The Keris in Early Javanese Literature

[baganing_balyan]

In Malay languages, a root word remains the same even if you add a prefix, an infix or a sufix. "Iris" should be "kiniris" not "kinris," which has an incomplete root word. It would have been good if there is a word "kinris". That would mean that its root word is kris. Unfortunately, the later is an Anglicized word.

If iris is related to keris, I assume that there was a linguistic evolution that happened-- eris became iris. But it needs to be studies if in Javanese language, e can be i. In other Malay languages, it is not the case. In the Philippines, "ibon" and "ebon" are two different things. The former is bird and the latter is egg.

Malay languages are very sensitive with their vowel change. You change the vowel, the meaning changes. It is not also common to omit a vowel because that would be confusing. Imagine if you use kinris, and you know that "aris" (edge) and iris (cut), can you really say which is which?

If the word eris existed befored and meant the same as iris, then it is related to keris. But I doubt if eris is existed. The vowel "e' is a commonly used vowel in malay. If "e" usualy becomes "i", we would have kiris not keris.

A relationship between two words is not rare in Malay languages, but the root word is not altered when two meanings are connected. "Urus" (thin) is related to "kurus" (nurse), "ilig" (interest), "kilig" (shiver), and "alat" (basket), "kalat" mess.

Keris, for instance, if added with an infix -in-, it should have been kineris not kinris. In malay languages, vowels are important. In the philippines for instance kamot (scratch) becomes "kinamot" not "kinmot." "kurus" could be "kinurus" not "kinrus"-- that kind of spelling malay words is just to modern and too lingua Franca.

[baganing_balyan]

Mr. Maisey, I know you are an expert of Javanese language and culture, but what really made me laugh-- inside though-- is your stubborn insistence that "kinris" appeared in early javanese text.

I refrain from questioning peoples knowledge of logic, but since you really want me to resort to it, this is my logical explanation that will hopefully open your mind and close the issue.

How could "kinris" appear in early javanese text when the javanese people that time period used a sanskrit-like script? If you ask me it's the fault of the translator not yours.

Maybe the original javanese word means cut or "gorok"-- Filipino gulok (bolo) comes from that word. Instead of using "gorok", the tranlator used keris. That's already problematic right there. Why would a verb be tranlated into a noun? I think the translator thought of gorok as a blade like gulok. The appropriate translation would have been "ginorok" not "kinris." By the way "gorok" is still widely used in relation to slaughtering animals. "kinris" is never used according to my indonesian friend.

If you read the javanese prose you posted, it is definitely about hunting, spearing, and cutting animals. I think you are lost in translation.

[A. G. Maisey]

Ms. Baganing, let me make this as clear as I possibly can:-

I am not a linguist.

Yes, Indonesian is my second language. Yes, I use Indonesian and Javanese daily. Yes, I can read romanised Old Javanese.

But I am not a linguist.

I rely on the work of Pigeaud and Zoetmulder for my understanding of Old Javanese.

Zoetmulder produced the Old Javanese dictionary that is regarded as the definitive lexicon of this language, and he is regarded as perhaps the most respected of authorities on this language.

Pigeaud also produced a Javanese dictionary, and this was used by the respected Javanese academic Purwadarminto as the base for his Baoesastra Djawa. However, what Pigeaud is really renowned for is his work in Javanese literature, and his voluminous work on the Nagarakertagama.

The translation I provided of Canto 54 in the Nag. was not my translation, it was Pigeaud's. It is great pity that Theodore Pigeaud passed away in 1988 at the age of 89, were it not so you could assist him to a better understanding of the Old Javanese language.

Petrus Zoetmulder passed away in 1995, so you will equally be unable to correct his misunderstandings, which is a great pity, as his work on the Old Javanese language is used as texts in Indonesian universities, and must be responsible for spreading misinformation far and wide throughout the academic community.

However, all is not lost. Dr. Stuart Robson,who taught Javanese in Holland, and was a professor--well, associate professor---at Sydney University collaborated with Prof. Zoetmulder in the Indonesian edition of his dictionary. Dr. Robson is now retired, but I am certain he would welcome tuition from you to help him achieve a better understanding of the languages he spent most of his life researching and teaching.

To repeat:- the translations and word meanings are not my work, I have only passed on the work of Zoetmulder and Pigeaud.

It is not I who became lost in any translations, but Theodore Pigeaud and Petrus Zoetmulder.

Similarly, I am not stubbornly insisting that the word "kinris" appears in Old Javanese texts. This stubborn insistence is all Petrus Zoetmulder's. It seems he managed to locate kinris and anris a number of times in Old Javanese works.

Oh, by the way, may I suggest that you reread my posts? After rereading and understanding what I have written, you may wish to delete your post #6.

Ms. Baganing, I feel that you really should make your theories and discoveries in respect of Old Javanese, Modern Javanese, and the Malay languages in general , available to the academic world. For too long have we all laboured under this burden of ignorance.

You are clearly wasting your time here. Here we are but poor, benighted students of weaponry, with a little bit of ethnographic and anthropological study thrown in---not too much, mind, just sufficient to allow us to come to terms with our subject.

Your erudition is wasted upon us. I urge you to make the results of your valuable research available to those who research and teach in the field of Javanese and Old Javanese literature. I am certain they will be most grateful to learn that for so many years have they been misled by those in whom they placed trust.Perhaps you could begin by placing your work before Dr. Stuart Robson.

Ms. Baganing, there is no point in you continuing to display your great wealth of knowledge here. As I have said, we are simply not equipped to assess the value of your work. You have made your points, you have demonstrated more than adequately the depth and quality of your knowledge, now, if I may most humbly suggest, go thee forth and place your ideas before those who may have a greater appreciation of them.

[Rick]

Baganing , you are in my sandbox now .
Goodbye .

[David]

Ahhh ....yeah. My sandbox as well and i second Rick's thinking here. Goodbye. Please don't hit yourself with the door on your way out.

[sukuh]

...

[Rick]

Here's why Sukuh :

http://fmatalk.com/showthread.php?t=4395