Siladang Syntax: A Study of Grammar Typology
Abstract
The analysis of basic clause structures shows that clauses in Bahasa Siladang consist of verbal and non-verbal predication. The non-verbal predicate can be filled by an adjective, noun, numeral or prepositional phrase. The analysis of the argument structure shows that the intransitive predicate requires one NP argument as the only argument functioning as the grammatical subject, which can be an agent or a patient. Meanwhile, the transitive verb predicate requires two or more arguments. The presence of these arguments in the predicate in transitive sentences is mandatory. The conclusion from the analysis of the grammatical behavior in syntactic construction is that SL is a language which has a grammatical alignment system which gives the same treatment to A and S, and a different treatment to P. It can be categorized as an accusative language, marking the direct object of transitive verbs, making them different from the subject of both transitive and intransitive verbs.
Keywords: clause structure, argument structure, syntactic typology
References
[1] Arka, I. W. (2000). Beberapa Aspek Intransitif Terbelah pada Bahasa Nusantara: Makalah Dipresentasikan pada Austronesia Formal Linguistic Association. Vrije Universiteit, Amsterdam.
[2] Artawa, K. (1994). Ergativity and Balinese Syntax (disertasi). Melbourne: La Trobe University.
[3] Basaria, I. (2011). Relasi dan Peran Gramatikal dalam Bahasa Pakpak Dairi: Kajian Tipologi (Dissertation, Pascasarjana Universitas Sumatera Utara, 2011).
[4] Blake, B. J. (1990). Relation Grammar. London: Routledge.
[5] Budiarta, I. W. (2013). Tipologi Sintaksis Bahasa Kemak (Dissertation, Pascasarjana Universitas Udayana, 2013).
[6] Butar-Butar, M., et al. (1984). Morfologi dan Sintaksis Bahasa Siladang. Jakarta: Pusat Pembinaan dan Pengembangan Bahasa Departemen Pendidikan dan Kebudayaan.
[7] Comrie, B. (1989). Linguistics Typology. In F. J. Newmeyer (Ed.), Linguistics: The Cambridge Survey (vol I). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
[8] Greenberg, J. H. (1963). Universal of Language. Massachusetts: The M.I.T. Press.
[9] Haegeman, L. and Gueron, J. (1999). English Grammar: A Generative Perspective. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers.
[10] Jufrizal. M. (2007). Tipologi Gramatikal Bahasa Minangkabau. Padang: UNP Press.
[11] Li, C. N. (Ed). (1976). Subject and Topic. New York: Academic Press. Inc.
[12] Mallinson, G. and Blake, B. J. (1981). Language Typology: Cross-Linguistic Study in Syntax. Amsterdam: North Holland Publishing Company.
[13] Mithun, M. (2001). Who Shapes the Record, the Speaker and the Linguist. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
[14] Pawiro, M. A. and Siwi, P. (2005). Karakteristik Tipologi Bahasa Siladang. Medan: Fakultas Sastra UISU.
[15] Sawardi, F. X. (2007). Pivot dan Subjek dalam Kasus Bahasa Jawa. Semarang: Universitas Sebelas Maret.
[16] Sinar. T. and Syarfina (2009). Prosodi Bahasa Siladang Sumatera Utara. Medan. Universitas Sumatra Utara.
[17] Sudaryanto. T. (2015). Metode dan Aneka Tehnik Analisis Bahasa. Yogyakarta: Duta Wacana University Press.
[18] Sukendra. M. (2012). Struktur Klausa Bahasa Sabu: Kajian Tipologi Bahasa. (Dissertation Pascasarjana Universitas Udayana, 2012).
[19] Tambusai, A. (2016). Tipologi Morfologis dan Struktur Argumen Bahasa Melayu Riau. (Dissertation, Pascasarjana Universitas Sumatera Utara, 2016).
[20] Van Valin, R. D. and Lapolla, R. J. (1999, 2002). Syntax: Structure, Meaning, and Function. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
[21] Verhaar, J. W. M. (1988). Syntactic Ergativity in Contemporary Indonesian. Athens: Ohio University.