MODIFIERS vs. Complement


Dear all netters.
Tahukah anda apa perbedaan yang jelas atau CLEAR CUT antara modifiers and complements?
berikut ini paparan singkatnya:
pertama kita membahas tentang MODIFIERS
MODIFIERS
ya MODIFIERS. APAan tuh MODIFIERS? ^_^

Jika dibandingkan antara complements dan modifiers: modifiers is OPTIONAL.YAH, Betoel bangetz,opsional, gan !!!. jadi beda sama si KAMPLENGEN Eh COMPLEMENTs yang harus/kudu ada dalam struktur kalimat.Coz we all know that MODIFIERS (Semacam penjelas gitu) dapat merubah makna di dalam struktur yang diterangkan atau diperjelas dengan cara yang menarik; misalnya, meskipun frasa THE CAT dalam bentuk frasa nomina atau noun Phrase dalam bentuk kalimat yang “A.” di bawah ini: merupakan bentuk netral dalam memaknai frasa THE CAT, Anda mungkin punya pendapat yang berbeda mengenai frasa THE CAT yang terdapat dalam frasa nomina/ NPs seperti pada bentuk yang B. dan C. :

A.The cat
B.The cuddly, friendly cat
C.The fierce, mean cat

tetapi perlu diingat bahwa kata CAT merupakan kata yang terkadang ga perlu diberi ajektif atau kata sifat. Coba liat yang ini:

The cat sat on the mat.

ini adalah kalimat yang well formed . secara grammatical udah cukup dengan bentuk tersebut meski seperti apa sifat si kucing kita belum ada informasi yang jelas karena frasa THE CAT hanya bisa diartikan sebagai KUCING ITU dalam bahasa Indonesia.

demikian juga kita bisa mengatakan:

1.Harold drove.
2.Harold drove fast.
3.Harold drove fifty miles over the speed limit.
4.Harold drove with exemplary caution on the wet road.

The adverbials/Kata keterangan dalam kalimat 1-4. memberi informasi pada anda mengenai ” how Harold drove ” dan akan membawa anda pada kesimpulan yang berbeda mengenai bagaimana sebaiknya apakah anda siap atau tidak jika anda menumpang kendaraan si Harold “HAROLD DROVE”. is complete–if bland–without an adverbial modifying the verb.

NAH SEKARANG yang berikutnya :COMPLEMENTS,GAN!

tRIK dan tips mudah untuk mengingatnya ialah bahwa: COMPLEMENTS WAJIB ADA DALAM STRUKTUR KALIMAT (BACA:wajib ‘ain: obligatory) untuk melengkapi makna dalam struktur kalimat dalam konstruksi tertentu
. Sebagai orang yang tahu sedikit banyak tentang bahasa Inggris, anda tentu akan merasakan ada yang hilang jika komplemen yang wajib ada ini tidak dimasukkan dalam struktur kalimat.

I. sebagai contohnya, sekelompok kecil kelas kata kerja dalam bahasa Inggris memerlukan “adverbials of location” /kata keterangan tempat sebagai complements.

misalnya kata DWELL yang mana bila kalimat yang disusun kayak gini *FAY AHMED DWELLS. adalah EXTREMELY 🙂 ungrammatical. sama sekali tidak gramatikal maksudnya
coba bandingkan dengan struktur yang keren dan imut ini:

1.Fay ahmed dwells in a beautiful village called Kye Gompa.
2.Fay Ahmed dwells there.
There, Fay Ahmed dwelt.

II. Similarly, with be and the linking verbs, the subjective complement completes both the structure and the meaning.

*FAY AHMED SEEMS. won’t work alias ga jalan,gan: because the word SEEM is used only as a linking verb.

Compare:

FAY AHMED SEEMS WELL. [adj. as subjective complement]
FAY AHMED SEEMS TO BE WELL. [infinitive as subjective complement]
FAY AHMED SEEMS A WISEGUY. [NP as subjective complement]

You might say that these sentences work because the word SEEMS is tagged in a speaker’s internal dictionary, or mental lexicon, as a verb that requires a an adjectival or Noun Phrase complement:

Some verbs that can function as linking verbs can also be used as transitive or intransitive, but note that their meaning changes:

Fay Ahmed looked (pak fay melihat).
Fay Ahmed looked down the hole(pak fay ngliat ke lobang di tanah).
BUT Fay Ahmed looks good and cool.(pak fay keliatan cakep dan keren:)

jadi kata LOOK paling tidak punya dua possible tags: it’s either without complement (intransitive) or (in a different meaning) with subjective complement.

Compare: Harold looked down the hole. This sentence is simply an instance of the intransitive use with an adverbial PP modifying the verb.

A sentence like: Harold is. is possible only in the present tense and only in the marginal meaning “Harold exists.” You might, in fact, want to consider it a sort of pseudo pattern VI (intransitive).

The sentence Harold was. isn’t a possible sentence in English in the meaning *”Harold existed.”

Forms of BE can, however, occur in all tenses as responses to questions, but in these cases the complement is missing, or implied from the context of the preceding sentence; for example:

Q. Who was at the party?

A. Harold was. [at the party]. (pattern I be + ADV T/P)

Q. Who is the smartest of them all?

A. Fay Ahmed Lats is. [the smartest of them all] (pattern II be + adj)

Q. Who was the team’s manager?

A. Harold was. [the team’s manager]. (Pattern III be + NP)

III. Some grammarians would describe verbs that are ONLY transitive as requiring direct objects as complements.

Consider:

*Harold adores.

But:

Harold adores chicken tandoori. [NP as D.O. ]
Harold adores eating Indian food. [gerund phrase as D.O.]

Again, the word ADORE can be thought of as tagged in the speaker’s mental dictionary as requiring a direct object:

IV. Similarly, some verbs are marked as requiring either objects or objective complements:

*The voters elected. (contoh yang salah)
BUT REMEMBER YACH SODARA-SODARA :)ini yang grammatically correct atau bener
the voters elected a president.
The voters elected Fay Ahmed Ernestine president.

A verb like ELECT would be marked as either:
1. requiring a D.O.
OR
2. requiring a D.O. and an objective complement:

V. Other structures, for example, adjectives, can take complements too.
Compare:
Harold is eager.
Harold is eager to go to the store.
Here, the adjective EAGER is tagged as possibly, but not obligatorily, taking an infinitive as complement.

2 thoughts on “MODIFIERS vs. Complement

  1. I like this, but I want to ask you..the cat n a cat is not similar, Can you explain the difference between the cat and a cat if the object is given the adverbial of laocations? tq

    • Ya Bu Emmy memang antara THE CAT dan A CAT itu ga sama. kalo THE CAT sudah mengacu pada seekor kucing yang dibicarakan/dipahami antara komunikator dan komunikan. kalo A CAT masih ngambang kucing yang mana?. Can you explain the difference between the cat and a cat if the object is given the adverbial of locations?
      wew ,pertanyaan bagus,Bu 🙂
      coba kita bereksperimen ya:
      1. The cat sat on the mat.
      2.A cat sat on the mat.
      kucing di contoh satu dan dua sama2 duduk di keset tapi bedanya THE CAT mengacu pada seekor kucing yang sudah diketahui si pembicara dan pendengar sedangkan pada kalimat dua kucing manapun bisa duduk di keset/THE MAT yang sudah jelas mangacu pada keset yang mana. wah cuman begitu keterangan saya, anda punya argumen yang berbeda silakan ditulis. ini sharing koq bukan lecturing 🙂

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s