英语、印尼语和java语言的对比分析

Ikmi Nur Oktavianti, Noor Chaerani, I. Prayogi
{"title":"英语、印尼语和java语言的对比分析","authors":"Ikmi Nur Oktavianti, Noor Chaerani, I. Prayogi","doi":"10.22146/sasdayajournal.50343","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Along with verbs, nouns are very crucial—among other lexical and functional categories—in arranging linguistic constructions. Thus, there are many ways to change words from other word classes into nouns or known as nominalization. This paper aims at describing the similarities and differences of nominalization in English, Indonesian, and Javanese. By contrasting three different languages, this study can give another insight on nominalization, especially for language teachers and students of language. This study employed a qualitative method in accordance with the type of data collected (i.e. clauses containing nominalized units). The data were collected using metode simak for English language data and researchers’ intuition as the native speakers of Indonesian and Javanese. English language data were collected from English grammar books. The approach used is contrastive analysis to compare three languages under study. The method of analysis is metode padan translational and metode agih. The results of the analysis show that generally, these three languages use affixation, particles, and conversion as the nominalizers. English, however, differs from Indonesian and Javanese since it doesn’t have reduplication as nominalizer and the use of particle is limited to the initial position. Unlike English, Indonesian and Javanese tend to be alike and it is plausible since both are from the same language family. In the comparison, it is figured out that there are three main similarities and six differences of the realizations of nominalization in English, Indonesian, and Javanese. The results are plausible due to the unrelatedness of English with Indonesian and Javanese.  ","PeriodicalId":33570,"journal":{"name":"Sasdaya Gadjah Mada Journal of Humanities","volume":"76 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-10-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"ANALISIS KONTRASTIF NOMINALISASI DALAM BAHASA INGGRIS, BAHASA INDONESIA, DAN BAHASA JAWA\",\"authors\":\"Ikmi Nur Oktavianti, Noor Chaerani, I. Prayogi\",\"doi\":\"10.22146/sasdayajournal.50343\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Along with verbs, nouns are very crucial—among other lexical and functional categories—in arranging linguistic constructions. Thus, there are many ways to change words from other word classes into nouns or known as nominalization. This paper aims at describing the similarities and differences of nominalization in English, Indonesian, and Javanese. By contrasting three different languages, this study can give another insight on nominalization, especially for language teachers and students of language. This study employed a qualitative method in accordance with the type of data collected (i.e. clauses containing nominalized units). The data were collected using metode simak for English language data and researchers’ intuition as the native speakers of Indonesian and Javanese. English language data were collected from English grammar books. The approach used is contrastive analysis to compare three languages under study. The method of analysis is metode padan translational and metode agih. The results of the analysis show that generally, these three languages use affixation, particles, and conversion as the nominalizers. English, however, differs from Indonesian and Javanese since it doesn’t have reduplication as nominalizer and the use of particle is limited to the initial position. Unlike English, Indonesian and Javanese tend to be alike and it is plausible since both are from the same language family. In the comparison, it is figured out that there are three main similarities and six differences of the realizations of nominalization in English, Indonesian, and Javanese. The results are plausible due to the unrelatedness of English with Indonesian and Javanese.  \",\"PeriodicalId\":33570,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Sasdaya Gadjah Mada Journal of Humanities\",\"volume\":\"76 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-10-03\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"3\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Sasdaya Gadjah Mada Journal of Humanities\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.22146/sasdayajournal.50343\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Sasdaya Gadjah Mada Journal of Humanities","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.22146/sasdayajournal.50343","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

摘要

名词和动词一样,在其他词汇和功能范畴中,在安排语言结构方面是非常重要的。因此,有许多方法可以将其他词类中的单词变为名词,即所谓的名词化。本文旨在描述英语、印尼语和爪哇语中名词化的异同。通过对三种不同语言的对比,本研究对名词化有了新的认识,尤其是对语言教师和学生。本研究根据所收集的数据类型(即包含名词化单位的从句)采用定性方法。数据的收集使用了英语语言数据的metode simak和母语为印度尼西亚语和爪哇语的研究人员的直觉。英语语言数据收集自英语语法书。采用对比分析的方法来比较所研究的三种语言。分析的方法是法巴丹平移法和法阿格法。分析结果表明,这三种语言普遍使用词缀、助词和转换作为名词化词。然而,英语不同于印尼语和爪哇语,因为它没有重复作为名词,并且粒子的使用仅限于初始位置。与英语不同,印尼语和爪哇语倾向于相似,这是合理的,因为它们都来自同一个语系。通过比较,发现英语、印尼语和爪哇语的名词化实现有三个主要的相似点和六个不同之处。由于英语与印尼语和爪哇语没有关系,所以结果似乎是合理的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
ANALISIS KONTRASTIF NOMINALISASI DALAM BAHASA INGGRIS, BAHASA INDONESIA, DAN BAHASA JAWA
Along with verbs, nouns are very crucial—among other lexical and functional categories—in arranging linguistic constructions. Thus, there are many ways to change words from other word classes into nouns or known as nominalization. This paper aims at describing the similarities and differences of nominalization in English, Indonesian, and Javanese. By contrasting three different languages, this study can give another insight on nominalization, especially for language teachers and students of language. This study employed a qualitative method in accordance with the type of data collected (i.e. clauses containing nominalized units). The data were collected using metode simak for English language data and researchers’ intuition as the native speakers of Indonesian and Javanese. English language data were collected from English grammar books. The approach used is contrastive analysis to compare three languages under study. The method of analysis is metode padan translational and metode agih. The results of the analysis show that generally, these three languages use affixation, particles, and conversion as the nominalizers. English, however, differs from Indonesian and Javanese since it doesn’t have reduplication as nominalizer and the use of particle is limited to the initial position. Unlike English, Indonesian and Javanese tend to be alike and it is plausible since both are from the same language family. In the comparison, it is figured out that there are three main similarities and six differences of the realizations of nominalization in English, Indonesian, and Javanese. The results are plausible due to the unrelatedness of English with Indonesian and Javanese.  
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
15
审稿时长
6 weeks
期刊最新文献
BERTAHAN DI TENGAH KRISIS: KESINAMBUNGAN PABRIK GULA KEBON AGUNG DI MALANG 1930an-1958 Disharmoni Sosial Masyarakat Kampung Kota di Era Demokratisasi (Konflik dan Disharmoni Sosial di Yogyakarta Pada Pilpres tahun 2019) Menilik Ulang Resiliensi: Covid-19 dan Pariwisata di Kaliurang Yogyakarta Pelestarian Kesenian Debus Banten di Padepokan Maung Pande Hermeneutika Dialogis sebagai Basis Filosofis dalam Fiksyen dan Sejarah, Suatu Dialog Karya Umar Junus
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1