Copyright©2019 P-ISSN: 1978-8118 E-ISSN: 2460-710X 99 Lingua Cultura, 13(2), May 2019, 99-105 DOI: 10.21512/lc.v13i1.5326 LANGUAGE CODE CHOICE OF MALE ABDI DALEM OF KARATON NGAYOGYAKARTA HADININGRAT Hanova Rani Eka Retnaningtyas1; Mangatur Rudolf Nababan2; Dwi Purnanto3 1,2,3Post Graduate of Linguistic Department, Universitas Sebelas Maret Jl. Ir. Sutami No. 36-A, Kentingan, Surakarta 57126, Indonesia 1hanovarani57@gmail.com; 2Amantaradja@yahoo.com; 3dwi.purnanto@yahoo.com Received: 25th January 2019/Revised: 26th March 2019/Accepted: 16th April 2019 How to Cite: Retnaningtyas, H. R. E., Nababan, M. R., & Purnanto, D. (2019). Language code choice of male abdi dalem of Karaton Ngayogyakarta Hadiningrat. Lingua Cultura, 13(2), 99-105. https://doi.org/10.21512/lc.v13i1.5326 ABSTRACT This research aimed to show the language code choices of male abdi dalem of Karaton Ngayogyakarta Hadiningrat because each community had its own language code choice in their daily lives, including every individual. This research was a descriptive qualitative study conducted to determine the language code choice of abdi dalem Karaton Ngayogyakarta Hadiningrat. Data were taken using questionnaires. The form of questions used was closed questions to find out the language codes choice. In addition, the open questions were used to find out the reason for selecting particular language codes. The data were in the form of an informant’s answer about the choice of a language code and the reason for the selection. This research conducted in Karaton Ngayogyakarta Hadiningrat based from UU Republik Indonesia Nomor 13 Tahun 2012 concerning the DIY Specialities. It finds that the use of Javanese Kromo dominates the language code choice used by male abdi dalem. The dominance of the use of Javanese Kromo language is considered to be the most polite language code rather than other languages presented by the researchers in the questionnaires. The next order after Javanese Kromo is Indonesian, Javanese Ngoko, Bagongan, and lastly is a foreign language. Keywords: language code choice, abdi dalem, Karaton Ngayogyakarta Hadiningrat, Bagongan Language INTRODUCTION The language phenomenon is always an interesting thing to be studied. This area is very dynamic. The development can go either in a positive direction or a negative direction depending on which point of views. Each community has its own language characteristics, as well as every individual. Every individual has the freedom to use language code. The choice of the term code is more appropriate to be used in this research because, in addition to the use of language, the researchers also need to find out the use of language variations, especially Javanese language. Language variations consist of regionals, social classes or social dialects or sociolects, various varieties and styles, also the uses or registers variations. This also applies in Karaton Ngayogyakarta Hadiningrat environment. It is one of the kingdoms in Indonesia that still exists nowadays and even recognized by the NKRI government with the issuance of privileged laws (Republic of Indonesia Law Number 13 of 2012 concerning DIY Specialties). Besides being inhabited by a royal family, keraton is also a place for thousands of abdi dalem. Who is a person who chooses to devote himself to the Karaton Ngayogyakarta Hadiningrat. Abdi dalem is also called the cultural agent because he/she is expected to be able to maintain and preserve the culture so that it can be a role model for the society in general. Based on these, the researchers are interested in investigating language used in these communities. Abdi dalem also has their position and each function which are divided into several sections. The sequence position is starting from the lowest position to the top in the structure in Kraton, those are Jajar, Bekel Anem, Bekel Sepuh, Lurah, Kliwon, Wedana, Riya Bupati Anem, Bupati Anem, Bupati Kliwon, and Bupati Nayaka. Each level of the position is taken for five years for abdi dalem who work as Caos (they present to wait for assignments or orders), while for those who serve in the Tepas (office) usually will get the promotion for 3-4 years. Abdi dalem based on its duties is divided into two namely Abdi dalem Punakawan and Abdi dalem Keparak. The first is Abdi dalem Punakawan. They come from ordinary people and are not employees of the Regional Government of Yogyakarta. Abdi Dalem Punokawan consists of Abdi Dalem Punokawan Sowan (working in the office, every day at work except holidays) and Abdi dalem 100 LINGUA CULTURA, Vol. 13 No. 2, May 2019, 99-105 Punokawan Caos namely Abdi dalem Punokawan who go to work only every three days, seven days, 10 days, and 12 days once every month. The second is Abdi dalem Keparak, a woman who generally fulfills her obligations at Kraton Kilen (Keputren). In general, they work with preparing tools such as sesaji when there are kraton events. As mentioned, Abdi dalem in the Karaton Ngayogyakarta Hadiningrat includes male and female. The number of male abdi dalem is higher that will certainly help researchers during the data collection process. In addition, the issue is also related to a little limited access to meet the females abdi dalem who are placed inside the kraton. The females abdi dalem need special permits and special procedures to be accessible to the general public. Another thing that strengthened the researchers’ decision to choose males abdi dalem because they are easy to meet and make communication with the general public. In addition, they are placed in the front row, so the male abdi dalem have the possibility to use a more variety code choice rather than the females ones. There are many relevance research with this research; one of them is Sari and Wedasuwari (2014) that have discussed the language choice of high school students in Denpasar, Bali. While the research related to the use of language in the Kraton’s environment is carried out among others by Asih (2015) and Yogatama (2017), both are using qualitative research. Asih (2015) has used the listening method with notes and record techniques followed by proficient methods with interview techniques, while Yogatama’s (2017) research has used record recording techniques. Then it is identified and analyzed based on Leech’s courtesy principles, Brown and Levinson’s politeness strategies, Pranowo’s politeness indicators, Duncan’s non-verbal language theory, and complemented by non-verbal language forms Ruben and Stewart (Yogatama, 2017). The difference from all three, researchers chose to use a questionnaire to collect research-related data. Another thing that distinguishes these two researches from this research is the main focus of the research. Asih’s (2015) research focuses on the form of chit-chat (linguistic and non-linguistic markers and language-speaking intentions in that location), while highlighted’s Yogatama (2017) is about verbal and nonverbal politeness in abdi dalem Karaton Ngayogyakarta Hadiningrat. The main purpose is to describe the use of verbal and nonverbal language as a marker of language politeness. Yogatama’s (2017) research is also a qualitative descriptive study that the main location of the research is in Tepas Dwarapura. Other researches related and similar in terms of research focus are conducted by Khotimah (2014), Putri (2017), Dewi and Setiadi (2018), and Mahsusi, Djatmika, and Marmanto (2017). Their focus relates to language code choices. Khotimah’s (2014) research is a qualitative research with ethnographic models of communication. The research aims to describe the form of language choice and to describe factors that determine language choice of the Sukaparna village community. The data in the research are in the form of direct speeches and interviews. Putri’s (2017) research is a qualitative research using Dell Hymes theory. The purpose of the research is to describe the form of mixed code variation in speech and its code variations, code- switching, and code mixing in public speech and social factors that determine code switching and code mixing. The research of Sari and Wedasuwari (2014); Kiswadi (2016); Kholidah and Haryadi (2017); Darwati and Santoso (2017); and Dewi and Setiadi (2018) are related to the domain of education. The research conducted by Sari and Wedasuwari (2014) aims to describe the form of language choices used by students of grade XI IPA 2 SMA (SLUA) 1 Saraswati Denpasar and the factors that cause it. Kiswadi’s (2016) research uses 10 records of lecturers’ oral languages at educational seminars. The purpose of this research is to analyze the form, variety, and then implement the results of the analysis of code usage and the type of spoken sentence by the lecturer in the official situation as teaching material in junior high school. The other research belongs to Kholidah and Haryadi (2017). They have described the form of code choice used by Aceh’s students of friendship domain in Semarang. In another research, Darwati and Santoso (2017) has aimed to know the form of code choice and identify some factors that influence the advice and counsel discourse of student for the teacher in SMK Ma’arif 4 at Kebumen. Then the research conducted by Dewi & Setiadi (2018) has aimed to determine the language attitude and factors that influence the language choice of English Department students at Bina Nusantara University. The research of Sari and Wedasuwari (2014), Kholidah and Haryadi (2017), Kiswadi (2016), Darwati and Santoso (2017) use descriptive qualitative methods, while Dewi and Setiadi’s (2018) research is a quantitative study. In Sari and Wedasuwari (2014)’s research, the method of data collecting is observation, interviews, and recording. Kiswadi (2016) and Kholidah and Haryadi’s (2017) research are similarly used listening technique and noted, but Kholidah and Haryadi (2017) have added Simak Bebas Libat Cakap‘s technique (SBLC) and recording technique. In Darwati and Santoso’s (2017) research, the data are collected by using Simak’s technique or listening technique and interview. This technique is completed by Sadap’s technique or recording technique as the main technique during the interview process. The data collected by Sari and Wedasuwari (2014) is analyzed using three stages of the flow model (data reduction, data presentation, and data verification), while Kiswandi’s (2016) research used Agih’s method to analyze the data. In Darwati and Santoso’s (2017) research, the form of code choice is analyzed by Baca Markah’s technique or reading marked technique, the factor that influence code choice uses the contextual technique. Last is the research conducted by Sari, Putra, and Ramendra (2016), Agasi, Putra, and Ramendra (2016), Suktiningsih (2017), Mahsusi, Djatmika, and Marmanto (2017), Chuchu and Noorashid (2015), and Choudhury (2018). Sari, Putra, and Ramendra (2016) have aimed to find out the kind of codes (code mixing, code-switching, code selection, and calling rules) that are used by Bugis people when communicating and to find out how the Bugis society on Serangan Island, Bali uses codes to communicate with other Bugis communities and the community around Serangan Island. The instruments used in this research are record instruments and checklists instrument. The subjects are Bugis people at Serangan Island, Bali. Next is the research conducted by Agasi, Putra, and Ramendra (2016) which aims to analyze the use and form of code used by Balinese families in Nusasari village. In this research, the data are collected in three domains of language use. These domains include family, environment, and friendship. Observations, interviews, and documentation are carried out by researchers to obtain the data needed with recording technique, field notes, and cameras. The 101Language Code Choice.... (Hanova Rani Eka Retnaningtyas, et al.) researchers conduct interviews with two families to get data about the code used in the village. The data collected is transcripts and analyzed. While Suktiningsih (2017) has aimed to identify the factors of language choice among Sasak adolescents in speeches. This research is a qualitative research. Data are collected using observation, recording, and interview methods. Mahsusi, Djatmika, and Marmanto’s (2017) research has aimed to identify code choice and to know the influence code choice in the interaction between Riau students living in Yogyakarta. While Chuchu and Noorashid’s (2015) research has aimed to identify the choice of ethnic code in intercultural communication, and their need and motivation to practice the codes in the ethnic minority multilingual environment in Brunei Darussalam. The research is conducted on 60 indigenous Brunei ethnic groups in Mukim Ukong, Tutong District. This research uses purposive sampling to select informants. Both of these researches use recording techniques and interviews to collect data, but Chuchu and Noorashid (2015) have added a questionnaire to supplement the data on the research. Last but not least is research conducted by Choudhury (2018). It tries to formulate code choice as linguistics style and show that the speaker is sensitive to code choice. Based on these researches, it can be seen that there are still a few researchers who try to examine the language phenomenon in Karaton Ngayogyakarta Hadiningrat. The choice of location is also related to the researchers’ interest in indigenous Indonesian culture, especially in the field of language. Therefore, the researchers have decided to raise the issue of language code choice as the object of research. Researchers assume that this can be a good start for further linguistic research in Karaton Ngayogyakarta Hadiningrat. METHODS This research belongs to a descriptive qualitative research. The method used is the equivalent method. The equivalent means comparable or comparing or comparative, which is to compare the relevant discourses compiler aspects. The basic technique uses in determining the determinants elements technique or commonly mentioned as PUP. The researchers use a questionnaire to collect data. The questionnaires questions are in the form of closed questions to capture the code choice of language and semi- open questions to obtain the data regarding the reason for the code choice of language. Thus it is expected that it will show suitable data in accordance with the research objectives. The questionnaire consists of 25 semi-open questions. Questions number 1-5 are related to language code choices in the family domain, while questions 6-25 are related to language code choices in the workplace. These questions are displayed in the form of tables to make it easier for informants to give answers. Informants only need to mark the column according to the choice of language code used based on the situation raised in the question. The choice of code raised by researchers is bahasa Jawa Ngoko (BJN), bahasa Bagongan (BB), bahasa Jawa Kromo (BJK), bahasa Indonesia (BI), and bahasa Asing (BA). Then the informant is asked to write down the reasons for choosing the language code in the column provided. The data in this research are divided into two parts; they are primary data and secondary data. Primary data are obtained during the research, while secondary data are obtained before the researchers are starting to collect the primary data. The secondary data in this research are in the form of information related with abdi dalem obtained from Karaton Ngayogyakarta Hadiningrat database (literature and personal data of employees who become courtiers). Meanwhile, the primary data are the responses from the questionnaires filled by abdi dalem. As the interviewees who are chosen with a purposive random sampling system. This research was conducted in July-August 2018 at Karaton Ngayogyakarta Hadiningrat. It is located in the Special Region of Yogyakarta (DIY). DIY is located at 8º 30 ‘- 7º 20’ South Latitude, and 109º 40 ‘- 111º 0’ East Longitude which borders Central Java (South: Indian Ocean, Northeast: Klaten Regency, Southeast: Wonogiri Regency, West: Purworejo Regency, Northwest: Magelang Regency). DIY has a total area of 3185,80 km2. DIY consists of 4 districts and 1 city, namely Sleman Regency, Kulonprogo Regency, Bantul Regency, Gunung Kidul Regency, and Yogyakarta City. This location is chosen because of the abdi dalem are considered as the cultural agent in the environment, thus the researchers assume that the location is still the right location to obtain the data in accordance with the research objectives. This is closely related to the researchers’ desire to find out how the obedience towards the abdi dalem’s language norms who live closely with Javanese cultural functionary. RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS There are 25 informants who are abdi dalem in Kraton Ngayogyakarta Hadiningrat. They are asked to answer the 25 semi-open questions in the questionnaire. Table 1 shows the responses from one of the informants that is referring to Informant 24 or abbreviated into (I-24). Question number 1 is what the language used by (I- 24) during communicating with parents or parent’s in-law. Based on Table 1, the informant prefers to use Javanese Kromo language with the reason to pay respect because the Javanese language is full of politeness. Question number 2 is what language code is used when speaking with a husband or wife, (I-24) prefers to choose a mixture of Kromo language to respect each other. Question 3 is regarding the language used when communicating with the boys, (I-24) chooses to used Javanese Kromo language. According to the informants, this is deemed necessary to set an example and to preserve the culture. Not much different from the previous questions, question number 4 is asks about what language is used when communicating with the daughters. The response given is more or less the same as the answer to the number 4 question with the reason to set an example and preserving the culture. The question number 5 is about what language is used in communicating with others relatives (brothers, sisters, uncle, aunt, etc.), (I-24) chooses to use Javanese Kromo with the reason of preserving the manners. Question number 6 is about the used language when talking to male colleagues who are older and have a higher position, (I-24) chooses to use Javanese Kromo to pay respect to the older. Question number 7 is about the language used when talking to older male colleagues with an equal position. (I- 24) chooses to use Javanese Kromo to pay respect to the elder. Question number 8 is regarding the language used when talking to male colleagues who are older and have a lower position. (I-24) chooses to use Javanese Kromo to maintain a sense of courtesy. Question number 9 is about the language used when talking with the older female 102 LINGUA CULTURA, Vol. 13 No. 2, May 2019, 99-105 coworker with a lower position. (I-24) chooses to use the Javanese Kromo to pay respect and maintain the sense of courtesy. Question number 10 is about the language used when talking to older female coworkers, but has an equal position. (I-24) chooses to use the Javanese Kromo language for harmony and manners. Question number 11 is regarding the language used when talking to older female coworkers, but has a lower position. (I-24) chooses to use the Javanese Kromo language to maintain manners. Question number 12 is about the language used when talking to male colleagues who are of the same age, but have a higher position. (I-24) chooses to use the Javanese Kromo language to cultivate manners together. Question number 13 is regarding the language used when talking to male Table 1 Code Selection Used by Informant 24 I Q BJN BB BJK BI BA 24 1 √ The informant prefers to use Javanese Kromo language with the reason to pay respect because the Javanese language is full of politeness. 2 √ The informant prefers to choose a mixture of Kromo language to respect each other. 3 √ The informant prefers to use Javanese Kromo language with the reason to set an example and to preserve the culture. 4 √ The informant prefers to use Javanese Kromo language with the to set an example and preserving the cul- ture. 5 √ The informant prefers to use Javanese Kromo language with the reason preserving the manners. 6 √ The informant chooses to use Javanese Kromo to pay respect to the older. 7 √ The informant chooses to use Javanese Kromo to pay respect to the older. 8 √ The informant chooses to use Javanese Kromo to maintain sense of courtesy. 9 √ The informant chooses to use the Javanse Kromo to pay respect and maintain the sense of a courtesy. 10 √ The informant chooses to use the Javanese Kromo language for harmony and manners. 11 √ The informant chooses to use the Javanese Kromo language to maintain manners. 12 √ The informant chooses to use the Javanese Kromo language to cultivate manners together. 13 √ The informant chooses to use the Javanese language Kromo, both of them are cultivating the manners. 14 √ The informant chooses to use the Javanese Kromo language to maintain harmony as a work colleague. 15 √ The informant chooses to use the Javanese Kromo language to maintain and respect each other's manners. 16 √ The informant chooses to use a combination of Javanese Kromo languages to respect each other's culture of manners. 17 √ The informant chooses to use the Javanese Kromo languages, respect and maintain cultural courtesy. 18 √ The informant chooses to use the Javanese Kromo language to respect and be polite to the young. 103Language Code Choice.... (Hanova Rani Eka Retnaningtyas, et al.) Table 1 Code Selection Used by Informant 24 (Continued) I Q BJN BB BJK BI BA 24 19 √ The informant chooses to use the Javanese Kromo language to cultivate culture. 20 √ The informant chooses to use the Javanese language Kromo to keep respecting coworkers and to save dan- ger. 21 √ The informant chooses to use the Javanese Kromo language because it has become a culture, to maintain manners. 22 √ The informant chooses to use the Javanese Kromo language to preserve the culture of manners (better). 23 √ The informant chooses to use Javanese Kromo to maintain harmony and maintain culture. 24 √ The informant chooses to use the Javanese Kromo language to show that Javanese could also be understood by other regions. 25 √ The informant chooses to use the Kromo language because to show the Javanese language already belonged to the people. Total 0 0 25 0 0 Acronyms: I : Informant Q : Question BJK : Bahasa Jawa Kromo BJN : Bahasa Jawa Ngoko BB : Bahasa Bagongan BI : Bahasa Indonesia BA : Bahasa Asing (includes all languages other than the Javanese and Indonesian language variants) colleagues who are of the same age and have equal positions. (I-24) uses the Javanese language Kromo, both of them are cultivating the manners. Question number 14 is about the language used when talking to male colleagues who are of the same age, but who have a lower position. (I-24) chooses to use the Javanese Kromo language to maintain harmony as a work colleague. Question number 15 is about the language used when talking to female colleagues who are of the same age, but who have a higher position. (I-24) chooses to use the Javanese Kromo language to maintain and respect each other’s manners. Question number 16 is regarding the language used when talking to female colleagues who are of the same age and have an equal position. (I-24) chooses to use a combination of Javanese Kromo languages to respect each other’s culture of manners. Question number 17 is regarding the language used when talking to female colleagues of the same age, but have a lower position. (I-24) chooses to use a combination of Javanese Kromo languages, respect and maintain cultural courtesy. Question number 18 is about the language used when talking to younger male colleagues and having a higher position. (I-24) chooses to use the Javanese Kromo language to respect and be polite to the young. Question number 19 is regarding the language used when talking to younger male colleagues, but who have an equal position. (I- 24) chooses to use the Javanese Kromo language to cultivate culture. Question number 20 is about the language used when talking to younger male colleagues who have a lower position. (I-24) chooses to use the Javanese language Kromo to keep respecting coworkers and to save danger. Question number 21 is regarding the language used when speaking with female colleagues who are younger and have a higher position. (I-24) chose to use the Javanese Kromo language because it had become a culture, to maintain manners. Question number 22 is about the language used when talking to younger female coworkers and having equal positions. (I-24) chooses to use the Javanese Kromo language to preserve the culture of manners (better). Question number 23 is about the language used when talking to younger and lower-ranking female coworkers. (I- 24) chooses to use Javanese Kromo to maintain harmony and maintain culture. Question number 24 is regarding the language used when talking to domestic tourists. (I- 24) chooses to use the Javanese Kromo language to show that Javanese could also be understood by other regions. Question number 25 is regarding the language used when talking to foreign tourists. (I-24) chooses to use the Kromo language because to show the Javanese language already belonged to the people. Based on the previous elaboration of (I-24) answer, it can be known that (I-24) prefers to use Javanese Kromo language because it is considered more polite and respectful. This is with no exception for male and female coworkers and is not age bound, although in the certain situations (I- 24) chooses to use Javanese Ngoko as the language used to communicate with the younger coworkers. 104 LINGUA CULTURA, Vol. 13 No. 2, May 2019, 99-105 Thus, Table 2 is the result data tabulation from the 25 informants who filled out the questionnaires. Table 2 Code Selection Used by 25 Male Abdi dalem Informants BJN BB BJK BI BA 1 6 1 22 24 1 2 12 0 4 9 1 3 5 18 7 0 0 4 12 0 21 19 1 5 2 0 6 17 0 6 14 0 9 1 1 7 14 0 9 2 0 8 9 0 23 8 0 9 16 0 17 1 2 10 6 11 6 1 1 11 14 0 21 20 6 12 2 5 9 8 1 13 16 3 10 10 1 14 10 0 12 3 1 15 2 2 8 13 0 16 15 0 9 19 1 17 2 0 22 0 1 18 14 0 10 20 1 19 16 0 1 8 0 20 3 18 20 2 1 21 4 18 23 4 2 22 4 14 22 1 1 23 6 2 24 5 0 24 0 0 25 0 0 25 0 0 14 10 1 Total 204 92 354 205 24 From Table 2, it can be seen that the code order that commonly used by the informants is the Javanese Kromo, followed by Indonesian language, then thinly continued with the use of Javanese Ngoko, next is Bagongan language, and lastly is the foreign language. The foreign language is all languages other than Javanese and Indonesian included other regional languages. Based on Table 2, it can be seen that the usage of Javanese Kromo dominates the code choice of languages chosen to be used by the male Abdi dalem. The dominance of the Javanese Kromo usage is because of the Javanese Kromo language considered to be the politest code choice of language compared to the other languages codes presented by the researchers in the questionnaires. Furthermore, the Javanese Ngoko is used as a familiarity marker. The politeness referred in this research is as a proof of speech level variations application in Javanese languages that Javanese Kromo language is used to pay respect to the older speech partner and or have higher positions. Foreign languages are the least used code choice of language because the informants claim that they lack or do not master languages other than Javanese and Indonesian languages. The code choice used by the informants is appropriate if it is based on the commonly Javanese speech leveling rules. In addition, it will not be appropriate if it is based on the rules in the Karaton Ngayogyakarta Hadiningrat. Abdi dalem and all Karaton Ngayogyakarta Hadiningrat’s residents are expected to use Bagongan language in all situations. Even, Bagongan language must be used as a written language for correspondences or documents in Karaton Ngayogyakarta Hadiningrat. The findings show that the Bagongan language is still lack in usage and it raises questions about things that might cause the phenomenon. This phenomenon may be due to Bagongan and Javanese Kromo not much different. Basically, the difference between them is only in a few vocabularies. The Bagongan language is combining between the Javanese Kromo with 11 vocabulary markers of the Bagongan language. In addition, it is accompanied by the replacement of the suffix -ipun to the suffix –e or –ne. Eleven of this vocabulary are between. First, henggeh [heŋgeh] generally means hinggih or enggih means iya in Indonesian, yes in English. Second, mboya [mboya] generally means mboten or ora means tidak in Indonesian, no in English. Third, manira [manirͻ] or menira [mǝnirͻ] generally means kula or aku means aku in Indonesian, me in English. Fourth, pakenira [pakǝnirͻ] or pekenira [pǝkǝnirͻ] generally means sampeyan or kowe means kamu in Indonesian, you in English. Fifth, penapi [pǝnapi] or punapi [punapi] generally means punapa or menapa means kenapa in Indonesian, why in English. Sixth, puniki [puniki] generally means punika or menika or iki means ini in Indonesian, this in English. Seventh, puniku [puniku] generally means punika or menika or iku means itu in Indonesian, that in English. Eighth, wenten [wǝntǝn] generally means wonten or ana means ada in Indonesian, there is in English. Ninth, nedha [nǝdhͻ] generally means suwawi or sumangga or mangga means silahkan in Indonesian, please in English. Tenth, besaos [bǝsaͻs] generally means kemawon or wae means saja in Indonesian, only in English. Last, seyos [seͻs] generally means sanes or seje means bukan or beda in Indonesian, not in English. It can be seen in Table 3. Table 3 Examples of Sentences in BJK and BB No. Lan- guage Code Example of sentences 1. BJK Mboten dados menapa. BB Mboya dados punapi. English No problem. 2. BJK Buku menika kagung- anipun sinten? BB Buku puniki kagung- ane sinten? English Whose book is this? 3. BJK Sepatunipun sae. BB Sepatune sae. English Nice shoes. The example in Table 3 shows that the difference between BJK and BB is very thin. In the example of the first sentence, the word mboten in BJK is changed to the mboya 105Language Code Choice.... (Hanova Rani Eka Retnaningtyas, et al.) in BB. Then the word menapa in BJK turns into a punapi at BB. Both are vocabulary that only exists in the Bagongan language. In the second sentence, there is a change in the word menika into puniki and the word kagunganipun becomes kagungane. The change in the word menika into puniki in the second sentence is occurred by changing the variant of the BJK vocabulary into BB. Whereas the word kagunganipun there is a substitution of the suffix -ipun the suffix -ne as a BB vocabulary marker. The same thing happens in the third example, sepatunipun is changed to sepatune. The marker of change in the third example is in the substitution of the suffix -ipun the suffix –ne. Based on these three examples, it can be seen that the difference between BJK and BB is not too much. Therefore, it is not strange if there are still Abdi dalem who do not use BB, especially those who are new. CONCLUSIONS This research is related to the language code choice used by abdi dalem’s men in KNH. Male AD was chosen as an informant because there were more male abdi dalem than female AD. This can help researchers in obtaining data from informants. This is also related to the limited access to get data from females abdi dalem. But female abdi dalem can be used as an informant in the subsequent language research. This research concludes that not all of the abdi dalem use Bagongan language when interacting in Karaton Ngayogyakarta Hadiningrat. The abdi dalem prefers to use Javanese Kromo because it is considered more polite than the other code choices. As the familiarity marker, the code choice used is Javanese Ngoko language. Furthermore, the Indonesian language becomes the second choice to show the politeness because the informants think it is better to use Indonesian rather than using the Javanese language that is not appropriate. Abdi dalem especially those who are still new have difficulty in adjusting with the rules. The external factors such as the residential environments and social environments are also suspected as the factors causing the abdi dalem for not mastering the Bagongan language. However, all these allegations still have to be verified by doing further observations. Thus, it can be alternative advance research for the researchers themselves or other researchers. This research is important because it helps the readers to get to know about the other variations of the Javanese language which is Bagongan language that is applied in Karaton Ngayogyakarta Hadiningrat. Consequently, it can improve the circulated information’s in the community regarding the paradigm about the life in the palace environment, and also in terms of language. REFERENCES Agasi, I. G. A., Putra, I. N. A. J., & Ramendra, D. P. (2016). An analysis of codes used by the Balinese families of Nusa Sari village, Melaya, Jembrana. Pendidikan Bahasa Inggris Undiksha, 3(3). Asih, M. B. (2015). Basa-basi berbahasa Abdi dalem Kasultanan Yogyakarta. Yogyakarta: PBSI Universitas Sanata Dharma Yogyakarta. Choudhury, M. (2018). Accommodation of conversational code-choice. Proceedings of The Third Workshop on Computational Approaches to Code-Switching. Melbourne, Australia. pp. 82–91. Chuchu, F., & Noorashid, N. (2015). Code choice within intercultural communication among ethnic minority in Brunei. Indonesian Journal of Applied Linguistics, 5(1), 86–94. https://doi.org/10.17509/ijal.v5i1.835. Darwati, D., & Santoso, B. W. (2017). Pilihan kode pada wacana konsultasi siswa kepada guru di SMK Ma’arif 4 Kebumen. Seloka: Jurnal Pendidikan Bahasa Dan Sastra Indonesia, 6(1), 93–99. https:// doi.org/10.15294/seloka.v6i1.14770. Dewi, U. P., & Setiadi, C. J. (2018). Language attitude and language choice in bilingual academic learning environment. Lingua Cultura, 12(4), 369–373. https://doi.org/10.21512/lc.v12i4.4288. Kholidah, U., & Haryadi, H. (2017). Wujud pilihan kode tutur mahasiswa Aceh pada ranah pergaulan di Semarang. Seloka: Jurnal Pendidikan Bahasa Dan Sastra Indonesia, 6(2), 208–217. https://doi. org/10.15294/seloka.v6i2.17288. Khotimah, D. K. (2014). Pemilihan kode bahasa pada masyarakat tutur di kelurahan Sukapura, kecamatan Kiaracondong, kota Bandung: Kajian Sosiolinguistik. Bahtera Sastra Linguistik, 1, 386-397. Kiswadi. (2016). Kode, bahasa, dan jenis kalimat bahasa lisan dosen pada situasi resmi: Sebuah kajian sintaksis serta implementasi sebagai bahan ajar di SMPN 2 Kartasura Publikasi. Surakarta: Universitas Muhammadiyah. Mahsusi, J., Djatmika., Marmanto, S. (2017). Pemilihan kode pada mahasiswa Riau di Yogyakarta: Kajian sosiolinguistik. Lingua, 14(2), 267–284. Putri, N. A. (2017). Pilihan kode dalam masyarakat dwibahasa: Kajian sosiolinguistik pada SMP-SMA Semesta Bilingual Boarding School, Semarang. Riksa Bahasa: Jurnal Bahasa, Sastra, dan Pembelajarannya, 3(1), 78–82. Sari, E. P., Putra, I. N. A. J., Ramendra, D. P. (2016). An analysis of code used by Bugis diaspora in Serangan island, Denpasar. Pendidikan Bahasa Inggris Undiksha, 3(3). Sari, N. W. E., & Wedasuwari, I. A. M. (2014). Pilihan bahasa siswa kelas XI IPA2 SMA (SLUA) 1 Saraswati Denpasar. Bakti Saraswati, 3(2), 40–47. Suktiningsih, W. (2017). Language choice among teenager ethnic Sasak of Mataram. Retorika, 3(2), 211–219. https://doi.org/10.22225/jr.3.2.334.211. Yogatama, T. T. (2017). Kesantunan berbahasa verbal dan non verbal Abdi dalem Karaton Ngayogyakarta Hadiningrat. Yogyakarta: Universitas Sanata Dharma.