Hostname: page-component-74656f9884-j7cmm Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-10T21:03:24.886Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

External Negation in Malay/Indonesian

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2026

Paul Kroeger
Paul Kroeger*
Affiliation:
Graduate Institute of Applied Linguistics and SIL International
*
Graduate Institute of Applied Linguistics 7500 W. Camp Wisdom Rd., Dallas, TX 75236 [paul_kroeger@gial.edu]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Two distinct negation markers compete in Malay/Indonesian verbal clauses. I argue that one (also used to negate nominal predicates) is a marker of ‘external’ (sentential) negation, while the other is a marker of ‘internal’ (predicate) negation. This contrast is demonstrated by striking differences in syntactic distribution and scopal properties. In verbal clauses the marker of predicate negation is the default, while the marker of sentential negation is allowed only in certain pragmatically determined contexts. These contexts include: (i) contrastive sentences, (ii) marked narrow focus, and (iii) metalinguistic negation. External negation in Malay is restricted to ‘root clauses’; I suggest that this is due to its echoic character.

Keywords

negationmetalinguistic negationcontrastive negationfocuspresuppositionmain clause phenomena

Information

Type
Research Article
Information
Language , Volume 90 , Issue 1 , March 2014 , pp. 137 - 184
Copyright
Copyright © 2014 Linguistic Society of America

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

Footnotes

*

I would like to thank the following people for helpful comments on earlier versions of this article: René van den Berg, Michael Boutin, Adrian Clynes, Greg Carlson, Josh Jensen, Jason Merchant, and three anonymous referees. Special thanks are due to Greg Carlson as editor for his patience and perseverance.

References

Chaer, Abdul. 2009. Sintaksis Bahasa Indonesia: Pendekatan proses [Indonesian syntax: A process approach]. Jakarta: Rineka Cipta.Google Scholar
Aelbrecht, Lobke, Haegeman, Liliane; and Nye, Rachel (eds.) 2012. Main clause phenomena: New horizons. (Linguistik aktuell/Linguistics today 190.) Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Amaral, Patricia, Roberts, Craige; and Smith, E. Allyn. 2007. Review of The logic of conventional implicatures, by Potts, Christopher. Linguistics and Philosophy 30.707-49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Halim, Amran. 1981. Intonation in relation to syntax in Indonesian. (Pacific linguistics D-36.) Canberra: Australian National University.Google Scholar
Arka, I Wayan, and Manning, Christopher. 1998. Voice and grammatical relations in Indonesian: A new perspective. Proceedings of the LFG ’98 Conference. Online: http://www.stanford.edu/group/cslipublications/cslipublications/LFG/3/lfg98.html.Google Scholar
Omar, Asmah Hj.. 1982. Nahu Melayu mutakhir [Modern Malay grammar]. 2nd edn. Kuala Lumpur: Dewan Bahasa dan Pustaka.Google Scholar
Austin, J. L. 1956. Ifs and cans. Proceedings of the British Academy 42. 107–32.Google Scholar
Beaver, David I., and Clark, Brady Z.. 2008. Sense and sensitivity: How focus determines meaning. (Explorations in semantics.) Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bentzen, Kristine. 2009. Embedded root phenomena, assertion, presupposition, and main point of utterance. Paper presented at the ZAS Workshop on Root Phenomena, Berlin, September 2-4, 2009.Google Scholar
Burton-Roberts, Noel. 1989. On Horn's dilemma: Presupposition and negation. Journal of Linguistics 25. 95–125.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carston, Robyn. 1996. Metalinguistic negation and echoic use. Journal of Pragmatics 25. 309–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chapman, Siobhan. 1996. Some observations on metalinguistic negation. Journal of Linguistics 32. 387–402.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chung, Sandra. 1976. On the subject of two passives in Indonesian. Subject and topic, ed. by Li, Charles N., 57–98. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Cole, Peter, Hermon, Gabriella; and Aman, Norhaida bt.. 1999. Clefted questions in Malay. Clefted questions in Malay: University of Delaware, ms. Online: http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/summary?doi=10.1.1.160.7036.Google Scholar
Cole, Peter, Hermon, Gabriella; and Yanti, . 2008. Voice in Malay/Indonesian. Lingua 118. 1500–1553.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dahl, Östen. 1979. Typology of sentence negation. Linguistics 17. 79–106.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dahl, Östen. 2010. Typology of negation. The expression of negation, ed. by Horn, Laurence R., 9–38. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dalrymple, Mary, and Mofu, Suriel. 2009. Machine-readable grammatical resources for Indonesian. Machine-readable grammatical resources for Indonesian: University of Oxford. Online: http://users.ox.ac.uk/∼cpgl0015/indonesian/index.html.Google Scholar
Dardjowidjojo, Soenjono. 1978. Sentence patterns of Indonesian. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press.Google Scholar
Declerck, Renaat, and Reed, Susan. 2001. Conditionals: A comprehensive empirical analysis. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dik, Simon C. 1997. The theory of functional grammar, part 2: Complex and derived constructions, ed. by Hengeveld, Kees. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dreyfuss, Jeff. 1979. Towards a definition of ‘nouniness’ in Indonesian. Miscellaneous studies of Indonesian and other languages in Indonesia, part 6 (NUSA 7), ed. by Halim, Amran, 1–10. Jakarta: NUSA. Online: http://sealang.net/nusa/.Google Scholar
Ducrot, Oswald. 1972. Dire et ne pas dire: Principes de sémantique linguistique. Paris: Hermann.Google Scholar
Emonds, Joseph E. 1970. Root and structure-preserving transformations. Cambridge, MA: MIT dissertation.Google Scholar
Emonds, Joseph E. 1976. A transformational approach to English syntax: Root, structurepreserving, and local transformations. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Ernst, Thomas. 2007. On the role of semantics in a theory of adverb syntax. Lingua 117. 1008–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ernst, Thomas. 2009. Speaker-oriented adverbs. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 27. 497–544.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Faller, Martina. 2002. Semantics and pragmatics of evidentials in Cuzco Quechua. Stanford, CA: Stanford University dissertation.Google Scholar
Siong, Gan Kok. 1991. Kata kerja bantu dalam sintaksis Bahasa Malaysia [Auxiliary verbs in the syntax of Bahasa Malaysia]. Kuala Lumpur: Dewan Bahasa dan Pustaka.Google Scholar
Gazdar, Gerald. 1979. Pragmatics: Implicature, presupposition, and logical form. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Gil, David. 2013. Riau Indonesian: A language without nouns and verbs. Flexible word classes: Typological studies of underspecified parts of speech, ed. by Rijkhoff, Jan and van Lier, Eva, 89–130. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goedemans, Rob, and van Zanten, Ellen. 2007. Stress and accent in Indonesian. Prosody in Indonesian languages, ed. by van Heuven, Vincent J. and van Zanten, Ellen, 35–62. Utrecht: LOT. Online: http://lotos.library.uu.nl/publish/artides/000213/bookpart.pdf.Google Scholar
Green, Georgia. 1976. Main clause phenomena in subordinate clauses. Language 52. 38297.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grice, H. Paul. 1975 [1967]. Logic and conversation. Syntax and semantics, vol. 3: Speech acts, ed. by Cole, Peter and Morgan, Jerry L., 41–58. New York: Academic Press. [Originally presented as William James lecture, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA.].Google Scholar
Haegeman, Liliane. 2006. Conditionals, factives and the left periphery. Lingua 116. 165169.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Haegeman, Liliane. 2010a. The movement derivation of conditional clauses. Linguistic Inquiry 41. 595–621.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Haegeman, Liliane. 2010b. The internal syntax of adverbial clauses. Lingua 120. 628–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Haegeman, Liliane. 2010c. West Flemish verb-based discourse markers and the articulation of the speech act layer. West Flemish verb-based discourse markers and the articulation of the speech act layer: Ghent University, ms. Online: http://ling.auf.net/lingbuzz/001027.Google Scholar
Harada, Shin-Ichi. 1976. Honorifics. Syntax and semantics, vol. 5: Japanese generative grammar, ed. by Shibatani, Masayoshi, 499–561. New York: Academic Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harris, Jesse, and Potts, Christopher. 2010. Perspective-shifting with appositives and expressives. Linguistics and Philosophy 32. 523–52.Google Scholar
Alwi, Hasan, Dardjowidjojo, Soenjono, Lapoliwa, Hans; and Moeliono, Anton M.. 1998. Tata bahasa baku Bahasa Indonesia [A standard grammar of Indonesian]. 3rd edn. Jakarta: Balai Pustaka.Google Scholar
Heycock, Caroline. 2006. Embedded root phenomena. The Blackwell companion to syntax, vol. 2, ed. by van Riemsdijk, Henk and Everaert, Martin, 174–209. Malden, MA: Wiley-B lackwell.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Honegger, Mark. 2003. Modality tests in Malay. Southeast Asian Linguistics Society 7. 87–97. Online: http://sealang.net/sala/seals/htm/7/index.htm.Google Scholar
Hooper, Joan, and Thompson, Sandra. 1973. On the applicability of root transformations. Linguistic Inquiry 4. 465–97.Google Scholar
Horn, Laurence R. 1985. Metalinguistic negation and pragmatic ambiguity. Language 61. 121–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Horn, Laurence R. 1989. A natural history of negation. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Abdullah, Imran Ho. 1993. The semantics of the modal auxiliaries of Malay. Kuala Lumpur: Dewan Bahasa dan Pustaka.Google Scholar
Iwata, Seizi. 1998. Some extensions of the echoic analysis of metalinguistic negation. Lingua 105. 49–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jackendoff, Ray S. 1972. Semantic interpretation in generative grammar. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Jespersen, Otto. 1964 [1933]. Essentials of English grammar. Tuscaloosa: University of Alabama Press.Google Scholar
Karttunen, Lauri, and Peters, Stanley. 1979. Conventional implicature. Syntax and semantics, vol. 11: Presupposition, ed. by Oh, Choon-Kyu and Dinneen, David, 1–56. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Kiparsky, Paul, and Kiparsky, Carol. 1970. Fact. Progress in linguistics, ed. by Bierwisch, Manfred and Heidolph, Karl, 143–73. The Hague: Mouton. [Reprinted in Semantics: An interdisciplinary reader in philosophy, linguistics and psychology, ed. by Danny D. Steinberg and Leon A. Jakobovits, 345-69. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1971.].Google Scholar
Kroeger, Paul R. 2004. Analyzing syntax: A lexical-functional approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kroeger, Paul R. 2009. Malagasy clefts from a Western Malayo-Polynesian perspective: Comments on the paper by Hans-Martin Gärtner. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 27. 817–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Laka, Itziar. 1990. Negation in syntax: On the nature of functional categories and projections. Cambridge, MA: MIT dissertation. [Distributed by MIT Working Papers in Linguistics.].Google Scholar
Lambrecht, Knud. 1994. Information structure and sentence form: Topic, focus, and the mental representations of discourse referents. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Levinson, Stephen C. 1983. Pragmatics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Levinson, Stephen c., and Annamalai, E.. 1992. Why presuppositions aren't conventional. Language and text: Studies in honour of Ashok R. Kelkar, ed. by Srivastava, R. N., 227–42. Delhi: Kalinga.Google Scholar
Lewis, Μ. Blanche. 1947. Teach yourself Malay. London: English Universities Press.Google Scholar
Liberman, Mark, and Sag, Ivan. 1974. Prosodic form and discourse function. Chicago Linguistic Society 10. 416–27.Google Scholar
Lyons, John. 1977. Semantics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Kader, Mashudi B. H.. 1981. The syntax of Malay interrogatives. Kuala Lumpur: Dewan Bahasa dan Pustaka.Google Scholar
Matthewson, Lisa. 2006. Presupposition and cross-linguistic variation. North East Linguistic Society 26. 63–76.Google Scholar
McCawley, James D. 1991. Contrastive negation and metalinguistic negation. Chicago Linguistic Society (Parasession on negation) 27. 2. 189–206.Google Scholar
Miyagawa, Shigeru. 2012. Agreements that occur mainly in the main clause. In Aelbrecht, et al., 79–111.Google Scholar
Karim, Nik Safiah. 1978. Bahasa Malaysia syntax: Some aspects of its standardization. Kuala Lumpur: Dewan Bahasa dan Pustaka.Google Scholar
Pak, Miok, Portner, Paul; and Zanuttini, Raffaella. 2013. Politeness, formality and main clause phenomena. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Linguistic Society of America, Boston, January 2013.Google Scholar
Pasaribu, Truly Almendo. 2012. The negation jangan from a lexical functional perspective. The negation jangan from a lexical functional perspective: Udayana University, ms.Google Scholar
Paul, Ileana. 2001. Concealed pseudo-clefts. Lingua 111. 707–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Payne, John R. 1985. Negation. Language typology and syntactic description: Grammatical categories and the lexicon, vol. 3: Clause structure, ed. by Shopen, Timothy, 197242. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Pitts, Alyson. 2011. Exploring a ‘pragmatic ambiguity’ of negation. Language 87. 346–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pollock, Jean-Yves. 1989. Verb movement, universal grammar and the structure of IP. Linguistic Inquiry 20. 365–424.Google Scholar
Potsdam, Eric. 2006. More concealed pseudoclefts in Malagasy and the clausal typing hypothesis. Lingua 116. 2154–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rooth, Mats. 1996. Focus. The handbook of contemporary semantic theory, ed. by Lappin, Shalom, 271–98. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Rutherford, William E. 1970. Some observations concerning subordinate clauses in English. Language 46. 97–115.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Seuren, Pieter. 1990. Burton-Roberts on presupposition and negation. Journal of Linguistics 26. 425–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sneddon, James. 1996. Indonesian reference grammar. London: Routledge, and St. Leonards: Allen & Unwin.Google Scholar
Speas, Peggy, and Tenny, Carol. 2003. Configurational properties of point of view roles. Asymmetry in grammar, vol. 1: Syntax and semantics, ed. by Maria, Anna Sciullo, Di, 315–44. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Sudaryono. 1993. Negasi dalam Bahasa Indonesia: Suatu tinjauan sintaktik dan semantik [Negation in Indonesian: A syntactic and semantic review/survey]. Jakarta: Pusat Pembinaan dan Pengembangan Bahasa.Google Scholar
Sweetser, Eve. 1990. From etymology to pragmatics: Metaphorical and cultural aspects of semantic structure. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tadmor, Uri. 1999. Can word accent be reconstructed in Malay? Paper presented at the 3rd International Symposium on Malay/Indonesian Linguistics, Amsterdam, August 24, 1999.Google Scholar
Tonhauser, Judith, Beaver, David, Roberts, Craige; and Simons, Mandy. 2013. Toward a taxonomy of projective content. Language 89. 66–109.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
van Zanten, Ellen, and van Heuven, Vincent J.. 1998. Word stress in Indonesian: Its communicative relevance. Bijdragen tot de Taal-, Land-and Volkenkunde [Journal of the Humanities and Social Sciences of Southeast Asia and Oceania] 154. 129–47.Google Scholar
Verhaar, John. 1984. The categorial system in Indonesian: Verbs. Towards a description of contemporary Indonesian: Preliminary studies, part 1 (NUSA 18), ed. by Purwo, Bambang Kaswanti, 27–63. Jakarta: NUSA. Online: http://sealang.net/nusa/.Google Scholar
von Fintel, Kai, and Matthewson, Lisa. 2008. Universals in semantics. The Linguistic Review 25. 139–201.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Waltereit, Richard. 2001. Modal particles and their functional equivalents: A speech-act-theoretic approach. Journal of Pragmatics 33. 1391–417.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wolff, John, Oetomo, Dede; and Fietkiewicz, Daniel. 1992. Beginning Indonesian through self-instruction. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University, Southeast Asia Program.Google Scholar
Zanuttini, Raffaella. 1997. Negation and clausal structure. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Don, Zuraidah Mohd, Knowles, Gerry; and Yong, Janet. 2008. How words can be misleading: A study of syllable timing and ‘stress’ in Malay. The Linguistics Journal 3. 6681. Online: http://www.linguistics-journal.com/August_2008_zmd.php.Google Scholar