LINGUISTIKA, SEPTEMBER 2016

ISSN: 0854-9613

Vol. 23. No. 45

Translation Method Of Phrasal Verb In Novel Eat Pray Love By Elizabeth Gilbert

I Made Krisna Adi Candra

email: [email protected]

Sekolah Tinggi Pariwisata Bali Internasional Jalan Padang Tawang 26B, Canggu, Kuta Utara

Abstrak—The aim of this research is to investigate the translation of phrasal verb by applying the translation theory proposed by Newmark. The data were taken from a novel entitled Eat Pray Love and its translation entitled Makan Doa Cinta written by Elizabeth Gilbert.

The data in this research are phrasal verbs in Source Language and its translation in Target Language which is Bahasa Indonesia. The data in this article were collected using documentation method followed by note taking. Then, the data were analyzed descriptively using the exponential mapping adopted from Natural Semantic Metalanguage theory and 64 semantic primes proposed by Wierzbicka.

The result shows that the method of translation used by the translator was the communicative translation method with a percentage of 98, 33%, and 1, 66% was left untranslated. This supports that no phrasal verb in Source Language translated into phrasal verb in target language; moreover, the aesthetic and emotional elements of Source Language were omitted. Based on the analysis done by using Natural Semantic Metalanguage theory, out of 60 phrasal verbs in Source Language, 59 were translated into Target Language and one was omitted.

Keywords—phrasal verb, method of translation, natural semantic metalanguage.

Abstract—Tujuan dari riset ini adalah untuk menginvestigasi penerjemahan frasa verba dengan menggunakan teori penerjemahan yang di gagas oleh Newmark. Data diambil dari novel berjudul Eat Pray Love yang ditulis oleh Elizabeth Gilbert dan terjemahan bahasa Indonesianya yang berjudul Makan Doa Cinta.

Data dalam penelitian ini adalah phrasal verb dalam bahasa sumber dan terjemahannya dalam Bahasa Indonesia. Pengumpulan data dalam artikel ini menggunakan metode dokumentasi yang disertai dengan teknik catat. Data yang terkumpul lalu dianalisis secara deskriptif dengan menggunakan pemetaan eksponen makna berdasarkan teori Metabahasa Semantik Alamiah serta 64 semantik primitif yang digagas oleh Wierzbicka.

Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa metode yang digunakan oleh penerjemah adalah communicative translation method dengan persentase sebesar 98,33 %,sedangkan 1,66 % tidak diterjemahkan. Hal ini menunjukan bahwa tidak ditemukannya frasa verba dalam bahasa sumber yang diterjemahkan dalam bentuk frasa verba pada bahasa target dan dihilangkannya nilai estetika serta emosi dari bahasa sumber. Berdasarkan analisis dengan menggunakan teori Metabahasa Semantik Alamiah pada 60 buah frasa verba yang ditemukan, 59 buah frasa verba dari bahasa sumber diterjemahkan kedalam bahasa target dan satu dihilangkan.

Kata kunci—phrasal verb, metode penerjemahan, metabahasa semantik alamiah.

INTRODUCTION

Translation is the combination of skill, art and science. Therefore, those capabilities must be gained in producing a better translation (Nida 1964). Since a translator may use some shifts in translating a text as long as the message of Target Language (TL) is the closest equivalent to source language (SL), it is common that some chances and variations happen in translation. Catford (1980) stated that translation is an operation performed on languages: a process of substituting a text in one language for a text. In addition , Newmark (1988) stated that translation is the super ordinate term for converting the meaning of any utterance of any source language to the target language.

Then, based on the Merriam Webster Dictionary (2012), to translate is to change a text from one state or form into another, or to turn a text into one’s own or another language. Moreover, Larson (1984) also stated that translations fall on a continuum from very literal to literal, to modified literal, to near idiomatic, to idiomatic, and moved on to unduly free. It is all done to achieve the goal of a good translator which is to translate idiomatically, by making adjustments in forms. In other words, the translator’s goal should reproduce a text in the target language which delivers the same message as the source language using the natural grammatical and lexical choices of the target language.

Furthermore, in achieving the result needed in translation, Nida in Hatim and Mason (1990) proposed four basic requirements of translation, such as, 1.) Making sense; 2.) Conveying the spirit and manner of the original; 3.) Having a natural and easy form of expression; 4.) Reproducing a similar response. Apart from that, Munday (2001) stated that translation is the process of changing an original written text (the source text or ST) in the

original verbal language ( the source language or SL) into a written text (the target text or TT) in different verbal language (the target language or TL).

In line with this, Labov (1973) states that,

“If linguistics can be said to be any one thing it is the study of categories: that is, the study of how language translates meaning into sound through the categorization of reality into discrete units and sets of units”

It can be concluded that translation is concerned with the transference of meaning from one language to another. In order to do this, the first thing needs to be discovered is the meaning in source language (TL). Then, it is continued by discovering meaning in target language (TL). Finally, it is matched to find the equivalence.

According to Grice (1957), meaning is primarily based on an explication of what he refers to as the speaker’s meaning, i.e., what a speaker means by uttering a sentence or, on a more general level, by carrying out an act with a communication intention. This approach is best treated as encompassing two parts: the theory of the speaker’s meaning or communicative acted on one hand and that of regular meaning, conventional meaning or linguistic meaning on the other hand.

Moreover, Goddard (2011) stated that meaning is a natural or innate property of human mind activated by experience but not wholly and solely derived from it. Meaning is also the bridge between language and cognition, and between language and culture. Linguistic analysis such as syntax, morphology, semantics, and pragmatics, therefore, makes little sense (Goddard in Heine and Narrog 2010). In this case, semantic analysis was applied to find the meaning, that is, Natural Semantic Analysis (NSM) approach.

The NSM approach proposed by Anna Wierzbicka (1972) is claimed to be the most well-

developed, comprehensive and practical approach to cross-linguistic and cross-cultural semantics on the contemporary scene. This theory is believed as one of the world's leading theories of language and meaning. Goddard (1998) also stated that the NSM system is one of the most comprehensive and widely applied approaches to descriptive semantics in modern linguistics. The NSM approach is based on evidence, which is a small core of basic, universal meaning, known as semantic primes expressed by words or other linguistic expressions in all languages. This common core of meaning is used as a tool for linguistic and cultural analysis to explain the meaning of complex and culturespecific words and grammatical constructions (using semantic explications), and to articulate culture-specific values and attitudes (using cultural scripts). The theory also provides a semantic foundation for universal grammar and for linguistic typology.

In addition , the NSM starts with the premise that semantic analysis is conducted in natural language, rather than in terms of technical formalisms (abstract features, logical symbols, etc.), because technical formalisms are not clear until and unless they are explained in ordinary language. The second premise is that the full meaning of any semantically complex expression is stated in terms of a reductive paraphrase in ordinary language, i.e. an equivalent expression composed exclusively of simpler meanings than the original. From these premises it can be stated that every language has an irreducible semantic core consisting of a minilexicon of indefinable expressions (semantic primitives) and a minisyntax governing how they can be combined. Such a system of primitive meanings and grammar is termed as ‘natural semantic metalanguage’. The third assumption, supported by the available evidence, is that the NSM of all human languages are essentially isomorphic, i.e. that all languages possess concrete linguistic exponents (words, bound morphemes, or phrases) of the same set of semantic primes, and these exponents share a common set of combinatorial properties (Goddard and Wierzbicka Eds 1994).

Furthermore, it is said that, on the NSM approach, the meaning of a semantically complex expression (be it a word or a grammatical construction) is described by means of an explanatory reductive paraphrase (an ‘explication’) framed entirely within the semantic metalanguage. By relying on a specified, minimal metalanguage, the approach aims to maximize explicitness, clarity, and translatability. The NSM primes are stabilized as a list of irreducible meanings, coded here as English words with specific senses. These primes are hypothesized to be language universals, with most of them having been tested across a wide variety of languages without encountering disconfirmation.

It is very important to realize that some exponents in the following list have meanings in English that are not shared with other languages, but when used as an exponent in the NSM, we are only concerned with the meanings that are universal. Moreover, there are sixty four sets of universal human concepts proposed by Wierzbicka (2010), they were,

  • 1.    Substantives : I, YOU, SOMEONE, PEOPLE/PERSON, SOMETHING/THING, BODY

  • 2.    Determiners :  THIS, THE SAME,

OTHER/ELSE

  • 3.    Quantifiers    : ONE, TWO, SOME, ALL,

MANY/MUCH, LITTLE/FEW

  • 4.    Mental predicates : THINK, KNOW, WANT, FEEL, SEE, HEAR

  • 5. Speech : SAY, WORD, TRUE

  • 6. Actions, events and movement :  DO,

HAPPEN, MOVE, TOUCH

  • 7. Existence, location,   specification   and

possession: BE (SOMEWHERE),THERE IS,           HAVE,           BE

(SOMEONE/SOMETHING)

  • 8.    Life and death : LIVE, DIE

  • 9.    Time : WHEN/TIME, NOW, BEFORE, AFTER, A LONG TIME, A SHORT TIME, FOR SOME TIME, MOMENT

  • 10.    Space : WHERE/PLACE, HERE, ABOVE.

  • 11.    Evaluators : GOOD, BAD

  • 12.    Descriptors : BIG, SMALL

  • 13.    Space : BELOW, FAR, NEAR, SIDE, INSIDE

  • 14.    “Logical" concepts : NOT, MAYBE, CAN, BECAUSE, IF

  • 15.    Intensifier, Augmenter : VERY, MORE

  • 16.    Rational Substantive : KIND OF, PART OF

  • 17.    Similarity : LIKE/AS/WAY

It is illustrated by the following explication. The Explication shows a semantic description of the word lie (Wierzbicka 1990), which, it is argued to be fully compatible with the prototypically effect described by Coleman and Kay (1981). Notice in particular that the final component of this explication is a reference to a social evaluation. From a syntactic point of view, the explication exemplifies the use of certain complement and argument structures, e.g. the ‘addressee’ argument of SAY, the sentential complements of WANT and KNOW.

X lied to Y =

X said something to person Y

X knew it was not true

X said it because X wanted Y to think it was true people think it is bad if someone does this.

In this case, part of sentence which needs to be translated is phrasal verb. It is because two-word verb or phrasal verb has a different meaning from the verb that forms it. Hart (2009) divides phrasal verbs into two. Phrasal verbs are either separable or nonseparable. However, there is no rule that differentiate both separable from nonseparable phrasal verbs.

Separable phrasal verbs are separated by their objects. When the object is a noun, it is optional whether the object is placed between the verb and the particle or after the particle. Examples: 1.) I took my shoes off; 2.) I took off my shoes. Both sentences are correct. However, when a pronoun is used instead of a noun, the pronoun is placed between the verb and the particle. Examples: 1.) I took them off, 2.) I took off them. On the other hand, nonseparable phrasal verbs cannot be separated from their objects. Example: 1.) He ran into a tree, 2.) He ran a tree into.

In translating phrasal verbs in this study, some translation methods were used. Newmark (1988) mentions the difference between translation

methods and translation procedures. He states that, while translation methods are related to whole texts, translation procedures are used for sentences and the smaller units of language". He goes on to refer to the following methods of translation:

  • •    Word-for-word translation: in which the SL word order is preserved and the words translated singly by their most common meanings, out of context.

  • •    Literal translation: in which the SL grammatical constructions are converted to their nearest TL equivalents, but the lexical words are again translated singly, out of context.

  • •    Faithful translation: it attempts to produce the precise contextual meaning of the original within the constraints of the TL grammatical structures.

  • •    Semantic translation: which differs from 'faithful translation' only in as far as it must take more account of the aesthetic value of the SL text.

  • •  Adaptation: which is the freest form of

translation, and used mainly for plays (comedies) and poetry; the themes, characters, plots are usually preserved, the SL culture is converted to the TL culture and the text is rewritten.

  • •    Free translation: it produces the TL text without the style, form, or content of the original.

  • •    Idiomatic translation: it reproduces the 'message' of the original but tends to distort nuances of meaning by preferring colloquialisms and idioms where these do not exist in the original.

  • •    Communicative translation: it attempts to render the exact contextual meaning of the original in such a way that both content and language  are readily  acceptable  and

comprehensible to the readership.

Moreover, preliminary research was conducted in Eat Pray Love novel which was translated into Makan Doa Cinta. It was found that the translation of phrasal verb had less accuracy, lost the sense and words of SL. Based on this, it is

assumed that in dealing with translation complexities, many problems came up in translation; one of them was the translation of phrasal verb. These are the data of English phrasal verb and its translation

Data 1 : “to look up” translated into “mencari”.

The phrasal verb used in the first data is to look up, if it is translated literally into TL, the meaning will be melihat keatas. Melihat means to see something using eyes and keatas means to a higher place. If it is used in the sentence, the sentence in TL had to be “saya melihat kata tersebut keatas dalam kamus”. This makes the sentence not understanble in TL. On the other hands, to look up is better known as mencari in TL. However, the sense of SL is omitted in the process.

Data 2 : “to get together” was translated into “bertemu”.

Moreover, in the second data another phrasal verb is introduced. The phrasal verb used in this is to get together. If literal translation method was used to translate this phrasal verb, the translation of TL should be untuk dapat bersama. Dapat in Indonesia means getting or obtaining something and bersama means together. In TL sentence, the result of the translation is “Kenapa kita tidak dapat bersama saat makan siang suatu hari nanti?” This sentence is not the wrong form of TL and contains meaning, but the meaning is slightly different from that of SL. However, it is acceptable in TL.

The above pre-research shows a glimpse of data found in the study. Datum 3 was taken from the sentence in page 29 of the novel, “I absolutely needed to get myself back to Indonesia somehow, on my own dime this time” this is translated into “ Saya sangat perlu untuk mendapati diri saya kembali ke Indonesia, kali ini dengan uang saya sendiri”. It was found that the phrasal verb in that sentence is to get back.

Furthermore, in the SL sentence “I absolutely needed to get myself back to Indonesia somehow, on my own dime this time”. Kembali means to return to a place you have been to. The

explication of to get back ‘kembali’ is shown below;

At that time, someone (X) needs to get herself (X) back to somewhere :

someone (X) did something (move)

(X) did this to (X)’s place

(X) did this with something (plane, ship, etc)

(X) wanted to do this (return)

because of this, (X) be somewhere (in previous place)

Based on the above preliminary research, it was found that NSM is needed in translation in order to obtain an appropriate translation of SL to TL since the goal of NSM is to avoid common failures of other methods. NSM sees two major obstacles in meaningful semantic analysis; those are circularity and terminological obscurity (Marusch 2008). NSM tries to avoid circularity using a restricted set of sixty-four semantic primitives in the analysis (Wierzbicka 2010); while terminological obscurity deals with semantic primitives in natural language.

Moreover, the novel Eat Pray Love was chosen because of it contains a lot of emotion and sense in the SL. It contrasts with the translation using common language with less sense and emotion than the original. However, the translation entitled Makan Doa Cinta is acceptable by target reader. These facts need to be discovered.

RESEARCH METHOD

The research methods in this study focus on several aspects namely: research approach, method and technique of collecting the data, method and technique of analyzing data. The first aspect is the research approach. It gives the general description on how the data in this research are analyzed and categorized.

Moreover, method and technique of collecting data is the next aspect in this research. Basically, this aspect provides information needed on the way of collecting the data, including the steps. Data were collected by observing both novels to find the English phrasal verbs and their translation equivalents. Observation is a procedure of collecting data by

observing the data; in this case, novels were read focusing on the English phrasal verbs and their translation equivalents in Bahasa Indonesia. Then, some steps were applied. First, the phrasal verbs in the source text were identified. Identification provided appropriate data to be analyzed in this study. Next, the English phrasal verbs and their translation equivalents were noted down completed with page number and the sentences in which the phrasal verbs can be found.

The last aspect is the method and technique of analyzing the data. This aspect gives the description on how the data were analyzed in this present study. The method applied to analyze the data in this study was the qualitative-descriptive method. The descriptive method is aimed at describing the data systematically and factually, namely, characteristics and correlation that occur among phenomena, while the qualitative method is used to describe the data scientifically (Djajasudarma 1993). The data of phrasal verbs and their translation equivalents were put side by side completed with the sentences. Then, the meaning of each phrasal verb and its translation equivalent were configured in the form of paraphrases. All the meaning of phrasal verbs was mapped by adopting the exponential mapping technique. Finally, the meaning of phrasal verbs and their components were explicated using the NSM approach in which the words were broken down into the combinations of semantic primes.

DISCUSSION

Based on the aim of the study, this unit shows the translation methods used to figure out all of the data in a systematical way; as a result, a clear picture about the translation methods used for phrasal verbs in this translation of English-Indonesian texts was revealed. The translation methods are divided into two main parts based on Newmark (1988); they are the translation methods which emphasize the SL and the translation method which emphasize the TL.

Moreover, the translation methods emphasizing the TL are divided into four. They are adaptation, free translation, idiomatic translation, and communicative translation. Moreover, there are translation methods which emphasize the SL. They are adaptation, free translation, idiomatic translation, and communicative translation. In this

case, the communicative translation was used to translate the phrasal verbs. It can be seen from the explication of phrasal verbs in SL and their translation equivalents.

Data 3.1.

SL

TL

I walk up the stairs to my fourth-floor apartment, all alone. (Gilbert 3)

Saya menuju apartemen saya di lantai empat , sendirian. (Nugroho 3)

The communicative translation method was used. It appears that the translation focuses on the meaning, not on the form, in this case, the form of phrasal verb. Therefore, it is not translated into phrasal verb in Indonesia. Walk up, if seen from the meaning in the dictionary (OALD), it means to walk or to go on foot toward somebody or something, especially in a confident way. The process takes a certain period of time to be somewhere. It involves the action of movement. It can be near or far. However, the word up in walk up indicates that the place is in the higher position than where the phrasal verb is spoken. Walk means heading toward particular direction on foot. The word up indicates that the destination is located in the higher place than previous one. It might be collectively and individually done. The time taken is not definite. The word walk shows that the speed of the movement is not more than 20 km/h. Therefore, if the distance is long, time and energy needed would be more than going by transportation media.

In the other hand, menuju means heading toward a particular direction (KBBI). It is not clear whether it is done on foot or by a certain transportation vehicle. It shows that we are losing a piece of information whether the action is done on foot or not. The speed might be more than 20 km/h and the distance is limitless. Time and energy could be saved. However, money might be needed to pay for the transportation service or gas. The destination is not located in the higher position than the previous place. This is assumed to be acceptable to the readership of TL, even though, this cannot

represent all parts of walk up in SL. Moreover, it will be clear if it is seen from the following explication.

The explication of walk up ‘menuju’

At that time, (X) did something

Because of this, something happened to (X)’s place

(X) did (move) to somewhere (higher)

(X) did this for sometime

(X) wanted this to be happened

The explication of menuju ‘walk up’

At that time, (X) did something

Because of this, something happened to (X)’s place

(X) did (move) to somewhere

(X) did this for sometime

(X) wanted this to be happened

Data 3.2.

SL

TL

But I share it here because something was about to occur on that bathroom floor that would change forever the progression of my life—almost like one of those crazy astronomical super events when a planet flips over in outer space for no reason.... (Gilbert 5)

Tetapi saya berbagi disini karena sesuatu baru saja akan terjadi di lantai kamar mandi tersebut yang akan merubah hidup saya selamanya—hampir seperti peristiwa yang luar biasa yang berhubungan dengan astronomi ketika sebuah planet terbalik di ruang angkasa untuk alasan (Nugroho 5)

Flip over means turning onto the other side or upside down (oxford learner dictionary). It is a kind of movement. It involves an effort to do this. Sometimes, it is good or bad. Only a short time is needed to do this. The phrasal word flip over is translated into terbalik by using the communicative translation method. It can be seen from the attempt made to render the exact contextual meaning of the original in such way that both are acceptable to the reader without transferring the senses and emotion. The translator did not use another phrasal verb as the translation product in TL. Moreover, flips over is commonly used to modify a flying object like aero plane, kite, etc. It is a kind of action. The action is done by something. That kind of action

makes the stand to be in an upside-down position. It can be done once or many times. The time needed is very short. In this sentence, the phrasal verb flips over is used to modify a planet. Meanwhile, almost the entire planets have a ball shape which is assumed that this action will not take an effect on them. This is not appropriate with the meaning shown by the writer, in which the planet flips over and create massive mess on the surface.

Terbalik in TL means turning onto the opposite side or upside down. In some occasions, it is done accidentally (KBBI). Moreover, terbalik shows that an action could be done by everyone and everything. Nothing indicates that the action is done as fast as aero plane. Moreover, the doer will keep being in this upside-down position for a certain length of time. This is also done mostly on purpose. The translator used this word to tell the readership that the action would change the life of the doer to be something different the previous life. In conclusion, it is assumed that the translator used terbalik to represent the phrasal verb flips over because terbalik is the closest equivalent. Even though, it is meant that some senses must be omitted for the sake of readership of TL. It takes a short time. This is a kind of movement which is very fast.

The explication of flip over ‘terbalik’ is as follows: At that time, (X) did something

Because of this something happened to (X) (X) did this (move upside down) in a short time. (X) maybe did this (move upside down) because (X) wanted it.

(X) did this (move upside down) because something (effort)

The explication of terbalik ‘flip over’ is as follows: At that time, (X) did something

Because of this something happened to (X) (X) did this (move upside down) in a short time. (X) maybe did this (move upside down) because something (effort)

(X) did not wanted this (move upside down)

Finally, it can be concluded that the English Phrasal verbs appear in the total number 60.

However, the same phrasal verbs are omitted. It can be seen from table 3.1. below:

Table 3.1.

NO

TRANSLATION METHOD

NUMBE R

PERCENTA GE

1

Word-for-word translation

0

0 %

2

Literal translation

0

0 %

3

Faithful translation

0

0 %

4

Semantic translation

0

0 %

5

Adaptation

0

0 %

6

Free translation

0

0 %

7

Idiomatic translation

0

0 %

8

Communicative translation

59

98,33 %

It was counted that 59 were translated into TL using the communicative translation method and 1 was omitted in the target language. The percentages were that 98,33 % was translated using the communicative translation method and 1,66 % was omitted or erased. This shows that the communicative translation method is the method dominantly used in the translation of Eat Pray Love.

CONCLUSION

Based on the analysis of the data in this study, it was found that the communicative translation method was the translation method dominantly used in the translation of the novel Eat Pray Love. The percentage of the use of the communicative translation method is 98,33 %, and only 1,66 % was not using it. This communicative translation method focuses on the readership of TL. Therefore, phrasal verbs in SL were not transferred into phrasal verbs in TL. Moreover, the aesthetic and emotional values of SL were omitted in the process of translation.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Catford, J.C. 1980. A Linguistic Theory of Translation. An Essay in Applied Linguistic. United Kingdom, Oxford University Press.

Coleman, L, & Kay, P. (1981). Prototype semantics: The English word “lie”. Language. URL : https://www.academia.edu/1855217/Prototy pes_in_Cognitive_ Linguistics.

Djajasudarma, Fatimah.1993. Metode Linguistik Ancangan metode penelitian dan kajian. Bandung, PT Aresco.

Goddard, C. 2011, Second Edition : Semantic Analysis. New York, Oxford University Press Inc.

Goddard, C. 1998. Theoretical Linguistic Journal : Bad Arguments Against Semantic Primitives. Australia, University of New England.

Goddard, C. & Wierzbicka, A. (eds.). 1994. Semantic and Lexical Universals—Theory and Empirical Findings. Amsterdam, John Benjamins.

Grice, H.P. 1957. The Philosophical Review. United States of America, Duke University Press.

Hart, C.W. 2009. The Ultimate Book of Phrasal Verb. United States of America, Barron’s Educational Series, Inc.

Hatim, Basil. & Mason, Ian. 1990. Discourse and The Translator. United Kingdom, Pearson Education Limited.

Heine, Bernd and Narrog, Heiko. 2010. Oxford Handbook of Linguistic Analysis. New York, Oxford University Press.

Marusch, Tina .2008. Natural Semantic Formalism? A Discussion of the Naturalness in Wierzbicka’s Approach to  Lexical  Semantic  Analysis.

Chemnist, Technische Universitaat.

Merriam Webster  Dictionary, 2012.   America,

Encyclopedia Brittanica Company

Munday, Jeremy. 2001. Introducing Translation Studies :  Theories and Applications. New York,

Routledge.

Labov, W. 1973. The boundaries of words and their meanings.    Washington, Georgetown

University Press.

Larson, Mildred L, 1991. Translation : Theory and Practice, Tension and Interdependence.

North America, John Benjamin Publishing Company.

Newmark, Peter. 1988, A Textbook of Translation, United Kingdom, Prentice Hall.

Nida, EA, 1964. Towards a Science of Translating. Leiden, E.J.Brill.

Newmark, Peter. 1988, A Textbook of Translation, United Kingdom, Prentice Hall.

Wierzbicka, Anna. 1972. Semantic Primitives. Linguistische Forschungen 22. Athenäum , Frankfurt.

Wierzbicka, Anna. 2010. The set of universal human  concepts.  University of New

England.URL:

(http://www.une.edu.au/bcss/linguistics/nsm /semantics-in-brief.php )

147