ELLIPSIS IN SPOKEN AND WRITTEN INDONESIAN

  • A. Djawad Mubasyir Universitas Indraprasta PGRI
Keywords: ellipsis, translation, translator

Abstract

Ellipsis may be claimed as a very dominant characteristic of Indonesian, but, ironically enough, very little is known about the exact nature of its occurrence in the language. It may be expected that translating a text from English to Indonesian and vice versa may almost impossibly be carried out literally because of the different ways ellipsis operates in both languages. The aims of the study are (1) to identify which elements of meaning(s) in a message or in any smaller unit of meaning  is/are left unsaid, by analysing the lexicon-grammatical forms being used to realise the meanings (2) to identify whether ellipsis occurs in different frequency in written and spontaneous spoken texts in Indonesian (3) to conduct a contrastive analysis between English ellipsis (according to Halliday and Hasan, 1976) and Indonesian ellipsis related to the findings of the present study. This study reports an overview of recent literature on ellipsis phenomena in natural language, knowledge of constrains on ellipsis construction in Indonesian. It can be concluded that the types and frequency of Indonesian ellipsis may be held true only as far as the data in the present study are concerned. The study has identified six types of ellipsis in Indonesian. In terms of types and the underlying principles of their operation, Indonesian ellipsis may be seen as a very different system from English ellipsis that may have a significant implication for translation from English to Indonesian and vice versa.

References

Chaer, Abdul, Tata Bahasa Praktis Bahasa Indonesia, Jakarta: Bhatara Karya Aksara, 1988.
Frazier L. and ., Ellipsis and discourse coherence, Linguist Philos. 29 (3): 315–346, 2006.
Halliday, M.A.K. dan Christian M. I. M. Matthiessen, An Introduction to Functional Grammar, 3rd Edition, London: Edward Arnold, 2004.
Halliday, M.A.K. and Ruqaiya Hassan, Language, Context and Text: Aspects of Language in a Social-Semiotic Perspective, Victoria: Deakin University Press, 1985.
Halliday, M.A.K. and Ruqaiya Hassan, Cohesion in English, London: Longman Group Limited, 1976.
Hatim, Basil and Ian Mason, Discourse and the Translator, New York: Longman, 1990.
Hymes, D. & J. Gumperz, Directions in Sociolinguistics, New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston, 1972.
Kehler A., Interpreting Cohesive Forms in the Context of Discourse Inference, Ph.D. dissertation, Harvard University, 1995.
Lobeck, A., Ellipsis: Functional Heads, Licensing and Identification, Oxford University Press, New York, 1995.
Matsuo A. and Nigel Duffield, VP-Ellipsis and Anaphora in Child Language Acquisition. Language Acquisition, 9 (4), 301–327, 2001.
Noah A. Smith, Ellipsis Happens, and Deletion Is How, University of Maryland Working Papers in Linguistics, vol. 11, 176-191, 2001.
Parera, J.D., Sintaksis, Jakarta: Gramedia, 1988.
Preisler, Bent, A Handbook of English Grammar on Functional Principles, Aarhus C, Denmark: Aarhus University Press, 1992.
Samsuri, Analisis Bahasa, Jakarta: Percetakan Sabdodadi, 1987.
Schiffrin, Deborah, Approaches to discourse, Cambridge: Blackwell Publishers Inc., 1994.
Sneddon, James Neil, Indonesian Reference Grammar, St. Leonard, Australia: Allen and Unwin, 1996.
Tata Bahasa Baku Bahasa Indonesia, Jakarta: Balai Pustaka, 1988.
White, PRR., English Language Research, Department of English, University of Birmingham, 1999.
Published
2015-12-02
Section
Artikel