An analysis on synonymous verbs and a study on the students` mastery of synonymous verbs - USD Repository
AN ANALYSIS ON SYNONYMOUS VERBS AND A STUDY
ON THE STUDENTS’ MASTERY OF SYNONYMOUS VERBS
A THESIS
Presented as Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements to Obtain the Sarjana Pendidikan Degree in English Language Education
By Laurensia Andina Atika Wardani
Student Number: 031214046
ENGLISH LANGUAGE EDUCATION STUDY PROGRAM
DEPARTMENT OF LANGUAGE AND ARTS EDUCATION
FACULTY OF TEACHERS TRAINING AND EDUCATION
SANATA DHARMA UNIVERSITY
YOGYAKARTA
AN ANALYSIS ON SYNONYMOUS VERBS AND A STUDY
ON THE STUDENTS’ MASTERY OF SYNONYMOUS VERBS
A THESIS
Presented as Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements to Obtain the Sarjana Pendidikan Degree in English Language Education
By Laurensia Andina Atika Wardani
Student Number: 031214046
ENGLISH LANGUAGE EDUCATION STUDY PROGRAM
DEPARTMENT OF LANGUAGE AND ARTS EDUCATION
FACULTY OF TEACHERS TRAINING AND EDUCATION
SANATA DHARMA UNIVERSITY
YOGYAKARTA
! ! " # # $
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
First and above all, my greatest gratefulness is worth giving to my only Lord, Jesus Christ, to whom I go whenever I feel burdened and frustrated. I hardly imagine having accomplished my thesis without His blessings. His never ending blessings accompanied me in the thesis accomplishment.
I owe much to Yohana Veniranda, S.Pd., M.Hum., my sponsor, for giving me constant guidance, suggestions, profound feedback, attention and motivation during the process of thesis accomplishment. I thank her for giving the biggest contribution to my thesis through her comments, corrections, and suggestions. I also would like to thank her for giving me permission to conduct the survey in her class.
My sincere gratitude goes to Christina Kristiyani, S.Pd, M.Pd. for her willingness to give suggestions and valuable feedback on my thesis. I am also deeply indebted to Dr. F. X. Mukarto, M.S. for his willingness to spare his valuable time to give me guidance, helpful suggestions and comments as the improvement on my thesis. I would like to address my deep gratitude to Drs. J. B.
Gunawan, M.A., for the permission to conduct the survey in his class. My
deepest gratefulness goes to all PBI lecturers, who have guided me to be a mature person. I owe a debt of gratitude to all of my participants for spending time to give me precious data. My appreciation also goes to Mbak Dani, Mbak Tari, and all of the librarians for their assistance during my study.
My greatest gratitude goes to my beloved family, my father, L. Djoko
C. Tristavania D. for their unconditional love, care, support, trust, understanding,
stories, encouragement, and never ending prayers for me. I am so grateful to have those Super persons in my incredible life who always lift and cheer me up whenever I fall. I would like to express thanks to my dearest grand ma, aunties, uncles, and cousins for their support and prayers, especially: Suster Antonina,
Bulek Wiwik, Bulek Datik, Om Subur, Aldo, Grace, Gilang, Anin, and Sindu.
My deepest gratitude goes to my best grace, J. B. Satrio Nugroho, for his care, love, patience, understanding, unwavering support, and willingness to help me passing through hard times in completing my thesis. I thank him for always giving me faith “no star is out of reach”.
I would like to offer my greatest thankfulness to my friends of PBI’03, especially: C’ Popz galz (Dita, Patzi, Mak Mier, Dame, Neti, Proti, Paul, Be,
Bagong, Punto, Suki), Ozzi ‘Mak Oz’, Pak Febri, Ratri, Gaby, Ardi, Iyas,
Lukas, Yusta, Layung, Yesi ‘Kabul’, Monci, Hepi, Retha ‘Mba Ndut’, Wiwid,
Fendi, Ajeng, Melani, Tony, Timur, Vivi, Yuan, Arum, Tyas ‘Najongki’,
Lintang, and Pakde Andri, for friendship, sharing moments and laughs,
discussion, and support we ever had during my study. My sincere appreciation also goes to the following persons: Mas Rendy’02 for lending me journals and books, Dewi’04, for giving valuable suggestion on my thesis, and my ‘STECE’ friends, especially Anggi ‘Mba Cum’, Ucee, Tesa for their support and motivation. Lastly, I thank persons whose names cannot be mention one by one, who help me in completing my thesis. God bless them all.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page TITLE PAGE ....................................................................................... i APPROVAL PAGES ........................................................................... ii STATEMENT OF WORK’S ORIGINALITY .................................. iv LEMBAR PERNYATAAN PERSETUJUAN PUBLIKASI ................ v DEDICATION PAGE ........................................................................... viACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ................................................................. vii
TABLE OF CONTENTS ..................................................................... ixLIST OF TABLES ............................................................................... xii
LIST OF FIGURES ............................................................................. xiv
LIST OF APPENDICES ..................................................................... xv
ABSTRACT .......................................................................................... xvi
ABSTRAK .............................................................................................. xviii
CHAPTER I. INTRODUCTION A. Research Background ................................................................
1 B. Problem Formulations ...............................................................
3 C. Problem Limitation ....................................................................
4 D. Research Objectives ..................................................................
5 E. Research Benefits .....................................................................
5 F. Definition of Terms...................................................................
6
CHAPTER II. REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE A. Theoretical description .............................................................
9 1. The Nature of Word .............................................................
9 2. Overview of Meaning ..........................................................
11 3. Overview of Synonym .........................................................
14 a. Definition...........................................................................
14 b. Types of Synonym ............................................................
15 c. Classification of Synonymous Words ...............................
17 d. A Study on the Definition of Synonymous Verbs ............
19 4. Componential Analysis ........................................................
48 a. Meaning and Feature .........................................................
49 b. The Function of Features .................................................
49 c. The Way to Identify Semantic Features ............................
51 5. The Mastery of a Language..................................................
52 a. Definition...........................................................................
53 b. Criteria of Mastery ...........................................................
53 B. Theoretical Framework .............................................................
54 CHAPTER III. METHODOLOGY A. Research Method .......................................................................
56 B. Research Participants.................................................................
57 C. Research Instrument ..................................................................
58
a. Validity ..............................................................................
60 b. Reliability ..........................................................................
63 D. Data Gathering Technique ........................................................
65 E. Data Analysis Technique ...........................................................
66 F. Research Procedure ....................................................................
71 CHAPTER IV. RESEARCH FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION A. Data Presentation .....................................................................
73 The Presentation of Students’ Achievement ..........................
73 B. Discussion ...............................................................................
74
1. Componential Analysis of Twelve Pairs of Synonymous Verbs .........................................................
74 2. The Students’ Mastery of Synonymous Verbs......................
85
3. The Profile of the Students’ Mastery of Synonymous Verbs
89 CHAPTER V. CONCLUSIONS AND SUGGESTIONS
A. Conclusions ................................................................................ 105
B. Suggestions ................................................................................ 107
REFERENCES ..................................................................................... 110
LIST OF TABLES
PageTable 2. 1. The Thematic Roles of Verb ……………………………….….… 51 Table 2. 2. The Semantic Features of Word Meaning to Carry ...………........ 52 Table 3. 1. The Content of the Test …………………….................................. 61 Table 3. 2. The Distribution of Item in the Test...……………………………. 62 Table 3. 3. Best’s Reliability Classification ……………………………….… 65 Table 3. 4. The Raw Scores and Their Meanings ...……….............................. 67 Table 3. 5. The Sample of Raw Data Tabulation ……………………............. 68
Table 3.6. The Classification of Average Value and Criteria… ............. ……. 70Table 4. 1. The Students’ Achievement in the Test...………………………… 73 Table 4. 2. The Semantic Features forming to kill and to assassinate ……….. 75 Table 4. 3. The Semantic Features forming to try and to attempt …………….. 76 Table 4. 4. The Semantic Features forming to choose and to select ………….. 77 Table 4. 5. The Semantic Features forming to invent and to discover ………... 78 Table 4. 6. The Semantic Features forming to defend and to protect ………… 79 Table 4. 7. The Semantic Features forming to employ and to use ……………. 80 Table 4. 8. The Semantic Features forming to receive and to accept ………… 80 Table 4. 9. The Semantic Features forming to hear and to listen …………….. 81 Table 4. 10. The Semantic Features forming to look and to see ……………… 82 Table 4. 11. The Semantic Features forming to permit and to allow ………….. 83 Table 4. 12. The Semantic Features forming to prevent and to hinder ……….. 84
Table 4. 14. The Descriptive Statistics of the Study...………………………… 86 Table 4. 15. The Students’ Scores in Relation to Academic Regulation ……… 88 Table 4. 16. The Students’ Scores in Relation to the Category and the Total Amount …………………………………………………88
LIST OF FIGURES
PageFigure 3. 1. The Sample Test Item of the Modified Version of the FTRM….... 59 Figure 3. 2. A Sample of a Set of Test Item ….................................................. 67
LIST OF APPENDICES
PageAppendix A: Surat Permohonan Ijin Penelitian………...…………................ 114 Appendix B: The Modified Version of FTRM (Test)………………………... 115 Appendix C: The Acceptable Responses……………………………………... 120 Appendix D: The Sample of the Student’s Sheets…………………….……... 121 Appendix E: The Students’ Test Scores……………………………………… 131 Appendix F: Reliability of the Test ………………………………………….. 134 Appendix G: Distribution of Responses based on
Verb Accuracy Category ……………………………………… 135
ABSTRACT
Wardani, Laurensia Andina Atika. 2008. An Analysis on Synonymous Verbs and a
Study on the Students’ Mastery of Synonymous Verbs . Yogyakarta: English
Language Education Study Program, Department of Language and Arts Education, Faculty of Teachers Training and Education, Sanata Dharma University.
The current study investigated the mastery of synonymous verbs among the sixth semester students of the English Language Education Study Program of Sanata Dharma University. There were three research questions: (1) What are similar and distinctive semantic features contained in each pair of the synonymous verbs? (2) How much have the sixth semester students of the English Language Education Study Program of Sanata Dharma University mastered the synonymous verbs? (3) What is the profile of the sixth semester students’ mastery of synonymous verbs?
To answer those research questions, the writer applied survey method and dictionary study. Since it was not feasible to study the entire population, therefore, sample of 47 students were taken to represent all of the sixth semester students of the English Language Education Study Program. The modified version of Forward Translation Recognition Matrix (FTRM) designed by Mukarto (2005) was used as the instrument to obtain the data.
There were three results obtained from the study. First, although each pair of verbs was considered identical in meaning, both verbs could not be substituted in all contexts. The results indicated that each pair of synonymous verbs shared certain similar semantic features and distinctive semantic features which differentiated one verb from another. The results showed that all pairs of synonymous verbs have similar semantic feature which was a human agent. Second, the mastery of synonymous verbs among the sixth semester students of the English Language Education Study Program of Sanata Dharma University fell into three categories, namely very good, good, and sufficient. The number of students classified in very good and good category was almost the same. There were 21 students (44.68%) achieved the category of very good, 22 students (46.81%) entered the category of good, and 4 students (8.51%) were included in the category of sufficient. The mean of the students’ scores was 197.97 of 240 as the highest score. Based on academic regulation of Sanata Dharma University, this score was categorized in the good category. Accordingly, it can be concluded that the mastery of synonymous verbs among the sixth semester students of the English Language Education Study Program of Sanata Dharma University was good. Third, the results of the study showed that the sixth semester students’ mastery of synonymous verbs varied from verb to verb. In general, based on the computation of the average value of the students’ responses, the results signified that the students definitely knew the usage of seven verbs: accept, choose, employ,
hear, listen, protect, and see. The average value of those verbs entered the range known by the students, but their level of confidence was low since the average value of those verbs entered the range of 3.50 - 4.49. The average value of three verbs: hinder, permit, and prevent entered the range of 2.50 - 3.49 signifying that the students had no knowledge of the usage of those three verbs.
ABSTRAK
Wardani, Laurensia Andina Atika. 2008. An Analysis on Synonymous Verbs and a
Study on the Students’ Mastery of Synonymous Verbs . Yogyakarta: Program Studi
Pendidikan Bahasa Inggris, Pendidikan Bahasa dan Seni, Fakultas Keguruan dan Ilmu Pendidikan, Universitas Sanata Dharma.
Studi ini mengkaji penguasaan kata kerja bersinonim oleh mahasiswa semester enam Program Studi Pendidikan Bahasa Inggris Universitas Sanata Dharma. Terdapat tiga permasalahan dalam penelitian ini, (1) Apa sajakah similar
features dan distinctive feature di dalam setiap pasang kata kerja bersinonim? (2)
Sejauh mana mahasiswa semester enam Program Studi Pendidikan Bahasa Inggris Universitas Sanata Dharma menguasai kata kerja bersinonim? (3) Bagaimana gambaran kemampuan mahasiswa semester enam dalam menguasai kata kerja bersinonim?
Untuk menjawab ketiga permasalahan tersebut, penulis menggunakan metode survei dan dictionary study. Karena tidak memungkinkan untuk mengkaji seluruh populasi, maka diambilah 47 mahasiswa sebagai sampel yang mewakili keseluruhan mahasiswa semester enam Program Studi Pendidikan Bahasa Inggris. Penulis menggunakan modifikasi Forward Translation Recognition Matrix
(FTRM) yang dirancang oleh Mukarto (2005) sebagai alat untuk mengumpulkan
data.Ada tiga hasil yang diperoleh. Pertama, meskipun arti dari setiap pasang kata dianggap serupa, namun kedua kata kerja tersebut tidak dapat bertukar dalam setiap konteks. Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa setiap pasang kata berbagi
similar semantic features tertentu dan distinctive semantic features yang
membedakan kata kerja yang satu dengan yang lain. Hasil penelitian juga menunjukkan bahwa setiap pasang kata kerja bersinonim memiliki persamaan
semantic feature yaitu human agent. Kedua, penguasaan kata kerja bersinonim
oleh mahasiswa semester enam Program Studi Pendidikan Bahasa Inggris Universitas Sanata Dharma terbagi dalam tiga kategori, yaitu kategori amat baik, baik, dan cukup. Mahasiswa yang tergolong dalam kategori amat baik dan kategori baik, jumlahnya hampir sama. Sebanyak 21 mahasiswa (44,68%) mencapai kategori amat baik, 22 mahasiswa (46,81%) termasuk dalam kategori baik, dan 4 mahasiswa (8,51%) tergolong dalam kategori cukup. Nilai rata-rata yang dicapai oleh mahasiswa adalah 197,97, dari nilai tertinggi yaitu 240.
Berdasarkan peraturan akademik Universitas Sanata Dharma, nilai tersebut termasuk dalam kategori baik. Oleh karena itu, dapat disimpulkan bahwa penguasaan kata kerja bersinonim oleh mahasiswa semester enam Program Studi Pendidikan Bahasa Inggris Universitas Sanata Dharma adalah baik. Ketiga, hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa penguasaan kata kerja bersinonim oleh mahasiswa semester enam bervariasi pada setiap kata kerja. Secara umum, berdasarkan perhitungan nilai rata-rata dari jawaban mahasiswa, hasilnya menunjukkan bahwa mahasiswa benar-benar mengetahui penggunaan dari ketujuh kata kerja berikut: penggunaan dari keempat belas kata kerja berikut: allow, assassinate, attempt,
defend, discover, disregard, invent, kill, look, neglect, receive, select, try, dan use
akan tetapi tingkat keyakinan mereka rendah. Nilai rata-rata dari keempat belas kata kerja tersebut termasuk dalam kisaran 3,50 – 4,49. Nilai rata-rata dari ketiga kata kerja berikut: hinder, permit, dan prevent tergolong dalam kisaran 2,50 – 3,49 yang menandakan bahwa mahasiswa tidak mengetahui penggunaan ketiga kata kerja tersebut.
CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION In this chapter, the researcher intends to construct the main rationale for
conducting the research. The researcher elaborates six major underlying issues, namely background of study, problem formulation, problem limitation, objective of the study, benefits of the study, and definition of terms.
A. Research Background
Words are vital to communication. It is indisputable that most human language is largely a matter of words. Quoting Stubbs (1986: 99), Singleton (1999: 8) affirms that ‘when people think of a language, they think almost invariably of words’. Therefore, words play an indispensable function in human language, of which the role is as “the building blocks that are strung together according to the rules of sentence structure” (Carter, 2000: 7) in order to convey meaningful messages.
It seems universally acknowledged in all languages that the meaning of words can be similar in nature. Terms whose meanings overlap are generally called ‘synonym’ (Nida, 1975: 98). Study on meaning relation, especially synonym, however, is complex. Even though, the term ‘synonym’ suggests the resemblance; it does not mean that both synonymous words have the same meaning in all contexts. Nida (1975: 98) affirms that synonymous terms are contexts. Accordingly, the improper choice of synonymous words in both oral and written may create a sense of disorientation to the message receiver, i.e. reader or hearer.
The term ‘synonym’ is often confusing for foreign language learners. The EFL learners sometimes wrongly conclude that the synonymous verbs are interchangeable in all contexts ; a misconception that commonly results in the production of erroneous sentences. For instance, in case of the following Indonesian example, Siapa yang membunuh presiden itu?, it is common that the EFL learners translate the sentence into “Who killed the president?” instead of “Who assassinated the president?” The inaccurate production may indicate that “the learners are only familiar with general meanings, but lack knowledge of these words in depth” (Read, 2000: 90).
The students of the English Language Education Study Program deal with English everyday. During the process, they learn English, not only in surface level but also in deep level. Based on informal interview to several students of the English Education Study Program on November 2007, half of the respondents said that they used their feeling or their logic when they had to choose between two synonymous words, without knowing the exact reason why they had to be that way. This thesis is, basically, developed from this experience. As future English teachers, the English Education Study Program students are supposed to master all things related to English language as the subject matter. It is required for them to prepare for the explanation of each aspect of English language, especially synonymous verbs, in anticipation of anxious and critical students who wish to know more than what is given and ask for details of this specific topic.
Considering that synonymous verbs are indispensable and should be mastered by the students of the English Education Study Program, therefore, through research, it is crucial to measure their ability of using the synonymous verbs. The research results can show whether the students have the capability to use the synonymous verbs or not. The research was conducted to the sixth semester students, with the consideration that they have learnt and internalized sufficient English vocabulary, particularly synonymous verbs, since they have taken Vocabulary I-II, Structure I-V, Reading I-II, Speaking I-V, Interpreting, and Translation I-II. This study enables the writer to see how much the sixth students of the English Language Education Study Program, as future teachers, have mastered this specific topic.
B. Problem Formulation
The problems of the investigation, the study on the mastery of synonymous verbs among the sixth semester students of English Education Study Program of Sanata Dharma University, are operationally formulated as follows.
1. What are similar and distinctive semantic features contained in each pair of the synonymous verbs?
2. How much have the sixth semester students of the English Language Education Study Program of Sanata Dharma University mastered the
3. What is the profile of the sixth semester students’ mastery of synonymous verbs?
C. Problem Limitation
The discussion of the research is limited to synonymous verb. Verbs are chosen since they play a central role in sentences. They are relational in nature since they relate the arguments (Kempson, 1989: 89). In addition, Mukarto (2005: 159) affirms that verbs have the potential to cause more problems to L2 learners than either nouns which serve more or less as labels and adjectives. The pairs of synonymous verbs selected as the test materials are taken from Graham’s word list (1916) and the writer selected the pair of verbs based on four categories, namely the head of generic and specific, the head of passive and active, the head of intensity, the head of positive and negative. Three pairs of verbs per category are taken as the representative.
The research was conducted to the semester six students of the 2007/2008 academic year in the English Language Education Study Program of Sanata Dharma University. In order to measure the students’ ability in using the synonymous verbs, the writer administered a test. Forward Translation Recognition Matrix (FTRM) proposed by Mukarto (2005) is adapted in this study. The test is used to measure the students’ mastery of the depth of meanings of each pair of synonymous verbs. The results of the test were analyzed further to determine their mastery and to present the profile of the students’ mastery of in each pair of the synonymous verbs, some dictionaries are used in this study. The definitions of the twelve pairs of synonymous verbs taken from several dictionaries are used to analyze the similarities as well as the differences of each pair of synonymous verbs.
D. Research Objectives This study has several objectives to achieve. The objectives are as follows.
1. To find out whether there are the similar and the distinctive semantic features contained in each pair of the synonymous verbs.
2. To measure the mastery of the synonymous verbs of the sixth semester of the English Language Education Study Program of Sanata Dharma University.
3. To present the profile of the students’ mastery of synonymous verbs.
E. Research Benefits
It is expected that the study can contribute valuable benefits for those who deal with language teaching and learning, particularly lecturers, students, and future researcher. First, it provides the lecturers, especially those who teach vocabulary or semantics, and students with the explanation of similar and distinctive semantic features contained in each pair of the synonymous verbs. Therefore, it is expected that this study can help the lecturers to improve their performance, particularly in explaining the similarities and the differences of pair of synonymous verbs and also the students to enrich their knowledge on this study could be employed as one of the references for the next study intending to explore the synonymous verbs more or any researches conducted in the field of vocabulary teaching and learning. Third, the findings could be used as a tool to evaluate the instructional processes and practice in the department particularly in the field of vocabulary teaching and learning and in making necessary adjustment for improvement.
F. Definition of Terms
In order to avoid confusion and misconception in perceiving and understanding some important terms in this study, some significant terms related to this study would be defined as follows.
1. A study A study is a piece of work that is done to find out more about a particular subject or problem, and usually includes a written report (Longman Dictionary of
Contemporary English, 2004: 1650). Webster (1976: 1414) defines a study as a careful attention to and critical examination and investigation of any subject, event, etc. Both definitions of a study are regarded to be in accordance with the definition proposed by Good (1973: 73) that a study is an investigation of a particular subject, or the published findings of such investigation. In this study, a study refers to the investigation of the mastery of synonymous verbs among the sixth semester students of the English Language Education Study Program.
2. Mastery Hagboldt (1935: 2) argues that we have a mastery of a language when “our comprehension by ear is spontaneous; our reading is effortless and fluent, our use of words, idioms, and sentences in speech and in writing is habitual and skillful”. Collins Cobuild (1995: 1024) states that if you show mastery of particular skill or language, you show you have learnt or understood it completely and have no difficulty using it. To sum up, in mastering a language, one should learn all the elements of language and is able to apply the knowledge both in speaking and writing. In this study, ‘mastery’ refers to the understanding and ability to use the synonymous verbs correctly and appropriately in the sentences.
3. Synonymous Verbs Verb is a word or group of words that describes an action, experience, or state (Longman, 2004: 1833). Radford (1999: 147) remarks that verb typically refers to activity and it plays a central role in meaning and structure of sentences (Fromkin, 2003: 191). In addition, Fromkin (2003: 191) contends that the verb determines the number of objects and limits the semantic properties of both its subject and its object.
Nida (1975: 233) affirms that synonym is a word or expression which has essentially the same diagnostic components as another and which can therefore be substituted for it in many but not all contexts. Lyon (1995: 60) asserts that expressions with the same meaning are synonymous. The Longman Dictionary Contemporary English (1978: 1127) defines synonymous as having the same or nearly the same meaning with another word in the same language.
This study employs the term ‘synonymous verbs’ referring to the verbs that are more or less similar, but not identical in meaning. Those synonymous verbs, basically, have the certain similar semantic features and the distinctive semantic features which differentiate one verb from another. Since the distinctive semantic features exist between two synonymous verbs, both verbs cannot be substituted in all contexts .
4. The Sixth Semester Students The sixth semester students are the students of the English Language
Education Study Programme of Sanata Dharma University who are in the sixth semester during the academic year 2007/2008. The students study English as a Foreign Language. They are trained to master English and to qualify as English teachers.
CHAPTER II REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE This chapter reviews all theories proposed by some experts relating to the
research. There are two major parts in this chapter namely theoretical description and theoretical framework. The first part is theoretical description that elaborates some important notions related to the research. The second part is theoretical framework that summarizes all relevant theories which helps the researcher solve the research problem.
A. Theoretical Description
There are five main theories to be elaborated in the study, namely the nature of word, overview of meaning, overview of synonym, componential analysis, and mastery of a language. These theories serve as the bases for the discussion and design the instrument.
1. The Nature of Word
Words play an important function in human language, of which the role is as “the building blocks that are strung together according to the rules of sentence structure” (Carter, 2000: 7) in order to convey meaningful messages. Accordingly, when doing communication, people understand others with words. People talk, read and speak with words. In rough sense, words may be thought as the power of theoretical terms for various applied purpose” (Read, 2000: 17), but some clear distinctions as the basic points to define words exist. The first, words can be thought of in terms of types or tokens. This distinction refers to the counting of words in text. Tokens defined as “actual occurrences of any times” (Singleton, 1999: 10). The number of tokens is the same as the total number of word forms, which means that “individual words occurring more than once in the text are counted each time they are used” (Read, 2000: 18). On the other hand, types mean “the items with different identities” (Singleton, 1999: 10). The number of types is the total number of the different word forms, so that a word which is repeated many times is counted only once (Read, 2000: 18). For instance, the phrase
Tomorrow, and tomorrow, and tomorrow will be thought of as containing five
words (tomorrow, and, tomorrow, and, tomorrow) if we view words as tokens or two words if we view words as types. Likewise, the phrase going, going, gone will be considered to comprise three words (going, going, gone) on a count of tokens but only two words (going, gone) on a count of types. On the other hand, with regard to the usage of word, the last phrase would be judged to contain just one word, the verb go, represented by two of its various forms (going, gone) (Singleton, 1999: 10).
Second, the distinction is between function words and content words. The words like the, a, to, and, in and that are seen as belonging more to the grammar of the language than to its vocabulary. Words of this kind, such as articles, prepositions, pronouns, conjunctions, auxiliaries are often referred to as function have little if any meaning in isolation and serve more to provide links within sentences, modify the meaning of content words and so on (Read, 2000:18).
2. Overview of Meaning
There are two broad types of meaning, namely different meanings of single terms and related meanings of different terms. Different meanings of single terms refer to “an only word may contain quite different senses or meanings” (Nida, 1975: 11). Meanwhile, related meanings of different terms refer to “different words that may have very closely related meanings” (Nida, 1975: 15).
a. Different meanings of single terms
In different meanings of single terms, a single word may have a number of quite different senses (Nida, 1975: 11). The term hand, for instance, may occur in several kinds of contexts in which it contributes quite different meanings, e.g. he
raised his hand, we gave him a hand, a new hired hand, and the hands of a clock
(Nida, 1975: 11). Similarly, duck, referring to bird, and duck meaning ‘to thrust under water’ or to ‘lower the head or the body suddenly’, are usually regarded as homophones (Nida, 1975: 13). In most cases, a word seems to have a central meaning from which a number of other meanings are derived and we can usually recognize or imagine some kind of connection between each of these meanings and the obvious central meaning. Nevertheless, different meanings of single terms is not the concern of the current study, so no further explanation is offered here.
b. Related meanings of different terms
While the same word may have quite different meanings, different words may have very closely related meanings. Nida (1975: 15) mentions four principle ways in which the meanings of different semantic units may be related to one another, namely inclusion, overlapping, complementation, and contiguity.
1) Inclusion
In inclusion, the meaning of one word is included within the meaning of another word. For instance, the meaning of poodle is included in the meaning of
dog , and the meaning of dog included in the meaning of animal (Nida, 1975: 15).
With regard to the relationship of specific and general lexical items (Carter, 1998: 21), here, poodle is the hyponym or subordinate of dog, and dog, as the more general term than poodle, well known as the hypernym or the superordinate of
poodle . Meanwhile, dog is the hyponym of animal, and animal is the
superordinate or the hypernym of dog.2) Overlapping
One of the most obvious features of relatedness of meanings is the tendency for meaning to overlap, for instance, give/bestow, ill/sick, possess/own, and answer/reply (Nida, 1975: 16). The sense relation that holds between these pairs is synonymy. They are, however, partial synonymy since they are never substitutable one for another in any and all contexts. Accordingly, they are not another in at least certain contexts without significant changes in the conceptual content of an utterance” (Nida, 1975: 16).
3) Complementation
In complementation, Nida (1975:17) affirms that the meanings which are complementary to each other involve a number of shared features of meaning, but show certain marked contrasts, and often opposite meanings. Nida (1975:17-18) mentions three types of complementation. They are: (1) Opposites or often spoken as polar contrasts since they involve distinct antithesis of qualities (e.g. good/bad), quantities (e.g. much/little), states (e.g.
dead/alive ), time (e.g. now/then), space (e.g. here/there), and movement (e.g. go/come )
(2) Reversives of event ( e.g. tie/untie, alienate/reconcile) (3) Conversives (e.g. buy/sell, lend/borrow)
4) Contiguity
Nida (1975: 19) asserts that the relation of contiguity is considered as the most important for the analysis of the distinctive features or components of meaning since it represents the relation between closely related meaning occupying a well-defined, restricted semantic domain, and exhibiting certain well- marked contrasts. For instance, the related meaning of walk, run, hop, skip, and
crawl share the features of movement by an animate being and using the limbs, the supporting surface involve clearly definable contrast. Therefore, each meaning is distinctly set off from other related meanings by at least one important feature.
The relation of contiguity does not apply to the words walk, run, hop, skip, and
crawl , but only to the meanings of those words which are related, in the sense that
they share certain features, and hence constitute a single semantic domain.3. Overview of Synonym As discussed in section 2, it is noted that words have sense relations.
Regarding the aim of the study is to find out the students’ mastery on synonymous verbs, therefore, it is worthwhile to discuss synonym further.
a. Definition of Synonym
In learning vocabulary it is often found that there are two or more words that can be similar in meaning. Terms whose meanings overlap are generally called synonyms (Nida, 1975: 98). Palmer (1991: 88) asserts that synonymy is used to mean sameness of meaning. The definition of synonymy is similar with the definition proposed by Hurford (1996: 102) that synonymy is the relationship between two words or more that have same sense.
1) Synonymous Verb
It seems universally acknowledge that in all languages, two or more verbs can be synonymous in meaning. Lyons (1995) defines synonymous as expressions expression with the same meaning. To be specific, Nida (1975) asserts that synonymous verb is a verb or expression which has essentially the same diagnostic components as another and which can be substituted (Nida, 1975: 233) in at least certain context, but rarely in all contexts (Nida, 1975: 98).
Radford (1999: 147) affirms that verbs typically refer to activities (e.g. steal, snore, applaud, and collide). Verb plays a central role in the meaning and structure of sentences. They are relational in nature since they relate the arguments (Kempson, 1989: 89), determine the number of objects, and limit the semantic properties of both its subject and its objects (Fromkin and Rodman, 2003: 191).
For example, find requires an animate subject and selects a direct object, whereas
put selects for both a direct object and a prepositional object that has a locative
meaning. In this respect, the improper choice of verbs in both oral and written may create a sense of disorientation to the message receiver, i.e. reader or hearer.
Mukarto (2005: 159) contends that verbs have the potential to cause more problems to L2 learners than either nouns which serve more or less as labels and adjectives.