Hijrianda Niko Larizky / Jurnal Arbitrer - Vol. 10 No. 2 (2023) 169 Online version available in : http://arbitrer.fib.unand.ac.id | 2339-1162 (Print) | 2550-1011 (Online) | JURNAL ARBITRER Submission Track A B S T R A C T Received: June 16, 2023 Final Revision: July 09, 2023 Available Online: July 20, 2023 This study discusses linguistic phenomena regarding the lexical variations of the Agam Tanah Datar dialect found in Nagari Gunuang, Padang Panjang City. The research conducted in Nagari Gunuang covered four villages as observation points, namely Ekor Lubuk village, Sigando village, Ganting village and Ngalau village. This study describes the forms of lexical variations of the Agam Tanah Datar dialect of the Minangkabau language found in Nagari Gunuang, Padang Panjang City. The data of this study are the dialects spoken orally by nine informants. The informants of this study were the natives of Nagari Gunuang who directly explained 851 glosses of vocabulary, phrases and sentences. This research is a qualitative as well as quantitative research. The method of providing data used is the method of observing, noting, and speaking. The method of data analysis uses dialectometric calculations, in order to determine the percentage of speech differences between observation points. In this study, 172 lexical variations were found from 851 glosses which were grouped into: two two- symbol etimonsss, two three-symbol etimonss, two four-symbol etimonsss and three three-symbol etimonss. In the dialectometric calculation, it was found that the overall average percentage was below 25% which was classified as a speech difference. Keywords Variation lexical, dialectology, dialectometry, dialect agam tanah datar, Nagari Gunuang Correspondence E-mail: genrejateng.niko@gmail.com Article Lexical Variation of Agam Tanah Datar Dialect in Nagari Gunuang of Padang Panjang City Hijrianda Niko Larizky1, Chattri Sigit Widyastuti2 1-2Universitas Sebelas Maret, Central Java, Indonesia Under License of Creative Commons Attributioni-Non Commercial 4.0 International.DOI: https://doi.org/10.25077/ar.10.2.169-175.2023 I. INTRODUCTION Indonesia is a country known for a variety of linguistic characteristics in each region. This is known from various tribes, religions, cultures, and social groups. This diversity represents communication and national identity through groups of speakers, one of which is variation in a dialect which can be identified through a regional mapping. So the existence of cultural complexity in Indonesia makes communication and cultural interaction increasingly massive and complex, so it needs to be the basis for understanding basic insights 2023). The results of linguistic research conducted by the Indonesian Ministry of Education, Culture, Research, and Technology in 2018, show that there are 718 regional languages in Indonesia. This illustrates how communication is established in each group of speakers of a particular language. The diversity of regional languages and dialects in Indonesia has given rise to many variations of the language. These language and dialect variations can then be identified through language mapping. Language mapping represents a variety of languages that are unique to an area. Language mapping on the basic cultural vocabulary plays an important role in underpinning society to preserve the vitality of language (Zabadi, 2021). This variety of dialects is an object of study in the field of linguistics which can be an attraction for the development of linguistic insights, so that it becomes an indication related to the study of dialect geography in order to know that language plays an important role in running a social system in an area. The study of dialectology addresses the variety of languages in the scope of society in a region or area, so that the study of dialectology covers every subsystem of the field of linguistics underlying between generations (Sohabudin & Darmawan, Hijrianda Niko Larizky / Jurnal Arbitrer - Vol. 10 No. 2 (2023) 170 linguistics, including phonology, semantics, syntax and morphology. Lauder reveals that “dialectology is a variety of language that is based on a unit of space in which variations in research is carried out to obtain conclusions that can be known factually” (Lauder, 2001: 1). Theoretically, previous research related to dialectological studies, traced the derived forms of vocabulary compared through phonological rules between dialects (Suryati, Mbete, Lauder, & Dhanawaty, 2012). Thus it can be said that dialectology can identify similarities and differences in the use of sign systems, namely through elements that coincide with certain languages. Through mapping language in an area, dialectology studies can be linked to a unit of place in order to create a variety of language uses. The explanation related to dialectology is stated by Ayatrohaedi (1983: 29) that dialect geography is a comparison in language studies which has a relationship in the variety of languages. Based on a map to find out the dividing line on language mapping, the observation points that are known to have a variety of speeches are marked (Chambers and Trudgill, 2004:24). Through geographical location, unique isolects are often found, so the role of dialect geography is important in identifying a region (Saddhono & Hartanto, 2021) This research examines the Minangkabau language, located in the region of West Sumatra. In this area, the Minangkabau language is used in conversations between children, parents, relatives and colleagues. Minangkabau language is a part of the Melayu language constituting a family of Austronesian languages. The Minangkabau language is used as the mother tongue in West Sumatra Province, while the Malay language family covers almost the entire island of Sumatra. Through previous research, the uniqueness of the Minangkabau language, known as migrants, has been explored, so that the language units brought by nomads affect differences or variations between regions through the surrounding isolects and it is the process of creating dialects that differentiates one Noviatri, Aslinda, & Midawati, 2016). It can be said that the Minangkabau language has many dialect variations. Previous research emphasized language mapping. Language mapping aims to verify the novelty of differences in the number of dialects in a region, one of which is through dialectological studies (Budiono, Novita, & Syarfina, 2023). Then, through verifying the geographical language mapping, the Minangkabau language also has various dialects such as the Agam Tanah Datar dialect, the Pasaman dialect, the Lima Puluh Kota dialect, the Koto Baru dialect, and the Pancung Soal dialect. Traditionally, the Minangkabau region has its own characteristics, i.e. there is an autonomous regional structure that regulates the deliberation system according to customary traditions, the existence of Nagari based on the application of Minangkabau customary law and norms. Nagari is a concept that shows a thorough understanding of the indigineous law community units that have been stipulated in regional regulations (Hasanuddin, Azwar, Akmal, & Handoko, 2023). In addition, this is based on previous research finding that the Minangkabau people use nature as a way of life in giving birth and the norms in acting and thinking (Firdaus, Lubis, Susanto, & Soetarto, 2018). Through previous research providing the origins of the Minangkabau language, one of which were influenced Indian traders who came to Padang, it can known that there is an interaction between Minang people and Indians who mingle quickly, resulting in code mixing which is shown in the Minang people’s current communication style (Aditiawarman & Yuli, 2020). The observation in this research was carried out on the use of the Minangkabau language, the Agam Tanah Datar dialect in Nagari Gunuang, Padang Panjang City. Nagari Gunuang is known for historical wealth preserved continuously and unique culture. This can be seen from the use of various languages between villages in Nagari Gunuang. The dialect research in Nagari Gunuang was divided into four observation points consisting of four villages: Ekor Lubuk, Sigando, Ganting and Ngalau. At these observation points, various dialects were found related to lexical variations, especially the field of lexicon which underlies the form of communication in each group of speakers. The lexical differences occur because the lexicons represent a meaning from a different etimonss. Therefore, the difference in a lexicon identified through the fields of phonology and morphology can be determined (Nadra and Reniwati, 2009: 22). region from another in Minangkabau (Reniwati, Hijrianda Niko Larizky / Jurnal Arbitrer - Vol. 10 No. 2 (2023) 171 The identification of lexical variation in this study refers to the opinion put forward by Zulaeha (2010: 46) that if the lexeme used in realizing a meaning coming from more than one etimons, this will be due to differences in perspectives between speakers in influencing the lexical variation spoken. This research focuses on the lexical variations of the Agam Tanah Datar dialect in Nagari Gunuang. An example of vocabulary found in the Agam Tanah Datar dialect is the word brave having two ethimones and two symbols of lexical variation: [baraŋ] spoken in Ekor Lubuk and Ganting villages, and [baga?] spoken in Sigando and Ngalau villages. Previous research discussing lexical variations was carried out by Amri (2020) who explained the lexical variations of the Agam Tanah Datar Nagari Tuo Pariangan dialect in Tanah Datar District. The research conducted by Amri found that the lexical variation of the Agam Tanah Datar dialect found in Nagari Tuo Pariangan shows the realization of speech differences between observation points. This study is different from Amri’s as it provides a description of the lexical distribution at the observation points in the Nagari Gunuang area. Previous research also related to lexical variations in the Sasak language emphasizing the use of the dialectometric method and isogloss bundles. Another previous research concluded that geographical factors influence lexical differences (Zulkarnaen, Dhanawaty, & Putra, 2021). Still another previous study on dialectometry in the authentication of Weleri dialect in Kendal Regency concluded that through dialectometric calculation, Weleri cannot be verified to be dialect as it shows only 27% value, so that the existence of Weleri region has different speech] (Lestari & Munawarah, 2022). This study seeks to preserve and record the lexical variations of the Agam Tanah Datar dialect found in Nagari Gunuang, Padang Panjang City. Thus, this study aims to describe the forms of lexical variations existing in Nagari Gunuang to find out indications of the occurrence of lexical diversity. II. METHODS This dialectology study uses qualitative and quantitative research types to determine the lexical variations of the Agam Tanah Datar dialect found in Nagari Gunuang. This research is also descriptive in nature. Pribady (2018: 61) says that the quantitative method is an approach that produces descriptive data in the form of written or oral data on phenomena existing in society, while it is said to be descriptive because the data collected is in the form of words that are explained scientifically. In addition, quantitative research is used to calculate dialectometry constituting the formula in this study. The data of study were oral utterances in the form of vocabulary delivered directly by nine informants from Nagari Gunuang. The research data is also based on the Swadesh vocabulary list from Nothofer, with a total of 851 glosses in the form of vocabulary, phrases and sentences. To classify the data, it is necessary to number the observation points in order to map lexical variations in the vocabulary with information depending on the observation points through the map depicted (Nadra and Reniwati, 2009:74). In this study, researchers used a bottom-up numbering system. This is adjusted to the shape of the base map of Nagari Gunuang, namely: Ekor Lubuk Village (observation point 1), Sigando Village (observation point 2), Ganting Village (observation point 3), and Ngalau Village (observation point 4). The data analysis method used is the equivalent method obtained through conversation, with sorting technique to find out the lexical variations associated with the contrast-to-differentiation technique and the comparison-to-equal technique. The data analysis method used is the dialectometric method. This is intended to determine the percentage of speech differences between observation points. This study refers to the dialectometric calculation formula proposed by Seguy (in Zulaeha 2010:37) as follows: Information : S = the number of differences in observation points N = amount of comparative data d = number of dialects in percentage >70% : considered a language difference 51—70% : considered to be dialect differences 31—50% : considered to be subdialectal differences 21—30% : considered to be a speech difference < 20% : considered no difference Hijrianda Niko Larizky / Jurnal Arbitrer - Vol. 10 No. 2 (2023) 172 2) The Two-Etimonss Three-Symbols Group Based on the data found, 19 out of 851 glosses belong to the two etimonss two symbol group. This group of two etimonss and three symbols is a gloss with three phonological variations and two lexical variations. The following is the vocabulary of belongin to the two etimonss and three symbols group. This formula is a guideline based on Nadra and Reniwati (2009: 92) stating that “the results obtained are in the form of the percentage distance of linguistic elements between observation points”. It is in line with previous research finding that the dialectometric method pioneered by Seguy calculates the aggregate distance in dialect application in an area (Wieling, Nerbonne & Baayen, 2011). The dialectometric method aims to analyze corpus-based statistics and computations at the point of observation (Eddington, 2022). III. RESULT AND DISCUSSION Specific lexical variations in the Agam Tanah Datar dialect can be found in two two-symbol etimonsss, two three-symbol etimonsss, two four-symbol etimonsss and three three-symbol etimonsss. This study found lexical variations of 142 glosses for two etimonss with two symbols, 19 glosses for two etimonss with three symbols, 1 gloss for two etimonsss with four symbols and 10 glosses for three etimonss with three symbols. Lexical variations can be identified in the lexicon which represents a meaning from a different etimonss. Then, it can be determined that the differences in a lexicon are identified through the fields of phonology and morphology, and grouped data can be explained in Indonesian. Because the grouping at each observation point requires a dialectometric method, this study also found that the overall average percentage was below 25% so that it could be classified as a speech difference. Forms of Lexical Variation To classify lexical variations, they can be classified into two: two etimonss and three etimonss. Each etimonss can be divided based on symbols classified based on the data found in each OP (Observation Point). 1) The Two-Etimonss Two-Symbols Group Based on the data found, 142 out of 851 glosses belong to the group of two etimonss two symbols. The group of two etimonss and two symbols is known as a gloss with two phonological variations and two lexical variations. The following is the vocabulary belonging to the two etimonss and two symbols group. Table 1.Two-Etimons Two-Symbols Variation Table 2. Two-Etimonss Three-Symbols Variation 3) The Two-Etimonss Four-Symbols Group Based on the data found, 1 out of 851 glosses belongs to the group of two etimonss four symbols. This group of two etimonss and four symbols is a gloss with four phonological variations and two lexical variations. The following is the vocabulary belongs to the two-etimonss and four-symbols group. Table 3. Two-Etimons Four-Symbols Variation 4) The Three-Etimonss Three-Symbols Group Based on the data found, 10 out of 851 glosses belong to the three-etimonss and three-symbol group. This group of three etimonss three symbols Hijrianda Niko Larizky / Jurnal Arbitrer - Vol. 10 No. 2 (2023) 173 is a gloss with three phonological variations and three lexical variations. The following is the vocabulary belonging to the three etimonss and three symbols group. there are indications that these lexical variations are influenced by these variations, i.e. geographical factors and social factors. This is proven through the percentage of dialectometric calculations at each observation point. The group of two-etimonss two-symbols, as exemplified in the brave glosses in table 1, shows that there are differences in phonological and lexical variations: [baraŋ] is spoken in the Ekor Lubuk Village and Sigando Village, while [baga?] is spoken in Ganting Village and Ngalu village. In the group of two-etimonss three-symbols, it can be exemplified that the glosses are not good, ugly in the data above meaning that there are differences in phonological variations, namely, [inDa?elo?] spoken in Kampung Ekor Lubuk and Kampung Ganting, [burua?laku] spoken in Kampung Sigando, and [hurray?] spoken in Kampung Ngalau. In the two-etimonss group, the four symbols can be exemplified in the glosses you all in the data above showing differences in phonological variations, namely, [saDoño] spoken in the areas of Ekor Lubuk Village and Ganting Village, [kasaDoño] spoken in Sigando Village, [kamisa ?aDelahño] is spoken in Kampung Ngalau, and [kamisa?aDela?ah] is spoken in Kampung Ganting. In the group of three ethimones, three symbols can be exemplified by the gloss a cubit in the data above showing differences in phonological variations: [saheto] spoken in Ekor Lubuk Village, [sabahu] spoken in Sigando Village, and [satampo?] spoken in Kampung Ekor Ganting and Ngalau Village. Based on dialectometric calculations, each observation point has an average percentage below 25%. The calculation results of OP I and OP II finds a percentage of 22.3%. This explains that there are differences in speech. The results of calculating OP I and OP III show a small percentage of 8.6%. This indicates no difference. The results of calculating OP I and OP IV show a percentage of 24.6% explaining the difference in speech. The results of calculating OP II and OP III show a percentage of 24% indicating a difference in speech. The calculation results for OP II and OP IV show small percentage, 4.8%. Thus, they do not explain the difference. The results of calculating OP III and OP IV show the largest percentage of 26.5%. This finding indicates that there are differences in speech in that area. This Table 4. Three-Etimons Three-Symbols Variation Dialectometric Calculations To determine the status of differences at each observation point, a dialectometric calculation is required which is defined in the form of a percentage. This dialectometric determination is obtained through the formula proposed by Seguy. The followings are the results of the overall dialectometric calculations carried out at each observation point in the Nagari Gunuang area. Table 5. Dialectometric Calculations OP Percentage OP I - OP II 22,3 % OP I - OP III 8,6 % OP I - OP IV 24,6 % OP II - OP III 24 % OP II - OP IV 4,8 % OP III - OP IV 26,5 % OP : Observation Point Information >70% : considered a language difference 51—70% : considered to be dialect differences 31—50% : considered to be subdialectal differences 21—30% : considered to be a speech difference < 20% : considered no difference IV. DISCUSSION Based on the results of the lexical variation found in this study, it can be said that the form of lexical variation can describe the different forms of etimonss phonologically and lexically shown in the form of symbols. In addition, a total of 172 lexical variations can be found from 851 glosses, and Hijrianda Niko Larizky / Jurnal Arbitrer - Vol. 10 No. 2 (2023) 174 is because the phenomena with a high probability of occurrence of these variations are geographical factors and social factors, as evidenced by the background of the research location which provides supporting explanations that the mobility and the conditions of observation area influence the occurrence of variations. This result is different compared to previous research conducted by Amri (2020) finding that dialectometric calculations in Nagari Tuo Pariangan have no difference through the results of 219 lexical variations in a total of 991 basic vocabularies. This is different from the results of this study, due to geographical factors and also differences in the number of vocabulary that is the result of the analysis. V. CONCLUSION Based on the result and the discussion, it can be concluded that there are 172 lexical variations of 851 glosses in the form of lexical variation in the Agam Tanah Datar dialect. This form of variation can be classified into two-etimons two-symbols, two-etimons three-symbols, two-etimons four- symbols and three-etimons three-symbols groups. The grouping performed at each observation point utilizes dialectometric calculations. From dialectometric calculations in this study, it is also possible to find the overall percentage, that is, on average below 25%. Thus, it can be said that the differences occuring are considered as differences in speech. REFERENCES Aditiawarman, M., & Yuli, A. (2020). Social Dialect Uttered By India Community In Padang. Ekasakti Jurnal Penelitian dan Pengabdian, 1(1), 70-84. Ahmadi, Rulam. (2014). Metodologi Penelitian Kualitatif. Ar-Ruzz Media. Amri, Ulil, & Yusdi. (2020). Variasi Leksikal Bahasa Minangkabau di Nagari Tuo Pariangan. NUSANTARA : Jurnal Ilmu Pengetahuan Sosial. 7(1):52–78. Ayatrohaedi. (1983). Dialektologi: Sebuah Pengantar. Pusat Pembinaan dan Pengembangan Bahasa Departemen Pendidikan dan Kebudayaan. Budiono, S., Novita, R., & Syarfina, T. (2023). Mentawai Language Variations in the Mentawai Islands Regency, West Sumatra Province. Jurnal Arbitrer, 10(1), 8-18. Chambers, J.K. & Trudgill. (2004). Dialectology. Cambridge University Press. Dwi, Eva. (2016). Variation Dialect Bahasa Bawean di Wilayah Pulau Bawean Kabupaten Gresik: Kajian Dialecttologi. Thesis of Universitas Airlangga. Eddington, D. E. (2022). Grouping Spanish-Speaking Countries By Dialect: A Corpus Dialctometric Approach. Isogloss, 8(1), 1-30. Firdaus, D. S., Lubis, D. P., Susanto, D., & Soetarto, E. (2018). Portrait of The Minangkabau Culture According to Hofstede’s Six Cultural Dimensions. Sodality: Jurnal Sosiologi Pedesaan, 6(2), 122- 130. JURNAL SAPALA, 1–10. Hasanuddin, Azwar, W., Akmal, & Handoko. (2023). The Winding Road to Return to the Beauty of Indonesian Multiculturalism: A Discourse Analysis of ‘Back to Nagari’ in the Regional Autonomy Policy in West Sumatra. Jurnal Arbitrer, 10(1), 35-50. Lestari, M., & Munawarah, S. (2022). Pembuktian Eksistensi Dialek Weleri Di Kabupaten Kendal. SASDAYA: Gadjah Mada Journal Of Humanities, 5(2), 93-107. Mahsun. (1995). Dialektologi Diakronis. Gadjah Mada University Press. Medan, dkk. (1986). Geografi Dialek Bahasa Minangkabau: Suatu Deskripsi dan Pemetaan di Daerah Kabupaten Pasaman. Pusat Pembinaan dan Pengembangan Bahasa Departemen Pendidikan dan Kebudayaan. Hasbullah, Izur. (2019). Variation Dialecttal di Kabupaten Jember dan Banyuwangi Bagian Selatan. Hijrianda Niko Larizky / Jurnal Arbitrer - Vol. 10 No. 2 (2023) 175 Nadra & Reniwati. (2009). Dialektologi Teori dan Metode. Elmatera Publishing. Purwaningrum, Prapti. (2020). Variation Lexical di Kabupaten Kebumen (Sebuah Kajian Dialecttologi). WANASTRA, 12(2). Reniwati, Noviatri, Aslinda, & Midawati. (2016). Bahasa Minangkabau di Daerah Asal Dengan Bahasa Minangkabau di Daerah Rantau Malaysia: Kajian Dialektologis. Jurnal Arbitrer, 3(2), 173-180. Saddhono, K., & Hartanto, W. (2021). A dialect geography in Yogyakarta-Surakarta isolect in Wedi District: An examination of permutation and phonological dialectometry as an endeavor to preserve Javanese language in Indonesia. Heliyon, 7(7). Sariono, Agus. (2016). Pengantar Dialecttologi: Pedoman Penelitian dengan Metode Dialektometri. CAPS. Sohabudin, A., & Darmawan, W. (2023). Narasi Alternatif dalam Pembelajaran Sejarah untuk Pendidikan Multikultural di Indonesia. Indonesian Journal of History Education, 8(1), 62-78. Suryati, N., Mbete, A. M., Lauder, M., & Dhanawaty, N. (2012). Phonological And Lexical Varieties Of Lio Language In Flores, East Nusa Tenggara: A Study Of Geographical Dialect. e-Journal of Linguistics, 6(1), 1-27. Wieling M, Nerbonne J, Baayen RH (2011) Quantitative Social Dialectology: Explaining Linguistic Variation Geographically and Socially. PLoS ONE 6(9): e23613. Zabadi, F. (2021). Pemetaan Penguasaan Kosakata Budaya Dasar Penutur Jati Bahasa Kafoa sebagai Wahana Pemelajaran Bahasa Daerah. Imajeri: Jurnal Pendidikan Bahasa dan Sastra Indonesia, 04(1), 34-43. Zulaeha, Ida. (2010). Dialektologi: Dialek Geografi dan Dialek Sosial. Graha Ilmu. Zulkarnaen, Dhanawaty, N., & Putra, A. P. (2021). Variasi Leksikal Bahasa Sasak di Kecamatan Karangasem: Kajian Dialektologi. HUMANIS, 25(2), 201-213. BIOGRAPHY Hijrianda Niko Larizky was born in Boyolali, April 5, 2000. He is an active student of Indonesian Literature, Faculty of Cultural Studies, Universitas Sebelas Maret. Some of the achievements that have been achieved include: Pioneer of Tourism Village MBKM Ministry of Education and Culture (2021), Chairman of Forum Genre Jawa Tengah BKKBN Jawa Tengah (2022) Harapan 2 Mahasiswa Berprestasi Universitas Sebelas Maret (2021). With this research it is important to record the glosses of the Tanah Datar Agam dialect in Nagari Gunuang, Padang Panjang City. Dra. Chattri S. Widyastuti, M.Hum, born in Jepara, December 31, 1964. GraTwoted from Bachelor of Indonesian Literature, Faculty of Letters, Universitas Sebelas Maret, 1989, and graTwoted Master of Descriptive Linguistics, 2008 from Universitas Sebelas Maret. Teaching several subject areas including Introduction to General Linguistics, Indonesian Language Morphology, Comparative Historical Linguistics, History of Language Studies, and Indonesian Language. Some of his scientific writings include: Indonesian Language and Mental Revolution in the Perspective of Indonesian Spirit (2015) (Paper presented at PIBSI Univ Sanata Dharma Yogyakarta), Impoliteness in Language in Criminal Trials in the Ex-Karesidenan Surakarta Area (2015), Representation of Pancasila in the Perspective of Cognitive Metaphors (2018), Pitch Movement in Javanese Language Use: Lesson Learned from People across-Generations in Yogyakarta Municipality (Inscription Seminar 2018), The Intensity of Imperative Sentences in Javanese Language (BASA International Seminar 2018), Konseptualisasi Pancasila dalam Metafora Bahasa Indonesia: Sebuah Kajian Awal (Journal of Kandai, Vo. 15, No. 2, November 2019).