One of the conversations in the treasures of language must be discoursing on standardized, popular, and slang languages. In every culture, the dichotomy of public language is sure to happen. Why? The root cause is that the language itself when spoken or written is just a tool, a communication tool, a tool to convey ideas, thoughts or interest.

Language, though, regarding the identity of nation, ethnicity, culture, and may be even becomes part of ideological and religion representation (in this context) remains as a tool. As a tool, the language will naturally adjust to the prevailing structure. The structure is in addition to the mouth of speakers (or people who think in the context of writing), also a habit that has been prevailing in nature.

That is why a term will face a variety of pronunciation. Different pronunciation is then often enter the area of written language when the authors do not understand, do not realize, have no interest or else, do not care for requiring they selves writing text language according to the basic rule instead of the haphazard language as in the oral pronunciation.

Language originated from it, developed a dichotomy between standardized language (according to the dictionary rules) and popular language that is used in daily oral communication which is not tied to standardized rules. Why? Because a variety of dialects spoken by people do not really serious; can be fickle, and usually is not considered too serious.

Such lack of seriousness happen every day, every hour, even every seconds. And it all can be seen from everyday reality. People will not refer to their pronunciation according to rules of good language, even more the correct language.

In practical level, popular and slang language is no longer considered as problem when connected with daily written language, because written language is in line with oral language. Such conscious thought I personally got from daily cases facing the dynamics of flood of new words or terms (especially foreign language) that continue to be absorbed by bahasa Indonesia. This thought is also reinforced with what was said by Remy Sylado that "language will always develop following the dynamics of aesthetics" and Faiz Manshur's statement in his book, Genius Menulis, that "language will continue to evolve". However, such case will continue to made an issue at least among linguists, journalists or academics who pay more attention to language.

In sociological and cultural sphere like this, popular or even slang language should not being stepchild-ed, but viewed in proportion as natural phenomenon, so its preference is not seen as a polemic but as a dynamic. It must be admitted also that language is not standing in its own territory. It is not a statue with permanent location. It is just like humans who occupy space and time. That is why language should also be seen as something dynamic, changing, evolving and even legitimate to develop through engineering strategies.

It is true that slang language is often berated, even devastating "earlier existing" standard. But if we notice all that slang as principal cause of destruction then we really are thinking as extremists or fundamentalists who defend conservatively old values/norms which has questionable validity. Therefore, the presence of slang language should not always be suspected as a destroyer. Things that are acceptable in the community, or new things that appear but comfortable to use as a mean of communication could be part of language, even may also be standardized as language wealth.

However, it does not mean we can fully taking lying "disorder slang" down, or every single of new word or term formation must be consistent with existing standard formation. Determination of slang language should have to consider the rules and always have to consider the effect of that determination. Critical attitude by looking at various aspects, especially from cultural spectacles should really be used as the basic paradigm.[]