[A. G. Maisey]

I see, we're playing Javanese word games, are we?

Pak Ganja, it is well known to anybody who has studied Javanese culture and society, or to anybody who has spent a reasonable length of time in Jawa, that the Javanese people are very fond of playing with words, and that no reliance at all can be placed upon anything they say, or any committments they undertake.

Certainly, as you mention, "yes" often means no; "no" can sometimes mean yes; agreement to do something can never be taken as agreement ; no reliance can ever be placed upon arrangements that have been put in place and confirmed; appointments may or may not be kept, and if they are kept, there could be a variation of a couple of hours either way as compared to the agreed time; answers to questions will frequently reflect what the informant believes the questioner wants to hear, rather than accuracy; questions in any case, should never be asked directly, but hinted at and approached indirectly; when an answer that is an approximate representation of fact is given, it will often be given in a way that permits several choices. And of course, the circumstances under which these most charming cultural mores are exercised almost invariably reflects heirarchical position and economic advantage.

The propensity of Javanese people to regard the words they use as their own personal property is well known to linguists.

The words used by a Javanese person mean no more, and no less, than he intends them to mean.

Of course, the problem with this is that although the user of the words may clearly understand their intent, the listener sometimes may not. This can facilitate ease of conversation between family and close friends, but for somebody outside the circle it creates an impossible situation.

The other well known feature of Javanese culture that you have drawn attention to is the habit of mixing historically supportable fact with myth.

This is not just something that is a part of folk culture, but it can sometimes be found in text books.There is probably not a great deal wrong with this, provided it is used only within the culture. After all, history itself is only a set of stories that everybody agrees upon. Probably no real harm in adding in a few myths and legends.

However, when that history moves to the world stage, we find that a somewhat different set of rules apply. Those miserable Europeans---and those of European descent--- want supportable fact, reason, logic, evidence. Damned inconvenient, and not at all comfortable!

Pak Ganja, I understand your culture, and I respect it. It is unique, and once we scratch past the superficial, has much to offer.
However, in this discussion group we are catering to a wide cross section of the international community. We are using the English Language, and the use of that language requires that we also use thought patterns that are able to be expressed using the medium of that language.
Regretably, Javanese word games do not easily translate in the English Language.

Take a parrallel example:- would it be reasonable if I posted my comments in the combination of Cockney rhyming slang and Australian patois that I use with many of my friends? Almost nobody who visits this forum would understand a word I said.

You are an educated man, and your English is excellent.

Could I request in the most humble and respectful fashion that you cease playing Javanese word games, and express yourself in a manner that may be comprehended by most of our readers?

What do I mean by this?

You tell us that "Pajajaran" can be interpreted as a "parrallel thing".
I understand the way you have arrived at this, and it is typical of Javanese word play.
"Jajaran" means "in rows".
Rows usually run in parrallel, so we can twist this to mean "parrallel".
"Jajaran" is a part of "Pajajaran", so we can repress the "pa" and we have "jajaran".
Two kingdoms , side by side, can be interpreted as "parrallel kingdoms".
Parrallel kingdoms are clearly "Pajajaran".

Standing in Kediri, and having a conversation in Indonesian or Javanese about the division of the kingdoms, this makes perfect sense, enlivens the conversation, and demonstrates the flexibility of your mind. Actually this play is possibly more understandable in Indonesian, than in Javanese, as "jajar" comes into Indonesian as "sejajar", which is in fact "parrallel"; in Javanese some mental gymnastics are required to generate the English Language idea of "parrallel".

Trying to express the same idea in English on an internet forum does not have quite the same effect.

There was only one Kingdom of Pajajaran, even though that kingdom did go through several moves, and it was located in Sunda, not East Jawa.

However, I have seen a tangguh of "Pajajaran III" given to a keris blade, and "Pajajaran III" was supposedly in East Jawa. This is a part of our tangguh system of belief, and not historically supportable.

Pak Ganja, it is most definitely not my place to try to advise you on how to present yourself, but were I in your position, I would give sober consideration to adopting a form of presentation that is slightly more comprehensible in international terms.