Norma Pawestri



This study tries to discuss and analyze the topic of copula verbs in Indonesian language, and is aimed to see the types of copula verbs in Indonesian language, also the structure of copula verb in Indonesian language. This research used descriptive analysis method, the findings showed that in Indonesian language, there are these copula verbs such as “adalah” or “ialah” which equals to ‘to be’ in English, but unlike in English, these copula verbs are optional in Indonesian language. Just like in English, it is imperative to use the copulative verbs such as: seem (tampak /terlihat, appear (tampak), become (menjadi), turn (berubah) to form a contruction in Indonesian language, but unlike in English, the form of copula in Indonesian language never changes based on tenses. Another similarity of Indonesian language and English is the necessity to use the copulative verbs such as: feel (merasa), look (tampak/terlihat) etc to form a construction. It is also possible in Indonesian language to form a copula verb by creating the verb into a noun and add some prefix and suffix –nya and pair it with adjective.


Keywords: copula verb, indonesian language, english



Penelitian ini mencoba membahas dan menganalisis kata kerja kopula dalam bahasa Indonesia dan bertujuan untuk mengetahui tipe dan struktur kata kerja kopula dalam bahasa Indonesia. Penelitian ini menggunaan metode deskriptif analisis dan hasilnya menujukkan bahwa dalam bahasa Indonesia, terdapat beberapa kata kerja kopula seperti ‘adalah’ atau ‘ialah’ yang setara penggunaannya dengan ‘to be’ dalam bahasa Inggris, namun yang membedakan adalah bahwa penggunaan kata kerja tersebut tidak lah krusial dalam bahasa Indonesia. Sama halnya dengan dalam bahasa Inggris beberapa kopula seperti “tampak/terlihat” (seem), tampak (appear), menjadi (become), berubah (turn) membentu konstruksi pada bahasa Indonesia, namun dalam bahasa Indonesia, kata kerja kopula tersebut tidak di pengaruhi tenses.


Kata kunci: Kata kerja copula, bahasa indonesia, bahasa inggris


Biber, D., Johansson, S., Leech, G., Conrad, S., Finegan, E. (2000). Longman Grammar of Spoken and Written English. Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press.

Blust, R. A. (2013). The Austronesian languages. Australian National University.

Dixon, R. M. W. (2009). Basic Linguistic Theory 2: Grammatical Topics. Oxford:Oxford University Press.

Frank, M. (1993).Modern English: A Practical Reference Guide-Second edition. New Jersey:Regents, Prentice Halls.

Greenbaum, Sidney and Randolph Quirk.(1990).A Student’s Grammar of the English Language. Harlow: Longman

Harvey. M. (2003). The Nuts & Bolts of College writing.Hackett Publishing Company, Inc USA

Longman dictionary of contemporary English. (2003). Harlow: Longman.

Matthews, P.H. (1987). Syntax. London: Cambridge University Press.

Pratika, D. (2016). The Existence of Indonesian Language: Pidgin or Creole. Journal on English as a Foreign Language, 6(2), 83-10

Quinn, G. (2001). The Learner’s Dictionary of Today’s Indonesian. Sydney:Allen & Unwin. ISBN 1864485434

Quirk, R., Greenbaum, S., Leech, G., and Svartvik, J. (1985).A Comprehensive Grammar of the English Language. London:Longman.

Schütze, C. (2000). Semantically empty lexical heads as last resorts. Semi-lexicalCategories: On the Content of Function Words and the Function of Content Words. N.Corver and H. v. Riemsdijk. Berlin, Mouton de Gruyter.

Shaw, H. (1986). McGraw-Hill Handbook of English. New York: McGraw Hill, Inc.

Stowell, T. (1996). The phrase structure of tense. Phrase structure and the lexicon. J.

Rooryck and L. Zaring. Dordrecht, Kluwer: 277-291.


  • There are currently no refbacks.

View My Stats