An Analysis of Symbols Used in The Dowry of The Traditional Marriage in The East Rote Community
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.20961/qpg8md68Keywords:
Symbols, Meaning, DowryAbstract
This study entitled: “An Analysis of Symbols Used in the Dowry in The Traditional Marriage of the East Rote Community”.It addresses two research question: (1). What are the symbols that are used as dowry in the traditional marriages in the East Rote community? (2). What are the meanings of the symbols that are used as dowry in the traditional marriage in the East Rote community?. This study aims to identify, describe and analyze the types of symbols use and to explain the meanings of these symbols in the context of traditional marriage. The research employed a qualitative descriptive method. The study was conducted in Hundihopo Village, East Rote District, Rote Ndao Regency. The data source of this research were three informants. Data were collected through observation, interview, and recording techniques. The data were analyzed using identification, and description analysis techniques. The result of the study showed that symbols used in the dowry of the traditional marriage ceremonies in the East Rote Community have various meanings. The research identified ten (10) symbols used in the dowry in Hundihopo Village, East Rote Community, namely: Oli (Areca nut box), Raido (Betel), Pua (Areca nut), Ao (Lime), Rereli (Ring), Doi (Money),Niru/Dulang (Tray), De’dede (Lamp),Pou-Lafa/Pakaian Adat (Traditional Clothing), Silaka (Headband).
References
Angell, C. A. (2009). Language development and disorders: A case study approach. Jones & Bartlett Publishers.
Anggraeni, S. A., Michael, B. B., Kalunggu, N. R. J., & Yuwono, G. D. (2003). Perempuan Sumba dan belis. Bappeda Kabupaten Sumba Timur.
Arikunto, S. (2000). Prosedur penelitian: Suatu pendekatan praktik. Jakarta: Rineka Cipta.
Artha, D. J., & Sinulingga, S. (2021). Semiotic analysis of Kerja Adat Erdemu Bayu in Karonese. Randwick International of Social Science Journal.
Berger, A. A. (1989). Sign and symbols: Their design and meaning (A. Bluhm, Trans.).
Bustan, F. (2011). Language and culture. Unpublished module. Kupang: Nusa Cendana University.
Chandler, D. (2002). Semiotics: The basics. London: Routledge.
Chandler, D. (2007). Semiotics: The basics (2nd ed.). London: Routledge.
Charon, J. M. (1979). Symbolic interactionism: An introduction, an interpretation, an integration. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
De Saussure, F. (1915). Course in general linguistics. Lausanne: La Gazette de Lausanne.
Eco, U. (1979). A theory of semiotics. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.
Geertz, C. (1973). The interpretation of cultures. New York: Basic Books.
Hamejani, Y., Bayzidi, Q., & Sahabi, J. (2018). The semiotics of Pir-e Shaliar ritual ceremony in cultural landscape of Hawraman. Bagh-e Nazar.
Kabunggul, N. (2020). Tindak tutur dalam upacara adat pembelisan pada masyarakat Kodi Bangedo, Sumba NTT [Undergraduate thesis]. Universitas Muhammadiyah Mataram.
Koentjaraningrat. (2008). Manusia dan kebudayaan di Indonesia. Jakarta: Djambatan.
Littlejohn, S. W., & Foss, K. A. (2009). Teori komunikasi. Jakarta: Salemba Humanika.
Ningrum, C. U. (2016). Belis dalam perkawinan: Studi tentang pandangan masyarakat Lamaholot di Larantuka Kabupaten Flores Timur [Undergraduate thesis]. UIN Malang.
Peirce, C. S. (1982). Logic as semiotics: The theory of signs. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.
Purwanti, N., Mardliyah, U., & Yapen, Y. (2022). The tradition of paying dowry: A case of Biak Wardo tribe in Ayau Islands, Raja Ampat.
Sebeok, T. A. (2001). Signs: An introduction to semiotics. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Costantin Toring (Author)
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
