginalized power.
Moreover, linguistic signs of the LL provide insight into the social practices and ideological orientations of the community.
REFERENCES