|
Methodology
Primitive Rooting
Words used for the identical pairs are highly selected from their primitive roots. Some are even not commonly used but still found among elders' conversation in interior places of the West Sumatra and some are from unique dialects spoken in several villages.
Primitive rooted words in Minangkabau language for instance 'arang' (oral) from the disctrict of Agam compared to nagari commonly used 'muncuang' (mouth) are different by lexicon from but synonymous with another dialect 'muluik' used for Indonesian 'mulut'. But modern Indonesian language also absorbs 'muncuang' with Javanese dialect to become 'moncong.' Almost 80% of Bahasa (Indonesia & Melayu) dictionary composition derived from Minangkabau.
Loan Words Exclusion
As a logical step of the first rule of this methodology on primitive rooting particulary that of in the Minangkabau Hebrew, there followed like that of in Minangkabau English with excluding loan words from foreign languages such as 'perai' from Dutch's frij or such as emosi (English), jendela, barando (Hispanic) or cincau (Chinese). Suspicious modern words are also excluded such as 'sunek,' 'sunaik' (circumcision) from Arabic 'sunnah.'
False Cognate Detect
Words classified into the false cognate are supposedly excluded from the dictionaries such as 'duo' (two) eventhough the two words are identical, primitive rooted and presumably not a false-cognate as much we find its identicals in other languages such as Sanskrit (dwi), Hispanic (duo) and European such as German 'zwei.'
Thus the Minangkabauan 'duo' and Hispanic 'duo' are identical as well as primitive and therefore not a false cognate. Some linguists persists that the two duos are false cognate. False cognate by definition is two words from different languages that appear to have similar form and meaning but derive from different roots. The best example that suits the criteria of the false cognate is the English 'adequate' with adikuat (modern Bahasa). However, false cognate quite rarely occurs among languages of the archipelago.
But in the two 'duos' case I believe they have similar roots considering the theory of human multiplication after the big flood of Noah. This is what the dictionaries entirely are about that whether or not they are false cognate, it does not change the cradle of civilization from which language has been preserved as a heritage, a transformation in which duwa, duwah, dawah that means 'asking with 2 hands' (prayer) turns dua (two) in Bahasa to the Hebrew 'yadav' (two hands) or Arabic do'a (prayer), Hispanic duo and English two as to Sanskrete dwi.
But you would not find the above mentioned examples in the Hebrew or English identical dictionaries for I am setting up for another upcoming work namely "The Language of History."
The Identical
The identical words with Hebrew and English are paired from Minangkabau not Indonesian language neither the Malay simply because the Bahasa has enormous dictionary limitations in their primitive derivation. In certain cases such as 'malaveh' (escorting) one may see how the Minangkabauan 'malapeh' suits the pair instead of Indonesian 'melepas' which form is corrupt by modern Malay dialect. Evenmore, the verbial prefix 'ma' is more original than 'me.'
Anoher example, the English 'coast' may only be identically paired with Minangkabauan 'kasiak' because Bahasa does not have the similar word, but instead only a synonym such as 'pasir' (sand). Since the dictionaries are strongly focused on the identical similarity in both words and meaning, Minangkabauan language becomes more appropriate and relevant. Whilst, synonym is mostly about similar meaning but different words.
Kasiak (coastal people or beach boys), if I may theorize, plays an important role in ancient history of civilizations ranging from Egyptian kush, Persian kushistan, Sumerian kishite, Greek kissoi, Hindu kush mountain, to the biblical cush and the puranic cusha (dwipa).
And the main reason why I use 'identical' term instead of 'cognate' is to impress readers that it is hard to deny their resemblance. Besides, identical is more easily understood by common readers while 'cognate' is mostly comprehended by linguists and language related scholars. It's a fast simple way to broaden audience and reach public grasp.
Ali Cestar
Sutan Rangkayo Labieh
|
