"Maaf, aku tidak membawakanmu apa pun."
Translation:Sorry, I did not bring you anything.
6 Comments
1373
Are the possessive endings attached to verbs to denote objects? This is the first I have seen it here, I think.
- 1135
Hai teman! This is a short version of "Maaf, aku tidak membawakan kamu apa pun."
So:
Maaf (Sorry), + aku (I, me) + tidak (do not) + membawakan / bawakan (bring, bitransitive verb; instead of "membawa" / "bawa") + kamu (you) + apa pun (anything, whatever)
Selamat belajar! :)
- 1373
Oh, my lord, I think your use of the word bitransitive (that's the same as ditransitive, right?) has clarified this me-X-kan form for me. What I was remarking on was the contraction of kamu to -mu here, which we have only seem previously as a possessive suffix. Here it is indicating what we might call an indirect object (though this clearly works a little differently in Indonesian). Can we use this kind of suffix or contraction for all objects or is it just for the indirect object (or beneficiary?) of a ditransitive verb? It's a lovely sort of suffix to me, as it reminds me of Hungarian.
If my understanding of grammatical terms is correct, "-mu" is the direct object of membawakan, whereas "apa pun" is the indirect object. The alternative would be "membawa apa pun buat kamu"= "Didn't bring anything for you" where the roles are reversed. Here "apa pun" is the direct object and "kamu" the indirect
With that example in mind, you can use the suffixes "-ku" = "me", "-mu" = "you" and "-nya" = "her/him/it" as the direct objects of any transitive verb. (At least when the level of formality is appropriate)
I also believe that you can get away with using them after various prepositions but I'm more shakier on when it is and isn't acceptable.
eg. "Maaf, aku tidak membawa apa pun buatnya" Sorry I didn't bring anything for her.
I think for clarity and simplicity "membawakanmu" should be split this way "membawakan kamu".
