Winda Titi Putri Ningtias, Emy Sudarwati
  Erudio, Vol 8, No 1 (2021),  pp. 1-15  


The objective of this study was to analyze the abnormality of language use by Indonesian truck drivers in using phoneme and unique way of interpreting. This study uses a qualitative analysis of text content. The data of this study are graffiti texts displayed on Indonesian truck. They were collected from some websites and social media. The relation of sound- meaning was analyzed by using Homophonic Translation, Functional Grammar, Saussurean and Barthesian Semiotic concept. The results of this study show Soramimi between English and Indonesian Native languages such as Javanese, Betawi, or Sundanese from 27 truck graffiti texts. There are three out of 27 data were grammatically accepted in both languages. There are 3 vowels and 4 consonants pronunciation tendency. There are reduction and addition in some words to fit the Indonesian language. The reason this data exist is that the truck community want to amuse people on the road by showing unique language use through moving exhibition.



graffiti; truck graffiti; unique phoneme; interpretation; linguistic variation

Full Text:



Aida, Ridha. (2005). Liberalisme dan Komunitarianisme: Konsep tentang Individu dan Komunitas. Journal of DEMOKRASI Vol. 4 No.2

Ambarwati, Rosita. (2009). FENOMENA MUNCULNYA INTERLANGUAGE (INGLISH) DI INDONESIA. Retrieved November 17, 2017, from inglish-di-indonesia.html.

Anderson, Matthew. (2016). “The foreign word that seem like English – but aren’t”. Retrieved March 10th, 2017, from

Andrew. (2012). "What is the difference between Micro linguistics and macro linguistics, with definitions and examples, please?” Retrieved November 22nd, 2017, from

Ary, Donald, Lucy Cheser Jacobs, Asghar Razavieh. (1979). Introduction to Research in Education: Second Edition. United States: Rinehart and Winston Inc.

Basthomi, Yazid. (2007). An Initial Intimation of a yet Banal Discourse: Truck Graffiti. k@ta, 9(1), 34-48.

Coleman, John. (1998). Cognitive reality and the phonological lexicon: A review. Journal of Neurolinguistics 11, 295-320

Campbell, Allan. (2002). 6 Axioms in 3 transcriptions. Journal of the Simplified Spelling Society J30.

Chaer, Abdul. (2009). Fonologi BAHASA INDONESIA. Jakarta: Rineka Cipta

Chandler, Daniel. (2007). SEMIOTIC THE BASICS: second edition. Taylor & Francis e-Library.

Devney, Joe. (2013). Sociolinguistics: What is the difference between “graffiti text” and “register”? Retrieved November 20th, 2017, from

Drury, Donald. A. (1969). Homograph and Pseudo-Homograph. Article of Word Ways Vol. 2, Iss. 3

Flege, James Emil. (1981). Cross-language phonetic interference: Arabic to English. Language and Speech, 24(2), 125-146

Flemming, Sarah, Ghil’ad Zuckermann. (2013). One name, two parents: The marketing potential of Phono- Semantic Matching in China. Article PROCEEDINGS OF ICONN 2 Oliviu Felecan (ed.).

Gerrot, Linda, Peter Wiegnell. (2017). Making Sense of Functional Grammar. Antipodean Educational Enterprises.

Gross, Johan, Sally Boyd, Therese Leinonen, James A. Walker. (2016). A Tale of Two Cities (and One Vowel): Sociolinguistic Variation in Swedish. Language Variation and Change, 28. (Cambridge University Press No. 225-247).

Ibrahim, FahmiRachman. (2014). An Analysis of Graffiti text in “Milanisti Ngalam Raya” Community. Malang: Universitas Brawijaya.

Isotalo, Peter. (2003). Interactive IPA Chart. UCLA: Phonetic Lab. Retrieved March 21st, 2017, from

Kana, Anandina. (2013). Word Formation Processes on Graffiti text Used by Barista in Coffee Corner Malang. Malang: Universitas Brawijaya.

Labib, Muhsin. (2008). ‘KATA-KATA “BIJAK” DI PANTAT TRUK’. Retrieved March 10th, 2017, from

By Law Service City of Williams Lake. (2006). Graffiti. Retrieved May 25th, 2017, from

Lidahibu Official Team. (2010). “Lupus= Lucu (tapi) Pusing”. Retrieved March 10th, 2017, from

Oakes, Michael P., Souvik Banerjee. (2004). Regular Sound Changes for Cross-Language Information Retrieval. Lecture Notes in Computer Science Journal, vol. 3237

Pallawa, Andi. (2013). A Comparative Analysis between English and Indonesia Phonological System. International Journal of English Language Education, Vol. 1, No. 3.

Pratama, Nicholas Willa Adhi. (2013). FENOMENA DIBALIK LUKISAN BAK TRUK. Jurnal Ruparupa Program Studi Desain Komunikasi Visual Universitas Bunda Mulia. Vol. 2 No. 2.

Radford, Andrew. (2009). An Introduction to English Sentence Structure. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Schuh, Russel. (2010, January). Linguistic 19: Amusing and Abusing with Language. Syllabus

Scobbie, Jim. (2006). What is "ghoti"?. Retrieved November 3rd, 2017, from

Sutarsih. (2017). Phonetic Signifier in The Speech of Javanese Tionghoa’s Society in Gang Baru Semarang. Journal of Aksara Vol. 29, No.1

Taylor, Myra F., Robin Cordin, Joseph Njiru. (2010). A twenty-first century graffiti classification system: A typological tool for prioritizing graffiti removal. Article of Crime Prevention and Community Safety Vol. 12, 3, 137–155.

Veverka, John A. (2011). What is Interpretation. Retrieved June 25, 2018, from

Wardhaugh, Ronald. (2006). An Introduction to Sociolinguistics; Fifth Edition. United Kingdom: Blackwell Publishing.

Yule, George. (2010). The Study of Language Fourth Edition. United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press.

Zuckermann, Ghil’ad. (2003). Language Contact and Globalisation: The Camouflaged Influence of English on The World’s Languages – with special attention to Israeli (sic) and Mandarin. Article in Cambridge Review of International Affairs Vol.16, No. 2.



  • There are currently no refbacks.

Copyright (c) 2021 Erudio Journal of Educational Innovation

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.