A Semiotic Analysis of Gus Mus’s Poems Kaum Beragama Negeri Ini and Selama Ini di Negerimu: A Roland Barthes Perspective

Authors

  • Fitri Diva Saskia MR. Binol Prodi Pendidikan Bahasa dan Sastra Indonesia, Universitas Negeri Gorontalo, Gorontalo, Indonesia
  • Herson Kadir Prodi Pendidikan Bahasa dan Sastra Indonesia, Universitas Negeri Gorontalo, Gorontalo, Indonesia
  • Zilfa Achmad Bagtayan Prodi Pendidikan Bahasa dan Sastra Indonesia, Universitas Negeri Gorontalo, Gorontalo, Indonesia

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.55909/jpbs.v5i5.1642

Keywords:

semiotic, poem, Roland Barthes

Abstract

This study aims to describe the denotative, connotative, and mythic meanings in the poems Kaum Beragama Negeri Ini and Selama Ini di Negerimu by Ahmad Mustofa Bisri, utilizing Roland Barthes' semiotic framework. The research data consist of words, phrases, and sentences from both poems that embody denotative, connotative, and mythic meanings. A qualitative descriptive method was employed, with data collection involving the reading, comprehension, and recording of poem segments containing semiotic signs. Data analysis was conducted by identifying signs, classifying the data, and subsequently analyzing meanings based on Roland Barthes' semiotic theory. The results indicate that both poems by Gus Mus contain denotative, connotative, and mythic meanings related to social criticism and humanity. The denotative meaning reflects the literal sense of the words used, while the connotative meaning reveals criticisms regarding religious fanaticism, poverty, social injustice, and the erosion of human values within society. Furthermore, the mythic meaning in both poems highlights social perspectives accepted as natural by the public—such as the notion that religious symbols outweigh human values, or the view of poverty as a commonplace aspect of social life. Through the use of simple symbols, Gus Mus successfully conveys profound moral messages and social critiques regarding the reality of life in Indonesian society.

References

Aminuddin, A. (2011). Semantik: Pengantar Studi tentang Makna dalam Bahasa. Bandung: Sinar Baru Algesindo.

Elmustian, E. & Razak, A. (2021). Pembelajaran Apresiasi Sastra. Pekanbaru: Yayasan Pendidikan Raja Zulkarnain.

Mawaddah, H. M., & Supena, A. (2024). Analisis Semiotika Teori Roland Barthes dalam Kumpulan Puisi Kopi, Kretek, Cinta Karya Agus R. Sarjono. Bahtera Indonesia: Jurnal Penelitian Bahasa dan Sastra Indonesia. Vol. 9, No. 2; 554-563

Maleong, L. J. (2017). Metode Penelitian Kualitatif. Edisi Revisi. Bandung: Rosda Karya.

Nasa, A., & Pratiwi, S. E. C. (2023). Aspek. Epistemologis Puisi Negeriku Karya K.H. A Mustofa Bisri: Kajian Ekologi Sastra. Literature Research. Vol. 1, No. 2; 166–176

Pradopo, R. D. (2021). Pengkajian Puisi. Cet-IV. Yogyakarta: Gadjah Mada University Press.

Qusayri, M., Somadi, S., & Sukirno, S. (2024). Kajian Semiotika Roland Barthes dalam Puisi: Sajak Matahari dan Sajak Burung-Burung Kondor Karya W.S. Rendra. Indonesia: Jurnal Pembelajaran Bahasa dan Sastra Indonesia, 5(2), 391-399

Ratna, N. K. (2021). Teori, Metode, dan Teknik Penelitian Sastra. Yogyakarta: Pustaka Pelajar.

Razak, A. (2017). Metode Riset: Menggapai Mixed Methods Bidang Pembelajaran Bahasa Indonesia. Pekanbaru: Ababil Press.

Sumarsono, S. (2008). Sosiolinguistik. Yogyakarta: Sabda.

Sobur, A. (2020). Semiotika Komunikasi. Bandung: Remaja Rosdakarya.

Sugiyono, S. (2021). Metode Penelitian (Kuantitatif, Kualitatif, dan R&D). Edisi II, Bandung: Alfabeta.

Tarigan, H. G.. (2009). Pengkajian Pragmatik Sastra Indonesia. Bandung: Angkasa.

Wibowo, I. S. W. (2013). Semiotika Komunikasi: Aplikasi Praktis Bagi Penelitian dan Skripsi Komunikasi. Jakarta: Mitra Wacana Media.

Waluyo, H. J. (2019). Teori dan Apresiasi Puisi. Edisi 2, Cetakan III. Jakarta: Erlangga.

Downloads

Published

2026-09-01

How to Cite

Binol, F. D. S. M., Kadir, H., & Bagtayan, Z. A. (2026). A Semiotic Analysis of Gus Mus’s Poems Kaum Beragama Negeri Ini and Selama Ini di Negerimu: A Roland Barthes Perspective. Jurnal Pembelajaran Bahasa Dan Sastra, 5(5), 4155–4166. https://doi.org/10.55909/jpbs.v5i5.1642