Skip to content

LADIndonesianMorphology

Jump to bottom
DavidMoeljadi edited this page Nov 21, 2015 · 43 revisions

Argument Change and Reduplication in Indonesian: Some issues

DavidMoeljadi (FrancisBond and LuisMorgadoCosta)

Indonesian is a Western Malayo-Polynesian language of the Austronesian language family, spoken mainly in the Republic of Indonesia. Indonesian is a mildly agglutinative language with a rich affixation system, including a variety of prefixes, suffixes, circumfixes, and reduplication. Most of the affixes are derivational. Two important inflectional affixes are the prefix meN- which marks active voice and di- which denotes passive voice (Sneddon et al. 2010: 29, 72). There is no agreement in Indonesian. In general, grammatical relations are only distinguished in terms of word order. Indonesian has a SVO basic word order. Argument alternations are triggered by passive and applicative constructions.

The purpose of this session is to show what we are currently doing with reduplication in Indonesian and to discuss the connection and complexity with voice and valence changing/applicatives.

The following topics will be presented:

  1. Intransitive and transitive verbs
  2. Voice
  3. Applicative constructions
  4. Verb reduplication

Verbs

Intransitive verbs

According to Sneddon et al. (2010: 71), verb bases can occur with ber-, meN-*, or without affixation unpredictably. There is no explanation for the following forms other than usage:

  • (without affixation) mandi "bathe"

  • (with ber-) berbaring (ber-+baring) "lie down"

  • (with meN-) menginap (meN-+inap) "stay, spend the night"

* When meN- combines with bases, a number of nasalization (sound changes) or morphology process occur. Moeljadi, Bond and Song (2015) discuss the implementation of this morphology process in INDRA.

If the base is other than verb, either ber- or meN- must occur to derive verb. Here also there is sometimes no predictability about which affix will occur. For example,

  • (with ber-) berteriak (ber-+teriak) "yell, shout"

  • (with meN-) memekik (meN-+pekik) "scream"

In this session, due to time constraints, ber- will not be discussed.

Intransitive verbs with ''meN-''

According to Sneddon et al. (2010: 69-70), Some intransitive verbs with meN- have verbal bases. meN- is required to produce a well-formed verb. For example,

  • mengungsi (meN-+ungsi) "flee"

  • meledak (meN-+ledak) "explode"

  • menyanyi (meN-+nyanyi) "sing"

  • menginap (meN-+inap) "spend the night"

  • meluncur (meN-+luncur) "slide"

Many intransitive verbs with meN- have noun bases. A number of different meanings can be identified.

  • Some verbs mean "go to [location-base]". For example, mendarat (meN-+darat land) "(go to) land"

  • Some verbs mean "produce [sound-base]". For example, mengeong (meN-+ngeong meow) "meouw"

  • Some verbs mean "become like, resemble [base]". For example, menggunung (meN-+gunung mount) "pile up, mount up" (lit. "become like a mount")

With adjective bases, the meaning is "become [base], take on the characteristic of [base]". The number of such forms is limited and unpredictable, although there is some degree of productivity. For example,

  • menghebat (meN-+hebat intense) "intensify" (lit. "become intense")

  • menghangat (meN-+hangat warm) "warm up" (lit. "become warm")

  • memerah (meN-+merah red) "redden" (lit. "become red")

Intransitive verbs in INDRA

Because meN- is required to produce a well-formed verb in the declarative, interrogative and imperative constructions, the verbs are listed together with meN- in the lexicon. For example, for the verb mengeong "meow",

mengeong := intr-verb-lex &
  [ STEM < "mengeong" >,
    SYNSEM.LKEYS.KEYREL.PRED "_mengeong_v_rel" ].

Transitive verbs

Transitive verbs can occur with meN-, di-, or without a prefix. meN- marks active voice and di- marks passive voice. Prefixes are omitted in imperative constructions and in passive constructions with a pronoun agent. Voice is discussed in the next section.

Transitive verbs with ''meN-''

Most transitive verbs have verb bases. For example,

  • membuka (meN-+buka) "open"

  • mengejar (meN-+kejar) "chase"

  • mencuri (meN-+curi) "steal"

Some transitive verbs have noun bases and mean "use [base] on the object, apply [base] to the object". For example,

  • menggunting (meN-+gunting scissors) "cut with scissors"

  • mengecat (meN-+cat paint) "paint"

  • menggergaji (meN-+gergaji saw) "saw"

Transitive verbs in INDRA

Because the verbs appear without affixes in imperative constructions and in passive constructions with a pronoun agent, only the bases are listed in the lexicon. For example, for the verb base kejar "chase",

kejar := tr-verb-lex &
  [ STEM < "kejar" >,
    SYNSEM.LKEYS.KEYREL.PRED "_kejar_v_rel" ].

We apply lexical rules for transitive verbs.

voice-lex-rule-super := add-only-no-ccont-rule & infl-lex-rule &
  [ INFLECTED.VOICE-FLAG +,
    DTR tr-verb-lex ].

act-lex-rule := voice-lex-rule-super.

Voice

Consider this example:

1. a. Adi mengejar Budi.
      Adi ACT-chase Budi
      "Adi chases Budi."

   b. Budi dikejar ((oleh) Adi).
      Budi PASS-chase ((by) Adi)
      "Budi is chased (by Adi)."

   c. Budi saya kejar.
      Budi 1SG chase
      "Budi is chased by me."

(Moeljadi, Bond and Song 2015)

In Example (1a), the verb mengejar is formed from meN- and the base kejar and takes two arguments. MeN- is changed to di- in passive type one (Sneddon et al. 2010: 256-257) and takes one argument with optional agent as in Example (1b) and without prefixes in passive type two (Sneddon et al. 2010: 257-258) and takes two arguments with the agent preceding the verb as in Example (1c). Sneddon et al. (2010: 256-257) states that in passive type one, the actor is third person or a noun, while in passive two, the agent is a pronoun or pronoun substitute and it comes before the unprefixed verb.

In INDRA, passive constructions have not been implemented yet.

Applicative constructions

In Indonesian, a verb can have voice morphology as well as applicative morphology -i or -kan, which changes the valence. In this session, due to time constraints, only -i is presented.

In INDRA, applicative constructions have not been implemented yet.

Arka et al. (2009) states that -i shows applicative and causative polysemy. At least four types are identified.

  • Type 1 (Intransitive -> Monotransitive)

Type 1 involves derived monotransitive -i verbs undergoing a valence-changing applicativisation effect. The base is an intransitive verb with an optional goal/locative PP (v_pp*_dir_le in ERG and INDRA). For example,

2. a. Mangga jatuh ke rumah.
      mango fall to house
      "A mango falls onto a house."

   b. Mangga menjatuhi rumah.
      mango ACT-fall-i house
      "A mango falls onto a house."

Other examples are:

  • datang ke "come to" > mendatangi

  • masuk ke "go.in to" > memasuki "enter"

  • Type 2 (Monotransitive -> Ditransitive, Three-place Monotransitive)

Type 2 is associated with ditransitive taking two objects with the displaced theme being the second object. For example,

3. a. Budi mengirim surat kepada Adi.
      Budi ACT-send letter to Adi
      "Budi sends a letter to Adi."

   b. Budi mengirimi Adi surat.
      Budi ACT-send-i Adi letter
      "Budi sends Adi a letter."

A bound verb root can also appear in this type. For this type of root, -i is obligatory.

4. a. *Budi menyuguh minuman kepada Adi.
       Budi ACT-serve drink to Adi
       FOR "Budi serves a drink to Adi."

   b. Budi menyuguhi Adi minuman.
      Budi ACT-serve Adi drink
      "Budi serves Adi a drink."

The displaced theme can be non-core and surfaces as oblique (PP). For example, the verb menyuguhi "serve" can be ditransitive as in (4b) or monotransitive as in (4c).

4. c. Budi menyuguhi Adi dengan minuman.
      Budi ACT-serve Adi with drink
      "Budi serves Adi a drink."
  • Type 3 (Monotransitive -> Monotransitive with repetition or plurality)

Type 3 shows no valence change in -i derivation. -i signifies repetition or intensification. For example,

5. a. Budi memukul Adi.
      Budi ACT-hit Adi
      "Budi hits Adi."

   b. Budi memukuli Adi.
      Budi ACT-hit-i Adi
      "Budi hits Adi repeatedly."

Arka et al. (2009: 97) notes that the object is semantically linked to a locative-goal role and the action is applied to a surface of an object. For inherently punctual verbs like "hit", actions are given a repetitive interpretation. For verbs where the object measures event completion like "kill", -i gives rise to pluralisation or individuation of the object. For example,

6. a. Budi membunuh binatang itu.
      Budi ACT-kill animal that
      "Budi kills that animal."

   b. Budi membunuhi binatang itu.
      Budi ACT-kill-i animal that
      "Budi kills that animal one by one."
  • Type 4 (Intransitive -> Monotransitive)

Type 4 of -i results in causativisation. For example,

7. a. Air memanas.
      water ACT-hot
      "Water becomes hot."

   b. Budi memanasi air.
      Budi ACT-hot-i water
      "Budi heats the water."
      (lit. "Budi causes the water to become hot.")

8. a. Budi menguliti kambing.
      Budi ACT-skin-i goat
      "Budi peels the goat skin."
      (lit. "Budi causes the goat to be skinned.")

   b. Budi menguliti buku.
      Budi ACT-skin-i book
      "Budi covers a book."
      (lit. "Budi causes a book to be covered")

Reduplication

Nouns, adjectives, and verbs can be reduplicated in Indonesian. We have not implemented a rule for verb reduplication but we have successfully implemented rules for noun and adjective reduplication in INDRA.

Noun and adjective reduplication

Reduplicated forms can have unreduplicated or no unreduplicated counterparts (treated as single bases) (Sneddon et al. 2010: 19). For example,

  • batu "stone" > batu-batu "stones"

  • es krim "ice cream" > es krim-es krim "ice creams"

  • mata "eye" > mata-mata "spy", "eyes"

  • sia > sia-sia "futile"

Sneddon et al. (2010: 20, 22) notes that the major function of noun reduplication is to indicate plurality as illustrated in the examples above. The non-reduplicated forms of nouns are underspecified for number (can be singular or plural). The adjective reduplication occurs when the noun it describes is plural. For example,

9. a. Budi melempar batu kecil.
      Budi meN-throw stone small
      "Budi throws a small stone."
      "Budi throws small stones."

   b. Budi melempar batu kecil-kecil.
      Budi meN-throw stone small-REDUP
      "Budi throws small stones."

   c. Budi melempar batu-batu kecil.
      Budi meN-throw stone-REDUP small
      "Budi throws small stones."

   d. ?Budi melempar batu-batu kecil-kecil.
      "Budi throws small stones."

The above example illustrates that the non-reduplicated form batu kecil is underspecified for number. Both the reduplicated adjective batu kecil-kecil and the reduplicated noun batu-batu kecil denote plurality. The reduplicated form batu-batu kecil-kecil is considered not standard.

=== Noun and adjective reduplication in INDRA=== We employ regular expression in handling noun and adjective reduplication. In repp/vanilla.rpp a rule stating that any strings reduplicated with a hyphen in between is changed to the string itself with an iteration mark two square (²).

!(.+)-\1                                \1²

Because noun/adjective reduplication mades a singular/plural underspecified noun/adjective become a plural noun/adjective, the reduplication rules is written in lrules.tdl. The rules state that for any strings with the iteration mark two square (²), apply the lexical rules redup-noun-lex-rule or redup-adj-lex-rule.

redup-noun-suffix :=
%suffix (* ²)
redup-noun-lex-rule.

redup-adj-suffix :=
%suffix (* ²)
redup-adj-lex-rule.

redup-noun-lex-rule makes the number plural (PNG.PERNUM pl) and redup-adj-lex-rule states that the reduplicated adjective should unify with a plural head noun.

Try to parse and generate these sentences in demophin:

Verb reduplication

Mistica et al. (2009) describes three functions of verb reduplication in Indonesian.

Purposelessness The base can be intransitive or transitive verb. The reduplication results in an action done in casual or leisurely way or randomness, lack of specific purpose. For example,

  • duduk "sit" > duduk+REDUP > duduk-duduk "sit about"

  • lihat "see" > meN-+lihat > melihat "see" > +REDUP > melihat-lihat "have a look around"

  • tulis "write" > meN-+tulis > menulis "write" > +REDUP > menulis-nulis "write randomly"

Repetition or plurality The base can be intransitive or transitive verb. The reduplication results in an action performed repeatedly. For example,

  • pijit > meN-+pijit > memijit "massage" > +REDUP > memijit-mijit "massage repeatedly"

  • bagi > meN-+bagi > membagi "divide" > +REDUP > membagi-bagi "distribute, divide to many people"

  • cek > meN-+cek > mengecek "check" > +REDUP > mengecek-ngecek "check repeatedly"

  • amat > +-i > amati "observe" > meN-+ > mengamati "observe" > +REDUP > mengamat-amati "keep observing, observe repeatedly"

9. a. Budi mengamat-amati orang itu.
      Budi ACT-observe-REDUP-i person that
      "Budi observes that person."

   b. Orang itu diamat-amati ( (oleh) Budi ).
      person that PASS-observe-REDUP-i ( (by) Budi )
      "That person is observed (by Budi)."

   c. Orang itu saya amat-amati.
      person that 1SG observe-REDUP-i
      "That person is observed by me."

Reciprocals The base is transitive verb and the reduplication makes it to intransitive verb denoting a reciprocal action. The subject must be plural as in example (9). For example,

  • pukul "hit" > +REDUP > pukul-pukul > meN-+ > pukul-memukul "hit each other"

  • harga "value" > +-i > hargai "respect" > +REDUP > harga-hargai > meN-+ > harga-menghargai "respect each other"

  • panas "hot" > +-i > panasi "heat" > +REDUP > panas-panasi > meN-+ > panas-memanasi "heat each other"

10. a. *Anak itu pukul-memukul.
        child that hit-ACT-hit
        FOR "Those children hit each other."

    b. Anak-anak itu pukul-memukul.
       child-REDUP that hit-ACT-hit
       "Those children hit each other."

Questions

  1. What DELPH-IN tools can be used to deal with reduplication and morphology for Indonesian?
  2. Semantics representation for applicative constructions and reduplication

References

  • Arka, I W., M. Dalrymple, M. Mistica, S. Mofu, A. Andrews, and J. Simpson (2009) A linguistic and computational morphosyntactic analysis for the applicative -i in Indonesian. In The Proceedings of the LFG 09 Conference, edited by M. Butt and T. H. King. Cambridge

  • Mistica, Meladel, I W. Arka, T Baldwin, and A Andrews (2009) Double Double, Morphology and Trouble: Looking into Reduplication in Indonesian. In Proceedings of the Australasian Language Technology Workshop (ALTW 2009) Sydney, Australia, edited by L. Pizzato and R. Schwitter, 44—52. UNSW, Sydney.

  • Moeljadi, David, Francis Bond, and Sanghoun Song (2015) Building an HPSG-based Indonesian Resource Grammar (INDRA). In Proceedings of the Grammar Engineering Across Frameworks (GEAF) Workshop, 53rd Annual Meeting of the ACL and 7th IJCNLP, pages 9–16, Beijing, China, July 26-31, 2015.

  • Sneddon, James Neil, Alexander Adelaar, Dwi Noverini Djenar, and Michael C. Ewing (2010) Indonesian Reference Grammar. Allen & Unwin, New South Wales, 2 edition.

Home | Forum | Discussions | Events

Clone this wiki locally