ELLIPSIS OF SUBJECT IN BALINESE SUBORDINATIVE CONSTRUCTION
on
e-journal of linguistics
ELLIPSIS OF SUBJECT IN BALINESE SUBORDINATIVE CONSTRUCTION
I Wayan Mandra e-mail: .......................................... Faculty of Brahma Widya State Institute of Hindu Dharma Denpasar
Prof. Drs. Ketut Artawa, M.A., Ph.D e-mail: [email protected] Study Program of Linguistics, School of Postgraduate Studies, Udayana University Jl. Nias 13 Denpasar, Telp. (0361) 224121
Prof. Dr. Drs. Ketut Riana, S.U. e-mail:...........................................
Study Program of Linguistics, School of Postgraduate Studies, Udayana University
Dr. Ni Made Dhanawaty, M.S. e-mail:........................... Study Program of Linguistics, School of Posgraduate Studies, Udayana University
ABSTRACT
This study was aimed at identifying the types of constructions in which ellipsis of subject took place in the Balinese language, the meaning of conjunction, and the syntactic category of the omitted subject in Subordinative construction.
Descriptive-qualitative method was used, and the ellipsis of subject in the Balinese Subordinative construction was investigated in the present study. The data were collected using triangulation system, that is, the combined method of observation, interview, and documentation. From the process of observation, the researchers noted down the Subordinative constructions in which the ellipsis of subject took place. Then the data were selected based on the meaning of the conjunction used. The data were taken from a Balinese story. The data which could not be obtained from the written source were replaced by the intuitive data as the researcher is a Balinese native speaker. To make the intuitive data more accurate, the informants who were knowledgeable of the structures of the written and spoken Balinese language were used.
The result of the study showed that the conjunctions used in the Subordinative constructions indicated temporal, expectation, concession, cause, result, conditional, and unison meaning relations. Furthermore, it was identified that the constituents in which the ellipsis of subject took place in the Subordinative constructions were noun, noun phrase, and pronoun (the first and third pronouns).
Keywords: Ellipsis of subject, meaning of conjunction, and syntactic category
Quirk et al (1985: 536) stated that ellipsis refers to any grammatical unit which is omitted for economic purpose. The omitted words can be made to reappear in the structure in which they are used to make it perfect. The reason is that the construction in which ellipsis takes place is not perfect.
Verhaar (1981: 70) stated that there are three levels of syntactic constructions; they are function, category, and role. The subject, as one of the syntactic functions, plays a role in the system of ellipsis. If compared to the other syntactic functions such as predicate, object, and adverb, the subject is more dominantly omitted in the Subordinative construction. Similarly, in the syntactic category, the omitted subject can fill in the elements of the syntactic category level such as noun, pronoun, verb, adjective, adverb, and preposition.
The problems in the present study are formulated as follows. (1) What is the meaning of conjunction in the Balinese Subordinative clause? (2) What syntactic category could be omitted in the ellipsis of subject in the Balinese Subordinative construction? Based on the two problems mentioned above, this article is focused on the meaning of conjunction and the syntactic category which can be omitted in the Balinese Subordinative construction.
Descriptive-qualitative method was used in the present study. The data were obtained from a Balinese story ‘satua Bali’ (abbreviated to SB) written by I.N.K. Supatra (2006) published by CV. Kayumas Agung, Denpasar. The data were focused on the Subordinative construction using conjunction.
The data were collected using triangulation method; a combined method of observation, interview, and documentation. It was believed that using the triangulation method could overcome the limitation and weakness of every method. The observation method was used to obtain the written data from SB. Then, the informants were interviewed in order to obtain the Subordinative constructions which could not be written. The interview was held repeatedly in order to obtain accurate data. Elicitation technique was used in the interview.
The data were also collected using documentation method to obtain the written data from SB. The collected data were then analyzed using direct element dividing technique. This technique was used to select the data in such a way that the types of conjunction, the syntactic
category, and the meaning of conjunction in the Balinese Subordinative construction could be identified.
Based on what was described above, the result of the present study related to the ellipsis of subject in the Balinese Subordinative construction can be presented as follows.
Subject, as one of the syntactic elements, can be omitted in the level of its category. In the present study, the Subordinative construction using conjunction is discussed. The Subordinative conjunction links the nucleus clause and the non nucleus one; in other words, the Subordinative conjunction links the clauses whose syntactic statuses are not the same. The meaning of the conjunction in the Subordinative clause indicates (1) temporal meaning relation, (2) requisite meaning relation, (3) expectation meaning relation, (4) result meaning relation, (5) unison meaning relation, (6) concessive meaning relation, (7) cause meaning relation, and (8) conditional meaning relation.
-
3.1.1 Ellipsis of Subject in the Subordinative Conjunction Using Conjunction Indicating Temporal Meaning Relation
In the Subordinative construction with the conjunction indicating temporal relation, the subject can be omitted. The conjunctions used include dugas ‘when’, rikala ‘when’, and uling ‘since’ as exemplified below.
(3-1) I Kedis paekin-a teken I Bojog rikala Ø waiwasan (SB, 2006: 11)
Art burung dekat-Pas oleh Art kera Konj menoleh
‘Si Burung didekati oleh Si Kera pada waktu menoleh’
[The bird was approached by the monkey when turning its head]
(3-2) I Macan ketemu I Bojog dugas Ø melaib ngawag ulian takut-ne (SB, 2006:4)
Art Harimau bertemu Art Ker Konj lari tanpa arah karena takut-Pos
‘Si Harimau bertemu dengan Si Kera ketika berlari tanpa arah karena takut’
[The tiger met the monkeu when running aimlessly because of being scared]
-
(3-3) Wayan Suta suba nongos di Gianyar uling Ø enu cerik
Nama sudah tinggal Prep Gianyar Konj masih kecil
‘Wayan Suta sudah tinggal di Gianyar sejak masih kecil’
[Wayan Suta has been staying in Gianyar since he was a child]
(3-4) Pan Balang Tamak tonden bangun dugas Ø delokin-a teken timpal-e (SB,2006:7)
Nama belum bangun Konj tengok-Pas oleh teman-Pos
‘Pan Balang Tamak belum bangun ketika ditengok oleh temannya”
[Pan Balang Tamak has not woken up when he was visited by his friend]
From examples (3-1) to (3-4) it can be identified that rikala ‘when’, dugas ‘when’, and uling ‘since’ indicate temporal relation. The subjects I Kedis ‘Si Burung’ (the bird), I Macan ‘Si Harimau’ (the tiger), Wayan Suta, and Pan Balang Tamak were omitted in the second clauses. From the level of category, I Kedis ‘Si Burung’ (the bird), I Macan ‘Si Harimau’ (the tiger), Wayan Suta, and Pan Balang Tamak are noun phrases.
-
3.1.2 Ellipsis of Subject in the Subordinative Clause with Conjunction Indicating Requisite Meaning Relation
In the Subordinative clause with the conjunction indicating conditional relation, the subject can be omitted. The conjunctions indicating conditional relation include yen kalau (if) and yening ‘jika’ (if) as illustrated below.
(3-5) Tiang suba mati amah macan yen Ø tusing malaib uli alas- e (SB, 2006: 43)
1T sudah mati dimakan harimau Konj Neg lari dari hutan-Def
‘Saya sudah mati dimakan harimau kalau tidak lari dari hutan itu’
[I would have been dead eaten by the tiger if I had not fled from the forest]
(3-6) Iraga sepatutne mineh-ang malu yening Ø lakar melaksana (SB, 2006: 10)
Ijm sebenarny pikir-Apl dulu Konj akan melakukan sesuatu
‘Kita sebenarnya pikirkan dulu jika akan melakukan sesuatu’
[We should have thought about when we would do something]
(3-7) I Belog tusing ngelah pretisentana yening Ø tusing nganten (SB, 2006:59)
Art Nama Neg punya keturunan Konj Neg kawin
‘I Belog tidak punya keturunan jika tidak kawin’
[I Belog would not have any descendant if he were not married]
In the Subordinative constructions (3-5) and (3-7) above, it can be identified that the subjects were omitted in the second clauses. The subject Tiang ‘I’ is a noun, and the subject Iraga ‘Kita’ (we) is a pronoun, and the subject I Belog is a noun phrase. The conjunctions yen ‘kalau’ (if) and yening ‘jika’ (if) indicate conditional meaning relation.
-
3.1.3 Ellipsis of Subject in the Subordinative Clause with the Conjunction Indicating
Meaning Expectation Relation
In the Subordinative clause with the conjunction indicating expectation relation, the subject can be omitted. The conjunctions used are apang, mangda ‘supaya’ (so that) as exemplified by the following examples.
(3-8) Iraga sepatutne malajah apang Ø mani puan tusing kena
1Jm sebenarnya belajar Konj dikemudian hari Neg kena
uluk-uluk (SB, 2006: 10)
olok-olok
‘Kita sebenarnya belajar supaya dikemudian hari tidak kena olok-olok’
[We should learn so that we will not be deceived in the future]
(3-9) Pan Angklung Gadang matur ring Jero Kelian mangda Ø polih matanggeh
Nama berbicara dengan Jero Kelian Konj dapat menunda
utang malih abulan (SB, 2006: 51)
hutang lagi satu bulan
‘Pan Angklung Gadang berbicara dengan Jero Kelian supaya dapat menunda
Hutang lagi satu bulan’
[Pan Angklung proposed to Jero Kelian that he could postpone paying for the debt until next month’]
(3-10) I Cicing nunasica ring Ida Sang Hyang Widhi apang Ø
Art Anjing berdoa Prep Tuhan Konj
setata rahayu (SB, 2006:27)
selalu selamat
‘Si Anjing berdoa kepada Tuhan supaya selalu selamat’
[The dog prayed to God so that it would always be healthy]
From examples (3-8) – (3-10), the subject Iraga ‘Kita’ omitted in the second clause is a noun, the subject Pan Angklung Gadang is a noun phrase, and the subject I Cicing ‘Si Anjing’ [the dog] is noun phrase as well. The conjunctions used are apang, mangda [so that] indicating expectation meaning relation.
-
3.1.4 Ellipsis of Subject in the Subordinative Clause with the Conjunction Indicating Result Meaning Relation
The subject in the Subordinative clause with the conjunction indicating result relation can also be omitted. The conjunctions used are nganti, ngatos ‘hingga’ (until) as exemplified by the following examples.
(3-11) Tiang tiwas kaliwat nganti Ø tusing ngidang mayah utang di
-
1T miskin sekali Konj Neg bisa membayar hutang Prep
banjar (SB, 2006:49)
banjar
‘Saya miskin sekali hingga tidak bisa membayar hutang di banjar’
[I was so poor that I could not pay my debt at banjar (hamlet)]
(3-12) Luh Sari nimbus sela nganti Ø puun
Nama menambus ketela Konj hangus
‘Luh Sari menambus ketela mingga hangus’
[Luh Sari roasted in a fire the sweet potato until it was burnt]
(3-13) Ida Bagus Anom makarya ring gria ngantos Ø leleh
Nama work Pref rumah Konj lelah
‘Ida Bagus Anom bekerja di rumah hingga lelah’
[Ida Bagus Anom worked at home so he was tired]
From examples (3-11) – (3-13) it can be identified that the conjunctions used in the second clauses are nganti, ngatos ‘hingga’ [so] indicating result meaning relation. The subject Tiang ‘Saya’ is a pronoun, the subject sela ‘ketela’ [sweet-potato] is a noun, and the subject Ida Bagus Anom is a noun phrase too.
-
3.1.5 Ellipsis of Subject in the Subordinative Clause with the Conjunction Indicating Conditional Meaning Relation
The subject could also be omitted in the Subordinative clause with the conjunctions indicating conditional meaning relation. The conjunctions used are dipete, dipradene ‘seandainya’ [if] as described in the following examples.
(3-14) I Bojog lakar ngewantu I Kambing dipete Ø sengkala (SB, 2006: 26)
Art Kera akan membantu Art Kambing Konj bahaya
‘Si Kera akan membantu Si Kambing seandainya bahaya’
[The monkey would help the goat if there were a danger]
(3-15) Tiang lakar ngemang adin tiang-e pipis dipete Ø maan gaji dipegaen tiang-e
-
1T akan memberi adik 1T- Pos uang Konj dapat gaji di tempat kerja 1T - Pos
‘Saya akan memberi adik saya uang seandainya dapat gaji di tempat kerja saya’ [I will give my younger sibling some money if I receive salary where I work]
(3-16)Wayan Sudi lakar megae di kapal pesiar dipradene Ø bisa ngomong
Nama akan bekerja Prep kapal pesiar Konj bisa bicara
basa Inggris
bahasa Inggris
‘Wayan Sudi akan bekerja di kapal pesiar seandainya bisa bicara bahasa Inggris’
[Wayan Sudi will work on a cruise if he can speak English]
The conjunctions used in the Subordinative clauses (3-14) – (3-16) are dipete, dipradene ‘seandainya’ [if] indicating conditional meaning relation. The subject I Kambing ‘Si Kambing’ is a noun phrase, the subject Tiang ‘Saya’ [I] is a pronoun, and the subject Wayan Suandi is a noun phrase.
-
3.1.6 Ellipsis of Subject in the Subordinative Clause with the Conjunction Indicating Unison Meaning Relation
The subject could also be omitted in the Subordinative clause with the conjunction indicating unison meaning relation. The conjunction used is sambilanga ‘sambil’ [while] indicating unison as illustrated in the following example.
(3-17)I Belog nganggur kema ka umah-ne Luh Sari sambilanga Ø ngaba
Art Nama melancong kesana Prep rumah-Pos Nama Konj membawa
bakul misi tabia (SB,2006:9)
keranjang berisi cabai
‘I Belog melancong kesana ke rumah Luh Sari sambil membawa keranjang berisi cabai’
[I Belog came to Luh Sari’s house while brought basket white red pepper]
(3-18)I Bojog masaut sambilanga Ø ngamah biu (SB,2006:11)
Art Kera menjawab Konj makan pisang
‘Si Kera menjawab sambil makan pisang’
[ The monkey answered while ate banana]
(3-19)I Bojog suir – suir ngamah sela sambilanga Ø ngurut – ngurut
Art Kera bersiul makan ketela Konj mengelus – elus
basang-ne (SB,2006:35)
perut-Pos
‘Si Kera bersiul makan ketela sambil mengelus – elus perutnya’
[The monkey whistled sweet potato while stroked its stomach]
In the Subordinative clauses above, it can be identified that the conjunction used is sambilanga ‘sambil’ [while] indicating unison meaning relation. The subjects I Belog and I Bojog were omitted and are noun phrases.
In the Subordinative clause using the conjunction indicating concessive meaning relation, the subject could also be omitted. The conjunctions used are yadiastun, yadian, diastu, yadiapin, wiadin ‘walaupun’ [although] as illustrated by the following examples.
(3-20)Cai nyuang upon – upon carik -e makejang diastu Ø tusing tuyuh
2T ngambil hasil sawah-Def semua Konj Neg payah
megae (SB,2006:13)
bekerja
‘Kamu mengambil hasil sawah itu semua walaupun tidak payah bekerja’
[You took all of the rice field crops although you were tired to work]
(3-21)Iba tusing bisa ngae umah yadian Ø suba kelih (SB,2006:15)
2T Neg bisa membuat rumah Konj sudah dewasa
‘Kamu tidak bisa membuat rumah walaupun sudah dewasa’
[You could not make house although you were adult]
(3-22)Ni Luh Sari tusing kapok-kapok yadiastun Ø suba uluk-uluk –a teken timpal-ne
Nama Neg jera-jera Konj sudah olok-olok-Pas oleh teman-Pos
(SB,2006:23)
‘Ni Luh Sari tidak jera – jera walaupun sudah diolok – olok oleh temannya’
[Ni Luh Sari undaunted although she had been joked by her friend]
(3-23)Iraga sepatutne mapineh malu yadiapin Ø lakar mapitulung anak lenan (SB,2006:20)
1Jm sebenarnya berpikir dulu Konj akan menolong orang lain
‘Kita sebenarnya berpikir dulu walaupun akan menolong orang lain’
[We ought to think first although we will help some one]
(3-24)Ketut Anom demit gati wiadin Ø liu ngelah kasugihan
Nama pelit sekali Konj banyak punya kekayaan
‘Ketut Anom pelit sekali walaupun banyak punya kekayaan’
[Ketut Anom was very stingy although he had wealth]
From the examples above, it can be identified that the subject can be omitted in the Subordinative clause using the conjunction indicating concessive meaning relation. The conjunctions include diastu, yadian, yadiastun, yadiapin, and wiadin ‘walaupun’ [although]. The subject Cai ‘Kamu’ [you], Iba ‘Kamu’ [you] are nouns, and the subject Ni Luh Sari is a noun phrase, the subject Iraga ‘Kita’ [we] is a pronoun, and the subject Ketut Anom is a noun phrase.
-
3.1.8 Ellipsis of Subject in the Subordinative Clause with the Conjunction Indicating Cause Meaning Relation
The subject can also be omitted in the Subordinative clause using the conjunction indicating cause meaning relation which includes mawinan, dening ‘oleh karena’ [therefore], sawireh, mapan, krana, sangkaning, santukan ‘karena’ [therefore], as illustrated by the following examples.
3-25)Ia ngenah enggal tua sawireh Ø sing suud – suud makeneh ane
-
3T kelihatan cepat tua Konj Neg henti – henti berpikir yang
tidong – tidong (SB,2006:5)
bukan – bukan
‘Dia kelihatan cepat tua karena tidak henti – hentinya berpikir yang bukan – bukan’
[He seemed to be getting older quickly as he kept thinking about what was not necessary]
(3-26)Pan Balang Tamak sing nuutin awig – awig banjar mawinan Ø kena
Nama Neg mematuhi peraturan banjar Konj kena
danda (SB,2006:9)
denda
‘Pan Balang Tamak tidak mematuhi peraturan banjar oleh karena itu kena denda’
[Pan Balang Tamak broke the regulation issued by the banjar (hamlet); therefore, he was fined]
(3-27)Pan Balang Tamak ngeka daya krana Ø tusing demen megae (SB,2006:53)
Nama membuat upaya Konj Neg suka bekerja
‘Pan Balang Tamak membuat upaya karena tidak suka bekerja’
[Pan Balang Tamak made attempted to do something as he did not like working]
(3-28)I Kedis ngajang sebun mapan Ø lakar ngawit mataluh (SB,2006:11)
Art Burung membawa sarang Konj akan mulai bertelur
‘Si Burung membawa sarang karena akan mulai bertelur’
[The bird brought nest as it would lay eggs soon]
(3-39)Dewa Agung kituk – kituk santukan Ø nenten resep teken munyin
Nama geleng – geleng Konj Neg mengerti dengan pembicaraan
Pan Angklung Gadang-e (SB,2006:41)
Nama -Pos
‘Dewa Agung geleng – geleng kepala karena tidak mengerti dengan pembicaraan
Pan Angklung Gadang’
[Dewa Agung shook their heads as he did not understand what was said by Pan Angklung Gadang]
(3-30)Pan Angklung Gadang tan presida naur utang ring banjar sangkaning
Nama Neg bisa membayar hutang Prep Banjar Konj
Ø kaliwat tiwas (SB,2006:49)
sangat miskin
‘Pan Angklung Gadang tidak bisa membayar hutang di banjar karena sangat miskin’
[Pan Angklung Gadang could not pay his debt at the banjar (hamlet) as he was too poor]
(3-31)Sabilang minggu Wayan Suarta luas ka pasih Sanur dening Ø mandus di setiap minggu Nama pergi Prep pantai Sanur Konj mandi Prep pasih -e pantai-Def
‘Setiap minggu Wayan Suarta pergi ke pantai Sanur oleh karena mandi di pantai itu’
-
[ Every Sunday Wayan Suarta went to Sanur Beach to bath]
From examples (3-25) – (3-31) it can be identified that the conjunctions used are mawinan, dening ‘oleh karena’ [therefore], sawireh, mapan, krana, sangkaning, santukan ‘karena’ [therefore], which indicate cause meaning relation. The subject Ia ‘Dia’ is a pronoun, the subject Pan Balang Tamak is noun phrase, the subject I Kedis ‘Si Burung’ [the bird] is a noun phrase; the subjects Dewa Agung, Pan Angklung Gadang and Wayan Suarta are too.
If observed from the level of syntactic function, the subjects from (3-1) to (3-31) are omitted for economic and practical purposes, although, if observed from the grammatical structures of the Subordinative constructions, they are not perfect. To make them perfect, the omitted elements are mentioned again or replaced with nouns, pronouns and so forth.
From the level of category, the subjects omitted from (3-1) to (3-31) are nouns, noun phrases, and pronouns. Neither verb nor adjective and adverb are found, as far as the examples above are concerned.
From the meanings of the conjunctions used in the Subordinative constructions (3-1) to (3-31), they are identified to indicate temporal, requisite, unison, result, expectation, conditional, concessive, and cause meaning relations.
It is suggested to other researchers that they should explore the ellipsis of the the other syntactic functions such as the ellipsis of predicate, object and adverb. It is also suggested that they should compare the Subordinative clauses with conjunctions and those without
conjunctions, and the difference in meaning between the nucleus clauses and the non nucleus ones.
This present study could not have been completed without direction, input, suggestion and assistance from many parties. Therefore, in this opportunity, the writer would like to thank Prof. Drs. Ketut Artawa, M.A., Ph.D., as the main supervisor, Prof. Dr. Drs. Ketut Riana, S.U., as Co-supervisor I, and Dr. Ni Made Dhanawaty, M.S., as Co-supervisor II.
Owing a great debt of gratitude should also be expressed to the board of examiners such as Prof. Dr. Made Budiarsa, M.A., Prof. Dr. Aron Meko Mbete, Prof. Dr. Drs. Ida Bagus Putra Yadnya, M.A., Prof. Dr. I Nengah Suandi, M.Hum., and Prof. Dr. I Ketut Darma Laksana, M.Hum., for their comments and suggests.
References
Anom, I Gusti Ketut dkk. 2008. Kamus Bali – Indonesia Beraksara Bali dan Latin. Denpasar : Badan Pembina Bahasa, Aksara, dan Sastra Bali, Provinsi Bali.
Artawa, Ketut. 2004. Balinese Language a Typological Description. Denpasar : CV Bali Media Adhikarsa.
Artawa, Ketut. 2004. Cohesive Devices in Indonesian. Denpasar : CV Bali Media Adhikarsa.
Comrie, Bernard. 1998. Language Universals and Linguistic Tipology. Oxford : Basil Blackwell
Dixon, R.M.W. 2010. Basic Linguistic Theory. Oxford : Oxford University Press
Quirk et al. 1985. A Comprehensive Grammar of The English Language. New York : Longman Group Limited.
Riana, I Ketut. 1988. “Hubungan Antara Kalimat dan Hubungan Makna yang Dinyatakannya dalam Bahasa Bali” (tesis). Yogyakarta: Program Pascasarjana Universitas Gajah Mada.
Sudaryanto. 1993. Metode dan Aneka Teknik Analisis Bahasa. Yogyakarta : Dutawacana University Press.
Supatra, I. NK. 2006. Satua Bali. Denpasar : CV. Kayumas Agung.
Verhaar, J.W.M. 1981. Pengantar Linguistik. Yogyakarta : Gadjah Mada University Press.
11
Discussion and feedback