PACIFIC LINGUISTICS

Series D - No. 56

A CLASSICAL MALAY TEXT GRAMMAR:

INSIGHTS INTO A NON-WESTERN TEXT TRADITION

by

Danielo C. Ajamiseba

(MATERIALS IN LANGUAGES OF INDONESIA, No.21)

W.A.L. Stokhof, Series Editor

Department of Linguistics

Research School of Pacific Studies

THE AUSTRALIAN NATIONAL UNIVERSITY

Ajamiseba, D.C. A classical Malay text grammar: Insights into a non-Western text tradition.
D-56, vi + 121 pages. Pacific Linguistics, The Australian National University, 1983. DOI:10.15144/PL-D56.cover
©1983 Pacific Linguistics and/or the author(s). Online edition licensed 2015 CC BY-SA 4.0, with permission of PL. A sealang.net/CRCL initiative.
 PACIFIC LINGUISTICS is issued through the Linguistic
Circle of Canberra and consists of four series:

SERIES A - Occasional Papers

SERIES B - Monographs
SERIES C - Books
SERIES D - Special Publications

EDITOR: S.A. Wurm

ASSOCIATE EDITORS: D.C. Laycock, C.L. Voorhoeve, D.T. Tryon, T.E. Dutton

EDITORIAL ADVISERS:
B.W. Bender John Lynch
University of Hawaii University of Papua New Guinea
David Bradley K.A. McElhanon
La Trobe University University of Texas
A. Capell H.P. McKaughan
University of Sydney University of Hawaii
Michael G. Clyne P. MUhlhiiusler
Monash University Linacre College, Oxford
S.H. Elbert G.N. O'Grady
University of Hawaii University of Victoria, B.C.
K.J. Franklin A.K. Pawley
Summer Institute of Linguistics University of Auckland
W.W. Glover K.L. Pike University of Michigan;
Summer Institute of Linguistics Summer Institute of Linguistics
G.W. Grace E.C. Polome
University of Hawaii University of Texas
M.A.K. Halliday Gillian Sankoff
University of Sydney University of Pennsylvania
E. Haugen W.A.L. Stokhof National Center for
Harvard University Language Development, Jakarta;
A. Healey University of Leiden
Sum mer Institute of Linguistics E.M. Uhlenbeck
L.A. Hercus University of Leiden
Australian National University J.W.M. Verhaar
Nguyen f)ling Liem Gonzaga University, Spokane
University of Hawaii

All correspondence concerning PACIFIC LINGUISTICS, including

orders and SUbscriptions, should be addressed to:

The Secretary
PACIFIC LINGUISTICS
Department of Linguistics
Research School of Pacific Studies
The Australian National University
Canberra, A.C.T. 2600
Australia.

Copyright ® The Author

First Published 1983

Typeset by S. Tys Printed by A.N.U. Printing Service

Covers by Patria Printers Bound by Adriatic Bookbinders Pty. Ltd.

The editors are indebted to the Australian National University for assistance in
the production of this series.
This publication was made possible by an initial grant from the Hunter Douglas
Fund.
National Library of Australia Card Number and ISBN 0 85883 286 0
 TABL E OF CO NT E NTS

Page
ABBREVIATIONS v

CHAPTER 1 : INTRODUCTION 1
1 . 1 . INTRODUCTORY REMARKS 1
1 . 2 . SUMMARY 4

CHAPTER 2 : THEORETICAL ORIENTATION 6

2 . 1 . INTRODUCTION 6
2 . 2 . TEEUW AND WYATT : HIKAYAT PATANI - THE STORY OF PATANI 6
2 . 3 . HOPPER 7
2 . 4 . ERRINGTON 9
2 . 5 . BECKER 10
2 . 5 . 1 . The figure a sentence makes : an interpretation of a class ical
Malay sentence 10
2 . 5 . 2 . Text-building , epistemology , and aesthetics in Javanese shadow
theatre 13
2 . 6 . PIKE AND PIKE VIA JONES 1977 14
2 . 6 . 1 . Part-whole hierarchical organization of reference 14
2 . 6 . 2 . The referential hierarchy vs . the grammatical hierarchy 15
2 . 6 . 3 . H ierarchical organization of the grammar 16
2 . 6 . 4 . Referential vs . gramma tical ta grneme s 16
2 . 6 . 5 . Comment 18
2 . 7 . CONCLUS ION 18
Notes to Chapter 2 19

CHAPTER 3 : INTERPRETIVE ANALYSIS OF THE TEXT 20

3 . 1 . THE TEXT AND ITS TRANSLATION 20
3 . 2 . OVERALL STRUCTURE 28
3 . 2 . 1 . From the speech act perspective 28
3 . 2 . 2 . From the perspective of temporal adverbials 33
3 . 3 . BAHASA 34
3 . 4 . NAMING AND ETYMOLOGIZING 43
3 . 5 . PARTICLES 45
3 . 5 . 1 . Maka 45
3 . 5 . 2 . Arakian 46
3 . 5 . 3 . Hatta 48
3 . 5 . 4 . Ini
-
Itu 50
3 . 5 . 5 . Syahdan 52
3 . 5 . 6 . Demikian 53
3 . 5 . 7 . Summary 55

iii
iv

Page
3 . 6 . CONSTRUCTION TYPES 56
3 . 6 . 1 . Pun-lah constructions 56
3 . 6 . 2 . Frame-content constructions 69
3 . 6 . 3 . -Lah constructions 75
3 . 6 . 4 . Other constructions 78
3 . 6 . 5 . Embedded structures 80
3 . 6 . 6 . Su nunary 97
Notes to Chapter 3 100

CHAPTER 4 : CONCLUSION 104

4 . 1 . FINDINGS 104
4 . 2 . PROBLEMS FOR LATER WORKS 107
Notes to Chapter 4 108

BIBLIOGRAPHY 108
 AB BREVIAT I O NS

A Axis ( the obj ect of a preposition indef. Act indefinite Act

=

in a prepositional phrase , i . e . inde f . art . indefinite article

=

the obj ect o f a Director in an lit. literally

=

endocentri c construction) loc o locative

=

Act Action
= loc . m. location marker
=

act . foc . action focus marker

= M = Modifier
Adj . Adj ective
= N = Noun
Adj n . Adjunct= Nom . C l . Nominal ized Clause
=

Adv . Adverb
= NP = Noun Phrase
Ag . Agent
= NT = New Topic
ag . foc . agent focus marking prefix
= a = Object
Ag . m . Agent marker
= Part . Particle
=

alIt . allative suffix ( indicates

= past m. past marker=

that the action of the verb move s PP = Prepositional Phrase

toward or onto the obj ect of the Pred . Predicate
verb , or is directed toward or pre f . prefix
=

onto it , or is applied to it ( cf . Prep. Prepos ition

=

Macdonald and Soenj ono 1967 : 90) Pro . proto form

=

C = Comment Pron . Pronoun

=

caus . causative
= Prop . N Proper Noun=

Cl . Clause
= Pt . Patient
=

clas s . class ifier

= pt . foc . patient focus marker
=

Cltr. Cluster= PTN Paya Tu Naqpa

=

CM =Comment Marker Punct . punctuation

=

Concl . Concluding= Q . Part . Question Particle

=

Conc l . M 1 conclusion marker of a

= Ref . Referential
=

sentence , paragraph , or an ep�so de

. rel . pron . relative pronoun
=

of a descriptive indirect speech Rt . Root

=

within the story S = Sentence

conn . connective
= SA = Speech Act
Const . Constituent
= Sp . Speech
=

coord . coordinate= spec . spec ific

=

D = Director ( initial e lement in an Str. Structure

=

exocentric construction) E = Subject

de f . Act definite Act = T = Topic
Def . Art . Definite Article
= TH = Topicalized Head
defoc . de focused= TM = Topic Marker (on the sentence
Elab . Elaboration
= level : p u n )
Encl . Enclitic
= TM ' Topic Marker ( on the phrase
=

ESM Event Sequence Marker

= level : n g )
gen . generic
= UEStr . Unmarked Embedded Structure
=

gen . inde f . vb . pref. generic = V = Verb

indefinite verbal prefix VP = Verb Phrase
H = head Vb . Pref . Verbal Prefix
=

Hon . Honori fic

= 3rd . pers . pron . third person pronoun
=

v
Ajamiseba, D.C. A classical Malay text grammar: Insights into a non-Western text tradition.
D-56, vi + 121 pages. Pacific Linguistics, The Australian National University, 1983. DOI:10.15144/PL-D56.cover
©1983 Pacific Linguistics and/or the author(s). Online edition licensed 2015 CC BY-SA 4.0, with permission of PL. A sealang.net/CRCL initiative.
 C hapter 1

INTRODUCTION

1.1. I NTRODUCTORY R E MARKS

The data under analysis is taken from the first story of Hikayat Patani ( HP )
a s i s found i n Hikayat Patani - The s tory o f Patani, edited by Andries Teeuw and
David K. Wyatt , The Hague : Martinus Ni j hoff , 1970 , pages 68 to 71 . This first
story is an account of the founding of the town of Patan i ; it is comprised of 4 5
sentences i n total . My main interest in writing this study is basically an
attempt to di scover the strategies that the reporting narrator and the reported
narrators used in building up this particular text . Many of these strategies
are not used in either modern Indonesian or modern Malay .
Prior to coming out with the findings and the generalizations that I include
in this work , I started out with a thick description of the whole text. Bas ic­
ally what it is is a thorough de scription of the whole text from discourse down
to word level and sometimes down to morpheme level when it seemed relevant ,
illuminating , and necessary . The description was pre sented in the form of tree
d iagrams and the nodes of the diagrams are labelled using Pike and Pike ' s ( 1976)
four-cell tagmeme analysis as can be seen in section 2 . 6 . 4 . ( Chapter 2 ) . The
purpose of this thick description was for me to get a thorough understanding of
how the system of the text and its units work before making any inferences or
generalizations . The following is sentence 13 in the Malay text of the first
story of HP , as an i llustration of this thick des cription . It is broken down
into four tree-diagrams ( Di splays 1 . 1 . 1 . - 1 . 1 . 4 . ) .
Mal ay w i th morpheme g l o s s Free trans l a t i on
( 13 ) A ra k i an s e t e l ah d a t an g=lah pada The fo l lowing
conn . after this then come=CM to morning
the king
keesokan h a r i =nya , maka bag i nda p u n
departed with
tomorrow day=the conn . his majesty TM
a l l his
be rangka t= l ah dengan sega l a men t e r i ministers
depart=cM with all minister and officers,
and accompanied
h u l ub a l an g=nya d i = i r i ng=kan
by his people.
officer=the/he pt. foc . =accompany=act . foc .
o l eh ra'y a t seka l i a n
by people a l l
Note:
- Time Setting conn ( ective) Cl ( ause ) conjoins two series of events ;

Ajamiseba, D.C. A classical Malay text grammar: Insights into a non-Western text tradition.
D-56, vi + 121 pages. Pacific Linguistics, The Australian National University, 1983. DOI:10.15144/PL-D56.1
©1983 Pacific Linguistics and/or the author(s). Online edition licensed 2015 CC BY-SA 4.0, with permission of PL. A sealang.net/CRCL initiative.
2

- A ra k i an : initial punctuation for sentence cluster or paragraph leve l ;

- ma ka : initial punctuation for sentence and clause leve l ; i n terms o f role it
i s an event sequence sentence marker in a discourse ;
- Core and Elab ( oration) contain the event of motion towards location ;
- Core and Elaboration , in terms of cohesion , are referential in nature , while
precore is textual ;
- Precore in general has to do with preceding units of the text (prior text
units ) , and Elaboration in general has to do with the units of the text that
follow it ( development or elaboration of the text) .

Di s p l ay 1 . 1 .1 . T ree D i a g ram
A ra k i a n s e t e l a h d a t ang l ah pada keesokan h a r i nya , . ..
'The fol lowing morning, . . . '
( for an explanation of all abbreviations see p . v)

pun- l ah S

Pre core conn . Cltr . Core pun- l ah Cl . Elab . PP+CI .

Textual Ref . Spec . Ref .

Punct . conn . conn . Cl . Punct . (;onn .

Time Setting ESM

maka

s e t e l ah

Core : C - l a h Const . Elab . PP

gen .

H v M . Encl . Part . D Prep . A NP

CM Time
datang - l ah

M N H N

defining de fined

H N M De f . Art .

nominaliser Adv. defined defining

I
ke- - a n
I
e s ok ha r i - nya
 3

Di s p l ay 1 .1 . 2. Tree D i a g ram
. . . b a g i nda p u n be r a n g ka t l ah
' . . . the King departed . . . '

Core p u n - l ah Cl .

T pun Const . C - l ah Const.

de fining

H Hon . N M Encl . Part . H V M Encl. Part .

Ag . TM Inde f . CM
gen . Act
bag i nda p un - l ah

gen . :inde f .
vb . pre f . Rt .
I I
be r- angkat

Di s pl ay 1. 1 .3. T ree D i a g ram

. . . d e n g a n sega l a men t e r i h u l uba l angnya
' . . . with all his ministers and officers . . . '

Elab . PP+Cl .

Spec . Re f .

Cl .

D A NP

dengan

M Adj . H Coord . NP M Def . Art.

quanti­ quantified defining

fier defined
sega l a - nya
N N

men t e r i h u l ub a l a n g
4

D i s p l ay 1 . 1.4. Tree Di agram

. . . d i i r i n gkan o l eh ra ' ya t s e ka l i an .
' . . . and accompanied by a l l his peop le. '

Cl .

Pred . v

defoc .
def . Act

D Prep . NP
pt . foc . Rt . act . fo c .
I I I Ag . m .
di- i r i ng - ka n
o l eh

H N M Adj .

defined defining
ra ' y a t seka l i an

This thick description in preliminary stages of my analysis proved to be

very useful for the purpose that has been stated above , i . e . to discover the
strategies that were used in building up this text . However , the degree of de­
tails is so overwhelming that if I presented them here in my finished work it
would be confusing rather than illuminating .
The main reason for me to leave out the thick des cription is that the focus
in this work is on levels above the clause . In addition to this , I discuss and
justi fy the clause-like embedded structures , the Yang Embedded Structures and
the Unmarked Embedded ones , and those particles that are defined textually be­
cause they reveal some things of the nature of the levels above the clause : the
conclusion markers a ra k i a n and dem i k i a n , the definite articles i n i 'this ' and
i t u ' t hat ' , the event sequence sentence marker maka , the evaluation marker
syahda n , the marker of the change in the action or the event in an episode ha t t a ,
the topic marker p u n and the comment marker -lah.

1.2. SUMMARY
The following is a summ ary of each consecutive chapter in this work .
Chapter 2 presents a review of some of the l iterature within linguistics , an­
thropology and li terary criticism that in one way or another are related to or
have affected my work . Pike and Pike ' s four-cell tagmemic analysis as presented
in Jones 1977 provides theoretical framework . Hopper 1976 , Teeuw and Wyatt
1970 , and Errington 1974 provide me with data and insights . Becker 1977 and his
other es say ' Text building , epistemology , and aesthetics in Javanese shadow
theatre ' ( to appear in Becker and Yengoyan , eds ) provide me both theoretical
framework , and insightful methodology . Chapter 3 , interpretive analysis of the
 5

text , i . e . the first story of part I of HP , which is the core of my work , con­
s ists of six parts : 1) the text and its translation ; 2 ) Overall Structure ;
3) Bahasa ; 4) Naming and Etymologising ; 5) Particles ; and 6 ) Construction type s ,
which i n turn consists of 6 . 1) pUn- l ah constructions ; 6 . 2 ) Frame-Content Con­
structions ; 6 . 3 ) - l a h construction s ; 6 . 4) Other construction s ; and 6 . 5 ) Embedded
Structures .
The first part of Chapter 3 consists of the text in Malay accompanied by an
interlinear and a free translation . The second part presents the text as a text
unit that is part of a larger context , i . e . as the first story of part I of HP ,
and also as a text unit that in turn is composed of smaller ones . I claim in
this part that the sequence of temporal adverbials is used by the narrators as
a strategy to mark the outline of the text . Part 3 , b a ha s a , deals with dis­
tancing , showing honour and deference , speaking up and speaking down as reflected
in the speech act participants ' vocabulary , manner s , and gestures depending on
who speaks to whom and on what occasion . Part 4 deals with naming and etymol­
ogizing as strategies to build texts on . Part 5 deals with particles that func­
tion as s ignals of certain text units and also of certain temporal aspects in
the text . Part 6 has to do with construction types that occur in the text . The
first type , the p u n - l ah construction , consists of three parts : a precore , a core
( p un - l ah part) and an elaboration , which is a further development of the core .
The second type , Frame-Content construction type , consists of a preframe , a frame
and a content part. The third type , the - l ah construction type , are sentences
that contain new information on the content or lexical level and on the meta­
level , signalled by the comment marking particle - l a h . In the subsection ' other
constructions ' I will de scribe transition sentences or constructions that occur
between two p u n - l ah constructions or between a p u n - l ah construction and a p u n
variant of the p u n - l ah construction type . In the subsection ' embedded struc­
tures ' I will di scuss two kinds of embedded structures : the marked (ya n g ) embed­
ded structures and the unmarked embedded structures .
Chapter 4 presents a summary o f things that have been discovered and dis­
cussed in my work . It also presents things that remain to be done , i . e . problems
or hypotheses the truth of which needs to be verified by more evidence .
 Chapter 2

THEORET ICAL OR IENTAT ION

2.1 . I NTRODUCT I ON
Thi s chapter presents a review of some of the literature within linguistic s ,
anthropology and literary criticism that in some ways are related to or have
affected my work . The effects of these works are of three kinds :
( 1 ) The kind that provides theoretical framework : Pike and Pike ' s four-cell tag­
memic analys is via Jones 1977 .
( 2 ) The kind that provides data and insights :
( a) Hopper ' s ( 1976) discussion of the sequence of clauses marked with
- l a h viewed as the crucial foci of the narrative , i . e . it provides a
synopsis of the dynamic line of the episode of the passage that he
analyzed . His remarks of p u n attached to topic which are not com­
pletely new to the narrative , but which have not been the most recent
participant mentioned .
( b ) Teeuw and Wyatt ' s making available the Malay text o f Hikayat
Patani , their discussion of the meaning of the names of participants
in the first two stories of H ikayat Patani .
( c) Errington ' s ( 1974) generalized discuss ion of the notion of
bahas a .
( 3 ) The kind that provides both theoretical framework , and data and insights .
( a) Becker ' s article ' Text-building , epistemology and aesthetics in
Javanese Shadow Theatre ' which provides the following kinds of
relations :
( i ) Textual coherence
( ii ) Text within text : the Javanese art of invention
( ii i ) Intentionality in a text : the uses of texture
( iv) Re ference
(b) Another Becker article ( 19 7 7 ) , ' The figure a sentence makes : an
interpretation of a Class ical Malay sentence ' which is a thorough
study of a prototypical Malay pun- l a h sentence .

2.2. TEEUW AND WYATT : HlKAYAT PATANI - THE STORY OF PATAN I

What Teeuw and Wyatt do i s , basically , contextualize the HP , which is a
conceptually distant text , and make it available to modern readers , especially
in the world outside Patani . As they put it in the preface , ' In any case [ we ]

6
 7

hope that the book will help to give a better knowledge and understanding of the
Malay world of Patani to both Eastern and Western readers . ' ( 1970 : vi i i ) . More
specifically what they do is to 1) present a short history of Patan i , including
the probable date when it was founded and the dates of the reign of its rulers ;
2 ) discus s different versions of HP and decide which is the most accurate one
among them; 3) present its overall structure : di scuss the nature of the authors
of each part , the date when each part was written , and the style of language ;
4) present Hikayat Patani ( the Malay text) ; 5 ) give a translation of HP ; 6) pro­
vide commentary for each story of all the parts of HP ; 7) present a conclusion
which discus ses the reason why HP was written.
In discussing the first story of Part I of HP what they mainly do i s
1) relate the story of the foundation of Patani t o other stories o f s imilar
nature , i . e . all of them share the fact that the settlements were founded on the
spot where a royal hound encounters a white mousedeer ; 2 ) relate'the story to
other stories that are based on the popular belief that states that the name of
the settlement is taken from Pak Tan i ; 3 ) relate the story to other stories in
Malay l iterature and folklore about the foundation of Patani ; 4 ) discuss the
etymology of the inland town of Kota Maligai ; and 5) discuss the meaning of the
names of participants mentioned in the first two stories , in the persons of the
King of Maligai , his son the first ruler of Patani , and the latter ' s three
children .

2.3. HOP P E R
In h i s article ' Focus and aspects i n discourse grammar ' ( 19 76 ) , Hopper
isolates devices for indicating foregrounding and event sequencing in the mid-
19th century narrative prose of the Malaccan writer Abdullah bin Abdul-Kadir
Munshi . The passages that he chose are taken from Abdullah ' s autobiography ,
commonly known as the Hikayat Abdullah , and his Voyage , known as the Kesah
Pelayaran Abdullah . Regarding these devices he reports the following :
In Malay narrative language , kinetically new events which
are highly relevant to the story line are marked by suffixing
the particle -lahto the verb . In such sentences , the verb
generally appears in the initial position . Thi s initial verb
is without the prefix meng- , which , when attached to lexically
specified verbs , denotes ' active voice ' . If the verb is
transitive and is in the key narrative function , it is in­
variably in some form of the passive . ( 1 9 76 : 7 , 8)
After isolating all the events marked with the particle -lah and ignoring
the others in one of these passage s , he observes that the clauses marked with
- l a h:
provide a synopsis of the dynamic line of the episode , in
the sense that without them the story would be unintellig­
ible . They are successive events , each one dependent on
the completion of the preceding one . ( 1976 : 9 )
. . . the clauses not marked with - l ah are incidental and
supportive , or denote events which occur ' off- stage ' ; they
are not skeletal , kinetic events , but are es sentially sub­
s idiary one s . ( 1976 : 8 )
In other words , clauses marked with - l a h are viewed as the crucial foci of the
narrative and the ones not marked with - l a h are not .
8

Regarding topicalization he observes the following :

This initial position of the verb , and the absence of the
men g-prefix on the verb [ as talked about above in footnote 3 ] ,
are not found if the subj ect is ' topicalized ' , i . e . is placed
ahead of the verb . Topicalization takes place under quite
restricted discourse conditions , namely when the s ubj ect is
not new in the narrative , has been mentioned fairly recently
( almost always in the clause preceding the previous clause)
and is not identical with the last named possible sub j ect .
( 1976 : 8) 1
Regarding M . B . Lewis ' grammar , he makes the following remarks :
I have felt it worthwhile to quote Lewis on the use of - l a h
and pun for two reason s . One is that , although standard
grammars of Malay correctly describe the focusing function
of -l a h (mis leadingly naming it an ' emphatic ' function , how­
ever) , they have consistently missed the rule-governed nature
of its use in narrative , typically dismiss ing its appearance
with qualifiers such as sometime s , frequentl y , etc . More­
over , the ' preterite ' function of - 1 a h mentioned by Lewis is
seen as independent of its focusing function . I t is only
when a discourse analysis of-1 a h is approached that the
essential unity of these two features can be seen . S imilarly ,
the use of pun is also far from being an arbitrary choice of
the writer . Pun is attached to topics which are not com­
pletely new to the narrative , but which have not been the
most recent participant mentioned . - L ah is a focusing part­
icle , whose function is to indicate that the word of which
it is a part , as we l l as any dependent clauses , are a central
part of the narrative , and are foregrounded . These two
functions - foregrounding and focusing - are not separable ,
but are aspects of one and the same principle . ( 1976 : 11)
Hopper also manages to relate the focusing function of the - l ah particle to its
extended function as a past tense marker or a completed aspect marke r . Regarding
this he says :
We have seen that the aoristic function of - 1 a h requires a
condition of strict sequentiality with the preceding verb +
- 1 ah clause . This sequential ( non-overlapping) property of
-1 a h involves necessarily a view of the action which it sig-
nifies as something compl e ted; the next turn of events in
the narrative cannot be initiated until the preceding event
s ignalled by - 1a h has been completed . In narrative , therefore ,
the idea of anteriority is strongly attached to - 1 a h , so much
so that in some contexts it has a clear ' pluperfect ' sense ,
provided the principle of strict chronological sequentiality
is observed . ( 19 7 6 : 11-12)
According to him , this preterite function is discourse conditioned . Hence it is
clear that this can h ardly be a ' preterite ' in the sense of the ' past tense ' of
English and German .
 9

2.4. E RR I NGTON
I will review here in general terms what Errington discusses in her disser­
tation , ' A study of genre : Meaning and form in the Malay Hikayat Hang Tuah'
( 19 7 5 : 1-7 ) . Basically what she does is explicate the text and by so doing reveal
something of its coherence ( form) and meaning . That is to say , that she explains
the meaning of the text , parts of the text , especially key terms such as baha s a ,
t a h u , raj a by relating them to the context they occur in; in other words , she
shows what premises the hikayat is based upon .
In explicating the text as a genre she points out that although hikayat
come in the form of written texts , in their original context they were more
analogous to performances than they are to ' literature ' as it is known in the
Western tradition . To elaborate on this let me quote what she says :
Hikayat were read aloud to an audience , not in private silence .
In the performance , which involved no equipment , pictures ,
or puppets , the narrator ' s vocal skill and the quality of
his voice be came of paramount importance in rendering the
hikayat ' s sound and meaning and it seems clear , too , that
the sound of the beautifully modulated voice was thought to
have an e f fect in i ts own right . Indeed , the sound , the
meaning , and the effect on the listeners were probably con­
sidered to be part of the same inseparable whole . ( 1975:1)
Because of ' this emphasis on the unity of sound and meaning in the hikayat as
well as its oral performance ' she says that ' hikayat are probably more analogous
to the Javanese wayang k u l i t performances than they are to the texts of the
Wes t , either of hi story or of literature . ' Furthermore she states that ' as in
way a n g k u l i t , the plots of hikayat are diverse : no one hikayat can claim to be
the one origin myth or paradigmatic statement about the Malays . '
Another characteristic which she points out , which she actually gets from
Professor Bastin (Bastin 1964 ) is that figures in hikayat have no interiority.
Professor Bastin has declared that an ' inside ' view of Malay history is impos­
sible , because Malay works have no ' personalities ' , by which he means that there
is no character development and that readers are never given access to a figure ' s
point of view. We are never given , for instance , an insight into an interior
motive , a reflection , a diary - in short never told how the world appeared to a
given character or to the author ( for an authorial point of view is also lacking ) .
without point of view or motive , it is difficult for us to either discern or
imagine what might be the reasons or impulses behind a figure ' s actions .
Another hindrance to a Western audience ' s understanding , she points out , is
the lack of temporal framework . Periods of time are sometimes mentioned - ' the
palace was built in forty days ' - but they are never linked so as to form an
unbroken temporal referent l ine to which events could be related .
(Note : these two last characteristics are seen from the point of view of
Westerners , not from the point of view of the Malay peopl e . )
The premises ( 1975:32 - 3 3 ) 2 that the hikayat Hang Tuah is based on are :
( 1 ) The sultan ( called ' ra j a ' in the hikayat) provided a principle which organ­
ized the story ' s events in a way which is analogous to the notion of ' time ' in
Western hi storie s .
( 2 ) The raja is the fixed reference through which the world ' s ordering makes
sense .
10

( 3) The raja ' s presence gives a shape to society ' s totality .

( 4 ) The society is defined or given shape by baha s a , a term which in Modern Malay
means ' culture ' , ' language ' , and ' good manners ' . In Part One (of H ikayat Hang
Tuah ) , b a h a s a means all those , but it is clear that it means not A culture or A
language but culture , society and language themselves , which are all part of a
single whole . Within Part One , there is no conception of social form outside
baha s a ; people , events , and places outside b a h a s a are imaged as simply anarchi c .
( 5 ) Social cohesion within society appears to depend on the raj a ' s giving royal
bene ficence to his subj ects , and their returning to him homage in the form of
gi fts or deference expressed through speeches and body-stance . This perfect
relation of a raj a be stowing beneficence and his followers offering homage is ,
in a profound sens e , eventless .
( 6 ) I f the relationship , expressed in the forms of b a ha s a , is broken , events
occur .

2 . 5. B E C KER
2 . 5. 1 . 'Th e fi gure a sentence makes: an i n terpreta t i on of a c l as s i cal Mal ay
s en tence'
In this article , which is a study of the Classical Malay sentence :
S a - t e l ah dem i k i a n maka Sang B i ma n y u p u n b e rj a l a n - l a h samb i l
Bimanyu walk whi le
mench i um bau b unga2an mengh i bo r kan h a t i - nya i t u , na i k
sniff sme l l flowers entertain heart ( liver) ascend
bu k i t t u ru n b uk i t b e rapa g u nong dan j u rang d i l a l u i
hi l l descend hi l l many mountain and val ley pass over
taken from page 34 of the Dewan Bahasa dan Pustaka edition (1964) of the Hikaya t
edited by Khal id Hussain , Becker came out with the following inter­
Pa ndawa Li ma ,
esting observations :
( 1 ) There is a clear need in Classical Malay to distinguish between sentence
structure and clause structure - and between sentence function and clause func­
tion . Some features of sentences as distinct from clauses in Classical Malay
that he lists are :
Sentences Cl auses
1. Topic-event structure Sub j ect-predicate structure
2 . Topic initial is unmarked Predicate initial is unmarked
3 . Post-positional particles Prefixes on predicates (meng- , d i - )
( p un , - l ah ) mark relations mark relations
4 . Re ferentially constrained topic Role- focus constrained subject

( 2 ) In Classical Malay , case relations are not relevant at sentence level , which
helps to explain some of the special features of pun- l a h structures , particularly
the observation that case-marked predicates do not in Classical Malay precede
- l ah . ( This means only ' verbs ' with b e r - or te r- or no prefixes appear before
- l ah in Classical Malay , at least until quite late . The loss of this constraint
appears central in the history of Malay . )
 11

( 3 ) There are three sections in thi s sentence :

I . DEICTIC CONNECTIVES
Plot level relations
textual coherence
S a - t e l ah dem i k i a n maka
I I . P UN - LAH CORE
topic-event relations
script indexing
Sang B i manyu p u n b e rj a l a n l a h
I I I . ELABORATION
role- focus relations
referential coherence
s a mb i l mench i um . . .
( 4 ) The pun- l a h structure has several variant forms as the result o f other sec­
tions of the sentence , which precede and follow the central p u n - l a h structure ,
overlapping or merging with the p u n - l a h structure .
( 5 ) In Longacre ' s ( 1 9 7 2 ) terms , the sequence of pun- l ah structures forms the
' backbone ' or the ' skeleton ' of the text . It indexes an event ( - l a h ) and the
participant ( pu n ) who or which will be in a single case role - in the sentence
under investigation , this role is actor or agent - in the clauses which follow
the p u n - l a h core , clauses which fill in the detail s and particularize the event ,
IN RELATION TO THIS PARTICIPANT .
( 6 ) Following the pun- l a h structure are one or more c lauses involving the topic
(marked by pun ) and within the scope of the event ( marked by - l a h ) .
( 7 ) The progress ion of the clauses is : actor focus to no marked focus to non­
actor focus (meng- to � to d i - , morphologically) .
(8) The readers experience topics moving in and out of roles and roles moving in
and out of focus , the former at the sentence leve l , the latter at the clause
leve l .
( 9 ) The progression in the elaboration section from individual , actor-focused
events to location-focused events (marked by the d i - prefix and the - i suffix on
the final predicate ) appears to reflect what has been called variously the Cline
of Person ( Becker and Oka 1977) , the Referentiality Hierarchy (Foley 1976) , the
Natural Topic Hierarchy (Hawkinson and Hyman 1974) , or the Inherent Lexical
Content Hierarchy ( S i lverstein 1976) , all of which seem to be quite similar , a
continuum from self to other , marked off in strikingly s imilar ways from language
to language . In most general terms , thi s cline of hierarchy can be represented
as :
speaker > hearer > human proper > human common > animate > inanimate
(> location)

( 1 0 ) The first section of the sentence contextualizes the p u n - l a h core in the

hierarchy of the prior text .
( 1 1) There are two kinds of coherence : referential coherence ( relations to a
single event or a series of events in a stereotypic script) and textual coherence
(marked relations between sentence s , with sentences defined as discourse uni ts ) .
In those terms , we could say that the first section marks the textual coherence
of the core , the final section the referential coherence of the core . The
REFERENTIAL coherence is provided by the event ( or script) of a man moving
through a landscape , with perspective shifting from man to landscape . The
12

TEXTUAL coherence is established by the first part of the figure , with the words
s a - t e l a h d em i k i a n maka . . .
( 1 2 ) The heaviness or density of connectives or deictics such as s a - t e l a h
dem i k i a n ma ka marks structural boundaries . At the level of sentences , the
Class ical Malay text uses j ust maka [ or another s ingle-word connective like
s h a hadan or h a t t a ] to mark separate units . At a boundary of a larger ( i . e .
larger in scope) unit , a cluster o f sentences o f some sort , heavier or denser
connectives are used , two-word connectives ( e . g . a ra k i a n maka , dem i k i an maka ,
h a t t a s a - t e l ah , a ra k i an s a - t e l ah , s a - t e l a h dem i k i an , and a few other combinations
of these few connective words ) , and for larger units , three-word connectives
( e . g . maka s a - t e l ah s u dah , h a t t a s a - t e l a h s udah , s a - t e l ah i t u ma k a , and the form
we are looking at here , s a - t e l a h d em i k i an maka ) .
( 1 3 ) More coinciding deictics or connectives mean a higher-level plot boundary :
new place , new time , new state , new major character , etc . To put it another way ,
thi s sentence is (or for the reader , will be) the context to background for a
potentially large number of lower level sentences .
( 14 ) The movement o f the sentences is from generality to particularity , in several
senses :
1 ) From non-role and case marking ' verbs ' to role and case marking
' verbs ' ( e . g . from b e r- prefixed verbs to meng-/ d i - prefixed ' verbs ' ) .
2 ) From least referential terms to most , in the sense that ma ka is
less referential than men c h i um 'sniff ' .
3 ) From metacomment ( about tell ing) to comment ( the telling) . That
is , from information about the text to information about the story .
4) From language to nature .
( 15 ) The first two sections are constrained by prior text ; the third section is
more ' emotional ' - more reflective of the imagination and the skill of the author ,
into whose ' subj ectivity ' we as readers enter in this third section .
( 1 6 ) This Malay sentence i s what might be called a PROTO-TYPICAL sentence ,
related not by derivation but by partial resemblances in several dimensions to
a great many other Classical Malay sentences with which it shares some or nearly
all its meanings .
( 1 7 ) The boundary between sect ions II and III ( core and elaboration) is no longer
clear , and the functions of the two sys tems ( re ferential-topic and role-focus) no
longer di stinguish clauses and sentences in modern urban Malay or Indonesian .
( 18) Many of the deictic connectives which established textual coherence are no
longer used , except in very formal situations where an archaic flavour is
important .
Becker ' s work on the p u n - l a h sentence as reviewed above in some ways came
out from the discussions that I had with him when I was working on p u n - l ah con­
struction as one type of construction in section 3 . 6 . of this work . The similar­
ity and the difference between his work and mine can be seen when one reads the
review above and compares it to sect ion 3 . 6 . 1 . In general , the difference i s in
the texts examined , i . e . in terms of time that they were written : the text in
which Becker ' s prototype p u n - l ah sentence occurs was written ' approximately in
the middle of the 15th century AD ' , 3 while my text , according to Teeuw and Wyatt ,
was written between the years 1690 and 1720 , i . e . the first draft in 1690 and
the present form after 1720 . � Moreover , my work includes the variants of the
p u n - l ah type of sentence , while Becker ' s only deals with one p u n - l ah sentence ,
 13

which he claims to be a prototype . The similarity , in general , is in the fact

that in both works Becker and I claim that the p un - l a h sentence type has three
parts : a deictic connective precore part , a p u n - l a h core part and an elaboration
part .

2.5.2. 'Text-bui l d i ng, epi stemo l ogy, a nd aes thet i c s i n Ja vanese s hadow theatre'
This essay i s a description of some of the constraints on text-building in
Javanese shadow play , way a n g k u l i t , which is performed in Javanese language .
The goal is ' to discover how to build a text in Javanese , to explore what text­
building revealed about Javanese epistemology , and to learn how to respond
aesthetically to a very different artistic medium ' (Becker , to appear , p . 2 ) .
According to Becker ,
the analysis of a text requires , minimally that the modern
philologist describe several kinds of relations in order to
recreate a conceptual ly distant context . A minimal set of
these relations i s :
1 . The relation o f words , phrases , sentences , and larger
units of the text to each other ( i . e . the coherence of the
text)
2 . The relation of this text to other texts : the extent that
it is repetition or new ( speaking the present or the past)
3. The relation of the author to both the text and the
hearers/readers of the text - seen from the point of view
of the author or from the point of view of the hearers/
readers ( i . e . the intent of the text-builder)
4 . The relation of units in the text to non- literary events
( i . e . reference) . ( p . 8)
Based on this , Becker states : ' Context , then , includes coherence , degree of
repetition/spontaneity , intent , and reference . ' He goes on stating that
sorting out the SOURCES of constraints on all these relations
is a further task for the modern philologist : to what extent
are the constraints on these relat ions human ( i . e . universal
to all texts ) ? Or are they operative only within a s ingle
language family or cultural tradition , or within a s ingle
language , or only in a specific genre , or only in the works
of one author? Any work is constrained at all these level s ' .
(p. 9)
Becker applies the relations that are discussed above t o de scribe a Javanese
shadow play . As a result , he claims that the following are the similar kinds of
relations that the play has with its context :
( 1 ) Textual coherence or plot coherence (plot as symbolic action) : the relation
of parts of a text to the whole ( c f . pp . 9 , 4 7 ) .
( 2 ) Text within text : the Javanese art of invention - the relation of the motifs
or episodes of a text to their source in a cultural mythology ( c f . pp . 2 7 , 4 7 ) .
( 3 ) Intentionality in a text : the uses of texture - the relation of the text and
its parts to the participants in the l inguistic act ( speaker - direct or indirect,
hearer - direct or indirect , bene ficiary - direct or indirect , etc . ) (cf. pp . 3 3 ,
47) .
14

( 4 ) Reference ( either naming or metaphoric reference) : the relation of the text

and its parts to the non-text world ( c f . p . 4 7 ) , i . e . the present-day non-wayang
world ( c f . p . 40 ) .
In describing the first kind of relation , Becker defines plot as follows :
The plot of a story or a play is a set of constraints on the
select ion and sequencing of dramatic episodes or motifs
Plots , like tennis rule s , do not allow one to predict - except
in very general terms - what will happen in a play . Rather ,
plots tel l us what cannot be done appropriately. They also , .
l ike scientific theories , tell us one other important thing :
what the relevant variables are in the things one can do in
the play . ( p . 10)
Note that Becke r ' s kinds of relations discussed and li sted above provide
the basic methodology for my work . The first kind , that is the textual coherence ,
is reflected in the di scuss ion of sections 3 . 2 . , 3 . 5 . and 3 . 6 . The second kind ,
i . e . text within text , can be seen in the discussion of sections 3 . 2 . and 3 . 4 .
The third kind , i . e . intentionality in a text , can be seen in sections 3 . 2 . , 3 . 3 .
and 3 . 4 . The fourth kind , i . e . reference , can be seen in sections 3 . 3 . and 3 . 4 .

2.6. P I KE AND P I KE V I A JON ES 19775

In doing my work , the following notions of Pike and Pike , which I use ,
integrate into , and modify according to the nature o f my text , have in some ways
influenced my theoretical orientation .

2.6.1. Part-whol e h i era rch i ca l orga n i za t i o n of reference

Commenting about this Jones ( 1977 : 108-109) states :
Part-whole hierarchy in tagmemics means organization into
levels that embed within each othe r . Except for units of the
lowest level , each unit of each level may be analyzed into
parts , or IMMEDIATE CONSTITUENTS , which themselves are units
of the same or di fferent levels . This is a part-whole rela­
tion : the whole has parts , and each part in turn may be
viewed as a whole which itself has parts , and so on until
one reaches some fundamental units which may not be further
decomposed .
She also states : ' Frequently the units o f a level have as their immediate
constituents units of the next lower level or layer. Sometimes . . . there is
l evel-ski ppi ng ( dropping more than one level ) , or recursi veness . '

Regarding a framework for this hierarchy , she states : ' Pike and Pike have
presented a tentative framework of the referential hierarchy , distinguishing four
levels ( from highest to lowest) : performative interaction , story , event and
identity . '
As an illustration of this framework she provides the following table with
examples from her Allen Brown-Washington D . C . text (which is a text she made up)
along with a discussion of each level in the framework :
 15

Th e re ferenti a l h i era rchy wi th examp l es

from the Al l en B rown-Wa s h i ngton D . C . text

PERFORMATIVE Allen Brown REPORTING his Washington D . C . visit

INTERACTION : to Monte Wrigh t , friend a t work

STORY : Allen ' s vi sit to Washington D . C . on vacation

EVENT : losing wal let in restaurant ,

visiting Washington Monument ,
getting stuck in Monument elevator

IDENTITY : Allen Brown , wallet , Washington D . C . , elevator ,

Washington Monument

along with the following discuss ion of each leve l :

The lowest level in the referential analysis would be
IDENTITIES , with the ir emically-perceived properties : Allen
Brown , Monte Wrigh t, the restaurant , each of the governmental
buildings , the elevator , the wallet , his hotel , etc . The
next lowest level of the analysis - EVENT level - analyzes
the actions and states the identities . For example , losing
the wallet would be an event relationship between Allen and
the wallet. Getting stuck in the elevator would involve the
identities Allen and the e levator and the Washington Monument .
Visiting the Washington Monument itself ( o f which getting
stuck in the elevator was one part) would be a higher layer
within the event leve l .
The STORY level would consist of the sequence of events ,
along with setting , background , and other pertinent inform­
ation conveyed . That is , the story consists of everything
told about Allen ' s visit to Washington , D . C . PERFORMATIVE
INTERACTION level is represented by the whole of the dis­
course : Allen's report to Monte , and any responses by Monte .
Here attitudes and beliefs be long , e . g . Allen ' s obvious
enj oyment of the visit , his belief in the value of democracy
and pride in his government , his good feelings toward Monte .
Also included is the overall purpose for the discourse ,
which was REPORTING .

2. 6.2. The referent i a l h i erarchy v s . the grammati cal h i era rchy

In this section , Jones ( 19 7 7 : 110) uses her Allen Brown-Washington D . C . text
to contrast the referential hierarchy with the gramma tical hierarchy . Regarding
this she states :
The Pike and Pike referential hierarchy is concerned with
the relation of Allen ( and Monte) to the real world situation
depicted by the discourse . It involves pragmatic conditions
of appropriateness as well as truth conditions . The gram­
matical hierarchy is concerned with the verbalization itsel f :
the words , sentences , paragraphs , etc . involved, and the
16

relat ions of these gramma tical constructions to one another .

In sum, the referential hierarchy is matrix or network­
like , whereas the grammatical hierarchy is more linear in
nature .
The referential hierarchy has components of purpose ,
speaker attitude , belief , etc . that are not present in the
grammatical hierarchy. On the other hand , there are elements
in the grammatical hierarchy not present in the referential
hierarchy , e . g . special cohesive elements such as third
person s ingular inflection in English verbs .
The referential hierarchy is concerned with lexical collo­
cational restrictions , e . g . round s quare is nonsensical in
a normal universe of discourse . Grammatically , however ,
this sequence conforms to acceptable grammatical construc­
tions for noun phrases : adj ective before noun . This points
out again the contrast of PARTICULARS in the referential
hierarchy and GENERALITIES in the grammatical hierarchy .

2. 6.3. Hi erarch i ca l orga n i zation of the grammar

Regarding this , Jones ( 1977 : 111) states : ' The levels in the Pike and Pike
grammatical hierarchy are ( from bottom of the hierarchy up) : Morpheme , morpheme
cluster , word , phrase , clause , sentence , paragraph , monolog , exchange , and con­
versation . These are grouped by pairs according to similar function s . ' These
functions , which she refers to in a footnote , are : ' lexical package (morpheme/
morpheme cluster) ; term (word/phrase) ; proposition ( clause/sentence ) ; theme­
development (paragraph/monolog) ; social interaction ( exchange/conversation) . '
To illustrate these levels , Jones provides the following table :
The grammat i ca l h i era rchy wi th exampl es
from the Al l en Brown-Was h i n gton D.C. text

EXCHANGE/CONVERSATION : 'Hi , Allen . ' Oh , hi , Monte . Let me tell

,

you about my visit to Washington D . C . . . .

,

PARAGRAPH/MONOLOG : Then I went to a French restaurant . I got

a crepe and . . The food was fantastic!
. .

CLAUSE/SENTENCE : Then , suddenly , the elevator stopped!

WORD/PHRASE : wallet , in the restaurant , few taxis

MORPHEME/MORPHEME CLUSTER : the , to , -s , wallet , re-

2.6.4. Re ferenti a l v s . grammati cal tagmemes

In discuss ing this Jones does not give an exhaustive comparison of the
tagmemes of the two hierarchies , since her main purpose is to give the reader a
basic fami liarity with tagmemes . She goes on stating that·'Tagmemes depict four
important aspe cts of a linguistic unit : ( 1 ) its SLOT in the larger construction ;
( 2 ) its CLASS , or type , of construction ; ( 3 ) i ts ROLE in relation to other units ;
 17

and ( 4 ) COHESIVE aspects binding the unit into the larger system ' ( Jones 1977 :
111-112) . To illustrate these aspects , Jones ( 19 77 : 112) provides the following
figure which presents a generali zed nature of a tagmeme :

SLOT CLASS
WHERE is the item on WHAT is the form of
the including wave? the unit or construction?
( nucleus , margin)

ROLE COHESION
What PURPOSE or How does this item RELATE
FUNCT ION does the item to others within the system ;
fill in relation to how does it govern them or
the system? is it governed by them?

Jones ( p . 113) presents the following table which gives a few sample tagmemes from
several different hierarchical levels of Reference and Grammar for the Allen
Brown-Washington D . C . Text . The referential tagmemes occur on the left ; the
grammatical tagmemes occur on the right .

Constituents of REFERENCE Constituents of GRAMMAR

Level Leve l
PERFORMATIVE INTERACTION : EXCHANGE :
Nucleus Talking with Monte Nucleus Monolog

Reporting Real ( vs . imagined) Response

STORY : MONOLOG :
Visiting Washington
Nucleus D . C . ( vector) Nucleus Story

Vacation Real Story-tell ing

EVENT : SENTENCE :
Going up in ele­ Transitive
PreMargin vator ( complex) Nucleus Clause Root

Transportation Real Statement

to goal
CLAUSE :
Predicate Verb Phrase

Statement Transitivity governs

occurrence of Sub j .
and Dir . Obj . tagmemes
18

IDENTITY : PHRASE :
WALLET Nucleus Noun
' wallet '
' that stupid thing ' Item Governs number of
Prop 'it' Pronoun & of Demons .
Pro . ; Requires
Possess ion Reali/Missing occurrence of a
Speci fying Article

2.6.5. Commen t
It should be noted that in my work I do not make any distinction between
the referential and the grammatical hierarchies as Pike and Pike do . By this I
am not implying that their making of this distinction is wrong . I j ust don ' t
grasp i t completely in order to apply this to my work. In other words in my work
there is an overlap between these hierarchies. And the terms I use in a lot of
ways are not similar to Pike and Pike's . This i s mainly due to the fact that the
nature o f my data requires me to coin different terms . In spite of this the
underlying principles introduced by Pike and Pike are operating in the descrip­
tion of my work . That is to say , notions such as part-whole , hierarchical
organization , and four- cell tagmemes can be easily detected in my work .

2.7 . CONCLUS I ON
Other works , which in one way or another have given richness to my work are
Austin's and Searle's speech act theories as discussed in Austin 1962 ( 1970) and
Searle 1 9 69 ( 1974) ; Labov' s , Waletzky's and Eisner ' s ideals about the functions
of the narrative structure as discussed in Helm , e d . , 1967 , in Labov 1972 and in
Eisner 1975 ; Grimes' discus sion on kinds of discourse information in Grimes 1975 ;
Halliday's and Hasan's explanations of the notions of anaphoric and cataphoric
reference in Halliday and Hasan 1976 ; Klammer's ideas regarding Dialogue Para­
graph in Klammer 1971 ; and Schank ' s explanation of the notion of Script in
Schank et al . 1975 .
The following scholars of Malay and Indonesian - besides Becker, Hopper ,
Errington , Teeuw and Wyatt whose works were reviewed above - have provided me
with some basic ideas which I extend , expand and modify in accordance with the
nature of my data and the purpose of this study : Winstedt and Lewis ' discussion
on deictic particles which they refer to as 'punctuation or transition words'
respectively in Lewis 1947 and Winstedt 1913 ; Poerwadarminta ' s lexical meanings
or de finitions of most of the de ictic particles in Poerwadarminta 1966 .
 19

NOTES TO CHAPTE R 2

1. The remarks in square brackets are mine .

2. The numbering o f the premises i s mine .
3. See Becker 1977 : 2 7 ( footnote 14) .
4. See Teeuw and Wyatt 1970 : 66 .
5. I use Jones 1977 as a source to understand Pike and Pike ' s referential and
grammatical hierarchies s ince she worked closely with them , and the way she
presents their materials is very clear and helpful to me . Also , I don ' t
have access to Pike and Pike ' s Gramma tical Analysis published in 1976 , in
which these notions are presented.
 Chapter 3

INTERPRET IVE ANALYSIS OF THE TEXT

3.1. THE TEXT AND I TS TRANSLAT ION l

The following is the first story of Hikayat Patani (HP) , the text which
forms the primary source of insights that I am attempting to share with those
who are interested in this study of a non-Western text tradition :
Text and i nterl i near tran s l a t i on Free tran s l a t i o n
( 0 ) BTsm i I l' a-h i - r ra hman i - In the name o f God
'
In the Name of God - the Compassionate - the Compassionate,
the Meraifu l .
r ra hTm
·
the Meraifu l .

( 1) In i = l a h s ua t u k i s s a h y a n g This i s a story
This=CM a story rel . pron . whiah has been to ld
by the o ld peop le : 2
d i =cete ra=kan o l eh o ra n g
the origin of the
pt . foc . =te l l=act . foc . by person
king who founded the
t ua- t ua , a s a l raj a yang b e rbua t settlement of Patani,
o ld-o ld, origin king re l . pron . make the Abode of Peaae .
nege r i P a t a n i Da r us s a l am i tu
sett lement Patani Abode of Peaae that

( 2 ) Ada=p u n raj a d i Ko ta Ma l i g a i i t u The king in Kota

Exis t=TM king in town Ma ligai that Ma ligai Was aal led
Phaya Tu Kerub
n ama=nya Paya Tu Ke rub Maha j a na
Mahajana.
name=the/he Paya Tu Kerub Mahajana

( 3 ) Maka Paya T u Ke r u b Mahaj ana p u n b e r a na k

conn . Paya Tu Kerub Mahajana TM beget ahild He had one son,
whom he gave the name
s e=o r a n g l ak i - l a k i , maka d i = n ama= i
of Phaya Tu Antara.
one=person boy-boy conn . pt . foc . =name=allt .
a na kanda b a g i n da i t u Paya T u An t a ra
ahi ld his majesty that Paya Tu Antara

20
 21

( 4 ) H a t ta b e r a pa l ama=nya ma ka Paya Tu Ke rub After some time

conn . how long=the conn . Paya Tu Kerub Phaya Tu Kerub
Mahajana died.
Ma haj ana pun ma t i = 1 ah
Mahajana TM die=cM

( 5 ) Syahdan maka Paya T u An t a ra p u n Then Phaya Tu Antara

conn . conn . Paya Tu Antara TM became kingJ
succeeding
ke raj aan= l a h meng=ga n t i =kan
his father.
become king=cM ag . foc . =succeed=act . foc .
ayaha n da b a g i n da i tu
father his majesty that

( 6 ) Ia me=nama= i d i r i =nya Paya T u He ca l led himse lf

He ag . foc . =name=allt. se lf=he Paya Tu Phaya Tu Nakpa.
Naqpa
Naqpa

( 7 ) Se l ama Paya Tu N a q pa keraj a a n i tu During his reign

During Paya Tu Naqpa become king that Phaya Tu Nakpa was
accustomed a lways
s en t i a s a i a p e rg i b e r b u r u
to go hunting.
always h e go hunt

( 8) Pad a s ua t u ha r i Paya Tu N a q pa p u n d u d u k One day Phaya Tu

On one day Paya Tu Naqpa TM sit Nakpa was seated
on his roya l
d i =a t a s t a k h t a ke raj aan=nya d i =adap
throne whi le his
in=on throne roya l=the/he pt . foc . =attend
ministersJ officia lsJ
o l eh s eg a l a men t e r i pegawa i officersJ and a l l
by all minister official his subjects were
sitting in attendance
h u l uba l a n g dan ra ' ya t seka l i a n
officer and peop le a l l

( 9 ) A ra k i a n maka t i t a h b a g i nda : "Aku Then the king spoke :

conn . conn . speech his majesty : I "I have heard reports
that the game
denga r khaba r=nya p e r b u r u a n sebe l ah
near the sea-shore
hear report=the hunting game side
is abundant indeed. "
tep i l a u t i t u t e r l a l u b a ny a k kono n "
shore sea that very many report says

( 10 ) Maka sembah sega l a men te r i : The ministers

conn . obeisance a l l minister: rep lied respectfu l ly :
"Hai l my LordJ it
" Da u l a t Tuan=k u , s un g g uh= l ah sepe r t i
is true indeed as
good fortune Lord=my true=CM like
Your Majesty has
t i tah D u l i Y a n g Maha=mu l i a spoken; we too have
speech dust of t �e feet the most=noble heard likewise . "
i t u , p a t i k denga r p u n dem i = k i a n j uga "
that s lave hear TM like=that also
22

( II) M a k a t i t a h P a y a T u Naqpa : " J i ka l a u Phaya Tu Nakpa

conn . speech Paya Tu Naqpa : if then spoke :
"In that case
dem i =k i an ke rah=kan= l a h sega l a ra ' y a t
caU up aU Our
like=that summon=ac t . foc . =CM a l l peop le
peop le. Tomorrow
k i ta . E sok ha r i k i ta hendak p e rg i We shaU go
I tomorrow day I intend go hunting along the
sea-shore . "
b e r b u ru ke t e p i l a ut i tu . "
hunt to shore sea that

( 12 ) Maka s embah s ega l a men t e r i The ministers

conn . obeisance a l l minister and officers
rep lied respectfu l ly :
h u l ub a l a n g=ny a : " Da u l a t Tuan=ku ,
"Hai l my Lord;
officer:he good fortune Lord=my
we humb ly accept
ma n a t i t a h Du l i Ya n g whatever Your
any speech dust of the feet the Majesty says . "
Maha=mu l i a pa t i k j unj u n g "
most=nob le s lave carry on the head

( 13 ) A ra k i an s e t e l ah d a t a n g= l ah pada The fo Uowing

conn . after this then come=CM to morning the
king departed
keesokan h a r i =nya , ma ka b a g i n d a pun
with aU his
tomorrow day=the conn . his majes ty TM
ministers and
b e rangkat= l ah dengan s ega l a men te r i officers, and
depart=CM with all minister accompanied by
his peop le.
h u l ub a l a n g=nya d i = i r i ng=ka n
officer:the/he pt. foc . =accompany=act . foc .
o l e h ra ' ya t seka l i a n
by people a U

( 14 ) S e t e l ah sampa i pada t empat b e rb u ru When they

After this then arrive to place hunt arrived at the
hunting-grounds
i t u , ma ka seka l i a n ra ' ya t pun b e rhen t i = l ah
the peop le made
that conn . a l l peop le TM stop=CM
a s top and the
d a n kh emah pun d i =d i r i =kan tents were
and tent TM pt . foc =erect=ac t . foc .
. erected.
o ra n g= l a h
person=CM

( IS ) Maka b a g i n d a pun t u ru n= l ah da r i Then the king

conn . his majesty TM descend from=cM from descended from
his e lephant and
a t a s gaj a h=nya s emayam d i da l am
sat in state in a
on e lephant=the/he sit in state in
tent while his
kh emah d i =adap o l eh sega l a men te r i ministers and
tent pt . foc . =attend by all minister officers and aU
his subjects were
h u l ub a l a n g ra ' y a t seka l i an
sitting in
officer peop le a l l
attendance.
 23

( 16 ) M a ka bag i n da p u n me=n i tah=kan Then the kin0

conn . his majesty TM ag . fo c =orde reac t . fo c .
. ordered ( some )
men to go and
o ra n g p e r g i me= l i h a t bekas r u s a i t u
look for the tracks
person go ag . foc . =see track deer that
of deer.

( 17) Hatta sete l ah o ra n g i t u d a t a n g When these men

conn . after this then person that come returned and
appeared be fore
meng=adap b a g i nd a maka
the king they
ag . foc . =appear before his majesty conn .
said respectfu l ly :
s embah=nya : " Da u l a t T u a n=k u , "Hai l my Lord,
obeisance=he good fortune Lord=my , in the woods
near the sea
pada h u t a n s eb e l ah t e p i l a u t i n i te r l a l u
there are a great
at forest side shore sea this very
many tracks . "
banyak bekas=nya�
many track=the

( 18) Maka t i ta h bag i n da : " Ba i k= l ah esok The king spoke :

conn . speech his majesty good=CM tomorrow "Good, let Us go
hunting early
p ag i - pag i k i ta b e r b u r u . "
tomorrow morning. "
morning-morning I/we hunt

( 19 ) Maka s e t e l ah keesokan h a r i =nya The fo Uowing

conn . after this then tomorrow day=the morning snares
and nets were
maka j a r i n g dan j e ra t p u n d i = t a han
set .
conn . net and trap TM pt . foc . =set
o ra n g= l a h
person=CM

( 2 0 ) Maka sega l a ra ' y a t pun ma s uk= l a h ke=da l am Then the people

conn . all people T M enter=CM to=in went into the
wood beating
h u t a n i t u men g= a l a u - a l a u sega l a
game from early
forest that ag . foc . =beat al l
morning until
p e r b u r u a n i t u da r i pag i - pag i the sun began
game that from morning-morning to decline; but
not one anima l
h i n g ga d a t a n g n g e l i n c i r mataha r i .
was obtained.
ti l l come decline sun
s e=e ko r p e r b u r u a n t i ada d i =p e ro l eh
one =clas s . game not pt . foc . =obtain

( 2 1 ) Maka b a g i nda pun ama t ha i ran= l ah The king was

conn . his majesty TM very .lS 1 Jmis hed=cM greatly astonished
and gave orders
s e r t a me=n i tah=kan me=n y u r uh
to re lease
and ag . foc . =say=act . foc . ag . foc . =omer
his own hunting
me= l epas=kan a n j i n g pe r b u r u a n dogs . 3
ag . foc . =release=act . foc . d()� hunting
bag i nda send i r i i t u
his majesty self that
24

( 2 2 ) M a k a a n j i ng i t u pun d i = l epas=kan So the dogs

conn . dog that TM pt . fo c . =re lease=act . foc . were released.
o r a n g= l ah
person=CM

( 2 3) H a t t a ada s ek i ra- k i r a d ua [ d u ] j am Then� after

conn . exist about two hour about two hours�
the sound of the
l ama=nya maka b e r b uny i = l a h s u a ra anj i ng
dogs ' barking
long=the conn . sound=cM voice dog
was heard.
i t u me=nya l a k
that ag . foc . =bark

( 24 ) Maka b a g i n d a p u n sege ra The king

conn . his majesty TM immediately immediately went
in the direction of
men=dapa t=kan s u a ra a n j i n g i t u
the sound of the dogs .
ag . foc =find=ac t . fo c . voice dog
. that

( 2 5 ) S e t e l ah bag i n da d a t a n g kepada s ua t u When the king

After his majesty come to a arrived at an
inlet of the
s �rokan t as i k i t u , maka bag i nd a
sea he found the
in let sea that� conn . his majesty
men who had gone
p u n be r t em u= l ah dengan s ega l a o rang wi th the dogs .
TM find=cM with all person
yang me=n u ru t anj i ng i t u
rel . pron . ag fo c . =go with dog
. that

( 26 ) M a ka t i tah b a g i nda : "Apa yang The king spoke :

conn . speech his majesty : What rel . pron . "What were these
dogs barking at ? "
d i =sa l ak o l eh anj i ng i t u ? "
p t . foc . =bark by dog that

( 2 7 ) Maka s embah me reka seka 1 i a n i t u : They rep lied

conn . obeisance they all that respectfu l ly :
"Hai l my Lord� we
" Dau l a t Tuan=k u , p a t i k mohon=kan
beg your pardon
good fortune Lord-my s lave beg=act . foc .
and grace .
amp u n dan k a r u n i a . Ada s e=eko r
There was a
pardon and grace exist one=c lass
white mousedeer
p e l a n d u k p u t i h , besa r=nya sepe r t i the size of a
mousedeer white big=it/the as goat� and its body
had a luminous sheen.
kamb i ng , wa rna t ub uh=nya g i l a ng gem i l a n g .
goat colour body=it/the glittering
I t u= l a h y a n g d i = hamb a t o l eh That was what the
That=CM rel . pron . p t . fo c . =pursue by dogs were pursuing;
but the mousedeer
a nj i ng i n i . Maka p e l a n d u k i t u p u n
has vanished on
dog this Conn . mousedeer that TM
this beach here . "
l e nyap= l a h pada pan t a i i n i . "
disappear=cM at beach this
 25

(28) Sete l a h b a g i n da me=nenga r After the king

After this then his majesty ag. foc . =hear had heard the
men ' s report,
s emb ah o ra n g i t u , ma ka b a g i n d a
he set out for
obeisance person that conn . his majesty
that p lace .
p u n b e r a n g k a t b e rj a l an kepada tempa t i t u
TM depart walk to p lace that

( 29 ) Maka bag i n da p u n b e r t emu dengan There he found

conn . his majesty TM find with a house where an
o ld coup le lived,
s e=b uah r umah o ra n g t ua l a k i - b i n i
catching prawns
one=class house person o ld husband-wife
and setting snares.
d u d u k me= rawa dan men=j e ra t
reside ag. foc . =catch prawn and ag . foc . =set snare

( 30 ) M a ka t i ta h bag i nda s u ru h b e r t a nya The king then

conn . speech his majesty order ask gave orders to
ask these o ld
kepada o ra n g t ua i t u , da r i ma na
people whence they
to person old that from where
had come and
da t a n g=nya ma ka i a d u d u k kema r i i n i settled in this
come=he conn . he reside hither this p lace and what
their origin Was .
d a n o ra n g ma n a a s a l =nya
and person where origin=he

( 3 1 ) Maka hamba raj a i t u p un men=j unj u n g=kan The king 's servants
conn . servant king that TM ag . foc . =carry on respectfu l ly trans­
the head=act . foc . mitted the king ' s
t i t a h bag i nda kepada o r a n g t u a i t u words t o the o ld
speech his majesty to person o ld that peop le.

( 32 ) Maka s embah o ra n g t ua i t u : They respectfu l ly

conn . obeisance person o ld that : rep lied:
" Da u l a t T u a n=k u , ada=pun p a t i k i n i "Hai l my Lord,
good fortune Lord=my exist=TM s lave this we are just
servants of
hamba j uga pada kebawah Du l i
Your Majesty;
s lave a lso at to under dus t of the feet
for original ly
Yang Maha=m u l i a , ka rena a s a l pat i k
the most=nob le because origin s lave
i n i d ud u k d i Ko ta Ma l i ga i . Maka we lived in
this reside in town Maligai conn . the town of
Ma ligai. When
pada ma s a Paduka Nenda be rangkat
your Royal Grand­
at period foot grandfather depart
father departed
p e rg i b e r b u a t n e ge r i ke Ay u t i a , ma ka for Ayudhya in
go make city to Ayutia, conn . order to build a
settlement there,
p a t i k p u n d i =k e ra h o r a n g p e rg i
we were summoned
s lave TM pt . foc . =summon person go
to come and
meng= i r i ng=kan Du l i accompany Him on
ag . foc . =accompany=act . foc . dust of the feet His voyage .
26

P a d u ka N e n d a b e ra n g ka t i t u .
foot grandfather depart that
Sete l a h Pad uka N e n d a When he had
After this then foot grandfather arrived at
s ampa i kepada t emp a t i n i , maka p a t i k p u n this plaoe we
arrive to were strioken
p laoe this conn . s lave TM
with an i l lness,
keda t a n ga n penyak i t , ma ka pa t i k p u n so we were left
s trioken with i l lness conn . s lave TM behind here . "
d i =t i ngga l = kan o ra n g= l ah
pt . foc . = leave behind=act . foc . person=CM
pada t em pa t i n i "
at plaoe this

( 3 3 ) M a ka t i t ah bag i nda : "Apa n ama The king spoke :

conn . speeoh his majesty : What name "What is your
name ? "
e n g ka u 1 "
you

( 3 4) Maka s emb a h o ra n g t u a i t u : " Nama The o ld man

conn . obeisanoe person old that : name respeotfU l ly
replied: "My
pat i k Enc i k Tan i "
name is Enoik
s lave Enoik Tani
Tani . "

( 35) S e t e l a h s udah b a g i n da When the king

After this then already his majesty heard what
me=n e n ga r s emba h o ra n g t u a i t u , the man told
him, he re­
a g . foc . =hear obeisanoe person o ld that,
turned to his
maka bag i n da p u n kemba l i = l ah pada tent.
conn . his majesty TM return=CM to
kh e ma h=nya
tent=he

( 36 ) Dan pada ma l am i t u bag i n d a pun That same night

And o n night that his majesty TM the king de lib­
b e r b i ca ra dengan sega l a men t e r i erated with his
all minister ministers and
talk with
offioers, as he
h u l uba l a n g=nya hendak b e r b u a t nege r i wanted to build
offioer=he intend make sett lement a settlement on
the spot where the
pada tempat pe l a n d u k p u t i h i t u
at p laoe mousedeer white that white mousedeer
had been.

(37) Sete l ah ke e sokan h a r i =nya The fo llawing

After this then tomorrow day=the morning the
ministers and
maka s ega l a men t e r i h u l uba l a n g p u n
offioers ordered
conn . all minister offioer TM
men to go upstream
me= n y u r u h o ra n g mud i k ke Kot a to the town of
ag . foc . =order person go upstream t o town
 27

Ma l i ga i d a n ke Lancang me=nge r a h=kan Maligai and to

Maligai and to Lancang ag . foc . =summon=act . fo c . Lancang in order
to cal l up a l l the
sega l a ra ' y a t h i l i r berbuat
subjects, that they
all peop le go downstream make
should come down­
n ege r i i tu . s tream and start
sett lement that bui lding the 4
sett lement .

( 38) S e t e l a h s udah sega l a men t e r i After the ministers

After this then a lready a l l minister and officers had
received instruc­
h u l uba l an g d i = t i tah=kan o l �h
officer tions from the
pt . foc . =order=act . foc . by
king, each with
b a g i nd a mas i ng-ma s i ng dengan his own men, the
his majesty each with king returned to
the town of
ket umb u kan=nya , ma ka b a g i n da pun
Ma ligai.
man=he conn . his majesty TM
b e rangkat kemb a l i ke Ko t a Ma l i g a i
depart return to town Maligai

( 39 ) H a t t a a n ta ra d u a b u l an I ama=n y a , ma ka After two months

conn . between two month long=the, conn . the sett lement
Was ready .
nege r i i t u p u n s u dah= l a h
sett lement that TM a lready=cM

( 4 0 ) Maka bag i n d a p u n p i ndah h i l i r The king moved

conn . his majesty TM move go downstream downstream and
resided in the
d ud uk pad a n e ge r i yang
newly made sett le­
reside a t sett lement re1 . pron .
ment, which he
d i =p e r b u a t i t u , d a n n ege r i i tu named Patani,
pt . foc . =make that and settlement that Abode of Peace .
p u n d i =n ama=kan=nya P a ta n i
TM pt . foc . =name=act . foc . =he Patani
Da r u s s a l am
Abode of Peace

( 4 1 ) A r a k i a n p a n g ka l a n yang d i = t empa t Hence s the

conn . landing stage re1 . pron . in=place landing-stage on
the spot where
pe l a n d u k p u t i h l e nyap i t u [ da n
the white mouse­
mousedeer white disappear that and
deer had disappeared,
pangka l an=nya i t u ] pada P i n t u Gaj a h i . e . at the
landing stage=the that at Gate Elephant Elephant Gate,
in land from the
ke=h u l u J am b a t a n Ked i , [ i t u = l a h .
Kedi Pier.
to=inland Pier Kedi that=CM

( 4 2 ) Da n ] p a n g ka l a n i t u= l a h t emp a t E n c i k And that landing

And landing s tage that=CM place Encik s tage S was the p lace
28

Ta n i n a i k t u r u n me= r awa where Enaik Tani

Tani go up down ag. foc =catch prawn
. used to go up and
down catching prawns
d a n men=j e ra t i tu
and setting snares .
and ag . foc . =set snare that

( 4 3 ) Syahdan kebanyakan ka t a o ra n g nama Furthermore (and

conn . most speech person name note this) 7 most
peop le say that the
n ege r i i t u meng= i k u t nama
sett lement was
settlement that ag foc . =fo l low name
.
named after the
o ra n g y a n g me= rawa i t u= l a h prawn-fisherman.
person rel . pron . ag . foc . =catch prawn that=CM

( 4 4 ) Bahwa s e s u ng uh=nya n ama n ege r i i tu In actual fact, the

Truly truly=the name sett lement that name of the sett le­
ment derived from
meng= i ku t s embah o ra n g
the words which the
ag . foc . =fo l low obeisance person
peop le used when
me= n g a ta=kan pe l a n d uk l enyap i tu reporting the dis­
ag . foc . =say=ac t . foc . mousedeer disappear that appearance of the
mousedeer.

( 4 5 ) Dem i = k i a n= l ah h i kaya t=nya That is the way

Like=that=CM story=the the story goes. 8

3. 2. OVE RALL STRUCT URE

3. 2 . 1 . From the s peech act pers pecti v e
The overall structure of the story , i . e . the first chapter of Part I of
Hikayat Patan i , from the speech act perspective can be seen in the following
display :

Di s p l ay 3 . 2 . l .
Narrator ( s ) Addressee

SA l I> I . Supernatural
SA2 I>

SA 3
SA4
I>

I> } I I . Natural

S (peech) A ( ct) refers to the Arabic invocational prayer B i sm i l l ah i - r rahman

' i - r r ahTm
.
at the beginn ing of the story (which is presented as Chapter 1 of part I of
Hikayat Patani) . From a limited perspective , i . e . from the chapter level , it
looks as if it were part of Chapter 1 . However , upon c loser examination , i . e .
from a broader or an overall perspective , it i s clear that the prayer belongs to
a level higher than the chapter level , i . e . the book level or the Hikayat leve l .
This can be seen a s presented i n Display 3 . 2 . 2 . below :
 29

Di s p l ay 3.2 . 2.
Hikayat Patani (HP)

------ --
HP Proper
Pre-Mar Arabic Phrase Nuc as Histo Post. Mar Conc l . Par
Invoca­ to sustain Retelling Coda :
tional the narrator the story Conclu­
prayer in retelling sion &
the story colophon

Part I Part I I Part I I I Part IV

I
Part VI
I
Part V

From the display we see that the invocational prayer forms the pre-marginal part
of HP , with the HP Proper as the nucleus and the concluding paragraph as the
post-margi n . The following lists , which present the parts of HP Proper with their
topics 9 and chapters , serve , along with Display 3 . 2 . 2 . above , to give my readers
a clearer perspective of where the story proper of the first chapter , as pre­
sented in Display 3 . 2 . 1 . above , fits in the overall structure of HP .
( a) 1 . Part I : The history of Patani during the rule of the Inland Dynasty
2 . Part I I : The story of Patani during the rule of Kalantan Dynasty
3 . Part I I I : A summary of Bendaharas ( i . e . Prime Ministers) of Patani
4 . Part IV : The story of the elephant doctor Cau Hang and progeny
5 . Part V : The s tory of the death of Datuk Sai and the struggle between
the pretenders to the pos ition of bendahara during the reign
of the Kalantan Dynasty
6 . Part VI : The Undang-Undang Patani ( i . e . the court customs of the royal
orchestra of Patani)

(b) l . Part I has 22 chapters : chapters 1-22

2 . Part I I has 2 chapters : chapters 2 3- 2 4
3 . Part I I I has 1 chapter : chapter 25
4 . Part IV has 2 chapters : 26-27
5 . Part V has 1 chapter : chapter 28
6 . Part VI has 1 chapter : chapter 2 9

In re lat ion t o the nuclear HP proper , the concluding paragraph i s what

Labov and waletzky l O call Coda , i . e . a functional device for returning the verbal
perspective to the present moment , s ince the actual sequence of events described
30

in the narrative does not , as a rule , extend up to the present . In other words ,
it is " the signal which ends a narrative and bridges the gap between the narra­
tive and the present moment. " l l The present moment in the case of HP is the
time when the copying of the text was completed , i . e . October 16 , 1839 . 1 2
From the point of view of the production of the text , the coda can also
function as a colophon , since it provides the date as to when the production or
the copying of HP was completed . Furthermore it provides information as to who
the owner was , i . e . who the copying of the story was done for . These can be seen
in the following quotation :
Tama t a l ka l am . Bahwa t ama t l ah k i tab Undang Undang P a t a n i i n i
d i s a l i n da l am n ege r i S i ngapu ra kepada s emb i I a n h a r i b u l a n
Sya ' b a n t a h u n 1 25 5 s a n a t , ya i t u kepada enam be l a s h a r i b u l a n
O k t ob a r t a h un maseh i 1 839 s a na t . Tama t adanya . Ada p u n yang
empunya k i tab i n i t ua n North adanya . 1 3
which translates as :
Here ends the text. The copying of the book of the laws of
Patani Was comp leted in the town of Singapore on the ninth
day of the month Sya 'ban of the year 1255, i . e . on the
sixteenth of October of the year AD 1 839. This is the end.
The owner of the manuscript is Mr North. 1 4
The Arabic invocational Prayer , as made clear in Display 3 . 2 . 1 . above , i s
a supernatural speech act which functions a s an opening o r preparation for a
ritual or a venerable activity . I call it supernatural because the addressee of
this speech act is God , a non-human and invisible being . Translated into English
thi s prayer means ' In the Name of God , the Compassionate , the Merciful . ' The
sacred activity or the ritual for which the prayer is said is the act of re­
telling HP . It is sacred because it is traditionally passed down by the old
narrators who were the original or master performers of the act of telling the
story . It is not the product of the personal artistic inspiration of the present
quoting or reporting narrator , i . e . the narrator who is doing the retelling of
HP according to how it has been told by the old narrators , the narrators that
are being quoted from or reported about .
The reason for the saying of the prayer is to assure help , bless ing , in­
spiration and support from God for the narrator ' s act of retell ing the story ,
because the latter is an act of invoking sacred or traditional elements which
may bring into play great and potentially dangerous powers . The prayer is there­
fore considered as a channel to receive the needed strength from God that is
capable of controlling these powers . It is generally believed and accepted that
the name of a ruler or a supreme being such as God has authority and power .
According to J . D . Douglas , et al . , underlying the name of a person are three
proposit ions : l S 1) the name is the person , 2) the name is the person reveale d ,
and 3 ) the name is the person actively present . B y invok ing God ' s name the
present quoting narrator is calling upon the person of God who , in response ,
reveals His person or nature of authority , power and might that the narrator
particularly needs in combating the potentially dangerous powers referred to
above . Howeve r, realizing that he is a mortal man who does not have the pre­
rogative to call upon the name of a powerful and mighty God and that , even as
with the dangerous powers , he could also be destroyed by the power of God , the
narrator needs to call upon the other names or attributes of God , i . e . the
Compassionate and the Me rciful , that could save him. This act presupposes that
the narrator , whether conscious or not , is aware of God ' s active presence .
 31

Why is the invocational prayer in Arabic instead of in Malay? To answer

this question , let me quote A . L . Becker , 1 6 writing about Javanese shadow theatre ,
who states :
Archaic language is not merely embel lishment or mystification ,
else it would have been lost long ago . Rather it is essential
language addressed to the essential audience • . . .

7
As to essential audience he says the following : 1 ' The essential audience of a
wayang i s normally unseen : spirits , demons and creatures , gods , and ancestors . '
Hence , Arabic might be used here for the same reason , i . e . as the essential lan­
guage to the essential audience , Allah ( God) .
SA2 , in Display 3 . 2 . 1 . above , refers to the announcing and the concluding
of the story as mani fested respectively by the introductory sentence ( sentence 1 ) ,
I n i l a h s u a t u k i s s a h y a n g d i ce t e rakan o l eh o ra n g t u a t u a , a s a l raj a y a n g b e rb u a t
n e ge r i P a t a n i Da r u s s a l am i t u . 'This i s a story which has been to ld b y the o ld
peop le : the origin of the King who founded the settlement of Patani, the Abode
of Peace ' and by the concluding sentence ( sentence 45) , 'That was the story . '
SA 3 refers to the assertion of the point of the story , i . e . the reason why
the story is told , which is found towards the end of the story and mani fested as :
Syahdan keb a n y a k a n k a t a o ra n g n ama nege r i i t u meng i k ut n ama o ra n g yang me rawa
i t u l a h . B a hwa s e s ungg uhnya nama n ege r i i t u men g i k u t s embah o ra n g men g a t a ka n
pe l a n d u k l e nyap i t u . 'Most peop le say that the sett lement was named after the
prawn fisherman. In actual fact the name of the sett lement derived from the
words which the people used when reporting the disappearance of the mousedeer. '
SA 4 stands for the actual tel ling o f the story by the old people as the
quoted narrators and also by the present narrator as the quoting narrator . It
should be noted that the quoting narrator used the introductory and the concluding
sentences as a quotative strategy to put the reported story in quotation .
The reported story in essence is a text , a specific hunting story , that is
built on the meaning of the name of the main participant in the story and within
the text are embedded two incidents , the climax of the hunting and the result of
the hunting , which in turn are used by the narrators as illustrative supports or
background information for their point of the story , i . e . SA 3 referred to above .
From the point of view of the four-cell tagmemic analysis , chapter I of HP
can be seen in the tree-diagrams of Display 3 . 2 . 3 . Note that the introductory
sentence can be analyzed in two ways , i . e . B . l which is analyzed based on the
perspective of Frame-Content Construction and B . 2 which is analyzed from the
point of view of - l ah Construction . ( For details , see the section on construction
types . ) Note also that the content specific NP or the content reported NP
( depending on what perspective one chooses) a s a l raj a yang be r b ua t nege r i P a t a n i
Da r us s a l am i t u i s the abstract of the story , i . e . the brief summary given a t the
beginning of the account. 1 8
The content reported story , which is the middle node in Display 3 . 2 . 3 . A ,
consists o f three major parts :
( 1 ) Orientation , which introduces the father of the main participant
in the foreground , the main participant in the background , i . e . the
name that the father gave him , and the place where they l ive .
( 2 ) Introduction of the main participant in the foreground, specific­
ally in terms of his name , i . e . on the basis of its meaning , as a
strategy to start off the story , which is comprised of
32

Di s p l ay 3 . 2 . 3 .
A. Chapter 1

Frame Content Story Frame Concl . S

Reporting Cataphoric Reported Reporting Anaphoric

B.1 Intro . S

Frame - l a h Constr . Content NP

Reporting Reported

In i l a h s u a t u k i s s a h yang d i ce­ a s a l raj a yang be rbuat

t e rakan o l eh o ra n g t ua tua n ege r i P a t a n i Da r u s s a l am i t u
'This is a story whieh has been ' (about) the origin of the
told by the old people ' king who founded the sett le­
ment of Patani, the Abode of
Peaee '

B.2 Intro . S

Core - l a h Constr . Elab . NP

introducer introduced

H Def . Art . M . Enc l . Part . Frame NP Content NP

Cataphoric CM Generic Specific

ini - l ah suatu k i ssah a s a 1 raj a yang

yang d i ce t e ra ­ b e r b u a t ne ge r i
k a n o l eh P a t a n i Da r u s ­
o ra n g t u a t u a s a l am i t u

( a) a generic statement about one of his characteristics , i . e .

his hab it of hunting;
(b) a specific account of a hunt , as an instantiation of the generic
statement in point 2 a , which consists o f :
1 . the preparation of the hunting :
a . dialogue in the court
b . movement away from the court
2 . the actual hunting
3 . the result of the hunting which consists of :
a . the encounter with the prawn fisherman
b . the decision to build the settlement on the spot where the
mousedeer disappeared
c . completion of the building of the settlement
 33

( 3 ) Point of the story : etymologizing about the name of the new settle­
ment that the main participant built as a strategy
( a) to conclude the story of the hunt , and
(b) to expand on the point of the story which i s embedded in the
scenes or the episodes of the encounter of the main participant
with the old couple and the act of the main participant ' s dogs
pursuing the mousedeer ( for details see section 3 . 4 . ) .
Returning to the NP a s a l raj a y a n g b e r b u a t n ege r i P a t a n i Da r u s s a l am i t u
'the origin of the King who founded the sett lement of Patani ' , the abstract of
the story , I could state that a s a l ' the origin ' is developed in the Orientation
part of the reported story and raj a yang b e rb u a t nege r i P a t a n i Da r u s s a l am i t u is
developed in the second and the third part of the story , i . e . the Introduction
of the Main Participant and the Point of the Story .

3.2.2. From th e pers pecti ve of tempo ral adverb i a l s

Having seen the overall structure from the speech act perspective , let us
now look at it from the perspective of temporal adverbials . In most grammar text
books , temporal adverbials are analyzed and accounted for in the context of
sentence , clause or phrase level , without taking into consideration discourse or
textual structure . In this section I would l ike to focus on the function of
temporal adverbials in the context of discourse structure .
In our story all the temporal adverbials together are used as a strategy to
mark the outline of the story which is expressed in all the main clauses that
follow these adverbial s . In the following I wil l present them s ide by side as
il lustrations :

Ma i n cl auses Temporal c l auses

( 4 ) o l d king (king ' s father) B E RAPA LAMANYA ' (After) a whi le '
died
( 7 ) he (new king) used to S E LAMA PTN ke raj a a n i t u 'during the time
hunt when PTN was on the throne '
( 8 ) PTN (new king ) sat on his PADA S UATU HAR I 'on a eertain day '
throne , attended by min­
isters , officials , officers
and sub j ects
( 13 ) King departed ( to hunt) SETE LAH d a t a n g l a h pada kee sokan h a r i nya
'after eoming to the next day '
( 14 ) sub j ects stopped and tents S ET E LAH sampa i pada t empa t be r b u ru i t u
erected 'after arriving at the hunting p laee '
( 17 ) report to the king : much S ETE LAH o ra n g i t u d a t a n g men g a d a p b a g i n d a
game 'after the people eame an d appeared
before the king '
( 19 ) set up traps and nets S ETELAH keesokan h a r i nya 'after the next
day '
( 2 3 ) the dogs ' voices were ADA s ek i ra- k i ra d u a j am l amanya 'for
heard about two hours '
34

( 25 ) king found the people that S E T E LAH bag i n da d a t a n g kepada s ua t u

were following the dogs s e rokan t a s i k i t u 'after the king came
to an inlet of the sea '
( 28 ) king went to the place [ i . e . S ET E LAH bag i nd a menenga r s embah o ra n g I t u
where the mousedeer dis­ 'after the king had heard the peop le 's
appeared ] report '
( 3 5 ) king returned to the tent SETE LAH S UDAH bag i n d a menenga r s embah
o ra n g tua i tu 'after the king heard what
the o ld man said '
( 36 ) king discussed with min­ DAN PADA ma l am i t u 'and on that night
isters and officers the (or in the evening of that day ) '
intention to build a town
at the spot where the
mousedeer disappeared
( 37 ) ministers and officers S E T E LAH keesokan h a r i nya 'after the next
ordered ( some ) people to get day '
all the sub j ects downstream
to build the town
( 38 ) king returned to Kota S E T E LAH s udah s e ga l a men t e r i h u l uba l an g
Maligai d i t i t a h ka n o l eh b a g i nda mas i ng-mas i ng
dengan ket umb u kannya 'after a l l the
ministers and officers had received
instructions from the king, each wi th
his own men '
( 39 ) the town was finished ANTA RA dua b u l a n l ama nya 'after [ l i t .
'between ' ] two months '

It should be noted that the connective particle s e t e l ah 'after this then ',
'having gone over, thus, then . , 1 9 signals a change of scene and the beginning
. .

of a new activity . The latter occurs always in the main clauses as can be seen
above . Notice that the scene and the new activity involved are usually expressed
in a cluster of sentences . They can however be expressed in a s ingle sentence ,
e . g . sentence ( 1 3 ) which is followed by sentence ( 14 ) with another s e t e l ah
particle . In this sentence , the narrators obviously did not think of elaborating
the scene probably due to the fact that it is not important or relevant to do so .

3.3. BAHASA
This section deals with distancing , showing honour and deference , speaking
up and speaking down as reflected in the speech act participants ' vocabulary ,
manners , conduct and gestures depending on who speaks to whom and on what
occasion . All of these mani festations are capsulated in the Malay term ba a s a .
To confirm the meaning of this notion let me quite Shelly Errington 2 0 who ,
writing of the Hikayat Hang Tuah , states :
The world ' s order depends on the raja in the profound sense
that his presence gives the world a shape , makes it intellig­
ible . This abstraction , translated into social terms , means
simply that the raj a ought to be the center of patterned or
formulaic behavior , and of course the court is precisely that .
In the court we see at its most concentrated those aspects of
 35

social form which we term ' hierarchy ' : etiquette , formulaic

speech and orderly location of people ; and , appropriately ,
they are in the Malay context all aspects of one another .
The term which means all of them i s baha s a . Bahasa i s usually
translated ' language ' , but also as ' appropriate behavior ' .
An early translator from Europeans to the Malay court was
sent back because he did not ' know bahasa ' . He spoke the
language perfectly well ; the problem was that he did not use
the right etiquette and terms of deference and , in short ,
did not behave appropriately It is interesting that
. . . •

Hang Tuah ' s parents went to Bentan so that Hang TUah would
' know bahasa ' ; there were no religious scholars where they
were , apparently making ' knowing bahasa ' impossible . In
short , religion , culture , manner s , norms and speech are
equated in the term b a h as a .
In another source 2 1 Errington gives a similar explanation about b a h a s a and
extends it into contexts where events occur , i . e . events occur i f and whenever
relationship expressed in b a h a s a is broken :
The raja is the fixed reference through which the world ' s
ordering makes sense . The raj a ' s presence gives a shape to
society ' s totality . Thi s society is defined or given shape
by b a ha s a , a term which in modern Malay means ' culture ' ,
' language ' , and ' good manners ' . In Part One , b a h a s a means
all those , but it is clear that it means not a culture or a
language , but culture , society and language themselve s , which
are all part of a single whole . Within Part One , there is
no conception of social form outside bah a s a ; people , events ,
and places outside b a ha s a are imaged as simply anarchic .
Social cohesion within society appears to depend on the
raja ' s giving royal beneficence to his sub j ects , and their
returning to him homage in the form of gifts or deference
expres sed through speeches and body-stance . This perfect
relation of a raj a bestowing beneficence and his followers
offering homage is , in a profound sense , eventless . The
very first paragraph in the h ikayat pictures such a relation­
ship between a raj a of heaven and his court. I f the
relationship , expressed in the forms of bahasa , is broken ,
events occur .
As a native speaker of Bahasa Indonesia (Bahasa Melayu) I can confirm from
experience Errington ' s explanation above , especially regarding bahasa as
' appropri ate behavior ' or ' good manners ' by giving some examples that I have
used in speaking Malay or Indonesian .
( l ) O ra n g i t u t a k t a h u b a h a s a 'The man doesn ' t know any
man that not know manners manners . ,
( 2 ) O ra n g i t u me l a n gga r b a h a s a 'The man commits a breach
man that commits a breach of good manners of good manners . ,
( 3 ) Ba i k s e ka l i bud i b a h a s anya 'He/she has very good
good very manners he manners. ,
Note that another word for b a h a s a , in the sense of good manners , is bud i b a h a s a
( c f . example 3 above) , which is derived from the Sanskrit words b ud i ' sense,
inte l ligence, kindness, character ' and b a h a s a 'manners ' .
36

In the following I will present examples from my text ( the first story of
HP) that has features or aspects of bahasa and di scuss them.
( 4 ) A r a k i an maka t i t a h bag i n da : "Aku Then the king spoke :
conn . conn . speech his majesty : I "I have heard reports
that the game near the
denga r khaba r=nya p e rb u r uan sebe l ah
sea-shore is abundant
hear report=the hunting game side
indeed. "
tep i l a u t i t u t e r l a l u banyak konon "
shore sea that very many report says

( 5 ) Maka sembah sega l a men t e r i : The ministers rep lied

conn . obeisance a l l minister: respectfu Uy : "Hai l
my Lord� it is true
" Da u l a t Tuan=k u , s un g g uh= l a h s epe r t i
indeed as Your Majesty
good fortune Lord=my true=CM like
has spoken; we too
t i t a h Du l i Y a n g Ma ha=mu l i a have heard likewise. "
speech dust of the feet the most=nob le
i t u , pa t i k denga r pun dem i = k i an j uga
that s lave hear TM like=that a lso
Examples ( 4 ) and ( 5 ) are components of a single dialogue paragraph , i . e . exampl�
( 5 ) is the response to example ( 4 ) as the assertion by the King . NOw, the
following are vocabularies that reflect b a h a s a in these two examples in th � sensa
of showing deference , speaking up and speaking down : t i ta h , bag i n da , a k u , sernbah ,
Da u l a t Tua n ku , Du l i Yang Mahamu l i a , pat i k . Now , I wi ll di scuss the meaning
2 � of
each of these words :
t i t a h means 'speech of a ruler ' in this context ; it may mean 'royal command ' .
ba g i n d a means 'His or Her Majesty ' or 'King ' ; it is a title for rulers ; it is a

Sanskrit word which literally means 'the fortunate ' .

a ku is the first person pronoun which is used by a speaker when addressing his
addressee in an intimate circle .
semba h means 'obeisance (with fo Lded hands raised to forehead for rulers� to
nose or chin for lesser rajas ) � respectfu l address� statement (to any
superior) ' ; in thi s context , i . e . in relation with sega l a men te r i 'al l
ministers ' , i t means 'the speech of aU the ministers (running) ' ; in
relation to example ( 4 ) s embah s e ga l a men t e r i is better translated as
'al l the ministers replied respectfu l ly ' , which implies that the minister s ,
who are o f lower status are speaking up to the King , who i s o f a higher
status .
The word da u l a t in D a u l a t Tua n k u is an Arabic word which l iterally means 'good
fortune ' . Used with Tua n ku 'MY Lord ' , the whole expression �eans 'M2Y
Your Highness prosper ! ' This expression is a distancing device used hy a
speaker of a lower status when addressing a king or ruler ; it is a spe�c
act of blessing the ruler. That is to say that in responding to the speech
of the ruler , the speaker of the lower status has to use a distancj�g
express ion , a form of metalanguage , to separate the content level of his
speech from the content level of the speech of the ruler.
Du l i Yang Mah amu l i a l iterally means ' the dust ( o f the feet) o f the most noble ' .
This expression i s also a distancing device that i s used by a speaker of
lower status to address a ruler. In this instance the speaker of the lower
status is using thi s expression as a means of humbling himself be fore the
 37

ruler. That is to say , he puts himself literally at the level of the

dust of the feet of the most noble . The deictic marker anchorage here
is in the addressee , the King , and not in the speaker .
Pa t i k ' first person pronoun ' , which l iterally means ' s lave ' , is also an expres­
sion of lower status humbl ing himself before a ruler or a king .

Consider now the following :

( 6 ) Maka t i t a h P aya Tu N a q pa : " J i ka l a u Phaya Tu Nakpa then
cOnn . speech Paya Tu Naqpa : if spoke : "In that
case cal l up a l l Our
dem i =k i a n ke rah=kan= l ah sega l a ra ' ya t
people. Tomorrow We
like=that summon=ac t . foc . =CM a l l people
sha l l go hunting
k i ta o E so k h a r i k i ta hendak p e rg i along the sea-shore . "
I tomorrow day I intend go
b e rb u r u ke t e p i l aut i tu . "
hunt to shore sea that

( 7 ) Maka semb a h s ega l a men t e r i The ministers and

conn . obeisance a l l minister officers rep lied
respectfu l ly : "Hai l
h u l uba l a n g=nya : " Da u l a t Tuan=ku
my Lord; we humb ly
officer=he good fortune Lord=my
accept whatever Your
ma n a t i t a h D u l i Yang Majesty says . "
any speech dust of the feet the
Maha=mu l i a p a t i k j u n j u n g "
most=noble s lave carry on the head
The only term which I will discuss from examples ( 6 ) and ( 7 ) is j u n j u ng , which
literally means ' to carry on the head ' . Example ( 6 ) is given since it helps the
readers to understand example ( 7 ) , i . e . example ( 7 ) is a response to the command
expressed in example ( 6 ) . NOw, j un j ung is a term that expres ses the attitude or
the act of the speakers , all the ministers and officers , humbl ing themselves
be fore the addressee , the King , who is of higher status than they are . So what
they ' carry on their heads ' is whatever the King says . By saying this they are
speaking up to the king , while also humbl ing themselves be fore the king as was
stated before .
Consider now the following :
( 8) Ma ka t i t a h b a g i n da : " Apa yang The king spoke : "What
conn . speech his majesty : What rel . pron . were these dogs
barking at ? "
d i = sa l a k o l eh anj i ng i tu ? "
pt . foc . =bark by dog that

( 9 ) Maka s embah me reka s eka l i a n i tu : They rep lied

conn . obeisance they all that respectfu l l y : "Hai l
my Lord, we beg your
" Da u l a t Tuan=k u , p a t i k mohon=kan
pardon and grace . "
good fortune Lord=my s lave beg=act . foc .
ampun d a n k a r u n i a . Ada s e=eko r There was a white
pardon and grace exist one=class mousedeer the size
of a goat, and its
pe l a n d u k p u t i h , b e s a r=nya s e p e r t i
body had a luminous
mousedeer white big=it/the as
sheen.
38

kamb i ng , w a r na t ub u h=nya g i l an g gemi l an g .

goat colour body=it/the g littering
I t u= l ah yang d i =hambat o l eh That Was what the
That=CM re l . pron . pt . foc . =pursue by dogs were pursuing;
but the mousedeer
a nj i ng i n i . Ma ka pe l a n d u k i t u pun
has vanished on this
dog this conn . mousedeer that TM
beach here . "
l enyap= l ah pada p a n t a i i n i . "
disappear=cM at beach this
What I want to discuss here from examples ( 8 ) and ( 9 ) is the clause pa i
mohonkan ampun d a n k a r u n i a in example ( 9 ) . Example ( 8 ) is given since it helps
my readers to understand example ( 9 ) , i . e . example ( 9 ) is the answer to the
question posed in example ( 8) . However , in example ( 9 ) the answer to the qu
tion given in example ( 8 ) actually starts at the second sentence in the Content
Part of the Frame-Content Construction as found in example ( 9 ) . Why is this ,
What i s the function of the first sentence : Dau l a t Tua n k u , pat i k mohonkan amp un
d a n k a r u n i a ? The mean ing of Dau l a t Tuanku has been made clear above . No �hy
is there p a t i k mohonkan amp u n dan k a r u n i a ? To answer this we have to underst d
the fact that the king and his subj ects prior to this point in the story have
been hunt ing all day with no avail . So the king ordered his men to release hLS
hunting dogs . After two hours the sound of the dogs ' barking was heard , ic
meant that they were after some deer. However the deer , the white mousedeer
they were pursuing , suddenly disappeared . NOw, part of being good and loya .
subj ects of a ruler is trying always to please the ruler ( this is par of pr0�e�
behaviour) . In this case the king ' s men fail to do this ( even though it · s LO
their fault) , and so the appropriate way to express the ir failure and disa . · j y
is by saying pat i k mohonkan ampun dan ka run i a , which is an act of humbl ing y Q� ­
self through the speech act of asking pardon and grace . And this asking of
pardon and grace is part of appropriate behaviour (bahasa) that one shoul 'lye

in cases like this .

Consider the following :

( 10) Maka t i ta h bag i n d a s u ruh b e r tanya The king then gave

conn. speech his majesty order ask orders to ask these
o ld peop le whence
kepada o ra n g t u a i t u , da r i mana
they had come and
to person o ld that from where
sett led in this
d a t a ng=nya maka i a d u d u k kema r i i n i p lace and what the-t-r
come=he conn. he reside hither this origin was .
d a n o ra n g mana as a l =nya
and person where origin=he

( 1 1) Maka h amba raj a i t u pun men=j unj u n g=kan The king 's servants
conn . servant king that TM ag . foc . =carry on respectfu l ly trans­
the head=act. foc . mitted the king 's words
t i t a h b a g i n da kepada o ra n g t ua i t u to the o ld people.
speech his majesty to person old that

( 12 ) Maka sembah o ra n g t ua i t u : They respectfu l ly

conn . obeisance person old that : replied: "Hai l my Lord,
we are just servants
" Da u l a t Tuan=k u , ada=pun pat i k i n i of Your Majesty; for
good fortune Lord=my exist=TM s lave this original ly
hamba j uga pada kebawah D u l i
s lave a lso at to under dust of the feet
 39

Yang Maha=mu l i a , ka rena a s a l pa t i k

the most=nob le because origin s lave
i n i d u d u k d i Ko ta Ma l i ga i . M a ka we lived in the town
this reside in town Malagai conn . of Maligai . When
your Royal Grandfather
pada mas a Paduka Nenda berangkat
departed for Ayudhya
at period foot grandfather depart
in order to bui ld a
p e r g i b e r b u a t nege r i ke Ay u t i a , ma ka settlement there, we
go make city to Ayutia, conn . were summoned to come
and accompany Him on
p a t i k pun d i =ke rah orang perg i
His voyage .
s lave TM pt . foc . =summon person go
meng= i r i ng=kan Dul i
ag . foc . =accompany=act . foc . dust of the feet
P a d u ka Nenda b e ra n g k a t i t u .
foo t grandfather depart that
S e t e l ah Paduka N e n da When he had arrived
After this then foot grandfather at this p lace we
were stricken with
s ampa i kepada temp a t i n i , maka p a t i k p u n
an i l lness, so we
arrive to p lace this conn . s lave TM
were left behind
ked a t a n g a n penyak i t , maka p a t i k pun here . "
stricken with i l lness conn . s lave TM
d i = t i n gga l =kan o ra n g= l a h
pt . foc . =leave behind=act . foc . person=cM
pada t em p a t i n i "
at p lace this

( 13 ) Ma ka t i t a h b ag i nda : " Apa nama The king spoke :

conn . speech his majesty : What name "What is your name ? "
e n g ka u ? "
you

( 14 ) Maka s embah o ra n g t u a i t u : " N ama The o ld man respect­

conn . obeisance person old that : name ful ly replied: "My
name is Encik Tani . "
pat i k Enc i k Tan i "
s lave Encik Tani
Notice the complexity of the frame part of the indirect frame- content con­
struction in example ( 10 ) above . All the speech acts , t i ta h , s u ruh , b e r ta ny a ,
are expressed explicitly . Why is it that the narrator chose to speak about it
in this elaborate way , i . e . the King spoke in the form of ordering someone to
ask these old people , instead of j ust speaking about it plainly in the form o f
maka bag i n da b e r tanya kepada o ra n g t u a i t u ' the King asked these o l d people ' .
The reason why the narrator had to or rather chose to do this is a matter of
b a ha s a , a proper way of speaking about the King and also because that i s the way
it should be . The King , constrained by b a h as a , has to use a mediator when
speaking to someone he never met be fore . The narrator ' s name would be at stake ,
i . e . he would be considered me l a n g ga r b a h a s a 'committing a breach of good
manners ' , i f he did not do thi s or if he did not describe it. Notice that this
matter of bahasa involves two kinds of distancing : physical distancing and
linguistic distancing . The former requires the presence of a mediator , hamba
40

raj a 'Xing ' s servant ' in example ( 11) to be ordered and mainly to carry out the
speech act of asking the question to the old people . The latter require three
speech acts , t i tah , s u ruh , b e r ta nya , expres sed expl icitly , and not j ust one ,
be r t a n y a as di scussed above .
In example ( 1 1) the predicate men j unj u n g ka n literally means ' to carry on
one ' s head ' ( c f . discussion of j un j ung in example ( 7 ) above) . The reason why
this word is chosen and not any other , e . g . menyampa i ka n 'to convey ' or 'to
transmit ' , is again a matter of b a ha s a . Notice that b a h a s a here involves two
aspects : physical distancing and the act of showing respect . The former is man­
ifested in the fact that the servant carries on his head ( men j unj u n g ka n ) the
speech ( or the words) of the King towards ( kepada) the old people . The latter
is signalled by the fact that the servant carries on his head ( men j u n j ungka n )
the speech o f the King . The physical distancing may b e motivated by the fact
that normally when a king speaks to a stranger , especially when the status of
relationship between them has not been established , the former usually makes use
of a mediator . Once the status of their relationship is e stabli shed , as can be
seen in example ( 12 ) , the mediator isn ' t used anymore . This fact , i . e . ·the King
speaking directly to the old man without any mediator , can be seen in the ex­
change as portrayed in examples ( 1 3 ) and ( 1 4 ) .
In example ( 12 ) , the clause adapun p a t i k i n i hamba j u ga pada kebawa h Du i
Yang Mahamu l i a 'we are a lso servants of Your Majesty ' , which literally trans­
late s as ' Your s laves here are a lso servants underneath the dust of the feet 0
the Most Nob le ' , is a speech act of humbling oneself be fore a ruler or a King .
It i s a distancing device used by the speaker , the old man , to put himself lit­
erally at a level which is underneath the dust of the feet of the most noble .
By means o f this , the speaker , in other words , is making c lear his status in
relation to the King. Thi s is one aspect of this distancing device . The second
aspect of this device involves the separation of the content level of example
( 10 ) , i . e . the question da r i ma n a da ta ngnya maka i a d u duk kema r i i n i d a n o r a n g
ma n a a s a l nya 'where they had come from and sett led i n this p lace and what their
origin was ' , from its answer, i . e . the content level of example ( 12 ) , which
starts with ka rena a s a l p a t i k i n i . . and ends with . . pada tempa t i n i . The
. .

separation of these two content levels is done by means of the informatio in

example ( 1 1 ) and in example ( 12 ) , Dau l a t Tuanku , adapun pa t i k i n i hamba j u ga pada
keb awah Du l i Yang Mahamu l i a .
P a d u ka Nenda and Du l i Paduka Nenda as found in the second and third sen­
tences of the content part of example ( 12 ) are again proper ways for the old man
to refer to the King ' s Royal Grandfather . Note that b a h a s a does not allow the
old man to refer to the King ' s Royal Grandfather by terms other than P a d u ka enda .
Notice that the form Paduka Nenda occurs in subordinate adverbial clauses , wh as y

the form Du l i Paduka Nenda occurs in the main clause . This might indicate that
P a d u ka N e n d a i s probably the second mention form of the nominal form D u l i
P a d u ka N e n da . The truth of this inference has to be verified by more data .
Notice that in the exchange between the King and the old man in examples
( 1 3 ) and ( 14 ) , two kinds of distancing devices are absent , i . e . the non-verbal
phys ical one and the verbal relational one . The former is manifested in the
absence of the mediating servant ( c f . examples ( 10 ) and ( 1 1 ) for his presence ) .
The latter is mani fested in the absence of the re lational formulaic address t�
Da u l a t Tuank u , which is used in the context of examples ( 4 ) and ( 5 ) , and in t e
context of examples ( 6) and ( 7 ) to separate the content level of the King ' s
speech from the content level of the speech of his sub j ects . The reason for the
absence of the term Da u l a t Tuanku is probably due to the fact that example ( 14 )
is still part o f the same speech act interaction , i . e . the asking o f questions
 41

that still involves the same speaker and addressee , that starts out in example
( 10 ) and extends to example ( 14 ) . In other word s , when the interaction involves
a new speech act other than the one prior to it in a previous dialogue paragraph ,
the term Dau l a t T u a n k u usually appears as a signal of this change in speech act .
Note that this term only occurs in context where a king is speaking down to his
sub j ect and exclusively in the addressee part of the dialogue , and not in the
speaker part of the dialogue . To back up the validity of this inference ( or
hypothesis) compare the d ialogue paragraphs which are illustrated by examples
( 4 ) and ( 5 ) , and examples (6) and ( 7) , and which occur in the text one after the
othe r . Notice that the term Da u l a t T u a n k u occurs both in example ( 5 ) and in
example ( 7) . Notice also that the speech act in the context of examples (4) and
( 5 ) is an assertion (or a statement) , whereas in the context of examples ( 6 ) and
( 7 ) it is not an assertion but a command. Hence , a change of speech act involves
the following : a change of participants with the same speech act or a change of
speech act with the same participants .
Despite the absence of these two distancing devices , there are two others
that are involved in the context of examples ( 1 3 ) and ( 14 ) . The first type is
reflected in the pronouns engkau and pat i k . E n g ka u is a second person pronoun
which is used by elders and superiors in addressing j uniors and inferiors . Hence ,
there is a distancing here that the King is making between him and his addressee ,
the old man . The latter ' s proper response to thi s , constrained by b a h as a , is
the use of pat i k ' s lave ' as a way of acknowledging his status and accepting the
distancing set up by the King .
The second type o f di stancing is the one used by the narrators and is
reflected in the words t i ta h 'speech (of) ' for the King and s embah 'speech (of) '
for the old man . This di stancing is implied in the meanings of these words
which have been discussed above .
So far I have been talking about three types of speech act participants :
1) the narrator , who talks about the others , i . e . the characters in the story ,
2 ) speaker of high status ( character in the story) : speaks down to addressee of
lower status , 3 ) speaker of low status ( character in the story ) : speaks up to
the addre ssee of high statu s .
The terms i n the examples above that are used b y the narrator to refer to
the fact that the speake r of low status is performing the speech act towards the
addressee of high status is s embah and to the fact that the speaker of high
status ( in thi s case the king) is performing the speech act towards the addressee
of low status is t i ta h . In other words , t i ta h and s embah are in complementary
di stribution . They have basically the same meaning , i . e . ' the speech of ' but
are used by the narrator in di fferent contexts . In this way the narrator i s
acting appropriately , i . e . be rbah a s a , i n the sense of applying proper terms to
proper speech act participant s . The terms that are used by the King to refer
to hims e l f in addressing his addressee are a k u and k i ta . Ak u as di scussed above
is the f irst person which i s used by a speaker when address ing his addres see in
an intimate circle . K i t a , on the other hand , is used by a high status speaker
when speaking down to a low status addressee . Note that a k u is used by the King
when he is making an assertion or a statement to his ministers , official s ,
officers and all the people about the abundance of the hunting game near the
seashore ( see example ( 4 ) and the sentence prior to example ( 4 ) in the text) .
K i ta is used by the King when he is giving an order to his ministers and
officials to summon all his sub j ects ( see example ( 6 » . In other words , in
example ( 4 ) , the form a k u is used because the context or the speech act made by
the King is informal and intimate . However , in example ( 6 ) the form k i ta i s
42

used because the context o r the speech act made b y the King then requires a
formality and not an intimacy .
The terms that are used by the speaker of low status to speak up to the
King , the addressee of h igh status , are pa t i k , Dau l a t Tuan ku , Du l i Y a n g Mahamu l i a ,
( pa t i k ) j un j u n g , ( pa t i k ) mohonkan ampun dan ka run i a .
In summary , display 3 . 3 . 1 . presents what has been discussed above .
In conclusion , all these terms should be used right and properly by the
speaker , whether narrator or speech act participant , in any hikayat of a Malay
kingdom . If they are not , then the speaker will be described as someone who
me l an g g a r b a h a s a 'commi ts a breach of etiquette ' , or t a k t a h u b a h a s a 'does not
know manners ' . However if they are used right and properly the speaker will be
praised as someone who is ba i k s e ka l i b u d i b a h a s anya , i . e . who ' has very good
manners ' .

D i s p l ay 3 . 3 . 1 .

PARTICIPANTS DIRECT SPEECH INDIRECT SPEECH/DESCRIPTION

First Second Third

Speech Act Speech Act
Person Person Person

[ Question ] *
1 . King aku Tuanku [ order ] bag i n d a t i t a h (speech of)
(used ( used s u r u h (order)
by 2 , by the b e r t anya (ask)
3 & 4) narra-
tors)
I
2 . ministers pat i k Dau l a t (b less) sembah (speech
j unj ung (submit) of)

3 . people pat i k Dau l a t sembah

who mohon kan ampun
follow dan ka run i a
the dogs (ask pardon
and grace)

4 . the old pat i k engkau Da u l a t s embah

man ( used [ Reply ] t
by 1)
-

5 . Royal Padu k a Nenda

Grandfather D u l i Paduka Nenda
( used by 4 )

* The King never uses speech act verbs (or per formative verbs ) ; other parti­
cipants always do except the old man , Encik Tan i .
t This i s the instance ( see discussion of examples ( 13 ) and ( 14 ) ) where the
old man does not use a speech act verb . Thi s has to do with the problem of
the scope of Dau l a t , i . e . one dau l a t per speech act . More precisely , it has
to do with the fact that the exchange in which examples ( 1 3) and ( 14 ) take
place still occur within the same speech act .
 43

3.4. NAMI NG A N D ETYMOLOG I Z I NG

The text under analys is , the first story of HP , is essentially a story that
is built on the meaning of the name of the main participant , Paya Tu Naqpa .
Paya , according to Teeuw and Wyatt ( 1970 : 2 21) is an honorific title which is
common in Tha i , Burmese and Mon . T u according to them ( 1970 : 2 2 1 ) ' has one
meaning common to both Malay and Thai , as a demonstrative pronoun meaning " that ,
those" . ' However , they comment further that ' its application and interpretation
are uncertai n ' in the text . Naq p a , again according to Teeuw and Wyatt ( 1970 : 22 1 )
' might b e Thai n a k- p a "man of the forest" - a name appropriate t o one who "was
accustomed to always go hunting" . '
NOW , the story starts off by introducing the father of the main participan t ,
the place where he lives and the name that the father gave t o the son , Paya Tu
Antara ( sentences ( 2 - 3 » . The story goes on to the event of the son succeeding
the father after the latter died and provides information about the new name ,
Paya Tu Naqpa , that the son gave himself ( s entences ( 4-6» . After thi s point ,
i . e . beginning with sentence ( 7 ) , Se l ama Paya Tu N a q p a ke raj a a n i t u s en t i a s a i a
pe rg i b e r b u ru 'During his reign Paya Tu Naqpa was aooustomed to a lways go
hunting ' , the story goes on developing a context where the name is made meaning­
ful , i . e . an account of a specific instance of the habitual generic act of
hunting as expressed in sentence ( 7 ) . In summary form the specific account
could be presented as follows :
' The King , Paya Tu Naqpa , heard about a hunting ground by the
seashore wh ere there was plenty of game . His sub j ects con­
firmed this news and so he decided to go hunting at this place .
During the c limax of the hunt , his dogs came across a mouse­
deer which they pursued to the beach and disappeared at a
spot on the beach.
On his way to the spot , the King met an older couple who
were prawn- fishermen . He asked them how they got there and
asked the name of the husband .
Returning to his tent , that night after discussion with his
ministers and officers , he decided to build a town/country
at the spot where the mousedeer appeared/disappeared . The
town was completed in two months and was given the name
Patani Darussalam . '
Towards the end of the story , the narrators present the point of the story , i . e .
the reason why the story was told , in the following form :
Syahdan keba n y a k a n k a t a o ra n g 'Most people say that the settlement
n ama nege r i i t u men g i k u t n a ma was named after the prawn-fishermen .
o r a n g y a n g me rawa i t u l a h . In aotual faot the name of the
B a hwa s e s un g g uhnya nama n ege r i sett lement derived from the words
i t u meng i ku t semb a h o ra n g whioh the people used when reporting
men g a t a kan pe l a n d u k l e nyap i t u . the disappearanoe of the mousedeer. , 2 3
Notice that the point of the story , i . e . the explication of how the name
of the settlement was arrived at , i s a form of etymologizing . It consists of
two sentences . The f irst one states the popular public opinion . The second
states the opinion of the narrators , the ' true ' etymology ' .
The first etymology is embedded in the specific hunting account in sentence
( 34 ) , Maka s embah o ra n g t u a i t u : ' Nama p a t i k E n e i k Tan i ' 'The o ld man respectfu l ly
rep lied: "My name is Enoik Tani '' ' , which is a reply to the King ' s que stion in
sentence ( 3 3) , Ma ka t i ta h b a g i n d a : ' Apa n ama engka u ? ' ' The King spoke : "What is
44

your name? " ' . In reality the dialogue as expressed by sentences ( 3 3 ) an ( 34 )

i s part of a text uni t , an episode o r a scene ( extended from sentence ( 2 8) to
sentence ( 35 » , that is developed by the narrators as a further extension to
back up the explication that contains the popular belief.
The second or the ' true ' etymology is backed up in the hunting account by
s entence ( 2 7 ) , especially by the phrase pan t a i i n i ' this beach ' which is part of
the last sentence in the content part of sentence ( 2 7 ) , Ma ka s emba h me reka
seka l i a n i t u : ' Da u l a t Tua n k u , p a t i k mohonkan ampun d a n k a ru n i a . Ada seekor
pe l a n du k p u t i h , b e s a rnya s e pe r t i kamb i ng , wa r n a t ub u h nya g i l an g gem i l an g . I t u l a h
yang d i hamb a t o l eh a n j i ng i n i . Ma ka pe l a n d u k i t u pun l enya p l ah pada p a n t a i i n i . '
'They rep lied respectfu l ly : "Hai l my Lord� we beg your pardon and grace . There
was a white mousedeer, the size of a goat, and its body had a luminous sheen.
That was what the dogs were pursuing� but the mousedeer has vanished on this
beach here . '" Sentence ( 2 7 ) is a reply to the King ' s question in sentence ( 2 6 ) ,
M a ka t i t a h b a g i n d a : ' Apa yang d i sa 1 ak 0 1 eh a nj i ng i t u? ' 'The King spoke : "What
were these dogs barking at ? '" Thi s dialogue , expressed in sentences ( 26 ) and
( 2 7 ) , is part of an episode or a scene which is developed by the narrators as a
further extens ion to back up the expl ication that is expressed in the sentence
that contains the opinion of the narrators .
Notice that the first name , Nakpa, or rather the meaning of it is used as a
strategy to build up the hunting story which is a specific instance of the main
participant ' s generic habitual act of hunting that he was accustomed to do during
his reign . Within this hunting story are embedded two scenes or episodes , the
encounter of the King with the old couple and the act of the King ' s dogs pursuing
the mousedeer , which illustrate , instantiate or rather expand on the point of the
hunting story , i . e . the explication of how the name of the settlement is arrived
at . Hence , the second name , i . e . the name of the settlement , is also used as a
strategy to build up the two embedded scenes or episodes wi thin the b igger text
of the hunt .
In other words , in terms of its expansion , the point of the story is embedded
within the story about the meaning of the name of the main participant . I tenns
of role relation the latter , i . e . the specific hunting story , assumes the role
of instrument to achieve the former , i . e . the point of the story , as the goal or
the intention of the narrators that they try to communicate to their audience .
Fol lowing is a diagram to make this point clear :

D i s p l ay 3.4. 1 .

o� �p�o�i�n
�t�o
��f �he�
t� s�
t�
o�r�
y�: �
Narrator ____ ______
Addressee
1 . Popular belief vs .
2 . Narrator ' s opinion

1 the King went on a hunt TEXT

2 the dogs pursued the mouse-
deer
3 the King met the old couple
 45

Notice that in the first case , i . e . the meaning of the name of the parti­
cipant , name is used as a base or topic from which the text is developed , while
in the second , the name of the settlement , name is used as a concluding point .
In other words , names in this text are used by the narrators to give a sense of
completeness to the text . This act of giving a sense of completeness to the
text by means of names at the beginning and at the end of the text is another
text-building strategy that should be distinguished from the strategy of us ing
names or their meanings to build up a text as di scussed above .
Etymologizing about names i s not highly valued in Western culture because
people in this culture ' tend to fee l that names are the most arbitrary words of
all , given to people and places be fore they really " are " . , 2 4 However , in Judeo­
Christian tradition this strategy of text-building is very pervasive , e . g . ' The
new name given to Jacob after his night of wrestling at Penuel : "Your name" ,
said his supernatural antagon i st , " shall no more be called Jacob , but I srael ,
for you have striven [ sar i ta , from Sara ' strive ' ] with God and with men , and
have prevailed'" ( Genesis 32 : 28 , RSV) ; 2 5 the name Jesus , meaning ' Yahweh or God
saves ' , based on which lots of sermons have been written and preached ; an
American Chri stian family I know of gave their first son the name Jesse , meaning
' God exists ' , the story behind it being as follows : At the time the mother gave
birth to thi s son , the doctor said that the baby would not l ive because of the
difficult delivery . The parents , who were about to be Christians then, did not
yield to the doctor ' s statement , but were convinced that if God exists the ir son
would survive . He did survive and so they named him Jesse . Hence , I would say
that in the Christian and Jewish part of the Western culture names are not
arbitrary and etymologiz ing about names is still valued , i f not highly value d .

3. 5 . PART I CLES
3. 5.1. Ma ka
Richard Winstedt , in his Malay Engl i sh Dictionary ( 1967 ) , states that maka
in literary language means 'then ' or 'next ' with an additional comment that it
i s ' an untranslatable word that ful fils the function of a full stop or comma in
Malayo-Arabic scrip t ; obsolescent in Romanized Malay ' .
The first meaning given by Poerwadarminta in his Kamus Umum Bahasa Indonesia
' General Dictionary of Bahasa Indonesia ' ( 1966) is Ka t a u n t u k memu l a i ka l i ma t ,
be r a r t i : dan , l a l u , s ud a h i t u l a l u 'a word to start or to introduce a sentence�
with the meaning : and� then� after that then ' .
Lewis , in his Teach Yoursel f Mal a y ( 1947 : 2 5 5 ) gives the following informa­
tion :
M a ka i s the commonest of the punctuation words . When you are
translating a passage , you wi l l find it helpful to think of
it as an introductory word marking the opening of a clause ,
whether main or subordinate . But its real function is rather
to j oin one clause to the next . ' This happened , then , that
happened . ' It can sometimes be translated by ' and ' or ' then ' ,
but it is usually better to omit it in translation .
Becke r , in his article ' The figure a sentence makes ' subtitled ' An inter­
pretation of a classical Malay sentence ' ( 19 7 7 : 1 3) provides the following etymo­
logical explanation : ' Maka can be analyzed into ma- + ( k + a ) , in which ma­
stative prefix, - k- deictic formative , and -a
= third person there/then . ' In
=
46

the same article ( p . 14) , he also states that : ' At the level of sentences , the
Classical Malay text uses j ust maka (or another single-word connective like
s h a hadan or h a t ta . . . ) to mark separate uni ts . '
Winstedt , again in his Ma lay Grammar , in the section of ' punctuation words '
( 1913 : 161-163 ) , provides the following information : ' ma ka is written after the
words s a - b e rmu l a " story introducing word" , b e rmu l a " the story begins " , s a - ka l i
p e r s e t u a ( Skt . ) "once upon a time " , a l kesah (Ar . ) " the story is " , h a t a "next " ,
s a h a d a n ( s a h a Skt . + d a n ) , ka l a k i a n , a ra k i a n "moreover" . ' Besides this , he
=

also states that maka ' marks the temporal causal or other antithetical connec­
tion between clauses and parts of sentence ' and ' connects principal sentences in
rapid staccato narrative , marking each separate event of the whole ' , e . g . ' ma ka
dengan s a - s a a t i t u j u ga , maka B e t a ra Ka l a menj a d i l ah k a t a k ; ma ka i a pun hendak
l a r i ; maka d i l i h a t d i r i - nya t e l a h menj a d i ka t a k , maka l a l u t e r l ompa t l ompa t , maka
s e r t a b e r buny i g e r u k - g e r u k "At that very instant Bertara Ka la became a frog; he
wanted to run, noticed his changed form, straightway made leap after leap, at
the same time croaking'" and that it conj oins subordinate clause s .
Notice that all the de finitions o f maka given above have three things in
common . That is , maka is an initial punctuation that starts off a sentence or
a clause and since it always occurs at the beginning of sentences or clause it
is therefore a marker of these text units . It is also a connective because it
occurs between clause s and sentences and connects them .
These three aspects of ma ka hold true in our text. However , there is one
more aspect of i ts meaning that we would l ike to add to what has been given
above . That i s , in terms of the context of the text as a discourse , maka always
occurs preceding an event and a sequence sentence ( or clause ) . It never occurs
preceding a di scourse initiating sentence . In other words , ma ka could be viewed
as an event sequence sentence (or clause) marker in a discourse . 2 6 It should be
noted that Lewis implied this in the following sentence as quoted above : ' This
happened , then , that happened . ' However , this does not necessarily mean that
maka is a temporal sequence marker , although it can be temporal .
In summary we could state that ma ka i s a sentence level property in a dis­
course. In terms of i ts function slot it is an initial punctuation ; in terms of
its function or semantic role it is an event sequence sentence marker in a dis­
course ; in terms of its filler c lass it is a connective . In a four-cell tagmeme ,
it wi l l appear as follows :
initial unctuation connective
ESM

ma ka

3. 5.2. Ara k i an
Winstedt again in his Mal ay Engl i sh Di ctionary states that a ra k i a n means
'again ' or 'moreover ' . In relation with k i a n , which means 'as many (much, far)
as ' or ' there ' , he provides a ra k i a n with the meaning of 'next ' or literally
'direction there ' which probably derives from a ra h 'direction ' and k i a n ' there ' .
In his Mal ay Grammar a s quoted above , he considers thi s particle as belonging
to the class of words that he calls ' punctuation words ' ( 191 3 : 161) , i . e . ' words
which serve to introduce the commencement of story , of paragraph , and of sen­
tence , and to mark the balance of clauses . ' He comments further that ' these
words are not found in Malay conversation , and may be omitted in translating
 47

Malay composition into a foreign language . ' He goes on elaborating that ' a
fresh topic or paragraph will be opened by h a t a "next " , s a ha d a n ( s a h a Skt . +
=

d a n ) , ka l a k i a n , a ra k i a n "moreover" - . . . all followed by maka ' without making

any clear distinction between a ra k i a n and s a h a da n , which is spel led syahdan in
my text , and also between a ra k i an and ka l a k i a n .
Lewis , i n his Teach Yo ursel f Mal a y which is based o n Winstedt ' s Mal a y
Grammar labels these punctuation words , i . e . h a t t a ( or h a t a ) , s ha ha d a n , a ra k i a n
and ka l a k i an ' transition words ' . His comments on these words , with a little
modification , are basically the same as Winstedt ' s given above : ' These words
are used to introduce a new topic , or a new aspect of a topic already intro­
duced . ' ( 1947 : 2 30) . Again Lewis , l ike Winstedt , does not specify the difference
between a ra k i a n , s y a h d a n and ka l a k i a n . The meaning he gives to these words is
j ust the same as Winstedt ' s , that i s , 'moreover ' .
Poerwadarminta 1966 provides a ra k i a n with the meaning o f s e s ud a h i t u l a l u
'after that then ' or 'having that before then ' .
From all the contexts of a ra k i a n in my text, I observe that this particle
is a conclusion marker of a sentence , paragraph or an episode within the story .
That is to say that it does not function in the same way as dem i k i a n in dem i k i an ­
l ah h i kayatnya 'Thus was the story ' , which is a story conclusion marker and
hence occurs at the end of the story . In other words , a ra k i a n and dem i k i an are
both conclusion markers which are in complementary distribution .
To illustrate this point , take for instance sentence ( 9 ) and relate it to
sentences ( 7 ) and ( 8 ) ; or take sentence ( 1 3 ) and relate it to sentences ( 9- 1 2 ) ,
especially sentence ( 11) ; or take sentence ( 4 1 ) and relate it to sentences ( 39-
40) .
For more evidence fol lowing portions from story 2 of HP are presented (p . 7 2 ,
paragraph 4 ) :
S e t e l ah s udah Sya i kh Sa ' i d 'After Sheikh Sa ' id had made
b e rj a nj i dengan raj a i t u , maka this agreement with the King he
Sya i kh Sa ' i d pun d u d u k l ah sat down to treat him . It took
mengob a t raj a i t u . Ada t u j uh seven days before the King was
h a r i l amanya , maka raj a p u n ab le to go out and give audience
dapa t l ah ke l u a r d i adap o l eh to the ministers and officers .
me n t e r i h u l ub a l a n g s e ka l i a n . Then (or 'after that then ' )
A ra k i an maka Sya i kh Sa ' i d p u n Sheikh Sa 'id respectfu l ly took
b e rmohon l ah k e p a d a b a g i n da , his leave of the King and
l a l u kemba l i ke r uma hnya . returned to his home . '
( p . 72 , paragraph 5 , and p . 7 3 , paragraph 1 , partially : )
H a t t a a da d ua t a h u n se l angny a , 'After two years had e lapsed
ma ka raj a p u n s a k i t p u l a , the King fe l l i l l again, suffer­
s e p e r t i d a h u l u i t u j uga penya­ ing from the same disease as
k i t n y a . Maka Sya i kh Sa ' i d pun before. Again the King sent for
d i s u r u h pangg i l p u l a o l eh raj a . Sheikh Sa 'id. After the sheikh
Te l ah Sya i kh Sa ' i d d a t a n g , ma ka had arrived the King spoke.
t i t a h bag i n d a : ' T u a n obat 1 a h "Please treat this i l lness of
penyak i t h amba i n i . J i ka l a u mine. If I recover this time,
semb u h penyak i t h amb a seka 1 i I n I , then indeed I sha l l not ignore
b a hwa ba rang k a t a t uanh amba i t u again whatever you say . " The
t i a da l a h hamba l a l u i l ag i . ' sheikh said:
Maka k a t a Sya i kh Sa ' i d :
48

' S u n g g uh - s un g g u h j an j i Tuanku dengan "If your agreement with me is

pa t i k maka pa t i k mau mengob a t i Du l i truthfu l � then I wi l l cure Your
T u a n ku . J i ka l a u t i ada s un g g u h Majesty . But if your words are
s e pe r t i t i t a h D u l i Tuanku i n i , not sincere� then I wi l l not
t i a da l a h p a t i k mau mengob a t d i a . ' treat you . " When the King heard
Se te l a h d i de n ga r raj a s embah the words of Sheikh Sa 'id he
Sya i kh Sa ' i d i t u dem i k i a n , maka solemnly confirmed his agreement
raja p u n b e r t e g u h - teguhan j anj i l ah with him. Then (or 'after that
dengan Sya i kh Sa ' i d . Arak i an ma ka then ' ) Sheikh Sa 'id sat down to
Sya i kh Sa ' i d p u n d ud uk l ah mengob a t treat the King . '
raj a i tu .
( p . 75 : sentences 4-6 : )
S e t e l ah s ud a h Sya i kh Sa ' i d 'After the sheikh had given the
memb e r i n ama akan raj a i t u , maka name to the King� the King spoke :
t i tah bag i n d a : ' An a k h amba ket i ga "You should also give my three
i t u ba i k l a h t u a n hamba b e r i n ama chi ldren names at once so that in
seka l i , s u paya s emp u rna l a h h amba a l l respects I become a good
membawa agama Is l am . ' Maka semb a h Muslim. " Sheikh Sa 'id said res­
S y a i k h Sa ' i d : ' Sa rang b e r t ambah pectfu l ly : "May Your Majesty ' s
k i ranya dau l a t s a ' a d a t Du l i Yang might and prosperity increase� so
Mahamu l i a , h i ngga d a t a n g kepada that ti l l the end of time Your
k e s u d a h a n z aman paduka a n a ka n da Majes ty 's children and grand­
d a n cucunda Du l i Y a n g Mahamu l i a chi ldren may be forever secure
k a r a r s e n t o s a d i a t as t a kh t a and safe on the royal throne in
keraj a a n d i nege r i P a t a n i Da r u s ­ the land of Patani� Abode of
s a l am . ' A ra k i an m a k a Sya i kh Sa ' i d Peace . " Then ( or 'after that
p u n memb e r i n a ma akan paduka then ' ) Sheikh Sa 'id gave the
a n a ka n d a bag i n da yang t ua i t u e ldest son of the King the name
S u l t a n Mud h a f f a r Syah dan yang of Su ltan Mudhaffar Syah� and the
t e n g a h pe remp uan i t u d i nama i nya middle one� the daughter� he gave
S i t t i ' A ' i s yah dan y a n g b u n g s u the name of Sitti 'A ' isyah� and
l a k i - l a k i d i n ama i nya S u l t a n the youngest son he gave the name
M a nz u r Sya h . of Sultan Manzur Syah . '
A r a k i a n , according to Winstedt ( quoted above ) , in two of our i l lustrations
could be a punctuation word which introduces the beginning of a paragraph , i . e .
in sentence ( 9 ) it introduces the Complex Dialogue paragraph that i s composed
of sentences ( 9- 1 2 ) , and in sentence ( 13 ) it introduces the paragraph that is
made up of sentences ( 1 3-16) . However , this general ization does not hold we ll
for the examples given above that are taken from story 2 .
Lewis , as quoted above , classi fies this particle as one of the transition
words that ' are used to introduce a new topic , or a new aspect of a topic
already introduced . ' This generalization holds true in all the examples above .
However I argue that there is a difference between a ra k i a n , syahda n , h a t t a and
ka l a k i a n . 2 7 And this difference was not discussed either by Lewis or Winstedt.
It wil l be clear what it i s by the time we are through with discussing each of
these partic le s .

3.5 . 3. H a tta ( o r hata)

According to Winstedt in his Malay Engl i sh Dicti onary , h a t ( t ) a is origin­
al ly a Sanskrit word which means 'next ' and is used to introduce a new paragraph .
 49

The original Sanksrit form for h a t t a is a th a or a t ha . In his A Sanksri t­

Engl i sh Di ctionary ( 1899) , Sir Monier Monier-Wil liams provides the following
information : ' an auspic ious and inceptive particle (not easi ly expres sed in
Engl ish ) , now , then , moreover , rather , certainly , but , els e , what? , howelse? ,
etc . '
From all the contexts of h a t ta in my text, I observe that this particle
marks the beginning of a text unit that contains a change in the action or the
event . I t usually has to do with the change in partic ipant orientation or in
the scene . The change in participant orientation may involve the change of the
background major participant with the foregrounded major participant. It may
also involve the introduction of new significant participant , while the major
partic ipant is still the same , with a change in the scene .
The text unit in which this change takes place i s probably c lose to what
others label as ' episode ' . The following quotations describe what an episode
is , and is , in terms of propertie s , somewhat close to the text unit in which
h a t t a occurs :
Episode settings always involve a change of participant
orientation and scene from the previous incident in the
story . . . . While the opening incident of an episode takes
its temporal setting from the speech of the participant
thematized in the episode setting , settings for subsequent
incidents are defined by their motion away from or their
return to the previous setting . . . ( Grimes 1975 : 109-110)
. . . an episode may consist of a series of paragraphs in
which the same characters take part , so that a new episode
begins when a s ignificant change of participants takes
place . ( Grimes 197 5 : 110)
To know the specific context of h a t t a in my text , the following are comments
about them :
Sentence ( 4 ) contains the information about the death of the old king , the
father of the focussed major participant , Paya Tu Naqpa. Thi s sentence forms
the beginning of the episode where the King ' s son started his reign in the
kingdom . There is a change of participant orientation at this point. That is
to say that both the h a t ta sentence and the one after it provide the information
about this change .
Sentence ( 17 ) contains the information regarding the report of the scout to
the King that there are plenty of deer to hunt. And this information marks the
beginning of the actual hunt . It involves some change of scene here , i . e . move­
ment from the camping place to the fore st .
Sentence ( 2 3) contains the information about the dogs ' barking being heard
after two hours . It marks the beginning of the account of the discovery of the
spot where the mousedeer disappeared and of the encounter of the prawn fisherman
and his wife . There is a change of scene involved and an addition of s igni ficant
partic ipants to the story at this point .
Sentence ( 39 ) contains the in formation about the completion of the building
of the town . It marks the beginning o f the kingdom in the new town . In other
words , there is a change of scene or location involved here .
50

3.5 .4 . I n i - i tu
In i is a deictic particle which means 'this ' or ' these ' . In terms of
deictic anchor it usually modi fies the speaker or other entities that are c lose
to the speaker . This proximity can be temporal or phys ica l .
The following example contains i n i a s temporal cataphoric deictic particle :
( 1 ) In i = l ah s u a t u k i s s a h y a n g This is a story
This=cM a story rel . pron . which has been told
d i =ce t e ra=kan by the o ld peop l e :
o l eh o ra n g
pt . foc . =te l V=act . foc . the origin o f the
by person
king who founded
tua- tua , asa l raj a yang be rbuat the sett lement of
o ld-o l d, origin king rel . pron . make Patani, the Abode
of Peace .
nege r i P a t a n i Da r u s s a l am i tu
sett lement Patani Abode of Peace that
The fact that i n i is cataphoric in this particular sentence is due to the
position of k i s s a h , i . e . it follows i n i . In other words , the cataphoric feature
or ' nature ' of i n i is not something inherent but it is something external .
S ince k i s s ah ' story ' i s an abstract noun , i n i , in terms of proximity , is there­
fore temporal rather than physical . That is to say that the actual telling of
the story happen s right after this sentence i s uttered. In light of all the se
facts , our sentence above, would be interpreted as having the following meaning :
'This is a story which I, the speaker, am about to t e l l . It has been told by
the o ld people and is about the origin of the King who bui l t the sett lement of
Patani . '
Now, suppose we reverse the order of i n i and k i s s a h and as a result have
the following : K i s s a h i n i l ah yang d i ce te rakan o l eh o ra n g t ua t ua , as a l raj a yang
b e r b u a t n ege r i P a t a n i Da r u s s a l am i t u 'This (then) was the story told by the o ld
people about the King who bui lt the sett lement of Patani . , 2 8 In i in thi s con­
text i s not cataphoric but anaphori c . Hence , as has been stated above , it is
the position of the noun k i s s a h in relation to i n i that determines whether the
latter is cataphoric or anaphoric . In other words , this sentence i s a speech
act of concluding the story as opposed to the former which is a speech act of
introducing or announcing the tel ling of the story . Another difference that one
could observe between these two sentences is that the former sentence is an exo­
centric construction , whereas the latter is an endocentric one .
The following i s an example where the use of i n i is more physical than
temporal due to the fact that the noun it modifies is a concrete one .
( 2 ) Maka pe l a n d u k i t u p u n l e nyap= l a h The mousedeer dis­
conn . mousedeer that TM disappear=cM appeared on this
beach.
p a da p a n t a i i n i .
on beach this
Now , i n i here refers to the fact that the beach the speaker is referring to is
close to him physically. That is to say he was standing on the beach in Patani
when he was uttering thi s sentence . Notice that i n i in this particular context
is neither cataphoric nor anaphoric . It refers to an entity that is non-textual .
That is , something that is part of nature , the non-textual world , and not part
of the text .
I t u , like i n i , is a deictic particle which means ' that ' or ' those ' . I t
also carrie s a sense o f de finiteness . In terms of de ictic anchor it is usually
 51

hearer centred and also other centred , i . e . the person or thing talked about by
the speaker and heare r .
I n our text there are two kinds o f i tu : the presupposed o r the script2 9 one
and the non-presupposed one which i s usually anaphoric . To i llustrate the first
type following are some examples :
( 3 ) Adacpun raj a d i Ko ta Ma l i g a i i t u The king in Kota
Exist=TM king in town MaLigai that MaLigai was caLLed
nama=nya Paya Tu Ke r u b Mahaj a n a Phaya Tu Kerub
name=the/he Paya Tu Kerub Mahajana Mahajana.

( 4 ) A r a k i an ma ka t i t a h bag i n d a : "Aku Then the king spoke :

conn . conn . speech his majesty : I "I have heard reports
that the game near
d e n ga r khaba r=nya pe r b u ruan sebe l a h
the sea-shore is
hear report=the hunting game side
abundant indeed. "
tep i l a u t i t u t e r l a l u b a n y a k kono n "
shore sea that very many report says

( 5 ) Maka bag i n d a p u n me=n i t a h=kan Then the king ordered

conn . his majesty TM ag. foc . =order=act . foc . (some) men to go and
Look for the tracks
o ra n g p e r g i me= l i ha t bekas r u s a i t u
of deer.
person go ag . foc . =see track deer that

( 6) Ma ka bag i n d a p u n ama t ha i ran= l a h The king Was great Ly

conn . his majesty TM very astonished=CM astonished and gave
orders to reLease
s e r t a me=n i t a h=kan me=n y u r uh
his own hunting
and ag . foc . =say act . foc . ag. foc . order
= =
dogs .
me= l epas=kan a n j i ng p e rb u ruan
ag . foc . =re Lease=act . foc . dog hunting
ba g i nda send i r i i tu
his majesty seLf that
None of the i t u ' s in these sentences nor the one that occurs in sentence ( 1 ) are
anaphori c . That i s to say that the nouns they modi fy haven ' t been mentioned
before in the text . They are presupposed by the narrators . In other words , i t u
in sentence ( 1) implies that the narrators assume that the ir audience knows
about Patani the Abode of Peace ; it is not an indefinite or a new information
to the latte r . The same implication holds true for Kota Maligai in sentence
( 3 ) . In addition to thi s , i t u in thi s context gives a sense of a unit to the
first nominal phrase Adapun raj a d i Ko t a Ma l i ga i .
All the noun phrases modified by i t u in sentences ( 4-6) are part of the
hunting script . That i s to say that the seashore in sentence ( 4 ) , although it
has not been mentioned before in the text , is known to both the King as speaker
and to his ministers , officials , officers and all his subj ects as addres se e .
S o what the King i s really saying i s : 'I have heard reports that the game near
the seashore is abundant indeed. I assume you aU know what seashore I am
taLking about . That is why I couLd Launch into taLking about it as something
defini te. 1 3 0
In sentence ( 5 ) the narrators as sume that their addressee knows that when
they talk about a king going out on a hunt the only obj ect of his game is dee r .
And s o mentioning tracks of deer a t this point i n the text without explicitly
52

mentioning them before makes sense to both parties and also to us as outside
interpreters of the system. In sentence ( 6 ) , the narrators as sume that the
hunting dogs are stereotypic part of the hunting script . And so they mention
them here for the first time as an old definite information .
The anaphoric non-presupposed i t u is different from the script one in that
the former always modi fies nouns that have been mentioned previously in the text
whether it be the same noun or the paraphrase of i t , e . g . h u t a n i t u ' the forest '
in sentence ( 20) in the text refers back to h u t a n sebe l a h t e p i l a u t i n i ' the
forest on the side of this seashore ' in the content part of sentence ( 17 ) ;
anj i n g i t u ' the dogs ' in sentence ( 26) which is anaphoric of the string of
a n j i n g i t u in sentences ( 2 5) , ( 24 ) , ( 2 3 ) , ( 2 2 ) and also of anj i ng pe r b u ruan
b a g i n d a s e n d i r i i t u ' the king 's own hunting dogs ' in sentence ( 2 1) , which is an
instance of the script i t u as has been mentioned above .
In terms o f t ime , i n i usually has to do with immediate time be fore or after
a speech act is performed . See discuss ion of sentence ( 1 ) above for this . On
the other hand , i t u usually has to do with distant time whether in the past or
in the future . For example , i t u in ( 1 ) may also be interpreted as the modi fier
of the phrase raj a yang b e r b u a t nege r i P a t a n i Da r us s a l am . In this case i t u
re fers to the fact that the king ' s indefinite action of building the town of
Patani , the Abode of Peace was taking place in the past. I t u does not refer so
much to raj a as to his action . I f i t did, then raj a would be interpreted as
being de finite . This interpretation is not quite right because at thi s point in
the story raj a is inde finite to the addressee despite the fact that he is
de finite to the old reported narrator s , i . e . they know which raj a they have in
mind when telling the story . I t u in sentence ( 3 ) above may also be interpreted
as the modi fier of the whole phrase Ada p u n raj a d i Ko t a Ma l i ga i . with this
interpretation it is possible to interpret the existence of the raj a ( ad a 'exist,
be ' ) as being in the pa st. Again here i t u refers more to the EXISTENCE of the
king rather than to the king himse l f . The reason for this is quite the same as
the one given above where i t u modifies the action of the king rather than the
king .
The following i s an example o f the use of i t u i n the distant future . This
example is taken from a prophecy from the book of Zechariah ( 12 : 4a) in the
Indonesian ( Malay) Bible ( published by Pertj etakan Lembaga Alkitab Indonesia
[ the Indone sian Bible Society ] , T j iluar-Bogor) :
( 7 ) Maka pada h a r i i t u dj uga , dem i k i a n= l a h F i rma n On that day, thus
conn . on day that a lso thUS=CM Word says the Lord, I
wi U strike every
T u h a n , a ka n kupa l a sega l a k u d a dengan
horse with panic
Lord wi l l I s trike all horse with
and its rider
kekedj u t a n dan s ega l a o ra n g j an g with madness.
panic and a l l person rel . pron .
mengen d a ra i nya dengan g i l a ;
ride them with crazy

3. 5 . 5 . Sya hdan
In Winstedt ' s Ma l a y Engl ish Di ctionary , syahdan is spel led s ha h a d a n and the
meaning that is given there is 'moreover ' or 'furthermore ' . In his Mal a y Grammar
( 1913 : 16 1 ) he clas s i fies this particle as a fresh topic or paragraph opener along
with other particles of similar nature such as h a t t a , ka l a k i a n and a ra k i a n .
 53

According t o him s a h a d a n is derived from the Sanskrit s a h a ' together with, along
with, with, in common, in company, jointly, conjoint ly, in concert , 3 1 and Malay
d a n 'and ' . On the same page he makes a note that ' Sa h a d a n i s sometimes used in
old literature for the copula and . ' The examples that he gave to i llustrate
thi s are : Maha raj a Rawana k a ra r l ah dengan a d i l nya s a h a d a n dengan m u ra h a n
'Maharaja Ravana was established with justice and graciousness ' ; t e r l a l u l ua s
h umanya s a h a d a n t e r l a l u j a d i p a d i - nya ' the fie ld was very large an d the crop
bountifu l . '
In the text under analysis s y a h d a n apparently i s used as an evaluation
marker . The term EVALUAT ION here is adapted from Labov and Waletzky ( 1967 : 37 ) .
It i s the part of the text which reveals the attitude of the narrators toward
the text by emphasiz ing the relative importance of some narrative units as com­
pared to others . S y a h da n , whi ch is used twice in the text , occurs with and
modifies text units which are considered important by the narrators . The first
one i s : Syahdan ma ka Pay a T u An t a ra pun ke raj aan l ah men ggan t i ka n ayahanda bag i nda
i t u . Ia menama i d i r i ny a Paya T u N aq p a . 'Then Paya Tu Antara became king, suc­
ceeding his father. He ca l led himse lf Paya Tu Nakpa. ' The second one is :
Syahdan kebanyaka n k a t a o ra n g n ama nege r i i t u men g i k u t nama o ra n g yang me rawa
i t u l ah . Ba hwa s e s ungguhnya nama nege r i i t u meng i k u t semb a h o rang men g a t a ka n
pe l a n d u k l enyap i t u . 'Most people say that the settlement was named after the
p�-fisherman. In actua l fact the name of the settlement derived from the
words which the people used when reporting the disappearance of the mousedeer. '
Note that the f irst text uni t , especially Naqpa , the last part of the name in
the second sentence , is used as a base or topic or a theme from which the rest
of the text is developed ( c f . the meaning of N a q pa as a text-building strategy
discus sed in section 3 . 4 . , Naming and Etymologizing ) ; it is also used as a
device to start off the hunting story. The second text unit i s used to express
the point of the story ; it is also used as a device to conclude the story .

3.5 .6. Demi k i an

In discuss ing a ra k i a n above ( sect ion 3 . 5 . 2 . ) , I stated that this particle
is a conclusion marker of a sentence , paragraph , or an episode within the story
and that dem i k i a n is a conclusion marker at a story or a di scourse level and
occurs at the end of i t .
In this subsection I will point out two more aspects regarding the meaning
of dem i k i an . According to Poerwadarminta ( 1966 ) dem i in classical Malay liter­
ature means sebaga i ' like ' . K i a n , according to both Winstedt ( 1957) and
Poerwadarminta ( 1966) , means s a n a , s i t u ' there ' . The following is the concluding
sentence of the text in which dem i k i a n occurs :
( 1 ) Dem i k i a n l a h h i kay a t n y a That is the way
like there e M story the the story goes .
Note that d em i k i an ' like there ' or ' like that ' is anaphoric of the reported
story which is introduced by the introductory sentence In i l a h s ua t u k i s s a h yang
d i ce te rakan o l eh o ra n g t ua- t ua , a s a l raj a yang b e rb ua t nege r i P a t a n i Da r u s sa l am
i t u 'This is a story which has been to ld by the o ld peop le : the origin of the
King who founded the sett lement of Patani, the Abode of Peace . ' In the context
of the telling of the story i n i in the introductory sentence is the oppos i te of
dem i k i a n in the concluding sentence , i . e . i n i is cataphoric and dem i k i a n is ana­
phoric , i n i is introducing and d em i k i a n is concluding the story .
54

Now the following i s a context in the text where Dem i k i a n occurs in a

dialogue paragraph level :
( 2 ) A r a k i a n maka t i ta h b a g i n d a : "Aku Then the king spoke :
conn . conn . speech his majesty : I "I have heard reports
that the game near
deng a r khaba r=nya p e r b u r u a n sebe l ah
the sea-shore is
hear report=the hunting game side
abundant indeed. "
tep i l a u t i t u t e r l a l u banyak konon"
s hore sea that very many report says

( 3 ) Ma ka s emb a h sega l a men t e r i : The ministers rep lied

conn . obeisance a l l minister: respectfu l ly : "Hai l
my Lord� it is true
" Da u l a t Tuan=k u , s un g g u h= l ah s e pe r t i
indeed as Your
good fortune Lord=my true=CM like
Majesty has spoken;
t i ta h D u l i Yang Maha=mu l i a we too have heard
speech dust of the feet the most=nob le likewise. "
i t u , pat i k denga r pun dem i =k i a n j uga"
that s lave hear TM like=that a lso
Notice that dem i k i an in ( 3 ) is anaphoric of the information p e r b u ruan s eb e l ah
t e p i l a u t i t u t e r l a l u banyak 'the game near the sea-shore is abundant indeed '
in ( 2 ) . It is also conclusive in the sense of giving a sense of closure or com­
pleteness to this paragraph .
Consider the following context , which follows ( 2 ) and ( 3 ) in the text :
( 4 ) Maka t i ta h Paya Tu Naqpa : " J i ka l a u Phaya Tu Nakpa then
Conn . speech Paya Tu Naqpa : if spoke : "In that
case cal l up a l l
d em i =k i a n ke r ah=kan= l a h sega l a ra ' y a t
Our peop le. Tomorrow
like=that summon=act . foc. =CM a l l peop le
We sha l l go hunting
k i ta . Esok h a r i k i ta hendak p e r g i along the sea-
I tomorrow day I intend go shore . "
b e r b u ru ke tep i l aut i t u . "
hunt to shore sea that
Dem i k i a n in ( 4 ) is anaphoric of the content level in formation s un g g u h l a h s e pe r t i
t i t a h D u l i Yang Ma h amu l i a i t u , p a t i k denga r p un dem i k i a n j uga 'it is true indeed
as Your Majesty has spoken� we too have heard likewise ' in ( 3 ) . And since
dem i k i an in ( 3 ) is anaphoric of the information p e r b u ruan sebe l a h tep i l a u t i t u
te r l a l u b a n y a k in ( 2 ) , the scope of d em i k i a n in ( 4 ) has a range that includes
both these content levels of ( 2 ) and ( 3 ) . In other words , the content part of
the Frame Content construction in ( 4 ) means 'If you think that what I have heard
is true� i . e . the fact that the game near the seashore is abundant� and that you
have heard about this yourselves� ca l l up a l l my people . ' Dem i k i a n in this con­
text i s conclusive . However , because of the presence of the contingency connec­
tive particle j i ka l a u 'if ' in this context , the sense of closure inherent in
dem i k i a n is delayed to the end of the sentence in example ( 4 ) . In other words ,
there is a sense of prolonged suspense that is not present in ( 1 ) and ( 3 ) above
where d em i k i a n occurs .
To know more of dem i k i a n , its meaning and its nature , let us compare it
wi th a ra k i a n (discussed in section 3 . 5 . 2 . above ) :
 55

Demi k i an Ara k i a n
- usually occurs in the content - always occurs i n the pre frame
part of the Frame-Content con­ part of the Frame-Content con­
struction 3 2 ( see examples ( 3 ) struction ( see example ( 2 )
and ( 4 ) above) above ) , which i s the usual
position for the connective
particles
- modi fied by comment marker - l ah - not modified by comment marker
( see example ( 1 ) above ) - l ah
- conclusion marker of a Dialogue - conclusion marker of an indirect
Paragraph or a Complex Dialogue descriptive speech .
Paragraph level ( see examples
( 1 ) , ( 3 ) and ( 4 » . 3 3

Based on this it i s inferred that d em i k i a n , in comparison to a ra k i an , i s more a

content word than a function word . A rak i an on the other hand is a function word
more than a content word . In othe r words , from the point of view of coherence ,
dem i k i a n has more of a referential nature , i . e . it is anaphori c , while a ra k i a n
has more of a textual nature , i . e . it is more connective in nature than d em i k i a n .

3.5.7. S umma ry
The following is a summary chart of the particles discussed in this section :

PARTICLE FEATURES/COMMENTS

Hatta - marks a change in the action or the event in an episode . The

change usually has to do with the change in participant orienta­
tion or in the scene of location . The change in participant
orientation may involve the change of backgrounded major parti­
cipant with the foregrounded major partic ipant ; it may also
involve the introduction of a significant participant while the
major participant is still the same , with a change in the scene .
- usually occurs at the beginning of the episode .
Maka - operates on the clause and sentence levels ; in terms of its
function slot it is an initial punctuation ; in terms of its
function role it is an event sequence sentence ( or clause ) marker
in a text ; in terms of its filler class it is a connective .
Syahdan - functions as an evaluation marker and occurs always at the
beginning of the evaluation .
In i - modifies speaker or other entities that are close to the speaker .
- proximity is temporal if the noun it modifies is abstract .
- proximity is physical if the noun it modifies is concrete .
- is cataphoric and exocentric if it is followed by a noun .
- is anaphoric and endocentric if it is preceded by a noun .
- is neither anaphoric or cataphoric if it refers to an entity
that is non-textual , i . e . an entity that is part of nature
( ostensive reference ) .
- s ignals immediate time be fore or after a speech act is performed.
56

Itu - types : 1 . presupposed or script i t u

2 . non-presupposed or anaphoric i t u
s ignals distant time whether in the past or in the future .
A ra k i a n - conclusion marker of a sentence , paragraph or an episode of a
descriptive indirect speech within the story .
- always occurs at the beginning of the concluding unit. i . e . in
the preframe part of a Frame Content construction .
- not modified by comment marker - l ah .
Dem i k i a n - conclusion marker of a Dialogue Paragraph or a Complex Dialogue
Paragraph level , and also of a story as a di scourse unit.

3.6. CONSTRUCT ION TYPES

My text is made up of five types of construction :
1 - P u n - l a h constructions
2 - Frame-Content or Reporting- Reported constructions
3 - - La h constructions
4 - Other constructions
5 - Embedded structures

3.6.1 . Pun- l a h con stru ct i ons

Thi s construction type has two variants : p u n - l ah constructions and the pun
construct ions .

3. 6.1.1 . Pun- l ah con struct i ons

Thi s construction is a type of sentence that is very common in my text and
in other Classical Malay texts I have read . The name p u n - l ah derives from the
fact that at the core of this construction there is a p u n constituent and a - l a h
constituent . The p u n constituent is the topic of the construction and the - l ah
constituent is the event of the construction , i . e . the event that is performed
by the topic or that is affecting the topic . In terms of the information con­
veyed speci fically through the content of the text or the story the p u n consti­
tuent is old or given information and the -l a h constituent is new information .
Thi s dichotomy is not tight or absolute , since in the -l ah constituent there are
sometimes forms or elements that pertain to given information . The following
construction is an illustration of this fact :
( 1) . . . maka j a r i ng dan j e r a t p u n d i = t a h a n . . . nets and snares
conn . net and trap TM pt . foc =set . were set by the
people
o ra n g= l ah
person=CM
The word that pertains to old information in this construction is o ra n g 'peop le ' .
I t was mentioned before in the texts in the form o f o ra ng and ra ' y a t s e ka l i a n
'a l l the people ' . It should be noted however that the newness of information
 57

or event is expressed by d i t a ha n ' (were) set ' and o ra n g taken together as a

unit .
Besides the p u n - l a h structure , which i s the core , there are two other parts
of structures wh ich together with the former constitute the construction . The
one that precedes the core is called the PRECORE and the one that follows the
ELABORATION . 3 4 The core is obligatory , whereas the first and the last parts are
generally structural ly optional . Following is an example from my text to illus­
trate the three parts of the construction with an interlinear translation :
( 2 ) Syahdan ma ka Pay a Tu A n t a ra p u n Then Phaya Tu Antara
conn . conn . Paya Tu Antara TM became king,
succeeding his
keraj aan= l a h meng=gan t i =kan
father.
become king=cM ag . foc . =succeed=act. foc .
ayahanda bag i nda i tu
father his majesty that
Sya h d a n ma ka is the precore part , Paya Tu An t a ra p u n ke raj a a n l a h is the core ,
and menggan t i ka n ayahanda b a g i n d a i t u is the elaboration .
The role of the precore is to contextualize the core in the hierarchy of
the text . That is, it tel ls the reader that the sentence occurs at a certain
hierarchical level in the text . This is done not so much through the definition
of the meaning of the particles syahdan and ma ka individually , not through
etymological explanation of these partic les , but mainly through the density in
both sound and meaning of these terms . This viewpoint is inherent in certain
Southeast Asian cultural patterns and was brought to my attention by A . L . Becker ,
who , in his article ' The figure a sentence makes ' , states :
The main question , i t seems to me , is about the sheer heavi­
ness of these terms , a density in both sound and meaning
which is very reminiscent of the basic principle of heaviness
and l ightness in Southeast Asian music and calendars : the
coincidence of gongs at structural boundaries ( the more
gongs sounding together , the higher-level the boundary ) , or
- in calendric terms - the coincidence between marked
( highly valued) days in s imultaneously occurring ' weeks ' of
di fferent lengths . The Malay text at the level of sentences
uses just maka (or another single word connective l ike
s ha ha d a n or h a t t a from Persian and Hindi) ; sentence clusters
(or whatever the next hierarchical unit should be called)
use ' heavier ' or ' denser ' connectives , two words ( e . g .
a ra k i a n maka , d em i k i a n maka , h a t t a s a - t e l a h , a ra k i a n s a ­
t e l ah , s a - te l a h d e m i k i a n , and various other combinations
of a few connective words) or three words ( e . g . ma ka s a ­
t e l ah s ud a h , h a t t a s a - t e l a h s udah , s a - t e l a h i t u ma ka , . . .
s a - t e l a h d em i k i an maka ) . Aside from the rich meanings and
s ignificant variant orders of these terms , it i s the
' heaviness ' i tself which marks the figure we are studying
- the Classical Malay sentence - as a major boundary in the
hierarchical structure of the text , somewhat like a photo­
graph in English or Burmese . More deictics or connectives
mean a higher-level plot boundary : new place , new time ,
new state , new major character , etc . ( 19 7 7 : 11 )
58

So syahdan ma ka , besides being part of the sentence in which they occur ,

marks the fact that the sentence is the beginning of a hierarchical unit above
the sentence level , whatever it should be called .
In my text the hierarchical unit above the sentence level , besides being
expressed by two or three connective words , is also expressed by combinations
of connective phrases or connective clauses which starts with one or two connec­
tive words and is followed by another connective word , e . g . :
( 3 . 1) HATTA b e rapa l amanya MAKA
some time
conn . phrase conn .

( 3 . 2 ) A RA K I AN S ET E LAH da ta n g l a h pada keesokan h a r i nya , MAKA

arrive at the next day
conn . conn . clause conn .

( 3 . 3) S ET E LAH s ampa i pada t empa t b e r b u ru i t u , MAKA

arrive at the hunting ground
conn . clause conn .

( 3 . 4 ) MAKA S ETE LAH keesoka n h a r i nya MAKA

the next day
conn . conn . phrase conn .

( 3 . 5 ) S ET E LAH b a g i nda d a t a n g kepada s ua t u s e rokan t a s i k i t u , MAKA

he (the king) arrived at an inlet of the sea
conn . clause conn .
S ince the precore as stated above is the core contextual izer in the text ,
the core or the p u n - l ah structure , Paya Tu An t a rapun ke raj a a n l a h , in relation
to the former could be cal led the obj ect of the pre core or the contextualized.
Now the p u n - l a h structure as stated above consists of a pun constituent and a
-l a h constituent which in this particular example are instantiated by Paya T u
An t a ra p u n and k e raj a a n l a h . The former is the topic and the latter is the
comment . 3 5 The topic consists o f the head proper noun Paya T u An t a ra and the
modifying encl itic particle pu n ; in terms of role the particle is the topic
marker and the proper noun is the marked topic or the object of the topic marker .
The comment consists of the head ' verb ' ke raj a a n 'became king ' and the modifying
enclitic particle - l ah ; in terms of the role the former is the marked comment or
the obj ect of the comment marker and the latter is the comment marker.
The ' verb ' ke raj a a n is made up of the state marking affix ke- - an and the
word I:OOt raj a ' king ' .
The topic Paya T u An t a rapun in relation to the comment ke raj aan l ah has the
role o f Dative or Patient . This is expressed semantically as well as grarnrnatic­
ally through the affix ke- - a n . In relation with the topic , the comment ke raj a a n -
l a h has the role of event .
Following are other p u n - l a h structures from our text :
( 4 . 1 ) Paya Tu Ke r ub p u n mat i l a h
paya Tu Kerub died

( 4 . 2 ) b a g i n da p u n b e ra n g ka t l a h
he ( the king) departed
 59

( 4 . 3 ) s e ka l i a n ra ' ya t p un b e rhen t i l a h
a l l the peop le stopped

( 4 . 4 ) kh�mah p u n d i d i r i ka n o ran g l ah
tents were erected by the peop le

( 4 . 5) bag i n d a p u n t u r un l a h
he ( the king) descended from

( 4 . 6 ) J a r i ng d a n j e r a t p u n d i t a h a n o ra n g l ah
nets and snares were set by the peop le

( 4 . 7 ) sega l a ra ' y a t pun m a s u k l ah

a l l the people went into ( entered)

( 4 . 8 ) bag i nda p u n ama t h a i r a n l a h

he (the king) was great ly astonished

( 4 . 9 ) anj i n g i t u p u n d i l ep a s kan o ran g l a h

the dogs were released b y the peop le

( 4 . 10 ) b a g i n d a pun b e rtemu l ah
he (the king) came across

( 4 . 11) pe l a n d u k i t u p u n l enyap l a h
the mousedeer disappeared

( 4 . 12 ) p a t i k p u n d i t i n gga l kan o ra n g l ah
we (s laves) were left behind by the people

( 4 . 1 3) b a g i nd a p u n kemba l i l ah
he (the king) returned

( 4 . 14) n e ge r i i t u p u n s ud a h l ah
the sett lement was ready ( comp leted)

Note that there are no meN-Verbs ( agent focus verbs) in the - l a h constitu­
ent of the p u n - l ah structures listed above . Only ' verbs ' with be r- , ke- - a n , d i ­
or d i - - ka n , or no affixes appear be fore - l ah . Note also that with d i - or d i - - ka n
' verbs ' - l a h always occurs after the agent and not before i t , i . e . not attached
to the verb . We will see later on that meN-Verbs tend to occur in the elabora­
tion part of the construction . This has something to do with the fact that the
core in terms of role is more generic and indefinite and the elaboration is
more specific and definite .
I stated above that - l a h constituent is the new information part of the
message conveyed in the p u n - l a h sentence given above . To test this let us look
at the following sentences :
( 5 ) Ada =p u n raj a d i Ko ta Ma l i ga i i t u nama=nya As for the king in
exist cTM king in town Ma ligai that name=the/he Kota Ma ligai his name
was Paya Tu Kerub
Paya Tu Ke r ub Mahaj a n a
Mahajana.
Paya Tu Kerub Mahajana

( 6 ) *Ada l ah raj a d i Ko ta Ma l i g a i i t u n amanya Pay a Tu Ke r u b Mahaj a n a .

60

( 7 ) Ada = l ah seorang raj a d i Ko ta Ma l i ga i . There was a king in

exist=CM a king in town Maligai. Kota Maligai . His
name was Paya Tu
Nama =nya Paya Tu Ke r u b Mahaj a na .
Kerub Mahajana.
Name=the/he Paya Tu Kerub Mahajana.
Sentence ( 6 ) is not acceptable and gramma tical since - l a h does not go to­
gether with raj a d i Ko ta Ma l i ga i i t u , i . e . it does not go with raj a d i Kot a
Ma l i ga i when it is modi fied b y the de finite article i t u . I n sentence ( 7 ) ,
however , it works fine . 3 6 This is due to the fact that raj a d i Kot a Ma l i ga i is
modi fied by the indefinite seorang ( s e + o ra n g = one + human classifier ( l it­
eral ly 'person ' ) ) 'a ' .
I stated above that the elaboration i s the specification of the generic
p u n - l ah core . In my example , sentence ( 2 ) above , the elaboration men g g a n t i ka n
a y a h a n d a bag i n da i t u i s the specification of the generic event keraj a a n l ah that
happens to the topic Paya Tu An ta ra as the result of the motivating event m a t i l ah
'die ' that happens to Paya Tu Antara ' s father and is expressed in the preceding
p u n - l a h construction as :
( 8) H a t t a b e rapa l ama=nya ma ka Paya Tu Ke rub After some time
onn . how long=the conn . Paya Tu Kerub Phaya Tu Kerub
Mahajana died.
Maha j an a p u n m a t i = l ah
Mahajana TM die=cM
Now the speci fic result menggan t i ka n ayahanda bag i n d a i t u ( see example ( 2 ) ) is
basically a clause that consists of the predicate verb menggan t i ka n and the
obj ect noun ayahanda bag i n da i t u . The former has the role of focussed act ,
whereas the latter has the role of patient . Through focussing on the act
ga n t i kan by means of the focus marking prefix meN- the agent nature or feature
of the generic topic Paya Tu An ta ra is brought forth to the foreground . The act
ga n t i k a n consists of the word root gan t i and the suffix * a n (derived from the
preposition a k a n ) which functions in this context as a focus marker of the
action expressed in the act g a n t i . The obj ect NP consists of the head NP
a y a h a n d a b a g i n d a and the modifying definite article i t u . The former has the
role of defined and the latter has the role of defining . The head NP consists
of the head honorific noun ayah a n da and the modi fying honorific pronoun bag i n d a .
Aya h a n d a has the role of possessed and ba g i n d a the role o f possessing .
The following pun- l a h constructions wi thout their pre core structures are
given below for a close examination of the different variety of their elaboration
structures .
( 9 ) bag i n da p u n b e rangkat= l ah dengan sega l a the king departed
his majesty TM depart=CM with all with a l l his
ministers and
men t e r i h u l ub a l a n g=nya d i = i r i ng=kan
offieers, and aeeom­
minister offieer=the/he pt . foc . =aeeompany=
panied by his
act . foc .
o l eh ra ' y a t s e ka l i a n people.
by people a l l

( 10 ) M a k a bag i n da p u n t u ru n= l ah da r i Then the king

conn . his majesty TM deseend from=CM from deseended from his
e lephant and sat in
a t a s gaj ah=nya s emayam d i da l am
s tate in a tent
on e lephant=the/he sit in state in
whi le his ministers
k hemah d i =a d a p o l eh sega l a men te r i and offieers and
tent pt . foc . =attend by all minister a l l his subjeets
 61

h u l uba l an g ra ' y a t s e ka l i a n were sitting in

officer people a l l attendance .

( 11) H a k a s ega l a ra ' y a t p u n mas uk= l ah ke=da l am Then the people

conn . a l l peop le TM enter=CM to=in went into the
h u t a n i t u meng=a l a u - a l a u sega l a wood beating game
from early morning
forest that ag . foc . =beat all
unti l the sun began
p e rb u ruan i t u d a r i pag i - pag i to decline; but not
game that from morning-morning one anima l was
obtained.
h i ngga d a t a n g nge l i n c i r m a t a ha r i ,
ti l l come decline sun
s e=� ko r pe r b u r u a n t i a d a d i =p e ro l �h
one=clas s . game not pt . foc . =obtain

( 12 ) Haka bag i n da pun ama t ha i r a nc l a h The king was

conn . his majesty TM very astonished=cM great ly astonished
and gave orders
s e r t a me=n i t a h = ka n me=n y u ruh
to release his own
and ag . foc . =say=act . foc . ag foc order
. . =
hunting dogs.
me= l epas=kan a n j i ng p e rb u r ua n
ag . foc . =l'elease=act . foc . dog hunting
bag i n da s e nd i r i i t u
his majesty self that

( 13 ) bag i n da pun b e r temu= l a h dengan s ega l a The king came

his majesty TM find=cM with all across a l l the
men who had gone
o ra n g yang me=n u ru t
with the dogs .
person re l . pron . ag . foc . =go with
anj i ng i t u
dog that

( 14 ) pe l a n d u k i t u p u n l enyap= l a h pada The mousedeer

mousedeer that TM disappear=cM at disappeared on
this beach here.
pan ta i i n i .
beach this

( 1 5 ) p a t i k p u n d i = t i n g ga l =kan We were left

s lave TM pt . foc . = leave behind=act foc . . behind by the
people of this
o ra n g= l ah pada temp a t i n i
p lace.
person=CM at place this

( 16) maka bag i n d a pun kemb a l i = l ah pad a The king returned

conn . his majesty TM return=cM to to his tent.
k h�mah=nya
tent=be
The following list , with the numbers referring t o each p u n - l a h construction
given above , consi sts of information stating clearly the number of constituents
each elaboration has and what filler classes their constituents belong to :
62

Di s p l ay 3. 6.1.
- ( 9 ) consists of the prepositional phrase (PP) dengan sega l a
men t e r i h u l ub a l a n gnya and the clause ( Cl . ) d i i r i ngkan o l eh
ra ' y a t s eka l i a n
- ( 10 ) consists of the PP d a r i a ta s gaj ahnya and two CIs .
s emayam d i da l am kh�mah and d i ad a p o l eh sega l a men t e r i
h u l uga l an g ra ' y a t seka l i a n
- ( 11 ) consists of the PP keda l am h u t a n i t u and two CIs .
men g a l a u - a l a u sega l a p e rb u ruan i t u d a r i pag i - pag i h i ngga
datang n g e l i n c i r ma t a h a r i and s ee ko r perb u r uan t i a da
d i pero l eh
- ( 12 ) is made up of only one compound Cl . s e r ta men i t a h k a n
men y u r uh me l e p a s ka n a n j i n g p e r b u ruan bag i nd a s e n d i r i i t u
- ( 13 ) i s made up of one PP dengan sega l a o ra n g yang men u r u t
a nj i ng i tu
( 14 ) i s made up of one PP pad a p a n t a i i n i
( 15 ) i s made up of one PP pada t empa t i n i
( 16 ) is made up of one PP pada kh emah nya

From this we can see that the elaboration structure can be a phrase ( p p ) ,
or a clause , or a combinat ion o f both. Note that referentially , i . e . the sem­
antic domain in which the core and the elaboration occur and share their features ,
the PP i s more closely related to the event than to the topic , while the clause
is more closely related to the topic than to the event . That is to say that the
clause is the place where things related to the topic get specified or commented
about , and as a result the topic gets fore grounded here in the verbs as agent or
patient depending on the perspective the narrator ( s ) chose ; on the other hand
the PP is the place where things related to the event get specified in terms of
direction ( e . g . the elaboration of ( 16 ) ) , location ( e . g . the elaboration of ( 14 ) ) ,
and other participants the topic participant relates to ( e . g . the elaboration
of ( 13 ) ) .
As illustration for the speci fication of the topic consider construction
( 2 ) above . Its elaboration c lause mengga n t i kan ayahanda bag i n d a i t u , especially
the predicate menggan t i kan , is an action that gets focussed by means of the pre­
fix meN- (mentioned above) . In this sense the topic Paya Tu An t a ra gets speci­
fied or commented about in the elaboration clause in terms of his action . This
fact also applies to the elaboration compound clause of construction ( 12 ) , where
through the same prefix meN- the topic bag i nd a pun gets specified or commented
about again in terms of his action . Notice that in both these cases the agent
role of the topic participants are brought to the foreground gramma tically by
means of the prefix meN - , while in the p u n - l a h structure both topics have the
role of Dative or Patient (however one would label these ) . ( In construction ( 2 )
the role o f the topic participant Pay a T u An t a ra p u n i s expressed semantically
and grammatically in the event ke raj aan l a h and in construction ( 12 ) the role of
the topic participant bag i nda p u n is expressed lexically in the affix-less event
ha i ra n l a h . )
There are also elaborations where topics get specified or commented about
with affix-less or unmarked predicates , e . g . semayam ' to sit in state ' in the
first clause of the elaboration of construction ( 10) . In case s l ike these the
 63

roles of the topic participant are expressed referentially ( or semantically) ,

i . e . not by means of grammatical devices such as meN - or d i - , but by the lexical
meaning of the root word itse l f .
Hence , one would generalize that through the elaboration clause other roles
of topic participants are foregrounded , whether both referentially and grammatic­
ally or referentially alone .
We have seen above that there is clear distinction between the p u n - l a h
structure and the elaboration structure . At this point I want to focus e speci­
ally on the elaboration structure that is expressed in the form of a clause , i . e .
I will discuss the features that make it different from the p u n - l a h structure
and the reasons why I need to focus on their di fferences :

Di spl ay 3. 6.2 .

A . P U N - LAH STRUCTURE B . CLAUSE ELABORATION STRUCTURE

a . precedes clause elaboration - follows p u n - l a h structure
structure
b . more independent , i . e . can more dependen t , i . e . it is part
stand alone without elabor­ of the p u n - l ah structure and
ation and pre core structures cannot stand alone without it
c . topic initial , i . e . there i s - ' verb ' initial ( or predicate
an explicit syntactic topic initial ) , i . e . has no expl icit
syntactic sub j ect
d. more generic - more specific
e . marked by p u n - l a h particles - not marked by p u n - l a h
f. di stinction between old and new - distinction between old and new
information more clearly cut information not very clearly cut
g . has no meN- ' verbs ' , i . e . - has meN - ' verbs ' (definite
generally has affix- less , d i ­ intended acts)
or d i - - ka n and b e r - ' verbs '

To illustrate the features in both columns above see examples ( 2 ) , ( 10 ) ,

( 11 ) and ( 1 2 ) , and the information that goes with these examples in Display
3 . 6 . 1 . above . Note that feature ( c ) in column B does not apply to the second
clause of example ( 1 1) : s ee ko r p e r b u ruan t i ad a d i p e ro l e h . The reason for this
will be expounded in the section that discusses constructions without p u n - l ah
that share both features of pun- l a h structure and Clause Elaboration Structure .
I stated above that the p u n - l a h construction ( note : pun- l ah structure is
th e core of the p u n - l ah construction) is a type of sentence . It is the type
whose topic and event are marked respectively by the particles p u n and - l a h .
These constituents are marked because they are important information o f the story .
That is to say , the Old Malay narrators consider them s ignificant and so mark
them to make the structure they occur in distinctive from other kinds whose topic
and event are not marked . In this ligh t , to borrow Longacre ' s term, the sequence
of these p u n - l ah structures form the ' backbone ' or the ' skeleton ' of the text . 3 7
Commenting about thi s , A . L . Becker says :
64

It indexes an event ( - l ah ) and the participant ( pu n ) who or

which will be a single case role - in the sentence under
investigation , this role is actor or agent - in the clauses
which follow the p u n - l a h core , clauses which fill in the
details and particularize the event in rel a tion to this
parti ci pant . ( 1977 : 9 )
What Becker calls ' a sentence ' i s that which i s referred to here as the p u n - l a h
construction. In a sense the p u n - l ah structure is a sentence or better yet a
marked sentence as opposed to the unmarked type ( i . e . the type whose topic and
event are not marked by p u n - l a h particles) which will be discussed later on
( section 3 . 6 . 4 . ) .
Based on this I could say that the features presented in columns A and B
3 8 reveal the difference between a marked sentence and a
in Display 3 . 6 . 2 . above
clause in our classical Malay text. I stated above , between examples ( 1 ) and
( 2 ) , that the elaboration part of the p u n - l ah construction is structurally
optional . The following sentence , which is the fourth sentence in our text ,
exemplifies thi s fact , i . e . after i ts p u n - l a h structure , the story goes on with
another p u n - l a h construction without particularizing or specifying the p u n - l ah
structure in an elaboration structure :
( 17 ) H a t t a be rapa l ama=nya maka Paya Tu Ke rub After some time
conn . how long=the conn . Paya Tu Kerub Phaya Tu Kerub
Mahajana died.
Mahaj ana p u n ma t i = l ah
Mahajana TM die=cM
The p u n - l a h sentence that follows this sentence , as can be seen in the text , is
the one given in example ( 2 ) above :
( 18) Syahdan maka Paya Tu An ta ra p u n Then Phaya Tu Antara
conn . conn . Paya Tu Antara TM became king�
succeeding his
ke raj aanc l a h meng=ga n t i =kan
father.
become king=cM ag . foc . succeed=act . foc .
=

ayahanda bag i nd a i tu
father his majesty that

3.6.1 . 2 . Pun con s truct i on

P u n construction is a variant of the p u n - l ah construction in that its event
consti tuent is not marked by -1 a h It is not marked because it is not considered
.

important by the narrators , i . e . relatively speaking , it is not as important as

when it is marked by - l a h . In other words in this variant the topic is the only
constituent that gets foregrounded.
There are two subvariants within the p u n construction . The first sub­
variant basically has the same structure as the p u n - l ah type , i . e . it has the
precore , the core and the e laboration structures . The following examples , dis­
sected into three parts with interlinear translation , show thi s .
 65

PRECORE CORE ELABORATION GLOSS

( 1 9 ) maka Paya Tu Ke r u b maka d i =namac i Paya Tu Kerub

conn . Paya Tu KeY'Ub conn . pt . foc . =name=a11t . Mahajana had one
son, to whom he
Mah a j a na pun a n a k a n d a bag i nd a i t u
gave the name of
Mahajana TM child king the
Paya Tu Antara .
b a r a n a k s eo rang P aya T u A n t a ra
beget a Paya Tu Antara
l ak i - l ak i
son

( 2 0 ) Pada s ua t u Pay a Tu N a q p a d i a t a s t a kh ta ke raj a a n One day Paya Tu

on one Paya Tu Naqpa o n up throne roya l Naqpa was seated
on his royal
har i p u n d ud u k nya d i adap o l eh
throne, whi le
day TM sit his attended by
his ministers,
sega l a men t e r i officials, offi­
all minister cers and a l l his
subjects were
pegawa i h u l uba l a n g dan
sitting in
official officer and
attendance .
ra ' y a t seka l i a n
people a l l

( 2 1) S e t e l a h bag i n d a p un b e rj a l an kepada After the King

After king TM wal k to heard the man ' s
report, he set
bag i n da b e ra ng ka t t emp a t i t u
out for that
the king depart p lace that
p lace .
men d e n ga r
hear
s emba h o ra n g
worship man
i t u maka
the conn .

( 2 2 ) maka bag i n d a p u n dengan sebuah r umah The King found

conn . king TM with a house a house where
an o ld couple
b e r t emu o r ang t u a l a k i - b i n i
lived, catching
find man o ld husband-
prawn and
wife
setting snares .
d u d u k me rawa
reside catch prawn
d a n menj e ra t
and set snare

( 2 3 ) Ma ka pada ma sa p a t i k p un p e r g i meng i r i n g ka n When your Roya l

conn . at time s lave TM go accompany Grandfather de­
parted for
P a d u ka N e n d a d i kerah D u l i P a d u ka N e n da
Ayudhya in order
foot Grand­ summon dust foot Grandfather
father
66

PRECORE CORE ELABORATION GLOSS

b e r an g k a t p e r g i o ra n g b e rangkat i t u to build a
depart go man depart that sett lement there,
we were summoned
be r b u a t nege r i
to go and aaaom­
make se tt lement
pany Him on this
ke Ay u t i a maka voyage .
to Ayutia conn .

( 2 4 ) S e t e l ah Paduka pat i k pun When your Roya l

after foot s lave TM Grandfather
arrived at this
N tf n d a s ampa i kedatangan
p laae we were
grand- arrive striaken with
striaken wi th an
father
i l lness.
kepada t emp a t penya k i t
to p laae i l lness
i n i , ma ka
this conn .

( 2 5 ) S e t e l a h s ud a h bag i n d a p u n kemb a l i ke After the

after already king TM return to ministers and
offiaers had re­
s e ga l a men t e r i b e r angkat Ko t a Ma l i ga i
aeived instrua­
aU minister depart town Ma ligai
tions from the
h u l ub a l a n g King, eaah wi th
offiaer his own men, the
d i t i t a h kan o l eh King returned
aorronand by to the town of
Maligai .
b a g i nd a
the king
mas i n g mas i n g
eaah
dengan ke t umb u kannya , maka
with men his conn .

( 26a) maka bag i n d a p u n d u d u k pada nege r i The King moved

conn . king TM reside in settlement downstream (and)
resided in the
p i ndah h i l i r yang d i p e r b u a t i tu
(newly) bui lt
move down- that bui lt that
sett lement
stream
( 26b ) d a n neger i P a t a n i D a r u s sa l am and he named
and sett lement Patani Abord of Peaae the sett lement
Patani, Abode
i tu pun
of Peaae .
the TM
d i nama kannya
name he
 67

Notice that in this subvariant the d i - , b e r - and affix- less ' verbs ' tend to
occur in the elaboration part of the p u n construction along with the meN-verbs .
As illustrations for d i -verbs see examples ( 19 ) and ( 2 0 ) ; for be r-verbs see
example ( 2 1) , for affix- less ' verbs ' see examples ( 2 3 ) , ( 2 5 ) and ( 26a) . Thi s
situation is the reverse of the one in the p u n - l a h construction , i . e . in the
pun- l ah sentences these ' verbs ' tend to occur in the core structure and not in
the elaboration structure . Example ( 26a and b) taken together is an i llustra­
tion of a compound pun construction .
To illustrate the second subvariant of the p u n construction , fol lowing are
four examples :

PRECORE CORE ELABORATION GLOSS

( 2 7 ) maka bag i n d a p u n me n i t a h ka n o ra n g Then the King

conn . king TM command people ordered (some) men
t o go and look for
perg i me l i h a t b e ka s
the tracks of the
go see track
deer.
rusa i tu
deer that

( 28 ) maka b a g i nd a p u n s e g e r a mendapa t k a n The King immedi-

conn . king TM immediately obtain ately went in the
direction of the
s ua ra a n j i n g i t u
sound of the dogs .
sound dog that

( 2 9 ) maka h amba raj a me nj u n j u n g ka n t i t ah The king ' s servant

conn . s lave king carry on the head speech respectfu l ly trans-
mitted the king ' s
i tu pun bag i n d a kepad a o r a n g
words t o the o ld
that TM king to person
peop l e .
t ua i t u
o l d that

( 30 ) s e t e l ah sega l a men y u r u h o ra n g mud i k The fo l lowing

after all order men go upstream morning the minis-
ters and officers
keesokan men te r i ke Ko ta Ma I i ga i dan ke
ordered men to go
next minister to town Ma ligai and to
upstream to the
h a r i nya h u l ub a l ang Lancang me nge rahkan town of Ma ligai and
day officer Lancang ca I I up to Lancang in order
to ca l l up the
maka pun sega l a ra ' v a t h i I i r
subjects, that they
conn . TM all subject come
should come down-
downstream
s tream to build a
b e r b u a t nege r i i tu
settlemen t .
build sett lement that

Notice that in this subvariant there are no d i - , d i - - ka n , b e �, and affix- less

' verbs ' in the core structure . Probably this is due to the fact that all of
these examples are sentences specifying those generic ones that precede them in
the text . For example :
- Sentence ( 2 7 ) is preceded by the generic p u n - l a h construction Maka b a g i n d a
p u n t u r u n l ah d a r i a t a s gaj a h n y a s emayam d i da l am khemah d i ad a p o l eh sega l a
men t e r i h u l ub a l a n g ra ' ya t s eka l i a n ( for translation see example ( 10) ) .
68

- sentence ( 28 ) is preceded by the following two sentence s :

M a ka a n j i ng i t u p u n d i ; l epas;kan So the dogs were
conn. dog that TM pt . foc . =re l ease=act . fo c . released by the
people.
o r a n g= l ah
person=cM
and :
H a t t a ada sek i r a - k i ra dua [ d u ] j am Then, after about
conn . exist about two hour two hours, the
sound of the dogs '
1 ama=nya ma ka b e r b u n y i s ua ra a n j i ng
barking was
long=the conn . sound voice dog
heard.
i t u me=nya 1 a k
that ag . fo c . =bark

- sentence ( 29 ) is preceded by the sentence that is given in example ( 4 2 ) .

- Sentence ( 30 ) is preceded by :
D a n pad a ma 1 am i t u bag i n da pun That same night the
And o n night that his majesty TM king deliberated
with his ministers
b e r b i ca r a dengan sega 1 a men te r i
and officers, as
talk with all minister
he wanted to build
h u 1 ub a 1 a n g;nya h e n d a k b e r b ua t nege r i a sett lement on the
officer=he intend make sett lement spot where the white
mousedeer had been .
pada t em p a t pe 1 a n d u k p u t i h i t u
at p lace mousedeer white that

The distinctive features of the first type of construction or sentence can

be summarized as follows :

Di s p l ay 3 . 6.3.

CONSTRUCTION TYPE CORE ELABORATION

pun- 1 ah - has both p u n and - l ah - generally has meN-

verbs
- generally has - generally has d i - ,
and affix-less ' verbs ' d i - - ka n , and b e r -
verbs

p u n ( variant o f
pun- 1 ah)
- Type 1 - has p u n constituent and - generally has a mix-
a -1 a h -less predicate ture of d i - , d i - - i ,
constituent b e r - , affix-less and
meN-verbs
- Type 2 - has p u n constituent only - generally has meN-
and no -1 ah-less predicate verbs
constituent
- elaboration comes right
after the p u n constituent
 69

3.6. 2. Frame- content cons tru c t i o n s

This construction or sentence i s different from the p u n - l ah construction
discussed previously . The difference is manifested in the fact that the nature
of this construction is endocentric or attributive , i . e . it has a relation
analogous to a Head-Modifier relation , while the nature of the p u n - l ah construc­
tion is exocentric or predicative , that is , it has a relation analogous to a
Subject-Predicate relation . In terms of the inherent system of Classical Malay
we have viewed the exocentric type of construction as having a Topic-Event
relation , or better yet a p u n - l a h relation . For lack of a better term, i . e .
one that i s Malay by nature , we will view the endocentric construction as having
a relation of FRAME and CONTENT . Becker calls this relation a ' Metacomment­
Comment Re lation ' ( 1977 : 16) . In terms of role relation , as opposed to the slot
relation expressed by the terms FRAME and CONTENT , we will view this construction
as having a relation of REPORTING- REPORTED .
A s illustrations , the following are some examples taken from our text :
( 3 1) Maka t i ta h Pay a Tu Naqpa : " J i ka l a u Phaya Tu Nakpa then
conn . speech Paya Tu Naqpa : if spoke : "In that case
cal l up a l l Our peop le.
dem i = k i a n k e r a hckan= l a h sega l a ra ' y a t
Tomorrow We sha l l go
like=that summon=ac t . foc . =CM a l l peop le
hunting along the
k i ta o E sok ha r i k i ta h e n d a k p e rg i sea-shore . "
I tomorrow day I intend go
berbu r u k e tep i l aut i t u . "
hunt to shore sea that

( 32 ) M a ka t i t a h bag i n d a : " Ba i k= l ah esok The king spoke :

conn . speech his majesty : goOd=CM tomorrow "Good, let Us go
hunting early
pag i - pag i k i ta be rb u r u . "
tomorrOlil morning . "
morning-morning I/we hunt

( 3 3) I t u= l ah yang d i =hamba t o l eh That was what the

That=CM rel . pron. pt.foc . =pursue by dogs were pursuing;
a nj i ng i n i .
dog this

( 34 ) Syahdan kebanyakan k a t a o r a n g n ama Furthe�ore (and note

conn . most speech person name this) most peop le say
that the settlement
n e ge r i i t u meng= i ku t n ama
was named after the
sett lement that ag . foc . =fo l low name
prawn-fisherman.
o ra n g yang me= rawa i t u= l a h
person rel . pron . ag . foc . =catch prawn that=CM

( 35 ) I n i = l a h s u a t u k i s s a h y a n g This is a s tory which

This=CM a story rel . pron . has been told by the
old people : the
d i =cete ra=kan o l e h o ra n g
origin of the king
pt. foc . =te l l=act . foe . by person
who founded the settle­
t ua- t ua , a s a l raj a y a n g berbuat ment of Patani, the
o ld-old, origin king rel . pron . make Abode of Peace .
nege r i P a t a n i D a r u s s a l am i tu
settlement Patani Abode of Peace that
70

( 36 ) Dem i =k i a n= l ah h i kaya t nya That was the story .

like=that=CM story the

( 37 ) Da n ] pangka l a n i t u= l ah t empat E n c i k And that landing stage

And landing stage that=cM p lace Encik was the p lace where
Encik Tani used to go
T a n i n a i k t u r u n me= rawa
up and down catching
Tani go up down ag . foc =catch prawns
.
prawns and setting snares.
The structure of examples ( 3 1) and ( 32 ) in terms of s lot and role is made
up of a pre frame connective maka ( identical to precore in pun- l ah construction) ,
a reporting frame t i t a h Pay a Tu Naqpa , t i ta h bag i nd a and a reported content
J i ka l a u dem i k i an k e r a h ka n l a h sega l a ra ' ya t k i ta and Ba i k l ah esok pag i - pag i k i t a
be r b u r u .
Examples ( 3 3-37) are reduced forms o f the complete structure Preframe-Frame­
Content as expressed in examples ( 31) and ( 32 ) . That is to say that in examples
( 3 3-37 ) , the part of the s tructure that is lexically manifested is the content
one ; the pre frame and the frame parts are lexically not mani fested because they
are not relevant or interesting to the narrator .
In terms of the overal l hierarchy of the story , there are two kinds of
leve l s involved in examples ( 34-3 7 ) . The first level is the story level , i . e .
the level where the narrator i s telling the story to his audience in the form
of a monologue . This level , in terms of the substance of speech - its reference
to who is doing the tel ling of the story - involves two kinds of narrator ( s ) .
The first one is what I call the reporting narrator , and the second one is what
I term the reported narrators . The reporting narrator is involved in examples
( 35 ) and ( 36) ( the former is the introductory sentence of the story and the
latter is its concluding sentence ) . The reported narrators , on the other hand ,
are involved in examples ( 34) and ( 37 ) . That is to say that if I were asked to
lexically fill the frame parts in examples ( 35 ) and ( 36) , we would fill them
with a phrase such as ce te ra saya ( 'story I ' ) meaning roughly 'Thus my story ' ,
and i f I were asked to do the same for examples ( 34 ) and ( 3 7 ) , I would fill them
with a phrase such as ce t e ra o ra n g t ua t u a 'Thus the story of the o ld people ' .
I n other word s , sentences ( 3 5 ) and ( 36 ) are what some people would call the
editorial comments , while sentences ( 34 ) and ( 3 7 ) are part of what is reported
or quoted ; or in terms of level , the former would be called the level above the
story and the latter the level within the story .
The second level , as opposed to the story level or the monologue leve l , is
the dialogue paragraph level , i . e . the level within the story where one finds
verbal interaction between the participants of the story , e . g . :
( 38 ) Ma ka t i t a h b a g i nd a : "Apa yang The king spoke :
conn . speech his majesty : What rel . pron . "What were these
dogs barking at ? "
d i = s a l ak o l e h anj i n g i t u ? "
pt . foc . =bark by dog that

( 39 ) Maka semb a h me reka s e ka l i an i t u : They / rep lied

conn . obeisance they all that respectfu l ly : "Hail
my Lord. we beg your
" Da u l a t Tuan=k u , p a t i k mohon=kan
pardon and grace.
good fortune Lord=my s lave beg=act . foc .
amp u n d a n ka r u n i a . Ada se=eko r There was a
pardon and grace exist one=class
 71

pe l a n d u k p u t i h , b e s a r=nya s e pe r t i white mousedeer the

mousedeer white big=it/the as size of a goat, and
its body had a
kamb i n g , wa rna t u b uh=nya g i l a n g - gem i l a n g .
luminous sheen.
goat colour body=it/the glittering
I t u= l a h yang d i =hamb a t o l eh That was what the
That=CM rel . pron . pt . foc . pursue by
= dogs were pursuing;
but the mousedeer
anj i ng i n i . Ma ka p e l a n d u k i t u p u n
has vanished on
dog this Conn . mousedeer that TM
this beach here . /I
l e nyap= l a h pada pan t a i i n i . "
disappear=cM at beach this
Both sentences ( 38) and ( 39 ) constitute the d ialogue paragraph referred to
above . These two sentences are made up of the same basic structure that sen­
tences ( 3 1) and ( 32 ) are built around . S entences ( 31) and ( 32 ) are actually
part of other dialogue paragraphs in the text . So is sentence ( 3 3) . Actual ly ,
sentence ( 3 3) is part of the dialogue paragraph expressed by sentences ( 38) and
( 39 ) above . It is part of the content part of the Preframe-Frame-Content struc­
ture which consists of four sentences and is the third sentence of this part .
It should be made clear that there are two kinds of endocentric relations
in the Preframe-Frame-Content structure . The first one , on a higher level
(whatever name one would give this level ) , is the Frame-Content relation which ,
in terms of speech act , has a role relation of Reporting-Reported as mentioned
above . In terms of the inherent nature of the parts themselves the frame and
the content parts may be viewed as having a role relat ion of Generic-Speci fic .
That is to say that the speech of the speaker may manifest specifically in the
form of a command , an assertion , a request , a question ( see example ( 38 » , or
in the form of a word , a clause , a sentence ( see examples ( 31 ) , ( 32 ) , ( 38» , a
sentence cluster ( example ( 39 » , a paragraph or a whole discourse .
The second kind of relat ion , on the phrase level , occurs within the frame
part o f the construction , e . g . t i ta h bag i nda ' the speech of the King ' in example
( 3 2 ) . Now, in terms of slot relation , t i t a h is the head and bag i nda is the
modifier; in terms of role relation t i ta h is the possessed and bag i n d a is the
pos sessor (or the possessing constituent) .
In discussing the story level above , I stated that sentences ( 35 ) and ( 36 )
are respectively the introductory and the concluding sentences of the story . I
stated also that some people call them editorial comments . Now in a certain
sense these two sentences put some kind of quotation marks around the story .
Hence the structure that the whole story is made up of could be conceived as
consisting of Frame ( introductory sentence) , content ( s tory proper ) , and Frame
( concluding sentence ) . In other words the structure of the story as a whole is
a non-context free variant of the Frame-Content structure . That is to say that
whenever the form of a discourse or a text is a monologue the structure that one
would get is generally Frame-Content-Frame , whereas whenever the form of it is a
dialogue the structure that one would get is generally Frame-Content .
In terms of how the message was communicated , there are two kinds of Frame­
Content constructions : the direct and the indirect types . The direct type is
illustrated clearly in examples ( 31) and ( 32 ) . Example ( 3 3 ) is also an illustra­
tion of the direct type and can clearly be seen in example ( 39 ) . Examples ( 34 )
through ( 3 7 ) are also other illustrations o f the direct type . However , they
seem not to make sense , because they are li sted here out of context. That is
to say that sentences ( 3 4 ) and ( 37 ) will only make sense when they are seen as
72

part of the direct speech of the reported narrators in their act of telling the
story and sentences ( 35 ) and ( 36) will too , when they are seen as part of the
direct speech of the reporting narrator in his act of retelling the story as
told by the reported narrators .
The indirect type is illustrated within example ( 34 ) : syahdan is the pre­
frame , kebanyakan k a t a o ra n g is the frame and nama nege r i i t u men g i ku t n ama
o ra n g yang me rawa i t u l ah is the content . Following are four other examples
( 40-4 3) from the text as illustration ; interspersed with discussion of each
example .

PREFRAME FRAME CONTENT FRAME GLOSS

( 40 ) A k u denga r p e rb u ruan konon I have heard re-

I hear hun ting game report ports that the game
say near the seashore
khaba r= nya sebe l a h t e p i l a u t
is alJundant indeed.
report=the side shore sea
i t u t e r l a l u banyak
that very many

Note that sentence ( 40 ) , when Seen in a bigger context , is a direct reported

content part of the Preframe-Frame-Content construction maka t i t a h b a g i nd a : Aku
denga r khaba rnya p e rb u ruan sebe l a h tep i l a u t i t u t e r l a l u banya k kon on . In other
words sentence ( 40 ) is an example of an indirect speech embedded within a direct
one . Note , furthermore , that it is the only example on the sentence level that
has the structure Frame-Content-Frame . Thi s structure gives sentence ( 4 0 ) a
certain sense of closure j ust as the one that the concluding sentence ( example
( 36 » gives to the story as a unit of discourse . Their difference is that the
former operates on the sentence level , and the latter on the discourse level .
In terms of funct ion slot , a ku is the subject , denga r is the predicate , and
khab a rnya p e rb u ruan sebe l a h tep i l a u t i t u te r l a l u banyak konon is the direct
obj ect . Note that khaba rnya basically has the same meaning as konon . Hence
there is a redundancy here . This redundancy is a gramma tical as wel l as a sem­
antic device to foreground the content message p e rb u r ua n s eb e l ah t e p i l a u t i t u
t e r l a l u ba nya k . The foregrounding has a correlation with the form denga r , i . e .
because o f i t the ' verb ' den g a r doesn ' t take the agent focus marker meN - . In
other words , the agent is defocussed for the sake of foregrounding the patient
or the content message . Hence , the foregrounding is motivated by two factors :
the absence of meN - in denga r and the occurrence of Frame twice ( khaba rnya and
kon o n ) .

PREFRAME FRAME CONTENT GLOSS

( 4 1) . . . serta men i t a h ka n me l epaskan and gave orders

and ag . foc . =speak= ag . foc . =re lease=act. foc . to release his
act . foc . own dogs .
anj i ng p e r b u ruan
meny u r u h
dog hunting
ag . foc . =order
bag i n d a sen d i r i i t u
king self that
 73

Example ( 41) is actually the elaboration structure of the p u n - l a h con­

struction as illustrated in example ( 12 ) . Notice that there are three different
clauses in this construct ion . The first one has the predicate men i ta h kan 'speak ' ,
the second one has the predicate men y u ruh ' order ' or ' command ' and the third has
the predicate me l e p a s ka n 're lease ' and the direct obj ect a n j i n g pe r b u r ua n bag i nda
send i r i i t u 'his (the king 's) own hunting dogs ' . Notice the progression of gen­
eric to specific expressed in these predicates : men i t a h k a n is a generic speech
act performed by the topic participant bag i n da ' the king ' , men y u r u h is a specific
speech act , i . e . the illocutionary force of the generic speech act , and me l e p a s ka n
anj i n g p e r b u ruan bag i nda sen d i r i i t u i s the specification on the content o f the
command meny u ruh . Notice also that the agent of the frame predicates men i t a hkan
and meny u r u h is b a g i n d a , whereas the agent of the content predicate me l epas kan
is o ra n g 'peop le ' , which is made explicit in the sentence fol lowing this one
where men i t a h kan , men y u r u h and me l e p a s kan occur . The sentence referred to is
as follows :
Ma ka anJ l ng i t u p u n d i = l epas=kan So the dogs
conn . dog that TM pt. foc . =re lease=act . foc . were released by
the people.
o ra n g= l ah
person=CM

PREFRAME FRAME CONTENT GLOSS

( 4 2 ) maka t i tah bag i nda d a r i ma na d a t a n g The King then gave

conn . speech king from where come orders to ask these
o ld peop le where
s u r uh b e r t anya nya maka i a d u d u k
they had come from
order ask he conn . he reside
and settled in this
kepada o ra n g kema r i I n I dan p lace, and what
to person hither this and their origin was .
t ua i t u o ra n g mana a s a l nya
o l d that person where origin
the

The Frame part o f example ( 4 2 ) has three speech acts : the generic speech
act t i t a h bag i nda 'the speech of the King ' , the speci fic speech act s u r u h 'com­
mand ' which is the speci ficat ion or the il locutionary force of the former , and
the speci fic speech act b e r t a nya 'ask ' . Note that the agent o f the first two
speech acts , t i t a h and s u r uh is bag i nda ' the King ' and the agent of the last
speech act is hamba raj a 'King ' s servant ' which is expl icitly stated in the
sentence following ( 4 2 ) in the text :
Maka hamba raj a i t u p u n men= j unj ung=kan The king ' s servants
conn . servant king that TM ag . foc . =carry on respectfu l ly trans-
the head=act . foc . mit ted the king 's
t i ta h b a g i nda kepada o ra n g t u a i t u words to the o ld
speech his majesty to person o ld that peop le .
In other words , h amba raj a is the patient ob j ect of the command s u r uh and is
the agent of the question speech act implied in the predicate b e r t a nya . This
implies that there are two kinds of content : the content of the command of the
King and the content o f the question of the King ' s servant.
From these two examples , (42) and ( 4 2 ) , we infer that the difference
between a direct Frame-Content structure and an indirect one is not only a matter
74

of the presence or the absence of quotation marks , but it involves more than
thi s . The indirect Frame-Content structure tends to be more elaborate than the
direct one . That is to say that the indirect type usually expresses all the
speech acts explicitly in terms of the range of their generality to the range of
the spec i ficity , e . g . men i t a h ka n is generic , meny u r uh i s specific , me l e p a s k a n is
more spe c i fi c ; and t i ta h i s generic , s u r u h is specific and b e r t anya is more
speci fic . And it usually involves more than one speech act participant , e . g .
bag i n d a ' the King ' and o r a n g 'peop le ' in example ( 4 1 ) , and b a g i nd a , h amba raj a
'king 's servant ' and o ra n g t ua ' o ld people ' in example ( 4 2 ) . The direct Frame­
Content structure , on the other hand , has the generic speech act explicitly
stated in the Frame part, e . g. t i ta h b a g i nda in ( 3 8) , and semb a h mereka s e ka l i a n
i t u in ( 39 ) , and the specific speech act implied in the content part , e . g . the
content part of example ( 3 8 ) is a que stion although there is no such word as
be r t a ny a 'ask ' in it , and the content of example ( 3 1) is a command without
having an explicit word such as s u r uh ' aommand ' or 'order ' .

PREFRAME FRAME CONTENT GLOSS

( 43 ) b a hwa s e s un g- kata kami n ama nege r i i tu In aatual faat

g uh n ya seka 1 i an ncune sett lement that the ncune of the
truly (presupposed) sett lement der-
meng i ku t sembah o ra n g
ived from the
fo l low worship people
words whiah the
men ga t akan pe l a n d u k peop le used
say mousedeer when reporting
the disappear-
l enyap i tu
anae of the
disappear that
mousedeer.

The Frame part of example ( 4 3 ) is presupposed. If it is stated explicitly ,

it would refer to the speech o f the reported old narrators and would probably
take a form such as k a t a kami s e ka l i a n 'our speeah ' . Note that this sentence
forms the antithesis of the statement made in ( 4 4 ) :

PREFRAME FRAME CONTENT GLOSS

( 44 ) s y a h d a n kebanyakan nama n ege r i i tu Mos t peop le say that

conn . most ncune sett lement that the settlement Was
ncuned after the prawn-
ka t a o ra n g men g i k u t n ama o ra n g
fisherman.
speeah person fo l low ncune person
yang me rawa
re l . pron. aatah prawn
i tu l ah
that CM

which , in the text , comes before example ( 4 3 ) .

To sum up the types of Frame-Content construction that are di scussed above ,
consider d isplay 3 . 6 . 4 .
 75

Di s p l ay 3. 6. 4. Frame- content con s tructi on s

TYPES FEATURES EXAMPLES

A : IN TERMS OF SPEECH MADE

l . Direct - has the generic speech act explicity stated ( 3 1) , ( 38 )

i n the Frame part and the specific speech
act implied in the Content part
- has clear distinction between Frame and
Content parts , signalled by the colon and
quotation marks in writing and by a j unc-
ture in speech
- has no speech act verb chain movi�g from
generality to specificity

2 . Indirect - has neither quotation marks nor colon ( 4 1) , ( 4 2 )

- no distinctive j uncture between Frame and
Content parts
- usually expresses all speech acts explic-
itly , moving from generality to specificity
- usually involves more than one speech act
participant , i . e . more than one agent .

B: IN TERMS OF LEVEL

l . Dialogue -
is open-ended , i . e . has the structure of ( 31) I ( 38) I ( 39 )
Frame-Content ( FC )

2 . Monologue - has a sense of completeness , i . e . Introductory sentence

( S tory) has the structure of Frame- ( 35 ) + Story proper +
Content-Frame (FCF) Concluding sentence
( 36 ) , taken as a unit;
and example ( 40 ) . 3 9

3.6.3. - La h constru c t i ons

I n this construction the information that has not been introduced before
in the text gets specified. That is to say that in it one finds new information
which is marked by the comment marker - l a h . Sentences ( 31 - 3 7 ) are presented
again as examples of - l ah construction and not of Frame-Content construction ,
together with ( 4 5 ) and ( 46 ) below :
( 31 ) Maka t i t a h Paya T u N a q p a : " J i ka l a u Paya Tu Nakpa then
conn . speech Paya Tu Naqpa : if spoke : "In that case
cal l up a l l Our peop le .
dem i =k i an ke rah=kan= l ah sega l a r a ' ya t
Tomorrow We sha l l go
like--that summon=act . foc . =CM a l l people
hunting a long the
k i ta o E s ok h a r i k i ta hendak pe rg i sea-shore . "
I tomorrow day I intend go
b e r b u r u ke t e p i l a u t i tu . "
hunt to s hore sea that
76

( 3 2 ) Maka t i tah bag i nd a : " Sa i k= J ah esok The king spoke : "Good,

conn . speeah his majesty goOd=CM tomo�row let Us go hunting
pag i - pag i e�ly tomo��ow
k i ta b e r b u r u . "
morning . "
morning-morning I/we hunt

( 3 3 ) I t u= J ah yang d i =hamb a t o J eh That was what the

That=CM rel . pron . pt. foc . =pu�sue by dogs we�e �suing;
anj i ng i n i .
dog this

( 34 ) Syahdan kebanyak a n k a t a o rang nama FU�the�o�e (and note

COnn . most speeah pe�son name this) most people say
that the sett lement was
nege r i i tu men g= i ku t n ama
named afte� the p�awn­
sett lement that ag . foc . =fo l l ow name
fishe�an.
o rang yang me= rawa i t u= J ah
pe�son rel . pron . ag . foc . =aatah p�awn that=CM

( 3 5 ) In i = J ah s ua t u k i s s a h yang This is a story whiah

ThiS=CM a story rel . pron . has been o ld by the o ld
peop l e : the o�gin of
d i =ce t e ra=kan o J e h o rang
the king who founded
pt . foc . =te l l =act . foc . by pe�son
the sett lement of Patani,
t ua - t ua , a s a J raj a yang b e r b ua t the Abode of Peaae.
o ld-o ld, o�igin king rel . pron . make
nege r i P a t a n i D a r u s s a J am i tu
settlement Patani Abode of Peaae that

( 36 ) Dem i = k i a n = J a h h i kaya t =n y a That was the story .

like=that=CM story=the

( 37 ) Dan ] p a n g ka J a n i t u= J a h t empa t E n c i k And that landing stage

And landing stage that=cM plaae Enaik was the p laae whe�e
Enaik Tani used to go up
T a n i n a i k t u ru n me= rawa
and down aatahing p�awns
Tani go up down ag . foc . =aatah p�s
and setting sn�es .

( 4 5 ) Maka s embah sega J a men te r i : The ministe�s �ep lied

conn . obeisanae a l l ministe�: �espeatfu l ly : "Hai l
my Lo�d, it is t�e
" Da u J a t Tuan=k u , s un g g u h= J ah s e p e r t i
indeed as You� Majesty
good fo�tune Lo�d=my t�e=CM like
has spoken;
t i tah DuJ i Ya ng Ma h a=m u J i a
speeah dust of the feet the most- -nob le

( 46) H a t t a ada s e k i ra- k i ra d u a [ d u ] j am Then, afte� about two

Conn . exist about two ho� ho�s, the sound of
the dogs ' ba�king
J ama=nya maka be rb uny i s u a ra anj i ng
Was he�d.
long=the conn . sound voiae dog
i t u me=nya J a k
that ag. foc . =ba�k
 77

The newne ss o f the information i n a l l these examples generally operates o n two

levels : the content level and the metalevel . By content level I mean the level
where the utterance or the sentence means exactly what it says or expresses . By
the metalevel I mean the level where the utterance may mean something other than
what it says , i . e . the illocutionary force of the speech act . In example ( 3 1)
the in formation that i s new is the command as the illocutionary force as well as
the content of the command expressed in k e r a h kan l a h sega l a ra ' ya t k i ta . In
example ( 32 ) , the act of agreeing as wel l as the content of this act as expressed
in ba i k l ah �sok pag i - pag i k i ta b e r b u ru is the new information . In example ( 3 3)
since i tu i s anaphoric it means that the information it refers back to , i . e . Ada
seeko r pe l a n d u k p u t i h , b e s a rnya s e p e r t i kamb i n g wa r n a t ub uh n y a g i l an g gem i l an g
'There Was a white mousedeer, the size of a goat, and the co lour o f i t s body was
glittering ' , i s new ( see examples ( 38) , ( 39 » . Example ( 3 3 ) itse l f , as a speech
act of concluding , is also new information. In example ( 34 ) , the act of quoting
other people as expressed by the content nama nege r i i t u meng i ku t n ama o ra n g
y a n g me rawa i t u l ah is the new information . The content itself might b e new to
the audience . In example ( 35 ) , s ince i n i is cataphori c , it means that the in­
formation it refers to , i . e . s ua t u k i s s a h y a n g d i cet e ra ka n o l e h o r a n g t ua- t ua ,
a s a l raj a y a n g be r b u a t nege r i P a t a n i Da r u s s a l am i t u its instantiation in the
story proper , by implication , are what are new . Beside s this , the speech act of
announcing or introducing as expressed mainly by i n i is also new information .
In example ( 36) d em i k i an is anaphori c of the story proper as the new information .
In addition to this , the speech act of concluding as expres sed by this example
i s also new information . In example ( 3 7 ) the modifier i t u of pangka l a n i t u is
anaphoric of A ra k i an pan gka l a n yang d i t empa t pe l a n d u k p u t i h l enyap i t u 'As for
the landing stage on the spot where the white mousedeer had disappeared ' as toP.
new info rmation . The speech act of concluding as expressed in this example i s
also new information . In example ( 4 5 ) the information that is new is the speech
act of confirming as well as the content of the confirmation as expres sed in
s un gg uh l a h s e pe r t i t i t a h D u l i Yang Mahamu l i a . In example ( 4 6 ) the information
that i s new is b e r b u ny i l ah s u a ra anj i n g i t u menya l a k . Note that on the metalevel
this in formation is part of the story proper , i . e . the act of telling the story ,
as the new in formation .
Note that examples ( 3 1-37) , as stated be fore in section 3 . 6 . 2 . , have the
structure of Preframe-Frame-Content in reduced as well as in complete forms .
Example ( 4 5 ) i s a complete form of the same structure . Example ( 4 6 ) , however ,
looks l ike a pun - l ah construct ion . That is to say that it has a precore : H a t ta
ada se k i ra- k i ra d ua j am l amanya , a core be r b u ny i l a h and an elaboration s ua ra
anj i ng i t u menya I a k . Note however that the core doesn ' t have any p u n constitn·­
ent . Thi s i s probably due to the fact that it is not relevant here . What is
relevant in this sentence i s s ua ra a nj i ng i t u ' the voice of the dogs ' which gets
speci fied in b e r b u ny i l a h 'sound ' as the new information , and not a nj i ng i t u ' the
dogs ' which is the p u n constituent in the sentence Maka anj i ng i t u pun d i l epa s kan
o ran g l ah ' the dogs were released by the peop le ' , which i s the sentence that pre­
cedes example ( 46 ) in the text .
Note that all the examples above that have anaphoric and cataphoric defin­
ite articles have a core part and an elaboration part . The core parts don ' t
have any pun constituen t . They only have - l a h constituents , e . g . i t u l a h in
example ( 3 3) , i n i l a h in example ( 35 ) , dem i k i a n l a h in example ( 36 ) , pangka l an
i t u l ah in example ( 37 ) . Thi s is due to the fact that i n i ' this ' is textually
pointing- forward-to in its nature , while i t u 'that ' and dem i k i an ' like that ' or
' t hus ' are textually pointing-backwards-to . In other words , the topics that are
being commented upon by these examples either precede or follow them. Now these
topics may take the form of nouns or noun phrases , e . g . s ua t u k i s s a h yang
78

d i c e t e rakan o l �h o ra n g t ua - t u a , a s a l raj a y a n g b e r b u a t nege r i P a t a n i D a r u s s a l am

i t u in example ( 35 ) . They may take the form of sentence s , e . g . Ada seeko r
pe l a n d u k p u t i h , b e s a r nya sepe r t i kamb i ng , wa r n a t ub uhnya g i l a n g gem i l an g ' There
was a mousedeer, the size of a goat, and the colour of its body was glittering '
which precedes example ( 3 3 ) in the text . They may take the form of paragraphs
or whole discourse s , e . g . the story proper which precedes example ( 36) in the
text . They usually do not have any p u n marker. This is probably due to the fact
that they are new topics and not old ones . The newness of these topics can be
seen in words like seeko r 'a ' , an inde finite article plus class i fier for animate
non-human nouns , in the sentence prior to example ( 3 3) in the text , and s ua t u
'a ' , an indefinite article for inanimate nouns , ifi example ( 35) . Hence , we infer
that there are two kinds of topic : new and old. The former is not marked with
p u n and is viewed as new in formation , the latter is marked with p u n and is viewed
as old information . To prove this point , note that preceding example ( 33 ) in the
text is the new topic sentence Ada seeko r pe l a n d u k p u t i h , b es a r nya s e pe r t i
kamb i ng , wa r n a t ub u h nya g i l an g gem i l a n g and following it is the pun� l a h sentence
Maka pe l a n d uk i t u p u n l enyap l a h pada p a n t a i i n i ( see examples ( 38) and ( 39 } ) .
In summary , we may infer that - l ah constructions , especially the ones that
have anaphoric deictic particle i t u , dem i k i a n and cataphoric deictic particle
I n l , are sentences that foreground both topics and comments as new information
and thi s is done by means of two sentences or two text units that may belong to
different hierarchical levels as has been illustrated above . P u n - l ah construc­
tions , in the l ight of this , may be viewed as sentences that foreground old
topics and old in formation only in terms of their comments which are the con­
stituents that carry new informat ion .
Furthermore , - l ah constructions are sentences that contain new information
on the content level and on the metalevel signalled by the comment marking
particle - l ah .

3.6.4 . Other con struct i o n s

I n this sect ion I will discuss sentences that we have not described yet in
the three construct ion type s discussed above .
( 4 7 ) Ia mecn a mac i d i r i cnya Paya T u Naqpa He cal led himself
He ag . foc . =name=al l t . se lf=he Paya Tu Naqpa Phaya Tu Nakpa.

( 48) S e l ama Paya Tu N a q pa k e r a j a a n i tu During his reign

During Paya Tu Naqpa become king that Phaya Tu Nakpa Was
accustomed a lways
s en t i a s a i a p e r g i b e r b u r u
to go hunting.
a lways he go hunt
Note that there are no p u n and - l ah enclitics in these sentences . I f we
examine carefully the b igger context where they occur in the HP text , however ,
we see that both sentences occur one after the other according to the order they
are presented here after the following pun- l a h construction. (Note : examples
( 4 7 ) and ( 4 8 ) occur after example ( 49 ) in the text . )
( 4 9 ) S y a h d a n maka Paya Tu An t a r a p u n Then Phaya Tu Antara
conn . conn . Paya T u Antara TM became king,
succeeding his
ke raj aanc l ah mengcga n t i =kan
father.
become king=cM ag . foc . =succeed=act . foc .
 79

ayahanda b a g i n da i tu
father his majesty that
It seems to us that both these sentences are part of the elaboration part of
example ( 4 9 ) , i . e . mengga n t i ka n ayahanda b a g i nda i t u . In other words , the elab­
oration part of example ( 49 ) includes the sentences that are presented in example�
( 4 7 ) and (48) . One proof why thi s is so is the fact that there are no pun and
- I a h constituents in these sentences and the fact that the predicate in ( 47 ) i s
a meN - verb which is a feature of the elaboration part of a pun- I a h construction
( see display 3 . 6 . 3 . ) . Note that example ( 48) differs from example ( 47 ) in the
fact that it has a connective clause Se l ama Paya Tu N a q pa ke raj a a n i t u and it
has an affixless and a ber-verb which is characteristic of either an elaboration
or a p u n - I ah structure . Note also that both examples have explicit free syntac­
tic subj ect i a 'he ' which is characteristic of the core structure in a p u n - I a h
construction ( see display 3 . 6 . 2 . ) . In other words , there is a merging or an
overlap here between an elaboration part of a p u n - I a h construction and some of
the features that occur in a precore and a core part of a p u n - I ah construct ion .
This might be due to the fact that both these examples are transition sentences
between a p u n - I ah construction and a p u n variant of the p u n - I ah construction type .
It might also be due to the fact that example ( 4 8 ) is a further elaboration or
specification of the name Paya Tu Naqpa 'man of the forest ' in example ( 47 ) .
However , in relat ion to the rest of the story , except the concluding sentence
Dem i k i a n l ah h i kaya t nya 'That was the story ' , it forms a generic sentence . That
is to say that the rest of the story is a specific account of the habitual act
of the King as given in the generic sentence ( 4 8 ) .
Just l ike examples ( 4 7 ) and ( 48) , example ( 5 0 ) be low is also a transition
construction which shares both the features of a p u n - I a h structure and the
features of an elaboration structure . That is to say , it has an expl icit frep.
syntactic sub ject , s ee k o r p e r b u ruan 'one anima l ' , and a d i - verb d i pe ro l eh 'ob­
tained ' , wh ich are features of a p u n - I a h structure , and that it does not have
any p u n and - I a h constituents which is characteristic of an elaboration structure .
( 50 ) s e=e ko r p e rb u r ua n t i a da d i =p e ro l e h not one animal was
one=class . game not pt . foc . obtain
= obtained.
Example ( 50 ) is a transition between the following two pun- I ah constructions .
Maka sega l a ra ' ya t p u n ma s u k l a h keda l am h u ta n i t u menga l a u - a l a u
sega l a p e rb u ruan i t u da r i pag i - pag i h i ngga d a t a n g nge l i nc i r m a t a h a r i
'A l l the people went into the wood beating the game from early
morning unti l the sun began to decline '
and
Maka b a g i n d a p un ama t h a i r a n l ah s e r t a men i t a h k a n meny u ru h me l e p a s k a n
anj i n g perbu ruan bag i nda send i r i i t u . ' The King was greatly astonished
and gave orders to re lease his own hunting dogs . '
In summary , other constructions are transition sentences (or constructions)
that occur between two p u n - I ah constructions or between a p u n - I ah construction
and a p u n variant of the p un - I ah construction type. That is to say they have
meN-ve rb s , which is a feature of the elaboration part ; they have affix- less and
be r-verbs , which are features of the core ; they have explicit free syntactic
sub j e cts , which is characte ristic of the core ; they have a connective clause ,
which is characteristic of the precore ; however they do not have any p u n and
any - I a h constituent .
80

3. 6. 5. Embedded structures
In this section we will discuss two kinds of embedded structures : 4 0 1 ) the
marked embedded structure , and 2 ) the unmarked embedded structure . The first
type may be called the y a n g - embedded structure , because it is marked by the
relative pronoun yan g . 4

3 . 6. 5 . 1 . Yang-embedded s tructure
Following are all the sentences that contain the y a n g- embedded �tructures
in our text :
( 51 ) Maka t i t a h bag i nd a : " Apa y a n g The king spoke :
conn . speech his majesty : What rel . pron . "What were these
dogs barking at ? "
d i -sa l ak o l �h a nj i n g i t u 7 "
pt . foc . =bark by dog that

( 5 2 ) I t u- l ah yang d i -hamba t o l �h That was what the

That=CM rel . pron . pt . foc . =pursue by dogs were pursuing;
a n j i ng i n i .
dog this

( 5 3 ) Ma k a b a g i n da pun p i n da h h i l i r The king moved

conn . his majesty TM move go downstream downstream and
resided in the newly
d ud u k pada n ege r i yang
made sett lement�
reside at sett lement rel . pron .
d i -p e rb uat i tu ,
pt . foc . =make that

( 5 4 ) In i - l ah s ua t u k i s s a h y a n g This is a s tory which

This=cM a story rel . pron . has been to ld by the
o ld peop le : the
d i -cete ra-kan o l eh o ra n g
origin of the king
pt . foc . =te l l=act . foc . by person
who founded the
t ua - t u a , a s a l raj a y a n g berbuat sett lement of
o ld-old� origin king rel . pron . make Patani� the Abode
of Peace .
n e ge r i P a t a n i Da r u s s a l am i tu
sett lement Patani Abode of Peace that

( 55 ) S e t e l ah b a g i n d a d a t a n g kepada s ua t u When the king

After his majesty come to a arrived at an inlet
of the sea he found
se rokan t a s i k i t u , ma ka b a g i nd a
the men who had gone
inlet sea that� conn . his majesty
wi th the dogs.
p u n b e r t em u- l ah dengan s ega l a o ra n g
T M find=cM with all person
yang me-n u r u t anj i ng i t u
rel . pron . ag . foc . =go with dog that
 81

( S6 ) Syahdan kebanyakan k a t a o ra n g n a ma Furthermore (and note

conn . most speech person name this) most people say
that the sett lement
n ege r i i t u menga i ku t n ama
Was named after the
sett lement that ag . foc . =fo llow name
prawn-fisherman .
o ra n g yang mea rawa
person re l . pron . ag. foc . = c atch prawn that=CM

( S 7 ) A ra k i an p a n g ka l a n yang d i = t empa t Hence the landing­

Conn. landing s tage re l . pron . in=place s tage on the spot
where the white mouse­
p e l a n d u k p u t i h l en y a p i tu
deer had disappeared,
mousedeer white disappear that
Let us examine the first four yang embedded structures , i . e .
( S la) Apa y a n g d i s a l a k o l � h a n j i ng i tu 7
( S2a) I t u l a h y a n g d i hamb a t o l eh a nj i ng i n i
( S 3a) nege r i yang d i p e r b u a t i t u
( S4a) s ua t u k i s s a h y a n g d i ce t e rakan o l eh o ra n g t ua- t u a
For the sake of clarity and t o see their minute differences , we w i l l present
them in four different tree diagrams (displays 3 . 6 . S . - 3 . 6 . 8 . ) . 4 2 It should be
noted that in the tree structures displayed the relative pronoun yang is ana­
phoric of the patient which may or may not be explicitly present preceding the
nominal clause .
In examples ( S4b-S7a) we will see that the relative pronoun yang is also
anaphoric of constituents that are agent and locative , i . e . those that do not
take patient focus verbal prefix d i - :
( S4b ) raj a y a n g b e r b u a t nege r i P a t a n i Da r u s s a l am i t u
( SSa) sega l a o ra n g y a n g men u r u t a n j i ng i t u
( S6a) o ra n g y a n g m e r awa i t u
( S7a) p a n g ka l an yang d i temp a t pe l a n d u k p u t i h l enyap i t u
82

Di s p l ay 3 . 6. 5 . T ree d i a g ram
( S la) Apa y a n g d i sa l a k o l eh a n j i ng i t u ?
Content Reported Sp . S

Reported

TM N (Q . Part . ) M Nom . Cl .

defined defining
Pt.
apa
2: Re l . Pron . Pred. V Adj n . PP

Pt. anaphoric de foc . Ag .

of TH def . Act

3rd TM'
pers . pt .
pron . foe . Rt .
I I I
ia -n g di- s a l ak
D Prep . A NP

Ag . m . Ag .

De f .
H N M Art.

defined defining

anj i ng i tu
Di s p l ay 3. 6. 6. Tree d i ag ram
( S2a) I t u l ah yang d i hamb a t o l eh anj i n g i n i

C S

Concl .

TH - I ah const . ( NPl M Nom. CI .

defined Pt. defining

H ( Pron . NT) Def . Art . M . Encl . Part. E Rel . Pron . Pred. V Adj n . PP

Pro . Pt . Anaphoric CM Pt . anaphoric de foc ' Ag .

Ac t
of TH def . •

( s ee ko r
i tu - I ah pe 1 a n d u k)

3rd
per s .
pron . TM ' foc . Rt . D Prep. A N
I I I I
ia -n g di- hambat Ag . m . Ag .

o l eh

H N M DeL Art.

defined defining

a n j i ng ini

(Xl
w
84

Di spl ay 3. 6 . 7 . T ree di ag ram

( 5 3a) . . . nege r i yang d i p e rb ua t i t u .

A NP

Loc .

H NP M Def . Ar t .

defined defining

i tu
TH N M Nom . Cl .

defined Pt . defining

n ege r i

E Rel . Pron . Pred . V

Pt . anaphoric defoc·
Ac t
of TH def . •

3rd
pers . caus .
pron . TM' Pt . foc . per f . Rt .
I I I I I
ia -ng di- per- buat
Di spl ay 3.6. 8 . Tree d i ag ram
( 54a) s u a t u k i s s a h yang d i cet e rakan o l �h o rang t ua - t ua

NT NP

announced
Elab .

TH NP M Nom . C I .

defined defining
Pt .

M Inde f . Art . H N Rel . Pron . Pred . v Adj n . PP

defining defined Pt . anaphoric defoc ' Ag .

Ac t .
of TH def .
s ua t u k i s sa h

D Prep . A NP

Ag . m . Ag .
pron . TM ' Pt . Foc . Rt . Act . Fo c .
I I I I I
ia - ng di- ce t e ra - ka n 01 h

H N M Adj .

defined defining

o ra n g t ua - t ua
())
V1
Di spl ay 3. 6.9. Tree d i ag ram
( 54b) . . . raj a yang be r b u a t nege r i P a t a n i D a r u s s a l am i t u

M NP

Possessing

TH NP M Nom . Cl .

defined defining
Ag .
raj a
Rel . Pron . Pred . V o NP

Ag . anaphoric indef . Pt .
of TH art .

3rd . pers . gen . inde f . H NP M Def . Ar t .

pron . TM ' vb . pref . Rt .
I I I I defined defining
ia - ng ber- b ua t
i tu

H N M Prop . N

defined defining

nege r i P a t a n i Da r u s sa l am
Di spl ay 3.6. 10 . Tree d i ag ram
( 55a) . . sega l a o ra n g yang men u ru t anj i ng i t u
.

A NP

TH NP M Nom . Cl .

de fined Ag .

M Adj . H N Rel . Pron . o NP

quantifier quanti fied Ag . anaphoric Pt.

of TH
sega l a o rang

H N M Def . Art.

pron . TM ' ag . foc . Rt . defined defining

I I I I
ia -n g meN - turut a n j i ng i tu

CD
-.J
88

Di s p l ay 3 . 6.1 1 . T ree d i ag ram

( 56a) o ra n g yang me rawa i tu

H NP

H NP M Def . Art.

defined defining anaphoric

i tu
TIl N M Nom . Cl .

defined de fining
Ag .

o rang
L Rel . Pron . Pre d . V

Ag . anaphoric def . Ac t .
of TIl

3rd . pers .
pron . TM ' ag . foc . Rt .
I I I I
ia -ng meN - rawa
 89

D i s p l ay 3 . 6 . 1 2 . Tree d i agram
(57a) . . . pangka l an yang d i t empa t pe l a n d u k p u t i h l en y a p i tu

NP

TH N M NP

defined
loc o
pangka l an
H Rel . Pron .

defined anaphoric
of TH

3rd . pers . 0 Prep . A NP

pron . TM '
.l 1a I Loc . TM Location
-ng
d i-

Oef . Art.

H N M Cl .

defined defining

t empa t

Adj .

J enyap

H N M Adj .

defined defining

pe l a n d u k put i h
90

The basic pattern that each o f these yang embedded structures have in
3
common may be described in formulas 4 as follows :

{ NP }
TH M{ Nom . Cl . }

{ }
-l ah Const. ( ProNP) NP
Y a n g Embedded Str . + -------r-
Pt. Defining
Defined Ag .
loc o

I { }
ReI . Pron . Pred . Verb

I
Adjn . PP
Nom . Cl . + --------�- +

Pt. defoc . de f . Act Ag .

indef . Act
def . Act

H Rel . Pron . M PP
+
NP --------�--
defined anaphoric defining
of TH

The way to read these formulas is : Yang Embedded Structure is made up of a topic­
ali zed Head (TH) and a modifier (M) . The TH has the role of the defined , which
may be further specified as having the role of patient , or agent or location
depending on i ts relation to the predicate in the Modifier , and in terms of
class it may be either a NP or a -l a h constituent which is actually a proform of
a NP modified by the particle -l ah . The modi fier has the role of the defining
and in terms of class it may be e ither a Nominalized Clause (Nom . Cl . ) or a NP .
The Nominalized Clause is made up of a Subj ect ( E ) and a Predicate (Pred . ) and
an Adjunct ( Adj n . ) . The E , in terms of role , is a patient (pt . ) and in terms
of clas s , is a Relative Pronoun ( Rel . Pron . ) . The Predicate , in terms of role ,
can be a defocussed definite Act d i -Verb (defoc . de f . Act) , or an indefinite Act
be r-Verb ( indef . Act) , or a definite Act meN-Verb . The Adjunct , in terms of role ,
is an Agent and in terms of class , is a Prepositional Phrase ( PP) . The NP i s
made up of a Head (H) and a modifier . The Head , in terms of role , is a defined ,
and , in terms of c las s , is a Relative Pronoun yang ( Rel . Pron . ) . In terms of
cohesion the Relative Pronoun yang is anaphoric of the TH. The part of yang
that i s anaphoric is ya or i a which i s actually the third person pronoun . The
morpheme - n g is the TOpic Marker ( TM ' ) . 4 4 The modifier has the role of defining
and the c lass of prepositional phrase .
From the perspective of the defining modifier , which can be e ither a
Nominal i zed Clause or a NP , the Yang Embedded Structure may be described as an
endocentric construction ( i . e . it has a relation analogous to the Head-Modifier
relation) that consists of either an embedded exocentric structure ( i . e . it has
a relation analogous to a Subject-Predicate relation) or an embedded endocentric
structure .
 91

3 . 6.5.2. Unma rked embedded s t ru cture

Following are the sentences in my text that contain the unmarked embedded
structures :
( 58) Ma ka bag i n da p u n b e r t emu dengan There he found a
conn . his majesty TM find with house where an o ld
coup le lived, catching
secbu a h r umah o ra n g t u a l a k i - b i n i
prawns and setting
one=class house person o ld husband-wife
snares .
d u d u k mec rawa d a n mencj e r a t
reside ag . foc . =catch p rawn and ag . foc . =set snare

( 59 ) H a t t a ada s ek i ra - k i ra d u a [ d u ] j am Then, after about

conn . exist about two hour two hours, the
sound of the dogs '
l ama=nya ma ka b e r b u ny i s u a ra anj i n g
barking was heard.
long=the conn . sound voice dog
i t u me=nya l ak
that ag . foc . =bark

( 60 ) Bahwa s e s u n g uh=nya nama nege r i i tu In actual fact, the

Truly trU ly=the name settlement that name of the sett le­
ment derived from the
meng= i ku t s embah o ra n g
words which the people
ag. foc . =fo l low obeisance person
used when reporting
me=nga ta=kan pe l a n d u k l enyap i tu the disappearance of
ag . foc . =say=ac t . foc . mousedeer disappear that the mousedeer.

( 61) Da n ] pangka l an i tu= l a h t emp a t E nc i k And that landing s tage

And landing s tage that=cM p lace Encik was the p lace where
Encik Tani used to go
T a n i n a i k t u r u n me=r awa
up and down catching
Tani go up down ag . foc . =catch prawns
prawns and setting
snares .

T o examine these unmarked structures , let u s look a t the following sentence

fragments :
( S8a) s e b u a h rumah o rang tua l a k i - b i n i d ud u k me r awa dan menj e ra t
( 59a) maka b e rbuny i l ah s u a ra a n j i ng i t u menya l ak .
( 60a) sembah o rang menga t a k a n pe l a n d u k l enyap i t u .
( 6 1a) t empa t E nc i k T a n i na i k t u ru n me rawa d a n men j e r a t i tu

Let me now present these sentence fragments in the form of tree diagrams
for us to see how the unmarked embedded structures fit within these fragments
(displays 3 . 6 . 13 . -3 . 6 . 16 . ) .
The Unmarked Embedded structure ( UEStr . ) as displayed in ( 58a) ( 3 . 6 . 13 . )
can be described in formulas as :

H NP M Nom . Cl .
+
UES tr . -----+-- ------+----
possessed possessing

Nom . Cl .
�
IL �p
+ p re d .
______-+__
State
VP

and Act
Di s pl ay 3.6. 13. Tree d i ag ram
( S 8a) . . . sebuah r umah o ra n g t u a l ak i - b i n i d u d u k merawa d a n menj e r a t

A NP

H NP M Nom . Cl .

possessed possessing

M Inde f . Art . H N NP Pred. VP

defining defined Ag .
r umah
H M Coord . NP VP
inanimate
classifier defined defining gen . state
I gen .
duduk
se- buah

H N M Ad j . N N V Coord .
Conn .
defined defining def . I
Act dan
o ra n g t ua l ak i bini

Ag . foc . Rt . Ag . foc . Rt .
I I I I
meN- rawa meN - j erat
Di s p l ay 3.6.14 . Tree d i ag ram
( 59a) . . . maka berbuny i l a h s u a ra anj i ng i t u menya l a k

Pre-Core Core - l a h Const . Elab . Cl .

Gen . Spe c . Pt.

Conn . Conn . Cl . Conn. Enc l . Part H N M

Time ESM Inde f . CM defined defining

Duration gen . Act
maka - l ah

Inde f .
act m. Rt .
I I
be r- buny i
H N M Def . Art .

defined defining

Ag . Foc . Rt .
a nj i ng i tu meN- s a l ak

L NP Pred . V
1
Ag . def.
Act

Note that in ( 59a) anJ l ng i tu ' the dog {s) ' Cl.
in relation to s u a ra 'sound ' ( l i terally
'voice ' ) is a defining modifier , while in
relation to menya l ak it is an agent sub j ect. \0
w
94

The Unmarked Embedded Structure which is part of the Elaboration Structure of

( 59a) ( Display 3 . 6 . 14 . ) can be formulated as : " 5

Elab . Str . =
H N
--------+--
defined
+ M
-------+--
defining

H N M Def . Art.
NP =
+
1
defined defining

*+
Pred . V
UEStr . =

Ag . Def . Act

The Unmarked Embedded Structures as displayed in ( 60a) (Display 3 . 6 . 15 . ) and

( 6 1a) ( Di splay 3 . 6 . 16 . ) can be formulated as follows :

UEStr . =

{ defined }
H N
+ { definin� }
M Nom . Cl .

possessed/Gen . SA possess�ng

H Cl . M Def . Art.
Nom . Cl . = +

de fined de fining anaphoric

past m .

*+
Pred .

*
VP
Cl . = ±
Ag . gen . Act Pt.
def . Act/Spec . SA

In conclusion , the Unmarked Embedded Structure is distinguished from the

Y a n g Embedded Structure ( discussed above) by the fact that it does not have any
relative pronoun yan g . From the perspective of its modifier , which has either
the role of defining or possessing , the Unmarked Embedded Structure can be
either a Nominalized Clause or a NP which is actually a merging between a NP
and a Clause ; that is to say the NP , in relation to the defined head Noun that
precedes i t , is a defining modi fier , whereas in relation to the predicate that
comes after i t , is an agent subj ect .
 95

Di s p l ay 3 . 6. 1 5 . Tree d i a gram
( 60a) . . . s embah o ra n g men g a t akan pe l a n d u k l enyap i t u � 6

o NP

Pt.

H N M Nom . Cl .

possessed possessing______
_
_
�
gen . SA
s embah H Cl . M Def . Art .

defined defining anaphoric

past m .
i tu

N o NP

Ag . Pt .

o ra n g

H N M Adj .

Ag . foc . Rt . act . foc. defined defining

I I I
meN - kata - ka n pe l a nd u k l enyap
96

Di s p l ay 3 . 6 . 1 6 . T ree di agram
( 6la) . . . t empa t E n c i k Tan i n a i k t u r un merawa dan menj e r a t i t u

Elab . NP

Spec .

H N M Nom . Cl .

defined defining

temp a t
H Cl . M Def . Art.

de fined de fined past m .

anaphoric
i tu
L: NP

Ag . Pred . VP

gen .
M Addres s Term H Prop . N Act

defining defined

Enc i k Tan i

H Coord . V

gen .
direction
na i k t u r u n
 97

3.6 . 6. S umma ry
In conclusion the following is a summary table with comments of each con­
struction type .

TYPES COMMENTS/FEATURES EXAMPLES

I . pun- l ah - has three parts : Precore
constructions Precore , Core , and I . Syah d a n maka I Paya T u
Elaboration . Core
- Precore and Elabor­ An t a r a p u n k e r a j a a n l ah
ation are structur­ Elaboration
ally optional ; Core mengga n t i ka n ayahanda b a g i n da
is obligatory i tu . 'And Paya Tu Antara
- has two variants : became king succeeding his
p u n - l ah variant and father. '
p u n variant , which Precore Core
is subdivided into 2 . Ma ka I bag i n da p u n p i n d a h I
two subvariants : Elaboration
the subvariant which h i l i r d ud u k pada nege r i yang
has the pun con­ d i p e r b u a t i tu . ' The King
stituent and a - l ah ­ moved downstream (and) re­
less predicate con­ sided in the (newly) bui l t
stituent ; and the sett lement. '
subvariant that has Pre core Core
only the p u n constit­ 3 . Ma ka I b a g i n da p u n I
uent without any Elaboration
-l a h - Iess predicate men i tah ka n o r a ng p e r g i me l i ha t
and hence make the bekas r u s a i t u . ' Then the
elaboration come King ordered men to go back
right after the p u n and look for the tracks of
constituent deer. '

I I . Frame-Content A . In terms of speech Pre frame Frame

constructions mode , can be sub­ I . Ma k a I t i ta h b a g i nd a :
divided into Direct Content
and Indirect sub­ ' Apa yang d i s a l a k o l eh a n j i ng
type s i tu 7 ' ' What were the dogs
I . The Direct subtype : barking at ? ' ( li t . 'The
- has the generic speech speech of the King : "What
act expl icitly stated (was it) that the dogs were
in the frame part and barking at ? '' ' )
the spec ific speech
act implied in the
content part.
- has a c lear d istinc­
tion between Frame and
Content parts : frame
is endocentric in i ts
structure , i . e . it has
a head-modifier rela­
tion and content is
exocentric in its
structure , i . e . it has
a sub j ect-predicate
relation.
98

TYPES COMMENTS/FEATURES EXAMPLES

- has no speech act verb
chain moving from gen­
erality to specificity
2 . The Indirect subtype : Pre frame Frame
- frame has an overlap Ma ka I t i ta h bag i nda s u ruh
of endocentric and exo- b e r tanya kepada o ra n g t u a i t u
centric relations Content
- usually expresses all I d a r i mana d a t a ngnya. ' The
speech acts explic itly King then gave orders to ask
moving from generality these o ld people where they
to specificity had come from and sett led in
- usually involves more this p lace, and what their
than one level of origin was . '
speech act partici­
pants , i . e . more than
one agent.
B . In terms of level , can
be subdivided into :
1 . Dialogue : is open­ Maka t i tah Paya Tu Naqpa :
ended , i . e . has the ' J i ka l a u dem i k i a n ke rah - ka n l ah
structure of Frame­ sega l a ra ' ya t k i ta . ' 'Paya
content ( FC) Tu Naqpa then spoke : "In that
case cal l up a l l our peop le. " ,
2 . Monologue (Story) :
has a sense of com­ Introductory Sentence
pleteness , i . e . has + Story Proper
the structure of + Concluding Sentence

Frame-Content-Frame
( FCF )

I I I . - l ah - contains new inform­ l . Maka t i tah b a g i n da : ' Ba i k l a h

construction ation on the content esok pag i - pag i k i ta be r b u r u ' .
level and on the meta­ 'The King spoke : "Good, let
level s ignalled by us go hunting early tomorrow
the comment marking morning. " ,
particle l ah 2 . It u l ah yang d i hamb a t o l eh
- the ones that have anJ I ng I n l . 'That was what
deictic particles these dogs were pursuing. '
i n i 'this ' , i t u 'that ' ( The new topic referred to by
and dem i k i an ' like thi s l ah construction is in
that ' usually fore­ the form of the sentence :
grounds both topics and Ada s eeko r p e l a n d u k pu t i h
comments as new inform­ b e s a rnya s e pe r t i kamb i ng ,
ation and this is done wa r n a t u b u hnya g i l a ng gem i l a n g .
by means of two sen­ 'There was a mousedeer, the
tences or two text size of a goat, and the color
units that may belong of its body was g littering. '
to different hier­
archical leve l s .
 99

TYPES COMMENTS/FEATURES EXAMPLES

IV . Other These are transition l . la menama i d i r i nya Paya T u
constructions sentences ( construc­ Naqpa. 'He ca l led himse lf
tions) between two Paya Tu Naqpa '
p u n - l a h constructions
2 . Se l ama Paya T u Naqpa ke raj a a n
or between a p u n - l ah
i tu senant i a sa ia perg i
construction and a p u n
berbu r u . 'During the time
variant of the p u n - l a h
he Was king3 Paya Tu Naqpa
construction type . That
was used a lways to go hunting . '
is to say they have meN­
Verbs (elab . ) , they
have affix-less and
b e r-Verbs ( core) , they
have explicit free syn­
tactic sub j ects ( core) ,
they have a connective
clause (precore) , but
they do not have p u n
and -l ah constituents .

V. Embedded are subdivided into raj a yang b e r b u a t n ege r i

structures the Yang Embedded P a t a n i Da r u s s a l am i t u ' tne
Structure and the King who founded the sett le­
Unmarked Embedded ment of Patani, the Abode of
Structure . Peace '
- the Yang Embedded
Structure from the
perspective of its de­
fining modifier can
be either a Nominal­
ized Clause or a NP .
The Nominalized Clause . . . pangka l a n yang d i tempa t
has an exocentric pe l a nd u k p u t i h l enyap i t u
structure , i . e . it ' the landing stage on the spot
has a subj ect-predi­ where the white mousedeer dis­
cate relation . The appeared '
NP has an endocentric
structure , i . e . it has
an attributive or
Head-Modifier relation
- the Unmarked Embedded
Structure is distin­
guished from the Yang
Embedded S tructure by
the fact that it does
not any relative pro­
noun y a n g . From the
perspective of its
modifier , which has
either the role of
defining or possessing ,
the unmarked embedded
structure can be either
100

a Nomina1ized Clause . . . maka b e r b u n y i l a h s u a ra

or a NP which is actu­ a n j i ng i t u menya l a k ' the
ally a merging between sound of the dogs ' barking
a NP and a Clause ; was heard '
that is to say the NP ,
in relation to the
defined head Noun that
precedes it , is a de­
fining modifier , where­
as in relation to the
predicate that comes
after it , it is an
agent subject.

NOTES TO CHAPTE R 3

1. The translation here i s for the most part based on that o f Teeuw and Wyatt .
Where my interpretation of spec ific lexical items differs from theirs I will
use my own translation . Furthermore , the equal sign ( ) is to separate =

morphemes within a word .

2. I do not use the word 'about ' here because I believe that this sentence is
basically a Frame Content construction ( for details see 3 . 6 . 2 . ) , which I
fee l is not clearly reflected by the English ' te l l about ' construction .
That i s , In i l a h s ua t u k i s s ah yang d i c e t e rakan o l eh orang t ua- t u a 'This is
the story whiah has been told by the o ld peop le ' is the frame part, and
a s a l raj a yang b e r b u a t nege r i Pa ta n i Da r u s s a l am i t u ' the origin of the King
who founded the sett lement of Patani, the Abode of Peaae ' is the content
part . It should be noted also that the frame part is a l ah-construction
( for details see 3 . 6 . 3 . ) .
3. Teeuw and Wyatt use the two English words 'hound ' and 'dog ' to translate
a n j i ng . I see no reason for using two terms , therefore I will s imply use
'dog ' .
4. I am using ' the ' here instead o f 'a ' because o f the presence o f the definite
article i t u in its Malay counterpart .
5. A r a k i a n is translated here as 'henae ' and not a s 'as for ' because I believe
that this particle is a conclusion marker ( for details see 3 . 5 . 2 . ) and not
a topic marker .
6. I am using ' that ' here instead o f ' this ' because o f the presence o f i t u in
its Malay counterpart .
7. Syahdan is translated here as 'furthermore ' since it is a coordinate con­
junction that is used for important information in the text ; in this case
it is used for the point of the story ( for details see 3 . 5 . 5 . ) .
8. Dem i k i a n l ah h i kayatnya i s translated a s 'That is the way the story goes '
due to the fact that d em i k i an ' like that ' is anaphoric of the story which
was retold by the narrator prior to it .
9. cf . Teeuw and Wyatt 1970 : 52 .
 101

10 . c f . Labov and Waletzky 1967 : 39 .

11. See Eisner 1975 : 7 5 .
12 . c f . Teeuw and Wyatt 1970 : 28 , 145 .
13. c f . Teeuw and Wyatt 1970 : 14 5 .
14 . c f . Teeuw and Wyatt 1970 : 20 , 216 .
15 . c f . Douglas et al . 1974 ( 1962) : 862-863 .
16 . See Becker ( to appear ) in A . L . Becker and Aram Yengoyan , eds .
17 . See Becker ( to appear) .
18 . c f . Eisner 1975 : 7 5 and Labov 1972 : 363 .
19 . See Becker 1977 : 13 .
20. Errington 1974 : 12 - 13 ; Hang Tuah is the name of the main character ( hero)
in the Hikayat Hang Tuah , which i s the text that Errington studie s .
21. Errington 19 75 : 3 2 - 3 3 . Note that the term ' Part One ' refers to part one
of H ikayat Hang Tuah , the text that errington analyze s .
22 . c f . Windstedt 1957 ( 1967) for the meanings of t i ta h , bag i nda , d a u l a t
t ua n k u , D u l i Yang Mahamu l i a ; the explanation about distancing , speaking
up and speaking down , and the act of humbling is my own .
23. Notice that the reason why the narrators think that their argument , i . e .
the second one , i s true rather than the first one ( the popular be lief) is
due to the fact that the mousedeer in most Malay animal fables is the main
character who always outwits all the other animals , especially the strong
ones such as tigers , crocodiles , apes , etc . In other words , in Malay
culture the mousedeer stands for intelligence . Sometimes it also stands
for gracefulness , elegance , and beauty . He is a trickster character ,
somewhat like Br ' er Rabbit in American folklore .
24 . See Becker ( to appear) in Becker and Yengoyan , eds , The Imagi n ation of
Re al i t y .

25. See Douglas e t a l . 1974 : 578 .

26. Richard Rhode s and I discovered this a s we wrote down a l l the sentences
and clauses that are preceded by maka .
27 . We won ' t take ka l a k i a n 'at that time ' or 'next ' ( der ived from ka l a 'time '
or 'period ' and k i a n ' that ' or ' there � into consideration , since it does
not appear in our text .
28. ," S u a t u k i s s a h i n i l ah is ungrammatical , because s ua t u is indefinite and
i n i l a h i s definite ; one cannot have the definite and the indefinite
articles s imultaneous ly modify the noun k i s s a h .
29 . SCRIPT is a term used by Roger Schank and his colleagues on the Yale
Arti ficial Intell igence Proj ect (a project to construct a computer that
will ' understand ' a story) . They define SCRIPT as ' a performed sequence
of actions that constitutes the natural order of a piece of knowledge '
( Schank et al . 1975 : 3 ) . ' Scripts ' , according to them , ' serve to fill in
the gaps in a causal chain when they can ' t be inferred j ust by themselves '
( 197 5 : 3 ) . They also state that ' scripts are intended to handle the range
of events that are the most mundane ' (p. 4 ) . For their purposes , they
state that ' a script is a predetermined , stereotyped sequence of actions
102

that define a well-known situation . . . . Scripts allow for new references

to obj ects within them j ust as if these obj ects had been previously men­
tioned ; obj ects within a script may take " the " without an expl icit intro­
duction because the script itself has already implicitly introduced them '
( 1975 : 3) •

In modern Indonesian this presupposed use of i t u is substituted by the

use of -nya , e . g . i f I say ' S i a pa namanya 7 ' "'What ' s your name ? '" to my
addressee what I mean is not ' What is YOUR name ? ' but rather 'I presuppose
that you have a name . What is i t ? '
30 . Another interpretation for this is that i tu could be a modi fier whose scope
is beyond l a u t , that is , it modifies the whole phrase p e r b u r u a n s e b e l a h
t e p i l a u t . In this case i t u is used as an anaphoric non-presupposed
deictic particle and not as a script one . This is due to the fact that
sentence ( 7 ) in our text , especially sen t i a s a i a perg i b e r b u r u 'he used to
go hunting ' already implies that there is always a location for hunting
when one talks about i t .
31 . c f . Monier-Williams 1899 .
32 . To know what frame-content construction is , see 3 . 5 . 2 .
33. Dem i k i an here i s part o f an understood dialogue between Narrator ( s ) and
Addressee .
34 . These terms - CORE , PRECORE and ELABORATION - were developed together with
A . L . Becker as I was working on this construction .
35 . - l ah constituent is called COMMENT , because the term ' comment ' is more
inclus ive than the terms ' event' and ' new information ' and also because I
want to use ' comment ' as a slot label and ' event ' as a role label . There
are also comments that have ' non-events ' roles , e . g . s u n g g uh 'indeed ' in
s un g g uh l ah as intensifier , i n i ' this ' in i n i l a h as an introductory marker ,
etc .
36. Lewis 1947 : 2 33 discusse s a different use of ada l a h , i . e . the fact that
a d a l ah , in introducing a statement , stresses the existence of the state of
affairs made known by that statement . For example , 1 ) Ma ka ada- l ah
da r i pada k�b anyakan ra ' y a t b � rj a l a n i t u s�ga l a h u t a n b � l a n t a ra p u n h a b i s ­
l ah m�nj ad i padang . 'It came about that because of the great multitude of
the marching army the spreading jungle Was utterly destroyed and became a
tree less p lain . ' 2 ) Ada- l ah bes i i n i kam i bawa da r i nege r i C h i na s a p� r t i
l en ga n b �s a r - nya , s eka rang h ab i s h a u s . 'This iron that we are carrying
from China, the truth is that it was original ly of an arm 's thickness, and
now i t has rusted away almost to nothing. '
37. Robert Longacre 1976a, especially Chapter V on plots and also Robert
Longacre 1976b .
38. Thi s list i s in some ways s imilar to and in other ways di fferent from
Becker ' s ( 1977 : 8 ) . Some of the features on my list are different from the
ones on his because the nature of his text is different from mine and also
because his features are obtained on the basis of studying one particular
type of sentence . That is to say , my list of features is a result of
studying more than one type of sentence ; it is a further elaboration of
what he started out in his list.
39 . In the case of example ( 40 ) the FCR construction is stated in the form of
a sentence and then the development of the content is given after that, in
the form of a discourse , whereas in the case of ' Introductory S + Story
 103

Proper + Concluding S ' , the FCF construction is stated in the form of a

non-openended discourse , where the content is the discourse itse l f . I n
other words , i n the former the content is the theme , whereas i n the latter
the content is the development of the theme , which is expressed in the
frame , i . e . the introductory sentence , as Asa l raj a yang b e r b u a t n ege r i
Pa t a n i Da r u s s a l am i t u ' The origin of the King who bui lt the sett lement of
Patani. the Abode of Peace ' . Note that this is an example of structural
similarity at different levels .
40 . There is a third which has already been discussed in section 3 . 6 . 2 . on
Frame-Content Construction , i . e . the content part of i t . I did not how­
ever state explicitly that it is an embedded structure .
41 . Yang consists of a third person s ingular i a + the topic marker - n g ( c f .
a n g in Tagalog) .
42 . To know what the abbreviations stand for consult the list of abbreviations
on p . v .
43. Note that these formulas , including the ones o f ( 58a) , ( 59a) , ( 60a) and
( 6la) , are not intended to give a complete breakdown to word and relevant
morpheme levels , but they are intended to give my readers a general idea
of what the difference is between the Y a n g Embedded Structure and the
Unmarked Embedded Structures , and of how complex the Unmarked Embedded
Structures are , i . e . they are so complex that I can ' t represent them in
one generalized formulaic pattern , but I have to represent them in three
different formulaic patterns . For interested readers who want to see the
complete breakdown formulas of these structures , please follow each indi­
vidual tree diagram (Displays 3 . 6 . 5 . - 3 . 6 . 16 . ) down from where I stop in
the formulas .
44 . This topic marker (TM ' ) is on the phrase leve l . It is distinguished from
p u n as the topic marker (TM) on the sentence leve l .
45. NP 1 in relation to Elaboration Structure (Elab . Str . ) i s the defining mod­
ifier of the defined Head Noun , whereas in relation to UEStr . , NP 1 is the
agent subj ect of the Pred . Def . Act Verb .
46 . i t u in this context, besides being anaphoric and marking past tense , has
also a function of giving a sense of c losure to the sentence .
 Chapter 4

CONCLUS I ON

This chapter consists of two parts : a list of things that have been dis­
covered and discussed in this book and things that remain to be done , i . e .
problems or hypothe ses the truth of which needs to be proven .

4. 1 . F I N D I NGS
4. 1. 1.In analyzing the overall structure of the text I found out about the
following :
( 1 ) There are two kinds of narrators , the old people as the reported narrators ,
and the present narrator a s the reporting narrator.
( 2 ) From this it is inferred that , in terms of the time of the telling of the
story , there are two types of addressee , the past addres see and the present
addressee . These two types of addressee are what I refer to as natural addres­
sees . The counterpart of this addressee is the supernatural addressee whose
name and protection is invoked by means of the Arabic invocational prayer at
the beginning of the story .
( 3 ) The telling of the story on a higher level involves the following speech
acts : the invocation , manifested by the Arabic invocational prayer , the announ­
cing and the concluding of the story manifested by the introductory and the
concluding sentences , the assertion of the point of the story , and the actual
telling (or retelling) of the story .
( 4 ) The announcing and the concluding of the story is a quotative strategy used
by the present narrator to signal the fact that the telling (or the retelling)
of the story is an act of quoting the old narrators . In other words , the intro­
ductory and the concluding sentences function as quotation marks around the
first story of part I of HP .
( 5 ) The point of the story , i . e . the etymologizing about the name of the new
settlement that the main partic ipant in the story buil t , is a strategy
( a) to conclude the story of the hunt - which is an embedded text in
the story - and
(b) to expand on the point of the story which is embedded in the scenes
or the episodes of the encounter of the main participant with the old
couple and the act of the main participants ' dogs pursuing the mousedeer .
( 6 ) The sequence of temporal adverbials is a strategy to mark the outline of
the text .

104
 105

4.1.2. In exploring bah a s a I discovered the following :

( 1 ) Distancing , showing honor and deference , as an express ion of b a ha s a has two
aspects : physical non-verbal and verbal relational .
( 2 ) Based on only one context in the text , i . e . the fact that the form D u l i
Paduka Nenda occurs in one main clause , while the form P a d u k a N � n d a occurs in
two subordinate adverbial clauses (both of which mean 'RoyaL Grandfather ' ) , I
hypothesize that Pad uka N e n da is the reduced form (or the second mention form)
of the nominal form D u l i Pad u ka Nenda . Note that the truth of this inference
needs to be verified by more data .
( 3 ) The King , who is the main participant in the story , when speaking to his
subj ects never uses speech act verbs ( i . e . per formative verbs ) . Other partici­
pants always do , except in the context where there are two or more exchanges
within the same speech act ( c f . examples ( 10- 14) in section 3 . 3 . ) .
( 4 ) D a u l a t T ua n k u 'HaiL my Lord ' , besides functioning as a verbal distancing ,
is also used as a signal of a speech act ch.ange , i . e . a change of participants
with the same speech act or a change of speech act with the same participants .
(Note : this term only occurs in contexts where a king or a ruler is speaking
down to his subj ects and exclusively in the addres see part of the exchange , and
not in the speaker part of the exchange . )

4 . 1.3. In discus sing naming and etymologizing I disclosed the following :

( 1 ) Etymologizing about names - the acts of naming of the main participant and
of the settlement wh ich are explicated in and by the text - is a text-building
strategy .
( 2 ) Names in this text are used by the narrators to give a sense of completeness
to the text , i . e . the name of the main participant is given at the beginning of
the text as a base or topic from which the text is developed and the name of the
settlement , i . e . the explication of how it was arrived at , is given at the end
of the story as a concluding point . In other words , this act of giving a sense
of completeness to the text by means of names at the beginning and at the end
of the text is another text-building strategy that should be distinguished from
the one l isted in ( 1 ) above .

4.1. 4 . In evaluating particles 1 I d iscovered the following information :

PARTICLE FEATURES/COMMENTS

Hatta - marks a change in the action or the event in an episode . The

change usually has to do with the change in partic ipant
orientation or in the scene of location . The change in
participant orientation may involve the change of back­
grounded major participant with the foregrounded major parti­
cipant ; it may also involve the introduction of a s ignificant
partic ipant while the major participant is still the same ,
with a change in the scene
- usually occurs at the beginning of the episode
106

PARTICLE FEATURES/COMMENTS

Maka - operates on the clause and sentence levels ; in terms of its

function slot it is an initial punctuation; in terms of its
function role it is an event sequence sentence (or clause )
marker in a text ; in terms of its filler c lass it is a con­
nective

Syahdan - functions as an evaluation marker and occurs always at the

beginning of the evaluation

In i - modifies speaker or other entities that are c lose to the

speaker
- proximity is temporal if the noun it modifies is abstract
- proximity is physical if the noun it modifies is concrete
- is cataphoric and exocentric if it is followed by a noun
- is anaphoric and endocentric if it is preceded by a noun
- is neither anaphoric nor cataphoric if it refers to an
entity that is non-textual , i . e . an entity that is part of
nature (ostensive reference)
- s ignals immediate time before or after a speech act is per­
formed

Itu - types : 1) presupposed or script i t u ; 2 ) non-pre supposed or

anaphoric i t u
- signals distant time whether in the past or in the future

A r a k i an - conclusion marker of a sentence , paragraph or an episode of

a descriptive indirect speech within the story
always occurs at the beginning of the conc luding unit , i . e .
in the pre frame part o f a Frame Content construction
- not modified by comment marker - l a h

Demi k i a n - conclusion marker of a Dialogue Paragraph or a Complex

Dialogue Paragraph level , and also of a story as a discourse
unit.

To my knowledge most of the definitions or information given above are not

found in any old or current Malay or Indonesian dictionary . This is due to the
fact that most definitions in dictionaries I have consulted tend to be lexically
centred rather than textually or discourse centred .

4 . 1 .5 . The following are the construction types that I discovered :

( 1 ) p u n - l ah constructions
( 2 ) Frame-Content constructions
(3) - l a h constructions
( 4 ) Other constructions
( 5 ) Embedded structure s .
(For a detailed summary see section 3 . 6 . 6 . )
 107

Note that the � a h and the p u n - l ah construction types have one thing in
common . That is the constituent that is modified by the enclitic l a h usually
contains new in formation . Their difference is in the commented entity , the
obj ect of the -l a h constituent ( the commenting entity) . In the p u n - l a h construc­
tion the commented entity , marked by the topic marker p u n , usually carries old
information , whereas in the -l a h construction , the commented entity , not marked
by p u n and usually occurring as a separate text unit ( ei ther as a c lause , sen­
tence , sentence cluster , paragraph or discourse ) preceding or following the
commenting entity depending on the de ictic particle used , usually carries new
information .
In Hopper ( 1976 : 9 ) , c lauses marked with -l a h are viewed as the crucial foci
of the narrative , i . e . they provide a synopsis of the dynamic l ine of the epi­
sode . In my work I take a different view regarding this . I view the encl itic
particle -l a h as a comment marker , that is the text unit it modi fies usually
carries new information . The newnes s of the information based on my work oper­
ates on two levels : on the content ( or lexical) level and on the metalevel .

4.2 . PROBLEMS FOR LATER WORKS

In conclsuion , I will point out is sues that need further verification by
later works .
( 1 ) The widespreadness of the patterns - the p u n - l a h constructions , the frame­
content constructions , the -l a h construction s , the other construction s , and the
embedded constructions - i . e . how common and how wide spread they were in differ­
ent Classical Malay texts , needs to be investigated .
( 2 ) The wide spreadness of the particles , i . e . the conclusion markers a ra k i a n
and dem i k i a n , the definite articles i n i ' this ' and i t u ' that ' , the event se­
quence sentence marker maka , the evaluation marker syahda n , h a t t a as the marker
of the change in the action or the event in an episode , the topic marker pun
and the comment marker - l a h , needs to be inve stigated .
( 3 ) The widespreadness of some text-building strategies 2 - the use of introduc­
tory and concluding sentences as quotative strategy , the use of temporal adverb­
ials to mark the outline of the text , the use of frame and frame in frame­
content construction type to foreground the content as theme or the topic sen­
tence of the text - needs to be investigated .
( 4 ) Except for the terms ( or notions) that occur in point ( 2 ) and a few others
such as topic , comment , precore , core , elaboration , most of the terms I use in
describing and illustrating the embedded structures in section 3 . 6 . 5 . ( consult
the list of abbreviations immediately preceding Chapter 1 for thi s ) and section
1 . 1 . , have not been justified . In other words , these notions need to be inves­
tigated in further detailed works on clause level and levels be low clause , i . e .
phrase leve l , word level and morpheme level . For thi s reason , some of the cells
of the nodes in the tree diagrams have been left un filled.
108

NOTES TO CHAPTER 4

1. This is not an exhaustive list of all the particles , deictic or connective ,

in my text.
2. The widespreadness of etymologizing about names as a text-building strategy
is one of the few that has been pretty much investigated . See Becker ' s
essay on ' Text building , epistemology , and aesthetics in Javanese shadow
theatre ' ( to appear ) .

B I B L I OGRAPHY

AJAMISEBA , Danielo C .
1973 Action transitive and action intransitive clauses in Bahasa
Indonesia . Unpublished paper , University of Michigan .
1974a A narrative discourse analysis in Bahasa Indonesia. Unpublished
paper , University of Michigan .
19 74b An intonational analysis of an Indonesian poem. Unpublished paper ,
University o f Michigan .
1975 On cohesion in a Malay written text . Unpublished paper , University
of Michigan .

ALKITAB
n.d. Published by the Indones ian Bible Society for The Gideons Interna­
tional . Tj iluar Bogor : Pertjetakan Lembaga Alkitab Indonesia .

AUSTIN , J . L .
1962 How t o do things wi th words . ( ed . by J . O . Urmson) . New York :
( 1970) Oxford ' University Press .

BALLARD , D . Lee , Robert J . CONRAD , and Robert E . LONGACRE

1971 The deep and surface grammar of interclausal relation s . Founda tions
of Language 7 : 70-118 . Also in Brend , ed . 1974 : 307-356 .

BECKER , Alton L .
1965 A tagmemic approach to paragraph analysis . Coll ege Composition and
Communication 16 : 237- 242 .

1966 Symposium on the paragraph . Coll ege Composi ti on and Communication

17 : 67-72 .
1967 A generative description of the English subject tagmemes . Ph . D .
dissertation , University of Michigan .
1974 Conjoining in a tagmemic grammar of Engl ish . In Brend , ed . 1974 :
2 2 3- 2 3 3 .
1977 The figure a sentence makes : an interpretation of a Classical Malay
sentence . Preliminary draft for participants in the Symposium on
Discourse and Syntaxt , UCLA , Nov . 17- 2 1 , 1977 .
 109

1979 Text building , epistemology , and aesthetics in Javanese shadow

theatre . In A . L . Becker and Aram Yengoyan , eds The imagination of
reali t y , 211-243 . Norwood : ABLEX .

BECKER, Alton L . and I GUSTI NGURAH OKA

1977 Person in Kawi : exploration of an elementary semantic dimension .
MS .

BEEKMAN , John
1970 Propositions and their relations within a discourse . Notes on
Transl ation 37 : 6- 2 3 .

BEEKMAN , John and John CALLOW

1974 Transla ting the Word of G o d , wi th scripture and topi cal index.
Grand Rapids : Zondervan .

BELLERT , Irena
1970 Conditions for the coherence of texts . Semi o t i ca 2 : 335-363 .

BREND , Ruth M . , ed .
1972 Kenneth L. Pike : selected wri tings . The Hague : Mouton .
1974 Advances in tagmemi cs . North-Holland Linguistic Series 9 .
Amsterdam : North-Hol land .

CALLOW , Kathleen
1970 More on propos itions and their relations within a discourse . Notes
on Translation 3 7 : 23-27 .

1974 Discourse considera ti ons in transla ting the Word o f God. Grand
Rapids : Zondervan .

DIJK , Teun A . van

1972 Some aspects of text grammars : a s t udy in theoretical l ingui s t i cs
and poetics . The Hague : Mouton .

DIJK , Teun A. van , ed .

1972 Text grammar and narra ti ve s tructures . Poetics 3 : Interna tional
Review for the Theory of Li tera ture . The Hague : Mouton .

DOLEZEL , Lubom!r
1972 From motifeme s to motifs . Poetics 4 : 55-90 .

DOUGLAS , J . D . et al . , eds
1962 The new Bible dictionary . Grand Rapids : Wrn . B. Eerdrnan s .
( 197 4)
DREYFUSS , Jeffrey
1977 Verb morphology and semantic case/role information in Bahasa
Indone s i a . Mimeo , University of Michigan .

DUNDES , Allan
1962 From etic to ernie units in the structural study of folktales .
Journal of American Folkl ore 75 : 95-105 .
110

EISNER, Janet Margaret

1975 A grammar of oral narrative . Ph . D . dissertation , University of
Michigan .

ELSON , B . and Velma PICKETT

1962 An i ntroduction to morphology and syntax . Santa Ana : Summer
Institute of Linguistic s .

ERRINGTON , Shelly
1974 A disengagement : notes on the structure of narrative in a Classical
Malay text . (Mimeo version . ) Published in Madison , ed. Proceedings
of the 1 9 74 Conference on Indonesian and Malay Li terature .

1975 A study of genre : meaning and form in the Malay Hikayat Hang Tuah .
Ph . D . dissertation , Cornell University .
1976 Some comments on style in the meanings of the past. ( Originally
prepared for the Conference on Southeast Asian Perceptions of the
past , Australian National University , Canberra , February 1976 .
This vers ion prepared for inclusion in a book edited by Wang Gangwu
and O . W . Wolters . )

FILLMORE , Charles J .
19 7 4 Pragmatics and the description of discourse . In George Lakoff et
al . eds Berkeley s tudi es in syntax and semanti cs 1 , V . (BS3) .

FOLEY , William A .
1976 Inherent referentiality and language typology . Mimeo .
,

GIVON , Talmy
1974 Toward a discourse definition of syntax. MS . UCLA Department of
Linguisti c s .

GORDON , Kent H . and Kenneth L . PIKE

1973 Paired semantic components , paired sentence reversals and the
analysis of Dhangar (Kudux) discourse . International Journal of
Dravidian Lingui stics 2/1 : 14- 46 . Also in Trail , ed. 1973 : 3 1 3- 34 3 .

GORRELL , Robert M. , ed .
1967 Rhetori c : theories for appl i ca t i on . Champaign , Illinois : National
Council of Teachers of Engl ish .

GRICE , H . P .
1969 utterer ' s meaning and intentions . The Philosophical Review 78/2 :
147- 177 .

GRIMES , Joseph E .
1972 Outlines and overlays . Language 48 : 513- 524 .
19 75 The thread of dis course . The Hague : Mouton .

GUMPERZ , John J . and Dell HYMES , eds

1972 Directions i n socioli ngui s t i cs : the ethnology of communication .
New York : Hol t , Rinehart & Winston .
 111

HALE , Austin , ed .
1973 Cl ause , s en t ence and di s course pat terns i n sel ected l anguages o f
Nepal . Norman : Summe r Institute of Linguistics Publications in
Linguistics and Related Fields 4 0 , vol . l .

HALLI DAY , Michael A . K .

197 1 Language structure and language function . In Lyons , ed . 19 71 :
( 1970) 140-165 .

HALLIDAY , Michael A . K . and Ruqaiya HASAN

1976 Cohesion in Engl ish . Hong Kong : Longman .

HAMILTON , A . W .
1941 Malay Pantuns (Pantun M�layu) . S ingapore : Eastern Universities
( 1959) Press .

HARE , R . M .
1970 Meaning and speech acts . The Philosophical Review 79/1 : 3- 2 4 .

HARTMANN , R . R. K . and F . C . STORK

1972 Dictionary of language and l i ngui s t i cs . New York : John Wiley .

HAWKINSON , Ann and Larry HYMAN

1974 Hierarchies of natural topic in Shona . Studies i n Afri can
Lingui sti cs 5 : 14 7-170.

HOLTZ , Will iam

1965 Field theory and literature . In Gorrel l , ed . 1967 : 53-6 5 .

HOPPER , Paul J .
1976 Focus and aspect in discourse grammar . Mimeo , S . U . N . Y-Binghamton ,
Linguis tics Program.

HUSSAIN , Khalid , ed .
1964 Hikayat pandawa li ma . Kuala Lumpur : Dewan Bahasa dan Pustaka.

JACOBS , Roderick A. and Peter S . ROSENBAUM

1970 Readings i n Engl ish transforma tional grammar . Waltham ,
Massachusetts : Ginn .

JONES , Linda K.
1977 Theme i n Engl ish expos i tory discours e . Lakebluf f , I l l inois :
Jupiter Press .

KLAMMER , Thomas P .
19 71 The structure of dialogue paragraphs in written English dramatic
and narrative discourse . Ph . D . dissertation , University of
Michigan .

KLAMMER , Thomas P . and Carol J . COMPTON

1970 Some recent contributions to tagmemic analysis of discourse .
Glossa 4/2 : 2 12-2 2 2 . Also in Brend , ed. 1974 : 377- 388 .
112

KOEN , Frank M . et al .
1968 The psychological reality of the paragraph . In Eric M . Zale , ed .
Proceedi ngs of the Conference on Language and Language Behavi or ,
174-187 . New York : Appleton-Century-Crofts .

LABOV , William
1972 The trans formation of experience in narrative syntax . In his
Language i n the Inner Ci ty : studies i n Black Engl i sh vernacular .
Philadelphia : University of Pennsylvania Pres s .

LABOV , William and Joshua WALETZKY

1967 Narrative analysi s : oral versions of personal experience . In June
Helm, ed . Essays on the verbal and visual arts . Seattle : university
of ''lashington Press .

LANDESMAN , Charles
1972 Discourse and i ts pres upposi ti ons . New Haven : Yale University Press .

LANE , Harlan L .
1966 Studi es i n l anguage and l anguage behavior , vol . 2 . Ann Arbor :
Centre for Research on Language and Language Behavior , The
University of Michigan.

LARSEN , Helen
19 74 Some gramma tical features of legendary narrative in Ancash Quechua .
In Brend , ed . 1974 : 419-440 .

LEVI-STRAUSS , Claude
195 5 The structural study of myth . ( Originally published i n Journal of
( 1967) American Folklore 68 : 428-444 . ) In his Structural An thropology ,
202-228 . Garden City , N . Y . : Doubleday .

LEWIS , M . B .
1947 Teach yourself Mal a y . London : Hodder and Stoughton , for English
Universities Press .

LIEM, Nguy�n D�ng

1966 Engl ish grammar : a combined tagmemic and transforma tional approach .
PL , C- 3 .

LONGACRE , Robert E .
1964 Grammar discovery procedures : a fiel d manual . The Hague : Mouton .
1968 Phi l ippine languages : di s cours e , paragraph , and sentence structure .
Santa Ana : Summer Institute of Linguistics Publ ications in
Linguistics and Related Fields , 2 1 .
1972 Hi erarchy and uni versal i t y o f discourse consti tuents i n New Guinea
l anguages . Washington , D . C . : Georgetown University Press .
1974 Narrative versus other discourse genre . In Brend , ed . 1974 : 357-
376.
1976a An anatomy o f speech notions . Lisse , Netherlands : Peter de Ridder
Press .
 113

1976b On mystery particles and affixes . Papers from the 1 3th Regional
Mee ting, Chi cago Lingui s t i c Soci et y .

LYONS , John , ed.

1970 New hori zons i n lingui s t i cs . Baltimore : Penguin Book s .
( 1971)

MACDONALD , R. Ross and Soenj ono DARJOWIDJOJO

1967 A s tu dent ' s reference grammar o f modern formal Indonesi a n .
Washington , D . C . : Georgetown University Pres s .

MAY , Herbert G . and Bruce M . METZGER, eds

19 73 Th e ne w Oxford annotated Bi b l e wi th t he Apocrypha . Revised
Standard Version . New York : Oxford University Press .

MONIER-WILLIAMS , Sir Monier

1899 A Sanskri t-English dicti onary . Oxford : The Clarendon Press .

NAYLOR , Paz Buenaventura

1973 Topi c , focus and emphasis in the Tagalog verbal cl auses . Ph . D .
dissertation , University o f Michigan .

PADUCEVA , E . V .
1974 On the structure o f the paragraph . Lingui s t i cs 1 3 1 : 49-58 .

PIKE , K . L .
1959 Language as particle , wave and field . The Texas Quarterl y 2/2 :
37-54 .
1962 Dimensions of grammatical constructions . Language 38/3 : 221-244 .
Also in Brend , ed . 1972 : 160-185 .
1963 A syntactic paradigm . Language 39/2 : 2 16-230 . Also in Brend , ed .
1974 : 2 3 5- 2 4 9 .
1964a Discourse structure and tagmeme matrices . Oceani c Lingui s t i cs 3:
5- 25 . Also in Brend , ed. 1974 : 285-305 .
19 64b On systems of grammatical structure . Proceedings of the Ninth
International Congress of Lingui s ts , Cambri dge , Mass . , 1962 , 145-
153 . The Hague : Mouton . Also in Brend , ed . 1972 : 200-208 .
1964c Beyond the sentence . Col l ege Composi ti on and Communi ca tion 15 :
129 - 1 35 .
1967a Grammar as wave . In E . L . Blansitt , ed . Monograph series on
l anguages and lingui s t i cs 20 : 2-14 . Washington , D . C . : Georgetown
University Press .
1967b Language in relation to a unified theory of the struct ure of h uman
( 19 7 1 ) behavi or . Second revised edition . The Hague : Mouton.
1971 Crucial questions in the development of tagmemic s : the s ixties and
seventies . Georgetown Uni versi ty Monograph Series on Languages
and Lingui s t i cs , 24 : 79-98 . Also in Brend , ed . 1974 : 3 5-54 .
1974 Recent developments in tagmemics . In Luigi Heilmann , ed .
Proceedings of the Eleventh Interna tional Congress of Lingui s ts ,
Bol ogna-Fl orence , 1 9 72 , 163- 1 7 2 . The Hague : Mouton .
114

PIKE , K . L . and Ivan LOWE

1969 Pronominal reference in English conversation and discourse - a group
theoretical treatment . Fol i a Lingui s ti ca 3 : 68-106 . Also in Brend ,
ed. 197 2 : 2 63-297 .

PIKE , K . L . and Evelyn G . PIKE

1972 Seven substitution exercises for studying the structure of dis­
course . Lingui s t i cs 84 : 43-5 2 .
1976 Grammati cal ana l ysi s . Prel iminary edition ( revised) . Huntington
Beach , Calif . : Summe r Institute of Linguistic s .

PIKE , K. L . and Burkhard SCHCYrTELNDREYER

1972 Paired-sentence reversals in the discovery of underlying and surface
structures in Sherpa discourse . Indian Lingu i s t i cs 33 : 7 2-83 . Also
in Hale , ed . 1973 : 361-375 .

POERWADARMINTA , W . J . S .
1966 Kamus Umum Bahasa Indones I a . Djakarta : P . N . Balai Pustaka.

PROPP , Vladimir
1968 Morphology of the folktal e . Revised and edited with a preface by
Louis A . Wagner . New introduction by Alan Dundes . Austin and
London : University of Texas Pres s .

QUIRK , Randolph , S . GREENBAUM , G . LEECH , and J . SVARTVIK

1972 A grammar o f contemporary Engl ish . New York and London : Seminar
Press .

RE I D , Lawrence A .
1968 Central Bontoc : sentence , paragraph and discourse . Norman ,
Oklahoma : Summer Institute of Linguistics Publications in
Linguistics and Related Field s , 27 .

ROBERTS , John M. and Michael L . FORMAN

1972 Riddles : expressive models of interrogation . In Gumperz and Hymes ,
eds 197 2 : 180-209 .

ROSS , John Robert

1970 On declarative sentences . In Jacobs and Rosenbaum , eds 1970 : 2 22-
27 2 .

SCHANK , Roger C . , and the Yale AI Project

1975 Script applier mechanism - a story understander. Research Report
No . 4 3 . (Mimeo . )

SCHOLES , Robert E .
1974 Structura l i sm in l i terat ure : a n in troduction . New Haven : Yale
University Press .

SEARLE , J . R.
1968 Austin on locutionary and illocutionary acts . The Phi l osophical
Review 78/4 : 405-424 .
 115

1969 Speech acts : a n essay i n t h e phi l osophy of language . Cambridge :

( 1974) The University Press .

SEBEOK , T . A . , ed .
1960 Style i n language . Cambridge , Mass . : The Technology Press of MIT .

SILVERSTEIN , Michael
1976 Hierarchy of features and ergativity . In R . M . W . Dixon , ed .
Grammatical 112-1 7 1 . Canberra :
categories in Australian l anguages ,
Australian Institute of Aboriginal Studie s .

STRAWSON , P . F .
1964 Intention and convention in speech acts . The Phi l osophi cal Review
73/4 : 439-460.

TEEUW , A. and O . K . WYATT

1970 Hikayat Patani - the story of Patani . The Hague : Martinus Ni j ho f f .

TRAIL , Ronald L .
1973 Semantic relations between whole propositions in English . In
Trail , ed . 19 73 .

TRAIL , Ronald L . , ed .
1973 Patterns in cl ause , sentence , and discourse in selected languages
vol . l : Sentence and di s course . Norman : Summer
of Indi a and Nepal :
Institute of Linguistics Publications in Linguistics and Related
Field s , 41 .

TURABIAN , Kate L .
19 72 A man ual for writers of term papers , theses and dissertations . 3rd
edition , revised. Chicago : The University of Chicago Press .

WILKINSON , Richard James

19 2 3 Pantun Mel ayu . Collected b y R . J . Wilkinson . . . and R . O . Winstedt.
Second edition , revised. Singapore : Methodist Publishing House .

WINSTEDT , R . O .
1913 Mal a y grammar . Oxford : The Clarendon Press .
1950 Ma lay proverbs . London : Murray .
1957 An unabri dged Mala y-Engl ish di cti onary . Kuala Lumpur : Marican
( 1967) (Malaysia) . 6th edition .
1969 A history of classi cal Mal ay l i tera ture . Kuala Lumpur : University
Pres s .

WISE , Mary Ruth

1968 Identification of participants in discourse : a study of aspects of
form and meaning in Nomatsiguenga . Ph . D . dissertation , University
of Michigan .
1970 Social roles , plot roles , and focal roles in a Nomatsiguenga Campa
myth . Paper read at the XXXIX International Congress of
Americanists , Lima , Peru , 1970 . In Brend , ed . 19 7 4 : 389-4 18 .
 116

YOUNG , Richard E. and Alton L . BECKER

1964 The role of lexical and gramma tical cues in paragraph recognition .
Studi es in Language and Language Behavior , Uni versi ty of Michi gan ,
1-6 .
1965 Toward a modern theory o f rhetori c : a tagmemic contribution .
Harvard Educa t i onal Review 35 : 450-468 .

1966 The role of lexical and gramma tical cues in paragraph recognition .
In Lane , 1966 : 1- 6 .

YOUNG , Richard E . , Alton L . BECKER and Kenneth L . PIKE

1970 Rhetori c : discovery and change . New York : Harcourt , Brace & World.

ZURBUCHEN , Mary
1976a Kawi discourse structure : cycle , event and evaluation . In Rackham
Literary S t udies (Perspectives on Narra tion) , Winter 1976 , 45-60.

1976b ' Weaving the text ' in Old Javanese . Paper presented to the Second
Eastern Conference on Austronesian Languages , Ann Arbor , May 1976 .
University of Michigan ( mimeo) . Published in P . B . Naylor , ed .
Aus tronesian Studi es , 285- 300. Ann Arbor : Center for South and
Southeast Asian Studies , 1980 .

Ajamiseba, D.C. A classical Malay text grammar: Insights into a non-Western text tradition.
D-56, vi + 121 pages. Pacific Linguistics, The Australian National University, 1983. DOI:10.15144/PL-D56.1
©1983 Pacific Linguistics and/or the author(s). Online edition licensed 2015 CC BY-SA 4.0, with permission of PL. A sealang.net/CRCL initiative.