Klasifikasi kata kerja tak ergatif dan kata kerja tak akusatif dalam Bahasa Melayu: Agentiviti dan penamat
Abstract
Makalah ini bertujuan membincangkan sifat semantik kata kerja tak ergatif dan kata kerja tak akusatif bahasa Melayu. Berdasarkan Hipotesis Tak Akusatif, kata kerja tak transitif dibahagikan kepada kata kerja tak akusatif dan kata kerja tak ergatif. Kedua-dua subkelas kata kerja tak transitif ini kelihatan sama pada tahap permukaan tetapi mempunyai representasi sintaksis yang berbeza. Dengan menggunakan analisis semantik yang berdasarkan klasifikasi kata kerja Aktionsart dalam teori Role and Reference Grammar (RRG), makalah ini akan memberi perhatian kepada konsep aspektual agentiviti dan penamat yang mewujudkan perbezaan antara kedua-dua kata kerja tersebut. Klasifikasi kata kerja Aktionsart yang membahagikan kata kerja kepada kata kerja keadaan, aktiviti, penyempurnaan dan pencapaian membuktikan bahawa ciri agentiviti hanya terdapat dalam kata kerja aktiviti dan ciri penamat terdapat pada kata kerja keadaan, penyempurnaan dan pencapaian. Dari perspektif Aktionsart, apabila kata kerja tak transitif ialah proses (atau aktiviti) maka kata kerja ini dipetakan sebagai tak ergatif manakala apabila kata kerja ini bertitik penamat, maka ia direalisasikan sebagai tak akusatif. Secara tidak langsung, makalah ini membuktikan penamat dan agentiviti mendasari perbezaan dalam subklasifikasi tak transitif secara merentas linguistik.
References
Ahmed, T. (2010). The unaccusativity/unergativity distinction in Urdu. Journal of South Asian Linguistics, 3(1),1-22.
Allman, J. L. (2015). Empirical examination of two diagnostics of Korean unaccusativity [Unpublished doctoral dissertation. University of Texas].
Meral, B. S., & Meral, H. M. (2018). On single argument verbs in Turkish, bilig-Türk Dünyası Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 86, 115-136.
Burzio, L. (1986). Italian syntax. Reidel Publishing.
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-009-4522-7
Dowty, D. R. (1979). Word meaning and montague grammar: The semantics of verbs and times in generative semantics and montague PTQ. Reidel Publishing.
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-009-9473-7
Fukuda, S. (2017). Split intransitivity in Japanese is syntactic: Evidence for the unaccusative hypothesis from sentence acceptability and truth value judgment experiments. Glossa: A Journal of General Linguistics, 2(1), 1-41. Haegeman, L., (1991). Introduction to government and binding theory. Blackwell Publishers.
https://doi.org/10.5334/gjgl.268
Kishimoto, H. (1996). Split intransitivity in Japanese and the unaccusative hypothesis, Language, 72, 248-286.
https://doi.org/10.2307/416651
Korpus Dewan Bahasa dan Pustaka (DBP). (2022, Februari 20). http://sbmb.dbp.gov.my/korpusdbp/Researchers/Search2.aspx
Levin, B., & Rappaport, M. H. (1995). Unaccusativity: At the syntax-lexical semantics interface. The M.I.T Press.
Legendre, G., & Sorace, A. (2003). Auxiliaries and intransitivity in French and in Romance. In D. Godard (Ed.), Les langues romanes: Problèmes de la phrase simple (pp. 185-234). CNRS Edition.
Narasimhan, B., Di Tomaso, V., & Verspoor, C. (1996). Unaccusative or unergative? Verbs of manner of motion. https://www.academia.edu/26423574/Unaccusative_or_Unergative_Verbs_of_Manner_of_Motion
Noriko, U. (2009). On unergative and unaccusative verbs in English. Departmental Bulletin Paper. http://hdl.handle.net/10519/896
Park, K.S. (2006). L2 'Acquisition of English unaccusatives verbs by native speakers of Korea' (Publication No: 14355000) [Master's thesis, Southern Illinois University at Carbondale] ProQuest Dissertations Publishing
Perlmutter, D. M. (1978). Impersonal passives and the unaccusative hypothesis. BLS, 4, 157-189.
https://doi.org/10.3765/bls.v4i0.2198
Perlmutter, D. M., & Paul, M. P. (1984) The 1-Advancement exclusiveness law. In D. M. Perlmutter & C. G. Rosen, (Eds.), Studies in Relational Grammar 2 (pp. 81-125). University of Chicago Press.
Soh, H., & Nomoto, H. (2011). The verbal prefix meN- and the unergative/unaccusative distinction in Malay. Journal of East Asian Linguistics, 20, 77-106.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10831-010-9069-5
Surtani, N., Jha, K., & Paul, S. (2011, November). Issues with the unergative/unaccusative classification of the intransitive verbs. International Conference on Asian Language Processing. https://colips.org/conferences/ialp2011/callforpapers.htm
https://doi.org/10.1109/IALP.2011.54
Yusof, M., Razak, R. A. & Ahmed, Z (2008). Pengelasan kata kerja Bahasa Melayu: Pendekatan semantik berdasarkan role and reference grammar (RRG). Jurnal Bahasa, 8(2), 242-262.
Yusof, M. (2015). Perkaitan semantik - sintaksis kata kerja dengan preposisi bahasa Melayu. Dewan Bahasa dan Pustaka.
Van Valin, R. (1986). The unaccusative hypothesis vs. lexical semantics: syntactic vs. semantics approaches to verb classification. Proceedings of NELS, 17(2), 641-661. https://scholarworks.umass.edu/nels/vol17/iss2/18.
Van Valin, R. (1990). Semantic parameters of split intransitivity. Language, 66, 221-260.
https://doi.org/10.2307/414886
Van Valin, R., & LaPolla, R. (1997). Syntax: Structure, meaning and function. Cambridge University Press.
https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139166799
Van Valin, R. (2005). Exploring the syntax-semantics interface. Cambridge University Press.
https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511610578.001
Vamarasi, M. K. (1999). Grammatical relations in Bahasa Indonesia. Pacific Linguistics Research School of Pacific and Asian Studies.
Vendler, Z. (1967). Linguistics in philosophy. Cornell University Press.
https://doi.org/10.7591/9781501743726
Voorst, J. (1988). Event structure. John Benjamins.
https://doi.org/10.1075/cilt.59
Zaenen, A. 1993. Unaccusatives in Dutch and the syntax-semantics interface. In J. Pustejovsky, (Ed.), Semantics and the lexicon (pp. 129-161). Kluwer Academic Publishers.
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-011-1972-6_9
Zaenen, A. (1998). Unaccusativity in Dutch: Integrating syntax and lexical semantics. Technical report 123, Center for the Study of Languages and Information (CSLI), California.
Zeyrek, D., & Acartürk, C. (2014). The distinction between unaccusative and unergative verbs in Turkish: An offline and an eye tracking study of split intransitivity. Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society. Cali
Copyright (c) 2022 UNIMAS Publisher
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Copyright Transfer Statement for Journal
1) In signing this statement, the author(s) grant UNIMAS Publisher an exclusive license to publish their original research papers. The author(s) also grant UNIMAS Publisher permission to reproduce, recreate, translate, extract or summarize, and to distribute and display in any forms, formats, and media. The author(s) can reuse their papers in their future printed work without first requiring permission from UNIMAS Publisher, provided that the author(s) acknowledge and reference publication in the Journal.
2) For open access articles, the author(s) agree that their articles published under UNIMAS Publisher are distributed under the terms of the CC-BY-NC-SA (Creative Commons Attribution-Non Commercial-Share Alike 4.0 International License) which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, for non-commercial purposes, provided the original work of the author(s) is properly cited.
3) For subscription articles, the author(s) agree that UNIMAS Publisher holds copyright, or an exclusive license to publish. Readers or users may view, download, print, and copy the content, for academic purposes, subject to the following conditions of use: (a) any reuse of materials is subject to permission from UNIMAS Publisher; (b) archived materials may only be used for academic research; (c) archived materials may not be used for commercial purposes, which include but not limited to monetary compensation by means of sale, resale, license, transfer of copyright, loan, etc.; and (d) archived materials may not be re-published in any part, either in print or online.
4) The author(s) is/are responsible to ensure his or her or their submitted work is original and does not infringe any existing copyright, trademark, patent, statutory right, or propriety right of others. Corresponding author(s) has (have) obtained permission from all co-authors prior to submission to the journal. Upon submission of the manuscript, the author(s) agree that no similar work has been or will be submitted or published elsewhere in any language. If submitted manuscript includes materials from others, the authors have obtained the permission from the copyright owners.
5) In signing this statement, the author(s) declare(s) that the researches in which they have conducted are in compliance with the current laws of the respective country and UNIMAS Journal Publication Ethics Policy. Any experimentation or research involving human or the use of animal samples must obtain approval from Human or Animal Ethics Committee in their respective institutions. The author(s) agree and understand that UNIMAS Publisher is not responsible for any compensational claims or failure caused by the author(s) in fulfilling the above-mentioned requirements. The author(s) must accept the responsibility for releasing their materials upon request by Chief Editor or UNIMAS Publisher.
6) The author(s) should have participated sufficiently in the work and ensured the appropriateness of the content of the article. The author(s) should also agree that he or she has no commercial attachments (e.g. patent or license arrangement, equity interest, consultancies, etc.) that might pose any conflict of interest with the submitted manuscript. The author(s) also agree to make any relevant materials and data available upon request by the editor or UNIMAS Publisher.
