Hubungan Kata dan Makna dalam Bahasa Indonesia dan Bahasa Arab: Kajian Semantik

Roby Fathan Alifiansyah*  -  UIN Kiai Haji Ahmad Siddiq Jember, Indonesia
Bambang Irawan  -  UIN Kiai Haji Ahmad Siddiq Jember, Indonesia
Nur Hasan  -  UIN Kiai Haji Ahmad Siddiq Jember, Indonesia

(*) Corresponding Author
DOI: 10.21580/alsina.5.1.16868
This study aims to determine the relationship between meaning and words in Arabic and Indonesian and their correlation. This research falls under the category of a literature review. Various books, dictionaries, and scholarly journals were used as data sources. Data was obtained through documentation and analyzed using the Miles and Huberman approach. The study results indicate that this linguistic phenomenon provides deep insights into the interaction between meaning and word forms within different cultural contexts. The findings reveal that the linguistic structure and dynamics of Arabic and Indonesian are influenced by phonotactic and semantic factors and the pressure to communicate efficiently. Furthermore, analyzing loanwords and meaning changes across languages enhances understanding of linguistic adaptation processes and semantic shifts

Keywords: Arabic; Indonesian; meanings; semantic; words

  1. ‘Izza, Amira Nayla. “Perbandingan Kata Bahasa Indonesia dan Bahasa Arab (Tinjauan Struktur dan Semantik).†Jurnal Motivasi Pendidikan dan Bahasa 2, no. 1 (2024). https://doi.org/10.59581/jmpb-widyakarya.v2i1.2605.
  2. Agustin, Karunia Kholifah Dini. “Analisis Semantik Kata Dla‘īf dalam Surah An-Nisa Ayat 28 dan Surah Ar-Rum Ayat 54.†Alsina : Journal of Arabic Studies 2, no. 2 (2020): 203–20. https://doi.org/10.21580/alsina.2.2.5915.
  3. Ayuni, Pebri. Analisis Kesalahan Berbahasa Tataran Semantik dalam Berita Politik Surat Kabar Tribun Pekan Baru (Undergraduate Thesis). Riau: Universitas Islam Riau, 2021.
  4. Brown, H. Douglas. Principles of Language Learning and Teaching. 5th ed. New York: Pearson Education, 2007.
  5. Buang, Sa’eda. “Madrasah and Muslim Education: Its Interface with Urbanization.†In International Handbook of Urban Education, edited by William T. Pink and George W. Noblit, 19:321–41. Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands, 2007. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-5199-9_17.
  6. Dölling, Johannes. “Systematic Polysemy.†In The Wiley Blackwell Companion to Semantics, edited by Daniel Gutzmann, Lisa Matthewson, Cécile Meier, Hotze Rullmann, and Thomas Zimmermann, 1–27. Wiley, 2020. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118788516.sem099.
  7. Edmonds, Philip, and Graeme Hirst. “Near-Synonymy and Lexical Choice.†Computational Linguistics 28, no. 2 (2002): 105–44. https://doi.org/10.1162/089120102760173625.
  8. Fadli, Muhammad Rijal. “Memahami Desain Metode Penelitian Kualitatif.†Humanika 21, no. 1 (2021): 33–54. https://doi.org/10.21831/hum.v21i1.38075.
  9. Ferawati, Dewi. “Polisemi dalam Bahasa Arab.†Cross-border 1, no. 1 (2018): 308–18. https://journal.iaisambas.ac.id/index.php/Cross-Border/article/view/886.
  10. Gao, Chunming, and Bin Xu. “The Application of Semantic Field Theory to English Vocabulary Learning.†Theory and Practice in Language Studies 3, no. 11 (2013): 2030–35. https://doi.org/10.4304/tpls.3.11.2030-2035.
  11. Gibson, Edward, Richard Futrell, Steven P. Piantadosi, Isabelle Dautriche, Kyle Mahowald, Leon Bergen, and Roger Levy. “How Efficiency Shapes Human Language.†Trends in Cognitive Sciences 23, no. 5 (2019): 389–407. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2019.02.003.
  12. Haugen, Einar. “The Analysis of Linguistic Borrowing.†Language 26, no. 2 (1950): 210–31. http://www.jstor.org/stable/410058.
  13. Hermena, Ehab W., Simon P. Liversedge, and Denis Drieghe. “Parafoveal Processing of Arabic Diacritical Marks.†Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 42, no. 12 (2016): 2021–38. https://doi.org/10.1037/xhp0000294.
  14. Ibn Manẓūr, Muḥammad Ibn Mukarram. Lisān Al-ʻArab. 8th ed. Beirut: Dār Ṣādir, 2012.
  15. Kostić, Nataša. “Antonymy in Language Use: From Core Members to Ad Hoc Couplings.†Poznan Studies in Contemporary Linguistics 51, no. 1 (2015): 133–61. https://doi.org/10.1515/psicl-2015-0005.
  16. Lakoff, George, and Mark Johnson. Metaphors We Live By. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press, 1980.
  17. Lyons, John. Semantics. New York: Cambridge University Press, 1990.
  18. Mahfud, Choirul, Rika Astari, Abdurrohman Kasdi, Muhammad Arfan Mu’ammar, Muyasaroh Muyasaroh, and Firdaus Wajdi. “Islamic Cultural and Arabic Linguistic Influence on the Languages of Nusantara; From Lexical Borrowing to Localized Islamic Lifestyles.†Wacana 22, no. 1 (2021): 224–48. https://doi.org/10.17510/wacana.v22i1.914.
  19. Maroun, Maryse, and J. Richard Hanley. “Are Alternative Meanings of an Arabic Homograph Activated Even When It Is Disambiguated by Vowel Diacritics?†Writing Systems Research 11, no. 2 (2019): 203–11. https://doi.org/10.1080/17586801.2020.1798327.
  20. ———. “Diacritics Improve Comprehension of the Arabic Script by Providing Access to the Meanings of Heterophonic Homographs.†Reading and Writing 30, no. 2 (2017): 319–35. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-016-9677-1.
  21. Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. Qualitative Data Analysis: An Expanded Sourcebook. Sage., 1994.
  22. Miller, George A., and Florentina Hristea. “WordNet Nouns: Classes and Instances.†Computational Linguistics 32, no. 1 (2006): 1–3. https://doi.org/10.1162/coli.2006.32.1.1.
  23. Muizzuddin, Mochamad. “Analisis Makna Denotatif dan Konotasi Linguistik Arab dalam Istilah Syariat Islam.†JOEL : Journal of Educational and Language Research 1, no. 10 (2022): 1–12. https://doi.org/10.53625/joel.v1i10.2286.
  24. Najah, Zughrofiyatun, and Arizka Agustina. “Analisis Kesalahan Semantik pada Skripsi Mahasiswa Jurusan Pendidikan Bahasa Arab UIN Raden Intan Lampung.†Al-Fathin 3 (2020): 1–12.
  25. Nasution, Sakholid. Pengantar Linguistik Bahasa Arab. Edited by Kholison. 1st ed. Sidoarjo: CV. Lisan Arabi, 2017.
  26. Panman, Otto. “Homonymy and Polysemy.†Lingua 58, no. 1–2 (1982): 105–36. https://doi.org/10.1016/0024-3841(82)90059-6.
  27. Ridlo, Ubaid. “Sinonim dan Antonim dalam Al-Qur’an.†Jurnal Al Bayan: Jurnal Jurusan Pendidikan Bahasa Arab 9, no. 2 (2017): 281–95. https://doi.org/10.24042/albayan.v9i2.2253.
  28. Rohman, Taufikur. “Analisis Semantik: Polisemi Verba QÄÂma dalam Al-Qur’an.†ALSUNIYAT: Jurnal Penelitian Bahasa, Sastra, dan Budaya Arab 1, no. 2 (2018): 98–111. https://doi.org/10.17509/ALSUNIYAT.V1I2.23552.
  29. S, Febry Ramadani. “Hakikat Makna dan Hubungan Antar Makna dalam Kajian Semantik Bahasa Arab.†Taqdir 6, no. 1 (2020): 87–102. https://doi.org/10.19109/TAQDIR.V6I1.5500.
  30. Sahkholid, Nasution. Pengantar Linguistik Bahasa Arab. Sidoarjo: CV. Lisan Arabi, 2017.
  31. Siompu, Nurjaliyah Aljah. “Relasi Makna dalam Kajian Semantik Bahasa Arab.†In Konferensi Nasional Bahasa Arab V, 53:1689–99. Malang: Universitas Negeri Malang, 2019. https://prosiding.arab-um.com/index.php/konasbara/article/view/536.
  32. Stede, Manfred. “The Hyperonym Problem Revisited and Lexical Hierarchies in Language Generation,†1996, 93–99.
  33. Suryaningrat, Erwin. “Pengertian, Sejarah dan Ruang Lingkup Kajian Semantik (Ilmu Dalalah).†At-Ta’lim 12, no. 1 (2013): 105–25. https://doi.org/10.29300/attalim.v12i1.1622.
  34. Susanti, Rina. “Analisa Komponen Makna Kata Sinonim dalam Bahasa Arab.†AL-AF’IDAH: Jurnal Pendidikan Bahasa Arab dan Pengajarannya 2, no. 1 (2018): 89–107. https://doi.org/10.52266/AL-AFIDAH.V2I1.195.
  35. Taufiqurrahman. Leksikologi Bahasa Arab. Malang: UIN Malang Press, 2018.
  36. Tim Penyusun Kamus Pusat Bahasa. Kamus Besar Bahasa Indonesia. Jakarta: Pusat Bahasa, 2018.
  37. Ullmann, Stephen. Semantic: An Introduction to the Science of Meaning. Oxford: Blackwell, 1977.
  38. Utomo, M. Supriyanto Wahyu. Kajian Semantik Penggunaan Hiponim dan Hipernim pada Judul Wacana dalam Koran Kompas Edisi September-Oktober 2013 (Undergraduate Thesis). Surakarta: Universitas Muhammadiyah Surakarta, 2014. https://eprints.ums.ac.id/29877/.
  39. Xiao, Richard, and Tony McEnery. “Collocation, Semantic Prosody, and Near Synonymy: A Cross-Linguistic Perspective.†Applied Linguistics 27, no. 1 (2006): 103–29. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/ami045.
  40. Zipf, George Kingsley. Human Behavior and the Principle of Least Effort: An Introduction to Human Eoclogy. Cambridge: Addison-Wesley Press, 1949.

Open Access Copyright (c) 2023 Alsina : Journal of Arabic Studies
Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

 

Alsina: Journal of Arabic Studies
Arabic Department, Fakultas Ilmu Tarbiyah dan Kependidikan
UIN Walisongo, Semarang, Indonesia
Jl. Prof. Dr. Hamka, Tambakaji, Kec. Ngaliyan, Kota Semarang, 50185
Central Java, Indonesia
Email: [email protected]

In collaboration with the Arabic Teachers Association of Indonesia (IMLA).

ISSN: 2622-6138 (Print)
ISSN: 2622-6146 (Online)

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License

apps