Oral Tradition
In learning the history of science we are often confronted with the data referred to historical sources. In
the use of historical sources we often find so-called oral tradition,
what exactly diamaksud about the oral tradition itself? General definition of oral tradition is a story or narrative, spoken by a speaker. We take the example Pantun, like what was written by Ajip Rosidi the Star Weekly Magazine, 12 April 1958. He
elaborated on the rhyme ynag is a Sundanese art that is almost lost, in
this art we find that there is rhyme or speaker builders who tells the
story in verse form. Rhyme story itself comes from the people, such as the Javan Kasarung, Ciung Vanara and others. Rhyme storyline itself will vary from one region to another. In practice this rhyme has its own procedures, whether time, place and the speakers themselves.
From the description above we can say that the poems included in oral tradition (Oral Tradition), the problem now is the extent to which Scientifics an oral tradition. Even in American folklore (folklore) has not been recognized as a field assessment of a truly scientific, it actually happened because the delivery of the speakers did not have a claim or not required to tell exactly like what he saw and heard, often times he added and reduced word or it can also be a story without any deliberate or accidental. Then what about the oral tradition that try written (written) like Hikayat, tripe and so on. Here it is possible once the existence of an addition or reduction and even changing the words are able to change the direction of the story. Because of this oral tradition can not be justified when used as a source of history, but the oral tradition can be an analytical tool of research. In the colonial period in Indonesia has been a process of moving to the creation of oral traditions of writing. In the oral tradition itself there is a distinction of forms, ie forms of privileges and understated form, the difference between them lies in its delivery. If the form of privileges to use the song, chant or a specific rhythm, but in the understated language of everyday conversation. Both forms of oral tradition is in its delivery will be heavily influenced by several things that certainly could change the course of the story, one of which is the situation when the speakers retell a story. Later also found by J.C. Bottoms that the reprocessing was immediately abolished the original story, but so it is possible to reprocess the oral tradition that is almost similar to the original but still pose a disappointment for the reader as a result of a conversion story.
In the process of writing the oral tradition has certain problems, namely concerning the rules of documentation. Actually, the problem can be solved by making making transcriptional scientific documentation becomes an unrestricted and accompanied interpretation and published together with the audio rekamam. But such works seems difficult to arrive at the wider community. The existence of the marking in the writing of an oral tradition can also lead to a confusion for the readers themselves. Be aware that the notion of oral tradition is only reached if the context of the interaction in contact with the tradition of writing, and also we have to realize that like it or not if we examine the oral traditions then we will be dealing with the alphabet. This is because the existing society discourse has been much influenced by the writings, and writings is able to influence the process of retelling of the community. At times like this is difficult to find pure kelisanan were unaffected by the tradition of writing. In the field of historical science, oral tradition able to become a useful tool in research and writing when we can process them.
From the description above we can say that the poems included in oral tradition (Oral Tradition), the problem now is the extent to which Scientifics an oral tradition. Even in American folklore (folklore) has not been recognized as a field assessment of a truly scientific, it actually happened because the delivery of the speakers did not have a claim or not required to tell exactly like what he saw and heard, often times he added and reduced word or it can also be a story without any deliberate or accidental. Then what about the oral tradition that try written (written) like Hikayat, tripe and so on. Here it is possible once the existence of an addition or reduction and even changing the words are able to change the direction of the story. Because of this oral tradition can not be justified when used as a source of history, but the oral tradition can be an analytical tool of research. In the colonial period in Indonesia has been a process of moving to the creation of oral traditions of writing. In the oral tradition itself there is a distinction of forms, ie forms of privileges and understated form, the difference between them lies in its delivery. If the form of privileges to use the song, chant or a specific rhythm, but in the understated language of everyday conversation. Both forms of oral tradition is in its delivery will be heavily influenced by several things that certainly could change the course of the story, one of which is the situation when the speakers retell a story. Later also found by J.C. Bottoms that the reprocessing was immediately abolished the original story, but so it is possible to reprocess the oral tradition that is almost similar to the original but still pose a disappointment for the reader as a result of a conversion story.
In the process of writing the oral tradition has certain problems, namely concerning the rules of documentation. Actually, the problem can be solved by making making transcriptional scientific documentation becomes an unrestricted and accompanied interpretation and published together with the audio rekamam. But such works seems difficult to arrive at the wider community. The existence of the marking in the writing of an oral tradition can also lead to a confusion for the readers themselves. Be aware that the notion of oral tradition is only reached if the context of the interaction in contact with the tradition of writing, and also we have to realize that like it or not if we examine the oral traditions then we will be dealing with the alphabet. This is because the existing society discourse has been much influenced by the writings, and writings is able to influence the process of retelling of the community. At times like this is difficult to find pure kelisanan were unaffected by the tradition of writing. In the field of historical science, oral tradition able to become a useful tool in research and writing when we can process them.
(Study at Sendang Dhuwur - Tuban)(Students of history science - Airlangga university)