English Lexical Causative Construction: A Study Of Syntax And Semantics

ENGLISH LEXICAL CAUSATIVE CONSTRUCTION:

A Study of Syntax and Semantics

SKRIPSI

Submitted to fulfill one of the requirements of Sarjana Sastra Degree

TRISA SEPDIANI NIM. 63710020

ENGLISH DEPARTMENT

FACULTY OF LETTERS

INDONESIA COMPUTER UNIVERSITY

BANDUNG

viii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

Alhamdulillahirabbil’alamin, praise be upon Allah SWT that I have finally accomplish this skripsi. I would like to express my deepest gratitude to:

1. Dean of Faculty of Letters, Prof. Dr. H. M. Tadjuddin, M.A.

2. Head of English Department, Dr. Juanda

3. My advisors, Tatan Tawami, S.S., M.Hum. and Nenden Rikma, S.S.,

M.Hum. Thanks for their kindness in guiding the writer to write this skripsi.

4. My examiners, Dr. Nia Kurniasih and M. Rayhan Bustam, S.S. Thanks for

their suggestions to the writer in revising this skripsi.

5. Guardianship lecturer, Nungki Heriyati, S.S., M.A.

6. All the lecturers in English Department; Retno Purwani Sari S.S.,

M.Hum., Asih Prihandini S.S., M.Hum. and the others who cannot be mentioned one by one. Thanks for their knowledge and experience they have shared to the writer.

7. Classmates of 2010; Dania, Ceuceuw, Vivi, Lena, Vini, Abang, Daliman,

Om, Wildan and the others who cannot be mentioned one by one.

Bandung, August 2014

ix CONTENTS

ABSTRACT vi

ABSTRAK vii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT viii

CONTENTS ix

LIST OF FIGURE xiii

LIST OF ABBREVIATION xiv

LIST OF APPENDICES xv

CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background to The Topic 1

1.2 Research Questions 4

1.3 Objectives 4

1.4 Significant to Knowledge 5

1.5 Framework of the Theory 5

CHAPTER II THEORETICAL REVIEW

2.1 Syntax 8

2.1.1 Syntactic Function 9

2.1.1.1 Subject 9

2.1.1.2 Predicate 10

x

2.1.1.4 Complement 11

2.1.1.5 Adverbial 12

2.1.2 Syntactic Unit 13

2.1.2.1 Phrase 13

2.1.2.2 Clause 16

2.2 Semantics 17

2.2.1 Componential Analysis 17

2.2.2 Semantic Roles 18

2.2.2.1 Agent 19

2.2.2.2 Causer 19

2.2.2.3 Affected 19

2.2.2.4 Beneficiary 20

2.2.2.5 Accompaniment 20

2.2.2.6 Resultant 21

2.2.2.7 Instrument 21

2.2.2.8 Location 21

2.2.2.9 Goal 22

2.2.2.10 Time 22

2.2.2.11 Manner 22

2.2.2.12 Measure 23

xi

2.3 Lexical Causative 24

2.3.1 Causer 25

2.3.2 Causee 26

CHAPTER III RESEARCH OBJECT AND METHOD

3.1 Research Object 27

3.2 Research Method 28

3.2.1 Data Collection 29

3.2.2 Data Analysis 29

CHAPTER IV FINDINGS AND DISCUSSIONS

4.1

Lexical Causative with No Change in Verb; the Agent is not the

Causer

33

4.2 Lexical Causative with No Change in Verb; the Agent is the Causer 40

4.2

Lexical Causative with Some Idiosyncratic Changes in Verb; the

Agent is the Causer

60

4.3 Lexical Causative with Different Verb; the Agent is the Causer 71

CHAPTER V CONCLUSIONS AND SUGGESTIONS

5.1 Conclusions 84

5.2 Suggestions 87

xii

APPENDICES 93

91 REFERENCES

Deterding, David, H. and Poedjosoedarmo, Gloria, R. 2001. The Grammar of

English: Morphology and Syntax for English Teachers in Southeast Asia. Prentice Hall, Singapore.

Dixon R.M.W. 1994. Ergativity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press

Flick, Uwe. 2009. An Introduction to Qualitative Research Fourth Edition. SAGE

Publication Limited, London.

Fromkin, Victoria and Robert Rodman. 1983. An Introduction to Language, Third Edition. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston

Goddard, Cliff. 1998. Semantic Analysis, A Practical Introduction. Oxford

University Press

Jacobs, Roderick A. 1995. English Syntax: A Grammar for English Language

Professionals. New York: Oxford University Press

Kreidler, Charles W. 1998. Introducing English Semantics. London: Routledge.

Larson, Mildred, L. 1984. Meaning Based Translation: A Guide to

Cross-language Equivalence. University Press of America.

Miller, Jim. 2002. An Introduction to English Syntax. UK: Cambridge University

Press.

O’Grady, William, et.al. 1996. Contemporary Linguistics: An Introduction (Third Edition). United Kingdom: Pearson Education Limited.

Palmer, F.R. 1976. Semantics: 2nd Edition. London: Cambridge University Press

Payne, Thomas E. 1997. Describing Morphosyntactic; A Guide for Field Linguist.

92

Payne, Thomas E. 2011. Understanding English Grammar. Cambridge:

Cambridge University Press

Radford, A. 2004. Minimalist Syntax: Exploring the structure of English.

Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Randolf, Quirk. 1985. A Comprehensive Grammar of The English Language. New

York: Longman

Samardzic, Tanja and Merlo, Paola. 2012. The Meaning of Lexical Causatives in

Cross-Linguistic Variation. Linguistic Issues in Language Technology – LiLT, 12 Januari 2012.

Sudaryanto. 1993. Metode dan Aneka Teknik Analisis Bahasa: Pengantar

Penelitian Wahana Kebudayaan secara Linguistis. Yogyakarta: Duta Wacana University Press.

Sugiyono. 2007. Metode Penelitian Kuantitatif Kualitatif dan R&D. Bandung:

Alfabeta

Werner, Patricia, K. 1990. Mosaic I: A Content Based Grammar (Second Edition).

Madison: McGraw-Hill Publishing Company.

William, James, D. 2005. The Teacher’s Grammar Book, Lawrence Erlbaum.

New Jersey: Associates Publisher.

Winarti. 2009. Konstruksi Kausatif Morfologis dan Perifratis dalam Bahasa

Indonesia. Bandung: Universitas Indonesia

Yulianasari. 2006. Analisis Konstruksi Kausatif Sintaksis (Syntactic Causative)

Dalam Novel Congo Karya Michael Crichton. Bandung: UNIKOM <http://www.natcorp.ox.ac.uk/>

CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION

This chapter presents background to the study, research question, objectives, significance to knowledge and framework of the theories.

1.1 Background to the study

Causative is an expression in which an event (the caused event) is depicted as taking place because someone does something or because something happens Goddard (1998:260). It is used when one thing or person causes another thing or person to do something. Causative is divided into three types according to Goddard (1998:260): analytical causative, morphological causative, and lexical causative. The analytical causative is expression in which there are two events that have relation where one event shows cause and another one shows result, as in Mary made her brother do his homework. The morphological causative is formed

by adding suffixation such as –en and –ify, for example widen, simplify. The last

one is the lexical causative, the expression in which the form does not show

causative but it has semantically causative, for example in the verbs like kill and

feed.

Lexical causative is a construction that shows a cause and an effect through one causative verb. For example in:

In (I), the cause and the effect are represented by the predicate kills. The

cause is shown explicitly that Danu (causer) causes Andrea (causee) to die. In (I),

the effect is shown implicitly that Andrea dies because of what Danu does to her.

Therefore, semantically Danu does something that causes Andrea to die. This

state is represented by the lexical causative of the predicate kill.

Observing the verbs kill and die from the above illustration, few simple

questions appear, why is it only the verb kill that is said to be lexically causative,

whereas die not? The brief answer may go this way, that kill is a transitive verb

whereas dies is an intransitive verb. Simply, because the object Andrea follows

the verb kill whereas no object follows the verb die. In addition to that, if both

verbs are seen from their shared meaning, death for example, should not their

meaning be easily accessible through their relation to death? When kill carries the

concept of die, does die carry the concept of kill? These questions then lead to the

difference in the inherent meaning of the verb; kill suggests that there seems to be

an intention to make one in death condition, whereas dies does not show the

intention though in the end it shows that one is death. Eventually, it is simply

understood that the sentence *Danu dies Andrea is not acceptable in English. This

phenomenon is one of several cases occurring in the lexical causative verb. Some may argue that these merely the cases of transitive or intransitive

verb. If so, what about the verb open that applies for both subjects in the

sentences:

II. a I open the door. II. b the door opens.

In II. a, it is clear that the one who makes the door open is I. However, in II. b it is not clear who makes the door open. This case indicates that the form of lexical causative verbs may have same form but carries different information. As stated earlier, lexical causative verb shows a cause and an effect through one causative verb. Then, what are the information and how are they related is a crucial issue to be discussed.

Another case occurs in the sentences: III. a I lay the book on the table. III. b The book lies on the table.

III. a suggests the same information as in the II. a, and III. b seems to suggest the same thing as in II. b. However, there is a slight difference in III. b that the verb is not the same as III. a as in II. b is the same as in II. a. It indicates that the discussion of lexical causative is quite complex in the way of understanding what information involve in the verb, who is the causer or the causee, and what is the

easy way to recognize the form. These questions stimulate the writer’s curiosity to

explore the inherent meaning carried by the verbs and at the same time to discover the impact towards the arguments (syntactic unit) following the verb or existing in the construction. The lexical causative seems interesting to be analyzed, because it is different from the analytical causative that shows the cause and the effect in the construction, whereas the lexical causative only shows the cause without the effect, and put one lexical verb that show the cause and the effect at the same time.

In relation to this research, two previous researches about causative have

been conducted. The first research is entitled Analisis Konstruksi Kausatif

Sintaksis (Syntactic Causative) dalam Novel Congo Karya Michael Crichton (Kajian Sintaksis dan Semantik) by Yuliana Sari (2006) UNIKOM. It focuses on what is the role existing in the syntactic causative construction, the category of causee, what is the kind of predicate of effect, and causative verb meaning. The

second research is entitled Konstruksi Kausatif Morfologis dan Perifratis dalam

Bahasa Indonesia by Winarti (2009) Universitas Indonesia. It focuses on

morphological causative and periphrastic construction in Bahasa Indonesia.

Both researchers did not analyze about the lexical causative. Therefore,

this research, entitled “English Lexical Causative Construction” is performed to

extend the discussion regarding the issue.

1.2 Research Questions

1. What are the syntactic units following the lexical causative verb?

2. What are the semantic features existing in the syntactic units with the

lexical causative verbs?

1.3 Objectives

1. To describe the syntactic units following the lexical causative verbs.

2. To describe the semantic features existing in the syntactic units with the

1.4 Significance to knowledge

This research is expected to have significant benefit, both theoretically and practically. Theoretically, it is expected to give knowledge about the lexical causative to reader in terms of how a lexical causative verb has different form of verb with different syntactic units following it. Additionally, how the semantic features existing in the syntactic units expose the existence of causer and causee within the sentences. Practically, it is expected to give understanding about the lexical causative to reader in how a lexical causative verb has semantically causative by exposing the inherent meaning of the verb. Other than that, the reader is informed how to differ the types of lexical causative verbs in English by looking at the syntactic units following it and the meaning properties contained.

1.5 Framework of the Theory

In this research, several theories are applied to guide the analysis. First, the writer uses the theory of syntax from Miller (2002), Jacobs (1995), and Radford (2004) to analyze the syntactic units and syntactic functions. In addition, the writer also uses other relating theories of syntax to extend the analysis. Other than the syntax theories, the writer also uses the theory of semantics from Palmer (1976), Larson (1984), Fromkin and Rodman (1983) to discover the meaning of the syntactic unit and the componential analysis. As for the theory used to analyze the lexical causative is taken from Goddard (1998:260):

“A causative an expression in which an event (the caused event) is depicted as taking place BECAUSE someone does something or because something happens. Lexical causatives are words like kill,

send, and feed which seem to be related in meaning to other words (such as die, go, and eat).”

According to the theory, it is said that causative is an event occurring because someone does something, or when someone or something causes another thing or person to do something, whereas the lexical causative is one lexical verb that has relation to other words, kill and die.

Further, Dixon (1994) states that there are three ways to identify the lexical causative, first, identify the lexical verb, second, identify the causer and the last, identify the causee. These are as follows:

i. Relating to the lexical verb involved in the construction, whether the

lexical causative verbs are:

a. Stative vs. active

b. Intransitive vs. transitive vs. ditransitive

ii. Relating to the causee, whether it is:

a. Having vs. lacking control

b. Acting willingly vs. unwillingly

c. Partially affected vs. completely affected

iii. Relating to the causer, whether it is:

a. Acting directly vs. indirectly

b. Acting accidentally vs. intentionally

c. Acting naturally vs. with effort

In addition, Payne (2002), in Winarti (2009:18) it is said that there are

three subtypes of lexical causative. There are no change in verb, some

idiosyncratic change in verb, and different verb. Lexical causative with category no change in verb means that the verb in the causative and non-causative

construction is the same. Some idiosyncratic change in verb means that there is

vowel change in the verb in the causative and in the non-causative construction

but the meaning is synonymous. Different verb means that verb in the causative

8 CHAPTER II

THEORETICAL BACKGROUND

This chapter outlines the theories used to analyze the data discussed in Chapter IV. In addition, it also illustrates the framework of the research. It exhibits theories regarding the focus and topic of the study. In general, the framework of this study is divided into two main theories, syntax and semantics; however, the focus is on the lexical causative. The theories are outlined based on the data analysis in Chapter IV. Therefore, it is expected that the description of the theories can ease the reader to understand the focus of the study that is explained through syntax and semantic approaches.

2.1 Syntax

The term syntax deals with the structure of sentence. As Miller (2002:56) states that “syntax has to do with how words are put together to build phrases, with how phrases are put together to build clauses or bigger phrases and with how clauses are put together to build a sentence”. It suggests that syntax combines word in order to construct the phrases, clauses or sentences. In addition,

according to Jacobs (1995:4) “Syntax deals with grammatical principles, units,

and relations involved in sentence structure”. This means that syntax talks about the grammatical principles, units and relation within the sentence structure. In this research, the writer limits the discussion of syntax into syntactic funtions and syntactic units.

9

Syntactic units or constituents fill grammatical function in syntactic analysis. In addition, the constituents can be said as part of the syntactic structure since they made up phrases and sentences that eventually form a complete sentence structure. As suggested by Radford (2004:7):

“The central assumption underpinning syntactic analysis in traditional grammar is that phrases and sentences are built up of a series of constituents (i.e. syntactic units), each of which belongs to a specific grammatical category and serves a specific grammatical function”

Departing from this, the syntactic analysis is performed to discover the sentence structure for its constituents, what category they belong, and what function they hold in the sentence.

2.1.1 Syntactic Functions

In syntax, syntactic function or grammatical function is understood as the functions that are served by every constituent in the sentence. It is then known that grammatical function is those that serve as the Subject, Predicate, Object, Complement, and Adverbial in the sentence.

2.1.1.1 Subject

Subject is the function in the sentence that is described or that does the

action. As Radford (2004:8) suggests “subject generally represent entities directly

involved in the particular action or event described by the predicate”. In addition, Deterding and Poedjosoedarmo (2001:74) illustrate what is defined by subject as in the following:

10 William buys Kate some flowers

They state that the subject usually occurs before the verb, the subject

determines subject-verb concord (so the –s suffix is added to present tense verbs

with third person singular subjects) and the subject and first auxiliary are inverted for interrogative sentence.

2.1.1.2 Predicate

In a simple way, predicate is commonly known as the action verb or the

words that exhibits what the subject does. William (2005:54) argues that verbs

tend to be words that describe actions and states of being. On this basis, we can see that sentences generally express two types of relations: (a) an agent performing an action; (b) existence. This indicates that predicate is not merely about what the subject does, yet it also suggests who or what the subject is. The examples below (taken from William, 2005:54) illustrates the definition:

1. The dogs bark. 2. The tree was tall.

In 1, the dogs performed the action conveyed in the verb bark, whereas in

2, the tree expresses its existence or what the subject is. He also states that functionally everything else in a sentence is related to its subject and predicate in some way (2005:55).

In addition to the discussion of verb, several of them oblige or can work

with an object. William names this kind of verb as transitive verbs (2005:72).

Other than that, Deterding and Poedjosoedarmo add that the verbs that take two

11

and indirect objects. Regarding the issue, William defines these terms as the noun

phrase that is acted upon we refer to as a direct object; the noun phrase that accepts the direct object we call it an indirect object (2005:75).

2.1.1.3 Object

In a simple definition, it is understood that object is the function in the sentence that receives the action from the subject. In line with this, William (2005:57) illustrates what is defined by object through the following example:

Fritz hit the ball.

He states that in this sentence, the ball was hit, so it is what Fritz acted upon. Such constructions are referred to as objects. He also adds that objects always consist of a noun phrase. This quotation suggests that object is indicated to have noun phrase as its constituent or syntactic unit.

2.1.1.4 Complement

Another term applies in the grammatical function is complement. It is different from object; that it is not acted upon by the subject. A complement is said to serve and complete the predicate William (2005:57). The term serve can be defined as to complete the be form verb as in She is beautiful. In addition, a

complement is also defined to complement the subject as in Kinan is my student.

Though my student is said to be noun phrase constituent, it is not an object since it

12

Another distinguished case of complement is where it occurs in the verb following by two noun phrases. They sometime do not directly state direct or indirect object but one of the constituents describes the direct object. Therefore, it

is called as object complement Deterding and Poedjosoedarmo (2001:76) as in we

have elected you our leader.

2.1.1.5 Adverbial

The term adverbial is said to modify the verbs, the adjectives and the other

adverbs William (2005:79). It is said to modify the verbs as in Anna walks slowly

to the room. Therefore, it is also defined to modify the adjectives as in Michele is really smart. Additionnaly, it is said to modify the other adverbs as in Charlie speaks very loudly. It has six types, as in the following:

 

  

  

  

  

  



Other than this, prepositional phrase also may serve as adverbial William (2004:79). He also states that prepositional phrase generally works with noun

13

phrase that can serve adverbially or adjectivally (2005:89) as in (examples taken from the same source):

The woman with the red hair drove a Porsche.

Fritz walked down the street.

In the morning, Fred always has wild hair.

2.1.2 Syntactic Units

Syntactic units or constituents are simply understood as the units of language contained in the sentence and they may serve particular grammatical

function. Deterding and Poedjosoedarmo (2001:65) argue that a constituent is a

group of words that belong together and behave as a single unit. It indicates that constituents are syntactic units serving as particular grammatical function in a sentence. Therefore, they can also be called as arguments (semantic term) of the predicate since they can also serve as subject and complements in the sentence Radford (2004:8). In this study, the constituents are limited to the discussion of kinds of phrases as the constituents present in the discussion in Chapter IV.

2.1.2.1 Phrase

Phrase is said to be the most basic kind of constituent Deterding and

Poedjosoedarmo (2001:67). In addition to this, William (2005:56) states that a

phrase can be defined as one or more words functioning together as a unit that does not constitute a clause. Radford (2004:50) adds up that the simplest way of

14

forming a phrase is by merging (a technical term meaning ‘combining’) two words together. However, relating to the merging itself, William argues that

a phrase is identified on the basis of the keyword at its beginning, such as a noun or a verb….These words are referred as headwords because they are at the head of the phrase and the other words in the phrase are attached to them (2005:57).

This definition suggests that by way of merging, the headwords of the phrases determine the kinds of the phrase itself. For examples (taken from Radford), if the beginning word of the phrase is a noun, the phrase is then called

noun phrase and if it is a verb it is then called as verb phrase, as in Flowers in her

hair and Running with the bull. This so-called merging is the basic rule in combining phrase. Several phrases under discussion are described below.

a. Noun Phrase

According to Quirk (1985:62):

“noun phrases consist of a head, which is typically a noun, and of elements which (either obligatory or optionally) determine the head and (optionally) modify the head, or complement another element in the phrase”

As mentioned earlier in the definition of phrase, the noun phrase has noun as its head. This quotation emphasis the phrase structure rule mentioned earlier. b. Verb Phrase

The same case occurs also in verb phrase, the phrase structure rule is

supported by the theories from Quirk (1985:62) saying that“verb phrases consist

of a main which either stands alone as the entire verb phrase, or is preced by up to four verbs in an auxiliary function”.

15 c. Adjective Phrase

In addition to the definition of phrase, adjective phrase is also built by the

adjective as its head. Quirk (1985:63) states that “adjective phrases consist of an

adjective as head, optionally preceded and followed by modifying elements”. This quotation suggests that the head may be followed or preceded by the modifying elements of other categories/phrases.

d. Adverb Phrase

The adverb phrase is also built by adverb as its head of the phrase. Quirk

(1985:63) says that ”adverb phrases are similar to adjective phrases in their

structure, except that they have an adverb, instead of an adjective, as their head”. This simply indicates that the phrase structure rule is also applied to this phrase. However, the form of this phrase may be in the form of prepositional phrase since it can serve to function as adverb in the sentence construction (see e below). e. Prepositional Phrase

Finally yet importantly, prepositional phrase is rather unique since it can

also serve as adverb. Quirk (1985:63) says that “prepositional phrase consist of

preposition followed by a prepositional complement, which is normally a noun phrase”. In addition to this and the point in d, William (2005:89) states that the preposition links its noun phrase to either a verb phrase or another noun phrase,

which means that the prepositional phrase functions either adverbially or

16 2.1.2.2 Clause

After considering phrases, the other syntactic unit to be discussed is clause. Deterding and Poedjosoedarmo argue clause as consisting of a subject and a predicate, sometimes with a subordinator preceding the subject (2001:85). This quotation implies a clause can be said as part of a sentence and it could be a dependent one or independent since it has a predicate and a subject, yet sometimes it has subordinator. Under this discussion, relating to the fact that there are independent and dependent clause, Deterding and Poedjosoedarmo (2001:88)

mention that there are three basic kinds of finite subordinate clause: a noun

clause, a relative clause, and an adverb clause.

Relating to this study, the clause itself may serve particular grammatical function since it is also a constituent, part of sentence that builds up the sentence. This understanding is supported by Deterding and Poedjosoedarmo (2001:88) through their illustration regarding the most common function of the mentioned clauses.

Clause type Function Example

Noun clause Direct object I know that SYNTAX IS FUN

Relative clause Post modifier of noun He is the man WHO MET ME

Adverb clause Adverbial I laughed WHEN I SAW HIM

Figure 2.1 Three Basic Types of Finite Subordinator Clauses.

As illustrated, each clause serves particular grammatical function. However, the form of these clauses may be reduced, making it rather difficult to identify the constituent and the function.

17 2.2 Semantics

Semantics is the study of meaning. As Palmer (1976:1) states that “Semantics is technical term used to refer to the study of meaning”. Another

opinion states by Fromkin and Rodman (1983:124) “The study of the linguistic

meaning of words, phrases, and sentences is called semantics”. Therefore, it can be concluded that semantics is the study of meaning of words, phrases and sentences. In this research, the analysis of semantics used is the meaning properties, the semantic role and pharaphrase.

2.2.1 Componential Analysis

The meaning of a word is said to be crucial to the wholeness of the meaning of the word itself. Therefore, meaning making process is performed in order to provide not only what is seen from the lexical item but also what is

implied or intended by the word itself. Larson argues that the meaning of lexical

item can only be discovered by studying that particular item in contrast to other items which are closely related (1984:79). This suggests that the meaning of a word can be discovered by way of contrasting or grouping it to other known words that are closely related. This way, the shared meaning components may exhibit the intended meaning of the words. One way of grouping or contrasting the word is through componential analysis.

In componential analysis, one is making the contrastive feature of meaning for certain areas of vocabulary Larson (1984:82). Through this, the words can then be grouped or mapped based on the similarity in order to achieve the

18

mapping of the word’s meaning. This kind of analysis, according to Larson

(1984:83) is known as the fact that each word is a bundle of meaning components.

In this approach, Larson also adds up that the words must contain a generic

component (1984:83).

In relation to this, he illustrates how meaning components can be analysed

through the words man, woman, boy, and girl, because they are all human beings

(1984:84). He says that the generic component is also shared as central component, which is HUMAN BEING (see figure below).

MALE FEMALE

ADULT man woman

YOUNG boy girl

Figure 2.2 Contrastive Feature of Meaning (taken from Larson, 1984:84)

The figure illustrates that in order to distinguish each word from another;

the presence of contrastive component is required. In this case, the contrastive

component of woman is ADULT and FEMALE, respectively for the others as illustrated from the figure.

2.2.2 Semantic Roles

Semantic role is understood to serve the arguments (constituents/units) of the verbs in the sentence. Semantic role names the role of each argument of the sentence as suggested by the predicate. Below are several semantic roles defined for this research.

19 2.2.2.1 Agent

Agent is someone or something that does an action. As Larson (1984:199)

said “agent is the thing which does the action”. For instance:

Bella read the book The sun rises

Bella is the one who does the action of reading whereas the sun indicates that it undergoes an action.

2.2.2.2. Causer

Causer is someone or something that makes someone or something do an

action. As suggested by Larson (1984:199) “causer is the thing which instigates

the event rather than actually doing it”. For instance:

Jason brokes the window (Jason causes the window brokes)

Eliza made her brother clean the room (Eliza causes her brother cleans the room)

The term causer here can also be indicated as the causer of lexical causative verb under discussion (see 2.3.1).

2.2.2.3 Affected

Affected is someone or something that experiences an action or that is

affected by the action. According to Larson (1984:200) “affected is the thing that

undergoes the event or is affected by the event”. For instance: The ice melted

20 Kinan feeds the cat

The ice undergoes an action of changing from solid to liquid whereas Kinan is the one doing the action of giving food.

2.2.2.4 Beneficiary

Benefiary is someone or something that receives an advantage or

disadvantage from the action. As Larson (1984:201) states “beneficiary is the

thing that is advantages or disadvantages by the event”. For instance: Sally gives the book to me

Mary bought her mother some cakes

The examples show that her mother and me take the advantages from the agents.

2.2.2.5 Accompaniment

Accompaniment is someone or something that takes a part and has relation with the agent, the causer or the affected in an action. As suggested by Larson

(1984:201) “accompaniment is the thing which participates in close association

with the agent, the causer or the affected in an event”. Robert walks to the partk with his dog

I ate dinner with my friends

In this research, since the accompaniment has close association, it may also serve as causer in some cases.

21 2.2.2.6 Resultant

Resultant is something that is produced by an action. As Larson

(1984:201) said “resultant is that which is produced by the event”. For instance:

He writes a letter for her wife George made some cookies

2.2.2.7 Instrument

Instrument is that is used to do an action. Larson (1984:201) states “instrument is the thing used to carry out an event”. For instance:

John cut the bread with a knife Andrea writes with a pencil

In this study, the instrument may serve as the causer. The first example illustrates that something that cuts the bread is the knife, the causer, likewise in the next example (see 2.3.1).

2.2.2.8 Location

Location is something that shows the source, the place or the destination

from an action. According to Larson (1984:202) “location is the thing which

identifies the spatial placement of an event”. For instance: Anna goes to the school

Martin comes from London

The first example shows that the school is the destination whereas the second

22 2.2.2.9 Goal

Goal is something which is directed by an action. Larson (1984:202) said “goal is the thing towards which an actionis directed”. For instance:

Billy throw the basketball to the ring I pray to God

Both examples show that goal is something/someone that is intended to be the final direction of the intention of the agent.

2.2.2.10 Time

Time is used to show when an action takes place. As Larson (1984:202)

suggests “time identifies the temporal placement of the event, it tells when the

event took place”. For instance:

Joanna will come at five o’clock Peter went to Paris two days ago

As suggested by the examples, time shows particular time of the events to occur.

It identifies the occurrence of the event at one specific time.

2.2.2.11 Manner

Manner is how to do the action. As suggested by Larson (1984:203) “manner is the qualification of the event, it is the manner in which the action, experience, or process was carried out”. For instance:

I walk slowly to the room Tania speaks loudly

23

According to the quotation and example, manner is simply understood as the extension of how the action is performed by the agent or how the action occurs.

2.2.2.12 Measure

Measure is used to show quantity of an action. According to Larson

(1984:203) “measure is the quantification of the event”. For instance:

My mother’s bag costs $70 The flower had grown five inches

The quotation simply suggests that measure quantifies the event or the action. It

tells exactly the units being measure as suggested by the action.

2.2.3 Paraphrase

In this section, the term paraphrase is intended to serve the analysis of making the lexical causative into non-lexical causative. It is due to the fact that paraphrase can be used to state similar thing in the different way. According to

Kreidler (1998:9) “parahrase is sentences that make equivalent stataments about

the same entities”. Below are examples taken from Kreidler (1998:9): a. Rebecca got home before Robert

b. Robert got home before Rebecca c. Robert arrived at home after Rebecca d. Rebecca got home later than Robert

The examples indicate that the meanings of the above examples are the same despite their differences in the sentence formation.

24 2.3 Lexical Causative

Lexical causative is the expression in which the verb shows the meaning of

cause and effect. As Payne (2011:392) states “lexical causative (also “inherently

causative verb”) is a verb whose lexical entry expresses the meaning of cause and effect, e.g., kill means ‘cause to die”. Therefore, in the lexical causative there are

the term called causer; agent of cause and causee; agent of effect.

Additionally, lexical causative is divided into three subtypes according to

Payne (1997:177). Lexical causative with category no change in verb means that

the verb in the causative and non-causative construction is the same. Some

idiosyncratic change in verb means that there is vowel change in the verb in the causative and in the non-causative construction but the meaning is synonymous. Different verb means that verb in the causative construction changes in the non-causative construction.

Further, Dixon (1994) states that there are three ways to identify the lexical causative, first, identify the lexical verb, second, identify the causer and the last, identify the causee. The writer classifies them into the following outline (taken from Dixon 1994):

a. Relating to the lexical verb involved in the construction, whether the

lexical causative verbs are stative vs. active and/or intransitive vs. transitive vs. ditransitive. It is intended to discover the characteristics of the verb so that the nature of the verb can be indicated.

b. Relating to the causee, whether it is: having vs. lacking control, acting

25

affected. This part is intended to discover the role of the cause and how the cause is affected by the causer through the verbs.

c. Relating to the causer, whether it is: acting directly vs. indirectly,

acting accidentally vs. intentionally, acting naturally vs. with effort, involved vs. not involved in the activity. This section is intended to discover how the causer affects the causee as well as to see their relation to the causee through the verbs.

2.3.1 Causer

In the causative construction, there is the term called causer, it is someone or something that make someone or something does an action. This term is indicated to be similar to the term causer of the semantic role. In addition, the causer in this term can also be served by the semantic role of instrument and/or

accompaniment. As Larson (1984:199) said “causer is a person or object causes

an action or process to happen). In addition, Payne (2011:317) said “causer is an agent that is external to the situation itself”. It suggests that causer is the argument that allows the action to occur, or it has the power to make the action to occur. For instance:

Mary made John cook the chicken.

In the example above, Mary is the causer of the action of cooking, but she

is not the agent of the action cook itself, the agent of the action cook is John. It shows that causer is the agent of the external situation related to Payne (2011:317).

26 2.3.2 Causee

According to Payne (2011:317), causee is the agent of the effect. This means that causee is someone or something that does the action suggested by the causer. For instance:

Cristine made Ana eat the burger

The causee in the construciton above is Ana. She becomes the agent of the

effect the action made suggested by the causer Cristine. In this research, the cause

can also serve as the affected since most of the findings suggest that the objects of the sentence or the arguments are the causee.

27 CHAPTER III

RESEARCH OBJECT AND METHOD

This chapter illustrates the object of the research in relation to the topic under discussion. It also covers how the research is conducted; comprising the research method and technique, the description of data collection, and the data analysis.

3.1 Research Object

The object of the research is lexical causative construction in English. The data of the lexical causative construction is taken from the British National Corpus (BNC) through several steps of selection from Thomas E. Payne (1997)

and Tanja Samardžić and Paola Merlo (2012) (see: 3.2.1 Data Collection for

details). The data is accessed on early February until late May to finish.

The lexical causative construction also known as lexical verb or transitive verb is a verb that shows the cause and effect of the properties or semantic features of the verb. The inherent meanings of the verb in the syntactic construction indicate the existence of participants or argument involved in the action carried by the verb itself. This suggests that through the verb the existences of causer and causee can be indicated. In addition, both terms (causer and causee) can be switched to show the nature of the lexical verb itself through the shifting of the causer in the non-lexical causative into the causee in the lexical causative verb.

28 3.2 Research Method

This research is qualitative. Flick (2009:90) states that “qualitative research comprises a specific understanding of the relation between issue and method”. The quotation suggests that the issue taken in this study is qualified and described to give particular understanding or findings. In addition, the analysing process is guided through specified method.

The method of this study is descriptive-analytic. Sugiyono (2007:14)

states, “Metode deskriftif analisis adalah yang digunakan untuk menganalisa data

dengan cara mendeskripsikan atau menggambarkan data yang telah terkumpul sebagaimana adanya”. This simply suggests that the data is analyzed through the description or illustration. The description and illustration discuss the facts of the data through the relation among the elements in the data. This method illustrates the steps taken to describe the topic under discussion through the analysis.

In addition, the writer uses distributional method to expose the data, as

stated by Sudaryanto (1993:15) “… metode agih itu alat penentunya justru bagian

dari bahasa yang bersangkutan itu sendiri”. From the quotation, it can be inferred that this method is applicable for the study since the analysis exposes how the elements of language combine to expand one’s understanding towards the

syntactic structure for example. In addition, Sudaryanto also argues that “Alat

penentu dari metode agih ini jelas, selalu berupa bagian atau unsur dari bahasa objek sasaran penelitian itu sendiri; kata, fungsi sintaksis, klausa, silabe kata, titi nada” (1993:15).

29 3.2.1 Data Collection

In collecting the data, several steps are taken. First, to guide writer’s for the lexical verbs, the writer uses selected article and book in order to figure out

the verbs. The article is “The Meaning of Lexical Causative in Cross-Linguistic

Variation” by Tanja Samardžić and Paola Merlo and the book entitled

“Understanding English Grammar” by Thomas E. Payne. The writer marks the lexical verbs found in the book and article. Second, writing out the lexical causative verbs that have been marked to ease the searching of the data. Third, the writer looks over the use of these lexical causative verbs in the sentences from the BNC in order to see the varied constructions as well as to enrich the discussion. Fourth, copying the selected data to the data collection file to be classified into its

categories; no change in verb, some idiosyncratic change in verb, and different

verb. After that, the writer picks out the representative data to be analyzed.

3.2.2 Data Analysis

After collecting the data, they are analyzed through several ways. First, the lexical causative verb construction is analyzed by finding its syntactic features to determine the constituent and their function in the sentences. Second, the character of the lexical causative verb is determined to see for its transitivity. Third, the inherent meaning of the lexical causative verb is described by examining the semantic features of the verb. Fourth, the semantic role in construction of the arguments/constituent in the sentence is described to see the

30

existence of causer and causee. Then, the constituents/arguments involved in the sentence undergo a simple test by moving them to be placed as subject or object of the sentences. This test is set to simply see the causer and cause of the verb and to prove that the verb is lexical causative verb.

The data analysis below illustrates the process of analyzing the data: Data

Miserable, she broke a breadstick into pieces.... (GV8:116) Analysis

Relating to the lexical causative verb existing in the data above, the

construction is formed by the nominal subject she followed by the

dynamic-transitive verb broke, the nominal object a breadstick, and the prepositional

phrase into pieces, that serves as the complement of object. Syntactically, broke is

dynamic verb since it shows the process of broking that occurs with some

duration of time. Additionally, broke is transitive verb since it is followed by the

object a breadstick receiving the action from the subject she. The prepositional

phrase into pieces serves as the complement of object since it complements the

object after receiving the action from the subject.

She broke a bread stick into pieces

Agent Affected Resultant

S P O Complement of

31

Semantically, the subject she has the properties of [female] + [animate]

indicating that the subject is human who has the capability of doing things. This indicates that the subject may serve as an agent who does the action suggested by

the verb broke. The verb broke has the properties of [separation] + [suddenness]

indicating that the action performed by the agent may make the object a

breadstick to separate and that the separation occurs suddenly without duration of

time. The object a breadstick has the properties of [kind of bread] + [having

longer form than the commonly known bread] + [the form may somehow be like a

stick]. The object a breadstick has the role of affected since it experiences an

action from the agent she and that the action has somehow made the object

becomes no longer in its condition as suggested by the properties, which is like a

stick. The adverb into pieces has the properties of [to become into separation] +

[the separation may be more than one]. This adverb has the role of resultant since

it describes the condition of the object a breadstick which is no longer in pieces

since it has undergone the action from the agent she.

To show the causative construction, the data is made into the analytical

causative using made as predicate of cause to show the existence of the causer and

the causee.

(i) She made herself break the breadstick into pieces

Someone made something (the breadstick) break The breadstick breaks into pieces

In (i), she has two roles, as an agent and as a causer. Relating to the causer,

32

Directly, in terms that the subject she does the action of breaking directly to the

object by herself. Intentionally, means that the subject she has the intention to break (the infinitive, present form of broke) the object a breadstick, as indicated by the resultant that the breadstick is to be made into pieces to be eaten by the subject herself or for others. The subject causer she also does the action with effort because, in order to fulfill subject’s intention; to eat the breadstick for example, the subject must put some effort (action) upon it, broke is a verb that

needs an action from the subject. The subject she also involves in the action

because she is the causer and the agent of the action.

Relating to the causee, herself, as the reflexive pronoun to the subject she,

does the action willingly, is completely affected, and has control to the action. As

a causee, herself acts willingly without force from the causer, because the causee

is the causer itself. Herself also is affected completely by the action broke, herself

makes the object broken and has control to the action because herself is the one

that does the action. To show that this is lexical causative with category no

change in verb, the causative construction and the non-causative construction are shown:

(i) She broke a breadstick into pieces.

(ii) The breadstick broke into pieces.

Construction (i) is the causative construction as illustrated above, whereas construction (ii) is the non-causative construction because it shows the effect of construction (i).

33 CHAPTER IV

FINDINGS AND DISCUSSIONS

This chapter describes the findings of the research under discussion. Lexical causative verb is the verb that shows two events; cause and effect through one event. The lexical causative verbs are divided into three categories of findings namely (a) lexical causative with no change in verb, (b) lexical causative with some idiosyncratic changes in verb, and (c) lexical causative with different verb.

4.1 Lexical Causative with NO CHANGE IN VERB; the agent is not the causer

This category illustrates the findings of the lexical causative verb with no

change in verb. In this term, no change in verb means that the verb in the causative construction is same when it is made into the non-causative construction.

Data 1

 Freeze

Freeze the juice separately. (ED3:2276)

Freeze the juice separately

Affected Manner

34

Relating to the lexical verb in the data above, its construction is formed by

the dynamic-transitive verb freeze, the noun phrase the juice that serves as the

object, the adverbial phrase separately that serves as the adverb. Syntactically,

freeze is dynamic verb since it shows the process of freezing. This verb indicates

that there is such process of freezing things, the freezing occurs after a while with

duration of timeline. Furthermore, freeze is transitive verb since it is followed by

the object the juice. The adverbial phrase separately serves as the adverb since it

shows how the objcet the juice freezes.

Semantically, the verb freeze has the properties of [harden into ice] +

[convert from a liquid to solid by cold] indicating that the action performed by the

agent makes the object the juice to harden and change from liquid to solid by cold

with duration of time. The object the juice has the properties of [the natural fluid

of a fruit] and has the role of affected since it undergoes the action from the agent.

The adverb separately has the properties of [to divide] and has the role of manner

since it shows how the object the juice is divided into some parts.

To show the causative construction, the data is made into the analytical

causative using made as predicate of cause to show the existence of the causer and

the causee.

(i) (You) made the juice freeze separately

Someone made something (the juice) freeze The juice freezes

In (i), you has a role as the agent but you is not a causer of the freezing, the causer is cold suggested by the properties. Relating to the causer, cold does the

35

action directly, intentionally, with effort and involves in the action. Directly,

means that the causer cold does the action of freezing directly to the object.

Intentionally, means that the causer cold has intention to freeze the object the juice

as shown by the manner separately to be divided into some part. This intention is

gained through the sense derived from the agent you that you wants ot make the

object the juice freeze separately. The causer cold also does the action with effort

since it needs the other medium to make the object the juice freeze, for example

by using a freezer. The causer cold also involves in the action of freezing since cold is the causer of the action freeze.

Relating to the causee, the juice does the action willingly, is completely

affected and has lack control to the action. Willingly, means that the causee the juice does the action kindly since the causee is inanimate; lifeless which means it

cannot refuse the action of freezing. Moreover, the causee the juice is completely

affected to the action of freezing since the object the juice changes into ice by the

process of freezing. In addition, the causee the juice has lack control to the action

since the causer is cold and the agent is you. To show that this is lexical causative

with category no change in verb, below is shown the causative construction and

the non-causative construction:

(i) (You) freeze the juice separately.

(ii) The juice freeze

Construction (i) is the causative construction as illustrated above, whereas construction (ii) is the non-causative construction since it shows the effect of construction (i).

36 Data 2

 Dry

(viii) Dry the pups with tissues.... (EV6:270)

Dry the pups with tissues

Affected Instrument

P O Complement of object

In the data above, the construction is formed by the dynamic-transitive

verb dry, the noun phrase the pups that serves as the objectand the prepositional

phrase with tissues that serves as the complement of object. Syntactically, dry is

dynamic verb since it shows a process of drying something. This verb shows that

to dry something, the drying occurs after a while with some duration of time and

with some helping of the other medium. In addition, dry is transitive verb since it

is followed by the object the pups. The prepositional phrase with tissues serves as

the complement of object since it complements the object the pups.

Semantically, there is a subject that does the action dry that is implicitly mentioned. According to the construction which is formed as the imperative

sentence, then the subject is you. You has the properties of [indefinitely specified

person] + [animate] showing that the subject is human who has the ability to do

things. The verb dry has the properties of [free from liquid or water] showing that

the action dry make the object the pups is free from something like water or

liquid. The object the pups has the properties of [a young dog] and has the role of

37

complement of object with tissues has the properties of [using] + [soft and thin

paper] and has the role as instrument since it shows a tool which is tissue that make the object become dry.

To show the causative construction, the data is made into the analytical

causative using made as predicate of cause to show the existence of the causer and

the causee.

(i) (You) made the pups dry with tissues

Someone made something (the pups) dry The pups dry with tissues

In (i), you has the role as the agent and with tissues has the role as the

causer. Relating to the causer, with tissues does the action indirectly, intentionally,

with effort and involves in the action. Indirectly, means that with tissues as the

causer cannot do the action by itself, it needs helping from the agent you to do the

action. Intentionally, means that the causer with tissues has intention to make the

object the pups become dry which is free from water or liquid using tissues. The

causer with tissues also does the action with effort, means that in doing the action

dry, there are some process that have to be done by the agent you. Moreover, the

causer with tissues involves in the action since to make the object the pups

become dry, the agent you need some tools which is tissues.

Relating to the causee, the pups does the action willingly, is completely

affected and has lack control to the action. Willingly, means that the pups as the

causee does the action of drying freely. Additionally, the pups as the causee is

38

causee the pups has lack control to the action since the one that has control is the

agent you. To show that this is lexical causative with category no change in verb,

the causative construction and the non-causative construction are shown below:

(i) (You) dry the pups with tissues

(ii) The pups dry

Construction (i) is the causative construction whereas construction (ii) is the non-causative construction since it shows the effect of construction (i).

Data 3

 Melt

Melt the butter in a large saucepan.... (ABB: 1298)

In the data above, the construction is formed by the dynamic-transitive

verb melt, the noun phrase the butter that serves as the object, and the

prepositional phrase in a large saucepan that serves as the adverb. Syntactically,

the subject you is omitted since it is an imperative sentence, melt is dynamic verb

since it shows a process of meltingthe object the butter. Additionally, melt is

transitive verb since it is followed by the object the butter that receives the action

from the subject. In a large saucepan as the prepositional phrase serves as the

adverb since it shows where the action melt occurs.

melt the butter in a large saucepan

Affected Location

39

Semantically, the subject is implicitly mentioned and since it is imperative,

then the agent is you. The subject you has the properties of [indefinitely specified

person] + [animate] showing that the subject is human who has the capability to do something. The verb melt has the properties of [to be altered from solid to liquid] + [by heat] showing that the action performed by the agent make the object the butter alters from solid to liquid state by heat. The object the butter has the properties of [soft yellow substance] + [is used for cooking] and has the role as

the affected, since it undergoes the action melt by the agent you and that the action

make the object becomes no longer in its condition. The adverb in a large

saucepan has the properties of [round cooking pan] + [with a handle] and has the

role as location, since it shows where the action meltoccurs.

To show the causative construction, the data is made into the analytical

causative using made as predicate of cause to show the existence of the causer and

the causee.

(i) You made the butter melt in a large saucepan

Someone made something (the butter) melt The butter melts in a large saucepan

In (i), you has the role as the agent, but you is not the causer of the

melting, the causer is heat suggested by the properties. Relating to the causer, you

does the action directly, intentionally, with effort and involves in the action.

Directly, means that the agent you does the action of melting directly to the object.

Intentionally, means that the agent you has the intention to melt the object the butter in order to cook something with it. The agent you also does the action with

40

effort, since to cook something with the melting butter, the subject you must put

some effort over it. Further, the agent you also involves in the action sinceyou is

the agent of the action of melting.

Relating to the causee, the butter does the action willingly, is completely

affected and having control to the action. Willingly, means that the causee the

butter does the action of melting kindly since the agent of the action is the causer

you.Furthermore, the causee the butter is completely affected to the action of

melting since the object of the action is the causee itself. In addition, the causee the butter has no control to the action, since it is inanimate that has no capability to do something and since the causer is heat and the agent is you. To show that

this is lexical causative with category no change in verb, it is shown the causative

construction and the non-causative construction:

(i) You melt the butter in a large saucepan

(ii) The butter melts

Construction (i) is the causative construction as illustrated above, while construction (ii) is the non-causative construction because it shows the effect of construction (i).

4.2 Lexical Causative with NO CHANGE IN VERB; the agent is the causer

This category illustrates the findings of the lexical causative verb with no

change in verb. In this term, no change in verb means that the verb in the causative construction is same when it is made into the non-causative construction.

41 Data 4

 Gather

Gather the nuts together.... (C9C:324)

Gather the nuts together

Affected Manner

P O Adv

The construction in the data above is formed by the dynamic-transitive verb gather, the noun phrase the nuts that serves as the object and the adverbial

phrase together that serves as the adverb. Syntactically, gather is dynamic verb

since it shows the proces of gathering something with some duration of time. In

addition, gather is transitive verb since it is followed by the object the nuts. The

adverbial phrase together serves as the adverb since it show how the object the

nuts is gathered.

Semantically, the subject is implicitly mentioned and according to the

sentence, the type of the sentence is imperative. Therefore, the subject is you. The

subject you has the properties of [indefinitely specified person] + [animate]

indicating that the subject is human who has capability to do something. The verb gather has the properties of [bring together] + [collecting] indicating that the

action gather make the object the nuts to collect and to bring together. The object

the nuts has the properties of [dry fruit] + [hard-shelled] + [seed with separable

rind] and has a role as affected since it undergoes the action gather from the

42

has the properties of [in one place] and has a role as the manner since it show how the action is done by the subject.

To show the causative construction, the data is made into the analytical

causative using made as predicate of cause to show the existence of causer and

causee.

(i) (You) made the nuts gather together

Someone made something (the nuts) gather The nuts gather

In (i), you has two roles, as the agent and as the causer. Relating to the

causer, you does the action directly, intentionally, with effort and involves in the

action. Directly, means that the causer you does the action directly without any

other medium to the object the nuts. Intentionally, means that you as the causer

does the action with intention in order to make the object the nuts together in one

place. You as the causer also does the action with effort since it requires some

attempts to gather the object the nuts. The causer you also involves in the action

since you is the causer and the agent of the action of gathering.

Relating to the causee, the nuts does the action willingly, is completely

affected and has lack control to the action. Willingly, means that the causee the nuts receives the action kindly since it is inanimate. Additionally, the causee the nuts is completely affected to the action since it experiences the process of

gathering. Moreover, the nuts as the causee has lack control to the action since it

43

the non-causative construction to show that the data is lexical causative with

category no change in verb:

(i) (You) gather the nuts together

(ii) The nuts gather

Construction (i) is the causative construction whereas construction (ii) is the non-causative construction since it shows the effect of construction (i).

Data 5

 Open

I opened a bottle of wine.... (KPV:2116)

I opened a bottle of wine

Agent Affected

S P O

Relating to the lexical causative verb in the data above, the construction is

formed by the nominal subject I, the dynamic-transitive verb opened and the noun

phrasea bottle of wine that serves as the object. Syntactically, opened is dynamic

verb since it shows the process of opening something with some durative of time.

In addition, opened is transitive verb since it is followed by the object a bottle of

wine.

Semantically, the subject I has the properties of [refers to oneself] +

[animate] showing that the subject is human who has capability to do things. The

44

showing that the action make the object a bottle of wine has no barrier in its top.

The object a bottle of wine has the properties of [container for holding liquids] +

[having neck and mouth] + [made from glass or plastic] and has the role as the affected since it experinces the action that make the object becomes no longer in its previous condition.

To show the causative construction, the data is made into the analytical

causative using made as predicate to show the existence of the causer and the

causee.

(i) I made a bottle of wine open

Someone made something (a bottle of wine) open A bottle of wine opens

In (i), I has two roles, as the agent and as the causer. Relating to the causer, I does the action directly, intentionally, with effort and involves in the

action. Directly, means that the causer I does the action of opening directly to the

object a bottle of wine. Intentionally, means that the causer I does the action with

intention in order to fulfill her/his willingness to drink the wine. The causer I also

does the action with effort since the action of opening needs some process and

some attempts. In addition, the causer I involves in the action since the causer I is

the agent of the action.

Relating to the causee, a bottle of wine does the action willingly, is

completely affected and has lack control to the action. Willingly, means that the

causee a bottle of wine does the action without force, moreover the causee is

45

Additionally, the causee a bottle of wine is completely affected to the action since

it undergoes the process of opening by the subject. Furthermore, the causee a

bottle of wine has lack control to the action since it is the object that receives the

action of opening. To show that this is lexical causative with category no change

in verb, below is shown the causative construction and the non-causative construction:

(i) I opened a bottle of wine

(ii) A bottle of wine opened

Construction (i) is the causative construction as illustrated above, whereas construction (ii) is the non-causative construction since it shows the effect of construction (i).

Data 6

 Close

I close his door quietly.... (J13:1568)

I close his door quietly

Agent Affected Manner

S P O Adv

According to the data above, the construction is formed by the nominal

subject I followed by the dynamic-transitive verb close, the noun phrase his door

that serves as the object and the adverbial phrase quitely that serves as the adverb.

46

and duration of time. Moreover, close is transitive verb since it is followed by the

object his door. The adverbial phrase quitely serves as the adverb since it shows

how the subject i does the action of closing to the object his door.

Semantically, the subject I has the properties of [refers to oneself] +

[animate] indicating that the subject is human who has the ability to do something.

The verb close has the properties of [block entry or passage] + [bind together parts

or edges] indicating that the action of closing make the object his door

inaccesable since it is blocked. The object his door has the properties of [movable

piece of wood, glass or metal] + [barrier for opening and closing an entranceway] and has the role as affected since it undergoes the action of closing from the

subject I. The adverb quietly has the properties of [making no noise or sound] and

has the role as the manner since it show how the subject I does the action.

To show the causative construction, the data is made into the analytical

causative using made as the predicate of cause to show the existence of the causer

and the causee.

(i) I made his door close quietly

Someone made something (his door) close

His door close

In (i), I has two roles, as the agent and as the causer. Relating to the causer, I does the action directly, intentionally, with effort and involves in the action. Directly, means that I as the agent and as the causer does the action of

closing exactly to the object his door. Intentionally, means that the causer I does

47

causer I also does the action with effort which means the causer I does the action

with some attempts that need some energy. In addition, the causer I involves in

the action since the causer I is the agent of the action itself.

Relating to the causee, his door does the action willingly, is completely

affected and has lack control to the action. Willingly, the causee his door does the

action of closing freely without any refusal. Furthermore, the causee his door is

completely affected to the action of closing since the object is the causee his door.

Additionally, the causee his door has lack control to the action since it cannot do

anything since it is lifeless. Below is the causative construction and the

non-causative construction to show that the data is lexical non-causative with category no

change in verb:

(i) I close his door quietly

(ii) His door close

Construction (i) is the causative construction whereas construction (ii) is the non-causative construction since it shows the effect of construction (i).

Data 7

 Grow

I grow so many of my plants, including trees and shrubs, from seed. (A0G:1021)

I grow so many of

my plants

including trees and shrubs

from seed

48

(origin)

S P O Complement of

Object

Adverb

In the data above, the construction is formed by the nominal subject I, the

dynamic-transitive verb grow, the noun phrase so many of my plants that serves as

the object, the adjective phrase including trees and shrubs that serves as the

complement of object and the prepositional phrase from seed that serves as

location (origin). Syntactically, grow is dynamic verb since it shows the process

of developing something with some duration of time. Additionally, grow is

transitive verb since it is followed by the object so many of my plants. The noun

phrase so many of my plants serves as the object since it receives the action from

the subject I. The adjective phrase including trees and shrubs serves as the

complement of object since it complements the object so many of my plants. The

prepositional phrase from seed serves as the adverb since it shows the source of

the object so many of my plants that is done by the agent I.

Semantically, the subject I has the properties of [refers to oneself] +

[animate] showing that the subject is human who has the ability of doing

something. The verb grow has the properties of [develop to maturity] + [to

increase in size] showing that the action of growing make the object to develop

and to increase with duration of timeline. The object so many of my plants has the

properties of [large number] + [living thing that grows in the ground] and has the role as the affected since it experiences the action of growing from the agent I.

49

The adjective phrase including trees and shrubs has the properties of [tall plant

that has a thick, stem and branches] and has the role as the accompaniment since it

complements the object. The prepositional phrase from seed has the properties of

[a small object produced by a plant from which a new plant can grow] and has the role as location that stands as origin which show the source of the the object so many of my plants.

To show the causative construction, the data is made into the analytical

causative using made as the predicate of cause to show the existence of the causer

and the causee.

(i) I made so many of my plants including trees and shrubs grow from

seed

Someone made something (so many of my plants including trees and shrubs) grow

So many of my plants including trees and shrubs grow from seed In (i), I has two roles, as the agent and as the causer. Relating to the causer, I does the action directly, intentionally, with effort and involves in the

action. Directly, means that the causer I does the action of growing directly to the

object so many of my plants by her/himself through some. Intentionally, means

that the causer I does the action of growing with intention to the object in order to

grow some plants from seed. The causer I also does the action with effort, since

to do the action of growing, the causer I needs some attempt and some energy

which is like watering or giving some fertilizer. Additionally, the causer I

83

construction (i). In addition, there is a verb changing in the construction (ii) fall from verb in construction (i) drop.

84 CHAPTER V

CONCLUSIONS AND SUGGESTIONS

This chapter illustrates the findings of the study and at the same time provides suggestions to extend the similar study in the future. The discussions in Chapter IV are concluded in this chapter, whereas the suggestions are derived from the possible gaps found during the analysis. In this chapter, the writer also exhibits the answers to the research questions suggested in Chapter I. In addition to that, the writer provides suggestions to extend the research in the future.

5.1 Conclusions

The conclusion is based on the discussions and analysis conducted in Chapter IV towards 20 data. The findings suggest four findings from the three categories of lexical causative verb; a. lexical causative with no change in verb; the agent is not the causer (3 data), b. lexical causative with no change in verb; the agent is the causer (9 data), c. lexical causative with some idiosyncratic change in verb; the agent is the causer (4 data), and d. lexical causative with different verb; the agent is the causer (5 data). Departing from this, several conclusions can be made as the answer to the research questions stated in Chapter I:

1. Lexical causative construction occurs in positive and imperative sentences (7 positive sentences and 13 imperative sentences) with the predicate characteristic of dynamic transitive verbs in 18 data and dynamic

85

ditransitive in 2 data. The syntactic units following the lexical causative verbs are:

a. In lexical causative with no change in verb, the lexical verb is followed by noun phrase (NP) as object with 3 data, NP as object and prepositional phrase (PP) as adverb with 5 data, PP as adverb with 1 data, NP as object and PP as complement of object with 1 data, and NP as object and PP phrase as complement of object and PP as adverb with 1 data (see table 5.1)

b. In lexical causative with some idiosyncratic change in verb, the lexical verb is followed by noun phrase (NP) as object with 1 data, prepositional phrase (PP) as adverb with 2 data, and NP as object and PP as complement of object with 1 data (see table 5.1)

c. In lexical causative with different verb, the lexical verb is followed by NP as object with 1 data, PP as adverb with 1, and 2 NPs as object with 2 data, and NP as object and PP adverb with 1 data (see table 5.1)

2. The semantic features of the syntactical units (constituents) of the lexical causative verb are:

a. In lexical causative verb with no change in verb, in all of the 11 data, the subjects are the animate agent. Eight data show the subject as the causer at the same time; the characteristics of these verb categories are the verbs that show or require the subjects to make effort of doing the action. In addition, three data show that

86

the subjects are not the causer; these category shows that the verbs are those that do not require the subject to make effort to do the action, they tend to occur naturally. The causees in all data are inanimate indicating that the agent and causer affect the causees. The constituents following the verbs have the role of affected, manner, time, and location (see table 5.1).

b. In lexical causative verb with some idiosyncratic change in verb, in all of the 4 data, the subjects are the animate agent. Four data show the subject as the causer at the same time; the characteristics of these verb categories are the verbs that show or require the subjects to make effort of doing the action. The causees in all data are inanimate indicating that the agent and the causer affect the causees. The constituents following the verbs have the role of affected, manner and location.

c. In lexical causative verb with different verb, in all of the 5 data, the subjects are the animate agent. Five data show the subject as the causer at the same time; the characteristics of these verb categories are the verbs that show or require the subjects to make effort of doing the action. The causees in two data are inanimate indicating that the agent and the causer affect the causees. The causees in three data are animate indicating that they are not only affected by the causer but they also affect the construction of the non-lexical causative verb.

87 5.2 Suggestions

This section is intended to provide future researcher with some ideas to extend the research. In general, this research provides findings regarding several syntactic units and semantic features of the lexical causative construction. However, several suggestions can be made:

1. In the future, the next researcher can focus on the lexical causative verb with some idiosyncratic changes in verb instead of discussing the three kinds. Other than using semantic approach, it can also be focused on the phonological conditioning of the idiosyncratic changes occurring in the verb using the theories of phonology and/or morphology. This way, the reader may be provided with the issues of any restrictions and conditioning of the phonemes and/or morphemes in the causatives.

2. Based on the discussion, this research can also be extended by analyzing the semantic relations of the syntactic units. This is meant to provide readers with some information regarding how they are related and what indicators that make them relate.