SEMANTIC ANALYSIS OF THE WORD HAVE USING THE NATURAL SEMANTIC METALANGUAGE

THESIS
Presented to
Gajayana University
in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements
for the Degree of SARJANA SASTRA

By
Ilham Trihandini
NIM 03415001

FACULTY OF LETTERS
GAJAYANA UNIVERSITY MALANG
2007

THE APPROVAL PAGE

This is to certify that the Sarjana thesis of Ilham Trihandini has been approved by the thesis advisors for further approval by the board of Examiners.

Malang, September, 2007
Advisor I

Dra. Sri Wahyuni, MA, MA Tesol

Malang, September, 2007
Advisor II

Fadhilah, SS

THESIS LEGITIMATION

This is to certify that the Sarjana thesis of Ilham Trihandini has been approved by the board of Examiners as the requirements for the Sarjana Degree in the English Language and Literature.

Malang, September 2007
Board of Examiners

Dra. Sri Wahyuni, MA, MA Tesol ………………………………Chairperson

Fadhilah, SS ………………………………………………………Member

Dra. Tatiek K. Danti, M. Pd ………………………………………Member

Acknowledged by
Dean of Faculty of Letters

Dra. Tatiek K. Danti, M. Pd

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

I would like to convey a great appreciation to Dra. Sri Wahyuni, MA, MA Tesol as my first advisor for her patience, attention, corrections, comments, and ideas for my thesis. My gratitude also goes to Fadhilah, SS as my second advisor for all her time, corrections and support.
The sincere thanks goes to Dra. Tatiek K. Danti, M. Pd as the Dean of English Department, and also to all the lecturers of faculty of Letters, Gajayana University.

TABLE OF CONTENTS
The Approval Page................................................................................. i
Thesis Legitimation................................................................................ ii
Acknowledgement................................................................................. iii
Abstract.................................................................................................. iv
Table of Contents................................................................................... v

CHAPTER I. INTRODUCTION.......................................................... 1
1.1. Background of the Study...................................................... 1
1.2. Problem of the Study............................................................ 4
1.3. Purpose of the Study............................................................. 5
1.4. Significance of the Study...................................................... 5
1.5. Assumption........................................................................... 5
1.6. Scope and Limitation........................................................... 6
1.6.1. The Scope of the Study......................................... 6
1.6.2. The Limitation of the Study.................................. 6
1.7. Definition of Key Terms...................................................... 7
1.8. Theoretical Framework........................................................ 7
1.9. Organization of the Study.................................................... 8

CHAPTER II. REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE.................... 9
2.1. Meaning............................................................................... 9
2.1.1. The Nature of Meaning.......................................... 10
2.1.2. Meaning According to Linguistic Approach.......... 11
2.2. Semantics............................................................................ 13
2.3. The Natural Semantic Metalanguage.................................. 14
2.3.1. The Basic Ideas of NSM......................................... 14
2.3.2. Semantic Primitives................................................ 16
2.3.3. How to Make an Explication.................................. 18

2.4. Have as an Ordinary Verb................................................ 19
2.5. Have as an Auxiliary........................................................ 20
2.5.1. Present Perfect Tense.......................................... 21
2.5.2. Past Perfect Tense............................................... 21
2.5.3. Future Perfect Tense........................................... 22
2.6. Have as Causative............................................................ 22

CHAPTER III. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY............................. 24
3.1. The Research Design........................................................ 24
3.2. Source of the Data............................................................ 25
3.3. Data Collection................................................................. 25
3.4. Data Analysis.................................................................... 25

CHAPTER IV. ANALYSIS AND DISCUSSION........................... 27
4.1. Analysis............................................................................. 27
4.1.1. The Meaning of the Word Have........................ 27
4.1.2.Context of Each Meaning of the Word
Have Used..................................................... 45
4.1.2.1. Have roughly means posses or own....... 45
4.1.2.2. Have roughly means already.................. 48
4.1.2.3. Have roughly means cause or ask.......... 49
4.2. Discussion........................................................................... 51

CHAPTER V. CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTION....................... 55
5.1 Conclusion............................................................................ 55
5.2. Suggestion............................................................................ 56

REFERENCE

CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION

This chapter contains background of the study, problem of the study, purpose of the study, scope and limitation, significance of the study, definition of key terms and organization of the study.

1.1 Background of the Study
One of the Linguistic subfields is Semantics. It is a wide subject within the general study of language. Semantics is usually understood to be the study of meanings which are encoded in the structure of the language. It is also understood to be the study of the more-or-less stable, conventionalized meanings of linguistic signs. Roughly speaking, semantics deals with meanings which are encoded into linguistic forms. Even more roughly, semantics deals with words and sentences (Goddard, 1998: 15).
The word semantics came from Greek, Sematikos, the “significant meaning” which is derived from Sema, Semeion the “sign, mark” [www.wikipedia.org]. According to Goddard, Semantics, the study of meaning stands at the very center of the linguistic quest to understand the nature of language and human language abilities (1998: 1). Learning and expressing the meaning of the words is what languages are all about. In the past, Semantic debate was largely concerned with discovering exactly the word meaning is. The enquires have undoubtedly increased our understanding of the nature of the problem, but accepted definition of meaning is still argued.
In modern Linguistics, then, the meaning is studied by making detailed analysis of the way words and sentences that used in specific contexts. It is an approach shared by some semanticists. Language without meaning is useless. When a person hears someone speaking without knowing the meaning of the utterances, for him those utterances are not a language. Linguists generally agree that, when people communicate, they do more than just attend to what actually being said by way of words, grammatical constructions and intonation patterns, they are also alert to what is implied. Most words and morphemes in the language have their own meanings. We shall talk about the meaning of words, even though we already know that words may be composed of several morphemes (Fromkin, 1983: 164). Not only do we know what the morpheme of the language are we also know the meaning of it.
Whether we are interested in exploring the connection between meaning and culture, or between meaning and grammar, or simply in exploring meaning for its own sake, the first thing we need is consistent, reliable, and clear method of stating meanings-a system of semantic representation. Not surprisingly, the main theoretical controversies in semantics concern the nature of the optimal system of semantics representation (Goddard, 1998: 3). Dictionaries are filled with words and their meanings, we are a walking dictionary, we know the meaning of thousands of words. But sometimes we still think what the meaning of certain word is even though it is a familiar word for us. Meaning is not an easy thing to get, it is more likely to be abstract. Therefore, the goal of semantic study is to explain how sequences of languages are matched with their proper meanings and placed in certain environments by speakers of the language.
The innovative tool of Natural Semantic Metalanguage analysis allows us to formulate statements of meaning in terms of semantic universals drawn from natural language, to pinpoint word meanings, grammatical meanings and discourse meanings expressed in any language and cultural setting. The Reductive Paraphrase or Natural Semantic Metalanguage (NSM) approach is founded on the principles of clarity and simplicity (Goddard, 1998: 56). The basic idea is that we should try to describe complex meanings in terms of simpler ones. For example, to state the meaning of a semantically complex word we should try to give a paraphrase composed words which are simpler and easier to understand than the original. This method of semantic description is called reductive paraphrase. NSM starts with a very reasonable observation. We just know that our words and signs have significance. Admittedly, we can not always define them precisely and we are apt to misuse terms on occasion. Anyone who speaks a language has a truly amazing capacity to reason about the meanings of texts. The meaning of a sentence is not just an unordered heap of the meanings of its words, so we need to think about arrangements of meanings.
The NSM approach accepts a stringent standard of descriptive adequacy-the test of substitutability without change of meaning. This means that the ultimate test of a good explication is that the native speakers agree that the explication and the original expression say exactly the same thing (Goddard, 1998: 57). The NSM enables us to examine what is meant by participants in a communication event and hence to identify exactly what meaning are and are not successfully conveyed in an intercultural communication. The NSM is one of the semantic metalanguage used to state semantic representation including English linguistic forms such as “have”.
Have is a general word, and is applied to whatever belongs to or is connected with someone. Knowing the meaning of this word means knowing that it is the most general word. Have generally means to own, to experience, or to posses. Consider, for example, the word Have used in these two sentences: “I have finished” and “I have pencils”. The first sentence means that Have done or have as used in forming in the perfect tenses and the perfect infinitive, the second one is to own or to posses. Have in English varies in terms of meaning depends on the grammar.
The semantic representation of have becomes confusing to English learners. Thus research on semantic representation of have is essential to do. In order to know the meaning of the word Have is, using the innovative tool of Natural Semantic Metalanguage and knowing in which context each meaning is used, I was motivated to conduct the study: Semantic Analysis of The Word Have Using The Natural Semantic Metalanguage.

1.2 Problems of the Study
Based on the illustration provided in the background of the study, the problems of the study are:
1. What is the meaning of the word have?
2. In which context is each meaning used?

1.3 Purpose of the Study
Based on the research problems, the purpose of the study is intended
1. To identify and explain the meanings of the word have.
2. To explain in which context each meaning is used.

1.4 Significance of the Study
This study is expected to give a meaningful contribution to the linguistic study especially in the field of semantics. By knowing the semantic representation of a linguistic form, we can comprehend the meaning. In addition, this study will be a helpful model for the students of the English Department, Faculty of Letters, Gajayana University on the use of the Semantic Metalanguage in stating the linguistic forms. This study also introduces the innovative tool of semantic analysis called The Natural Semantic Metalanguage.

1.5 Assumption
I assume that the word have has various meanings if it is used in different contexts. I also assume that, The Natural Semantic Metalanguage will be one of the efficient devices in stating the semantic representation of the English word have.

1.6 Scope and Limitation.
1.6.1 The Scope of the Study
The scope of the study is the semantic representation of the word have analyzed using the NSM (Natural Semantic Metalanguage). Thus, the study will present the semantic representation of the word have, the contexts in which the word have is used, and the explication of each semantic representation in terms of NSM.

1.6.2. The Limitation of the Study
Under the coverage of the scope of the study are semantic representation of the word have, the contexts in which the word have is used, NSM explication of each semantic representation, and the degree of validity of each explication of the semantic representation. However, the last item, the degree of validity, cannot be illustrated in study due to some reasons, such as lack of opportunity to confirm to the native speakers of the language.
Another thing considered to be the limitation of the study is the fact that the data of the study is only taken from the example sentences written under the entry of the word have in Oxford Learner’s Dictionary of Current English and Oxford Advanced Learner’s Encyclopedic Dictionary. If the data reflect all the use of the word have in the whole dictionary, the generalization of the findings will be more accurate. Thus, it is considered to be the limitation of the study.

1.7 Definition of Key Terms
To avoid misunderstanding, it is necessary to describe and explain some terms that are used in study in depth. The followings are the definition of the terms:
1. Semantics is branch of linguistics that concerned with studying the meanings of words and sentences (Hornby, 1974: 775).
2. NSM stands for Natural Semantic Metalanguage, the reductive paraphrase. It is founded on the principles of clarity and simplicity. An ideal NSM analysis (often called an explication) is a paraphrase composed in the simplest possible terms, thus avoiding circularity and obscurity (Goddard, 1998: 56).
3. Metalanguage is a language used to describe a language.
4. Explication (explicate) means explain and analyze in detail.
5. Semantic Representation is an object of any kind which states the meaning of an expression (Goddard, 1998: 11).

1.8 Theoretical Framework
According to Goddard (1998: 56), an ideal NSM semantic analysis (often called an explication) is a paraphrase composed in the simplest possible terms, thus avoiding circularity and obscurity. No technical terms, ‘fancy words’, logical symbols, or abbreviations are allowed in explications, which should contain only simple expressions from ordinary language (e.g. I, you, someone, do, happen, think, know, big, because). As a true paraphrase, the explication should be exhaustive; that is, it should faithfully portray full meaning of the expression being analyzed. It is also expected that an explication couched in semantically simple terms will be readily translatable across languages.
The NSM approach accepts a stringent standard of descriptive adequacy-the test of substitutability without change of meaning (Goddard, 1998: 57).
Tense is any of the forms of a verb that maybe used to indicate the time of the action or state expressed by the verb (Crowther, 1989: 941). There are six tenses in English: present, past, and future and present perfect, past perfect, and future perfect (Macmillan, 1986: 442).
Causative is words or forms of words expressing cause (Crowther, 1989: 140). Causative have is followed by the simple form of a verb, not an infinitive (Azar, 1992: 187).

1.9 Organization of the Study
The presentation of this study is arranged systematically into five chapters. Chapter one, introduction, contains background of the study, problem of the study, purpose of the study, significance of the study, assumption, scope and limitation, definition of key terms, theoretical framework and organization of the study. Chapter two is review of related literature. It covers the theories that are related to and supporting the analysis. Chapter three presents research methodology. It covers research design, research approach, data, and data analysis. Chapter four contains the analysis and discussion, and chapter five deals with the conclusion and suggestion.

CHAPTER II
REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE

In order to give theoretical bases to this study, this chapter presents theories underlying this study. It involves the discussions of the theoretical review to answer the questions mentioned in the first chapter. Here, I review some related literature in order to support the validity and reliability of my thesis.

2.1 Meaning
Expressing meaning is what languages are all about. Language without meaning is useless. Everything in a language—words, grammatical construction, and intonation patterns—conspires to realize this goal in the fullest, richest, subtlest way. To understand how any particular language works we need to understand how its individual design works to fulfill its function as an intricate device for communicating meanings (Goddard, 1998: 1).
According to Bloomfield, the statement of meaning is therefore the weak point in language study, and will remain so until human knowledge advances very far beyond its present state. In practice, we define the meaning of a linguistic form wherever we can, in terms of some other science. Even we had an accurate definition of the meaning that is attached to every one of the forms of a language, we should still face a difficulty of another sort (1933: 140). Meaning is not an easy thing to get, it is more likely to be abstract.
Yule states that, when linguists investigate the meaning of words in language, they are normally interested in characterizing the conceptual meaning and less concerned with the associative or stylistic meaning of word (1985: 91). Many English words have several meanings and uses.
Whether we are interested in exploring the connection between meaning and culture, or between meaning and grammar, or simply in exploring meaning for its own sake, the first thing we need is a consistent, reliable, and clear method of stating meanings—a system of semantic representation (Goddard, 1998: 3).

2.1.1 The Nature of Meaning
For thousands of years philosophers have been pondering the meaning of “meaning”. Yet everyone who knows a language can understand what is said to him or her and can produce strings of words that convey meaning (Fromkin and Rodman, 1978: 163). Goddard (1998: 3), explains about the nature of meaning using a notion ‘meaning is not what’ as follows:
1. Meaning is not reference
Meaning is not something which is pointed out, it is more than that. According to Goddard, whatever the meaning of a word may be, it must be something other than what the word refers to (1998: 4).
2. Meaning is not scientific knowledge
Meaning can not be described in terms of scientific knowledge, because it is more complicated and difficult to understand. The point is if we are going to use words to explain the meaning of other words, an important principle is that the definition or explanation must consist of simpler, more easily understood terms than the word being defined (Goddard, 1998: 6).
3. Meaning is not ‘use’
The meaning of a word is related to its use; in fact, it can be argued that the meaning of a word is the main determinant of its use. But for the purpose of accounting for linguistic competence, ‘the meaning is use’ theory must be rejected, or at least heavily modified. It is hard to see how the ‘meaning is use’ view could account for the meaning of whole sentences or utterances (Goddard, 1998: 7).
It is not very helpful if people only know the use of all the words. We have to go on to describe in each case what it is that they know about the use.

2.1.2 Meaning According to Linguistic Approaches
In modern linguistics, some semanticists define the meaning of ‘meaning’ more relevantly. Goddard explains some views of meanings which are more relevant to modern linguistics.
1. Truth-conditional Theories
The truth-conditional theory is the theory based on the approach that to understand a sentence we have to understand how the world would have to be for that sentence to be true (Goddard, 1998: 7). For example ‘Snow is white’, the world understand that the truth is ‘Snow is white’.

2. Conceptual Theories
A meaning of a word is a structured idea, or ‘concept’, in the mind of person using that expression (Goddard, 1998: 8). It has been in people mind since they can recognize the words and the use of it.
3. Platonist Theories
Platonist theories are contrasting with the conceptual theories according to which meaning is ‘all in the mind’ Platonist theories view meanings as abstract relationships between expressions, existing independently of speakers, hearers, and actual speech acts (Goddard, 1998: 9)
4. Structuralist Theories
According to a fully structuralist theory of meaning, the meaning of any word is actually constituted by the totality of relationships this words has with the other words in the language (Goddard, 1998: 9).
5. The Semiotic Approach
A final approach to meaning may be termed semiotic or translational. This approach to meaning can be called ‘translational’ because, in this theory, the meaning of a linguistic expression is regarded as a kind of translation; that is, people give the meaning of one expression by way of a translation into another, more easily understood expression. It is called ‘semiotic’ because it takes the world of ‘signs’ as irreducible (Goddard, 1998: 11).

2.2 Semantics
There are so many semanticists that define the meaning of semantics, but they have the same concept about semantics, that is the study of meaning. In Linguistics, the study of meaning is normally referred to as Semantics. The word semantics came from Greek, Sematikos, the “significant meaning” which is derived from Sema, Semeion the “sign, mark” [www.wikipedia.org]. Semantics refers to the aspects of meaning that are expressed in a language, code, or other form of representation. Semantics is contrasted with two other aspects of meaningful expression, namely, Syntax is the construction of complex signs from simpler signs, and Pragmatics is the practical use of signs by agents or communities of interpretation in particular circumstances and contexts. By the usual convention that calls a study or a theory by the name of its subject matter, semantics may also denote the theoretical study of meaning in system of signs [www.wikipedia.org].
Yule states that, generally, work in semantics deals with the description of word-and sentence-meaning (1985: 91). The study of linguistic meaning of words, phrases, and sentences is also called semantics. All the speakers know how to combine the meaning of words to get the meanings of phrases and sentences. We have no difficulties in using language to talk to each other (Fromkin and Rodman, 1978: 163).
According to Goddard, semantics is usually understood to be the study of meaning which are encoded in the structure of the language. It is also understood to be the study of the more-or-less stable, conventionalized meanings of linguistic signs. Roughly speaking, semantics deals with meanings which are encoded into linguistic forms. Even more roughly, semantics deals with words and sentences (1998: 15).

2.3 The Natural Semantic Metalanguage
The basic idea of the Natural Semantic Metalanguage is to try to describe complex meanings in terms of simpler ones. For example, to state the meaning of semantically complex word, try to give a paraphrase composed of words which are simpler and easier to understand than the original. This method of semantic description is called reductive paraphrase.
The reductive paraphrase or Natural Semantic Metalanguage (NSM) approach is founded on the principles of clarity and simplicity. An ideal NSM semantic analysis (often called an Explication) is a paraphrase composed in the simplest possible terms, thus avoiding circularity and obscurity (Goddard, 1998: 56). No technical terms, ‘fancy words’, logical symbols, or abbreviations are allowed in explication, which should contain only simple expressions from ordinary natural language.

2.3.1 The Basic Ideas of Natural Semantic Metalanguage
There are controversies about what is the best way to express a semantic representation. To make this clearer it is useful to introduce the term metalanguage. In general, a metalanguage simply means a language that is used to describe or analyze another language (Goddard, 1998: 11).
The NSM approach seeks above all to distinguish the essential from the optional, to capture the invariant, and to break complex concepts into maximally simple ones, relying exclusively on independently established conceptual primes and lexicon-grammatical universals (Wierzbicka, 1999: 40).
NSM starts with a very reasonable observation. We just know that our word and signs have significance. Admittedly, we cannot always define them precisely and we are apt to misuse terms on occasion. The basic ideas of Natural Semantic Metalanguage are:
1. Every word has one or more word-senses (concepts), which have different meanings.
2. Every concept has a literal meaning, and may have one or more metaphorical meanings. A meaning has an essential core (“semantic invariant”), and context-dependent variations.
3. Definition (explication) of a complex concept is a sequence of paraphrases using simpler concepts. A definition characterizes the complete meaning (range of use) of a concept.
4. Every natural language includes the same set of universal concepts (semantic primes) which cannot be defined by simpler concepts.
5. Matching prototype is a sufficient, but not necessary, condition for unit to be subsumed under a concept [www.volcano.net].
In addition, according to Goddard, as a true paraphrase, the explication should be exhaustive; that is, it should faithfully portray the full meaning of the expression being analyzed. It is also expected that an explication couched in semantically simpler terms will be readily translatable across languages (1998: 57).

2.3.2 Semantic Primitives
Semantic Primitive is some elementary meanings or set of basic terms which cannot be defined or reduced further.
Semantic primitive ought to be so-called lexical universal, in the sense that it should have a counterpart—an exact translation—in every human language. The term ‘lexical’ is used in broad sense to include not only words, but also bound morphemes and fixed phrases. Semantic primitives may have variant forms (allolexes or allomorphs). The set of semantic primitives is supposed to be a complete lexicon for semantic analysis. It should contain only expressions which are indefinable or incapable of further explanation, and it should contain all such expressions, making it powerful enough to take on the full range of complex meanings capable of being expressed in the language as a whole (Goddard, 1998: 60).
However, of all the modern proponents of semantic primitives, Anna Wierzbicka has been at once the most persistent, and the most insistent that semantic primitives can and must be embodied in expressions (words, bound morphemes, or fixed phrases) from ordinary, natural language. The current proposed primes can be presented, using their English exponents, in the table below.

Proposed NSM semantic primitives (after Wierzbicka 1996)

Substantives: I, YOU, SOMEONE, PEOPLE/PERSON; SOMETHING/THING
Determiners: THIS, THE SAME, OTHER
Quantifiers: ONE, TWO, SOME, ALL, MANY/MUCH
Evaluators: GOOD, BAD
Descriptors: BIG, SMALL
Intensifier, Augmentor: VERY, MORE
Mental predicates: THINK, KNOW, WANT, FEEL, SEE, HEAR
Speech: SAY, WORD
Actions, events,
movement: DO, HAPPEN,
MOVE
Existence: THERE IS
Life: LIVE, DIE
Time: WHEN/TIME, NOW, BEFORE, AFTER, A LONG TIME, A SHORT TIME, FOR SOME TIME
Space: WHERE/PLACE, HERE, ABOVE, BELOW; FAR, NEAR; SIDE, INSIDE
Interclausal linkers: BECAUSE, IF
Clause operators: NOT, MAYBE
Taxonomy, partonomy: KIND OF, PART OF
Similarity: LIKE
Metapredicate: CAN
(Goddard, 1998: 58)

2.3.3 How to Make an Explication
Goddard states that an explication can still be reductive—and still be valuable—even while containing some semantically complex terms, provided that none is more complex than the original term being defined and provided none needs to be defined in terms of the original word (1998: 61). Semantic explications are explanatory paraphrase, framed in the metalanguage of simple and universal semantic primes. They can range in length from two or three words to literally dozens of interrelated clauses. Semantic explication can be phrased so as to accommodate the subjectivity and vagueness of many meanings [www.wikipedia.org]. For example the following explication shows a semantic description for the word ‘sadness’ (Wierzbicka, 1999: 39)
Sadness (e.g X feels sad)
(a) X feels something
(b) sometimes a person thinks
(c) “I know: something bad happen
(d) I don’t want things like this to happen
(e) I can’t think now: I will do something because of this
(f) I know that I can’t do anything”
(g) because of this, this person feels something bad
(h) X feels something like this

The explication of ‘bela sungkawa’ is proposed as follows (Wahyuni, 2001: 38)
Bela sungkawa (X bela sungkawa marang Y)
(a) X felt something because X thought something
(b) sometimes a person thinks about someone (Y)
(c) “something bad happened to this person
(d) this person feels something bad now
(e) if something like this happened to me,
(f) I would feel something like this person feels
(g) I want to do something good for this person”
(h) when this person thinks this, this person feels something bad
(i) X felt something like this
(j) because X thought something like this

2.4 Have as an Ordinary Verb
Have is a general word and is applied to whatever belongs to or is connected with someone. We often use Have to talk about states: possession, relationships, illnesses, the characteristics of people and things, and similar ideas (Swan, 1995: 230). The examples of sentences are as follows:
Examples: Her father has a flat in Westminster.
They hardly have enough money to live on.
Have you any brothers or sisters?
The prime minister has a bad cold.
Have means posses. This is the basic meaning of Have (Thomson and Martinet, 1986: 125). When we use have in the sense of own or posses we do not need to use ‘do’, ‘does’, or ‘did’. We can simply put have, has, or had at the beginning of the sentence (Sinclair, 1990: 198).
Examples: He has a black beard.
I have had this car for ten years.
Have we anything else we ought to talk about first?
Have is the main verb. If the verb is have, we usually put ‘do’, ’does’, or ‘did’ at the beginning of the question or interrogative sentence, in front of the subject (Sinclair, 1990: 198).
Example: Does anyone have question?

2.5 Have as an Auxiliary
According to Macmillan (1986: 442), there are six tenses in English: Present, Past, and Future and Present Perfect, Past Perfect, and Future Perfect. To make the perfect tenses, we must use a form of the auxiliary verb have with the past participle of the main verb.
Have and be function as auxiliaries of aspect. Have is auxiliary of the perfective aspect when followed by the –ed participle of another verb (Aarts. F and Aarts. J, 1982: 39). Aspect is a grammatical category associated with verbs that expresses a temporal view of the event or state expressed by the verb. Perfective aspect is an aspect that expresses a temporal view of an event or state as a simple whole, apart from the consideration of the internal structure of the time in which it occurs [www.sil.org].

2.5.1 Present Perfect Tense
It expresses past time. Present refers to the tense of the auxiliary verb has or have. The present perfect tense expresses an action or condition that occurred at some indefinite time in the past.
Example: They have brought a present for us.
The present perfect tense can also be used to communicate the idea that an action or a condition began in the past and continues into present. This use normally involves adverbs of time or adverbial phrases.
Examples: We have kept the dogs indoors for a week.
Women have voted in presidential elections since 1921.

2.5.2 Past Perfect Tense
We form the past perfect tense by using Had. The past perfect tense is to indicate that one past action or condition began and ended before another past action started.
Examples: She had been the captain of the team before I became a captain
By the time the troops arrived, the war had ended

2.5.3 Future Perfect Tense
We form the future perfect tense by using will have or shall have. The Future Perfect Tense is to express one future action or condition that will begin and end before another future event starts.
Example: By summertime I will have lived here for four months.

2.6 Have as Causative
A special use of Have in phase structure is to say that the subject causes something to be dealt by someone else. In this case Have is followed by an object referring to the thing dealt with, and then by the past participle of a transitive verb or of an intransitive verb followed by a preposition (Sinclair, 1990: 192).
When Have followed by a direct object and a participle or infinitive (without to), the meaning is cause somebody to do something or cause something to be done (Swan, 1980: 281). Causative have is followed by the simple form of a verb, not an infinitive (Azar, 1992: 187). The Have causative implies the existence of some kind of well-established power relationship between the causer and the cause (Goddard, 1998: 269).
Examples: I had the plumber repair the leak.
She had her secretary type the letters.
He had his driver bring the car around.
They had her sing at the party.
Have gives idea that “X” requests “Y” to do something. The past participle is used after have to give a passive meaning.

CHAPTER III
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

This chapter presents the discussion on how the study is conducted. The discussion will include the research design, the source of the data, the technique of data collection and data analysis.

3.1 The Research Design
This study employs qualitative research method since the data of this study cannot be treated with the statistical procedures as those in the quantitative research. Qualitative research is one of the two major approaches to research methodology in social sciences. According to Bogdan and Taylor (1984: 5), qualitative research is a research that produces descriptive data which is people’s own written or spoken and observable data.
In getting and analyzing the data as the answer to the cited questions in the first chapter, I concern with the Semantics and Natural Semantic Metalanguage. Therefore, I attempt to explain and identify the meaning of the word “Have” using The Natural Semantic Metalanguage.

3.2 Source of the Data
The source of the data is Oxford Learner’s Dictionary of Current English and Oxford Advanced Learner’s Encyclopedic Dictionary. In this research, the selected sentences are only the sentences that consist of the word Have.

3.3 Data Collection
According to Seliger and Shohamy (1989: 154), the researcher of language possibly collects the words or sentences as the data because they belong to observable behavior. In collecting the data, I follow the following procedures: First, I collect some sentences from dictionary related to this study from the Oxford Learner’s Dictionary of Current English and Oxford Advanced Learner’s Encyclopedic Dictionary. The number of the data consists of the word Have is fifteen sentences. Second, I make list the sentences which consist of the word Have. Third, I classify the sentences based on question whether they are present tense, perfect tense, or causative.

3.4 Data Analysis
In order to answer the problems formulated in chapter 1, I take some steps in order to find out the meaning of the word Have using Natural Semantic Metalanguage. The steps of analyzing the data are:
1. Finding out the meaning of the semantic representation of the word Have according to the use of it in each context.
2. Make an explication of each meaning of the word Have.
3. Identify the context where each meaning appears.
4. Conclude the result of analysis.

CHAPTER IV
ANALYSIS AND DISCUSSION

This chapter presents analysis of the collected data based on theories underlying this study. The complete analysis and discussion on the research findings are as follows:

4.1 Analysis
There are two steps of analysis that I want to present to answer the problems of the study as stated in the first chapter, namely: what is the meaning of the word Have and in which context is each meaning used.

4.1.1 The Meaning of the Word Have
Have is a general word and is applied to whatever belongs to or is connected with someone. Based on the analysis, Have is used in several different ways, to talk about possession, to talk about causing and to talk about already.
Below, I list and classify the examples of sentences which contain the word Have:
DATUM SENTENCE EXPLANATION
1. He has the house in the country The word Has which actually comes from Have, roughly means possess or own. Thus, the meaning of the whole sentence is that a man (he) possesses a house and the house is located in the country. In other words, it can be said that the house located in the country belongs to the man. From the meaning of the word, it can be inferred that sometimes before the man claims to possess the house, the man does not think that an object, the house, is part of him. He wants to make other people think something like these: I can do something to this thing; other people cannot do something bad to this thing. Thus, the man in the sentence thinks that the house is part of him, and he wants to make people around him know that he can do whatever he wants to the house and he does not want other people to do harmful things to the house.
2. Do you have any pets? This sentence is an interrogative sentence. It is a kind of sentence which actually asks about something or any other information which expects a reply of yes or no. People ask something because they want to know about some information. Have here, roughly means possess or own. In other words, the questioner asks to the listener whether the listener possesses any pets or not. The questioner does not know about it, that is why he asks to the listener. From the meaning of the word, it can be said that maybe the listener owns or possesses the pets which are part of him. If the pets are part of the listener, it means that he can do something to the pets. He does not want something bad to happen to the pets.
3. She has a good memory The word Has which actually comes from Have, means possess or own. The meaning of the whole sentence is that a woman (she) possesses or owns a good memory. A memory is inside human body which means that it is part of human body. In other words, the woman possesses or owns something good inside her body, which is a memory. Before she claims that she possesses a good thing which is part of her, she can not think it is part of her. She wants people think things like these: I want someone to know about this; I can do something to this thing. Thus, the woman in the sentence thinks that the memory is part of her, and she wants to make people around her know that she can do something.

4. The house has three bedrooms. This sentence means a house can contain some bedrooms. In other words, inside the house there are some bedrooms. Has which actually comes from Have here, roughly means possess or own. Thus, the meaning of the whole sentence is that the house possesses three bedrooms. Those bedrooms are part of the house because it is inside the house.
5. I have two sisters Have in this sentence roughly means possess or own. This possession indicates relationship. In other words, I possess something, in this case someone. This one is part of me. The whole sentence means, that I possess two sisters, the two sisters are part of me. I can do something to my two sisters. Because of this, I want people think something like these: I can do something to this one; I do not want other people do something bad; this one is part of me.
6. I do not have the authority to send them home Have in this sentence roughly means as possess or own. The sentence is a negative sentence. The meaning of the whole sentence is that I do not own the authority to send them home. In other words, it can be said that the authority to send them home does not belong to me. From the meaning of the word, it can be inferred that, the ownership of the authority is not part of me. Because of this, I want people to think something like these: I want people to know this; This thing is not part of me; I know I can not do anything. Thus, I want people around me know that the authority is not part of me and I can not do anything to send them home.

The meaning of the sentence mentioned in datum 1 is that, the man (he) possesses a house which is located in the country. In other words, the house located in the country belongs to the man. To posses a thing means that the thing is part of the person who possesses it. The man can do something or whatever he wants to the house because it belongs to him. Before he possesses the house, he does not now that the house is part of him. Now, he knows that the house becomes part of him. Because of this, he can do anything he wants to the house and he wants people around him to know that he possesses the house. He does not want if people do harmful things to the house.
The meaning of the sentence mentioned in datum 2 is that, a person (the questioner) asks to the other person (the listener) whether the listener owns any pets. In other words, does the listener possess any pets or not. If the listener possesses or owns some pets, means that the pets belong to him and the pets become part of the listener. Becoming part of the listener, means that the listener can do something to the pets and the listener wants people around him to know that he owns the pets. He does not want if something bad happen to the pets.
The meaning of the sentence mentioned in datum 3 is the woman (she) owns a good memory. A memory is inside human body means that it is part of human. Thus, it can be said that the woman owns something good inside her, which is a memory, and it is part of her. Because of this, she can do something or anything she wants to her memory. She wants people around her know that she possesses a good memory. Other people can not interrupt or do any harmful things to her memory.
The meaning of the sentence mentioned in datum 4 is the house possesses three bedrooms. In other words, the house contains three bedrooms. Those bedrooms are inside the house, so the bedrooms become part of the house.
The meaning of the sentence mentioned in datum 5 is that, I own or possess two sisters. The two sisters are part of me. Because of this, I want people around me know that I possess two sisters and my two sisters are part of me. I can do something to my two sisters, whether it is good or bad thing. People around me can not do anything to my two sisters. I do not want if something bad to happen to my two sisters.
The meaning of the sentence mentioned in datum 6 is that, I do not own the authority to send them home. In other words, the authority to send them home does not belong to me, means that the ownership of the authority is not part of me. Because of this, I can not do anything. I want people around me know that I do not own the authority to send them home.
From all the meaning marked on datum 1 to datum 6, it can be concluded that the word Have roughly means possess or own, which is applied to whatever belongs to someone and part of someone.
The scenario of the meaning of the word Have is that, first, someone wants other people to know about some things which he claims to possess. For this a semantic component “X wants other people to know these things:” is required. Second, before someone claims he possesses something, some times before the moment of claiming, the thing was not part of him yet. Thus, a semantic component “some times before now, Y was not part of X” is required. Third, now he knows that the thing becomes part of him means that he possesses it. Therefore, the semantic component “Now, Y is part of X” is required. Fourth, after the claiming of possessing something and the thing becomes part of him, he wants other people to think that the thing is part of him, he can do he wants to the thing whether it is bad or good. Thus, the semantic component “I can do something to Y” is required. Finally, someone wants to protect the thing belongs to him and he does not want if other people to do harmful things to it. Thus, the semantic component “I don’t want something bad happen to Y” is required.
Based on the illustration, the full explication of the meaning of the word Have can be proposed as follows:
X has Y
(a) X wants other people to know these things:
(b) some times before now, Y was not part of X
(c) now, Y is part of X
(d) because of this, X can think something like this:
(e) I want other people to know Y is part of me
(f) I can do something to Y
(g) I don’t want something bad happen to Y
Component (b) indicates that Y was not part of X before the moment of claiming, but then Y becomes part of Y as it is mentioned in component (c). X can do something to Y whether it is good or bad thing, and X does not want other people do something bad to Y, component (f) and (g). X wants other people to know that X possesses Y and it is part of X as it is mentioned in component (e).
There is one exception which I should explain here. In datum 4, the explication only contains (b) and (c), because it is an example of sentence with an animate subject. Thus, the elements of desire to show and protect the possessiveness cannot be reflected. The explication of the word Have can be proposed as follows:
X has three Ys
(a) some time before now, Y was not part of X
(b) now, Y is part of X

DATUM SENTENCE EXPLANATION
7. I will have the gardener plant some trees. The word Have in this sentence roughly means cause or ask. The meaning of the whole sentence is that I will cause someone, the gardener, to plant some trees. From the meaning of the word, it can be inferred that I want the gardener to do something, plant some trees, and I want the gardener to know this. Because of this, I say something to someone or the gardener directly. Because of this, someone does something I want. I know if I say something to someone about something like this, someone can not say: “I don’t want to do this”. Thus, in the sentence, I want the gardener to plant some trees and the gardener will do what I want.
8. They are going to have their house painted. The word Have here roughly means cause or ask. The meaning of the whole sentence is that they are going to cause someone to paint their house. In other words, their house is going to be painted by someone. From the meaning of the word, it can be inferred that they want someone to paint their house and they want someone to know this. Because of this, they say something to someone or to other person. Because of this, someone does something they want. They know if they say something to someone about something like this, someone can not say: “I don’t want to do this”. Thus, in the sentence, they are going to paint their house and they want someone to paint it.
9. I must have these shoes repaired. The word Have in this sentence roughly means cause or ask. The meaning of the whole sentence is I must cause someone to repair these shoes. In other words, it can be said that these shoes must be repaired by someone. From the meaning of the whole sentence it can be inferred that I want someone to repair these shoes and I want someone to know this. Because of this, I want to say something to someone or to other person. Because of this, someone does something I want. I know if I say to someone about something like this, someone can not say: “I don’t want to do this”. Thus, in the sentence I must ask someone to repair these shoes.
10. Why don’t you have your hair cut? The word Have in this sentence roughly means cause or ask. The meaning of the whole sentence is the questioner wants the listener to cause someone to cut his hair. In other words, it can be said that the questioner wants the listener’s hair to be cut by someone. From the meaning of the word, it can be inferred that the questioner wants someone to do something to the listener’s hair and the questioner wants the listener says something to someone. Because of this, someone does something. The listener knows, if he says something to someone about something like this, someone can not say: “I don’t want to do this”. Thus, in the sentence the questioner wants the listener to cut his hair and his hair will be cut by someone.

The meaning of the sentence mentioned in datum 7 is that, I will cause someone to plant some trees. In other words, I want the gardener to plant some trees and I want to say this to the gardener directly. I know if I say something to the gardener, he (the gardener) can not say that he does not want to plant some trees. Because of this, the gardener will do what I want, namely, planting some trees.
The meaning of the sentence mentioned in datum 8 is they are going to ask someone to paint their house. In other words, they want someone to paint their house and they want to say this to someone to paint their house. They know if they say to someone that they want others to paint their house, someone can not say that he does not want to do what they want. Because of this, someone is going to paint their house.
The meaning of the sentence mentioned in datum 9 is that I must cause someone to repair these shoes. In other words, I want someone to repair these shoes and I want someone to know that I want these shoes to be repaired. I know if I say something to someone about this, someone can not say that he does not want to do what I want. Because of this, these shoes must be repaired by someone.
The meaning of the sentence mentioned in datum 10 is that, the questioner wants the listener to cause someone to cut his hair. In other words, the questioner wants the listener’s hair to be cut by someone. The listener knows if he says something to someone to do what he wants, someone can not say that he (someone) does not want to do this. Because of this, the listener’s hair will be cut by someone.
From all the sentences marked on datum 7 to datum10, it can be inferred that Have roughly means cause or ask, which is applied to cause someone to do something.
The scenario of the meaning of the word Have is that, first, someone has a wish to ask or cause someone else to do something for him. For this, a semantic component “X wants Y to do something” is required. Second, to make his wish comes true, he has to make another person knows his wish because it is impossible for the person to perform any action if the person does not know the wish. Thus, a semantic component “X wants Y to know this” is required. Third, to make another person knows about his wish, he has to say that he wants the person to do something for him. In other words, he has to ask the other person to do something. Thus the semantic component “because of this, X says something to someone” is needed. Fourth, after listening the words said by the person, the causee performs the action required. Therefore, a semantic component “because of this Y does this” is required. Y or the causee does the action because the causee does not have the capacity to reject the instruction. This fact is also known by the causer that the causee cannot refuse to do something the causer wants because of some reasons. This, hence, leads to a semantic component “X knows when X says something like this about something like this, Y cannot say: “I don’t want to do this”.
Based on the illustration, the full explication of the meaning of the word Have is as follows:
X has Y do (Z)
(a) X wants Y do something (Z)
(b) X wants Y to know this
(c) because of this, X says something to someone
(d) because of this, Y does it
(e) X knows when he / she say something like this about something like this, Y can’t say: ‘I don’t want to do this’ (Goddard, 1998: 270).
According to the explication above, the causer (X) wanting the causee (Y) to do something, as stated in component (a). The causer wants Y to know of her or his wish, and so expresses it verbally (either to Y or to some intermediary), as stated in component (b) and (c). Because of this, Y does it, as stated in component (d). The distinctive flavor of the construction comes from the implication, spelt out in (e), that X knows that Y could not reject an instruction or directive of this kind coming from X. In other words, for whatever reason, Y would do what X wants.

DATUM SENTENCE EXPLANATION
11. I have finished my work The word Have in the sentence roughly means already. The meaning of the whole sentence is my work is already finished. From the meaning of the word, it can be inferred that some times before now I did something, my work. I did my work for some times. And now, I do not do my work anymore or I do not do this thing anymore. I can say something about the thing I did.
12. He has gone home The word Has which actually comes from Have in this sentence, roughly means already. The meaning of the whole sentence is the man (he) is already at home. From the meaning of the word, it can be inferred that some times before now, the man (he) did something. He did this thing for some times. Now, he does not do this thing anymore. He can say something about the thing he did.

13. She had fallen asleep by that time The word Had in this sentence roughly means already. The meaning of the whole sentence is the woman (she) is already asleep. From the meaning of the word, it can be inferred that some times before now the woman (she) did something. She did this thing for some times. Now, she does not do this thing anymore. She can say something about the thing she did.
14. I shall have done it by next week The word Have in this sentence roughly means already. The meaning of the whole sentence is I will already do it. From the meaning of the word, it can be inferred that some times before now, I did something. I did the thing for some times. Now, I do not do this thing anymore. I can say something about the thing I did.
15. I will have had the results by then The word Have in this sentence roughly means already. The meaning of the whole sentence is I will already have the results. From the meaning of the word, it can be inferred that some times before now, I did something. I did the thing for some times. Now, I do not do this thing anymore. I can say something about the thing I did.

The meaning of sentence mentioned in datum 11 is that, I already finish my work. In other words, it can be said my work is already finished. Some times before now, I did my work. I did it for some times. Now, I do not do my work anymore. I can say something about the thing I did, namely, finish my work.
The meaning of the sentence mentioned in datum 12 is the man is already goes home. Some times before now, the man did something. He did this thing for some times. Now, the man does not do this thing anymore. He can say something about the thing he did.
The meaning of the sentence mentioned in datum 13 is the woman is already asleep. Some times before now, the woman did something. She did this thing for some times. Now, the woman does not do this thing anymore. She can say something about the thing she did.
The meaning of the sentence mentioned in datum 14 is I shall already do it by next week. Some times before now, I did this thing. I did the thing for some times. Now, I do not do this thing anymore. I can say something about the thing I did.
The meaning of the sentence mentioned in datum 15 is I will already have results by then. Some times before now, I did something. I did this thing for some times. Now, I do not do this thing anymore. I can say something about the thing I did.
From all the sentences marked on datum 11 to datum 15, it can be inferred that the scenario of the meaning of the word Have is that, first, in the past time someone did something. Thus, the semantic component “some times before now, X did something” is required. Second, during the time in the past, someone did the action or it can be said that he did something he actually started in the past. Therefore, the semantic component “X did this thing for some times” is required. Third, at this time someone does not do the thing he did in the past. Thus, the semantic component “Now, X does not do this thing anymore” is required. Fourth, after the thing he did in the past, he can say something about it. Thus, the semantic component “X can say something about the thing X did” is mentioned.
From the scenario above, it can be concluded that the word Have, roughly means already. Thus, the explication of the word Have is as follows:
X has … (past participle)
(a) some times before now, X did something
(b) X did this thing for some times
(c) now, X does not do this thing anymore
(d) X can say something about the thing X did
According to the explication above, component (a) indicates that person-X did something at the past time. X did the thing during the past time, it is mentioned in component (b). Component (c) indicates that this time or now, X does not do the thing he did in the past. Person-X can say that he did something in the past time, it is mentioned in component (d).

4.1.2 Context of Each Meaning of the Word Have Used
After I found out the meaning of the word Have, the next step of analysis is to explain in which context of each meaning of the word Have is used. From the explanation at the previous analysis, it can be concluded that the word Have roughly means possess or own, cause or ask and already. Below, I will explain the context of the word Have used according to the meaning of it.

4.1.2.1. Have roughly means possess or own
Have is used in the context of showing that something belongs to someone or someone possesses something. To possess something means that to have control and enjoyment of it. I mentioned some examples of sentences that contain the word Have which represents possess or own. They are as follows:
Datum1. He has the house in the country.
Datum2. Do you have any pets?
Datum3. She has a good memory.
Datum4. The house has three bedrooms.
Datum5. I have two sisters.
Datum6. I do not have the authority to send them home.
The tense of the sentences above is simple present, because it is to talk about general truth, or about things that happen regularly or all the time (not just around now). Datum 1, 3, 4 and 5 are the examples of affirmative.
He has the house in the country

Subject Verb Object adverb of place
(used by the third person singular / he)

From the examples above, it can be explained that Has which actually comes from Have, is used as an ordinary verb. It is to explain that something is possessed by someone. Has is used by the third person singular. The spelling of the verb coming with the third person singular have -s to infinitive. For example, work becomes works. Verbs ending in consonant +y change y to i and add -es, for example, cry becomes cries. Verbs ending in -s, -z, -ch, -sh or -x add -es to infinitive, for example, buzz becomes buzzes and the exceptions are have becomes has, go becomes goes and do becomes does.
Datum 2 and 6 are the examples of interrogative and negative sentence. Do as an auxiliary is used to form the negative and interrogative of the present simple of ordinary verb. Have is conjugated with do for habitual action.
Regardless the form of the sentence, it can be seen that, morphologically, the word Have inflects for tense, person, and number. Thus, when the tense is changed into “past”, datum 1 will change into “He had the house in the country”, and if the subject of the person is changed into first person, for instance, datum 1 is changed into “I have the house in the country”. In terms of number, if the subject of the sentence is changed into “plural”, then datum 1 will change into “They have the house in the country”. In short, the word Have which roughly means “to posses” changes its form depending on type of tense, person, and number involved in the sentence.
Similarly, the word Have which roughly means “to posses”, syntactically, fits on the slot N—. The N (noun) functions as the subject of the sentence, and the word Have occupies the slot following the noun. This position requires an agreement of N and verbs so that the morphological requirement is fulfilled.
The word Have which roughly means “to posses” also fits the slot N—N. The first N is the subject of the sentence; and the second one is the object of the sentence. The word Have occupies the slot in between. The use of the word Have which does not fit the slots illustrated here will bring the change of meaning of the word. For example, the word Have that is used in the slot Determiner—, will bring the meaning change:
“The have are normally arrogant”
Since the word Have occupies the slot that appears after a determiner, it is classified as a noun which means “people who are wealthy”. It is now obvious that the meaning of the syntactical condition.
Regarding the morphological as well as syntactical conditions of the word, the meaning (semantical condition) of the word can be identified.

4.1.2.2. Have roughly means already
Have roughly means already is used in the context of showing or indicating that something is already happened. It is functioned as auxiliary of aspect. Have is auxiliary of the perfective aspect when followed by the –ed participle of another verb. In other words, to make perfect tenses, we must use a form of the auxiliary verb Have with the past participle of the main verb. Irregular verbs have special past participles that must be memorized.
I mentioned some examples of sentences that contain the word Have which represents already. They are as follows:
Datum11. I have finished my work
Datum12. He has gone home
Datum13. She had fallen asleep by that time
Datum14. I shall have done it by next week
Datum15. I will have had the results by then
The tense of the sentences in datum 11 and datum 12 is the present perfect tense. It describes as an action that happened at an indefinite time in the past or that began in the past and continues in the present. This tense is formed by using Has / Have with past participle of the verb.
Have / Has + past participle
I have finished my work
(Auxiliary verb) (-ed participle)
(finish –ed)

The tense of the sentence in datum 13 is the past perfect tense. It describes an action that took place in the past before another past action. In other word, it is to indicate that one past action or condition began and ended before another past action started. This tense is formed by using Had with past participle of the verb.
Had + past participle
She had fallen asleep by that time
(Auxiliary verb) (past participle)
(irregular verb)

The tense of the sentence in datum 14 and datum 15 is future perfect tense. It describes an action that will occur in the future before some other action. In other words, it is to express one future action or condition that will begin and end before another future event starts. We form the future perfect tense by using will have or shall have with the past participle of the verb.
Will have / Shall have + past participle
I shall have done it by next week
(Auxiliary verb) (past participle)
(irregular verb)

4.1.2.3. Have roughly means cause or ask
Have roughly means cause or ask is used in the context of expressing the idea that the person wants something to be done for him or her. In other words, it is used when one thing or person causes another thing or another person to do something.
I mentioned some examples of sentences which contain the word Have that represents cause or ask. They are as follows:
Datum7. I will have the gardener plant some trees.
Datum8. They are going to have their house painted.
Datum9. I must have these shoes repaired.
Datum10. Why don’t you have your hair cut?
The form of the examples on datum 7 to datum 10 is in the form of causative. The form of causative is Have + Object + {Past Participle} Base form of a verb. This structure can be used to talk about arranging for things to be done by other people.
They are going to have their house painted
(causative) (object) (past participle)

This construction can be used to express an equivalent sentence which means “I employ someone to do something for me”.

I will have the gardener plant some trees
(causative) (object) (base form of a verb)

In shorts, it can be seen that the contexts of the word Have which roughly means cause or ask are that: first, if the sense of the sentence is active, the pattern must be S + Have + Object + Base form of a verb. Here, the object of the sentence must be able to perform an action. Thus, human being or animal should be used as the object of the sentence. Then, the verb used must be the base form, meaning that it cannot come with –s or –es ; -ed ; or –ing. For example “I will have the gardener plant some trees”.
Second, if the sense of the sentence is passive, the pattern must be S + Have + Object + Past participle. Here, the object of the sentence cannot perform any action, hence, it is considered to be done to. For example “I must have these shoes repaired”.

4.2 Discussion
The analysis elaborated in the previous section shows that the word Have is used in three different ways, to talk about possession, to talk about causing and already.
The first meaning of Have is to talk about possession. It is applied to whatever belongs to someone and part of someone. The explication of the word Have consists of component (a) to component (g). There is one exception, I found that an example of sentence with an animate subject, it only consists two components of explication, namely (a) and (b). Thus, the elements of desire to show and protect the possessiveness cannot be reflected. From the meaning of the word, Have is used in the context of stating something belongs to someone. The form of the sentences shown is in the form of present. When we talk about permanent situations, or about things that happen regularly or all the time (not just around now), we usually use the simple present. In general, according to Michael Swan (1995: 457-459), the types of simple present form are as follows:
1. The simple present is used to talk about permanent situations, or about thing that happens regularly, repeatedly or all the time.
2. The simple present is often used when we ask for and give directions and introductions.
3. We do not usually use the simple present tense, to talk about temporally situations or actions that are only going on around the present. However, the simple present tense is used with verbs that cannot normally be used in progressive forms.
4. We usually use the simple present tense, to talk about completed actions and events that happen as we speak or write.
The word Have morphologically inflects for tense, person, and number. In short, the word Have which roughly means “to posses” changes its form depending on the type of tense, person, and number involved in the sentence. Syntactically, the word Have which roughly means “to posses” fits on slot N—. The N (noun) functions as the subject of the sentence, and the word Have occupies the slot following the noun. This position requires an agreement of N and verbs so that the morphological requirement is fulfilled. The word Have which roughly means “to posses” also fits on the slot N—N. The first N is the subject of the sentence and the second one is the object of the sentence. The word Have occupies the slot in between. The use of the word Have which does not fit the slots illustrated here will bring the change of the meaning of the word.
The second meaning of Have is to talk about cause or ask. It is applied to cause someone to do something or cause something to be done. The causer wants the causee to do something. The causer wants the causee to know something he wants, so he says or expresses it verbally either to the causee or to some intermediary. Instead of doing something ourselves, we “have” someone else to do it. From the meaning of the word, Have is used in the context of causative. According to Goddard (1998: 260), a causative is an expression in which an event (the caused event) is depicted as taking place because someone does something or because something happens. The causative has the form of Have followed by object and past participle. This structure can be used to talk about arranging for things to be done by other people. If the sense of the sentence is active, the pattern must be S + Have + Object + Base form of the verb. Here, the object of the sentence must be able to perform an action. Thus, human being or animal should be used as the object of the sentence.
The third, the word Have roughly means already. It is applied to something which already happened. According to the explication on the previous analysis, Have roughly means already indicates that a person (he) did something in the past and he did the thing during the past time and this time he does not do the thing anymore, thus he can say that he did something in the past time. There is one possibility of another explication in this section. For example, in the sentence “Mary has loved chocolate”. Has loved is not something that she did, but something that she felt. Thus, the explication is as follows:
X has …. (past participle)
(a) some times before now, X felt something
(b) X felt thing for some times
(c) now, X does not feel this anymore
(d) X can say something about the thing X felt
From the meaning of the word, Have is used in the context of already. The form is in the perfective aspect. It indicates that an action or situation started in the past but has current relevance. The perfective aspect is grammatically encoded by the perfective auxiliary + -ed participle. In other words, perfective aspect is the aspect of a verb that expresses a completed action. Perfective tense is a tense of verbs used in describing action that has been completed (sometimes regarded as perfective aspect) [www.dictionary.com].
From the results of the analysis, it can be seen that there is a relationship between Grammar and Semantics. In the past, it was believed that there was very little relationship or even there was not any relationship between Grammar and Semantics. However, it has recently believed that sentence structure, which is under the domain of Grammar, is generally predictable from word meanings. Thus, Semantics can provide invaluable keys to understanding why Grammar works as it does (Goddard, 1998: 3).

CHAPTER V
CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTION

All of the results of the analysis are concluded in this section. Based on the problems of the study, the conclusion covers two essentials points, namely the meaning of the word Have and in which context each meaning is used. Moreover, some suggestions for the next researchers are available at the end of the section.

5.1 Conclusion
Having analyzed the meaning of the word Have using The Natural Semantic Metalanguage and in which context each meaning is used, I draw a conclusion as follows:
There are three different meanings of the word Have. The first is that Have roughly means possess or own. It is to talk about possession, which applies to whatever belongs to and part of someone. The second, Have roughly means cause or ask. It is to talk about causing someone to do something or causing something to be done. The third, Have roughly means already. It is to talk about something which already happened or something which happened in the past.
The context of each meaning of Have is, first, Have roughly means possess or own is used in the context of showing that something belongs to someone or someone possesses something. The form of the sentence is in the form of simple present tense. Second, Have roughly means cause or ask, is used in the context of causative. It is applied to cause someone to do something or cause something to be done. Third, Have roughly means already. It is used in the context of indicating or showing something which already happened or something which has happened in the past time. The form of the sentence is in the form of Present Perfect Tense. In other words, it can be said that perfective aspect determines the last meaning.

5.2 Suggestion
Based on the research, it is suggested for further researchers to check the correctness of the explication of the meaning of the word Have by asking to the native speakers who, of course, have better knowledge on the meaning of the given words.

Reference
Aarts, F and Aarts, J. 1982. English Syntactic Structures.
Ackley, E. 1986. Macmillan English. USA: Macmillan Publishing Comp.
Azar, B. S. 1992. Understanding and Using English Grammar. Jakarta: Binarupa Aksara Indonesia.
Beare, K. 2007. ‘English as 2nd Language’. [www.about.com]. August 21st
Bloomfield, L. 1933. Language. Chicago: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
Bogdan, R and S. J. Taylor. 1984. Introduction to Qualitative Research Methods. USA: John Wiley and Sons. Inc.
Crowther, J. 1989. Oxford Advanced Learner’s Encyclopedic Dictionary. Oxford University Press.
Fromkin, V and R. Rodman. 1978. An Introduction to Language. USA: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
Goddard, C. 1998. Semantics Analysis: A Practical Introduction. New York: Oxford University Press.
Hornby, A. S. 1974. Oxford Advanced Learner’s Dictionary of Current English. London: Oxford University Press.
Langacker, R. W. 1973. Language And Its Structure: Some Fundamental Linguistic Concepts. San Diego: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, Inc.
n.n. 2006. ‘Wikipedia The Free Encyclopedia’. [www.wikipedia.org/wiki]. July 16th
n.n. 2006. ‘The Natural Semantic Metalanguage’
[www.answer.com/topic/natural-semantic-metalanguage]. September 23th
n.n. 2006. ‘The Basic Ideas of NSM’. [www.volcano.net]. December 12th
n.n. 2004. ‘What is Perfective Aspect’. [www.sil.org]. January 5th
n.n. 2007. ‘Grammar’. [www.wikipedia.com]. September 17th
Princeton University. 2006. ‘Perfective Aspect’. [www.dictionary.com]. 2006
Seliger, H.W. and E. Shohamy. 1989. Second Language Research Methods. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Sinclair, J. 1990. Collin Cobuild English Grammar. London: Williams Collins Sons Co.ltd.
Swan, M. 1995. Practical English Usage. Oxford: Oxford University Press
Thomson, A.J and A.V. Martinet. 1999. A Practical English Grammar. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Trimmer, S. W. 2001. Body and Emotion in Javanesse. Australian National University: Unpublished MA Thesis.
Wierzbicka, A. 1999. Emotions Across Language and Cultures. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Yule, G. 1985. The Study of Language. London: Cambridge University