Object in Malay Language Transitive Sentence: A Minimalist Program Analysis
Abstract
The grammatical function of objects often causes confusion among Malay language users even though explanations have been given in the reference grammar book, Tatabahasa Dewan. Based on the issue of object confusion, this study aims to provide a theoretical description of the grammatical function of objects in Malay sentences by examining the syntactic behaviour of four verbs, namely 'mencari', 'mencarikan', 'menderma', and 'mendermakan'. The theoretical explanation is based on the Minimalist Program. From a methodological aspect, this study uses data from the DBP corpus and the Dibuat Individu dengan Yakin (DIY) corpus from the newspaper Berita Harian Online. In addition, a questionnaire survey was also conducted to assess the acceptability of sentences based on the intuition of native Malay speakers. The results of the study show that native Malay speakers accept that the sentences with 'mencari' and 'menderma' have two arguments that function as the subject and the direct object. For the verb 'mencarikan', it was found that native Malay speakers tend to construct two objects structure represented by a noun phrase. However, the findings of this study show that for the verb 'mendermakan', the subjects of this study tend to choose the dative construction, which is FN + verb + FN + FP. This study is of the opinion that the indirect object in the Malay language is given a choice of whether it consists of the construction FN + FN or FN + FP. This dative construction is in line with the native speaker's intuition and theoretical justification.
Keywords: Transitive verb, dative, indirect object, Minimalist Program, Malay language, preposition phrase
Full text: PDF
References
2. Asmah Haji Omar. (2009). Nahu Melayu mutakhir. Dewan Bahasa dan Pustaka.
3. Berita Harian Online. (15 Januari 2019 - 20 Disember 2019). https://www. bharian.com.my/.
4. Cook, V. J., & Newson, M. (2007). Chomsky's universal grammar: An introduction. Blackwell.
5. Chomsky, N. (1986). Knowledge of language: It's nature, origin, and use. Praeger.
6. Chomsky, N. (1995). The minimalist program. MIT Press.
7. Chung, S. (1978). Case marking and grammatical relations in Polynesian. University of Texas Press.
8. Cummins, S., Roberge, Y., & Troberg, M. (2010). L'objet indirect en français: Sens, representations et evolution. Vues sur le français du Canada. Quebec, Presses de l'Universite Laval, 77-113.
9. Josefsson, G. (2010). Object shift and optionality. An intricate interplay between syntax, prosody and information structure. Working Papers in Scandinavian Syntax, 86, 1-24. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/228845874_ Object_shift_and_optionality_An_intricate_interplay_between_syntax_ prosody_and_information_structure.
10. Korpus DBP. (23 Jun 2019). http://sbmb.dbp.gov.my/korpusdbp/SelectUserCat. aspx
11. Liaw Y. F., & Abdullah Hassan. (1994). Nahu Melayu moden. Penerbit Fajar Bakti.
12. Marantz, A. (1995). The minimalist program. Dlm. Webelhuth, G. (Ed.), Government and binding theory and the minimalist program, 349-382. Blackwell.
13. Nik Safiah Karim, Farid M. Onn, Hashim Musa, & Abdul Hamid Mahmood. (2015). Tatabahasa dewan. Dewan Bahasa dan Pustaka.
14. Pineda, A. (2012). Double object constructions and dative/accusative alternations in Spanish and Catalan: A unified account. An International Journal of Hispanic Linguistics, 2(1), 57-115.
15. Pineda, A. (2020). From dative to accusative. An ongoing syntactic change in Romance. Probus. International Journal of Romance Linguistics, 32(1), 129-173.
16. Pusat Rujukan Persuratan Melayu. (15 Mei 2022). Khidmat nasihat. https://prpm. dbp.gov.my/Cari1?keyword=objek&d=175768&#LIHATSINI.
17. Radford, A. (2009). Analysing english sentences: A minimalist approach. Cambridge University.
18. Ramli Md. Salleh. (1996). Transformasi datif dalam bahasa Melayu. Jurnal Dewan Bahasa, 40(5), 442-450.
19. Santorini, B., & Kroch, A. (2007). The syntax of natural language: An online introduction. https://www.ling.upenn.edu/~beatrice/syntax-textbook/
20. Smith, N. (Ed.). (2004). Chomsky: Ideas and ideal. Cambridge University Press.
21. Soenjono Dardjowidjojo. (1983). Beberapa aspek linguistik Indonesia. Penerbit Djambatan.
22. Sprouse, J., & Almeida, D. (2011). Power in acceptability judgment experiments and the reliability of data in syntax. Lingbuzz. https://lingbuzz.net/ lingbuzz/001520.
23. Tallerman, M. (1998). Understanding syntax. Arnold.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
Upon acceptance of an article, Authors will be asked to transfer copyright. This transfer will ensure the widest possible dissemination of information. A notification will be sent to the corresponding Author confirming receipt of the manuscript. If excerpts from other copyrighted works are included, the Author(s) must obtain written permission from the copyright owners and credit the source(s) in the article.
