Morfotaktik dan kaedah pengimbuhan Bahasa Melayu

Jangan pelik. Walaupun minat dan aktiviti penyelidikan saya tertumpu kepada bidang sains komputer, saya juga turut mengkaji bidang linguistik yang mengkhusus kepada morfologi. Cuma tidaklah ke tahap pakar. Adalah tulis satu atau dua makalah. Antaranya boleh baca di sini dan di sini [1]

Dalam penulisan ini saya nak bercerita hal berkaitan pembentukan perkataan dalam bahasa Melayu iaitu pengimbuhan. Tetapi bukan menerangkan kaedah pengimbuhan, sebab sudah ramai yang menulis tentang pengimbuhan (cuba Google). Tapi dalam penulisan ini saya menumpukan kepada menjelaskan konsep yang kurang diperkatakan orang iaitu morfotaktik.

Morfotaktik ialah suatu konsep dalam linguistik, yang merujuk kepada peraturan yang terpakai (atau diguna pakai) dalam proses pembentukan perkataan yang melibatkan imbuhan. Istilah ini jarang kita dengar kerana selalunya digunakan dalam kalangan ahli morfologi (pengkaji perkataan) saja.

Dalam bahasa Melayu ada beberapa jenis proses dan kaedah pembentukan perkataan. Antara yang dominan ialah pengimbuhan. Satu lagi yang dominan ialah penggandaan. Disebabkan ini, maka bahasa Melayu digolongkan sebagai bahasa aglutinatif. Maka pembentukan perkataannya juga turut melibatkan morfotaktik. 

(Trivia - Tahukah anda? Bahasa aglutinatif adalah famili bahasa yang turut merangkumi  bahasa Melayu, Turki dan Jerman. Bahasa Inggeris pula tergolong dalam bahasa inflektif, seperti bahasa Arab dan Hebrew. Bahasa isolatif ialah bahasa yang perkataannya berasaskan suku kata seperti bahasa Jepun dan Cina. Famili bahasa ini dibentuk berdasarkan proses dan bentuk perkataan yang dominan dalam bahasa-bahasa tersebut)

Amnya bahasa Melayu mengandungi 4 proses pengimbuhan iaitu:
(bahagian yang ditebalkan ialah imbuhannya)

• Awalan - cth: membaca, penulis, mendengar 
• Akhiran - cth: tulisan, keratan, punyai
• Apitan - cth: membezakan, perkataan 
• Sisipan - cth: gerigi, cerucuk, telunjuk

Pengimbuhan ialah proses mencantumkan kata akar dengan imbuhan untuk membentuk perkataan. Proses pengimbuhan ini pula berlaku mengikut peraturan tertentu (morfotaktik). Ini bermakna pengimbuhan tidak berlaku secara bebas atau sembrono, dan tidak boleh dilakukan sesuka hati. Misalnya imbuhan -an tidak boleh dicantumkan sebelum kata akar. Tempatnya hanya selepas kata akar. Misalnya anggaran, sisipan, makanan dsb. Begitu juga awalan (imbuhan sebelum akar) dan apitan (imbuhan wujud di kiri dan kanan akar) yang berlaku mengikut peraturan masing-masing.

Proses morfotaktik bagi sisipan (imbuhan terselit di celah kata akar) masih kurang jelas asas pembentukannya. Cuma yang boleh dikatakan mengenai pengimbuhan sisipan dalam bahasa Melayu ialah imbuhan hanya wujud (tersisip) selepas konsonan pertama kata akar. Misalnya imbuhan sisipan -er-, -el-, -em-. Namun secara amnya dipercayai proses sisipan juga ada morfotaktik yang tertentu.

(Trivia - Tahukah anda? Kata akar dan imbuhan ialah golongan morfem. Morfem ialah unit dalam perkataan yang mempunyai makna yang tertentu. Ini bermakna bukan kata akar saja yang ada makna, tetapi juga imbuhan. Misalnya imbuhan me- ialah morfem yang memberi maksud 'perbuatan' atau kata kerja. Ini bermakna apa saja yang dicantumkan dengan me- akan jadi perbuatan cth. membaca, mentakrif dsb.)

Siapakah yang mencipta morfotaktik bahasa Melayu? Morfotaktik bahasa Melayu bukan dicipta oleh sesiapa. Ianya terkandung dalam bahasa Melayu sejak dahulu. Ahli bahasa (spesifiknya ahli morfologi) mentakrifkan peraturan ini berdasarkan ciri dan sifat yang sudah wujud dalam bahasa, kemudian mengkelaskan ciri tersebut kepada pengkelasan seperti yang ada sekarang.

Kalau di Malaysia, pihak Dewan Bahasa dan Pustaka ada menerbitkan buku Tatabahasa Dewan. Walaupun bukan khusus tentang morfotaktik (ianya lebih kepada memerihalkan nahu bahasa Melayu), buku ini harus dijadikan rujukan untuk memahami peraturan morfotaktik yang mendasari proses pengimbuhan dalam bahasa Melayu. Antara rujukan lain yang patut dibaca ialah buku Morfologi (terbitan PTS) karangan Prof Emeritus Dr. Abdullah Hassan.

---


NOTA KAKI

[1] Terima kasih  kepada mentor saya, Prof Madya Dr. Zaitul Azma Zainon Hamzah, FBMK, UPM yang banyak mendorong minat dan mengajar saya dalam bidang linguistik dan morfologi. Ironinya waktu saya bersekolah menengah dulu, subjek Bahasa Melayulah yang paling saya tak suka (walaupun cikgunya sangat baik dan berdedikasi). Saya sangat malas buat kerja sekolah Bahasa Melayu hingga didenda jalan itik di koridor! Kenangan... :)

Zaum - bahasa emosi

Istilah zaum, merujuk kepada eksperimen linguistik dalam simbolisme bunyi dan penciptaan bahasa oleh penyajak 'futuris' empayar-Rusia seperti Velimir Khlebnikov dan Aleksei Kruchenykh. Istilah zaum ini diilhamkan oleh Kruchenykh, yang menggabungkan dua prefiks dalam bahasa Rusia iaitu za- (melampaui, di belakang) dan um- (minda, nous=kebijaksanaan), yang membawa maksud bahasa rentas-rasional dan tidak mempunyai maksud yang khusus (wikipedia-zaum)

Istilah ini belum pernah saya dengar sebelum ini. Saya cuba membayangkan sekiranya wujud bahasa sebegini (yakni dianggap sebagai suatu bentuk bahasa) bagaimana hendak menjelaskan maknanya kerana bahasa itu sendiri direka untuk tidak merujuk kepada makna yang khusus? Zaum dikatakan bukan menjelaskan simbol atau makna sebaliknya bahasa emosi. Ulasan ke atas karya penulisan Franco Berardi juga menarik kerana mengaitkan potensi zaum dengan aplikasi telepati dan alam maya (virtual reality).

Rujukan:

Wikipedia. URL- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zaum. Dirujuk pada 3 Jun 2017.

UFO (Unidentified Fishy Objects) found in malware?

Researchers can't identify programming language used in Duqu, ask for help
The programming language used to write parts of the Duqu malware remains a mystery despite countless hours of analysis

http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/9225024/Researchers_can_39_t_identify_programming_language_used_in_Duqu_ask_for_help


.

Developing new languages? etc.

Some news on new programming languages

http://www.technologyreview.com/computing/25854/

Nothing on new paradigms, just some improvement to the existing languages and techniques...

Other related news (on the same website):
Simpler Programming for Multicore Computers
The Problem with Programming

Search by tags : 'programming' | 'code'


p/s: Only manage to gather some news ...

Regular Expression (RE) as PL ?

Just a duplicate of my ol' blog posting in http://www.regexadvice.com :

Regular expression as a programming language. Is it possible?

I began to learn about regular expression about 3 years ago. I was at that time, never heard about, or even expect to know such a thing. I was asked to learn Perl to solve some Bioinformatics work, and in my mind i don't have any regex knowledge, except mathematical statements like x = { y| y is subset of z}, or y = {1,2,3}, and some basic knowledge of Z-language. Although the math statements did not closely resembles the regular expression statements that are used in programming language, its foundation is still a 'regular expression' (since regular expression is about stating the regular behavior of the item that we want to specify). We assure y = {1,2,3} by /[1-3]/. Anyway, from that point of time, i began to learn Perl, and slowly i was introduced to m// operator, s/// and tr/// (text processing requires a massive use of these operators).

What i like about regular expression is its compactness. Techniques for simplifying codes have been explored long time before. One approach is by using function (which is eventually another concept that come from math). Using function (or some use the word subroutine), we manage to reduce codes, and simplify them just by calling their name instead of rewriting the same codes. Almost with a similar purpose in mind, we use regex to simplify complex requirements, which is by representing a set of rules within a simple statement, i.e. /a-z/. One should realize that we are representing many lines of codes within a single statement. Just imagine, using regular expression as programming language, a million lines of codes can be turned into just several lines of codes (or symbols).

I'm also believe that regular expression can possibly be a language that is easier to remember, and can be written faster. This because in regular expression we use simple symbols to represent (possibly) complex rules. It have been proved that our brains can (easily) remember things that we see visually compared to the things that are written or touched. Also human brains will capture things in graphical form. Based on this fact, isn't it possible that we can remember some simple symbols more faster than to remember huge amount of text? Also since we only need to write symbols, it will not take us a long time to write the codes in regular expression (unless for complex rules).

Regular expression is specified using a finite set of symbols, such as '?' to represent existence, '+' to represent repetition etc, make it looks more encrypted. Programming language was created to bring computer language (machine language) more closer to the natural language, so that it will become easier for people to write codes to be computer programs. Based on this fact, it seem impossible for encrypted code like regular expression to be accepted as one of high programming language.However, it is not an excuse. Even most of programming language today require some comments to clarify its purpose, or explain what the code does. People might claims that some high level language is already self-explained (the codes explains its purpose). However many of us will found that this statement is not true for all cases. When a section of codes becomes so complex, even the most proclaimed self-explanatory language require at least few comments to describe the codes. Some of todays implemented regular expressions allows comments to be included in the regular expression statement. So it is not encrypted at all when the regular expression are combined with some extra comments. In implementation, no different in code size since comments will be ignored.

I'm just writing the general ideas of how regular expression can possibly be a programming language here. There's still a lot of things that need to be considered, studied and experimented with. But I'm still hoping for this idea to become true.

Guess what? Randal Schwartz (the Perl hacker) posted a comment on it! :)
He said:

Abigail uses regex to compute prime numbers. Ovid created a prolog-like problem solver using the regex engine. The regex engine is quite versatile, especially with built-in back-tracking.

And then later i added more updates:

I'm thinking about the advantage of natural (written) language over mathematical notations (and vice versa). Since (most) natural language statements can be simplified using mathematical notation e.g. like 'one plus two is equal to three' and '1+2=3'. But somehow there's a situation where mathematical notations gets longer than natural language. For example (unfortunately i can't show the mathematical expression), when we need to describe the relations of elements between sets, i found it is more convenient to describe it using simple sentence. But i arrive at a conclusion that, this 'advantages' over another is simply because there are no simple notation in either languages (neither natural nor mathematical) to describe the semantics of another language. If we need to describe certain aspect of a language (X), in another language (Y), we must define a notation (in Y) which describe the semantic described by other language (X) in similar fashion, which is as precise and understandable (same complexity in interpretation) as the original (X). So when we convert into the target language (Y), we gets a 'similar' complexity with the original (X), but with a new notation.

This idea basically was applied in regex to natural language, except with a different complexity. This complexity increased because regex tends to describe a pattern (many characteristics and semantics in a minimum notation) of natural text, not directly one-to-one interpretation (i mean the whole expression, not the symbol). If we want to allow regex to be able to describe a semantic of program (or as programming language), there should be many (not all) one-to-one correspondence between regex statement and computer program command.

Well, that's all. I haven't found anymore idea than this (yet!)

Yeah, that's all (since i never updated it). The last update is on June 12th, 2008.

Some funny (and not so funny) jokes on PL

Here are some jokes on programming languages (PL):

• If programming languages were cars...
  http://www.cs.caltech.edu/~mvanier/hacking/rants/cars.html

and here is the not-so-funny one (inspired from above):

• If programming languages were religions...
  http://www.aegisub.net/2008/12/if-programming-languages-were-religions.html
  
  
• it's 'cover note'
  http://www.aegisub.net/2008/12/if-programming-languages-were-religions_20.html