LANGUAGE PLANING IN MAINTAINING THE EXTINCTION OF BALINESE LANGUAGE

LANGUAGE PLANING

IN MAINTAINING THE EXTINCTION

OF BALINESE LANGUAGE

Written by: Luh Ketut Sri Widhiasih

CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION



A. Background

Balinese language is a local language that is mostly used by Balinese. Balinese language functions are as regional languages and the mother tongue for the Balinese that serves as the language of communication between Balinese. In relationship to the function of Indonesian, the local language serves as (1) Indonesian language supporters, (2) the language of instruction at the elementary school beginning level in certain areas to facilitate the teaching of Indonesian / or other lessons, and (3) the source language to enrich Indonesian language. And in certain circumstances, the local language can also serve as a complement of Indonesian in the management of local governance. Balinese language also plays the same role as other local language in Indonesia (Yadnya, 2004).

In the other hand, the existence of the Balinese language, especially in urban areas increasingly alarming even it can not be said to have been marginalized (Yadnya,2004). This linguistics symptoms is also felt by Jendra (2002) in Yadnya (2004), which indicated the use of language in a number of Balinese family has shrunk and has been unrivaled by use of Indonesian. In the contextual traditional situation of Balinese language also has urged by the use of Indonesian. The trend toward marginalization Balinese language is caused by at least 3 things: (1) the status of the Balinese language, (2) loyalty of the speech community, and (3) strategy formation and development of the Balinese language (Yadnya, 2004).

Predicted by Bagus (2001) in Yadnya (2004), Balinese language will become extinct before the end of this century. Although, such statements have a reason and concern for the survival of regional languages, it should be appreciated. As citizens who love Balinese language, Balinese must begin to think critically to assist government’s language planning to language extinction signs of Bali.

B. Statement of Problem

Based on the background above, the writer can state a problem, that is:

- How to maintain Balinese Language in term of language planning to save it from language death?


CHAPTER II

THEORITICAL REVIEW



A. The Definition of Language Planning

Language planning is a deliberate effort to change a language or its functions in society. Moreover, language planning is deliberate effort to influence the behavior of others with respect to acquisition, structure, or functional allocation of their language code. Language planning is as an activity which has as its main goal to solve problems and to provoke changes in the society concerned, (Wikipedia).

B. The Goals of Language Planning

These are some goals of language planning based on:

a. An Ideological goal.

It motivates decision making in language planning. There are four ideological goals, they are :

1. Linguistic assimilation, it is the belief that every member of a society, irrespective of his native language, he should learn and use the dominant language of the society in which he lives. A quintessential example is the English-only movement in the United States

2. Linguistic assimilation, it stands in direct contrast to the first one. It supports linguistic pluralism. It recognizes and supports of multiple languages within one society. It is also called a multi-lingual society. For example, in Switzerland they use French, German, Italian, and Romansh to communicate. In Singapore, the language exits English, Malay, Tamil, Chinese.

3. Vernacularization, it denotes the restoration and development of an indigenous language along with its adoption by the state as an official language. For example, it includes Hebrew in the state of Israel and Quechua in Peru.

4. Internationalization, it is adopted a non local variety or non-indigenous language for wider communication such as official general use or for particular function or domain, as education, trade etc. For example the use of English in Singapore, India, the Philippines, and Papua New Guinea.



b. Other goals (from Linguists).

They recognize eleven language planning goals. They are:

1. Language Purification, it is prescription of usage in order to preserve the “linguistic purity” of language. It protects language from foreign influences, and guard against language deviation from within.

2. Language Revival, it is the attempt to turn a language with few or no surviving native speakers back into a normal means of communication.

3. Language Reform, it deliberates change in specific aspects of language, like orthography, spelling, or grammar, in order to facilitate use

4. Language Standardization , it is the attempt to acquire prestige for a regional language or dialect, transforming it into one that is accepted as the major language, or standard language, of a region.

5. Language Spread , it is the attempt to increase the number of speakers of one language at the expense of another

6. Lexical Modernization, it is word creation or adaptation

7. Terminology Unification, it is development of unified terminologies, primarily in technical domains

8. Stylistic Simplification, it is simplification of language usage in lexicon, grammar, and style

9. Interlingua Communication , it is facilitation of linguistic communication between members of distinct speech communities

10. Language Maintenance – preservation of the use of a group’s native language as a first or second language where pressures threaten or cause a decline in the status of the language

11. Auxiliary-Code Standardization – standardization of marginal, auxiliary aspects of language such as signs for the deaf, place names, or rules of transliteration and transcription



C. Types of Language Planning

1. Corpus planning

Cooper’s (1989) in Diallo (2005) argued that corpus planning could be associated with activities such as coining new terms, reforming spelling, and adopting new script. It refers to the creation of new forms, the modification of old ones or the selection from alternative forms in a spoken or written code.

Based on Wikipedia (2010), corpus planning refers to the prescriptive intervention in the forms of a language, whereby planning decisions are made to engineer changes in the structure of the language. Corpus planning activities often arise as the result of beliefs about the adequacy of the form of a language to serve desired functions. Unlike status planning, which is primarily undertaken by administrators and politicians, corpus planning generally involves planners with greater linguistic expertise.

On the other hand, Liddicoat, 2005 in Richard and Baldauf (2010) states that Corpus planning – with its focus on the nature of the language to be taught and learned – is the activity area most dependent on linguistic input for its methodology, but it is shaped by status planning decisions, its output contributes in a major way to language-in-education planning and it may contribute to, or benefit from, the prestige that a language has in the community.

Gardelii (1999) adds that corpus planning refers to such activities as the production of grammars and dictionaries, the design of orthographies, the choice of script, spelling reforms, the production of primers and readers, etc.

Stating in Diallo (2005), in England, corpus-planning matters are addressed usually by universities, independent publishers of dictionaries, or scientific and technical terminology committees. In contrast, in French, corpus policy and corpus planning are dominated by vigorous government involvement. Corpus planning, in the first instance, is an entirely technical issue even though at times political authorities may interfere–as is often the case in France and other countries. Linguists mainly carry out corpus planning activities, along with other language-related specialists like writers, publishers, educators, translators, and lexicographers. However, it is noteworthy to mention that, according to Eastman in Diallo (2005), anthropologists might be included in developing corpus-language matters, especially at the codification phase (Eastman 1983: 69). Most corpus planning works are assigned to language academies (for instance, the Spanish Academy, the Urdu Academy, and French Academy), universities (e.g. English) and language directorates (e.g. Hindi and Tamil in India) just to name a few.

Generally, corpus planning follows a four-step model summarized below:

1) Graphization (Diallo, 2005) is the development or the creation of a writing system for unwritten languages. Graphization proceeds after a language or a variety of a language is selected. Usually, the choice is made with respect to an individual’s, group’s, community’s or country’s needs and aspirations while keeping in mind international linguistic communication challenges as well. Graphisation involves preparation of a script, and writing down an orthography and a spelling system.

Based on Wikipedia (2010), graphization refers to development, selection and modification of scripts and orthographic conventions for a language. The use of writing in a speech community can have lasting sociocultural effects, which include easier transmission of material through generations, communication with larger numbers of people, and a standard against which varieties of spoken language are often compared. In establishing a writing system for a language, corpus planners have the option of using an existing system or inventing a new one.

2) Standardization or codification (Diallo, 2005) is a matter of elevating one model (pronunciation, lexicon, and grammar) of a language among a number of varieties for acceptance as the norm of usage (Eastman 1983; Ferguson 1983; Haugen 1987 among others). Standardization or codification aims at creating harmonious communication and understanding between speakers of the same speech community regardless of the geographic spread of the language.

Wikipedia (2010) states that standardization is the process by which one variety of a language takes precedence over other social and regional dialects of a language. This variety comes to be understood as supra-dialectal and the ‘best’ form of the language. The choice of which language takes precedence has important societal consequences, as it confers privilege upon speakers whose spoken and written dialect conforms closest to the chosen standard. The standard that is chosen as the norm is generally spoken by the most powerful social group within the society, and is imposed upon the less powerful groups as the form to emulate. This often reinforces the dominance of the powerful social group and makes the standard norm necessary for socioeconomic mobility. In practice, standardization generally entails increasing the uniformity of the norm, as well as the codification of the norm.

3) Based on Diallo (2005), modernisation or elaboration of a standard for the selected language is the third phase. This process may involve terminology and style development and grammatication. According to Kaplan and Baldauf (2010), grammatication “involves the extraction and formulation of rules that describe how a language is structured”. Haugen in Kaplan and Baldauf (2010), paraphrasing Ferguson, contended that modernisation is “making the language fully translatable for the terminology of technological, social, artistic, and intellectual endeavors of our time”.

Modernization is a form of language planning that occurs when a language needs to expand its resources to meet functions. Modernization often occurs when a language undergoes a shift in status, such as when a country gains independence from a colonial power or when there is a change in the language education policy. The most significant force in modernization is the expansion of the lexicon, which allows the language to discuss topics in modern semantic domains. Language planners generally focus on creating new lists and glossaries to describe new technical terms, but it is also necessary to ensure that the new terms are consistently used by the appropriate sectors within society (Wikipedia, 2010).

Language has a significant communication role in society. Consequently, it should be able to fulfill this social function. Today’s society is marked by fast changes that affect all aspects of life. Ideally, to modernize and to develop a language is to keep it at the speed of social, political, economic and technological transformations by selecting and developing the appropriate lexicon, the structure, and the phonology of the language. Modernization is an intensive language activity that takes place through coining of new words, borrowing, loanwords, and translation among others.

4) Cooper (1989) in Diallo (2005) introduced renovation, the fourth phase of corpus planning. According to him, corpus planning designates “an effort to change an already existing writing code, whether in the name of efficiency, aesthetics, or national or political ideology”. He supported his statement by referring to the eradication of Persian and Arabic loanwords from Turkish and the feminist campaign for non-sexist language in English.



As discussed earlier, significant differences in procedures and approaches with regard to language corpus issues may appear across countries. In general, factors such as socio-historical, geographical, and political contexts and ideological orientation of the country account for these differences.



2. Status planning

Based on Wikipedia (2010), status planning is the allocation or reallocation of a language or variety to functional domains within a society, thus affecting the status, or standing, of a language. Language status is a concept distinct from, though intertwined with, language prestige and language function. Strictly speaking, language status is the position or standing of a language vis-à-vis other languages. A language garners status according to the fulfillment of four attributes, described in the same year, 1968, by two different authors, Heinz Kloss and William Stewart. Both Kloss and Stewart set four qualities of a language that determine its status. While Kloss and Stewart’s respective frameworks differ slightly, they emphasize four common attributes:
Language origin – whether a given language is indigenous or imported to the speech community
Degree of standardization – the extent of development of a formal set of norms that define ‘correct’ usage
Juridical status
Sole official language (e.g. French in France and Turkish in Turkey)
Joint official language (e.g. English and Afrikaans in South Africa; French, German, Italian and Romansh in Switzerland)
Regional official language (e.g. Igbo in Nigeria; Marathi in Maharastra, India)
Promoted language – lacks official status on a national or regional level but is promoted and sometimes used by public authorities for specific functions (e.g. Spanish in New Mexico; West African Pidgin English in Cameroon)
Tolerated language – neither promoted nor proscribed; acknowledged but ignored (e.g. Native American languages in the United States)
Proscribed language – discouraged by official sanction or restriction (e.g. Basque and Catalan during Francisco Franco’s regime in Spain; Macedonian in Greece)
Vitality – the ratio, or percent, of users of a language to another variable, like the total population. Kloss and Stewart both distinguish six classes of statistical distribution. However, they draw the line between classes at different percentages. According to Kloss, the first class, the highest level of vitality, is demarcated by 90% or more speakers. The five remaining classes in decreasing order are 70-89%, 40-69%, 20-39%, 3-19% and less than 3%. According to Stewart, on the other hand, the six classes are determined by the following percentages: 75%, 50%, 25%, 10%, 5%, and less than 5%.

Together, origin, degree of standardization, juridical status, and vitality dictate a language’s status. Van Els argues however that whatever the status purposes, that status planning decisions should be based on community needs.

Diallo (2005) states that status planning refers to the processes of the selection and use of languages in relation to education, administration, judiciary, mass media, trade, and international relations. Language status decisions intervene at several levels of language planning. Depending on the linguistic make-up of the society, language status may focus on issues such as which local languages or local variety to choose. Language choice may be also between local languages on one hand and local or international on the other. Consequently, status planning deals with crucial topics regarding which language should be official, national, regional, and so forth. The language choice is generally associated with wide social, cultural, and psychological factors in response to relevant sociolinguistic functions of the languages and the linguistic needs of the people. For instance, suggested that decisions regarding language choice and language of literacy might be carried out on the basis of the following questions:

1. Is literacy desired in the first language alone?

2. Is literacy desired in the language of a larger regional group if that language is neither a first nor a national language?

3. Is literacy desired in the language of a person’s domicile regardless of region of birth?

4. Is literacy desired in both the first language and/or a second language (most often the official national language)?

5. Is literacy desired in the official national language alone?



The questions above suggested by Eastman may serve as an excellent framework to make a language choice. In countries under former colonial domination, language choice has been made primarily either on the basis of nationism or nationalism or the combination of both. Nationism, in this context, refers to the use of an international language or language of wider communication for political integration and linguistic efficiency while nationalism is concerned with the choice of an indigenous language in order to foster patriotism and to preserve culture and traditions. The choice of a language and its development are essential elements of language planning. A great deal of attention has been given to language choice by sociolinguists. In 1969, Fishman, developed a model of language choice in which he claimed that language choices are made primarily with respect to six key features. Those key features were later modified and expanded by Eastman (1983).

Language status activities can affect linguistic distribution and language use in different ways. The most frequent language status activities are related to provision of a high or low status to languages. In multilingual countries of Africa and Asia, the encounter between international languages (associated with “high status and prestige”) and indigenous languages (associated with a “low or less high status”) has made language choice a complex issue. In Kenya, for example, language choice includes the attribution of prestige to Swahili – a local language – along with English. In Cameroon, the two international languages, French and English, have been given equally high status. The language policy of the European Union gives high status to all official languages of member countries of the Union.

Status planning has a fundamental role to play in the redistribution of linguistic resources and the maintenance of minority and community languages. Also, status planning has an important role for the protection of the language rights, especially the linguistic rights of the indigenous minorities and migrant communities.



3. Acquisition planning

Acquisition planning (Cooper, 1989 in Diallo (2005)) or language-in-education planning is closely associated with language learning and literacy skills development as well as literature production and language use in the media. It also focuses on planning and cultivation policies. Acquisition policy is not restricted only to the teaching of official or foreign languages but may include the teaching of minority and indigenous languages. Language-in-education policy has a tremendous impact on behavioural and attitudinal changes. These changes are achieved through curriculum development policy, teaching methods, and the material used. Indeed, the design of curriculum should consider the demographic make-up and reflect the socio-cultural diversity by integrating some essential elements of local as well as other cultures.

Based on Wikipedia (2010), acquisition planning is a type of language planning in which a national, state or local government system aims to influence aspects of language, such as language status, distribution and literacy through education. Acquisition planning can also be used by non-governmental organizations, but it is more commonly associated with government planning. Frequently, acquisition planning is integrated into a larger language planning process in which the statuses of languages are evaluated, corpuses are revised and the changes are finally introduced to society on a national, state or local level through education systems, ranging from primary schools to universities. This process of change can entail a variety of modifications, such as an alteration in student textbook formatting, a change in methods of teaching an official language or the development of a bilingual language program, only to name a few. For example, if a government decides to raise the status level of a certain language or change its level of prestige, it can establish a law that requires teachers to teach only in this language or that textbooks are written using only this language’s script. This, in turn, would support the elevation of the language’s status or could increase its prestige. In this way, acquisition planning is often used to promote language revitalization, which can change a language’s status or reverse a language shift, or to promote linguistic purism. In a case where a government revises a corpus, new dictionaries and educational materials will need to be revised in schools in order to maintain effective language acquisition.

In Baldauf & Kaplan, 2005 in Richard and Baldauf (2010) review of language-in-education policy and planning, sometimes known as acquisition policy, it was noted that language-in-education policy and planning often constitutes the sole language planning activity in many polities, but that such activities are limited in their impact by slow rates of dissemination, a limited audience and often a lack of resources. While language-in-education planning occurs most often in schools, it also implicates less systematic teaching situations in the community or the workplace.

Based on Wikipedia (2010), the education ministry or education sector of government is typically in charge of making national language acquisition decisions based on state and local evaluation reports. The responsibilities of education sectors vary by country; Robert B. Kaplan and Richard B. Baldauf in Wikipedia (2010) describe the sectors’ six principal goals:
To decide what languages should be taught within the curriculum.
To determine the amount and quality of teacher training.
To involve local communities.
To determine what materials will be used and how they will be incorporated into syllabi.
To establish a local and state assessment system to monitor progress.
To determine financial costs.

Further, acquisition planning may also deal with problems related to language use in various sociolinguistic contexts. For example, Baldauf and Ingram (2001), Cooper (1989), and Kennedy (1984) in Diallo (2005) among others have examined the five goals of language acquisition policy in relation to language use. These aims are:

1) language reacquisition, e.g., the revitalisation of Hebrew in Israel or Quechua language in Ecuador;

2) language maintenance, for example, the Bengali community maintains its language in Delhi in spite of the pressure from, and the domination of Hindi;

3) language shift, for instance, in Leeds, the Sikh community, especially the younger generation, is shifting towards the English language and in Delhi the Punjabis are shifting towards the Hindi language; and

4) the teaching of foreign and second languages.

5) language preservation and revitalization, e.g., native languages in California and West Africa, Schawenda in Brazil, and Quechua in Colombia.



Acquisition planning includes among other activities: curriculum design, teaching methodologies and materials to be employed, teacher selection and training, and evaluation. It also includes issues related to language choice, i.e., language planning should meet the full range of language needs by providing a wide choice for languages teaching. In fact, language acquisition planning should be able to cater for individual, group, and community needs, interests and aptitudes.

There are other important tasks to be carried out by the language acquisition machinery, such as curriculum content, time and resources allocation, selection of teaching materials, and the provision of infrastructures. There is also the central issue of personnel policy: the selection and recruitment of the teaching personnel, their initial and continuing training, and their qualifications and recruitment. The organization of systematic evaluation at each stage of the acquisition policy is of immense significance for the language-in-education policy in particular, and language planning in general. The feedback helps to monitor the necessary changes while the activities are in progress and ideally feeds back into the language policy-making itself. .

Acquisition planning has developed important tools such as schools for language acquisition purposes. Indeed, schools together with the media, just to name these two, are among the most effective places to introduce powerful and radical attitudinal and behavioural changes through the teaching of languages.



4. Prestige planning

Prestige planning or image building is the fourth range of language planning. According to Omar, the prestige planning concept stemmed from the observation that status planning, corpus planning, and acquisition planning are “… not sufficient to achieve the various functions the language should fulfill” (Omar, 1998 in Diallo (2005)). The objective of prestige planning is to promote the language for wider acceptance. Omar argued that image-building focuses on the functions rather than on the form of the language. Besides, Haarmann, 1990 in Diallo (2005) believes that corpus planning and status planning should be subsumed under the umbrella of prestige planning activities when he stated that: In language planning, all activities which are directed at the structure of a language (that is, at its corpus) and at its status appear in the light of prestige values which form a network of evaluations and attitudes.

The prestige and the positive image of a language are essentially associated with the attitudes of the recipients of the policy rather than those who plan or design for languages. Indeed, those who use the language are indeed the real choosers because the speakers are the people who shape the future of the language and bring its prestige to higher level.

The goal of prestige planning or image building is to promote the image or the prestige of a language in a given society. Indeed, according to Omar (1998) in Diallo (2005), a language needs to have a good image in order to be able to stand proud as a national and official language. The image is a necessary ingredient in the building of the confidence of its users, and it is this confidence that will take the language to greater heights.

However, Haarmann (1990) in Diallo (2005), from his own perspective, elaborated the goals of prestige planning in a larger frame. He argued that any kind of planning has to attract positive values, that is, planning activities must have such prestige as to guarantee a favorable engagement on the part of the planners and, moreover, on the part of those who are supposed to use the planned language.






CHAPTER III

DISCUSSION



The extinction of a language is not entirely due to the language itself but likely caused by factors of non-language. Based on Yadnya (2004), empirical facts presented earlier revealed that the powerlessness of the local language is parallel to the national language and declining loyalty of local language usage, especially among the younger generation in urban areas. It is caused by the speakers own attitudes and behavior by the impact of the allocation of language function which was formulated in the National Language Policy. Yadnya (2004) stated that the strategy should be focused on community revitalization speakers.

Efforts to revitalize the Balinese language must be intentional (voluntary) and provide convenience facilities and possibly through the method of inter-generational inheritance of language within the family from parents to children. In this case the parents should be encouraged to use the Balinese language. It also can be done by using Balinese language in the teaching-learning process at school. Addiction in government, in this case or the Pusat Bahasa, or too dependent on local governments, needs to be changed to the speakers of the Balinese language while the climate and facilitation provided by local governments (Yadnya, 2004).

In the Balinese language status planning and corpus planning need to run parallel with the social planning (Yadnya, 2004). In the status planning, in addition to the status held as a means of communication, the Balinese language has once given bigger vehicular load, thus the use of the Balinese language domains can be extended beyond the area of culture and communication activities within the family. If you want to stay alive Balinese language, it was not enough by the increasing number of children and adults learn Balinese language, linguistic environment must also be created so that the Balinese language can be used exclusively. Even once is ideal if you can make Balinese language as a prestige language by making the language as youth language among Balinese children and teenagers so that kids who learn Balinese language will continue to use it throughout her adolescence until they become parents and inheritance to their children. Thus the loyalty of the language among the Balinese will become stronger. This is the key to the survival of the Balinese language, which in turn strengthen the resilience of culture.

In corpus planning of Balinese language, the development of Balinese language should be directed to the parallelization of Balinese language to Indonesian language even with foreign language, for example through the absorption of Indonesia, another regional language or foreign language to accommodate the concepts of life, science and technology and other modern way of life. This also supported by Suastra (2007) that said society should create a broader language sphere; more the realm of language usage can be created (education, science and information technology) will be smaller gap between the needs of speakers to express themselves in various aspects of life. These efforts should also be supported by the movement of awareness to the public speakers of the Balinese language that the absorption of another language into mother tongue is not a pollution problem but enrichment process of the language so that the resistance to natural language symptoms in this multilingual society is reduced.

Standardization of Balinese language that has speech level in it needs to be directed at proposing standardization of lexical items or expressions of a more neutral or free of traditional social stratification (caste) to make the language more egalitarian in accordance with current usage trends and to make Balinese language more democratic. These steps are intended to limit or avoid Balinese’s speakers to switch the language because of avoiding the used of Sor Singgih.

In social planning, correctional of Balinese language needs to be directed at increasing positive attitudes toward the Balinese language, especially among the younger generation and encourage inter-generational inheritance Balinese language in a family environment. Balinese language speakers should have a positive attitude towards Balinese language to increase loyalty that are marked by an attitude to maintain language independence, language pride that drive to make the language as a personal or group identity, as well as differentiate it from other groups, and understanding the norms of Balinese language that encourage careful, correct, and courteous use of language (Suastra, 2007). Other steps that need to be taken is that to maintain the path of religion, education and culture as a point of Balinese language development in the potential domains of the society. In addition, encouragement and assistance need to be sought for the published of new local media that use Balinese language and to give appreciation to the mass media both newspapers, magazines, radio and television which has provided a column, the time to fill the cultural shows or local events and broadcast programs in Balinese language. Moreover, it is also important to campaign for the use of local languages through entertainment and performances of traditional arts which is a public pleasure in Bali. A government institution also can handle a training, seminar or workshop about the development of Balinese languages to solve the problem.

In addition to the harmony among status planning, corpus planning and social planning, it should attempt to minimize conflict of language through multilingualism symmetrical arrangement of non-discriminatory. Local Government should do evaluation, adjustment, and setting new policy for planning the local language through a synergy between the intellectuals, local governments and communities. In terms of national language policy, as suggested Purwo (2000:30) in Yadnya (2004), one way to prevent the extinction of local languages is the national language policy improvements through the elimination of the ways counseling and guidance from top to bottom (top-down) which continuously seen as force to use Indonesian in daily life.






CHAPTER IV

CONCLUSION



Balinese language as part of culture, cultural index, and the symbolic culture should be maintained parallel to the national language. Increasing fears of extinction of regional languages which have been marked by the declining number of speakers, the language competition (urging the Indonesian language and foreign languages), and the decreasing loyalty of speakers to use the local language as mother tongue and at the same time as a supporter of Balinese culture. Balinese language revitalization needs to be done to maintain the sustainability of Balinese culture. To achieve maximum results Balinese language revitalization and preservation should take place through inheritance interests in the home by family. Moreover, regulations and decisions made by the government could only provide a friendlier environment but not a substitution for efforts of Balinese that focused on using the language of Bali in homes and at every event. Awareness of using Balinese language is important in creating a positive language attitude which will further strengthen the functions of the Balinese language as a symbol of identity and support the noble values of local culture, especially religious values. Finally, the success of revitalization efforts, development, and preservation of the Balinese language requires sacrifice, support, and self discipline of Balinese.






REFERENCES



Diallo, Ibrahima. 2005. Language Planning, language-in-education policy and attitudes Toward Languages in Senegal. Griffith University.

Richard B. and Baldauf Jr. 2010. Language Planning and Policy: Recent Trends, Future Directions. University of Queensland, Australia.

Gadelii, Karl Erland. 1999. Language Planning: Theory and Practice. The United Nations Educational.

____________. 2010. Language Planning. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Language_planning

Suastra, I Made. 2007. Bahasa Bali Sebagai Simbol Identitas Manusia Bali. Universitas Udayana

Yadnya, Ida Bagus Putra. 2004. Revitalisasi Bahasa Daerah (Bali) di Tengah Persaingan Bahasa Nasional, Daerah, dan Asing Untuk Memperkukuh Ketahanan Budaya. Universitas Udayana.