A DISTRIBUTED MORPHOLOGY ANALYSIS OF INDONESIAN KE-/-AN VERBS

Lanny Hidajat

doi:10.26499/li.v32i1.12

Authors

Lanny Hidajat Atma Jaya Catholic University

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.26499/li.v32i1.12

Keywords:

ke-/-an circumfix, verbalizing head

Abstract

Indonesian ke-/-an verbs have a complex argument structure. Similarly to Indonesian passive di- verbs, ke-/-an verbs never have an agentive NP in the subject position and their subject NPs must be definite. However, unlike passive di- verbs, these verbs generally cannot be followed by an agentive prepositional phrase. In addition, when ke-/-an verbs have two arguments, the applied argument appears in the subject position instead of the internal one. In this study, the structure of Indonesian ke-/-an verbs is analyzed by using the Distributed Morphology framework (Folli dan Harley, 2002; Kratzer, 1996; Marantz, 1997; among others). Based on the verbsâ€™ distribution and interpretation, this study argues that of ke-/-an verbs are derived by attaching the ke-/-an circumfix, which is an overt representation of a verbalizing head, to the projection of
ROOT.

References

Baker, Mark, Kyle Johnson, and Ian Roberts. 1989. Passive Arguments Raised. Linguistic Inquiry 20: 219â€“251.

Chomsky, Noam. 1981. Lectures on Government and Binding. Dordrecht: Foris.

Chomsky, Noam. 2000. Minimalist inquiries: The framework. In Roger Martin, David Michaels, and Juan Uriagereka (eds.) Step by step: Essays on Minimalist Syntax in Honor of Howard Lasnik, (pp. 89-155). Cambridge, MA.: MIT Press.

Chomsky, Noam. 2001. Derivation by Phase. In Michael Kenstowicz (ed.) Ken Hale: A Life in Language, (pp. 1-52). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Cole, Peter. and Min Jeong Son. 2004. The argument structure of verbs with the suffix â€“kan in Indonesian. Oceanic Linguistics, Volume 43.2:339-364.

Dardjowidjojo, Soenjono. 1978. The semantic structures of the adversative ke-â€¦-an verbs in Indonesian. In S. Udin (ed.) Spectrum: essays presented to Sutan Takdir Alisjahbana on

his seventieth birthday (pp. 107-124). Dian Rakyat, Jakarta.

Dowty, David R. 1979. Word Meaning and Montague Grammar. Dordrecht: Reidel.

Dubinsky, Stanley, and Silvester Ron Simango. 1996. Passive and Stative in Chichewa: Evidence for Modular Distinctions in Grammar. Language 72:749-781.

Embick, David. 2004. On the Structure of Resultative Participles in English. Linguistic Inquiry 35.3: 355-392.

Folli, Raffaella and Heidi Harley. 2002. Consuming Results in Italian & English: Flavors of v. In P. Kempchinsky and R. Slabakova (eds.) Aspect. (pp. 1-26). Dordrecht: Kluwer

Academic Publishers, (Manuscript is downloadable at http://dingo.sbs.arizona.edu/~hharley/PDFs/ FolliHarley2002Final.pdf)

Grimshaw, Jane. 1990. Argument Structure. Cambridge, MA, MIT Press.

Guilfoyle, Eithne, Henrietta Hung, and Lisa Travis. 1992. Spec of IP and Spec of VP: Two Subjects in Austronesian Languages. Natural Language and Linguistics Theory 10: 375-414.

Hale, Kenneth and Samuel Jay Keyser. 1993. On Argument Structure and the Lexical Representation of Semantic Relations. In S.J. Keyser & K. Hale (eds.) The view from Building (pp.53-109). Cambridge, MA, MIT press.

Harley, Heidi and Rolf Noyer. 1999. Distributed Morphology. Glot International, Volume 4, Issue 4, April 1999: 3 â€“ 9.

Katz, Graham. 2003. On the stativity of the English perfect. In A. Alexiadou, M. Rathert and A. von Stechow (eds.) Perfect Explorations (pp. 205-234). Mouton de Gruyter, Berlin.

Kratzer, Angelika. 1996. Severing the External Argument from Its Verb. In Johan Rooryck & Laurie Zaring, (eds.). Phrase Structure and lexicon, (pp. 109-137). Dordrecht: Kluwer.

Legate, Julie Anne. 2001. The Configurational Structure of a Nonconfigurational Language. In J. Rooryck and P.Pica (eds.) Linguistic Variations Yearbook 1:61-104.

Levin, Beth, and Malka Rappaport Hovav. 1995. Unaccusativity: At the syntax-lexical semantics interface. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.

Marantz, Alec P. 1997. No escape from syntax: Donâ€™t try morphological analysis in the privacy of your own lexicon. In A. Dimitriadis, & L. Siegel, (Eds.), University of Pennsylvania

Working Papers in Linguistics, 4.2 (pp. 201-225). Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Working Papers in Linguistics.

Marantz, Alec P. 2001. Words and Things. Handout, MIT, Cambridge, Mass. (http://dingo.sbs.arizona.edu/~hharley/Oxford/Marantz2.pdf)

McCloskey. 1997. Subjecthood and Subject Positions. In L. Haegeman (ed.) Elements of Grammar, (pp. 197-235). Dordrecht: Kluwer.

McGinnis, Martha. 2001. Variation in the Phase Structure of Applicatives. In J. Rooryck and P.Pica (eds.) Linguistic Variations Yearbook 1: 105-146.

PylkkÃ¤nen, Liina. 2002. Introducing Arguments. Doctoral dissertation, MIT, Cambridge, Mass.

Sneddon, James Neil. 1996. Indonesian: A Comprehensive Grammar. London and New York: Routledge.

Sneddon, James Neil. 2000. Another Look at ke- â€¦ -an Verbs. In Bambang Kaswanti Purwo, Ed., Kajian serba linguistik: untuk Anton Moeliono, pereksa bahasa (Transl: Languages, linguistics, and civilization: festschrift in honor of Anton Moeliono, Indonesian expert in linguistics). Jakarta: Universitas Katolik Indonesia Atma Jaya, BPK Gunung Mulia.