Motion verbs related to Javanese traditional fishing activities: a natural semantic metalanguage approach

Abstract

Javanese fishermen use motion verbs, some of which are semantically very complex as a single lexical item can encode more than four semantic components. Compared to motion verbs across languages, which commonly contain two semantic components, the motion verbs used by the fishermen are more complex, and this raises the question of how to disentangle the components to accurately describe the verbs. This article aims to discuss the motion verbs used by the fishermen and how these verbs are decomposed into their semantic elements. The theory used in this study is the natural semantic metalanguage (NSM), a theory of semantics pioneered by Anna Wierzbicka. This study used data from fishermen living in Semarang, Demak and Kendal, representing areas of Central Java, Indonesia. The data were collected through observation and interview methods and analyzed using the NSM model of explication. The result shows that motion verbs used by the fishermen can be classified into the verbs expressing ‘going to the sea’, ‘coming back home from the sea’ and ‘motion activities on the sea’. Some of the verbs contain five to seven semantic elements, covering MOTION, FIGURE, PATH, GROUND, MANNER, MEDIUM and GOAL.

Keywords:

• Motion
• verbs
• Javanese
• fishermen
• natural semantic metalanguage

Reviewing Editor:

• Jeroen van de Weijer, College of International Studies, Shenzhen University, Shenzhen, China

Subjects:

• Language & Linguistics
• Cultural Studies
• Literature

1. Introduction

Fishermen on the northern coast of Java are active speakers of the Javanese language, a regional language in Indonesia spoken mostly by people living in Central Java, East Java and some parts of West Java. The Javanese language used by the fishermen is characterized by the lexicons associated with traditional fisheries, which reflect their fishing culture. As a cultural text, some lexicons used by traditional fishermen are so complex semantically that they may not be understood by Javanese people who do not live in their fishing areas. This can be seen from some motion verbs that they use in their daily communication. The motion verb miyang, for example, has a complex meaning because this lexicon is the conflation of several semantic elements to form the complex meaning ‘going to the sea by sopek (a kind of traditional boat) to find fish using a fishing net’. This lexicon is even more semantically complex than directed motion expressions, which are commonly realized by two or three lexicons (see Talmy, 1985; Subiyanto, 2010; Son, 2007, 2009). This lexicon contains some elements like ‘figure’ (a fisherman), ‘path/direction’ (to the sea), ‘manner’ (by boat) and ‘goal’ (to find fish). This motion verb is only one of the examples of complex motion verbs used by the fishermen, and so to understand the meaning, we need a comprehensive analysis of the semantic elements within the motion verbs.

In many languages, motion verbs have been an interesting subject lately, not only because of the existing variations of constructions involving motion verbs across languages but also because of the complex meaning that motion verbs have about the conflation of the semantic elements within the verbs. The variations of the lexicalization patterns in constructions involving the manner of motion verbs and the direction or the path of the motion have been widely discussed, such as by Talmy (1985), Sarda (2019), Son (2007, 2009), Pantcheva (2009), Beavers et al. (2009), Schaefer (1986), Slobin (2006), Snyder (2001), Sarda (2019), Gepner (2016), Kondic (2013), Subiyanto (2010) and Łozińska (2021). From the language typology perspective, the discussions on motion verbs are commonly related to how languages are classified based on their similarities in patterning the manner of motion verbs and the path or direction of the motion within a construction (Talmy, 1985, 2000; Slobin, 2006). Slobin said that languages can be categorized into satellite-framed, verb-framed and equipollently framed, depending on the lexicalization pattern used. Satellite-framed languages are the ones using non-verb elements like prepositions to express path or direction, verb-framed languages are the ones using finite verbs to express path, and equipollently framed are the ones using equivalent grammatical forms to express path and manner (Slobin, 2006). In this case, the Javanese language tends to be verb-framed because it has a lot of directional verbs that follow the manner of motion verbs (Subiyanto, 2010, 2016).

Motion verbs have also attracted linguists working with lexical semantics. Yin (2023) studied the semantic difference of motion verbs in Chinese from the image schemas perspective, and she found that the analysis using image schemas can demonstrate the semantic difference of synonymous motion verbs. Persohn (2018) discussed the conflation of semantic elements within seven basic verbs of motion in Nyakyusa, a Bantu language. Waegemaekers (2014) studied motion verbs without motion semantics in Japanese, and Ferez (2010) discussed the conflation types of English and Spanish motion verb lexicons. One of the common findings is that there is a tendency for motion verbs to be composed of the conflation of motion and one additional semantic element, which is either manner or path. In some languages, like English and Spanish; however, motion verbs can contain four conflated semantic elements which are Motion + Path + Ground + Manner, as found in the English verbs ‘skydive’, ‘ford’ and ‘swoop’ (Ferez, 2010).

Some other studies of motion verbs use the natural semantic metalanguage (NSM) theory to discuss the meaning of motion verbs. Mendaza (2016) studied the semantic and syntactic properties of the main Old English verbs related to motion. Goddard (1997) discussed the semantics of ‘coming’ and ‘going’ in English, and he found that, among others, the motion verb GO is not universal in meaning as there are plenty of languages that do not have the exact semantic equivalents of the verb GO. German, for example, has two verbs to express the meaning of GO, which are gehen ‘go on foot’ and fahren ‘go not on foot (in a vehicle)’. This implies that the verbs meaning ‘go’ in German are more complex than the verb ‘go’ in English, as there is an embedded element of the instrument of motion found in the verbs gehen and fahren.

Other studies on the semantics of motion verbs using the NSM approach can be found in Subiyanto (2008) on non-agentive motion verbs in Javanese, Verawaty et al. (2020) on motion verbs in Asahan Malay, and Saragih (2023) on agentive motion verbs in the Angkola Batak language. One of the findings of these studies shows that motion verbs can be classified into agentive motion verbs and non-agentive motion verbs. Agentive motion verbs are the ones conducted intentionally, and therefore, they are composed of the elements WANT and MOVE.

Studies on motion verbs, either from the typological or the NSM perspective show that motion verbs across languages mostly have two semantic elements, and they maximally have four semantic elements. Therefore, the semantic description of very complex motion verbs containing more than four semantic elements, as found in Javanese, has not been discussed. This article aims to discuss very complex motion verbs used by fishermen on the north coast of Central Java and the way the meaning of the motion verbs is explained using the NSM theory. By using the NSM theory, this paper uncovers the complexity of the motion verbs using the language primes as postulated in the theory so that the meaning of the motion verbs can be clearly explained or discrete using simple language. In addition, this theory is expected to be capable of describing how the complex elements of motion verbs are expressed via the explication system within the framework of NSM.

2. The natural semantic metalanguage

The NSM is a semantic theory developed by Wierzbicka (1996, 2003) and Goddard (Goddard & Wierzbicka, 2002, 2014). This theory has been designed to explicate all meanings including culturally complex lexical meanings. The basic assumption of this theory is that the analysis of meaning will not be clear and discrete unless it is conducted by using universal semantic primitives, a kind of universal mini-language. This relates to the second assumption that any complex meaning can be decomposed into a combination of discrete other meanings as found in universal semantic primes (see Goddard, 1997, 2008, Wierzbicka, 2003). These semantic primes are the meanings found in any language that cannot be paraphrased and decomposed into simpler other meanings. The following table shows the universal semantic primes proposed by Goddard and Wierzbicka (2014:12) from their comprehensive surveys across languages.

I, ME, YOU, SOMEONE, SOMETHING-THING, PEOPLE, BODY substantives

KIND, PARTS relational

THIS, THE SAME, OTHER-ELSE determiners

ONE, TWO, SOME, ALL, MUCH-MANY, LITTLE-FEW quantifiers

GOOD, BAD evaluators

BIG, SMALL descriptors

KNOW, THINK, WANT, DON’T WANT, FEEL, SEE, HEAR mental predicates

SAY, WORDS, TRUE speech

DO, HAPPEN, MOVE, TOUCH actions, events, movement, contact

BE (SOMEWHERE), THERE IS, BE (SOMEONE)’S, location, existence,

BE(SOMEONE/SOMETHING) possession, specification

LIVE, DIE life and death

WHEN-TIME, NOW, BEFORE, AFTER, A LONG TIME, time

A SHORT TIME, FOR SOME TIME, MOMENT

WHERE-PLACE, HERE, ABOVE, BELOW, FAR, NEAR, SIDE, space

INSIDE

NOT, MAYBE, CAN, BECAUSE, IF logical concepts

VERY, MORE intensifier, augmentor

LIKE-WAY-AS similarity

The semantic primes are innate in the sense that every human being from any cultural and language background has the concepts as found in the semantic primes. Therefore, the analysis of meaning using the semantic primes can be clear and discrete as it will also be understood by those coming from any cultural background.

In NSM, the semantic primes have certain combinatorial possibilities and basic extended valencies of predicates and quantifiers described in a syntax called ‘conceptual syntax’ (Goddard & Wierzbicka, 2014:12–13). The following is an example of how to explicate the verb ‘miss (someone)’ in English within the NSM framework (Goddard, 2008:17).

Someone X misses someone else Y:

1. when someone X thinks about someone else Y,

   this someone feels something bad

   like people feel when they think like this about someone:

2. b. ‘I was with this someone before,

   when I was with this someone, I felt some good things

   I know that I can’t be with this someone now’

In the explication above, the verb ‘miss’ is composed of two main semantic primes of mental predicates, which are THINK and FEEL. The combination of THINK and FEEL is common in the explications of emotion concepts (see Goddard, 2008) because emotion concepts involve the semantic concept of THINK before someone FEELs (something). These two semantic primes are combined with other semantic primes in a syntax of NSM to explicate the concept of ‘miss’ in English.

3. Motion verbs in NSM

In NSM, motion has the universal semantic prime MOVE (Wierzbicka, 1996), which has the affiliation with the semantic prime FOR SOME TIME, as motion is also related to duration. Motion also has the locational meaning BE SOMEWHERE, and so the semantic primes BEFORE and AFTER are often used to describe the concept of motion. Goddard (1997:153) gave an example as follows.

Someone moved from A to B

before this, X was somewhere (in place A)

after this, X moved for some time

because of this, after this X was somewhere else (in place B)

The explication above shows that motion involves some semantic primes like MOVE, FOR SOME TIME, BE SOMEWHERE, BEFORE and AFTER. Some motion verbs may also indicate direction, so the prepositions expressing directions like ‘towards’, and ‘away from’ may also be used (Goddard, 1997:153–154). This occurs with directional motion verbs, as found in various languages (see Subiyanto, 2010; Pantcheva, 2009; Son, 2009).

Motion verbs commonly have the semantic components of four elements, which are Figure, Ground, Motion and Path (Talmy, 2000). He further said that there are two types of motion in motion events: translational motion, in which the location of an object shifts from one place to another, and self-contained motion, in which an object keeps its location (Talmy, 2000:35–36). Developing Talmy’s components of motion, Mani and Pustejovsky (2012) said that motion can have six components, which are (1) MOTION or the event of motion, (2) the FIGURE, or the entity doing movement, (3) the PATH or the region traversed, (4) the GROUND where the movement occurs, (5) the MANNER of movement and (6) the MEDIUM involved. The semantic components are encoded in various ways using different lexicalization patterns (Waliński, 2020). This implies that the description of motion verbs in NSM can be so complex when there are more than six components conflated within a single motion verb lexicon as used by fishermen on the north coast of Central Java discussed in this study.

4. Research method

The data used in this study are spoken data taken from fishermen living in Semarang, Kendal and Demak fishing areas, which represent the areas of the north coast of Central Java. The fishermen chosen as the informants are those who are Javanese native speakers living in the fishing areas, and they speak Javanese for their daily communication. For each area, five fishermen were chosen randomly as the key informants. In this study, some additional informants were also employed to cross-check the data.

To get the data, we employed observation and interview methods. The observation method was applied to see how the fishermen used verbs of motion in their interaction with each other. In this case, we participated in their conversation and observed the use of verbs expressing motion in Javanese. Meanwhile, the interview method was applied to know the meaning, patterns and the use of verbs of motion and their variations. In addition, the interview method was used to check the acceptability of the use of motion verbs in different settings. In this case, the focus of the data collection is on motion verbs that they used in their fishing activities.

To analyze the data, we used a distributional method, which was conducted by classifying the kinds of lexicons based on their semantic similarities and differences. In this study, the lexical items analyzed are all the motion verbs that are related to Javanese traditional fishing, and so they are only used among the fishermen. In terms of the semantic elements, the verbs are very complex.

In the data analysis, some syntactic tests were used to know whether a certain verb of motion contains the elements of motion verbs such as MANNER, MEDIUM and FIGURE The meaning of the lexicon was then described using an NSM model of explication, using the syntax and the semantic primes of NSM. In this case, we used the explication model of NSM as outlined by Wierzbicka (1996) and Goddard (1997) to explain the meaning of motion verbs.

5. Result and discussion

5.1. Social background of the fishermen on the North Coast of Central Java

Traditional fishermen on the north coast of Central Java live in houses close to the seashore. Some of them have experienced their houses being flooded because of seawater rising at certain hours. This also happens to some streets in the fishing area and also elementary schools where their children study. The flooding that frequently happens, especially in Demak fishing areas, makes the areas look very dirty and smell bad as the water around the areas cannot flow well. This is also due to their habit of throwing rubbish anywhere around their house and so it stays there together with the seawater flooding the areas.

Most fishermen have the educational background of graduating from an elementary school, but their children, after graduating from the elementary school in their area, commonly study at high schools located in town, a bit far from the area. Some of them even study religion at religious education institutions out of town. Some fishermen think that by sending their children to an educational institution out of town, they hope that one day they can live better than their parents. They said that being a fisherman is very hard and dangerous, and it gives a very low income, so they do not want their children to work like their parents. From the perspective of the children when they were interviewed, they are not also interested in working as fishermen, as it is dangerous to work in the sea, and it does not give good income.

With their low education level, most fishermen do not have any choices other than finding fish in the sea. They think that the sea gives them a lot of fish they can take any time. In addition, they think they do not need special skills to find fish in the sea. Therefore, most fishermen conduct their work as miyang (finding fish in the sea using a small boat and a fishing net). To perform this task, a fisherman can either work alone or invite a friend to collaborate on a small boat. In addition, some fishermen go fishing in the sea. Some of them, together with their wives, make shrimp paste that they will sell in the market, and some others work in salted fish factories not far from their area. However, most fishermen have had the experience of working as miyang.

As the natives of the fishing areas in Central Java, the fishermen speak the Central Java dialect of Javanese for their daily communication. In terms of the Javanese speech levels (ngoko (low), madya (middle) and krama (high)) (Purwoko, 2008), the fishermen speak the ngoko level of Javanese to communicate to each other, even between children and their parents. They will speak the krama Javanese when they speak with the Javanese people that they are not familiar with or when they speak with strangers. During the interview, the researchers and the informants used both ngoko and krama Javanese, depending on the situation. The ngoko Javanese was used when the respondents were asked to check the acceptability of the meaning and the syntactic constructions containing motion verbs.

5.2. Motion verbs used by Traditional fishermen

Many motion verbs used by Javanese fishermen on the north coast of Central Java are specific in the sense that they are not used by speakers of Javanese who live outside of the fishing areas. In addition, some motion verbs are semantically complex, and so we cannot find their synonyms in standard Javanese or even English. The motion verbs discussed in the following are classified into three parts: the verbs related to going to the sea, the verbs related to coming home from the sea, and the verbs expressing motion activities on the sea.

5.2.1. The verbs expressing ‘Going to the Sea’

Among the fishermen community, the verb expressing a motion event of ‘going to the sea to find fish’ is popularly called ‘miyang’ (going to the sea by boat using a set of fishing nets to find fish). The activity of miyang has several kinds, which are miyang ngrabah/rucah, miyang nilon, miyang milenium, miyang nyodo, miyang ndogol and miyang njebak. These kinds of miyang are used according to the different kinds and sizes of the fishing net, the way or the method used, and the seawater depth. The activity of doing a certain kind of miyang depends on the kinds of fish the fishermen want to catch. The following table illustrates the differences between the miyang types.

Table

Kinds of miyang	Size of the mesh holes (inches)	The method used	Water depth (m)	Kind of fish commonly caught
miyang ngrabah	2.5	Spreading the net randomly on the sea	1–15	Any kind of fish but not very small fish
miyang nilon	4–5	Spreading the net randomly on the sea	25–60	Big fish
miyang millennium	3–4	Spreading the net randomly on the sea	5–30	Medium and big fish
miyang nyodo	0.25	Putting down a long net in the sea using long bamboo and dragging the net using the boat	3–5	Any kind of fish including very small fish (baby fish)
miyang njebak	1–1.5	Spreading the net filled with dead small fish as the bait randomly on the sea	1–1.5	Any kind of fish but not very small fish
miyang ndogol	0.5	Spreading the net of around 40–50 m long on the area where a group of fish meet on the sea	5–20	Small, medium and big fish

The semantic concept of miyang is complex as this verb is the conflation of seven semantic elements, which are (1) MOTION, (2) FIGURE, (3) PATH, (4) GROUND, (5) MANNER, (6) MEDIUM and (7) GOAL. The MOTION element is similar to the concept of ‘go’, which is from some location to somewhere else. The FIGURE element refers to fishermen, as the activity of miyang is only done by fishermen. The PATH refers to the direction of miyang, which is from the land to the sea. This is shown by the fact that the verb miyang is sometimes combined with the verb lunga ‘go’ as in lunga miyang ‘going miyang’ The GROUND element of miyang is the sea as this is the area where miyang is done. The MANNER element is related to the instrument, which is sopek ‘a kind of boat’ where the fishermen go around the sea to find fish. The MEDIUM used to conduct miyang is the fishing net, which can be of any type depending on the type of miyang. The last component, the GOAL of miyang is always to find fish, as this is the purpose of doing miyang.

The seven semantic elements can be seen from the fact that the verb miyang never comes with the lexicons expressing ground, manner, medium, and goal. In addition, the person doing miyang is always a fisherman, as seen in (1), which implies that Pak Umar ‘Mr. Umar’ is a fisherman. Sentence (1) also shows that the verb miyang contains the semantic element ‘go’ as the use of the Javanese verb lunga ‘go’ in the sentence is optional. Sentences (2–4), and (5) sound odd because the use of lexicons expressing the negation of ground, manner, medium, and goal of miyang is not appropriate.

1. Pak Umar dhek wingi (lunga) miyang tekan sore

   Mr Name yesterday go miyang until afternoon

   ‘Mr. Umar went miyang until late in the afternoon yesterday’

2. ?Pak Umar dhek wingi miyang ora neng laut

   Mr Name yesterday miyang not on sea

   ‘Mr. Umar went miyang not on the sea yesterday’

3. ?Pak Umar dhek wingi miyang ora nganggo sopek

   Mr Name yesterday miyang not use boat

   ‘Mr. Umar went miyang not by boat yesterday’

4. ?Pak Umar dhek wingi miyang ora nganggo jaring lan sodo

   Mr Name yesterday miyang not use fishing net and fishing net

   ‘Mr. Umar went miyang not by using a fishing net yesterday’

5. ?Pak Umar dhek wingi miyang ora golek iwak

   Mr Name yesterday miyang not find fish

   ‘Mr. Umar went miyang not to find fish’

As a semantically complex lexicon, the verb miyang can be decomposed into the semantic prime of the mental predicate WANT (repeated twice), the primes belonging to actions, which are MOVE, DO (repeated twice), and the logical concept MAY BE, combined with other primes like SOMEWHERE and FOR SOME TIME. These semantic primes combined with other semantic primes can be used in the explication for the verb miyang below.

Someone X miyang =

before this, someone X was somewhere FIGURE

this someone wanted to be somewhere else PATH

this someone wanted something GOAL

this person did something with Y MANNER

because of this, this person moved for some time MOTION

because of this, after this person wasn’t in this place anymore

this person was somewhere else GROUND

after this, this person did something with Z MEDIUM

because of this, there may be something inside Z

this person does like this to live

The explication above shows seven semantic elements of the verb miyang. The first component is FIGURE, represented with ‘someone X’, referring to ‘fisherman’, as miyang is only conducted by a fisherman. The second element is PATH, which is expressed by the semantic primes WANTED TO BE SOMEWHERE ELSE, and the semantic prime SOMEWHERE ELSE only refers to ‘the sea’, as the direction of going miyang is only to the sea. The next semantic element is GOAL, which is expressed by the prime WANTED SOMETHING and SOMETHING here refers to ‘fish’. The sentence ‘THIS PERSON DID SOMETHING WITH Y’ means that the fisherman used sopek ‘boat’ as an instrument or the MANNER component for moving, as seen from the sentence ‘BECAUSE OF THIS, THIS PERSON MOVED FOR SOME TIME’, which is the result of the MOTION component. This component is followed by the GROUND element, expressed by the sentence ‘THIS PERSON WAS SOMEWHERE ELSE’, and this SOMEWHERE ELSE refers to the sea. The element Z in the sentence ‘AFTER THIS, THIS PERSON DID SOMETHING WITH Z’ refers to a fishing net, and this is to show the MEDIUM component of doing miyang. The next sentence BECAUSE OF THIS, THERE MAY BE SOMETHING INSIDE Z implies that when doing miyang, a fisherman may or may not get fish. Therefore, the semantic prime MAY BE must be used here. Fishermen do not always get fish when spreading a fishing net in the sea, especially when there is a high wave. The last sentence ‘THIS PERSON DOES LIKE THIS TO LIVE’ shows that miyang is a way to make a living, and therefore, this job is only done by a fisherman.

The concept of miyang as described above is semantically very complex, and it is much more complex than other Javanese agentive motion verbs that belong to the polysemy of the semantic primes WANT and MOVE, such as the verb lunga ‘go’, The basic Javanese verb lunga ‘go’, does not contain the semantic elements of FIGURE, MANNER, GOAL, MEDIUM and GROUND. The concept of lunga is the same as the English GO in the sense that this verb can be used with or without directional elements, as in the sentence Dheweke lunga dhek esuk ‘S/he went this morning’. Therefore, the explication for the verb lunga is the same as that for the English GO, as seen in the following explication (Goddard, 1997:155).

X lunga’GO’ =

before this, X was somewhere

X wanted to be somewhere else

because of this, X moved for some time

because of this, after this X wasn’t in this place anymore

X was somewhere else

In terms of the semantic structure within Jackendoff’s (1990) conceptual semantics, the verb miyang is more complex than the verb lunga, as seen in the scheme below, where the motion event GO contains PATH, but the motion event miyang contains FIGURE, MOTION, PATH, MANNER, GOAL, MEDIUM and GROUND.

[Event GO ([], [Path FROM ([]) TO ([]))

[Event MIYANG [Motion Event GO (Figure [fisherman] [Path FROM ([land]) TO ([sea])],

[Manner SMALL BOAT]

[Goal FIND FISH]

[Medium FISHING NET]

[Ground ON THE SEA]

Another motion verb expressing ‘going to the sea’ is the verb praon ‘going to the sea by boat’. The meaning of this verb is different from that of miyang, as when doing praon, someone does not have a certain goal. In addition, the FIGURE element for the verb praon is not always a fisherman. Besides, the verb praon does not contain the MEDIUM element. The following are the semantic components of the verb praon.

[Event PRAON [Motion Event GO (Figure [X] [Path FROM ([land]) TO ([sea])],

[Manner SMALL BOAT]

[Ground ON THE SEA]

From the perspective of NSM, the verb praon contains some similar elements as the verb miyang, as praon is also one of the polysemes of the semantic primes WANT, MOVE, and DO. However, the verb praon does not contain the GOAL and MEDIUM elements as found in the verb miyang. The following is the explication of the verb praon, which is decomposed into the semantic primes WANT, MOVE and DO combined with other semantic primes.

Someone X praon =

before this, someone X was somewhere FIGURE

this someone wanted to be somewhere else PATH

this person did something with Y MANNER

because of this, this person moved for some time MOTION

because of this, after this time, this person wasn’t in this place anymore

this person was somewhere else GROUND

The explication above shows that the verb praon contains five semantic elements, which are FIGURE, PATH, MANNER, MOTION, and GROUND. The FIGURE element or the agent of praon is not specific, and this is different from that of miyang. The PATH, MANNER, MORION and GROUND elements are like those of miyang.

5.2.2. The verbs ‘Coming Home from Miyang’

When fishermen are back home from doing miyang, they are said to do ngranjing. The concept of ngranjing is different from that of the Javanese mulih ‘go home’. The verb ngranjing has the meaning ‘mulih saka miyang’ (come back home from miyang). In terms of the semantic elements, this verb has six elements: FIGURE, PATH, MANNER, MOTION, GROUND and RESULT.

In NSM, the verb ngranjing is the polysemy of the semantic primes DO, WANT, and MOVE, which is like the verbs miyang, and praon. However, the verb ngranjing is different from the verb mulih ‘come back home’ or teka ‘arrive’, which are the polysemes of WANT and MOVE. The following explication explains the difference between the verb mulih and ngranjing.

Someone X mulih =

before this, someone X was somewhere FIGURE

this someone X wanted to be somewhere else

because of this, this person moved for some time MOTION

because of this, this person was in place Y

someone in this place could think

this person is in the same place as me

someone X nganjing=

before this, someone X was somewhere FIGURE

before this, this someone did something for some time

this someone wanted to be somewhere else PATH

this person did something with Y MANNER

because of this, this person moved for some time MOTION

because of this, this person was on Z GROUND

someone in this place could think

this person is in the same place as me

something may be inside Y RESULT

The FIGURE element of mulih can be anything (X), and not always a human being, whereas that of ngranjing is always a fisherman. In addition, the verb mulih does not have the semantic elements PATH, MANNER, and GROUND as found in the verb ngranjing. To show the semantic relation between miyang and ngranjing, we use the sentence ‘BEFORE THIS, THIS SOMEONE DID SOMETHING (MIYANG) FOR SOME TIME’. When doing miyang, fishermen may get a lot of fish or may not get any fish. This can be seen from what is inside their sopek ‘small boat’ when they do nganjing ‘get back home from miyang’. This uncertainty of getting fish is described in the last sentence of the explication ‘SOMETHING (FISH) MAY BE INSIDE Y’ for the RESULT semantic component.

Fishermen usually feel good with whatever number of fish they get from miyang. At a certain time, they may get a lot of fish, the situation of which is called nyarak, but they may not get any fish, called blong. The unique characteristic of Javanese fishermen is that they always feel happy with whatever result they get, as they think that God has determined what is good and bad about something happening to them. In this context, the lexicon semeleh ‘surrender completely to God’ can describe how they think and feel about everything they face. The following explication describes the meaning of the lexicon semeleh.

X semeleh =

X feels something because X thinks about something

X thinks something good or bad can happen to X

X thinks Y does something good to X

because of this X feels something good

X feels like this

because X thinks like this

The verb semeleh is composed of two main semantic primes, which are FEEL and THINK. In addition, this lexicon is also motivated by the second party, which is Y (God) that X thinks will always do something good to X, as expressed in the sentence ‘X THINKS Y DOES SOMETHING GOOD TO X’. This is the reason why fishermen always feel fine when they ngranjing or go home from doing miyang even though they may not get enough fish.

5.2.3. The verbs expressing motion activities on the sea

When doing miyang, fishermen use some motion verbs to control their boats. The verbs cover mandoh ‘to stop somewhere on the sea temporarily’, and sandar ‘to park the boat at the seashore. The verb mandoh is like the verb mandek (the generic verb in Javanese for the meaning ‘to stop’), but the verb mandoh is unique in the sense that it is only used for the object sopek ‘boat’, and it is done on the sea temporarily. The place on the sea where the boat mandoh is called pandohan. To make the boat mandoh, a fisherman usually turns off the boat engine, and lowers down the anchor into the sea. The activity of making the boat mandoh is called mandoh-ake ‘to make the boat stop temporarily’. In this case, the causative suffix -ake changes the intransitive verb mandoh into the transitive verb. The following sentences describe the different uses of mandoh and mandohake.

(6) Praun-e mandoh neng tengah laut

boat-DEF stop at middle sea

‘The boat stopped temporarily in the middle of the sea’

(7) Nelayan kuwi mandoh-ake prau neng tengah laut

fisherman that stop-CAUS boat at middle sea

‘That fisherman made the boat stop temporarily in the middle of the sea’

During mandoh, fishermen spread the net on the sea to catch fish, and this fishing can be done for a few hours before the boat moves again. The verb mandoh is different from mandek as mandek can be used for any type of object and it can be done temporarily or permanently. In addition, the agent performing the action mandoh toward the object (the boat) is a fisherman, whereas the agent of mandek is not specified. The following sentences illustrate the use of mandoh and mandek.

(8) Praune mandoh/*mandek neng tengah laut, terus dheweke nebar jaring

boat-DEF stop stop at middle sea then 3.SG spread net

‘The boat stopped for a while in the middle of the sea, and then he spread the fishing net’

(9) Angin gedhen-e wis mandek

wind big-DEF stop

‘The big wind has stopped already’

(10) *Angin gedhe-ne wis mandoh

wind big-DEF PERF stop

‘The big wind has stopped already’

From the explanation above, we can understand that the semantic elements of the verb mandoh are FIGURE, PATH, MOTION, MANNER, MEDIUM and GOAL, which are conflated within a single lexicon. The FIGURE element refers to the ‘boat’, the PATH refers to the ‘sea’, the MANNER is ‘turning off the boat engine and lowering down the anchor into the sea’, the MEDIUM element is related to the way to catch fish, which is by spreading a fishing net, and the GOAL element is to catch fish.

In NSM, the verb mandoh is decomposed into the semantic primes MOVE, WANT, and DO, which is like the verbs miyang, ngranjing and praon. This is different from the verb mandek, which is the polysemy of MOVE and HAPPEN. The following explications show the difference between mandoh and mandek.

X mandoh=

before this, someone was on X moving on Y FIGURE and PATH

this someone wanted X not to move MOTION

this person did something with a part of X MANNER

because of this, X did not move

after this, this person did something with Z MEDIUM

this person wanted something GOAL

X mandek=

before this, X was moving

something happened to X

because of this, X did not move

The verb mandoh involves the agent, which is a fisherman. To make the boat mandoh, a fisherman should turn off the boat engine in such a way that the boat will stop. This is different from the verb mandek, which can happen to any type of object, and the object can stop because of something happening to the object. For mandek, the cause of stopping can be anything, and so this is non-agentive.

The analysis of the conflation of semantic parts within motion verbs above implies that Javanese fishermen understand and communicate complex motion elements concurrently. This relates to the type of cognitive efficiency in which intricate motion details are conveyed quickly and with the least amount of language effort (see Slobin, 2004). As a verb-framed language (Subiyanto, 2010), the Javanese language used by the fishermen provides linguistic forms through motion verbs to package complex information to facilitate rapid and effective communication. The use of complex motion verbs among the fishermen is very popular and so the verbs are very effective for their daily communication.

Another important implication of the findings above is that the kinds of motion verbs are related to the socio-cultural background of the fisherman. As a part of the fishing community, fishermen make a living by catching fish in the sea using a small boat, and therefore, the motion verbs they use are the ones related to the lexicons ‘sea’ and ‘boat’. This is a natural phenomenon because the way languages encode motion is tied to both the environmental landscapes and cultural practices that define their interaction with these landscapes (see Brown & Levinson, 1993).

6. Conclusion

Motion verbs used by Javanese fishermen are very complex semantically as a single lexical verb can contain five to seven semantic components. The most complex motion verb is miyang as this verb contains seven semantic components, which are MOTION, FIGURE, PATH, GROUND, MANNER, MEDIUM and GOAL, conflated within a single lexical verb. The antonym of this verb is ngranjing, which contains six semantic elements, which are MOTION, FIGURE, PATH, GROUND, MANNER and RESULT.

A formal analysis using the NSM framework has shown that the semantic components of the motion verbs can be clearly explained using the semantic primes within the NSM syntax. The semantic primes that always occur in the explication of the motion verbs are MOVE, WANT and DO, which imply that the motion verbs belong to agentive motion verbs. The three semantic primes above may occur more than once to clearly explain the meaning of motion verbs. The semantic analysis above also shows that the NSM theory can explain the complex meaning of motion verbs.

The kinds of motion verbs discussed above cannot be separated from the socio-cultural background of the fishermen. Traditional fishermen make a living by catching fish in the sea using a small boat. Therefore, the motion verbs that they use are related to the lexical items ‘sea’ and ‘boat’. These two entities have been the basis for the fishermen to create various kinds of complex motion verbs in their daily communication.

The motion verbs related to Javanese traditional fishing activities may be different from one dialect to another. As this study focuses on the Javanese fishermen in Central Java, the motion verbs discussed only reflect the Javanese dialect of Central Java. Further study needs to be done to know whether there are dialectal variations of the lexicons related to motion verbs used by fishermen.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Agus Subiyanto

Agus Subiyanto is an Associate Professor at the Linguistics Department, Faculty of Humanities, Diponegoro University, Indonesia. He obtained his M.A. from the Australian National University, Canberra, and his Doctor of Linguistics from Udayana University, Denpasar. His research interests are theoretical linguistics (phonology, syntax and semantics) and eco-linguistics. He can be contacted at [email protected]

Nurhayati Nurhayati

Nurhayati Nurhayati is an Associate Professor at the Linguistics Department, Faculty of Humanities, Diponegoro University, Indonesia. She obtained her Master’s and Doctor of Linguistics from the University of Indonesia, Jakarta. Her research interests are pragmatics and discourse analysis. She can be contacted at [email protected]

M. Suryadi

M. Suryadi is an Associate Professor at the Linguistics Department, Faculty of Humanities, Diponegoro University, Indonesia. He obtained his Master of Linguistics from Universitas Gadjah Mada, Yogyakarta, and a Doctor of Linguistics from Universitas Sebelas Maret (UNS), Surakarta. His research interests are semantics and forensic linguistics. He can be contacted at [email protected]

Peter Suwarno

Peter Suwarno is an Associate Professor at Arizona State University, Arizona. He obtained his M.A. and Ph.D. from Ohio University, Ohio. His interests are teaching and research in Indonesian languages, Linguistics & Southeast Asian Religious Conflicts & Literature. He can be contacted at [email protected]