Syntactic Characteristic Analysis of Colloquial Makassar Indonesian Based on the Use of Personal Pronoun Affixes: From Interference to Borrowing
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.17507/tpls.1309.14Keywords:
colloquial Makassar Indonesian, syntactic characteristicsAbstract
This paper will prove the existence of colloquial Makassar Indonesian (CMI) by showing its syntactic characteristics based on the use of personal pronoun affixes. This is very interesting and important because in general colloquial Indonesian languages are spoken in other cities in Indonesia, for example Jakarta, Manado, Ambon, etc. is a subsystem of the Indonesian language (hereinafter abbreviated as IND), but CMI is really a subsystem or subvariant of the Makassar language (MAK), the mother tongue of the Makassarese people. Therefore, it is not easy for Makassar newcomers to master this CMI. To master it, they must first learn the basic rules of MAK syntax. The fundamental thing in this case is the change in language typology, namely CMI has been proven to have adopted the V-S-O (Verb-Subject-Object) typology of MAK. Meanwhile, IND has the S-V-O (Subject-Predicate-Object) typology. This happened because there was language contact between MAK and Malay (now IND), a language which became the forerunner to the birth of IND as the national language and the state language of the Republic of Indonesia. In this case, at first Makassar city residents tried to use Malay, but with MAK syntactic interference. Gradually this form of interference became the entry point for the borrowing of the MAK syntactic subsystem in the IND speeches of Makassar city residents. IND utterances with the characteristics of MAK syntax then become the characteristics of CMI, which has now reached the level of integration and convergence.
References
Arka, I. W. & Yannuar, N. (2016). On the morphosyntax and pragmatics of-in in colloquial Jakarta Indonesian. Indonesia and the Malay World, 44(130), pp. 342-364.
Azzouz, A. (2013). Interference of syntactic, lexical and phonological aspects from Arabic into English for Syrian university students: A cross-sectional study in the HIL at Aleppo University. Unpublished Ph.D. Thesis, Aleppo University, Aleppo.
Belkacemi, C. (2013). Ip patterns of movements in vso typology: The case of Arabic. The Buckingham Journal of Language and Linguistics, 6(1), pp. 15-25.
Brown, P. & Levinson, S. C. (1987). Politeness: some universals in language usage (Vol. 4). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Darwis, M. (2014). Perilaku morfosintaksis bahasa Bugis [Bugis language morphosyntactic behavior]. Proceeding of International Congress of the Indonesian Linguistic Society, University of Lampung, Bandar Lampung, pp. 367-370.
Davies, P. G. C. (2010). Identifying word-order convergence in the speech of Welsh-English bilinguals. Bangor University (United Kingdom).
Diallo, A. (2010). Morphological consequences of Mande borrowings in Fula: The case of Pular, Fuuta-Jaloo. Journal of Language Contact, 3(1), pp. 69-85.
Eppler, E. M. (2005). The syntax of German-English code-switching. Ph. D dissertation, University of London, London.
Esser, H. (2006). Migration, language and integration. Berlin: WZB.
Fakih, A. (2016). Agreement in standard Arabic VSO and SVO word orders: A feature-based inheritance approach. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 6(1), pp. 1-33.
Gulle, O. (2014). Structural convergence in Cyprus. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation. Ludwig Maximilian, Universität München [University of Munich].
Hamers, J. F. et al. (2000). Bilinguality and bilingualism. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Haugen, E. (1950). The analysis of linguistic borrowing. Language, 26(2), pp. 210-231.
Heine, B & Kuteva, T. (2005). Language contact and grammatical change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Helmbrecht, J. (2004). Politeness distinctions in personal pronouns: A case study on competing motivations, in MacWhinney, B. (ed.) et al. Competing motivations in grammar and usage competing motivations in grammar and usage. pp. 315–332. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Hsin, L. (2014). Integrated bilingual grammatical architecture: insights from syntactic development. Unpublished Ph. D dissertation, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland.
Ide, S. (1989). Formal forms and discernment: two neglected aspects of universals of linguistic politeness. Multilingua, 8(2-3), pp. 223-248.
Jukes, A. R. (2006). Makassarese (basa Mangkasara'): A Description of an Austronesian language of South Sulawesi. Doctoral dissertation, University of Melbourne, Department of Linguistics and Applied Linguistics.
Jukes, A. (2013a). Aspectual and modal clitics in Makassarese. NUSA: Linguistic studies of languages in and around Indonesia, 55(1), pp. 123-133.
Jukes, A. (2013b). Voice, valence, and focus in Makassarese. Proceedings of the workshop on Indonesian-type voice systems (pp. 101-121). Research Institute for Languages and Cultures of Asia and Africa (ILCAA), Tokyo University of Foreign Studies.
Kamsinah et al. (2018). Bentuk konvergensi dan integrasi morfosintaksis bahasa Makassar terhadap bahasa Indonesia di kota Makassar [Convergence and integration of Makassar language morphosyntax to Indonesian in Makassar city]. Proceeding of International Congress of the Indonesian Linguistic Society (KIMLI 2018), University of Papua, Manokwari, Indonesia., pp. 172-178.
Kamsinah et al. (2021). Argument structure in Indonesian passive voice: Universal grammar analyses. Advances in Social Science, Education and Humanities Research, Atlantis Press SARL, 622, pp. 346-350.
Kanana, F. E. (2011). Dialect convergence and divergence: A case of Chuka and Imenti. In Bokamba, E. G. et al., Selected Proceedings of the 40 th Annual conference on African Linguistics, Somerville MA: Casadilla Proceedings.
Leisiö, L. (2011). Morphosyntactic convergence and integration in Finland Russian. Academic dissertation, The Faculty of Humanities of University of Tampere, Pyynikintie 2, Tampere.
Mackey, W. F. (1970). A Typology of bilingual education. In Foreign Language Annals, 3(4), pp. 596-606.
Mokhtar, M. (2000). Interferensi morfologis penutur bahasa Bugis dalam berbahasa Indonesia [Morphological interference of Bugis speakers in Indonesian]. Humaniora, 12(2), pp. 219-224.
Moeliono, A.M. et al. (2017). Tata bahasa baku bahasa Indonesia. [Indonesian standard grammar]. Fourth edition. Jakarta: Badan Pengembangan dan Pembinaan Bahasa, Kementerian Pendidikan dan Kebudayaan.
Nomoto, H. (2006). Voice in colloquial Malay relatives. In Tsuruga, Y. et al. (ed.) Gengojouhougaku Kenkyuuhoukoku, 12(1), pp. 97-116.
Napoli, D. J. (1993). Syntax theory and problems. New York & Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Sneddon, J. N. (2002). Variation in informal Jakartan Indonesian: A Quantitative Study. Linguistik Indonesia, 20(2), pp. 127-157.
Sneddon, J. N. (2003). Diglossia in Indonesian. Bijdragen tot de Taal-, Land-en Volkenkunde, 159(4), pp. 519-549.
Sneddon, J. N. (2006). Colloquial Jakartan Indonesian. Pacific Linguistics, Research School of Pacific and Asian Studies, The Australian National University.
Sofiane, K. (2015). Code switching and borrowing among Algerian English University students. Unpublished Ph.D. Thesis, University of Oran, Es Senia, Algeria.
Uhlenbeck, E. M. (1982). Kajian morfologi bahasa Jawa [Javanese morphology study]. Jakarta: Djambatan Press.
Yılmaz, G. (2013). Bilingual language development among the first-generation Turkish immigrants in the Netherlands. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Groningen, Netherlands. Retrieved May, 13, 2017.
