A-PDF Merger DEMO : Purchase from www.A-PDF.

com to remove the watermark

An Introductionto the
Studyof MorphologY
Vit Bubenik

fulltextresearch
abstracts ofalltitles
monthly updates
LINC.OM
www.lr
webshop
ncom-eulopa.com' 2003(2ndPrinting)
LINCOMEUROPA
 Publishedby LINCOMGmbH2003(2ndprinting)
1stprinting:
1999

All correspondenceconcerningLINCOM Coursebooks

in
Linguisticsshouldbe addressedto: PREFACE

LINCOMGmbH
Freibadstr.3 Thrs introductorytextbookto the studyoflinguislic morphologyis basedon four prcvious
D-81543Muenchen vcrsionsof a nranuscriptentitledAn IntroductirlttIo thc Sntly oJ Nlorphologt'.They were
publishedin a mimeographedform by Mcmorial University of Newlbundland(St. Johr's,
Canada)in 1978,1982,1986 and 1997,andwere usedat thc third-ycarlevel rn the Deparlment
LINCOM. EUROPA@t-ontine.de of l,inguistics.
http://home.t-online.de/home/L
INCOM.EUROpA Its currentversionis designedfor usc as a second-or third-yearuniversitylevel introductory
www.lincom-europa.com textbookto lirrguisticmorphology.Bcfore taking this coursc.studentsshouldhavepreviously
completedone or two introductorycoursesto the whole disciplincof linguisticsat their first or
webshop:lincom.at
sccondyearat the university.
All rightsreserved,includingthe rightsof translationinto any Its argumcntationis built aroundthe major tuming points in the recenthistory of morphology
foreignlanguage.No part of this book may be reproducedin any linkedwith EuropeanandAmericanscholarssuchas C. Ilockett, P. I{. Matthews,J. Bybee,W.
way withoutthe permissionof the publisher. A. Carstairs-McCarthy,M. Aronoil and others.Its primary data are taken
Dressler,A. Spencer',
(English,Gcnnan,Spanish,Latin,Greek,Russian,Sanskrit),
Indo-European
lrom representative
Alro-Asiatic (Flebrew,Arabic, Berber)and sevcralother languages(Turkish, Chinese,Algonkian
Printedin E.C. and others).
Printedon chlorine-free
paper
The book consistsof ten chaptersexplicatingfundamcntalprinciplcsof morphologyby
mcansof (numbered)examples.All chapters(with the exceptiouof the last ouc) arc ccluippcd
Die DeutscheBibliothek- CIP Cataloguing-in-publication-Data with a number of pcrtincnt cxcrcisesoften arrangedin the order of increasingdifficulty. Its
contentsareas follows:

A cataloguerecordfor this publicationis availablefrom Die l. Introduction

DeutscheBibliothek(http://www.ddb.de) 2. Grammaticall-inits(words,morphemes,clitics)
3. Paradigmaticand SyntagmaticRelations
4. Inflectionaland DerivationalMorphology
5. InflectionalCategoriesAssociatedwith Nominal Elements
6. InflectionalCatcgoricsAssociatedwith Verbal Elements
7. MorphosyntacticProperliesand thoir Exponents
8. Morpheme and Allomorph
9. DerivationalMorphology(derivationand compounding)
10. TheoreticalModelsof Morphology

to deal with subjectmattersin individualchapters

purposesit is necessary
F'orpedagogical
asconsistingofscveralunits(indicatedby subheadings). Recommended Readingsat the end of
eachchaptershould provide furthcr ammunitionto both and
instructors ofthis course.
students
 AN IN'I'RODI-IC'IION TO 1]]E STUDY O}I MORPHOI OCY

During my twenty yearsof introducingthe subjectof linguistic

morphologyto third-year
studcntsoflinguistics,languages, psychology,anthropology,sociologyand othertlisciplines
of
Humaniticsand social sciencesI benefittedenormouslyfrom
variouscommentsand suggestions
madeon the intermediateversionsof the presenttcxtbook CON'I'EN1'S
by my colleaguesand students.At lhis
point I want to acknowledgeadviceof and many helpful
commentsby the following scholars:
Dr' A. Barton6k(university of Bmo), Dr. A. Erhart (tJniversity
of Bmo), Dr. J. Irewson
(Memorial university of Newfoundland),Dr. B. Joseph(State Preface
University of ohio), Dr. Stanislav
Segert(lJniversityof califomia at Los Angeles),Dr. K. strunk (University
of Munrch),Dr. H.
Paddock(Memorial University ofNewfoundland),Dr. H. Petersmann Preliminaries
(University of Heidelberg),
Dr. 1,.Zgusta(Universityof lilinois).
Many of my studentsduring the g0's and 90's nrade a numbcr Chapter 1: lntroduction I
of observatronsanci
suggestlonson the sfylc ofthe four previousversions,the clarity I .1 l,anguageand its Units I
oftheir expos6and the level of
difficulty of someof the exercises:Julie Brittain, Audrey Dawe, 1.2 [Jnitsand Rules 3
Barbarao'Dea, Kathy Francis,
Margot French, Bemard Kavanagh, Angela Kotsopoulos, Dorothy 1.3 l,anguageand its SymbolicAspect A
Liberakis, christa Lietz,
SnezanaMilovanovich, SarahRose,Donna Starks,Margot Stuart, 1.4 lconic'I'endencyof l.anguagc 5
and others.Many thanks for
focusingmy attentionon the studentpoint of view in composrng tsXEITCISES 10
this textbook.
And finally, I am grateful to threegraduatestudentsu,ho formattedthe
foufth edition ( 1997)
of the manuscript:Hcnry Muzale,Natashasquiresand valeri Vassiliev. Chapter 2: GrammaticalUnits t2
My specialthanksarc
due to my researchassistantLawrenceGreeningwho has beeninvorved 2.1 The Word 12
in editing, final text
formatting,indexingand preparinga camera-rcady copy fbr publicationby Lincom Europa. andDefinition
2.1.1Identification t2
2.1.2 Phonological,Grammaticaland Lexical Words l3
St.John's,Aprit 1999 2.1.3InternalCohesionof the Word 14
Vit Bubenik
C-orrelations
2.1.4 Phonological 15
Departmcntof Linguistics
MemorialUniversityof Newloundland 2.2 'l he Morphcrnc 16
2.2.1 Idcntificationand Dcfinition l6
2.2.2 Segrnentabilityof Words t7
2.2.3 Allomorphs t9
2.3 Analysisinto Roots,Stemsand Affixes 21
2.4 Clitics
a1
2.5 BasicApproachesto Morphology
1r'
2.5.1 ltem and ArrangementModel
2.5.2 Word and ParadigmModel 25
2.5.3ltcm andProcess
Model 21
EXERCISBS 29

Chapter 3: Paradigmatic and SyntagmaticRelatiotts 35

-1.I Thc Notionof Distribution 35
3.2 Paradigmatics and Syntagmattcs 31
3.3 Markedness 4t)

EXERCISES 46
 -1

AN INTRODUC'I'ION 1'O THF] S]IJDY OI, MORPIIOLO(iY CON'IENTS

Chapter 4: Inflectional and Derivational Morphology Chapter9: DerivationalMorphology 166

52
4. I The Scopeof lnflection and Derivation 9.1 Theoryof Wortl Formllion r66
52
4.2 SomeUniversalTcndcnciesof Inflectionand Derivation 9.2 DerivationversusCompounding 168
54
4.3 Analysisof Inflections 57 9.3.1 Prefixation 170
EXERCISES 65 9.3.2Suffixation 113
9.4 Compounding 115
Chapter 5: Inflectional CategoriesAssociatedwith Nominal Elements 70 9.4.I CoordinatcCompounds 116
5.1 PrimaryNominal Categorres 70 9.4.2 DeterminativeC'ompounds 178
5.l. I NounsaudAdjccrives 70 9.4.3 Posscssive
Compounds t't9
5.1.2 Pronouns 73 9.4.4 SyntacticCompounds 180
5.2 SecondaryNominal Categories 79 9.5 Noun Derivationin Arabic t8 l
5.2.1Cender 79 EXERCISES 186
5.2.2Number 85
5.2.3Case 88 Chapter l0: 'f heoreticalModels of Morphology 188
5.2.4 Aligrunent 95 10.I Morphologyand Fomral Syntax 188
EXERCISES 98 10.2 Morphologyand GencrativcPhonology l9r
10.3 Morphologyin FunctionalGramn-rar 194
Chapter 6: Inflectional CategoriesAssociatedwith Verbal Elements 106 I 0.4 NaturalMorphology 197
6.1 Verb as a PrimaryGrammaticalCategory 106 10.4.I Universals 191
6.2 Quasi-NominalOategoriesof the Verb: Infinitive andparticiple t07 l0.zl.2'I'ypology 198
6.3 SccondaryGrammaticalCategoriesAssociatedwith Verbal Elements llt I 0.4.3Systcm-Dependence 199
6.3.1PersonandDeixis ill I 0.4-4 ParadigmaticStructure 199
6.3.2Tense 115 10.4.5Morphologicaland PhonologicalNaturalncss 200
6.3.3Aspect ll6
6.3.4Mood 120 Referencesand SelectBibliography 203
6.3.5Voice t25
EXERCISES 130 Index of Languages 208

Chapter 7: Morphosyntactic Propertiesand their Exponents 139 SubjectIndex 212

7. I CumulativeversusAgglutinativeExponcncc 139
7.2 Fuscd,Extendedand OverlappingExponence 142
EXERCISES 146

Chapter 8: Morphemeand Allomorph 148

8.1 The Altemationol'Allomorphs 148
8.2 Morphologicalvs. PhonologicalConditioningof Allomorphs r50
8.3 TurkishVowel l{armony 152
8.4 Morphonology 159
EXERCISES t64
 PRt'I,IMINARIES

Phrasestructurerules
i
l
l
PREL IM INARIES

Motphology in this book will be clefinedas that subdiscipline of

linguistics whose sub-;ectmalrer
DF,EPST'RUI]1-LJRE lI
is (i) g|ammatical units (morphemes anti lexemes) and (ii) gramnatical
traditionally dividcd into primarl'grammatical categories (i.c., .parts
verbs, pronoutls, ad.iectivcs,advcrbs) and secondary grammatical
catcgories ofgender, nurnber and casc, and verbal categories ofperson,
aspect and voice). Morphemes are traditionally defincd as the smallcst
categories. 'l'hc latter are
of speech, such as nouns,
categories (such as nomi'al
number, tense, mood,
'liansfbrmalional
rules

l
II
II
nreaninglul clemcnls ir.r
a language.
Morphological and
In thc sevcntics the transfotmational-generativc vielr'' of morphology STRUCTURT]
SURI.'ACE
as a scclion of sy^tax phonol ogi c alrul es
with its emphasis on rclational aspccts of language led 1o a neglect of
the sludy of grammalrcal
units and categories qua forms. Howcvsr, it should be matle clear
that all the above mentioncd
grarrnlatical units and categorics can be studicd most lcgitimately
in thrcc manners: morpho-
Iogical (or'formal'), functional, and syntactic (or'positional'). Any attempts
to disrcgard fbrnral i
aspectsoflanguage by overemphasizing fru-rctionalor syntactic aspects are
lnspection of various introductory books on linguistics will reveal anolher
currcnt neglect of morphology. Givcn the fact that the Iinglish morphological
dctrirnental.
aspect ol lhe
syslem is rather Fig' 0'l An earlier Translormational Model o{-language
I
I
poor compared with that o1, say, Spanish or I-atin, these books concentrate
on the phonenric I
I
aspect of morphology (phonological conditioning of allomorphs). Of course,
it is important t' languages.In these languages the segmentation ofrvords docs trot presL'rltal)y nrajor problcrns,
dis c us s s u c l r f a c t s a s t h e a llo m o r p h yo fth c3 ' d Sg Pr cs/s/- /z/- /az/ i nE ngl i sh (i nhen,al k,ktves since the morphemes and sememes are mostly in one-to-one relationship.
andpouches); this, howcver, should not dctract our attcntion lrom the nrorphological It should be mentioned that the earlier Transformational Nf odel of language d'id not makc
the categoriesofperson and t]unrber in Spanish, which display six dilferenr
aspeotsol'
inllectional tbrnts lor
three persons and two numbers (amo, amus, anm, ernatnos, antais, runrui). Thus
for Spanish, our
any provision for the formal study of primary and secondary grammatical categories. Thesc
cntitics wcrc takcn for granted and the emphasis was laid on the stucly of translirrmational
l
task will be to account for accentual shift (dnto - amamos) in terms of morphological
catcgories processes.Morphology was thus viewcd only as a'surlacc syntaclic inlbrntation', as shown tn
such as stcm and thematic vowel (and phonological categories such as penultimate Fi gure 0.1.
svllable).
Fltflhennore, it is necessaryto considcr any linguistic struotureas possesslng
1wo aspects,nilnely In the eighties, w,ith de-emphasison the transfon.nationalcompouent the placc was made for
syntagmatic and paradigmatic. It is the latter aspect rvhich was completely
<iiscar<1ecl
by meaning-based approaches to morphology. Linguists returned to a more traditiorlal concept of
transfonnational-generative grammar, but which ncvcrtheless is a propcr tlomain
of morphology. morphology as a study whose <lomain is the relation between meaning (semantics) and fomr
In the following chapters we will spend a lot of time on analyzing aml constmctilrg
paradrgmatic (morphology proper). Among the earl'ierstudies along these lines, .1.Bybee's Morphology (1985)
sets for the above mentioned gramrnatical units and categories. This approach
to morphology is h:s the lasting merit o{'lieeing the morphological theorizrng from genetio and areal biases (her
knorvn as the \\/ord and Paradigm Modcl (cfl l{ockett 1954, Robins 1959)
and thrs model is hypothcscs about inflcctional morphology are based on a sample o1-fifly languages). In the
especially suitable ftrr the analysis of inflectional languages vvhich are
morphologically eighties anothef approach to morphology gained promincnce under the titlc of Natural
comphoated in that they do not always display a one-to-one relationship bctween nrorpheme
and Morphofogy in imitation of the title Natural Phonology (Hooper's ,4n Intrcluctir.ttl to NdturLIl
semcnlc (polysemy and polymorphy). The olher morpheme-based approach, known
as ltem and Generative Grammat',1976). It was developed in Gemrany and Austria by W. Dressler and his
Arrangement Model, is suitable to the analysis ol' agglutinating and polysynthetic co,workcrs, and is available in the collection of their articles entitled I'eilmotifs in Nuturul
tr[orpfutlogv (1987). Dressler operateswith several explanatory principles (universals, typology'
 viii AN INTRODIICTION'I'O illlr St.UDy oF MORPHOLOGY PRBI,IMINARIIJS

system-dependency, paradigmaticstructureandnaturalness). Thc relationshipbetweenexpressron RtsCOMMENDEDREADINGS

andmeaning(Saussure'ssrgztfant andsignife)
remainsthe main concem. In additron,Dressler
cmphasizes the role of linguistictypesas mediatingbetween
nnivcrsalprinciplesand language- Aronolf, Mark. 1993.Morphologyby ltself. Stemsand InflexionalClasses.Cambridge,Mass.:
parttcularbehavior(universalprinciplesofnaturalness
vs. system-dependcnt naturalness).
one MIT Press.
ofthe centralconocmsis the natureand organization
ofinflectional classes(thc .conlugations, Bauer,[,aurie. lgSS.lntrotlucingLinguistic Morphology.Edinburgh:Edinburgh[JniversityPress.
and 'declensions'ramiliarfrom the traditionardescriptions
ofmany ranguages). Bybee, Joan 1985. Morphologltl 1 Sntlv- of the Relation Between Meaning und L'onn'
Theinfluenceofthescideaschangedthestudyofformal Benjantins.
syntaxwhich in the eightiesavoided Amsterdam:
the treatmentof purely morphologicalphenomenaand
focusedinstcadon the so-calletlinterf-ace Carstairs-McCarthy,Andrew. 1992.CurrentMorphology.[-ondon:Routlcdge'
questionssuchas the rerationbetweenmorphorogy
and syntax or that bctwcen morphorogy and Dresslcr,wolfgang lJ., w. Mayerthaler,o, Panagl& w. U. wurzel, eds. 1987.Leitntotifsin
phonology.To follow this changcofmind one nray
consultJensen(1990),Spcncer(r99r), Naturul M orp hoIogy. Amslerdam: Benjamins.
carstairs-Mccarthy(1992),Aronoff (r993). Aronoffs pragmatic
titre,Morphorogyby ltserf, Flockett,CharlesF. 1954."Two modelsof grammaticaldescription".Il/ord 10.210-231'.
marksthc completetum-aboutin the attitudeof Generative PhonologyNew York: Academtc
Grammartowardsmorphologyin that Ilooper,JoanB- 1976.An lntroductionto Nutural Generative
the latter is now considerednot mereryas an appendage
of syntaxand phonology;ratherthe Press.
author insists that linguistic theory must allow a separate
and autonomousmorphological Jensen,J. 1990.Morphology.Amsterdam:Benjamins.
component. An Introduction to the \'heoty oJ ll/ord-'ltructure
Matthcws, Peter I{. 1974. Ivttorphotogr-'.
The readerofthis manualmight be surprisedby the wealth [Iniversity Press.
ofdata included.Thrs hasbeen Carnbridgc:Clambridge
doneon purpose,sinceI shareBybee'sconviction(1985)thal
morphologicaluniversalscannot Robins. Robert H. 1959. "ln detbnseof WP". Transrtclionsof the Philological Sotietv
be fruitfully investigatedunlesswe are willing to examineparallel
areasof the grammarsol. 5 7. t 1 6 r 4 4 .
tndividuallanguages. Morphology,ofcourse,represents the biggcstchallengeto universalists, Spencer,Anclrew. 1991.Morphotogical Theory:An Introdur:lionto Ilord Stntcturein Generative
hypothesessinceit is preciselyherewhere languagesdiffer most.Thus
an importantaspectol any Gr ammar. Oxford: Blackwell.
coursern morphologyshouldbe a practical and theoreticalexperience
of analyzingphelorncna
which arc foreign to English. previous knowledgeof the ranguages
to be discussedis not
presupposed, but the ar.rthor
hopesthat this coursewill fosrerinterestin their sturly.
Given the recenthistory ofmorphology, it is no surpriscthat thcre
arc only a few textbooks
rntroducinglinguisticmorphology.The studiesquotcdaboveare
not suitablcfor a secondor a
third year universitycourse.Among earlierstudiesMatthews' Morphology
( I 974) has the merit
of having been uniquein pursuingword-basedmorphologyindependently
of the generatrve
concemsof thc sevcnties.More recently,Bauer(1988)attempted
a synthesisin the light of the
irflue.ce of NaturalMorphorogyon the field. Bauer'smonographprovides
both the generar
backgroundto a number of morphologicalstudiesand various
detailsof severaltheoretical
approaches.
Neither Matthews(1974) nor Bauer (1988) containany cxerciscswhich
are essentialto
funherprogressin this field.
 CI I APTER O NE
TNTRODUCIION

l.l Language and its Units

Fluman language is a particular kind of sign systenr which bridges two areas of the
nonl i ngui sti cuni v ers e:non-l i ngui s ti c real (ol i nragi nc c l )w orl d, i .e. the thi ngs \,' e tal k about, ol l
thc onc side, and physical speech souncisproduced by hunran specch organs, on the other. Put
differently, languagc is a mechanism that connects meaning with sout-tcl.
Various linguistic schools diffcr in the number oflanguage levels (subsystcnts) they posit.
Even rhe number of units assignedby various linguistic schools to each linguistic level is f'arfi'om
bei ng agreed upo n. S i nc e the pul pos c ofthi s book i s not to argue l br any parttc ul ar l i ngui s ti c
school. we ivill sinrply enutrreratear-rdbrieliy charactcrizc thc col)ccltts which app.'ar rtl most
I1uropcan and Anrerioan writings. Most linguists, no malter of what persuasion, rccognize thc
fol l ow i r-rg uni ts : di s ti nc ti v e l ' eatures , (al l o)phgnes , phonemes , morphophonemes ,
(allo)morphs, morphemes, lexemes (words), (allo)semes and sememes. l'he first three may be
callcd phonological units; nrorphs, morphemcs and lcxcrnes may bc called gramrnatical unils;
sememes represent 'semological' or cotrirnonly scmalrllc unlts'

(l ) Language Levels (Subsystems) Units

(i) phonology distinctive features,phones, phonetrres
(ii) rnorphology morphs' motphemes
(i i i ) l c x i c ol ogy l c x c nres
(i v) semanti c s(' s c mol ogy ' ) s c nl emc s

The phoneme h3-sbeen defined as a faniily (class) ofsounds in a given langttagcthat functtort
as one an{ to which the speakersreact as one sound. The nrembers ofthis class are (allo)phones,
which occur in mutually exclusive phonetic enviromnenls, and which shat'ca1leasl orrc phorrctic
l'eaturc.Phonetic l'eaturesare building blocks ofphones (e.g., igl is a 'bundle' ofclosurc, velarity
and voice). 1'wo phones are said to be in sontrast if they occupy analogous slots in two differcnt
morphemes or lexemes, i.e., if they occur in paradigrnatic distribution, such as./ine vs. r'irle, On
the other hand, this opposition docs not necessarilyhold on thc morphophonemic level, e.g., kttiJb
vs. knive-s. Here the allomorphs /najfl - /najv/ bclong to the samc tnotphctne {naj lJ and the samc
r,vajn} and trvo
lexeme kntfe whereas /fajil and lt'ajn/ are two diffcrcnt morphcrncs {tajn} and
different lexentes fne and vine. Tht-ts allornorphs arc not only held togcther by morpho-
phonemes, implemented by phonemes, but thcy arc also linkcd 1o tltc samc scnrarttic ttnit:
sememc. Morphemes are the urriversalunits of granmratical analysis aud they are established on
d
 AN INI'RODTJCTION TO 1'HE S'I'TJDYOF INTITODUCI'tON
MORPIIOLOGY

a semanticanddistributionalbasis.For instance, go a'd,u,en(f areusuallygroupedtogetherinto MORPI,I,bMBI Sl-.Mlrlv{til

one morpheme{go} becauseboth mean"go", and
distributionallythey behavern exactlyrhc
sameway as sreep andsrep-(t).However, there is SBMEIvltt VIORPIIIIMIi
no regularmorphophonemictie betweenthe
formcr pair whereasthereis one in the lattercasein
the senscthat thcrc aremore exiunplesof the
altemation/i/ - /t/ as in weep andwep-(t);consequently, S l rMl l l v l l i ?
rgorand/wen/shouldnot berongto the MOITPHEME2
samemorpheme{go}.Herc we witnessthat two
differentmorphemes{go} a'd {wen} can
representthe sa're sernanticunit. This fairly weil-known
phenomenon,neglectedby earlier ['ig. l.l Polymorphy and polysetny
theoreticaltreatmentsof morphology,is calred suppretion
or porymorphy. The opposite

'<:
phenomenonis calledporysemy.Thcscphcnomena

:>'
arc shown in Figurc 1.1. For instance,in
English the morpheme {s} (: /s/ - /z/ - /cz/) reprcsents
the 3.dpcrs Sg of verbs,and rhe M-S
possessivcand plural on nouns. In Arabic the
same discontinuous morpheme /var may
represerrt
the singularin kitab "book" andpl ural in kilab..dogs"(singula
r kalb). In otherwords,
morphologyand senranticsare indcpendcntoleach I'ig. f .2 Morphcrne and semetnc in llngurstlc slgn
otherevenifthey were colrapsedin many
rntroductory textbooksto linguistics.what is of particularintcrest
in the studyof morphologyis
thenatureo1'thelink-upbetweenmorphemeandsemerne
in thc linguisticsign;it may be one to- The <iistinctive features of souncl havc becn studred cxtcnsively since I'rubctzkoy's and
onc but alsotwo-to-oneor one-to-fw'o. This is illustraledin Figure 1.2.It shouldbc emphasrzed Jakobson's pioneer work in the thirties. They are relatively easy to study because they arc only
thatsystematic conlrontationol'morphemesandsememes(thesnrallest 'l'he distinctive features of nreaning arc
elementsof the semantic a few (bctwcen twclvc to seventeenin most languages).
contetrtof lauguage) wasdonemostlyby structuralist linguisticschools,whereasit wasneglected parallel to phonetic distinctive l'eatures,bul thcy are much more nunlerous and consequcutly
by generativists,who concentratedmore on relational
aspectsoflanguage and ten<ledto disreganl much nore difficr,rltto study. Ncvcrthelcss, much has been accomplislredat thc level of scmantics
units in favor of ntles. Also it should be mentioned analysis timited to a few areas of lexicon, such as kinship
that the backgroundfor distrnguishing by so-called componential
morphologyfiom semantics rvasprovideda long time agoby the work of linguists
dealingwirh terminology, animals, colors, ctc.; thcrc are many morc semantic areas which are notoriously
typology of languages.In one type of language,commonly
denotcdas aggrutinating (e.g., <iifllcult to decompose into their sernantic featurcs. Considcr, for instancc, how the semantlc
'turkish) eash
sememeis expressedby a separatemorpheme,whire in ll;alures lr rnale], I r female], and [r young] contbine with gcneric nteauings of anirnal spccics' as
anothertype, cailed
inflectional (c.g.' Latin), one morphemecan express
more than one sememe.c_.onsider the shou,n i n (3).
inflectionalforms of the word for "man" in Latin and'urkish
given in (2):
(3) Gcncric Meaning Male Femal e Young
(2) Latin Spelting Iurkish horse s tal l i on ntarc lbal
Spelling
vir "man" adam"man" goose gander goose goshng
vir - r v in adam - Q- n dug dog bi rc h puppy
adanrn
Sg/Gen Sg Gen cat tom-cat caI kitter-r
man man woman child
vrr - orum vtrorum adam - la r - r n adamlarrn
PliGen Pl Cen Thc ildcpentlcnccof morphologyand semanticsbecomesquiteclcar in that the sanreform catr
nri,l), gcilericand lcnralc(goose.cul\.
rcpresenttwo meanings:gencricand malc (t/r,,g,
in the Latin fomt vir't, -i exprcsscstwo semcmes(grammaticar
mcanings)namelythe singular
and the genitive case;-orum expresses thc plural and the genitivecase.Here the relationship 1.2 Units and Rules
betweenmorphologyand 'semorogy'is oneto-two. on the other It should be kept in mind that lir-rguisticunits cannot exisl in languagcrvithout rttlcs
hand,in rurkish, cachscmcme
is expressedby a separatemorphcme:-o (zero)cxpressesthc govemingtheirdistnbution.Both unitsandrules(or'iterns' andlheir'an'angcments') arccqually
singular,-/ar the prural and ,rz thc
genitivecase.The relationshipbetweenmorphorogyand .semology, the furrctioningol language.'l'heir nlutual
is herc onc-to-onc. important in any serious attenlpt to describe

#
 AN IN' fRODUCTION 1O I' HE
S,I' T]D\,OF M OR P}IO LOG \' IN'TRODIICI'ION

relationshipis of a complementary
nature,i.e., it is mislcadingand detrimental (ioncepl
themhiera'chically, to try to order
or to over-inflateeithertheentitatlvecomponent
(unit) or processcomponent
(rule)in linguisticdescriptionsThe
studyof phonoractic rules(constraints Word
o' phonorogical
sequences) ts a domainofphonology;thc studyofsyntactic
rules(lexotacticsor rulesgoveming
distributionof wordsin sentences) is a clomainof syrtax. ln morphologywe
will be dealingwith
morphotactics' rures of word formation.
Derivationar morphorogy (<lerivatronproper
compounding) and
is currentlytreatedwith a strongbiastowards
morphophoncniics; rt will be slrown l i 0 rm Refe rcnt
that the semanticaspcctsof wora lbrmation
areequallyinlportanta'd intercstirrs.

1.3 Language and its Symbolic Aspect

we may start this sectionby examining
onc of thc many problem-riddendelinitions I' i g. 1.3 S erni oti c tri angl e
languagc(Wardhaugh1972:3): of

The rclatiolship which holds between words (as units of linguistic rneaning) and things (i.e-.
A languageis a systemot'arbitraryvocal
svmbolsusedlor humancommunicatron.
their rcferents) is the relationship of reference. Linguistically, words can be viervcd as fbrms
signilying concepts, extralinguistically (i.e., referentially) as linguistic signs rofcrritrg to' or
In vicw of our discussionabove it is prcferabrc
to view ranguagcas a .system or: naming, cxtralinguistic things.
(sub)systcrns'(with 'levers'suchas phonorogy,molphology,
lexology,scmantics)..r.heabove ln c.xplaining the nature ofthe sign, Saussurc statcs that it is arbitrary in that one signified
definitionmakesno provisionfbr the societal
andculturalaspectsofla'guagc. 1.heterm and almost all these signiliers were 'chosen'
tn thedefinitiono'cr-emphasizes vocal will have dift-erentsignihers in different lar-rguages,
the fact thattheprimarymedrumof language
is sou'd antl that arbitrarily. t,inguistic signs or symbols have to be leamed whct.t ouc acquircs onc's language,
wnti'g is only a secondaryrepresentation
of the p'mary speech.I_et us row examrne
remainingtenn arbitrary symbols which thc since they are based on a leamed convelltional relation; in most cascs, the narncs wc glvc to
brings us back 1o the saussureanconcept
linguisticsign. Accordi'g to Saussurc of the things are conventional, not ofnatural origin. l{or.vever,there arc two olher typcs oflinguistic
the ringuislicsign is madeup of signifier and ' P i c tures ' ) attd
signe - signifiant t signtfri. It may be
signified: srgns (as del i netl by l i ngui s ts w ork i ng i n s emi oti c s ), narnel y i c ons (l i teral l y
remarkedthat thc Saussurcan dir:hotomycontlnuesa mainly fbrmal, lactual similarity
rcspcclable indcxes which havc to bc defincd refercntially. lcons express
traditionof semantics starlingin AncienlGreeccwith thc stoicsthat
dichotomyolltoivov /sdmainod plus oqprcLv6pcvov
had an identical between the mealilg a1d the form; in icons, thcrc is physical rcscmblancc betrveen thc shapc ol-
/semainorneno.,, (orliroiver,v
"signify") l'hc basicassumption /sEmai'cir/ the sign and its ref'erent (here, the line between fomr and rcfcrent is solid rather than dottcd).
hereis the word (i.e.,the basicunit of syntax
as a linguisticsign composedof two parts:
and se'rantics) Onomatopoeic w.ordslike Dang, thump, roar, eIc.are examples frorn English for this phcnomcnon
rhe./brmo1-theword (signifier)and what is
(stgnified),or irs meanitrg(concept). meant of clircctreprcsentationalconnection betwcen a word and somcthing in the 'real' rvorltl. As rs well
It will bc shown in chapterstlealing wjth of
moryhologythatthe form of a word mustbe
inflectional known, all languagcsposscsshighly iconic words by which speakerstry to inritate tlre sounds
distinguished from its inflected(.accittental,) 'fhe
forms nature. lndexes express mainly factual, exislential contiguity between mcaning and lbrm.
rvhichthe word assumeswhen it functions
i' the scntcncc.It must alsobc mentioned
tcrminologycan be confusingsincethe 'form'
that this inrfexical featuresoflanguage includc rclational conccpts ofplacc and time such as herc - there'
of a word (significr)could bc takcnto .srgniry,
boththe'concept'(mentalimage)andthe .thing, now - thetl, I -),ou - he, this - that.Tlteirrefcrcnce is rnultiple (c.g.,,t'c'rrcan theoretically rel'er to
itself(refcrent).As is wcll_known,thereexists
cxtensivcscholasticliteraturebearingon millions of addresses)and only othcr linguislic elcmcnts in discoursc can disambiguatc thetr
the relationship between,concepts,and ,things,,bur all
this is only of marginalinterestto hnguists. meanrng.
However,we haveto kecp in mi'd that the
domain
of linguistic r'cauing docs not incrutle
the ref'erent.obviousry, we can dear with .things,
thcnselvesonlybymeansof'conccpts',asexpressetlbythescholasticdictum 1.4 Iconic T-endency of Language
vocessigni/icant Onomatopoeic worcls are only one subcategory of icons, those sometimes callecl images
mediantibust:onceptibus "words signify by meansof conccpts,,.
Hencethe line betweenlbrm Li ngui sts w orking i n s emi oti c s (1he s l utl y of s i gns and s i gn s y s tems ) di s ti ngui s h tw o
more
(signifier)andreferent (thing)in the famous'scmiotic,trianglc
reprocruced in Figurer.3 is only
dotted. subclasses, namcly diagrams and metaphors. Diagrams arc characterized by a similaflty
cxanlplc
between form and mcaning that is constitutcd by thc relations ofthcir pafts. A classical
w
 AN TNTRODUCTION 1'O'IIIE SII]DY INT'RODlICTION
OF MORPHO]-OGY

ofan icon ofrelation is proportionar slgn

anarogy.An infantircspeakerofranguagewho
createsa
new form *brung (insteadof brought)compretes
the folrowingaiagram1o.p.opon,onl,
,,,N
,/l \
(4) utts
rung
bring
X
,/l \
syrnbol index

Metaphor is thc semantictransf'erthrougha

simrlarityof senscperccptionand rs basedon
a perceptlonofa fu'ctional resemblance belweentwo objects.Its full discussronbelongs
to
semantics' Thuslinguisticsignsrnaybeclassilledantlhierarchizecl
in thc manrershownrn l.rgurc lmage diagranr mctaPhor
l'4' The insistenceof many linguistson the
ico'ic tendencyof languagc(wherebysemantic
sameness ts reflectedin formalsameness) may comeasa sulpnse10many studentsof linguistics Fig. 1.4 Classification of linguistic signs
who haveleamedaboutthearbitrariness of languagevs. theiconicityof ccftainsystcms
o{'animal
conrnunlcatlon'Linguistsclaim' for instance, (lerman
thal a beetlanceis icorric(rather-thanarbitrary) (6) Greek Czech
sinceit dircctlyfeprescnts its subjectmatler(i.e.,thereis a directconlection vysoki Positive
betweenthe dance hupscl6s hoch /ho:x/
itselfandthe sourceofnectar in the number
and directionofthe gyrations);on the otherhand, hupsel6tcros hcihcr /ho:er/ vy55i ComParattve
it is assumedthat thereis almostnevcr any comcction Superlative
betwccnlinguistic sign and ref-erent the hupselotatos hcichst/ho:xst/ nejvyS5i
only counter-examples beingonomatopoeicwords (: .imagcs,).Howcvcr, "high"
in morphologyit is "high" "high"
comparatively v€ry easyto find iconiccorrelates betweenlinguisticsignsandthcir ref.erents. For
instance,in English, Latin and Arabic rhe positive,
comparativeand superrativedegreesof In Germanthe relatiorrshipholdsin soundcount(3 - 4 - 5), trut not in syllablccounl (l - 2 -
adjectivesshow a gradualincreasein their morphological'flesh'
conespondingto the increase l); in Czechthecomparativeis shoderbyboth syllableaudsoundcountthanits positive,but the
(or decrcasc)on the part oftheir referent,as shown (5).
in superlativeis longerthan the comparative;and in Greekthe comparativeeurdsuperlativehavc thc
samenumberofboth soundsand syllables(but both arelongerthan the positive).
(5) English Latin Arabic Anotherfrequcntlyusedexampleof iconicity is reduplication ol'the linguisticsign which
high alt-us posrtive
kabir indicatesmaterialincreaseon the part ofrclcrent. Thc subjeclof'reduplicationis practically
high-er alt-ior ?akbar Comparative inexhaustiblewith classicalexamplescoming liorn languagcswlicrc this linguisticstrategyrs
high-est alt-issimus ?al_?akbar Superlatrve nlcans"man" and
grarnmaticallylessmarginalthan in English.For instauce,in Malay .)r(r,/?8
'.deep,high" .,big,grear', sidehas its counterpaftin
or6ng-or(mgmeans"people";herethemultiplicationon the semantic
of the linguisticsign.lt may be saidthatthis typeof pluralizationis moreiconic
the reduplication
In I-atin the comparativeis longerthan the positive morphologyfoundin a varietyof languages
and the superlativeis longerthan the thanthe usualpluralizationby meansof grammatioal
comparatlvenot only by soundcount but arsoby syllable
count (2 - 3 - 4); in Englishboth such as ln6o-Europealor Semitic.l'hcrc are situationswhere we are dealingwilh repetitive
comparatlveand superlativehave the samenumber
of syllablesbut the relationshipholds in actionson the referentialside; onc could say that nothing would be more appropriatethan
soundcount(3 - 5 - 6) takingthe diphthongastwo sounds. most 'naturally' (i.e.,iconically)
Also,the Arabicelative(Arabicdoes on the linguisticsidc.Hencc"daily" is cxpressed
reduplication
not distinguishthe comparativeand superlativeinflectionally;
the superlativetakesthe definite by reduplicatingin many languages,for instauce,Hebrew.yont-yon,Hindi tlin-din, Malay huri
article?al- while the comparalivedoesnot) is rongeronly
by soun.Icount than the positive. huri (cl. Englishdq, h1'duY).
llowever' it is possibleto find languageswhich showlessiconicityin this respcctor cvcn where u'ould rank differentlyon the scale
It sceinsthat wc havc to assumethat variouslanguages
this relalionshipdoesnot hold. Grcek,Gcrmanand czcch lcol.ltc
may bc usccito cxemplily thesctwo of iconicity.Latin provcdto be more iconic in comparisonthan czech, and Malay l11ore
possibilities,as illustratedin (6). impossible
in pluralizationthan English.Of course,to makean exhaustivestatemenlis next to
becauseit would meancontrastingthe full systemicpotentialsof tu'o languagesandlinguistsare
:,rt0 thc ofthis
conclusion sr:ctionshouldbc rather
still lar Ilom being ablc to do that.Neverthcless,
 AN INTRODIJCTION TO TI{E STUDY OF MORPHOLOGY INl'RODtJCT]ON

srmple;earlierstatcmcntssuchas "any search RECOMMENDED RSADINCS

ror ... iconicityin languagewilr reveallangr.ragc
to be almostertirely noniconic"(wardhaugh
r972:25)wilr not standup to the cross_language
evidenceas indicatedabove.wardhaughargued Eine Einfiihrung in tlie sprachwisscnschaJiliche
that..theEngrishnumbersystemproceedsas Lfrekle, I{erbefi F.. 1972. Semantik.
fbllows: one,hpo, three,f.ur, ... ten ... thousand,and
so on, nolo,e, one_one,otte-otte_one, one_ B etleu tttngs I ehrc. Miinchen : Fink.
ot'e-one-one,..' eurdso on-Four is not four times Press
as rong as one". However, if we look at writing Lyons, John. lgJJ . Semuntics. Volume 1. C'amhridge: canrbridge ur-riversity
systemsof variouslanguages(add 'written' symbols 8il' Edition. l.ondotr:
to the abovedefinitionsof language),rt will Ogden, Cllarles K. & I. A. Richar<ls. 1946. Thc Meuning o;f Meaning.
appcarthatthis is a ralhermisleadingargumentation.
For instance,in the Arabic wntlng system Routledge & Kegan Paul. (First edition 1923')
/ bur L (fo w stro ke s ) is f our t im es as r ongas one\( one s t r o k e )i ;n A k k a d i a n c u n e r f b r m . f v e Peirce, Charles S. 1955. Phitosophicul Writings c,tfPeirce ed. by Justus
Buchler' Nerv York:
wedgcsis five timcs as long as onewedge),cr. Figure
1.5; similarly in Roman,chinese and Dover.
Japanesewriti'g systems.Currently, thc area Paris: Payot. (Hnglish
of writing is not considered as secon<Iaryto <leSaussure.Ferdinan<l.1955. Cours tle linguistique gtlninile. 5'hEdition.
linguistics;writing as the study ofgraphic signs(and (:ourse in Generul Littguistic.s. New York: Philosophical
their systems)is not esscntiallydiffercnt translation by wade Baskin,
lrom the linguislicstudyof vocalsig'ns(andtheir systems)
both are simply subdisciplines of Li brary, I959 ).
semiotics.
wardhaugh, Ronald. 1972. Inn"oduction to Linguislics. Ncw York: McGraw-l{ill.
It is of interestto note that the clearestexamples
of iconicity come from grammatrcar
morphologywhereaslcxical morphologyis based
largelyon unmotivatedarbitrarysigns(see
however9 4 for iconicityof compounds). Grammaticalmorphemes areeasilyrJiagrammatizablc
(seethe variousdiagramsdisprayinggrammatical
categoriesi. this book) and they occupy fixed
positionswithin the word (theclassicalexample
beingBASE + DerivationalSuffix + Inflectional
sufhx in Indo-Europeanlanguages). Furthermore,grammaticalmorphemesdiffer from iexical
morphemesby a reslricteduseofthe soundunits.For
instance,in the Hebrewconsonantalpattem
thc inflcctionaland derivationalsuffixesarerearized
by nasars(m, n), grides(w, .7),aentarstop
(r) andglottal sounds(i, ?) whercasthe rexicar
morphemesarebuilt from l9 obstruents.In the
Russianconsonantarpattem only four obstruents(t,,
t, i, x) of the twenty-four function in
inflectionalsuffixes.In lrnglish, the inflectional
suffixes are represcntcdby alveorarstops(r, d),
alveolarfricatives(s, z), and their combination(sr).

Y ryryYww <
tzJ4 ) 9102030

Fig. 1.5 Writing numeralsin Akkadiancuneiform

s
l0 AN INTRODU(]1]ON'I'O f III] STI]DY OF ]VIORPHOI,OGY INTRODl,IC]TION ll

EXERCISIlS l)iscuss the paradigm ol'the vcrb "to go" in Latin, Spanish and Frcnch fi'onr thc poittt ofvicrv
of pol ynrorphy (s uppl eti on). pol y s c my and al l omorphy . Identi l y fi r' s t tl rc root, s tc nl and
Analyzcthc paradigmof the verb "to
bc" in Latin, spanishancrFrenchl'om pcrsonal su{Iixes where possible. French data havc to bc phoncnrioized.
of polymorphy (suppletion),polysemy the vicw.point
and ailomorphy.lctenlily first the
personalsuffixeswhcrepossible. root, srem and
Frenchdatahaveto be phonemicized. Latrn S pani s h French

Present Sg I eo v oy VAIS
Latin Spanish French l ndi catrvc 2 vas VAS
Present Sg I sunl soy suis 3 it va va
Indicative 2 es :
crcs CS PI I lmus VAIr1OS a l l o rrs
3 est es est :..
2 Ius v al s allez
PI I SUInUS somos sommes 3 c unt van vont
2 estis sois 6tes Impcrlect Sg I lDalll rba allais
3 sunt son sont l ndi cati vc 2 ibat i bas al l ai s
Present Sg I st l]'t s6a sois 3 ibat i ba al l ai t
Subjunctive 2 sis SCAS lbamus i bamos al l i ons
SOIS PI I -!

3 s it sea soi t al l i c z
2 rbatis ibais
PI I siluus seinros soyolts 3 lbant ib:rlr allaicnl
2 sitls scdis soycz
3 sint sean solcnt

Analyzerhe paradigmof the ve.b "to

be" in Sanskrit,Avestan(o1r persian),
(ModemPersian)from rhepoint of ana Farsi
view of porynrorphy(supplction)anclalromorphy.
Excrcisc1, idcntify first the root andpersonar As r'
sutrxcs.Note:The formsof the l",Sg and
2''dPl Imperfectin Avestanarc not documcntctl. the

Sanskrit Avestan Farsi

Present Sg I ASlTlI 6hmi h:istan-r
lndicative 2 isi nhi h6sri
3 6sti iistl hiist
PI I smdh mdhi h6stim
2 sthA stii hristid
3 siinti hdnti hdstand
Imperfect Sg I asam L-,
; DU OAtn
Indicative 2 asrn ds Dl_ldl

3 asit !,
as bld
PI I asma ahna budim
!
2 asla ')r : 1 '- .
DU U Id
3 asan hon budand

.tfj
rry
 GR,\NINIA'f I(]AI- U N I1'S l3

]'EX t I)iscourse Anall'sis

CHAPTER TWO
GRAMMAT]CAL TINITS

2.1 The ll/ord Grammati c al A nal y s i s

2.1.1ldentiJicationattd Definition
This chapterwill <Iealwith the i<ientification
and definitionof lcxical units,therrstructure.
andtheirrelationshipto smarergrammatical
units,namelymorphemes(2.2) and roots,
and aflixes (2'3)' The attemptsat defining stems
the two primary units of grammaticalanalysis,
word and the morpheme,are essentially thc
of a circurar since we must prcsupposethe
knowledgeof the morphenreif we want to 'ature,
definethe word, and vice versa.Furthermore, l rl I'Z P3 (tl 02 (tl P honol ogi c al A nal l ' s i s
we have
to keep in mind that lexicaland morphological
analysisof a languageis intimatelyconnected
wlth its syntaclicancrprronorogicar anarysis,i.e., the lexical unitsaregoverned
by the syntactic Fi g. 2.1 I.i ngrri s ti cdc c onrpo:i ti orr
ruleswhcn thcy arecornbinedin scntenccs
andmorphologicalunitscannotbe discussed
paying due attentionto their phonorogicar without
substance.conversely,working in the realrn Looking at the higher level, forms which occur as sentenccsare lree fon.us; a lrec form which
phonologyor syntax,it would bc impossible of
to statca numbcr of significanlgencralizations corrsistsentirely of tu,o ormore lesserliee lomrs (e.g..poor.lohn)is a phrase; and, finally, a frce
without referenceto the notion of the il'ord.
It is customaryto includeboth lexical decomposition lornr which is not a phrasc is a word. According to Bloomfield (1935:178). "a word is a free lorm
of sentences into rvords,and morphologicaldecornposrtron
of words into morphcmesunderthe which docs not consisl entirely ol-(two or morc) lesser lrcc fbrms; in brief, a word is a ntininruur
label of grammaticalanalysis The word
is simply the umtpnr excelrenceofthe grammatrcal fi'ce fonn". All t[e units of thc ranks lowcr than w'ords (i.c., rnorphcmes and phortctnos) arc thcn
analysisas a final point in syntaxand as
a startingpolnt ln morphology. bound since they never occur alone as sentenccs. Bloornficld hinrsclf was aw'arc of variotts
The centrality of the co'cept of worcl
wiil be even morc obvious ir.we think difllcultics connected with this definition. For instance. the arlicles the ancl a, though rarcly
grammaticalanalysisas the centrar of the
ringuisticactivity flankedby discourseanalysrs spoken alone, play the sanle pan in the Ilnglish language as the lomrs f/ri.sand llirll, rrr4richfiecly
(decompo_
srtronof texts into sentences), and phonologicaranarysis(deconrposition
of morphemesinto occur as sentences.Hence the traditional olassiflcation of the artrr:lesas rvords. Bloomfield was
phonemcsand words into syllables),
as in Figure2.1. prcoccupicd rnore with words under their phonologrcal aspect than their grammalrcal and lexical
word thusappearsto be a unit intermediate
in rank behveenthe sentenceand the morpheme. propcrtics. 'l'hcsc terms will bc discussed in thc ncxt scetion
It is worthmentioningthatthis unit is recognized
by the conventionsof variouswriting systerns
(with somenotableexceptions suchasthatof sanskrit).Furthermore, traditionalgrammaticallore 2.1.2 Phonological, Cranunaticul and I'e.rical tr4/onls
dealswith word forms,not with morphemes.
As rve saw,in the preceding section, thc tcnn lvord tumed out to be surprisingly problenralic
Payingdueattentionto all thethreeaspects
of wordhood(i.e.,phonologicar, grammaticar w.hen it came 10 its definition. We may wish to approach the r.vholeproblenr frorn a different
scmantic)wc may adopta'tra<Iitional' definition anci
of the wor<l:worclmay be tlefined as the union angle and say that thc 'uvordis a basic unit al the level of lexical analysis (lcxology) called lexeme.
of a parlicularmeaningwith a particular
complex or sountlscapableof a parlicular grammalical Lexeme can be thought of as an abstract unit which occurs irr difl'erent inflecttonal fbnns; e.g.,
employnent This definition may strike us
as somcwhatpcdanticbut it ls importantto realize the lexeme \lR.lTE can be realized aocording to the morphosyrrtaclic rules as u'rllcs (3'" Sg
neitherone ofthese threeaspectsshould that
bc overemphasizecl or onrittedifone rvantsto shofton P resent),n,ri tc (al l otherpers ons P res ent), w rota(l he pas ttens eof l ri l c ) andn' ri tl c n (thc pas t
this definition This error was committed
evenby LeonardBloomfield in his influential
book parliciple of v,rite). 'l'he lbur inf'lectional forms of the lexcmc WRll'E ntay in thcir turn bc
Language(1935). His definition of wor<j
excelsin paninian brevity: the word according rcfcrrcd to as four diffcrcnt grammatical words.
'l'hc fact that these foLtr glalunlatical havc
to "vords
Bloomfield was a "minimum free form". The
terms .free' and ,bound, are more commonly to bc rcalizcd at thc phonological and orthographical levcl of the languagc brings us to the
used
in classifyingmorphemes(typically,the grammatical
onessuchas -.sin the plural arebound). phonological and orlhographical aspectsofthe word. For instance,the phonological word ira1ls/
 l1 AN INTRODT]CTION TO
TIIE ST'UDY OI. \{ORPHOLO(;Y GRAN{MATI(-'AI - I INITS l5

and its orthographiccounterparr

turites representa particular grammatical
categorlzedas the third person word which can be mobility betweenthe grammaticalmorphemesof the plural and pastis actuallyquitc common
singularpresentindicative.Needlcss
betweenphonologicarand grammatical to say, the rerationship (andmeaningful),as shownin (4).
woras neednot be one-to_one. .l.he
/r'tn/ rcpresentstwo different gramrnatical phonologicar word
words: thepresenttenseof run antlthc (4) ah - yor l ar - dl
of run (i.e., two differentinflectional past partrciple
forms of thc lt the phonotogicarword /hrt/
representsthree grammarical take - PROGRESSIVE P LU R A L - PAST
words (prus the ,^,
"they were taking"
";J"";;;r?;.
2.1.3 Internal Cohesionof the
Worrl
or
one of the characteristicsof the word is that it tencrsto be interna'y
morphemes stablc,r.c., that the
constitutinga complexlexical item
occurin a fixed order.The intemal ah - yor du lar
thc word contrastswith its positional cohesionof
mobitity in the frameworkof the sentence. PROGRESSIVE PAST PI,IJRAI-
we may toprcalizcthe sentence For instance, take -
"they were taking"

(l) His carclessness

was aslonishing
For furtherdiscussionsee4.2.
12 34

by bcginningwith the complement 2.1.4 Phonological Correlqtions

astonishirtg: of'phoneticstrings,sincein many
Phonologicalcriteriamay be usedfor thc segmentation
languagcsthe word is phonologicallynrarkedin someway. Ofcourse,the useofphonological
(2) Astonishingwas his carelessness
somc knowlcdgeof the phonological
critcria for scgmentingthe phoneticstringspresupposes
4 31 2
systemof the examinedlanguage;on the otherhand,thc phonologicalanalysisof the language

Thepermutation4 3 1 2 yieldsan acceptable in qucstioncanadvanceonly after a sulficientnumberof word andrnorphcmeboundarieshave

Englishscntence.Howevcr,the three been established.This fact demonstratesnicely the interdependence of grammaticaland
of carelessne'ss morphemes
(care + less* nes.s)cannotbe pemruted.
similarly in Latin the scntcncco1-three phonologicalanalysesin that linguistscannothopeto completefirst the grammaticalanalysisand
wordsmay be permutedby topicarization
in at leastfour ways,as show' in (3).
lhenmovcon to phonology,or vicc vcrsa.

(3) Igniscamemcoquct Soveralkinds of'phonologicalevidcnccarc relcvantin segmentingthe phoneticstringsin

"Thc fire cooks the meat"
rvords.For instance,a greatnumberof languageshavc thc so-calledword accent, which means
I 123
thatmostwords(with the exceptionof clitics,cf . 2.4) areaccentedon one and only one syllablc
: Ignis coquet canlem
(theaccentrnaybe ofdynamic or melodicnature).In Frenchthe accentcan fall only ou thc last
I 13z
pronouncedsyllableof a word (with thc cxceptionof the reducedschwa[el); knowing this one
Camem ignis coquet
may concludethat there is a word boundarysomewherebefore the next unaccentedvowel.
213
Analyzing czech data, where the accentfalls on the initial syllableof the word, it may be
Clamem coquet ignis
assumedthat the following phoneticstringcontainsat leastfour words:
231

i{owever' the two morphe'resof either (5) J6nrideiilpsAkLickem.

the nounsignis andcctrnentor rhe vcrb
permuted(*rsrgz or *etcoquare impossibre). coquetcannotbe "Johnhit the dog with the stick"
It appearsthat the positiomarmobility
elementsis found at the level ofphrase(and of meaningfur
sentence),whereasthe lower level ofword shows
the intemal positionalmobility only A more complicatedsituationarisesin languageswhere the accentis fixed with referenceto the
exceptionatty.no, lnstance,in the sequence
inflectionalsuffixcsvariationssometimes of several end of the word by the lengthor weight of the iasl or the penultimatesyllable.For instance,itr
may occur.In Turkishthe phenomenon
of.positional Ancient Greekthe accentcannotfall on thc antcpenultimatesyllableif the ultima containsa long
 t6 AN INIRODUCI]ON TO THE STUDY
OF MORPIIOLOGY GRAMMA'IICAL UNTI'S T7

vowcr; in Latin, on the other

hand,the antepcnultimate
syilabrecan be accentcdprovidcd
the (1) Thc+b oy + s l tos s I ed+ Mary + s + hat+ ov c r+ the l i l :nc e.
penultimatesyllableis light (i.e.,openandcontainin
beassumed
thattherorowingphoneric Latindatait mav
,,.i"s .or,:;r'::il:lfll#lvzing is by-passcd and we reach the level ofsentence directly fiorn thc levcl ol'
The level ofworrl

(6) Amikushipurnnekivit morpheme. Despite tl-refact that some words in this sentenceconsist of only one morphetls ws
..The have to introduce word boundaries (#) to avoid the confusing of the lexical and granlmatical
friendkilled the wolf,
morphcmes.

It may bc ofinterestto considerorthographical

conelatesofthe phonologicaicriteria
somcwriting systemsemploygraphemes si'ce
which displaydifferentficrmsfor inirrar,
final position in thc word. For insrance, medialand
in Bibrical Hebrewthe fricativcs
occur lnitialry unressthe prcceding fij v o x f gl .o not
word ends in a vower and thesetwo
connecrion, b:J ztaB"tr words arc in closc
r,,t b; f: ,,tellapev..in Babel,,ana
".g.
in Baber";the plosivesin initial
',Bibel; b::;:t /ulJepapeu..and
positionur.,noi.ut"o 0",n.0",,ii"ai;:iJ"
Arabicsystemofgraphemesis made rhe refter.The
up offour atographs (or only two
in somecases)usedfor
the tl'ce positionsmcnlione<labove
plus the allogrlph when the graphcrnc
rsolation.Studcntsof Grcek wilr is 10bc realizedin
be remindeaor tt e lettero (sigma)
which hasthe allograph
whenoccurringin final posrtionin
the wortl.
2.2 The Morpheme
2.2.1Identification and Definition
Morphemesare traditionaty defined
as the smatest mcaningfulclcments
cramrlatical anarysis(i.e.,analysis rn a language.
riealingwith meaningfurelements)
stop heresincethe units of lower ranks, of a'y languagc has to
namerysyllabresand phonemes,are
should be emphasizedthat defining non_meaningful. It
the morphemeas the minimar unit
meanrngfur)anarysisis conditioned
of grammaticar(i.e.,
by some explicit or implicit reference
grammaticalunit of next higher to the word as a
rank (2.I .1).Morphemesaresirnply
the unitsof lowestrank out
of which words arecomposed.To
useas an exampleone of the longcst
words in Enelish:
antr+ dis + establish+ ment I ari +
3p 1 irtrr
(8) I s #tos s r ed#Mary + s #hat#ov er#the#feuc e'
l hc#b oy
2.2.2 Segntentctbilitv of W'orLls
It is important 1o realize that r.r'hethera w,ord can be dividcd into slnallcr nlcanlngful clcnrclrts
is only a matter of degree. Of course, typical examples from a number of flective Iatrguagcsarc
those which are <letemtinateu ith respecl to segmentatiotr,whcrc the identification of motphgnle
+ s ,v ' al k 1e./,etc .
borLrrtl arysi mpl y c ons i s ts ol putti ngl hepl us s i gnbetl v eentw os egmc nl s hat
:
Bul thcrc arc quite a few tsnglish nouns and vcrbs u'hich cannot be analyzed in this way. 1,o.
processWhich
rnstancc, lhe irregular plurals zren, geese, tnice havc to bc arlalyzcd itt tc'rtttsof
E
vorvel which is
replaces the vowel occurriug in the singular fonr-r /re, u, arv/ by atlother
aj/. If the vast majority of English rlotrns are plut-aliTed
appropriare in tl-replural form /e, i,
cases where the
segmcntally (i.e., by adciing the morpheme s), therc are sonle exceptional
as it ) E (t,l(ln), u I i (goo.rc),aw I
pluralization is amatterof morphological processes,such
past tonse segmcnlally
aj (ntouse), etc. Sirnilarly, the vasl.majority of English verbs lbrrn their
(J1-thestrotl8 vcrbs wlrich forrl thsil
by adtiing the nrorphcme {cd}. But thcrc arc about a hundrcd
past ti3nsc incgularly by a nro4rhological process lvhicl-r replaces tllc vowel occttLrrnBin thc
singular fonn by another vowel whicl-r is appropriate in the plural form:
(9) aj t ow (ride I rode)
u ) ow (c hoos e + ohos e)
aj 'aw (fi nd + found)

'lhus in all these instances we are not dealing with the addition of segnrcrltsbut wrth replacrng
It may be said that cach one of the
scvenconstitutingpartsof this word theseprocessesrather
particularmeani'g and that we is assocrated with a onc segrnentby another one, hence the use ofthe arrow. Some linguists call
are dealing with sevenmorphemes. course. it can be
Each one of them has a rnisleadingly process morphemes (cor-rfusir"rgunits and processes). of
particulardistributionand arso parlicular
a phonological(andorlhographicar) in that thc so-called2s1s
In the era of A'rerican structuralism
shape. ntaintaineclthat thc addition ofsegnrents represcntsrcplacive processes
it was customaryto segmentsentences by the real motpheme o1'the markcd lb11
phoneticallyinto stringsof morphemes lranscribe. morpheme (O) of the unmarkcd fom is replaced
and thus by-passthe leverof word. This procedure
developed whenworking on languages was
ofaggruti'ativeandpolysynthctictypologies;
arestrangefbr flectivelanguagessuch the results (i 0) O+s (hatj hats )
as Engrish.For rnstance,Fromkin a'd
Rodmanin their & J€ (man+ mc n)
tntroductorytextbook to linguistics(1914:103)proposed
to analyzethesentenceThe bo.ys tosset!
Mary's hat over the/bncein this fashion:
 l8 AN INI'RODTJC'|ION TO TIIE
SI'LJDY OI MoRPIIOI,OGY GRANIMz{IICALUNITS 19

lntuitively, however,we feerthat

thesetwo strategies(acrdingthc seg'rents goose
and repracingone (13) hat man
segmentby another)are sufficicntly
distinct tojustify the introductionofthe hats men geese
versusinternar inflection. Extemar terms€xternal
inflection .onrirt, of adding segments
inflectionis rcarizetrthroughthe modification whercas inr.ernal
ofthe phonologicalshapeby replacing walk \4'nte llnd
lnternalsegmentsby anotherone. onc or.thc
In Englishthereare examplesof both walked found
extemaland internal wrotc
inflectiorrtaking placein one word:
child - children (where/ajl is rcplaccd
added)and keep- kept (wherc /i/ is replacecl by /r/ anrJ rranl ts
hy /t/ and/t/ is added).To dcmo.stratc Clearly.in theseequationswe nrayreplacethc lexemesby arbitrarysyntbols(usingcapital
inflectionmay be ce'tral to thc norninal that intemal
and verbarsub-systems we may look at Arabrc,which letters)andthe exponentsof the grarnmaticalmeaning(number,tense)by anothersct of arbitraty
distinguishes abouttwentyproductivepatternsofinternal
inflection.For insta'ce,the plural of symbols(usingsmall letters):
kittib "book" is kutub,iabar '1nountain".p6al
,asr ..vulture,,, rtusur,ctc. The repracivcprocesses
in Arabic arc more complicatedthan
in English,as can be seen.Indccd,it is Bx
aboutthe consonantarroot ('trilitteral')
nccessaryto talk (14) Ax _ C-x
into which variousvocaricpatterns are Ay Bv cv
interdisitatcd:

(ll) ro or K T B i ts L NS Pm Rm S-
srngular i :
a aa a@ Pn Rn Sn
plural u u ua
ln (14), each word is analyzedinto two components its lcxical and its granrmatical
T'hereplacivcproccsscs in the verbalsystemareequailycomprex, e.g.,
k.ttha ,,he rvrore,,,
kuttba meaning(singular- x, plural : y, present= m, past: n). All the nounson the top line of thc
"rt was writlcn",
.)nktubu.,hcwritcs",,yakfabu ,,itis written,,:
equationhavethe componentx (singular),on the bottom line y (plural);all the verbson the top
havethe componentm (present),and on the bottornn (past).Thus it can be maintainetl,as Lyons
( 12) KT B Y K .rB (1968:183)puts it, that "the morphemeis not a segnlenlof the word at all ... but merelyits
pastactlve a a presentactlve a u 'factorialfunction"'.Whatis dislributedin the word aresememes ratherthan motphemes,or, tts
Pastpassive u i presentpassive u u lexical and grarnmaticalmeaning.It is only when the lexical and grammaticalmeanlngare
(-a rn lcatub-aand_u in yaktuD_lzare suffixes).
matchable with distinctsegments, into partsthat thcsccan bc
i.e.,whcn thc rvordis segmcntable
referred to as morphs. The word wrote, wltich camot be segmentcd into 1wo morphs, slill
Finally'it is possibleto find so-callcdsuppletive
wordswhich arc indctcn.ninatcwith respect represenlsthe cornbinationof two sememes:write (Iexical meaning) * Past (gran-rmatical
tosegrnentation:govs.went,bacrvs.worse,Frenchal/"eye"vs.
yeux,Elerbertit,.eye,,vs.arn. mcaning).on the otherhand,the word walketlis segntentable into two morphsu'alk + ed and,
undoubtedly' standsin the samegrammaticarrelationship
'vel,/ to go as walkedis to tuark, bur of coursc,thesearc cxponentsol'two sememes:wait (lexical meaning)'l- Past(grammattcal
wbereasthereis phonologicalresemblance
betweenthe menrbersof the latterpair thereis in
rneaning).It will bc arguedcorrcctlythat thc morph/ti occurringinw'ulketl(oridl occLrrring
none
whateverbetweenwentandgo. Similarexamprescourdbeprovided trom any lungr"g.. Students begget{)areindicativeofthe phonicsubstancc ofthe morpheme{d}. ilorvever,we shouldavoid
of Greekwill be remindedof their difficurties
with reamingthe heavirysupplerivemorphoiogy wrote inthis manner:write + ed, sinceherethc grammaticalmeaningof the past is
segn-renting
of the aorist(for instance,dripon"u eft" stands
in the samegrammaticalrerationshipro teipo,,I explessedby theprocessofreplacing/ajl with /ow/ (seefurlherdiscussionin 8.2);seeFigure2.2.
lcave"aseidon"l saw" to horo,,I se€,).
we have1oconcrucle
thatin manylanguagcs trere arewordswhich cannotbe segmcntcdlnto 2.2.3Allontorphs
partsandthatthemorphemedoesno1always
have1obe an idcntifiablcsegmcntof thc word.
Still, In the precedingsectionwe noticedthat the regularpasttensemorpheme Id I can be realized
wc would maintain that ail the above
unsegmentable words enter into a proposrtronof
grammaticalequivalencewith the segtnentable by two different allomorphs lIl andldl in two differentcontexts:the lonner after voiceless
words;
consonantsand /d/ eisewhere.If we examined further examples(such as petted, paddedl we
would discoverthat thereis a third allomorph/ed/ occurring afterlt/ andld/. This is summanzed
in (ls).
 20 AN INTRODLjCTION TO tlili
S.l.tit)y Or, MORpt{Or.OGy GRAMMA-fICAI, IINITS ll

Semantics
Pasl lexicaffy, in thc scnsethat the word o-rsclcctsthe pluralizing morphenre{ n } and the word,tlatunt
kecpstl-reLatin pluralizingmorpheme-a /c/. Seethe more detaileddiscussionin 8.2.

2.3 Analysis into Roots, Stems and Affarcs

Morphology
Morphologicalprocess Suppletion lnlleclionalandderivatioualrnorphemcs (c1.4.1) aretraditionallyclassifiedby therrpositirrn
with rcgardto the root (or the base).ll they precedethe root they are callcdprefixes; i1-they
follow the root suffixes; and if they are placcd insidc the root infixes. In the word ccls, for
irrstancc,rzt is the root and -.sis an inflectional suffix. ln the word careless,care isthe root (or
Phonology /t/ ^'/d/ - /ad/ Replacing/aj/ with low/ went thedcrivationalbase)arrd ie.s.s
is a derivationalsuffix. SinccEnglishdoesnot haveinflectional
prefixes, wc may look at Arabic where in yaktubu "he r.vrites",!,1r-is an inllcctional prefix
Fig.2.2 Morphologicalunitsand proccsses
(meaning3"jperson),KTuB is theroot (notcthattheroot in Arabicis a discontinuous motphenre;,
md -a is an inflectionalsuffix (rncaningsingularandindicative).In the word hemoun,nroatris
(15) (i) /edi after/t/, /d/
theroot (or the derivationalbase)and be- is a dcrivationalprefix. To exemplifyinfixeswe may
(ii) /tl aftet voicelessconsonantsother than ztl
look a1Latin or Arabic. For instance,in Latin the morphemc-n- whic,happearsin the prcsent
(iii) /d/ elsewhere
Iango"l touch" is an infix; noticethat the perfectofthe sameverbteligt"l havetouched"docs
not show it.'Ihe root is then said to be discontinuoustd-lr-g.In Arabic the infir -/- derives
It is customaryto call thesethreealtemat'ive
representations of the sarncmorphcmealomorphs. reflexive r:r passivcfonns from the transitiveverbs:Fa[{iM "understand"vs. li]F-t-uHa}l:l
For instance,the rcgularpast tensemorpheme
in Engrish,which may be referredto as "comprehend".The rootF-HMis againdiscontinuous:Ft-al{aM. 'lnterdigitated'vocalic pattenrs
regularlyrepresentedby threeallomorphs {d}, is
/ad/, it/ and/d/ . lt is important to realize
that all these in Arabic roots are sometimescalled transfixes (doublc or triple infixes): s'afiR "poet" vs.
threeallomorphsarephonologically
conditioned,which simply meansthat the
of them is determi'ed by the phonological
selectionof one Jal'aRa?"poets".Anothertlpc of a doublcaffix is callcdcircumfix; lor iustancein Ilerberthe
shapeof the precedingsegment:the voiceless circumfix / I (prefix and suffix added sirnultaneously)derives fcmininc nouns lrom their
consonant selects/t/, the voiced one/dl, and in thc
caseofthe homorganic/t/ and/d/at the end masculinecounterparts.andakttl "ffiend" t t-amdakull "friend (Fem)". A lessfitting exat'nple
the third allomorph/e<vis selected. tJsingthe sameprocedurcwe would be
the plural morphcme
ableto establishthat would be thc Gcrmanpassiveparticiple,e.g.ge-schlag-en"hit" becauseherethe prefix and sulfix
{z} is rearizedby three a'omorphs, nanery/2,/,/s/ ad
analysisunder8.1). 'rhcsethreeailomorphs
/azr.(Sce rhe do not display tho same motpherne.And finally there is also a so-calledinterfix seenin
are againphonologicailyconditioned,in
that the latter is selectedaftcr sibilants the scnse conrpoundssuchas Englishhunt-s-tnonor German'I'ag-e-buchor Tag-esltuch "<ltary" (lit. day-
and affricates, and the former two after
voicelesssegments,respcctively.(fhe vorced and INTERFIX-book).Thc intcrfix shouldnot be confusedwith an inlix which by dclrnrtronsplits
voicelessallomorph/s/ is not selected
after voiceless the lexicalroot in two segments.
sibilantsand affricatessincethis is thc
cnvironmentwhere/ezl is selected).So
altemationsin the phonologicalshape
far, all these Sanskritand other flective languagessuch as Latin and Greek have additionalkinds of
of these1wo morphemeswere expricabre
phonologicaltermswithout reference in purely allixes, which areaddedto the roots,and inflectionalaffrxesare then addedto the complex fomr.
to the notionsof morphology.we may wish 'fhis additionalaffix is known asa thematicvowel andtheresultingcomplexlomt asa stem.For
pluralizingelementsto the rist of the to add other
threeregularailomorphsof the pruralmorpheme:
rn oxen and brethren, {o} as in treer and {en} as instance,in the Latin accusativestngularpuellatn,puell- is the rool, the addcdvowel -a is a
sheep, {al as in trctta and<,riteria, etc. (see
complctelist in 8.2). Examiningthe suffix their thematicvowel, and lr is the inflectionalsuffix marking the accusativesingular.(It may bt: noted
-en in oren we obviousrycannotsay that /en/
phonologically conditionedvariant is a that a traditionalschoolanalysiskeepsthe ending-am unanalyzed).In the l-atin form laudanus
ofthe morpheme {z}. First of ail, /z/
phonologicallysimilarenough(the
and /n/ are not "wc praise",luutl-is theroot,lhe addedvowel <7is a thematicvowel and -nrrsis the inflectional
only featurethey havein commonis voice);
words suchas box serectthe regularailo
second,similar suffix markingthc l'' personplural.This is shownschcmaticallyin Figurc 2.3.l'hc stcmcanbc
morphlazr. Similarry, it is equalry easyto
/c/ in data being an ailomorph of thc regular
argueagainst formedcvcn by prefixing stcm-formingelements,for instzulcc,in Arabic,yaitktttibu"tl is written",
morpheme.when some morphs are drstributed
this mannerwe havc to acknowrcdgethe fact in whcreKa'I'iB is the root to which the stcm-formingprelix r (accompaniedby the transfix a-i) is
that they arenot conditionedphonologrcally
but addcd(ya is an inflectionalprefix meaning3'dpcrsonand rr is an inflcctionalsuffix mcaning
singularand indicative).This is shownin Fig. 2.4. Front thcscexamplcsit appcarsthat thereis
 22 AN II\'TRODIJCTTON TO t.Htr
Stt.rDy OF MORPI{OLOcy GRAMMATICAL UNTTS

( CRAM M AI t ( AI W OR D
1

I nflectional IJerirarional I irOof I Dcrirational Infl ec ti onal

Prefix Prcfix Strffix S ul l i x
STEM
STEM

./\
./\ ( C R AM N I4 1l ( 'AL ) WOR t)
,/\
ROOT Thematrc Inflectional
Vowel Sulfix Itig. 2.5 Inflectional and derivational allixcs
Iaud- _a
-mus
Derivational affixes have the potcntial lo change the membership in the group of primary
['ig. 2.3 Grammaticalword in Latin
grammati cal c ategori es (s ee under 5.1 and 6.1). For i ns tanc e,the addrti on ofthe denv ati onal
sufllx -ic 16rthe noun denocrat results in an adjcctive; the addition ofthe derivational suffix -ize
(GRAMMATICAL) WORD
rcsulls in a yerb. On the other hand, the verb democratize it-tflcctcd lor the past tense remains a
verb, or an adjcctive inflecteclfor gender, number and case to agree with its hcad noun (in l-atin)
rcmains an adjcctive.
The distinction bctween inflcclion and derivation may be blurred in some cascs.For instatrce,
STEM the nasal infix ofLatin ntentroncd above is a dcrivational rather than inflectional affix even ifit
II sewes to mark thc seconilary grantmatical catcgory ol aspecl (i.e., its presence does not change
a-I the grammatical class both thc prescnl lango "l touch" and tho perfect laligt- "1 have touched"
are only grammatical forms of the satnc vcrb). Pcrhaps thc bcst wc can do is 1o recall the
traditional grammatical theory according to which inflection was colrsidet'edto bc any ctrangc
made in the lbrm of a word to express its relation to other words in the sentellce. Hence all the
Inllectional Derivational ROOT Inflectional grammars of flcctivc languagcs inclu<Ielenglhy sections describing the declensions of nouns'
Prellx Prefix
va- Suffix adjectives, and pronouns, and thc conjugations of velbs, according to selected models of
n- K-I'-B -u formations, called paradigms. Shorter scctions would bc devotcd to the study of various

Fig.2.4 Grammaticalword in Arabic tlerivational processes,by which ner'"'words arc formcd from cxisting lvords (or roots) verbs

tiom nouns, nouns liom verbs. etc. (See the discussiou undcr 4. I ).
a universaltendencylor derivationalaffixes (prefixes
and suffixes)to occurcloserto the root than
inflectional alfixes (prefixes and suffixes); 2.4 Clitics
derivationalelementstend to be centrar
and At this poinl a mention must be made of certain word classes (parts of speech) which
infleclionalelementsperipheral.The root ancl
derivationalaffixes (ifany) constitutethe stem,
and traditionally are vierved as lalling belween full-fledged words and grammatical af fixes. They are
the infleclional affixes are prefixetl or suffixed
to it (see the discussionin 4.2 for some
controversialexamplcs).Figure2.5 visualizes refcrrctl to by the ternr clitics or grammatical words (not to be confused rvith grammatical words
this.
At this point we have to distinguishmore discusscd in2.1.2). Futl-Iiedgcd words (nouns, verbs, adjectives, and adverbs) carry lexical
clcarly betweeninflectionaland derivational
affixes l'flectional afrrxcsare thosethat acceut and their lcxical meaning is of symbolic nature; on thc othsr hand, adpositions
mark secondarygrammaticar categories:gendcr,
numbcr'caservith nou's (cf 5.2), andperson, (prepositions and postpositions), articlcs, particles and pronouns do not (usually) carry acccnt and
tcnse,aspect,mood, voice with verbs(cr. 6.3).
Definingncgativcly,it may be saidthat derivational tlieir lcxical mcaning is of indexical naturc (cf. i.3).
affixesarethosethal arenon-inflectional. 'lean' against
The absenccofthcir own lexical accent makes them clitics in that they have to
flrll-fledged wonis (lrom Ancient Greek 6yrcl,r,v6psvo /cnklm6lnena/ "(words) leaning against")
 )A
AN INTRODTJCTION TO
THE S1'IIDY OII MORPHOLOGY
GRAMN4AT'ICAL TJNI'I'S 25

-ror lnstance,the definite article in Engrish

is a proclitic the:md, whilc its (r) a sc t ol ' morphemes
Rumanianis an encliticont:ul lJponcloser counterparlin
examinalionwe may classifythe (i i )
morc 'word-like'thanthe Rumanian Engrish articleas a sc l of pht-rnemes
one,becauscof its abirity to be
an adjcctive:thegootrman;in Rumanian, separated from its noun by (i i i ) a re l ati on ofs c quc nc e.
the articrebehavesalmostas a
attachedto the noun or the adjective suffix in beingalways
(both phonorogicalryand orthographicall 'l'his
biln-ul om' other languages y1: om_urbun _ morlel is successful in thc description of agghrtinative and polysynthetic languages
may repeatthe article in the noun phrasc,
ha-?ti hat-tofi or Ancient Greek e.g. tsiblical Hebrew whcre the phenomena of suppletion and discontinuity (see under 2.5.2) are rlon-existent, or are
io anir ho agatho.s(bu1arsoho
agathdsanEr) only vcry marginal. For instance, Cree vcrba.l fonns niwdltanlau, "l see him" and niv,clpumik" he
Typical exampresof clitics are
shortpronominalforms as in Ancient
GreeKmoi..me,,and seesmc" w'ould be analyzed as follows:
'ror "you" (vs fuil form emoi "to mc" and
sr.ti,.toyou,); conrrastdo.smoi..give
"gimme(it)" with dosX emoi"give me (it),,or
X to me,,;similarly,,riskei moi,lit. ..r
vs. emoiariskei,lit. it pleasesME it preases me like it,, (16) ni + wAp I afil + aw "l s c s hi m"
(not someoneelse)..1(e'rphasized) r3
tike it,,. ISG see 3S G I
Their intcmrediatesratusbctween
{''lr words and affixes is arsoreflected
conventionsof various languages; in varying spe'ing
for instance,Frenchhyphenatespronominal I
clitics in the ni wtp + aln + ik "l l e s c c s me"
imperativedorrnez-nous-la "give hcr to us" whereasSpanish
spellsthem togetherwrth their verb ISC S€C 3S G 33 I (-il - invcrsion marker)
damelo"give rne it" (not *da me
ro).However, both Frenchand Spanish
cliticsas full wordsin preverbalposition:je spelr their pronominai
Ie vois andr. veo,.rsechim,,,respcclivery. In this model morphemcs and sememcs are paired in an exhauslive one-to-one conesporl-
other hand' Semiticlanguagesspell on the
their pronominarclitics alwaysas
clitics. The sameis true dence. ln the past this model was overuscd to thc detrirncnl ol-the useful distinction between
ofthe conjunction"and" emdvariousprepositions
which arealwaysspelledasproclitics morphological and syntactic structure, i.c. word vs. phrasc/clause/sentence.If transl'erred from
and Hebrew on the Indo-European in Arabic
si<'e,in Latin the con;unctionque,,and,,is
spered as an the anal ysi s ol ' thc aggl uti nati v eand pol y s y ntheti c l anguagc sto that ol l ' l c c l i v e l anguages ,one
enclitic (c'g przler malerque"father
and mother') but not the olher copurativ
et mater' In the samc language, e conJunctjon.. pater may become oblivious of a crucial role played by thc rvord in nrost granunatical thcorics. In
thc postpositioncum.,with,, is speiled
pronouns:mEcunt"with me" as an encritic with practical terms, one has to operate with two types ofboundaries: * urorpheme boundary and #
but as a fut word with nouns:cumprtre..with
To expressthe intermediatestatus the word boundary, in thc analysis ol-inflecting languages. Contrast
of clirics betweenfu, words and
to place the equalionsign (-) between affixes it'ather,,.
rs customary
the word and the clitic, e.g. lhe:man;morpheme (17) C re e: ni + w ap + arn + i k P ol y s y nth.-ti c
boundary is specifiedby +; and
word boundary by #, e.g.the .gootl#friend+s.
As far as the Ii r-rgl i s h: he#s ee+ s #me Infl ec ti ng
accentualproperliesof clitics eurrl
affixes are concemed,it is usually
craimedthat, unlike full
words' they do'ot possessany
acccnt.ofcourse, therearea, sorts
Ancient Greek logos:tls "a certain
ofcounter-exampres (e.g. It woufd be wrong to analyze English * he 1 .see+ s t me.
word" vs. Iogoi:tines,,certainwords,,;
praise" but laud-a+mus:Ancient Lattn taud+o,,1
Greekpaideu+ads,.educated,,; etc.) But, on the wholc, the
abovestatementmay be usedas a 2.5.2 l4/onl anrl Parudigm Model
first approximationur their idenlification.
l'he Word and Paradigm Model is a hierarchical (vcrtical) rnodcl r.vhichasstgns a contral

2.5 Basic Approaches to Morphologt role to thc word as wcll as to rts constitutive elsmcnts (rnorphcmcs). l his ntodcl is succcssful itt
the dcscription of inflccting (flcctive) and introflccting .languagcsn'hcrc thc phcnomena of
Therc arc thrce basicapproachesto
morphology: Item and Arrangement
and ParadigmModel (Wp), antl Item Moder (IA), word infixatiol and transfixation create so-called discontinuous morphemes. Examine the following
and processModel (Ip).
set ofdata llom l,atin:

2.5.1lten and ArrangementModel

(I8) rumpo "l break" rupi "l have broken"
The ltem and Arrangement Moder
is a purely rinearmoder seeksto split eachword "I leave" "i havc lefi"
(morespecificarry,eachphonological 'r,hich relinquo reliqui
form of u *o.d; in,o a number of indepcndentryfunctioning
segments(morphemes). tundo "l pour" fudi "l have poured"
This model operateswith
 26 AN INTRODUCTION .TO' I
HE S IlII) Y O F M oR PIIOT ,O G Y GRAM]\,IA'IICAL TINI'fS 21

In the left column all the forms

haveone thirrg in corlnlon vis-ii-vis The trans fi x c d (i nterdi gi tated)grammati c al nrorpheme r-n i s di s c onti nuous ,and s o i s thc
column:they displaya nasar their counterpartsur ,re right
infix beforethe finar consonant
of the root. contrast ru * 111_p lexical cot.tsonanlalroot K I-B). J'o come up with its grammatical analysis onc has to apply the
with rup etc. However,ro acknowledge
rhe fact ,h" ;;"-r.';;;:;,_,: :::::1: WI'model, i.e. otre has to juxlapose, or superimposc,thc singular and plural fonns. The solution
sequencing
(sorarrhe
rAmodcr)
isnorenough.
n,'.n"lT##:l;ffJffi:j:il:,J is that I 17marks singular in "book" and "donkey" but plural in "mountain"; ltencc thc nced to
be done by contrastingthe forms in thc
left and right corumns.The conclusion cl assi fy A rabi c nouns i nto dec l ens i onalparadi gms (c f.2.2.2).
examrnationof English glosses basedon the
would be that the nasarinfix marks
expressrt in negativeterms,its non-perfectrbrms or, to
absencemarks perfcctforms. rhis 2.5.3 ltem und Pro<ess l+Iodel
is the essenceot.the wp
modcl:to comc up with a grammatical
er.rrrorrldrsuruuon
solutionoue
o'e nas
hastoJuxtaposc,
to ,,,_rr;;'^...:;-:".:l:
or rathersuperimpose, While tlic IA and WP models are diametrically opposed (horizontal synlagrnatic vcrsus
relatedforms: two
vertical paradigmatic model) the concenrs of the ltem and Process Model are errdemic to both
IA and WP models. lts main concem are the moqrhological processosundergone by both lexical
(1e)aquarn _
- f'I pour ) and granrmatical morphemes. For instance, u'hen contrasting the plural fbrnration proccsseso1'
f;:1.1 l'r havcpourcd/thewatcr" inflcctional vs. agglutinating languages one may prolitably draw on this model. Examinc thc
followinp sets of Latin and Turkish data:
Another aspcctof the wp moael which
is totalryabsentfrom the IA model
pahonwith irregularand suppletive rs its preoccu_
morphology;suppletion is the phenomenon (22) Lati n
differentformsmay belongto thesamc wheretotally Turkish
paradigm,e.s- Engrishgo - went,be "fri end" - "fri c nds "
- wa,s(cf.2.2.2).To amic-us amic-i dos t tl os t-l ar
staywith Latin verbalmorphology
examineadditionaldatawith non-perl,ect "1athcr" - "falhers"
vs. perlbct contrast: pater patr-Cs baba baba-l ar
cas-a cas-ae ev c v -l c r "house" - "houses"
(20) rumpo ..I break" rupi ..1
havebroken,, vic-us vic-i kriy kciy-lcr "r,i l l age" - "v i l l ages "
tango ..1touch" tetigi .,1
havetouched,,
laudo ..1praise" laudavi ..1havepraised,,
.,1 ln Lalin onc will notice morphophonemic change in the rootTzrler vcrsusp./lr es; in'l'urkish
dtco lcad" duxi ,.1
haveled,, the plural suffix l-larf tmdcrgoes the proccss ol-vowcl harrnony /-lari - i-leri. cl- 8 1.
feno ..i ..I
cany,' tuli havccarned,,

Morphologicarirreguraritiesof inflecting
ranguages
arecapturedby allocati'g fbmrs with
similar irregularitiesto diffr
perfectbyarraching,n",;T::;:',T;"1:::ilffi
tri::J:::rr::r;:,1;'HT,T;
fonns thc pcrfcct by the suffix -s bcrongsto conjulation
III. The verbs which form their perf.ect
by removingthe nasalinfix from the
root (t"-tig-7*ulpartial recluplication
and vocaric change)
belongalsoto conjugationIIr. rn the
last examprc,however,thereis no resemblance
betweentherootfer- and its counterp whatever
arl rnthepertect, tul_.
Transfixation found in introflecting
ranguagessuch as Arabic splits not only
nomrnalroot but alsocreatesdiscontinuous the verbaror
grammaticalmorprremes.Examine
of Arabic plural forms wrth their lexical the following set
rootscapitalizecl:

(21) K iT at s . ,b o o k "
KuTuB "book s "
jaB aL . . mo u n ta i n "
iiSaL ' . m ounta i n s ',
HiM aR . ,d o n k e y "
HaM iR "donk eys "
 28 AN II{TRODUCIION I'O TI{E S'fIJT)Y OIi MORPIIOI-OGY
GRAX,I.VIA]'ICAI- { INTIS 29

RECOMMENDED READINGS
EXERCISES
Bloomfield'Leonard'1935.Ltmguage.
London:Allen andUnwin. (Revised
eairion.)(chapters (A ) tdcnti fi cati on oIw ords
i 3-16 ).
Fromkin, Victoria & RobcrrRodrnan.
rg74. An Introductionto Language.New york:
Rinehanand Winsron. Holt, L Latin is a language that pemrits many varialions in *'ord order. Positional rnobility is

Gfeason,Henry A. 196r. An Introduction therelorc highly relevant to the location of word boundaries in Latin sentences. Usc the
to DescriptiveLinguistics.New york:
Ilort, Rinehart accentualcriteria discussedin 2.1.4 in isolating thc words in the sentencesbelou, antl giving
and Winsron.(RevisedEdition.)(Chapters
5 and 6).
Harris,Zelig s. l95 r . Methodsin structurar thci l grarrrrnati c almeani ngs .
Linguistics.chicago: tJniversityor-
Hockclt, charles F. 195g.A course in Modern chrcago press.
Lingursrlcs.Ncw york: l.he Macmillan
(Chaprers14, 15, tg, 2O). company. (1) R€ginam6gnaf6minaer6samdcdit.

Klavans,Judy l985. "The independcncc "The great queen gave a rose lo the woman".
ofsynlax anclphonologyin cliticization,,.
Language ^ ,,: ,,,. : : ,
61 .95 12 0. \l ) l .cmrnac dedl Lr()s amregr
namagnu.

Kr6mskll',Jiii. 1969 The Wordas a Linguistic "'l hc grcat queen gave a rose to the *'oman".
Llnit. TheHague:Mouton.
(l )
;,.-
P atc rs dpi Irrs fi l i oupi s tul ammi s i t.
Lyons' John 1968'Introduction to Theoretical
Littguistics. cambridge: carnbridge
Press.(Sections3.2 and 5.3). univcrsity "The wise fathcr sent a lelter to the son".
(4) ISpistulamsiipi€nsp6temrisitfilio.
Nida, EugeneA. 1949.Morphologv-:A
DescriptiveAnalysis of llords. 2"dlldirion.
Ann Arbor, "'fhe wise fathcr sent a letter to the sou".
Mich.: Universityof Michiganlrress.
(5) Mi g nus rex gl i tl i uml i l i odedi l .
"The great king gave a sword to the son".
.
(o)
,,:,.- : : --
f l l toml s rteprs tul S mrex s apl c ns .
"'l hc rvisc king sent a letter to the son".
(7)
:. ,
C l i d i u r r r r r r r l csn r d g n u sr fg l d cd i t.
"'fhe greatsoldiergavea swordto the krng".
- *1
( 8) nl eros amdedi t.
R cxs i pi i ns magrtaeregt
"The n'ise king gave a rose to the grcat qucen".
(9) Sapientipiitnepistulamfiliusmisit.
"l'he son senl a letter to the wise l-alher".
( 10 ) M 6gnareginarcgisapi6ntiglddiurndcdit.
"The great queen gave a srvord to thc wrsc kilrg".

2. Isolate the following words in the Russian selltcnccs below and state their tneaniug. Your
analysis should assign every phonological segrnent in Russian to a certain Finglish word.
There should be no residues.

(a) hcrc (d) molhcr tgl w as u) siek

(b) liiend (") lather (h) l ny
(c, dog (0 nill come (1 , tonlorTow
 30 AN INTRODT,ICTION I'O
I Hf] S I'I ]I)I' 0II MoRPHOI-(X;Y
GRAMN4A'I'I(]AI- I INI'I'S 3l

(1) bylzdesrdnig "(A) friend washere".

Turkish
(2) s.,rbdkebylibr!n6 "(The) dog was sick".
(3) ( I ) Ankara ve Izmire gidcccgirn
drLigblitb6len "(The) friendwas sick',. (lit) Ankara+NOM and - lzmir+DAT go+ P R OGR + l S G
(4) sablkabyl6zd6si "(The) dog rvasherc". "l am going to Ankaraaud lzrnir".
(5) m6jnterspridr6rzdftre "My fbtherwill conretomorrow,,.
(6) rn,rj6m6trb,rFn6. "My motheris sick',. (2)
(1) uzun yol uzun yollar
zdftrcpridi6tm^j6m6rr "My motherwill cometomotrow,, (lit) long road long roads
(8) m6j.rt6tsbolrcn "My fatheris sick',. "the long roads"
"the long road"

3. Isolatethe words in the fotowi'g

crzechsentencesand statct.cir mcanings.your Lctlin
shouldassigncveryphonorogicar analysis
segmentofevery sentence to sonleworci.Theres'ourd be (3) Ancyram Smymam-que c(]
no residues.
(lil) Ankara+ACC lzmirl ACC - antl go* I S G
"I am going to Ankaraand lzmir".
I.

(4) vi a l onga viae longac

(4 , here (d) sick
"thc l ong road" "the long roads
(b) man (e) was
(c) cat
(B) Idcntification of morphemes and mo4rhological proccsscs

(l) biltuil6vrek "(A) man was here".

Onc ofthe characteristicfeaturcs ofSrvahli (and Bantu languagesin gcrteral) is thc cxtstencc
(2) koikabilancmocn6 "(The) cat was sick".
of noun classcs.'l'herc are specilic singular and plural prefircs that occur lvilh lhe llor.lllslll
(3) dl6vjekbilndmoccn "(l'he) man was sick".
each class. ln thc tbllowing scntcnccs, two ofthese classesarc included:
(4) bilatuk6ika "(The) cat was here,'.

(1) mtoto amefika "The clrild has arivcd".

Il.
(2) vitabu vitaanguka "The books will fall".
(3) mtu amc l al a "' Ihe pers on has s l ept"
(a) tomorrow (d) father
(1) vi su v i taanguk a "The k ni v es w i l l fal l ".
(b) morhcr (c) IS
(5) nrtoto anafika "'I he child is arriving".
(c.) t'lty ( fl sick
(6) vikapu vinaanguka "1'hc baskcts arc falling".
(7) visu vir-neauguka "The knivcs have fallen"
(I) muj6tecpiijdezitra "l\{y father will come tonlorrow".
(8) watu wamelala "The people have slept".
(2) mojemiitkajen6mocna "My mother is sick".
(9) watoto watafika "The cirildren will anivc".
(3) zitrapiij<lemojemritka "My nother rvill come lomorrow,, "l ' he book has fal l en"
(10) ki ta bu k i mearrguk a
(4) mij6tecjendmocen "My father is sick".
(l 1) ki su k i naanguk a "' l ' he k ni fe i s fal l i ng".
( I 2) waloto rvanalala "I'he children arr: slccping".
1'hemakc-upof a word in Turkishdirrcrs
cruciallyrrom its make-upi'Latin. Discuss
statcmentwilh regardto (a) phonological this
and (b) granrmaticalcrileria for wordhood.you (a) Idcntify all 1he lexical and grammatical morplrcmcs you can detccl and spccify their
usethc following datafor (b): can
mca ni ng.
 AN INTRODUCI]ON
1,O 'frit, Sll it)Y Or; N4ORPIIOLOGY
GR{MlvlAl l(lAL llNl lS

(b) consrrucred?
Thatis,wharkindsof nrorplie'es (10) role "shepherd"
l"J;lffi, arcsrrungtogerher
ard ro) lm
(c)
(l 1) yaroq "green" ycruqqrm
I { o w . r v o u ld yo u sa y in
Swa h ili:
(12) maSiah "Mcsiah" maSihin-r
( l3) Sade "field" SAdo0
( l3) tne men are falling.
( l a ) b dyi 0 "house" batim
( l4)T.hebooks have anrved.
(15)
.fhe (1s) napi "prophe1" n J l J l l rn r
ch ild r e n will sle e p .
( l 6 ) m aq d m "place" mcqr)nr60
(16) T'hc baskct will t-all
( I 7 ) s usa "mare" siiso0

6'
( I 8) mirveO "death" moOirn
Dcscribe the morphological proccss
lountl in the followirg data (19) fes "tree"
lrom c.lassicar Arabic. Try \ es l m
to specily its meaning(s).
(20) safe "lip" '-^
Sal()U

( 1) ..he (21) do p "bear" dubbinr

kataba wrote,, ,.he
kattaba dictate<.I,, (22) rolE "physician" rofc?rm
(2) iarLrfa .,he
was noble,, iarrafa ..he
(3) ,.he
hotror.ed,, (23) rap "many" rabbrrr
fahima undcrstood,, ..he
lahhama explainecl,, (24) sedaqa 'Justicc"
(4) .,he sadaqo0
kabura w,asold,, ..he
kabbara magnifiecl,, (25) ?oyep "cnemy" ?oyeBim
(5) Sakka ,.he
was doublfuj,, Sakkaka ..hc
(6) ..he
filletl him rvith doubr,, (26) laFena "brick" leBdnim
lazza was strong,, ..hc
lazzaza roinlbrce<j,, (21) z,iqen "old man" zaq0nrm
(7) fasara ..hc
discovered,, fassara ,.he
explaincd,, (28) yo5o0a "inhabitant"(F) yirSep<10
(8) qarna "he got up" qawwama ..he set upright,,
(29) ?ri "man" {enaslm

T Using the IP a'tl wP nrodcls identify

(30) pe "mouth" pifiyyo0
anclconstrucl the paradigms fior
the fomration of plural ( 3 1 ) h axa m "wise rnan" hcximinr
of nouns (and adjectives) in Biblical
Hebrcw. Slarl br
rvhichfomr theirprurar
byasufnx
;, il;;;;; ffii;:ili,:H;:il:fl1:il;"llT
(32) malka "queen" mclaxo0
( 3 3 ) ? am a "nraicl" ?cmaho0
by a morphologicalprocesses.Hebrew distinguishes
two genders, masculinc and rbrnininc, (3a) tEnap "grape" tenaprrn
marked by -A and _a, respectively.
(35) horba "ruin" horap<10
(36) roS "hcad" raSinr
Note: Fricativc countcrpafis
of /b, d, g, p, t, k/ resulting from
postvocario renrlron are (37) n6lex "king" rnelaxrm
transcribed/F, d, y, 0, x/. Stress
t is always on the last syllablc, unless
marked on the penult. (38) ?exuzza "property" ?cxuzzo0
(39) kahol "blue" kchullim
(l) su s "horse" slsim (40) sefer "book" saIEnm
(2) h,lq "law" huqqirn (11) lipn "llebrew" ti p n m
(3) ?urwi "manger" ?urawo0 "chameleon" kohim
(4) (42) koah
?r,rsar "treasure" ?c-isaroO
(5) (43) qodes "holincss" qodaSim
rnatoz "{bflrcss" msf uzzjnr (44) ?ap "father" ?apo0
(6) hcrpa "shamc" heralbO "door" dala060
(7) (4s) d6le0
koxaB "star" koxaBim "mother" ?imrno0
(8) lc0 (46) lcm
"hcar1" libbim
(e) ?ah{3a (47) telilla "psalm" bhillirn
"love" ?chapoO
(48) fir "city" lannr
 31 AN INIRODI,TCTION
t.O fIIIr St.UDyOFMORpHOt_Ocy

(4e) ?issa "woman.. naSiln

(50) yona
"pigcorr.. yoninr
(51) kite0
"dog" kalapim
(52) besa "egg"
bEsirn C H APTER 'TH R EII
(53) fipparon "pencil"
fefrono0 PARAI)IGMATICAND SYNTACMATIC RELA'fIONS
(s4) baO "daughter" bano0
(55) ben "son,,
banim
(56) iahor "black" Sehrtnm 3.1 The Notion of Distribution
(57 ) ? i "island" ?iyyim Every linguistic unit (i.e., phoneme,nroryrheure,
lexcrnc arrd to a certuiu degreeererr
(s8) ?adom .,red
(59) ?dres
?edLrmmrm sentence) distribution. 'l'herearebasicallyibur typcso1'distributron:
hasa characteristic
"earth"
?arasoO
(60) IaBen ,.white.'
lcl3anrm (i) Distribulionalequivalence
(C) Definirions (ii) Clomplementarydistribution
(iii) Distribulional
inclusion
8. (iu) Overlappingdistribution
Definc and cxcmplify the
following morphological
processcs:

(a) Two units are said to be distributionally equivalent if thcy occur in thc sanrerangeol-
vorvclchange (e) tonalmodification (i) contcxts;on thc otherhand,ifthey do not havc any contextsirt cotnmonthcy are saidto bc in
(b) interfixarion strcss change
(0 subtraction
(c) 0) i nfi xati on complementarydistribution. Thesetwo temrscoverthc {amiliardistinctionbctwccnphotrctttcs,
suppletion
(g) partialrcduplication morphcmcsand semcmes(contrastiveunits) on the one sicle,and allophones,allomorphsand
(d) (k) conrpl ete
transfixation (h) circumfixation alloscmes(complementaryunits) on theother.Examplcsof totaldistnbulionaiequtvalence can
redupl i cati on
be foundmostcasilyin phonology.For instance, phonemes /p/ and ,/bisccm to be distributionally
9. Dcfine and cxemplify
the ibllowing terms: equivalentas a glanceat lhe lollowing rangeofcontcxts niay dclllollstratc:
(a) sirnpleroot (d) dcrivationalstem
(b) (l) l n iti a lPo si ti o n Fi n a lPo si ti o n
complexroot (c) inflcctionalstcm pin - bin lope - lobe
(c) inflectionalprefix (0 thematicvowel pic - buy rip - rib

l0' The morphemehas been pain - banc sip - sib

define<i
as "the minimarunit of grammaticar
analysis,,(r_yons, poor - boor cop - cob
1968:l8l).However,in some
languagesthereare pat - bat caP- cab
nrorphcmes
arthough
rhese
words
berong,",h".r_.;j:]J:::j;::::n:".r;:::ilI;
aresegmcntablc.
Discussthis problem.
On the otherhand,phonemesipl ar-rd sincethe rauge
ih,/arenot distribulionallyeclttivalent
ofcontextsof/hi doesnot includethe final position(i.e.,/h,'isphonotactically
inadrnissiblein
ll rhere are variousprobrerns
comrectedwith dcfini'g .word,.
It is usuallyclairncdthat thc final positionin nattveI,nglishwords):
word should be simultaneously
a semantic,a phonological (orthographical),
grammaticalunit. Discuss and a
thesethrecaspectsof ,wordhood,.
(2) Initial Posilion
pit - hit
pikc - hike
pail - hail
 36
AN INTRODIIC]ION
1'O'IIIU S I L]DY oF
MORPHOLOGY
PARADIGMA'II(] ANI ) SYNTAGMAI'IC R,LLA'I]ONS ]1
Similarly' the phonemes
/n/ and/4/ are not distrib'tionalry
equivalentsince
rhereare no
ffi',:#"i:i:i#}l::i"*'":"t'o*,'.n .""irremes
or'*"n'".*,*"u .ingr"
position(i'e /r1/ segmentur
is phonotacticallyinadmissible
nativeEngrish*n.o.jltu' ' in initiar positionin contexts of x

c ontex ts ol ' y
(3) Final position
kin _ king
Fig. 3.1 Distributional
inclusron
ban - bang
run - rung

contexts of x contcxts ol y
Hsncesomelinguistsmight
. be inclincdto rabel
labeiphonemes/h/ andt4/as contexls ol'x and y
it can easilyo" rr,oiun subphonemes.Bur
tir,'":;;,ill1":Jo
distributionary suchas/p/una,hr
u,,,
*",;,::l iijl,[i.liiTi:ff:"-*
*'.":.utomatch
o,,!,o'o reap .n
obviousrv,
u"..n"rr,,,1!1t.i:;:
,"""::'-l
distributional
or
analysiswould be a tediousur.in*, ,lo it
a certain point ir *o-e

:::'l?
seemsthat at Fig. 3.2 Overlappingdistribution

;ffiiii.;iliifi:r;:,il
ffi:t,,,
Betweenthesetwo
::il::n":",;,i::",H
:m;rr ::
wherewe aredealingwith
hundredsand thousands
of units.
":i:;::;'::::
contexts,lbr instarcc,in rcportingthe cvcntsfiom somebodyelse'spoint of view. Contrastthe
following minimal pair of sentcnces:
of distributionalequivalencc
we must<iistinguish una
,*ot*tt"t"t "o.npt"-"nlary distribution
Distributionat
trvoringuistic in"tusion
i, rouna
berwcen (4) Caesarmrlitespunivit quod malc pugnavcrant.
"r,,r,r"r"T?li:tffr""."'j:'iJtion
whi
c rv(v)oc
:n:::::i:; hon curs,
.,ff ::TlT:i:HT,:'::?ffi::# "Caesarpunishedthe soldielsbecauscthcy had foughtbadly"
,,l:,l",,il CaesarmilitEspunivit quodmale pugnavissent.

ffiffi"x.l;1:l:tr
;::;:j::xllTjj:T::iril: Tltru ;kt
Pastevents(perfcctivcor imperfcctive)
"Cassarpunishedthe soldiersfor havingfbughtbadly"

usedonly ifthe speaker whereasth" p"rr..t .un r," Inthe lattersentencethe narator, by usingthc subjunctive,implies what was tn ('aesar'smind
nllg
inrhepresen
tsute 1cr . ;:l ?,ffiffi;::il,ffi::Ij1:tr*il"T:T: when he punishedthe soldiers(i.c., hc gives an allegcdreason),whereasthe former sentence

:::1?.11:r'"T:;lfi"
in
"o"on bur'; ;;; hascontexts
in which
hmln presentsthe eventasa plain fact.Similarpairsslrownicelythat ntcaningfulnessimplies 'choice'
theotherdoes
not (to usellalliday's terminology)and furthermorethat it is impossiblefor two Iinguistictrnitsto
thistvpe ofdistribut ionill.""lffi Tli:T':::il: ,;ffiT:,'in" bc in mcaninglulcontraslunlcssthey areat leastparlially cquivalentin their distribution.
(qu'il vient)but the subjunctive
if themain
:":':'ffi :T'J;j
.on* a negativeverbJe ne crots
vienne).We use the indicarive ",_.. pas (qu,il 3.2 Paradigmatics und Syntagmatics
,: ;,':::,":.:^:":,conmrns

::sibte (q'lt'itvienne)."{:{'J',T-".^q
:;;i:"i":i:;,:;Xi:,:;:li;,,:l', Accordingto Saussure, everylinguistrcunit entersinto relationsoftwo differentkinds:those
Here the question ofthe contrast bctween
indicative and
and subjuncrive
*:; calledparadigmaticandthosecalledsyntagmatic.Paradigmatic relations arethosein which
arevariouscontexrs doesnor arise;howeverrhere a parlicularunit canbe replacedby imotherunit or contrastswith anotherunit. To usea lamiltar
. *n,"ili" #:"::.::::,1":
aredistriburionorrv"c,iuo'ffi
1i1":""T*;"il:il"rHffi*m*";;,,;:!;"":::i cxamplclronr phonology,thephonologicalunit /p/ contrastswith the phonologicalunit,/b/in the

conndenceabout nnding contextof/-rt/. 'l hc replacemcnl

of lpl by lbl in this context,of coursc,cntailschangcofmeanrng
:;::::;,';::;:,':::;:;"'o*"si'g such a person) andon c,herche (i.e., thc morphemc {prt} does not mcan the samc as thc morphcrnc {btt}). Syntagmatic
Lati
nthe
qu",ti
on"r,n" Tff::ff:"J:Til
i:Tlffi : m:l*;; TlLT relations arethosewhich are enteredinto by a particularlinguisticunit with the otherunits of
""l',Ll 'Ihus
":r the samelevel with which it co-occursand which may be said to constituleits conlext.
phonologicalunits /p/ and /rtl (or lpi andlrl and /t/) standin syntagmatic to
relalionships one
 38 AN INTRODUC],|ION
1O THFJS,fIIDY
OI'MORPHOI,OGY
PAILA.DIGMAlIC AND SYNl'AGMAl'IC RtI,I-A't'IONS 39
another.Obviously,
and syntagmatrcrelalionships
consr4errhemas *. lll^u]::"tic are interd
tmcnsions(verticaland
placingit in its netw( ho
;:',Tl n t syntagnlallcs
svnlagmaric :"1''"il'l;'il1':1n;r;'rr"'acteria#ff*I
..,;,1:-"-'
;:#illff,*:;il;Tf
j:,,''i,i,#[ff
:#iH,::#ilTr.;
liom
the
potentiar
itv
j,T,JT::r; b

orirsoccu'ence
in paradigmatics
-T':t::::i:#ffIJ::'fiiJ::J;l'"g
morp
ho,ogy, I lil,i*1?;,.,
cve,
s:phono
kgy, [-ig. 3.3 Paradigmatics and syntagmatics in phonology
",,.,,#t:l;i,Tl:,''# ;i{+lil
;",",f,*Jf jf:
p o t c n t r a l i t yo f o c cu r r e r
grammarica,'"*n*l!l::r*']*:;,iii::;:-r;i:f and a svntagmaticrelation
morphology syntax

morphemectomir-,.iord,,.;,;'r;" wrth a lexical

,:,,:':,:T.etc'
on the lcvel of syntax,the inflected
paradigmaticrerarions for^ oui*(Acc) contracls domi n- -us Romani cd syntagmallcs

#.T
:i:i:*l;, r*;fmi::t; ;:;;t:':
xm *:j;T;#
phonology)and morphotactics phonotactics(synlagmatics
-l Roma

(syntagmatics at the level of

rvithpattems at tl
tlre level of morphologv).phonoracrrcs
dears -o paradigmatics
lc and
r";,::"*::11i:s
impermissible
groupingsof phonemes.
"r0"""*r,ri"
the initial .lr.t., For instance,rn English
of th...,

:,,;:::;.;
ru;"*::*",'"'*"-.t*il:,,,tffi
r;;;l:i";:ffi
morphotacticspermit both
ji
sequences
paradigmatics

.ttL.r/or -du-Iar Lake+pROGRESS1yn+p4 "r-.rtrt.rori^ue+pRoGRESSlVE+r1-gp.41 r pAST and F'ig. 3..1I'aradigmatics and syntagmatics in n-rorphology and synlax
g 11p1pn] *thcv
le'el of lcxologr, weretaking". Svnragmarics
,*"r""r*" ;",::,".:l::ultAr ar rhe
'.",
il:Jlj:illffi i,::;;,::;,
::$**::,,,,* whelher he wants to express confidence or doubts about finding a Russian speaking secretary. In
answering the question What happened to Mar.y? the spcakcr has a choicc between the acttve
svrtasmarics j;#;:::ljH:TJJ:, rurther
antl,",i
arrherever "0.i, o"*digmatics
and John kissetl /rcr or the passive construction She wus kissed b.y John dcpending on whether he
(sentences)intontrr".r"urii.;r":::':"tj,1t:s woulddealwith thelinkingotsynractic
unirs wants to foreground the event of kissittg or its instigator.
astheutou"n'"ntiol:j,::",LlflT::TT;:,*":'o *"r *irr,minimuipui.,
such or,.nt"n"". Paradigruatics and syntagmatics may also be interpreted in tenns of thc Saussurcan
e thc indicativcandsubjunctrve
conrrast: diclroton-ry of langue and parole. As pointed out above, paradigmatic relatronships work in
obsentia which mcans that a parlicular linguistic sign is opposed to other signs (phonemes,
(5) On chercheunc secretaire lui sait le russe
/ l morphemes. lexemes) not bccausc thcy arc in the message but because they belong to langue, utd
lqui sachele russeJ
thus according to many structuralists, paradigmatics reflects the essential characteristic of langue
It is of interestto note (system). On the othcr hand, thc reality of syntagmatic relationships contracted by a particular
th
anarvsis
whereconsrrucJ' asdiscourse linguistic sign with thosc beforc or after should be relegated Io parole.
";iHJ*;:TTl:iil"'#'T":TT:ffJ::"n".d Under this assumption, only the study of linguistic units (phoncmcs, tnorphcmes, lcxcrnes
are quireofteninterpreted
as,code,
and.messase,;
in orher and sememes) and their paradigmatic relationships would belong to the study of langue, whercas

:I,ffi ,,Tffi:,ili1:l,H_T#::,T:il1ff
-"Jr:1ff;ff'r:i:svnlagmatics

or thesubjunctive,
fi :il"":,i.THT:1T: achoice-ot".tr,i"indicative
their syntagmatic relationships would belong to the study of parole. Hence sotnc structual
linguistic schools do not treat syntax as the proper object oflinguistic description since syntax
(i.e., lexotactics) does not belong to langue. Howcvel, we cannot say that phonotacttcs and
i.e the;::lJ:ffi#:::ff"kerhas
nventoryofverbal forms
dependingon morphotactics do not belong to langue (the fonner implernents morphcmes and the lattcr
 40 AN INTRODUCTION
TO TIiU S'|L]DY
OI. MORP}IOI,OCY
PARADICMA'fIC AND S\Nl ACNlA'fIC] Rl]LAI'IONS 4l
lexemes)and it is ntccessary
to give syntagmalicrelationships
rangue. their duc place in the stuay of
notionalplural
3.3 Markedness
Wheretwo or m< ringuistic
units(e g'' perfcctivevcrsus
often thc casethat orre imperrbctive)are rn
contrast,it is grarnmaticalsingular
ispositive' ormarked,
whi,e
theorher
is
;:'T*fftl*j#Tff:HJff.,;ori
other han.,
oppositionis
intuitively felt to be les'
us'al'
.0".ifi"
understimding
have
aprurar ntav
of rnarl bc -o."
"""d;";1;;:;ilffT'3;iH'il;J?,li:,:11'"1,";
rb,,,
*h:':l"s
is related to a singular
fc
Fig. 3.5 Internal plural
ibrm may be sai<ito
(or
marked
o,,n"
orch
,-,,1i,iff:,,.Tfl:":.*{:i:1i"il":,,"Jy"',:,,i::';;,:::n:iffi
*1"".t simplv to the presencc
rrrBrrglish,the discussionof notional courplcxity o1'eithercollective r:attlc or singular c'orvcannot
marker(rrorphen,"t in rcly on morphological markedness since we atc dealing with heteronymy (lexical differeucc),
*;;,;" its absence;
with l::'::T::l the ola parricurar
"o-nt*rt
nature.Howevc., ,n"r."on"utt criterionofmarkeclness whereasin Arabic wc have to do with a productive derivational proccss. Wc havc to keep in mind
otn"t t;pes of markednr is of a morphological
senrantrc, ttt most notablythose that it is not at all necessarilythc case that all oppositions will havc an unnrarkcd member antl a
statisticar
,r.ut" basedon criteriaof a
1to"t"*tuui iiu;;;' rnarkcd ntcnrbcr (or nrembers). It is possible fbr sonre oppositions 1o havc all nrctrtbcrs eclually
anorhermay b" ,ho*n "u'u'"'
rorowing
dara
rrom
rril:t^',:##;.;":T"ffi ':::Tffi [T?::L::T:
rrrarked. If we use l.alin inslcad of L,nglish lbr the discussion of pluralizatiort it is obviously
rnrpossible to attribute a positive value to thc plural solcly on the basis of ntorphological

(6) iagar .t nrarkcdncss(i.e., the presence of a morpheme). In Latin and many olher inilectional languages
(a groupoftrees)
sagar-a both singular and plural may have distinctive markers and there is no casy way to tlecide which
"tt""t" (a singletree)
hagar one is 'wcighticr' on purely morphological grounds. Contrast Latin and English:
"rt"t" (a pile of stones)
hagar-a "r'tottt'1"
[one" (a singlestone)
(7) Latin English
In EgyprianArabic tlre taur-us taur-i bull b u l l 's
morphological
markingin thesecascs
.Engrish.
The unmarke<i scemsto bc opposrte can-is can-es dog dog-s
of that in
rcpre
scn
tthe
caregorv
";:lfP,T:
Arabic
has
ll:'.iff ,T"Iru:: ; *1":k; l..,;";; Startling as lhese conclusions may appear, there is lto reason to rcjcct therrt. Lc1 tls I-ctrlilld
ffif;:l:::;,:il:H '..ru"r.,,", i e.,rororm iy,urn*ing
_o ourselvcs tfiat thc situation in morphology parallcls that in phonology. Ilere the oppositions rvith
ntic terms' that the plural
in English ",,"*",",,,," all mernbcrs cqually rnarkcd are called equipollent, and thosc binary oppositions with an
notronailymore comprex ,n" *"r*tlu". in eruui. or"
theyaremorphologically -o
wourdbe misleuorn*. markedty ,r,."pr"r"n.. unmarkccl and marked nembcr are callcd privative, usitrg tcrms introduced by Trubetzkoy
w" r'""ouse
to uomit thatmorphological of a marker
(1939). A s an ex antpl e ofan equi pol l ent oppos i ti on i n phonol ogy \\,e may us e that oftbe pl ac c

',i;i'fi:;l:'
do nor haveto agree,n markedn..:

'tr:f
on.t1u" ";;;;;;;;c markedness

T:'ffi
;:h'"ffi'iliilff j::i:':::fi
difficult to demonstrate*,.
:nrux as.internatpturats,
cf Fig 3.5. Ir is more
ofarti cul ati on (bi l abi al -dental -al v eol ar-rc trofl c x -pal atal -v c l ar-uv rtl ar-phary ngeal -
gl ottal )or hei gl rrl hi gh - mi d - l ow ). E x ampl c sof pri l ati rc oppos rti ol rsarc nul nc rous .e.g.. nas al
vs. non,nasal,round vs. non-round, syllabic vs. non-syllabic ctc. Ladcfogcd (1975) rnaintains that
overrmorph .::TT.TrJr.IHi*
orogi"uip.o.
_"-r",^_,::::Trn
l"l:ru:ff:r,,il"i:::i:ff even such a seentingly privative opposition as that of voice is actually equipollcnt (r.e.,
'srngulative,
areimplemented
by thegramm",*i*"lO ;::: ;i; rnultivalued in his tenninoloSy), i.e , thc simple binary oppositiot't voiced - r'oicelcss is replaced
whereas
Arabicsingurarir"r;;;;::::':".:::tt:"11") Morphologicallv,
Engrish
prurarizes in his system by a number of ncmbers: glottal stop - laryngealized - voicecl - nlun'trured -
suchas generi
c,..,". o lillT;]lll,Jj::l";,:il?J:*ilJry:,rffi voicelcss. Thus we have to kcep in mind that markedness rs not just a matter of sirnple-minded
,,a "ffi
singlerepresenrative binarism, i.c., a black or white choice (marked vs. unmarked). Furlhermore, therc are oppositions
cow,,.(cf. Egyptian Ara Orr*i)rir,onoue,, vs.
ba?ar_a..cow,,).obviouslv. where thc markcdncss diffcrences between the members are greal, and oppositions where the
 42 AN TAITRODUCTION
To THE ST-LI=DY
oF MORPHOI,OGY
PARADIGMA'I]C AND S]'N1'AGMA'fIC RELA'IIONS 43
differencesaresmall
- consequently'we have
ofmarkedncss. to acknowledgethat
therecan be various
degrees
runnrarke
d
One of the most lmportant
and decisivecriteria
manycases, of markednessis that
thernear g ofthe unmarked ot'distribution. In
(so-calledai.t.inutiol categoryencolnpasses
that ofits marked counterpart
u""'*il;:'.','X;'# ilffj'1* inFigure
issemanricary 36.F";;; rnarkcd

sex.
rhcre
*" *"'r"*,n*^n'u)ii"ffi ,T-;.ffi,i:
",*"-::1;-fff:::",1:l:
optional,i.e., when ,n,'ut "ut"t
when overt expression
; unmarkedcategoty
of the meaningof the
marked categoryis
can replacethe marked F'ig.3.6 Distributionaliucluston
Grcek the perfect is .* o.l t"r,""ce, in
marked category as Modcrn
perfectiveeventswhic opposedto the aorist (th"
f..-"; denotesthe past
canbebotho".""r,rjll1l1.tf state'whereas
,n" u".,rio"""r;;*,
.nttt*t evenrs
which Aorist (umarkecl)

i**.ll'*,:***ffi
,[l"':"ffi **,'. ,1#
(unmarkedcategory),
as (g) illustrates. Perl'ect (nrarkcd)

(8) r6ra 6xo liii (perfecl)

6en pin6 pi6
..I
haveeaten,I am not hungry Fig. 3.7 Distributional inclusion and aspect
any more,,

Ilere, the semanticcategory (9) hnperfcctive Perfective Lrpcrfective

ofresultative (cf. Irish
bytheperfect io*euer,
itisequary
I
miit "be dying" -+ umiit "have died"
"ro o"rr,oi1it
,lli :r;i!:;:;:;l;;ff:;:il?
',ii. umiit r umi rat "bc dy i ng"

ii!:l:i!:#,^ii]ll,iL:i:il::,*i:""#.rmesbvescribr.i"-,t,,u^wn,ing,,can
fimi:;:*i:iii:::#::fi
1tri:,:ffi ;:;i:l:,::':ilT.Iilr*x bit "beat" + z abi t "k i l l "
zabil -) z abi j et "bc k i l l tng"

j:-o:-"1'rv*itr,tr'",t,'ilJ,l*1l::""*'.'."':ilf
;:lf1:1i.":.3Jil9" Tffi l::*
,;ff*flj*;ffi.ft"H:ffi
;::Tt*ifi l;**l:
It is equally tlilhcult to use t'he criterion ol' morphological conrplexity in discussing
markedncss in Scrnitic languages. Classical Arabic conjugates its perfective (past) fonns by

Lct us examinesome ,i_:ff means of sufhxcs and impcrlective (prescnt) forms by means of prefires Which category is
rnarked'/ Or morc marked?
markcd o |iif ,1,".-#l?ff;:tt"rities whichtendtocor.eratc
- unmarked withthe
morphological.flesh,than *" unmarked categodes
an",.markedcounterparts
their tendto haveless (10) Perfective Impcrfcctivc
V+iag)orpcrfec -'""*r"^:::".*" For instance,
u"r,t.ilr"r*ssive (6e
t(hovevl Sg 3 kataba "he wrote" yaktubu "hc writcs"

i,f".;:il#:Ti":;:il**#:'t*ffi 2 katabta "you wrote" taktubu "you wt'itc"

i:ltrl"L;,#*I.'ff
multipled from a variety
of languages.on the
oth
counterpart;similar examples
coukl be
1 katabtu "l wrote" ?aktubu "l write"

corelates
,T:,::l:-:""'.compt"xii; ** 'Jff]i':J: Anothcrmorphologicalcritcrion for markedness is the greaterlikelihoodof morphological

'".i",,r'#1t#:T"::'::trff;; inegularrtyin urunarkcdforms.ln Ancient Greekthe categoryol'the aoristis morphologically

:tr".ffi T#:"[ffi:;ilffiH:il,HT::''"roronnpcrrecri"""Junl*un,uo- extremclyiregular (suppletive),u,hereasthe markedoategoryof the imperlect(vis-i vts thc

perrective
verbs(bysurrixation). prcsent)is usgallypredictablefron'rthe presentstemof'tho verb.Considerthc tblloivirrgdata:
considerthe
roi;;,;:#,#T.,:i::::ifi:_:lffiTT
 44 AN INTRODUC]I'ION
1'OTHL S]'UDY
Or, MORPiIOI-OG}.
PARADIGN,IATIC AND SYN'IA(]MA'IIC II}rt,A'I'ION S 45
(l l) Prcsenr
Lnperl,cot Aorist
ph6ro "l carry" RECOMMENDED READINGS
6phcron €nenkon
tr6kho "l run" 6trekhon edramon
drikno "I bite" \ntlr:rson.StephenR. 1985. "lnflectional morphology".Lttnguuge\,polog1' and Syntactic
6daknon cdakon
lelpo
"I leave" Descriptirn.Volume3 ed.by T. Shopelr,150-201. Cambridge : CarnbridgeUniversityPress.
6leipon dlipon
( orrrrie,Bernard. 1976.Aspect:An Introdurtiott to the Studyof VerbulAspeO.Cambridge:
Seefuflhcrdiscussion (iambridgeUniversilyPress.(Chapter6).
in 6.3.3.
Alother morphological
criterion for markedness llrrflitlay, Miclracl A. K. 1967."Notes on transitivityand themein Dnglish,ParlI". Journal of
gical identity) or is *at of so-called
iorms. ,, syncrerisnr lmorpholo- Linguistics3.37-81.
;" observed
be ;;;;":T::::l:that frequently
markedcategory,while "r" thcreis syncreti*
the oirt,.',, in ,t Petcr.1975.A Coursein I'honetics.New York: llarcourt BraceJovanovich.
I irrlcfoged,
urmarkcd
;";; ;, nstan
ll:.'*,r,*.; ;';;Ji#;:f"T:,ffi :"ji#Ji;lJ'"
"
cateSoryof the imperfecri"",
ce,
in - Fulure)i'the unnrarkcd
I yorrs,John. lc)68.Introductiortto TheoreticalLinguistics.Cambridge:CanrbridgcUnivcrsity
*hir. the
r;,;;)'::.-
rnarkcdcatr'eorvi**"t aspecruar Press(Section2.3).
wav disrinctio, (pasr of the perfecdv"
- Pasl,wherenon_past fbr a two- .-. 1971. Semuntics,Volume 2. CambridgeUniversityPress.(Chapter8.)
"""-;:]]"t rclcrsto luturctimc). "";;;;;;,
TcrenceF.1962. ColloquialArubjc, London:'l'he EnglishlJniversitiesPress.
N,litchell,
( 12) lg55.Coursdelinguistiqueginirulc.5'htsdition.Paris:Payot.(Part2,
lmperfective rlcSaussure,Ferdinand.
Past Perfective
nosil "usedlo carry" Chapter5).
Presenl prin,6s ..broughrin,,
,,r
cany (habirualty),,prrnesLi,.1 I rubetzkoy,Nikolai S. 1939.Grundziigeder Phonologie.Trovauxtlu cercle linguistiquede
f uturc :::O will bringin,,
bridunosit, ..1will carry,, Prague 7. (Englishtranslationby C. A. M. Baltaxe,Berkeley/LosAngeles:Universityof
( aliforniaPress,I969).
 46 AN INI'RODT,rCI'ION
IO TIIE S I'LDY
OI',\{OR"HOL(Xi\
PARADIGNTA'II(] AN D SYNl ACI\IA'II( : RI-LA1]ONS 11

EXERCISIS
( | i) SareY "street" Sawaref
l'
Discussan<J exemprifythefour ll(tl nai;Lr "carpentel'" nai::ZAr.n
basictypesof tiist'bution
of linguisticunits. ( l7) tor "bull, ox" twar
2. Accor<lingto Saussur t l 8 ) m al "wealth" /ant\\'al

o.,"no;,'"::?:ff:T,Tffi.T1fl'aticreradonships
or ringuistic arerercvant
arevery
rcver ( I 9) su?al "question" ' ?as ' ?i l c
level (sounds, morphemes, supply some good "workcr"
wor<is and r"nr"n.".)1nd
cxamplcs for each ll0) tamel fammal
(ll) lallah "peasant" falldlun
l. Thc notion of mark.,tl (^12)blad "countly" bal dan
therorrowing atarlrevels
oflanguage
srructure (asanll
,,r..;:;:;;:ilH';jil.Jint Discuss ( 1 3 ) ? esm "nante"
sorneconvincingcxamplcs:
(24) kdse "churclr" kanayes
(a) distribution ( il) z ame ) "mosque" lawarneY
(b) notionalcomplcxrty (26) dekkan "shop" dakakirr
(c) ovcrt morphology (27) madfaf "cannon" madalct
(d) privativevs. equipollent (28) malllk "proprietor'" mal l ak rn
opposition
(29) bahhar "s ai l or" bahhara "cteu,"
4. A large proportion (30) sckkin "knil'e" sakakin
ofl
pr.orru-o,rr"
"dog", filil:il:fi:#il;"ouo.l 1-r'"g rhe
base
pauem,
e.g,katb (31) xfirj "pricst" xawame
pattcrnsandfrcquently Th"tt are ' nranydiflirent pluralizing (32) sayyad "hunter" sayyadin
it is not possibrcto derlucc
,1.,,t
versa) wirhanyhighjegree
orcertainty. (33) dahhan "paintcr'" dahhanc
the plurals olmost
Various
;"ill::1,ff;l:::,jffi:::i#;*
nouns must be mcmorizcd (34) lon "c ol or" ?alwan
individually.
(3s) fid "hol i day " ?atynd
Discover antl c.lescribe (36) scnr "tooth" snAn
as patterns
SvrianArabic(o"*"r"rrT,TJ"il:*' asvoucanin thelbll.wing
<rara
rakenrrom (17) bahr "sea" bhIr
(38) safinc "ship SOIN
( I) mlallenr "teacher" (39) ras[l "apostle" rcsol
mfallmrn
(2) dabf (40) senk "panner" Srraka
nyena dbaf
(3) Saxs "pcrson" (41) nahr "river" /anhor
?aixas
(4) ?asl "origin" (42) hart "let1er" ?ahrof
?sil
(5) bank "bank" (43) ?inianr "imam" ?a?imme
bnDk
(6) kmb (44) hayck "rvcavcr" hiyyak
Dook katob
(7) r.r,a
?r "time" (45) xaliZ "gul f' xelZan
w?at
(8) bqat 'rug" (46) ?ard "land" ?aradi
basot
(9) ra?is (47) bales "motive" bawa!es
"chief' re?asa
(1 0) Sah r "monlh" (48) tanx "date" tawanx
?s5hor
(l 1 ) hsan (49) sebbak "window" Sababik
norse 'lhsne
(12) taier "merchant" (50) doktttr "doctor" dakatra
lal.iar
( l3) ?amis "shirt" (51) tasi-ur "birdie" tasafir
?omsln
(14 ) ? ah l "flamily" (52) banna "builder" bannaytn
?ahali
(53) fattal "portcr" tattal c "a groupof portcrs"
 48 AN INTRODUCTION
I'O TII! STUDY
OI.'MORPHOI,OGY
PARADIGMA I IC AND SYNTAGMAI]C RITLA I IONS
(54) nar
"situation
(55) Zabat IN\VAI
"mountain" (93) Satcr "poet" Setara
(56) bat ZbAj
"door" (94) lsan "longue" ?olson
(57) i,afn bwab
"eyelid" (95) wrsam "mcdal" ?awsrmc
(58) nesr 2tIn
"vulture,, (96) na?eb "represcntative"nuwwab
(59) madrne nsur
"city" (e7) gil "ghoul" grlan
(60) qura medon
"picture" 198) ha?i?a "truth" ha'?aye'1
(61 ) xe m e $uwar
"tent" (99) n1ctlAn "archbishop" nlatarne
(62) baxil xiyam
"miser" ( I 00) kazzab "liar" kazzabin
(63) nafs boxala
"person"
(64) nizant ?onfos
"syslem', ,?anz,ime A certain propollion ofArabic nouns are pluralizecl by suffixcs but a largc proportron are
(65) rakeb
"passengcr', pluralized intemally by changing the vocalic pattenr of the nourt (inlixation and trans
(66) sabi rekkab
"boy" fixation). lhere are many different pluralizing paltems and lrequently it is not possiblc to
(67) ?ahwe sabyan
"coffee" deduce the plural pattem Iiom the singular (or vice vcrsa) with a1y high dcgree ofccnainty.
(68) ?os?of ?ahawi
"bishop" Discover and dcscribc as many plural pattems as you can in the lbllowing ilata takcn fi'ont
(69) iesr ?asa?fe
"bridge', Modem l-iterary Arabic:
(70) sabrl Zsfrr
"way"
(71) zalame sobol
"man" (1) sinn "tooth" asnan
(72) fen zelm
"eye" (2) lawn "color" alwart
(73) xabir ryull
"expert" (3) fid "holiday" atayad
(74) inEne xcbara
"garden" (4) rnal "wealth" aurwal
(75) ba-xra Zanayen
"steamship" (5) 0awr "bull" aOwar
(76) zak t bawaxer
'Jacket" (6) najiar "carpclltcr" najjarln
(77) kabbnr Zawakit
"coat" (1) Sarit "street" Sawarit
(78) sbnt kababit
"week" (8) tajir "merchant" tujjar
(79) folfbl ?asabif
"pepper" (9) hisln "horse" ahsina
(80) ?esuz lalafel
"professor', (10) Sahr "month" aihur
(81) batrak ?asatze
'patriarch,' (1 l) ra?is "chief ' ru'?asa'1
(82) balkon batarke
"balcony', ( 1 2 ) k i ta b "book" kutub
(83) sanaf balakin
"moneychangcr',sarrlfe (13) bank "bank" bunflk
(84) zen
"button,' (14) ?asl "origin" ?us[l
(8s) saheb zrdr
"friend" ( 1 5 ) mu fa l l i m "teacher" mutallirnurl
(86) sabab shab
"cause" ( 16) su'lal "question" as?ila
(87) i.ebe rasbat)
"pocket" (17) famil "worker" lumala?
(88) res Z),ub
"billy goat,. (18) iallah "peasant" fallahhn
(89) wala<t ry[s
Doy (r9) bilad "country" buldan
(90) tari? wtld
"road" (20) kanisa "church" kana?is
tero?
(el) ?[da "room" jawamif
( 2 1 ) j a m i ta "mosquc"
(92) Soke ?uwad
"lbrk" (22) imra'la "wonan" rnar?dt
Suwak
(23) dukkan "shop" dakakin
 50 AN I}JTRODUCTION'IO
1HF, STIJDY OF
MORPTIOLOGY PAR-\DIGMATI(] AND SYN' I' G\,IAI'IC R F]I,ATION S

(24) matlak
(2s) bahhar mallakun
'.sailor,, ( ( 'I ) q i t t a "cat" qitat
bahhara .,crew,,
(26) bahr ..sea" ((r-1)lis[n "tongue" alsutr
(27) safina buhur
"ship'' ({r5) haqiqa "truth" haqa?iq
(28) rasrll suli.rn
',apostle.' ({rtr) gil "ghoul" gilan
(29) Sanl rusul
"partner" (67) nazila "misfortune" naz-a?il
(30) nahr Suraka?
"r.iver"'. ({rl1)nfir "light" anwar
(3 1) h ar f anhur
"lctler" ((r()) haram "pyranrid" al.rratn
(32) ?imim huruf
..imam" t /0) wiOaq "clrain" wu0uq
(33) xalU a?inrma
"gulf' (7r) dik "rooster" diyaka'.'duYhk-. adYiik
(34) faftat xuljan
'pofter,' (72) diwan "council'' dar.lawitt
fattaila .,a
(35) qanna .\r,;r-,, groupof porters,, (13\ zalzala "earlhquake" z,alazil
qan}at
(36) hat (74) firtawn "pharaoh" faratrna
"situation',
(37) jabal ahwal
"mountain" (75) maf(a)z "goat" amfuz^'mafiz
jibal
(38) bab (76) kahl' "cave" kuhtl'
"door,'
(39) madrna abwab
111) n7r "yo ke " a r l ya r'tttr a r t
(40) sura -,.J m udun
"picture" (7tl) fansa "prey" fara?is
suwar
(al) na ?ib "representative', (79) hin "totncat" hirara
(42) madad nuwwab
"help" (80) hirra "cat" hirar
amda4
(43) madda (8r) hihl "cresccut" ahilla-'ahalil
"stuff'
mawadd
(44) maks "lax " (82) hfunma "r e p ti l e " l ta u a m tn
(45) baxii m uk ls
"miser" (83) wakr "(bird"s)nest" aw'kar-'awkur
buxala.?
(46) nals (84) kub5a "hook" kuba5
"person', anfus
(47) jisr (85) ni5an "larget" naYaiin
"bridge" jusrir
(48) sabil (86) raj "cro\\ D" tijit:
way subul
(49) tayn 'eye" (87) bnq "lrulltpct" abwaq
fuyin
(50) xabir (88) blsa "kiss" bnsat
"expert,' xubara?
(5 1) kab bn r (89) uwar "heat" ur
"coat" kababit
(52) balkon (90) zatafran "sallron" zatatlr
"balcony" balakin
(53) sabab "cause" ( 9 1 ) x A tn n "lady" xawalin
asbab
(54) tays (92) moda "fashion" modit
"billy goat"
tuy,us
(55) walad (93) lakan "basin" alkan
"boy" awlad
(56) tanq "road" (94) qanat "despair" qunlt
turuq
(57) Safir
"poct" (95) bu?ra "locus Dtl(ar
Sufara?
(58) sayf "sword" (96) tutlw "linrb" atda?
suyuf
(59) zawja (97) firzal "lion's den" trazil
"wife" zawjat
(60) faqaba (98) walima "banquet" wala?im
"obstacle" tiqab
(61 ) fa qib a (99) kursul "wristbone" karasit
"end" tawaqib
(62) gadir "pond" ( I 00) dayla "village" diYat - diYat
gudur
 IN!'I,ECTIONAT, AND DbR]VATIONAI- MOR-PHOI-OCY 53

Wlral is an essential characteristic of inflcction is the lacl that all the five (or lcss) lorms
,l rr.rl rl yas ve rbs ; put di l ferentl y . i nfl ec ti onal pl ' oc c s s esdo N O' l ' c hange the nrembers hi pi n the
CHAPTER F,OUR , l.r.,r,ol'primary grammatical categolies (: parts of speech). What tltcy do is they express (1.e.,
tNFr.I]CTIONALAND
DERIVATIONAL lr.rrrrrrraticalize) the lexical notion to which they are attached: -s marks the secondary
MORPITOLOGY
llr,rrrrrrraticalcategories ofpersot.t and numbcr, -etl the category oftense, etc'
1,1 The Scope of I )crivational morphemes, on the othcr hand, may derive one pafi of speech from anothcr; tn
Inflection and Derit,ation
Tradirionally, infler ,,llr!.r words, derivational processes usually change thc membcrship in thc classes of primary

toexpress isdefincdasachange categories. Consider the following dcrivational set (derivational paradigm) with
itsrerarion
,;H":ffilinlfilXJ inrherorn,
orarvor.d
11r;rrrrruatical
variousprocesses derivation, .r rr)ws showing derivationai processes:
wherebyr.*;;;';;:;:t::t' on the orherrrand,deals
wirh
instancc,
verbs
mayr- words
(oruu,".;ruEngrish,
chooses;by 'n1il;;;:l: :::ffi*ll1"o,,n* ror (l) democrat (C'oncrete) Nour
the 3d Personsinguia
the vowel in the root r Present:(he) Noun
"hunging
a suffix in the ," ,n" ,,"ltT-.,in democracy (Abstract)
pastparlic
mavsav,ha,morpho,og;:fr ii5i,iffi'i
;:ffffr*,,:;:i1.::iil:iilI;1;:ffi
democrattc
tr Adjectrve
Adverb
of paradigmaticsets democratically
of fivc {brms:
Verb
(r)
(ii)
lnfinitive(,base,)
3'dSg pres
dem0cratlze
democratizalion I Noun

(iii) past
'I'he suffix -+ tlcnto<'rulic; the sullix {-li I
(r\,) pastparticiple {-rk} derives adjectives from nouns: denrccrul
vcrbs
(v) rlt:rives adverbs from adjectives: tlemocratic+ democrttlical/y; thc suffix {-ajz} dcrivcs
Gerund(or prosentl,articiple)
trouns lrom
fronr nouns: democrat s tlenrocratize('denominal'verb); thc suffix {-cin} derives
s tJenro(ratization ('deverbal' noun). It is urore difficult to establish lhe
A flull_fledged x,:rbs: tlemocrcttize
fivc_rr
asahat
orcl'zo'se'
gee,
erc,
isexcepriona, tlcrrvational rclationship, if any, between democrat anrJdentocrttcj'. Ilere
we have to accoulll
alternants which arc held
;;W;**fniXjn=:liTl,?I;it,i verbs
have plccisely for the allomorphy of /d6mekra:t/ and

togcther by tlre nrorphophonernic altcmations le

/clemhkresi/;these tu'o
* al and le - a/; furthermore, dentotrttt ant)

lft:.r'""*,"u,,0*,,*'ii'l;::*il;l;,:*:.:iq::T;.|,i:::'ll[:::"'r
(r)
rnnnitive
and(ir,)r",,njl"*:::i'::].::j:::'"meverbs
such
as,.i,,, ,lunocracy are also linked to the same set]lantic unit which is usually callcd a derivational
base'
in regionalEnglish(i) ',."";;.:ilff.fi: I lowever, the problcm with a derivational base lies in the dcgrcc olabstractncss. champions of
sruneform (I give i,u Infinitive anrt (iii)

:"::';::**^;:i;J.'l,l'Jifir:i*ru;:
o,r, ]n'"t""; ,"., ,,'r, have the of
base and a nutlber

nrfu dl.#",,!ff :rltstractphonology do not hesitateto postulate an unaccented derivatiorlal

rrrorphological rulcs which are necessary fbr the derivation of surface forms.
To uccount lor

,;tli*:fi
:,ffi:.i}lJ,Tfl::ffi::::;:*J*,""..:ililil;
:Ji:,,#*;.'f
tlcm6krosi/ lrom underlying /demckrat + i/ we would need vowel-reduction
5yl heprcccd i ngorfol l ow i rrgs trc s s (e t:r -.V antl t
rules conditioned
+ oi V ' 1andamorphophonemi c rul c

derivational suffix -,y(iii ). Note that this ruie is

with a morphological conditioning: t + s/-
NoT conditioned phonologically, i.e., the change I
r .t has nothing to do with phonological
(l) ( i r a r n m a lica l
M e a nrng MorPhologY this solution
properties of/i/, since there are lornrs such as tlemoc'ratic" For this and othcr reasons
Infinitive
choose rvork rs unacccplahl eto many l i ngui s ts and w e may c ous i der al l al tc mati rc l es s abs trac t s ol ttti otl '
3.uSg prcs run
chooses (-r
past works runs rtamely two accentedderivational bases: /d6mekrtr]tl (+ democrat' dentocratic)idcm6kret/
with rnorphological
pastparricipre ran tlentocratize).Those who are unwilling to rvrite abstfact phonological rules
ffi #:i., run(rnfinirive)
.'
conditioning have to consider the altemation t s in /demakrat-/ ^'/dem6kres-/
'cxceptional' and
Gcrund
choosirg *.,.*.L1-,tor,,
l ng rcl v ft-rri ts ' ex pl anati on' on paral l c l paratl i gmati cs ets :
runni ng
 54 AN INTRODUCI'ION
IO THE S LIDY OF
MORPHOLOGY INFT,FCI]ONAL AND DERIVATIONAL MORPHOI-OG\' 55

(3 ) dcmocrat
autocrat
democraric ::^'i"*"t. (\ ) K i nd "c hi td"
autocratic
dentocracy anstocracy
'1*1^slocraticautocracy (Plural of ,(inrl) Kind-er "children"
(Diminutive ot Kind) Kind-chen "baby"
Thosesynchroniclingursts (P l ural ofK i ntl .,t' hen) K i nd-er-c hen' babi es '
who do not hesitate
discoverthatdemo*at t open rhe Oxtord
a'nd
andaristocrat are popular :" English Dicrionary
fi
rormatrons will
arountl I 7g0), whereas "r^rr*, of the FrenchRevolution
^r)":",,:j:
t*" a;r;;; (formed ll, re rrrstcadof expected *Kintl-chen-er (Base - Diminutivizing Sutllx - Plural Sulfix; we obtain
rhe rurer , ., postulatetheother l,uttl r,r (.hen(Base - Plural Suffix - Dinlinutivizing Sulhx). However, here it seems that we are
rhoselimes,";"J;:l,J;.':';*il';;";T"#.j.T'Jffi":,;:,::':,'J;'*l: [,,] rlcrrlingwith a real plural suffix but with a stem-forming element (Stummbildurtgselentent)'
logizedin Modem r'.encrr. rule) which has beenputarivery
Thi.,'"f;;;;;;;il| morpho- l l rrs rvi l l beco me obv i ous i f w e c ompare the abov c fonns w i th pl ural i z c d and di mi nuti v i z ed
of Old Frenchis dcad. way of sayingthat the
l o' t" *"t palatalization
rule l,,rrns ol' (r/er) Bruder "brother"'.
inclinedro postulare o";;;;"t
u a't1" rerationship,"r::::^::r;::::,.:::r,;;::,^",we may be
rbrmerrormedrrom (6) Kind "child" Bruder "brother"
the,rerivarionar

[6 m;;f*l
"children" Briidcr "brothers"

#*",i,ii:;:#
Kind-er

ll*rt*****=*t
r e a c h i r r gs l s t e m s

:**;illtt":',rilH:
o f d cr l
Kind-chen
Kind-er-chen
"babY"
"babies"
Br-iider-chen
Briider-chen
"littlc brothcr"
"little brolhers"

il".;;:tfr1rff
lTIi,l:"::Tl';;t;i'fiilff
democratic unaa"n,o",o)y;;;;:j"::t"t,1n" paradigmatic set such
j** 1,n.,. as democrot,
wt. Obseryethat there is no rnorphcme boun<lary in
*Brul-er (brarl- is not a meaningful clement

ril ( icrman); the plural has been formed by rncans of a productivc process of vowel
change u r tj
schoois
srarrs
**".,'1,o".:jjlfifi:",,T; 'ont.ou"",,v ringuistic I v | (called mutation or umlaut); the diminutivc has been formed
by adding thc usual dirninutrve
;t"
ormof his/her grammar
in terms ol.rules. .irrllix; and hnally the clirninutivizcd form has becn pluralizcd by a o-suffix (the fornration of'
4.2 Some (Jniversal c .g.,derI' ehrer"l c ac hc r"' l i eLehrer
Tendencies of InJlection l rl rrralbyO-su fi rx i s oneofthepos s i bi l i ti es ofGeman,
and Derivation
As mentioned
un<ier
2.3,thereis a ''tctchers", the article is inflected and shorvs unambiguously that the following nouu is iu the
"n,*.ru, *idln
denvarionar
ff 1"fl,::H:;Jffi:. "*"*."",..l:.::,Jir"::::'
;fl::ffiil :1,:: lrlrrlal).Consequcntly, we may assumethat the first morpheme
brcak down should
boundary in Kind-er clrcn is ralher
look as lbllows:
rllrrsory and that thc correct morphernc

:.#it,ffi:::::;;:J,T;m:".J
ilt*lTitH*:1*il#dffi1il"ffi
as-d(1'persrr'...,"r'.;::::::;'Hff (7) Kinder-chen-O
,,T:[:"r:#,""*iffi
noun cogitdti6..thinking,,. 'ffi l*l*fl;Xl Base - Diminutivizing Suffix - Inflectional Suffix
The latter.rrfi" rnay
grammaticalize ii, towedby any of the derivational
the lexicalcontentof ..thinkins,,: six caseendingsto NOtc that this dccision could be developetl as an argument in tavor o1'lexcme-based
rrurrphol ogy.
(4) cogitarionis 'l'hc conectncss of this solution (or more generally, universality of the sequence Base-
cogrt-ation_is Genitive
cogitationi index of slmthesis
| )crivation-Inflection) may be confirmed by looking at languageswith highel
-i Dative
cogitetionem 1t i l ccuberg l 9 tr6) s uc h as C z ec h or Lati n:
_em Accusative

l nere are some rare Czech Latin

and dou (8) German
andderivariona, considerthe
following
German
r0"", inflecionar Bruder bratr frater
"r(r::,ll-;;T"TiJ,""ot"'' brati-ft frater-cul-us
Diminutive Bri.ider-chen
Plural Brtider-chen-O brati-ic-i frater-cul-t
 )O AN INIRODUCTION
TOTHES'I'UDYOT
MORPHOI-OGY INFI-NCTIONALAND I)ERI\/A I IONAI-N4OI{PHOI,(XIY 51

Inlhe lattcr two languages,

the plural suffix unmistakabl
in Lalin is thcrean fbllowsthediminutivizing rl r., ..(.(ti ()l t by as s umi ng that w i th thc pos s i bl e ex c epti on of c opul ati v e c ompounds s uc h ns
inflectior .rrn* marking;*;;;t suffix.onlv
and czcch have a In the singulaqwhile , order of el ementsi n c ornpoundsi s s tabl c .
l rr,l rcr rrrrrneral sthe
o_surfifll both Gcrrnan
ranguage ;;';;'|u'"t
comparison,n".rt rarr1"* .In:t '"
in(8).h.",db.;;;;'j;::JJ*fi,'n'. ,*. orcross_
I t frrrl.t,.sisof Inflections
(9)
German I lrc lbllowing grammatical categories may be inflected in English: nouns (for gcndcr,
Czech Latin (for
der Bruder a1d c as e),adj ec ti v es(for c ompari s on, i .e., c omparal i v c and s uperl ati v e),adv erbs
rrrrrrrl rr.r
bratr frdter
Diminutive dasBnider_chen_O , , ,rI r|:I ison), pt onouns (tbr gen<ler,nuntbcr and case),and verbs (for pcrson, numbcr, tense, and
plural brati-rk-O frdter_cul_us
die Bnider-chen_O 1,,rr rI y rrrootl).'fhe three other verbal categorics(aspect,mood and voice) arc t calizcd synlactically
brati-ic-i friter_cul-i w i th other l ndo-
{l rr rrre:ursof aux i l i ari c s ). A s tri k i ng c harac teri s ti col ' E ngl i s h, i n c ompari s on
It nright bc of inlerest |i l rrrl rcul rl l rrguagc s s uc has S pani s h,Lati norR us s i an,i s i ts pauc rty ol ' i nfl ec l i ons
F)x c l udi ngfbr
to utt"ttotn what happens
severalinflectional when we havethe sequencc say that English manages with one
.r slrrlc atljectives, adverbs and pronouns, onc may aln-rost
or ,..,
In'[he
ses
uen""' ol.baseand
;;;; innec'[i
ona, catcgorics (with the
::ft:J::*iil ;.#'ff:fi ril"ffi:; rrrtlt.elionalsuflix, namely -s, which is uscd to mark all nominal and
('l)lioll of tensc, marked by -erl, presentparliciple, marked by -ing' and
vcrbal
past paniclple' marked
' \{
thar
exampres
appear lonl"o"
ro"onlut ";";;';-(#ilil'r:':::1'::',ff il::,#;Ti
only from agglutinative r,.r,rrlirr ly by -ed, and irregularly by -en and/or ablaut). Historically, however. evctr
Flnglish rvas
rn Englishit is impossible la
suchas Turkish'Thus' prol rouns ). tl uc e
tcle +ed-love whereas l rrl ,l rl y i nfl ecti onal . Ok l E ngl i s h s how s rnfl ec ti ons for fortr c as c s (l i v e w i th
(or in;#*uu*o
exarnpres 3il,,ffff;il": r;t,,#;l:
on), rn Turkishit is quite adjectives; lor
nmon
"oir"u'
'o*
tonnd lrrrn[crs (singular, {ual ald plural) and threc genders with nouns, prollotltls and

"rr":,l,ri;'j tlilec pcrsons n,ith verbs (in tlie singular only) and pronouns; for tense and mood (subjunctivc)
(10) alr_yor{ar_dr rr rllr verbs; and tbr strong and weak nouns, adjcctives and verbs. Almost all of this rnorphology

srrsl osl cl uri ngtheMi drl l el i ngl i s hperi od(1 I50 1500). Ioex empl i l y s omeoftheabov efort.ns
;iffitJtssrvE-pAsr_pr.uRAl
ffiffffss:vE 'LLTRAL-'ASr \\ c nlay look at strong and weak nominal declensions in Old Engllsh:

al-rr-lar-dr (l l ) S trong D c c l c ns i ons

take-AORtST_pLURAL_pAST al-rr-dr-lar F cn-rinine
Masculinc Neuter
"they took,, t a k e - A O R I S T _ P A SpTt (short root) (long root) (short rool) (l ong roc l l )
IrRnL
"stone" "ship" "housc" "si11" "teaching"

In theseTurkish verl Sg. Nom stiin sclp h[s giclu lar

positionaily,n,.'.nu;*#ll tcn
se(Past)
and (pturar
number hus gi c fc larc
fi ffiT,Tffi'#:-'* ) are
markingverbalaspecr
Acc stan sclp
Aorisl). there are ," ,,rli.';;: (progressive, Gen stAnes sclpes htses gie{-e lare
:i"-:lT'ritx
mobiritv
i' .r".i'"ii."ar
arnxarion. l )at s tal l c sciPc h[se giefc liire
*ollarives "..;;;ilffi1"Til:,"j;:fisitionar
primarygrammatical the membership in the stanas sclpu hus gi eta,-c l ara, -e
cate'gones;consequentry, crassof Pl. Nom/Acc
wanr ro form a deverbal i, rs,not
i, no,"hun:tt
possibleto say *dentocrat_atton_ize giel'ena larena
" rf we C en S l at)a s c i pa lrIsa
;;,;::,:::,:T\r:
";"
;*iy*j:#1!X":":XJ::#H:HJ::.ffi
Ensri,h
j;,#
:,.""#,#t D at s tal l ul r) s c i P tttn husum giefum larum

Qtive-and-twenty'. ;".o;'J,,,,
*",,r-tr,"
;;;;,:1",:T:il"Ti'ilffillt":o* ( 12) Weak D ec l ens i ons
possibreto say both: ontv fiinfitnrtzwunzig
but in czech Neuter Femtntne

::::-::,";:;ji
,1r""",r:;;-^:;":::.:.:l:"3* it is Masculine

i :ji[!, :rkt:x;:y.,:;**:
;rjilil Sg. Nom
..name,'

nama
naman
..eye"

€age
eage
"sun"
sunne
sunnan

Gcn nalnan eagan sunnan

 58 AN INTRODUCTION
1O TIIF STUDYOF
MORPHOI,OGY IONAL AND DERIVATIONALMORPIIOI-O(jY
INFL.ITCI 59

Dat naman eagan sunnan

PL Norn vowcl. Horvever, they can be segmenled only at the price
-an ' 'l'r r.rlr1g,with the notion of thenatic
Acc -an ,,t ,r t r.rtrip arbitrarinessand inconsistency and only some of thenl are analyzable. Working ivith
Cen -ena rlr, ,r1ler'l.atin lorrn ser-yos(occurring in Plautus) wc nray discover the following pattern for tllc
(all plurals)
Dat _um t"rnrrti ou ofthe nomi nati v e, ac c us ati v eand abl ati v e:

This systemis rcmar (15) a-stems o-slems a-stems

similarto thatof Mod
morphorogyin much (which hasprescrved puell-a-O serv-o-s ntan-u-s
o"r,uuo',
er condirionthan English). its earlier N om
,:1T::: fbr
-ompare, instance,the following -u-m
lorms: A cc -a-m -o-m
( f 3) Abl -a-: (l ength)
Old Englisl
ModernGcrman
Str< weak Shong weak
sg Nom .,u.lnt I r,,rr rrrorrosyllabici-stcms, e.g., vn=,vim, vt"lorce" and e-stems fit this pattern, but thc problem
narra stein
Gen sta; Name rr0rrkl be ro account for the lcngth in thc norninative. consequently, we may try to refonlulate
naman st
pl Nom rlrr rriulitional slatement (-n marks the Nom Sg of a-stems and -r.rsmarks the Nom Sg of o-stems
sffin naman
Dat .ren,ot t':;:t ffffi' ,.r. 1by itlenlifying case markers with post-themalic elcmcnts: -O rvor'tldmark the Nom Sg of a-
um namum Steincn Nanrcn .t|rrrsarrcl-s the Nom Sg of all other stems. Therl, we would tleed somc rnorphophoncrnic rules
It may be observed *rtlmor-s'
that -.si t,, ;rtttrLlflt for rimor "rutnor" and honos "honor" frOnl 'undeilying' represcntations

:T,i"T.i?,..,m:1il3:.".":ilg:l
;:*:*",",;,,,,-..;:lili,,^:.:,Ti:,:ff rotmar
.lt,utt;r-s cf . *cJent-s> tlEns\;-m would mark the Acc Sg everyrvhere(rumorem would be derived

Iti|,t * rimor.-m); and thc Abl Sg would bc formed by the lengthening of the thematic
vowel As
thematic (.; ; ;;;;::::,1;.JJff crassin"";""
;;;;;;Jbasedonthe l;rr rrstlre thematic vowel is conccrncd, it might be tempting to identily it with nrarkers
of gender:
Greek ""*.r
orLatin. languages
Intheraner ;";-i,Tlllil jlt:t:ropean such
asSanskrit, ,r lcrliline. -o llascuhnc (and neutcr). U-stems are mostly masculine and c-stems femininc;

:ffi;',ff'#;i:::::.:2i::'.:'.,1",;r"":T,T:H':::"*
'"";,;;".
ii:m::: rrrrlirrtunately,i-stems are both masculine and f'eminine. Whoevcr is intcrcstcd in this
rrr:ryproceed along these lines. Actua'lly, this analysis was proposed at the end of thc
analysts
19'hc by
could be
rlrt. Ncogrammarians who maintained that a good many of the Latin inflections
(14) Five Latin Declensrons , rplaincd as bcirtg dus to thc coalescenceofa once distinct rnorphology'
.l.he
Iu bcst we can do lor Latin is to assume that its inflcctions are not synchronically
UIIVV declensions
4_stems o-stems ;rrrrrlyzableinto morphemcs. Hctrce, undoubtcdly, the traditional handling of Latin
C-stems /-stems rul c s '
Sg Nom pueira servus(' os) rrlmor
a_stems e_stems l rr r'emori zi ng and thi s i s w hy c l as s i c algrrrnrnari ansdi d not c s tabl rs hnrorpl ropl ronc mi c
i^-:^
r;^- ,E rrrb nl anus rFS lrrrrrDerelypatterns of formation (i.e., paradigms). This problern will be discussed
again lrom a
ac (. ai) i
ls that
Dat ac tts er tlillcrcnt angle in chapter Seven; lor the time being we can make a significant obser-vatiorr
r-l i
Acc
i-
a considerable degtee ofcumulation (or fusion) ofsignificates'
:un 'ul ei I atin inflectional endings show
(< om) em examples are
Abl u im
Lr r r um em I iltin is simply a typical example of a fusional linguistic type (other u'ell known
Pt NJ^^ \;rrrskrit, Grcck, Lithuanian, Russian, C-zech,Polish, Serbian)'
ae (r a,i) i
E
Es es sutfixes
Cen arum frs Es Diarnetncally opposed are so-callcd agglutinating languages in which inflectional
orum um
DatlAbl ium uum Erum ;rr.c{ypically composed of a sequence of morpherncs with cach morpheme represcntlrlg
one
r-s rs ibus rbus an cxamplc of this
Acc ds u/ibus €bus rifatxmatical meaning. Turkish, or any other Altaic language, may bc taken as
os es es,4s rls ds lrrrguistic type. Consider the data in (16) from Latin and I'urkish
tcachingof Latinwasbased
, ,,.11^..j.iot1t"nat
Li'guists on then of thisbatteryof endings'
maintainttratttrie inllecrionar
suffrxes
ur. .lttott'1']on
egmentable in a more
abstract analysis
 60 AN INTRODUCIION
I.O THE SI.UDYOF
MORPI{OI,OGY ]NFI,F]CTIONAI- AND DLRIVA'TIONAI- NIORPI]OI,OGY 6I

( 16)
Turkish Number C'ase
sg Nom ::t'" { l ,)) R oot Gendc r
vrr adam
Acc vir_um
Fem S g N om puel l a oo
adam_r
Ge n Gen Puell a :I
adam-tn Am
Pr Nom J,T]
vlr-t Acc Pucll a
adam_lar
Acc Abl Puell a a:
vir_ds adam-lar-r
Pl Nom a :t
Gcn r ir<lrum adam_lar-tn Puell
Cen a : ruln
Puell
The pluralin Turkish . Acc Puell a :S
ts markedwith the suffix _1ar
caseis markedwith distir (thesingularw,iththe Masc Sg Nom serv o Os
O_suffix)and the
(orrarher Assuming
rrrat',"
nominarivc Gcn scll' o ai
following "b,"r"n";.i:t:ff::Ti:T;T:J'"-]s,rnx
tnpartiteanalysisfor rhe o-suffix vugmay elaborate Acc serv o Om
whorc r the
'rkish rJ'jL;'. Abl serv o o:
(17) Pl Nom serv o :i
Sre: Number case serv o : ruln
sg Nonr ada Gen
a a
Acc Acc scrv o :S
ud": o I
Gen uoult
pl Nom ,au,l Ir rs.bvi.us that all this is still far fronr Turkish detemrinacy with
rcspecl to scgmcntatton lnto
f- ; al-tdgranlmatical r-ncaning) liirst'
Acc adam rrrorphernes(onc-to-one correspondencebetween morpheme
lar I problems remait]. For instancc, tltc
Gen adam \ (. inalyzed only some of the o- and a-stems. Second, many
lar nl Masc Pl Notn
with
I,cru Sg Cen shows a long thematic vowel; the Masc Sg Gen is homophonous
-rthe latter o-. i(plus thc lact that
As we have seen abovr r lrut in this type of analysis rhe former has un<lerlying -o -a
along these lines proved ) I. F'urthermore,we still do not cscape the issuc
casesand oniy for.on
.,"nlni,lTjtitJs
lo be possibrc only tbr
somo rt c lrave to writc a phonological rulc lor o + |
" ,rl polysemy (multiple meaning) olgrammatical t.notphcmcs.For instancc, in the abo"c tripartite
(18) :rrr:rlysis-s marks not only the nominative (sg Masc) but also the accusativc (Pl) and gcrtitivc
Ro o r Gender
Masc Nom
Casc cls$vhere. Thus we have to conclude that whereas Turkish is a typical exalnple of an
serv o s correspondence between morphcmcs and
Acc serv rugglutinatinglanguage in that it shows a one-to-olle
o nl
Abl serv l i rarttmati cal meani ng,Lati ni s fus i ona|i nthi s res pec t,ev eni fthereares otl tetrac es of
: (l ength) dealing with a corttinuum and
Fent Nom pucll ;rpi!,lutination.Howcver, as with all typologioal distinctions' we are
a a as semi-agglutinative (or
Acc puell rr rlright be instructivc to cxamine a languagc which may bc classi{ied
m successlul in keeping plural
Ab l p u e ll scmi-fusional). In contrast with Latin, Classical Arabic is more
: (lcngth) referred to as broken plurals
rrrlrkers fiom fusing wlth gender markefs.'l'hese are the instances
This type of analysiswoul t:'g.,raful -tt tt.\nan' ' ' pl ural i z edri i c l l ' un(.ai ntl i c al es nomi natrv c and-nc orres ponds tothe
ac,ua,ry,weshou,canay,,Ll:l-:$i,li;1T::,.:LiH::J;.Hffi rrrtlcfinitearticle of English). consider the follorving paradigmatic
scts (classical Arabic has only
as a 'gcnderrcss'ianguage ::#l*^_i,;,
hasonry n,,ioo".;-"ll"j:
For instance,we may entertain
tlrree casesancltwo genders):
that thc plural is rnarkerj thc idca
by the lengtheningof the

il:,'::: :::ff"JffT:
ther
T:;:T:
ff#:::il::il:K""';11,":#;ffi ff l;;
(20)
Sg Nom
Masculine
rajulun"a man"
Femrntne
?imra?a1un"a ll'oman"

Acc rajulan ?imra?atan

Gen rajulin ?imra?atin

 62 AN INTRODU(]TION
TO THE STUDY OF MORPHOLOCY 63
AND DERIVATIONAI-MOIIPIIOLO(J\'
INFI-EC]TIONAL

Pl Nom rijalun
?imra?atun :..rrrl rl ttl u .i l y ' i nC l as s i c al A rabi c r' v emay ti ntl c l earc utex ampl es ofaggl uti rrati onhul l hes e
Acc rijalan
?imra?atin Ius i on of l eri oal and
Gen riialin ,r' ,.rrrrl t:rba l anc c dby ex ampl esof l us i on, c s pec i al l yby a rather ttnus ual
?imra?atin ablaut in lndo-Europcan languagcs; ll ntay
!,r.rilill;tltLralmorphcmcs (somewhat reminiscent of
by ihc lcngtherring of the gcndcr
Sg Nom n rt .,, lrr.Dotedthat we have to assunle that nunrbcr is cxpresscd
"a teacher(M)"
mudarrisarun"a teacher ()f t'emi ni nenouns butby thel c ngtheni ngof thec as emark c rof mas c ul i nenouns ' c l -'
Acc ### (F),, rrr,rrl ,t.r
mudarrisatan ,,rrt,l ,trt r.tti l i rtv s . mudarri s tna i n (21).
Gen mudarrisin
pr Nom mudarrisatin
mudarrisrrna
mudarrisatun
Acc/Gen mudarrisina
mudarrisalin
Clearcut examplesof
agglutination comellom the
the masculinegenaer 'r urtrrnrrectron
infle of femininenouns.Assunrrng

l.'}*1,;:il;il:::1.:*,:::
is ma.k",t *t;; ;;"^'; thal

r.Ji:;ffHff;T:il1;illl;"m,l;
(21)
Stenr Gcndcr
Masc Sg Nom mudarrrs Number case (+tndsf;
q
a un
Acc mudams AAan
Gen mudarns AAin
Fenr Sg Nonr mudarrrs
at @ un
Acc mudams alAan
Gen mudanis al@
Masc pl Nom mudarris ln
A: una
Acc mudarris o:
Ccn mudarris a
Fem pl Nom mudarrrs Ina
at : un
Acc mudarris at:ln
Cen ntudarris at . in

The caseentringsof mascurine

nounsinflectedextemalry
thosein the singurar.flowever, in the plural arenot identical
they are identicarif the noun with
is inflectedintemalry(a-u +
i_dr:
(22)
RoottNumber
Gender Case
Masc Sg Nom RaJuL aun
Acc RaJuL
A an
Gcn Ra"iul ai n
Masc pl Nom Rijal
Oun
Acc Rijel- (a an
Gen Rijal
Ain
 o4 AN IN,TRODUCI'ION
TO.I'HE Sl,UDY OF
MORPHOI,OGY INFI -ECTIONAI- ANI) DERI\/A'1'I0NAI- NIOItPTIOI-OG\' 65

RECOMMENDED READINGS
E X B R C IS E S

*r:?:"#ill"ili, Anouttineofthestructure
ofshifta.Newyork:Ame.can t,l t,rrl i tyt he fol l ow i ng morphol ogi c al c ategori esi n' i ' ai c l hi t, the B erbel di al ec l s pok c n i n
councit
Campbefl, A. lg5g. Otd Englnh ,,,,rrthw esMoroc
t c o as dc s c ri bc dby A ppl egate (1958):
Gramrnar.Oxford:Clarendonpress.
(ireenberg,.loseph.
I 966. ZanguageUniversals
'l.he with special Referenceto Feature
Hague: Mouton. Hierarchies. ( .r) Verbal roots and their lexical meantttg.
Kurylowr'cz'Jetzy' 1964'Infle.ctional (l)) Dcrivatior-ralverbal affixes and their lcxico grammatical mcarling
Categoriesof In.o-Europeaz.
Lewis,GeoffreyL. 1967.Turkish Heidelbcrg: carl wintcr. (r') Inflcctional vcrbal allixes and their grammatical Irrerning'
Gro**or.O*fo.O: Clu..ndon p.....
Moreland,Floyd L. & Rita ,r. trl) Describe morphological processesexpressing thc past tonsc
M. rFleischer.
rwrJ!'er.t>rJ.l-attn:
1973.Latin: An
At Inten.sive
of Caiiforniapress. Course.Berkeley:University (c) C,'onstructparadigntatic sets lbr
t"::1il.::tl;]jj.l,,i maroftheArabic
Language
vorumes
t and'
2 cambridgo: (i) Subject aflixes
fi:l
(ii) Dircct objeot aftixes
(iii) Indircct object allixes

inflcctiorral
Describe their disrribution within wortls witlr respect to the rools in various
categories.

tr:ltrscriptlon (i.e'. do not

tlsc the lollowing rlata. Notice that the cxarnplcs arc in phoncnrlc
trv to pronottnce them):

(l) rdir "you wcnt"

(2) dant "they (F) wcnt"
(3) ifaiast "he gave it to hirn/hcr"
(4) urasntllnt "they (F) di d no1gi v e i t to them (M)"
(5) tramt "ye (F) rvanted"
(6) umzYt "l took him/it"
(1) raiiamz "he will takc mc"

(8) isfifll "he stolc her"

(9) fauasntt "thcy (M) gavc it to them (F)"

(10) nda "wc r.l'cttt"

( l l ) t s Jr n r t "ye (F) stolc"

(12) ramtfiy "I w i l l gi v e i t to Y ou (F)"

(13) Iiyast "l gave it to hrmlher"

(14) tkayast "I used to give it to him/her"

(15) uramtill "he did not give it to You (F)"

(16) urakzrtY "l rvill not sce you (M)"

(11\ izrat "he sarv me"

(18) rakmtamz "hc will take You (F)"

 66 AN INTRODT/CTION,fO'fHE
SI'TJDY OF MORI'I{OI,OGY MORPHOI'OGY O/
INI''LLCITIONAI- AND DERIVA-IIONAL

(19) rairlifa
"he will give it to
(20) urrastfin me,, l,atin ClassicalArabic Turkish
"they (M) will not
givc rr to him/her,, r' i r "mau" rajulun adam
(21) tbnunt "rhcy (F) usedto
',l i N otrl .
(22) tbnutl build,, vlrum rajulan adatnt
"you built ir" Acc.
(23) raktbnuy ( i crt. v i rr rajulin adamln
"I will build it for you
(24) fantaunt (M),, l 'l N otn. vin rijalun adamlar
(F) gaveit to you (M pl),, adamlart
(25) urrauntlfint ..they A cc. v i ros rijalan
"r hey( F) will nor
giv c i t t o y e ( F p l . ) , . (;cn. rrjahn adamlartn
(26) itifar v trontm
"he usedto steal,,
(27) tr;nrt "you stole"
(28) nird \1l Norn. fiemina"woman" imra?aturl kadrn
"we wgreclean,,
(29) rsirdmr Aco. leminam imra'/atan kadmt
"ye (F) washcd,'
(30) sirdn lEminae imra?atin k adrntn
"they (M) washed,, Ccn.
(31) rakuntizra t,l. Nom. 1.'cminae imra?dtun kadtnlar
"he will seeyou (F pl),,
Acc. leminas imra?atin kadtnlart
(32) urkunizri
"he did not seeyou (M pl),,
(len. leminarum imra?atin kadurlarln
(33) tzraytnt
"l uscdto scerhem(F),,
(34) itdn
"he usedto go,,
(35) tkanr l ru'asshow ni n4.3thal Lati ni s l us i oni l l w i rhres pec ttoi nfl ec ti onofnouns .H or,v ev c r,the
"they (F) usedro give,,
abstract analysis operating with
(36) nramz "we usedto rrrllcctional suffixes of l-atin are scgmcntablc in a more
take,, and morphophonemic rules'
(37) ifaiamt rr.tions sucl.ras a shorl and long thcn1atic vowel, zcro suffix
"he gaveit to you (F),,
ofthc fivc traditional dcclcnsions displayed
(38) fantast n ttcmpt to reduce along these lines thc varicty
"they (F) gaveifto
him/her,,
(39) riy i n(15).
"I wanted"
(40) urlrriy
"l did not want her,,
Arabic:
(41) ratttzra Idcntify the following morphological categories of Classical
"he will seeher"
(42) Lbint (a) Verbal roots and thcir lcxical meantng'
"they (F) usedto
cross,, meantng'
(43) ubit "you usedto (b) Dclivational affixcs and processcsand their lexico-gramntatical
cross"
(44) rabiy "I will cross"
(c)C otl str uc tparadi gmati c s ets o|i nfl ec ti onal s r' r|fi x c s ex pl os s i ngs ubj ec tanddi rec t
(45) tzrati obiect.
"you saw me"
"you (F)"'
(46) ifaiir (d) Predict the following fiomrs: "ye (M)" and
"he gaveit to me"
(47) rfirasr "you gave
it to him/her,,
(48) tlamtasnt "ye (M) gavehim/it t.lsc the following data:
to them (F),,
(a9) diy
I went
(50) tdam (I) katabahf "he wrote i1"
"ye (M) went,,
(2) fahimatha "she understood hcr"

(3) iktatabta "you (M) subscribcd"

)egntent the words of
l_atin, Classical Arabic
and Turkir "you (F) comPrehcnded me"
discuss
rhe.o..".oono.n."
belween ancr (1) iftahamtlni
morphemes
r"o r.i",i#Jl';;;,TJ'"*remes, "it was destined"
(5) kutiba
(6) aktabnahfl "q,e dictated it"

(7) afhamtunna "ye (F) instructed"

(8) istafhamna "they (F) inquired"

(9) talahaml "they (M) understood one another"

 68 AN INTRODI,ICIION
TO I,iI[ S]'UDY OF- 69
MORPHOLOGY INIIt,E(]TIONAI, AND DF]RIVAI'IONA I' IVORPIIOI -O(IY

(10) rakatabna
"they (F) wrote to l -s tc l ns l /-s tems
(l l) q ut ilat eachother,, 4-stems r.{-stcms C -s tc ms
"she was killed" "fricnd" "firc" "stlll"
(12) taqaralnn "daughter""son"
"we foughtwith agnis bhanus
(13) israqralti one another,, Nr)lll suta sutas suhrd
"you (F) riskedyour tlll um
(14) tadaxalri life,, ,,\(:c em am am
'you (F) interfered,, tttta
aya Ena a i na
(15) adxaltunnaha Ii l s tr
"ye (F) introducedhcr', E ay g av f'
(16) adxalatki | )ut ayai aya
"she introducedyou (F),, cs os
( l7) fahimaka r \l l l ayas at as
"he understoodyou" as cs
(18) adxalnakunna ( iL^il 4rric asya
"we inrroducedyou pl),, .i u
-s
au
(19) xarajru (F L( ) c ayam e i
"l left" as ay as a\ as
(20) axrajnakum N ottt aS aS
"we djsnrissedyou (M pl),, as irt tirt
(21) israxraj[hum r \c c ds dn
"they (M) exploited i bhi s ubhi s
them (M),, I l r s tr lbhis ais bhi s
bhyas ibhYas ubhYas
Translatethe following I ) at abhyas ebhYas
scntenccsinto Classical ubhYas
Arabrc: abhyas ebhYas bhYas ibhYas
Abl
dm i rtam ul tant
(22) "they (F) left" ( rcn anam lnlm
su isu tlsu
(23) "she was dismissed,, [ .oc asu Equ
(24) ',we understood
onc ano1her,,
(25) "ye (F) inquired"
(26) "they (F) iilroduced
you (M pl),,

The fbtowing tabredisplays

the batteryof 60 inflcctic
in varioustraditionargrammars.prove of Sanskrilaspresented
that rh",.nu-b'nu'sulfixes
more abstracranalysiswhich considerabryin a
operareswith the a,,"*fiT:;"Trcduccd

(a) thematicvowel
(b) suffix
(c) morphophonemic
rulesof ablaut(gradation)

Hinr; consider/E/ and,

/o/ as diphthongs/ai/ and/an/
i, theunderlyingfom (Ip
rnoder).
 INIJT,ECTIONAL CA.I.ljGORIES ASSOCIAI.ED WI.TTI NOI\4INAL I]LIMI]N.I.S 7l

r ,r, , l, | $ lrrclr are heaviiy flective and whcrc the adjectivc shows the sanlc sub-calcgorlcs as thc
,,,,rrrr,l 0t.s. l l o w ev er, i f w e l ook c l s c w here, w c rc al i z e that thi s s i tuati on i s fhr fronl betng
fbr
,!l\, t.,irl l;or instancc, in Itnglish and Turkish attnbutively uscd adjcctives are not inflected
rNFLE
crroNA
LcArEGoRt:Iiil:tl *tJfl , ,,,il,.r irl(l trumbcr. whereas in Latin and French they are. Put cliffcrenlly,
thc norninal sub-
r" NoMrNALELEM
ENrs s ec ondary i tt
,,rtr t,0i l es ofg ender, number and c as e are i nherent i n nouns , but thc y are onl y
or congruence was
r,t1rr trr r.s;urarking for nominal sub-calegoricsrvith adjectivesby agreement
5.1 primary Nominal data:
Categories ttl bc onl y a matter of ' s urfac e' grammar. c ons i der the l bl l ow i ng
, l ,rrrrrt.rl
5.1.1 Nowts and Adiectnes
Classical parts of speech Latrn
have been limited to III F.ngl i s h Turk i s h
u broad classcs: noun, verb,
adverb, prooouo, preposition, adjective,
interjection, numera]'"* a good man i Y i hi r adam v i r bot.tus
nrr] coniunction,
particre. ln traditonar and possibry articte and
grammatrcal
l;;;;;,":,':j:oL theory a good woman iyi bir kadln Gmina bona
the parts of speech *"."
Noun was defined as d"finJ in notlonal terms.
tl virl bont
nameof anypro*-',;:,qil';:LiHil jfi:fi ji:
goocl men iYi adamlar

(property) ofany person,

prace,animal or thi'g
H:lflff f ::*.:;JJ?,*li
oenoted
good rvomen iyi kadlnlar IEnliuae bouac

expressedby adjectives by a noun. propertiesofsubstanccs

are o'a static nature;on
exprcsscdby verbs are ofa the other
dynamicnature,or, more
commonly,verbs denote
and changesofstate ofthc
subject.foi.."rri."'"1 subjectless
Grammaricarrecrcfinition
orrhesethrecnorionar
;;*:::':,:"::::::
Il rcl -ati nadj ec ti v es how s c ompl eteagreemc ntw i thi ts rrouni l rgc ndc r' nunl berandc as e(r,l r
hand, propertiesof substances
P l ' etc ' )' On the othc r hand' w e
l ,,,ttrrt N om i nati v c , v i rt bonl : Geni ti v e S g or N onri nati v c
actions,states * i y i -l er ttdttm-l ttr i n Turk i s h. N ei ther w i l l the c as c bc
,,f rl rfr)tsay *good-s nrerr rn E ngl i s h or
sentencesbelr
belongsto svntax).
bononttrr (Gcnitive Plural) wc find
..1f,)$.n in thc lattcr two languagcs,thus vcrsus L,atinvirontm

;*:ll :;ffi :,iffi I*'sub-catcgories

adj
ective)
wo urd be'J::::::;:' ..,;:l'HH':"[::il:
of gender'
|,rr1i |rshgoodmel t,s andTurk i s hi y i udan.l c tr.tn.ofc ours c ,i nbol hE ngl i s l randTLrrk i s h,
.rrIl t.cl tvcsca nbenomtnal i z c d.Fori ns tanc e,y oungi s anadj c c ti v eus c das anorrri rl al i tl tl rc
theacrjective); number antl case(pluscomparison
the verb*:s rvith
as a primary granmatical fi l l i l i sl rsente nc e' .W hatc anoneerpec t.frornthel ' oung?' Obs erv e' how el ' er' thatw es ti l l c annot
rncrudessubcategories.;:l::"-o"oted categorythe domain of which
passing thar
rhisdichotomf T""l}fi:ffiin.,l, ;il:,ilil1;,lll,'Jliil;ttS::J;
1,Irtt.i tl i zc;.f ' ontthey outtgs i s notgranmati c al .ontheotherhand' i nTurk i s l r,norrri nal i z ed
.l t|;t.cti vesb ehav el rk enouns i nthal l hey may tak etl repl ural ' c as c andpc fs ol i al s rrffi x c s a|tc r
In othcrwords,the crcfinition bii.viik"big, old", hii-vik-ler-in
"r'tty
of themajorgr".rrr"", rlrt,rrr,or the indelinrte arlicle bir belbrc them; considcr:
rndependentry crassesof nounand verbcannotbe
ofsyntacticandlogrcarconsiderations made "young" geng-ler-in "ofthe youllg"'
(noun_verb,subject-predicate, ,,ltfers"; httstu"lll", bir husttt"a sick person"; gerrE '
Plato(429-347B.c.), who agent-action). of fomring the cornparative and
wasthe first to distinguish I f' we take as the critcrion of an adjective thc permissibiiity
the term 6ir1pa/rhema/ cxpricitrybctweennouns
for the latter and verbs, used
',rrl rcrl al i ve, nouns w i l l beex c l udedFori ns tanc e' i nE ngl i s hw emay s ay Theri t:hl tt' eontl l L' bd|
'predicate' It is significant "or"g;;_:'th e wordrh;mameans borh .verb, and
tbat in this ctasrifi*.utionverbs ,l .l 'l tt'ri ches tl i ,l ,eonthebay ,butnothi ngs i mi l arc anbc donc w i thThc tl tunl i v es ol l l heba.Y .||1
samecrass This may seem and adjectiveswere put together
surprisingon grammalicar in thc (i.e., can bc uscd as nouns)' thc converse
groundssinceadjecti'es ,rllrerrvords,although most atljectrvesare nominalizable
sub-categories ofgender' numberand havc the same
* rroun. oo, our, on notionargrounds, |.,||()l true(adj ec ti v al s ,s uc has ba' s i nbus s ropc annot|ormthc c omparati v c ors upc rl ati v c ).N ol e
sensesrnceborh verbsand "ua. it makesperfect
adjecrivesmay be charact..ired .r|stl thatthe.noun-nes s ' oftheadj ec ti v ec anbeamattc rofdc grec .Fronrtl rc di s c rrs s i onabov e
a, features-on.;;.;;;"". (dynamic
it isof interest
tonotetharraterGreek ||i |ppearsth atadj ec trv es rnTurk i s harc morenorrn-l i k ethanadj c c ti v c s i nE ngl i s h;\\' ec annotS ay
il*I"J.*H;"ffi:, "' grun'-u.iun,
ubandoned
rhe but
. I lrt' riches live on the bult, t.e.to treat the adjective rich as a noltn in respectto pluralization'
adjective)-verb,wheren;"Jfi
#r*'1"":J.Tj;:i,:H"T*:T"T",:,:#;$i::*; \\,(:oan in Turkish. HowcveL, evcn in Turkish, ancl
perl]aps in all languages' we have to drau' a
dichotomywas of a notionalnature,the later to the specilic adjectival catcgory of
dichotomywas of a gr,mmatical .|rviding line betu,een noun and adjective when it comes
emphasiswason nominarsubcategories nature(r.e.,the
st ur"a uy noun, and adjectives). . ornparison.
ol nouns,adjecti'es and verbs, The tripartitedrstinction
or the compromisebetween I-ati nandGrc ek adl ec ti v es arenot|ormal l y di fferent|ronrnouns .A s w as s how ni n(1)' w c
madelateron in metrievaltimes notional and grammalicalcntena,
was adjective, as far as lhc catcgories of gender'
and sincethosetimesit has
surviveain our schoorgramrnars. r.irnrrottalk aboul specitic a<ljectivalinflection. The
The cmphasison a tripartite Novcrthclcss, tlrc Germanic arrd Ralttr-
distinctionwas bom in a"ut,ng
with crassicallanguagcs(Latin tttttttber and case are concernetl, is inflecled nominally.
and
 AN IN.TROD{rcTION
I'O l}IE STTIDY
OFMORPHOIOGY IIONAL CATECORIIISASSO(]IAt bD WI-ftl NOMINAL LI'IMLN I S
INITI.EC 13

Slavic lamiliesof thc Indo_European

phylum crcatedv Personal Pronoun (Masc)
inflection.Let us consider tut be calleda specific { ') Complcx Adjective (Masc)
ord Englishasa representatr,unut adjcctival
strongdecrension ora-djcctives
dispravs ;i;;;;::;[JH:T:::'il]iJ;
"good" "he"
ji.
of pronouns.""0,;r,
gerds i s
almostidenticalwith those il'jiJi'Il S g N orn
ii.^"llowing data: Cc rr gdrtrj o 1d
".".,"0",
D at gc raj am j i rrrr
( 2) Noun (Masc) Adjcctive(Masc) f)emonstrativcpronoun(M Acc gerEti 1i
Slrong asc)
Strong Loc gerhjamc janrd
'.stone,, "good" "this" Ins tr geruoj u j ud
sg Nom stan
sod 0es
Acc stan god-ne 0is-nc ', | .' l'tott<.ttttts
cen stan-es god-es 'replace'
0iss-es I rDresscdtraditionally, pronouns tlo not 'name' pcrsolis, animals and things but
Dat strn_e gdd-urn "instead of the
0iss-um rlr,.rrr(llre l,atrrlterrn pronomen \\ascaltlued on Greek trVtOlvrrpiCt/antonymia/
Instr-
god-e case
UYS ,,,rr") On lhe one hand, pronouns rcscmble nouns in that they are inflected for number'
pcrsott wrtlt
Il.wever' the so-called .rrr,l.ltr a limif ed degree, for gendcr';on thc other hand, pronouns sharethe catcgory of
weak declensionofadjectives class' rvhercas nouns ale a largc
is identicalw,i1hthat of.w.eak r, rlrs. liurthermore, pronoulls are a small closed (grammatical)
nouns
open {lcxical) class to which we may lreely add ncw oucs'
(3) Noun (Masc) Adjccrive(Masc) (dcrivcd tiom (ireck
l o analyzc pcrsonal pronouns we have to introduce the notion of dcixis
Weak Weak class
,.name,, ,.I ir vtrur /<leiknhmi/,.1point, intlicate"). we nray say that persoual pronoulls arc only onc
,,good.. (' c l os e
ofpl ac c . here trnd /l rere
Sg Norn nama ,,1rfrcso-cal leddei c ti c c l c mc nl s , rv hi c h i nc l udc al s o adv c rbi al s
goda (.' al the ti rne of s peak i ng'
Acc l (, tl rc speake r' v s . ' not c l os e to tho s peak c r' ) anc lti me: nov .' andthen
nanan godan
r:.notatthetimeofs peak i ng' ).' l ' hc dc i c ti c c atc gory ol ' prox i mi ty i s nottooc onrntotru' i th
Gen natnan
godan examples may be found in trtorc'exotic' langtragcs For
Dat nanlan |t.r.sOnalpronouns of the 3'd Pers but
godan 'heisho closc to thc speakcr' vs'
ilrstiulcc,Hindi pronouns ofthe 3'd Pers show this contrast:.ue
i s i rrc l c v ant
Balticandslavic languages /rr, 'hc/she no t c l os e to the s peak er' . Obv i ous l y , the dei c ti c c ategory ofprox i nl i ty
havehvo typesof adjeclives: and the ariclressec arc always (disregarding
definite). simpre(or indcfinite)andcomprex \\,rthpronoults ofthc l"'and 2"d Pers sincc the spcaker
ior The simple forms are ;nn".i"O,
*iti, someexceptions'identically circumstance nay
considerthe following data with nouns. ,.orrversatiorlson thc tclephonc, ctc.) in the samc spatiotemporalsituation. Tlris
from Lithuanian: 2"d Person' and even less oommon with
erplain $'hy marking for gender is ralher unusual in the
,, llclc, the pcrsonal pronouns
(4) | | rc I Person.The situation in English is typical of rnany languagcs.
Noun(Masc) SimplcAdjective(Masc) Pers Sg shows gelldcr
ol thc l,t anti 2,,dPers Sg are genderless hut the plonoun of the 3"t
,,man,, ..good,,
pl ural c ounterparts s l tow gc ttd' ;t'
Sg Nom rl rsti ncti ons(he, s l tc ,l r). In Frenc h and Lal i n ev en thei r
vyras gOras
rl i sti ncti ons ,w hereasi n C emani c l anguagesthey do not
Cen vj,ro
9610 in (6)'
Dat Pronominal lbrms in Germanic anrl Romance languages are contrzrstcd
vjrui gerdm
Acc \ yr4
(6) Englislr Gcrmatt
r-oc vyre
::::r, hel
Instr v!1ru geru
*"1 they
.l
sle )
I
ste

The endingsof complex forms r t) esl

betraytheir pronominalorigin,
juxtapositior:r as is obvious tiom their
to personalpronounsofthc
3d person,cI. (5).
 74 AN INI'RODUCTION
I,O THE STTIDYOI,'MORPHOI,OGY WITII NON4INAI'I]I,LIVlLNI.S 15
CAI.EGORILSASSOCIA.I.EI)
INIiI-L,C]'fIONAL

L a tin
French
rs t,/t t" S g 2"0 S g
ii il ils 'hdb -hok
ea eae elle elles
id Masc -h€ba -hoka
ea
I cn r -hE bi hok i
Examplesofgendcrdir
in the2n Persmav
Alto-Asiaricphylum.;*:::: amonglanguagesberonging I lrr. llrst fornt is unmarke{ for gender, the second lbrrn spcoilies that the l'' (or 2"J) Pcrs
or rnstance'classicalArabic:e l:rnd ro thc
has tlistinct is l'emale'
antlprural: 2"dicrs;;?;. rn bothsi.sular 1,,, '!s()r'is male , and the third form specifies that llie posscssor
. ,(
ll 1r1y contes as a surprise to rcalize that truly geuderless languages are genderless evetl ltt

(7 ) rlr, rr plrrrotninal systems. Examplcs arc comparatively numerous and may bc lounil among
'f
2.dpersonMasc \ lr.rrr. I Jralic ancl Amerindian languages. urkish (Altaic lamily) nlay be used as an cxanrple:
;;ir,,* |jil;
Fem .?anti
.ri ^ ?antunna S i ngul ar P l ural
r., rersou Masc I l o)
huwa hum 2ndPerson sen slz
Fem hiya hunna 3'd Person o onlar

Irr Modem Arabic dialccts

thc gendcrtlistinctior
ns ln the plural disappeared. colltrasl
SyrianArabic is as follows: Thc systcmof \ , slrow,nin (7), Classical Arabic has lrvo fomrs in each o1'thcsc lbur slots. Or rve may
'poor'
tl rr,, sy s tem w i th the' ri c h' s y s temsof Lati n and C z ec h:

(8 )
Plural ( | l) Lati n C z ec h Turkish
2,,dperson Masc
;tjf.''- ,
3'd Person 3'd Person 3'dPcrson
Fem ?enti ?onru
/ PI Sg Pl Sg Pl
3'dperson Masc Sg
huwwe )
Fem hiyye /
narure Mas c is ii on
ona
oni
ony
Io onl ar
Fem eiL eae )
The reasonsfor this simplification Neutcr id ea ollo olla J
have
to do with ref
classical
Arabic
hadrousethemasculine
._, ,;il,";il",T.j1il"T::r":*T:; l{cruming to gendcr-languages,it is ofintcfcst to obscrve that Latin and
(lzcch shorv the typical
andoneman"),
whereas
Modem ut Pl vcr|'a "words"
;:r;il"::;11"i:J* Syrian
Arabicu,",,n. unmarketl lrrtlo-Europeansyncretlsnl of Feminine Singular and Ncutcr [)lural (cl" Ne

grammaricar g"nd., #,1lilfl .'iliT;, rrrrtlI'em Sg,fEntin-a"woman") even with personal plolloulls'
"ont.irbil":Tffi
Arabic'thesew'ererormedfrom themascu
T:::fil"n*.J#H],,;l
.,you
'l'herc are various problems with pronominal number distinctions in the 1'' Person Whcrcas
trr" i^*", iioutta
(two),, andhuntc..thcy(two),,. ..tl rr.cctablc s ' ' i s ' .tabl e.Itabl e,l tabl g' ' w ec annotS ay that..w e(' -tl rreeofrrs ).,i s ..Il + I' + I].' .
Again' in rererringto the
coupleof "a man una u *.onrrr,,or
to ..two women,,,therewas l lrc pronoun |re covcrs basically two distinct groups which can be establisliod
on the basis ofthe
gencrer.rn thcsecases a clasrr
,"::;";:^;:::lr,r;::",*r Modem Syrian Arabic usesprurar speaker and addressee distlncuon:
tmpleof a languagemaking foms
may mentionAdcni Arabic gendcrdistinctionin rhe pers
l,' Sg ive
gen derinSpa nishno,o,,o,*x:." {il:fi: ::i;::}::?;:K; trui ;;*i.::*:;:*; (i) the speaker-group (- I + he, * hc, . ') but NOI'the lrstcner group;
group (: you or you an'J
g e n d c rd i s t i n c t io nwith
p o sscssivcp r o n o u n s.
(ii) the speaker-group (- I or I * he' + he, ") AND the listcncr
in srancr For
Asiatic
phyrumt
r,o,1,.""i*rs or..nry,,anrJ Arro_
..your,,,;,1:1.:.rr.r$:::'::::"",;,r;rrhe he , I he2...)as w el l .

It is of interest to llote that

ln both cases,one or more 3'd Persons may or may llot be included.
grammaticalize this distiuction between two
some languages (most notably the Algonkian family)
 76 AN INTRODLIC]IION TO.TIIE NOMINAT- EI-8MENI'S 11
STUDY OF MORPIIOLOGY INIII,EC'IIONAL CATEGOzuL'S ASSOCIA'IED WITH

meanlngsof '.we',. f.hus Cree

has two 1., personplural forms cv-im "m Yh o u se " ev-lcr-im "mY houses"
possibiliriesapart: which keep thesetwo basic ll\)
-in "Your (Sg) house" -in "Your (Sg) houses"

-i "his/herhouse" -i "his/herhouses"
(i) ntrananincludesthe speakergroup
but exclndcsthc group being ..I ov-im-iz "our hottsc" ev-ler-im-iz "outhouscs"
he/theybut not you.,,This form addressed: and
is called l",pers pl exclusive. -in-iz "Your (P1)housc" -in.iz. "Your(Pl) houses"
(ii) l{trananawspecifiesthat both the
speakergroup and the addressee_group -ler-i "their house" -ler-i "their houses"
"I (and he/they)and you (and are rncruded:
helthey)".This form is cared .rpers pl
incrusive.
nominal antl pronominal plural appears tn
\rr riltcr.cstingproblem connected with marking for
Nevertheress, thercarc languageswhich form
pluralizingof their singurarcounterparts.
their plurarpersonarpronounsby
the simple rfr, l"r l'crs. tlere the single form evlerihas three mearlings:
As a crassicalexamplewe may quote
doesnot prurarizenouns,but does chinese which
pruralizepronouns.The cantonese (i) his/herhouses
systemis as folrows: ( l(t)
[
evleri 1ii; theirhousc
( l2 ) nt; * . . t " ngar v _day . . we, , \
( (iii) theirhouses
nay ..you" niy_dey..you,ye,,
koei..he/shc,' k6ei_day.,thcy,,
(i) ( e v'Pl ) Po ssSg (ev ' ler)t
(ii) (cv) PossPl (ev)ler l t
languages
courdbe anaryzedsimrrarry; ( cv r l cr ) l cr * i
for instance,Turkish,as shownin ( i i i ) ( e \'+Pl ) Po ssPl
lJu"?,ro"l" "'"ic ( I3)

i. Thc curiosityof this systemlics tn

(i3) be n. , t " f lrefirrm in (iii) *ev+/er+ler+iissimplified into ev]]ler+
biz . . we, ,
rfrelactthatthepossessivesuffixof the3'dPersPller+i"thetr" isanomalousifcomparedwith
scn ,.you', siz..ye,, suffix is addedon the right (asusualwith
rlre1,,and2ndPerson.[n thesepersonsthe pluralizing
o,.he/she" onlar,.they,, the 3'd Pets:leA l Flencethe homophonyof
rr,'rrns):lrn + ,z, whercasrt is adderlon the left in
*ey"]i r /er). This clashdoes
'.lrrs/lrer
houses,, (ev+ler+i)and..theirhousc''(ev+/er+i instcadof
Hcrc lhe situationis more
c<
ina,s,rfnx
(es.socuk ;::,ffi";ilT;:HT#i::::J;rJ[ffiffiT" |l(|lcxistinotherlanguageswithsimilarSystcmso|possessivesuffixcs.Forinstance'Persian
"rili';;i
pronominalprurarizingsuffix
-rz which occurstypica'y wrth possessive
(wlrichisoneo|thefewlndo-Europeanlanguagcswithasystcmofpossessivesu|fixes)adnrits
This is shownin (17):
suffixes: ir pluralizingsuffix on the right evenin the 3'dPerson'
(14 ) ev nouse "my brothers"'
(17) baradar-am "my brother" baradar-an-am
ev-lm "my house" (the possessor "his brothers"
is in the singular) barddar-eS "his brother" barldar-ln-e5
ev-im-iz "our house" (thepossessor
is in the plural)
baradar-em-an "ourbrother" barldar-dn-em-1n "ourbrothers"
Turkish may be takenas an exampre
of a type where possessivepr,nouns baradar-eS-an "theirbrother" baradar-an-e5-an "theirbrothers"
realizedassuffixes(boundmorphemes), 'inguistic are
whereas Latin an<tmany other Indo-European
realize their possessivepronouns ranguages
as attributiveadjectives(free morphemes)
inflected ficr gender,number an<l which may be S y s t e m so fo th e r l n d o .Eu r o p e a n l a n g u a g e ssh o w th e typ i ca l h e te r o n ym yo fp e r so n a |
the Latin data
case(to show agreement).Let us eveninthe systemof possessivepronouns Consider
Turkrshsystemfirst:
consider the less common flronouns (I - we, he - they:)
r r r( I 8 ) .

fiatres mei "mY brothers"

(18) fratermeus "mY brother"
frttrEs nostn "our brothers"
frdter noster "our brother"
 78 AN INI'RODUCTIONTOTHE
STUDY OI.'MORPHOT-OGY 1g
IN Ii L TC " I I O N A L C A TE G O R I E S A S S O C I A TE D W I ' f I I N O MI ] \ A I -I ] I ' E MH N TS

In Latin the possessir

whereas
r.urkish,,*r,r,ffi: t', lr,rl". l(' syntax and discottrse analysis; here we have to be satisficd
with obscr-vlng

fi i:J,":;"';,.fij;ilffH.H,fi::irlnH:
and its possessive
suflix. Contrastthe following
,,,,,,r,lr,,1,rr ical tlifferences between nominal
ex ampl e of thi s c ons traul t:
.,11,r ,rrrrrtl tct
and adjectival intenogativc prollol"lns.It ussian data

""rilor"r,
( I 9) Latin Turkish English AdjectivalSet
fraterrneus | , ') N omi nal S et
kanleg_im rny brothcr kot6ryj? 'l
fiAtrismei Musc I
kardeg_im_in I t<to: "u ho")" "which (onc)?"
my brothcr,s licr.r.r ) kotriraia?
-l !
lialres mei kardc$-ler_im my brothers Ncuter dto? "what?" kot6roje? )
fratrummedrunr kardeg-lcr_im_in my brothers,
frlter noster kardeg_irn_iz our brother podt nuihitiij ? "which poel is the best
frAtrisnostri I f r, rl rlsecon.espondsto Latrn or English in(21): Koton'j
kardeg-im-iz_in our brothcr,s "W hoi s thebes tpoet?"
lratrcsnostri r,'i l , )' \crsLrsKto nui tuc ' S ipodt?
j
kardeg-ler_im_i
z ourbrothers
fratrunrnostrorum kardc$_lcr-im-iz_in our brothers,
t ! .\reondary Nominal Categories

l hc diffcrcncebetweenthese ','| (;t'nder

two ringuisticsystemsmay
bc portrayedas shownin (20). ||rscttstonrary tos tartadi s c us s i onofgrammati c al gc nderw i thnon' l i ngui s ti c ;c ons i derattons
(20) Latin ,rr,.|;rttl ccedfromthemtoes tabl i s hi rrga.natural ' s enranti c bas i s l brgendc ri ni ndi v i dual
LEXEME Gender POSSPRONOUN Gender l ,rrr1,.rr:rges. l ti s c l earthatthenon-l i ngui s ti c uni v ers ec anbec l as s i fi edi nav ari ety ofw ay s
Number major clistinctionsis undoubtedly that of living
Number ,I I or(lflrg to various setsol properties. one of the
Case
C.asc
''|||tl i n|atebei ngs (humanandani mal bei ngs )v ers us i nani matethi ngs .Thi s i s theesneo-Platonic
s enc eof
as elaborated by lhe
T'urkish ,,il(. ()l thc most I-amous classifications of the universe
((LEXEME + Number)poss+
\umbs1) fs5g in I'-igurc 5 i '
l,lrrlosopherPorphyry, show'n
and so arc plants Howcvcr' the
lnterrogative' relativeandindefinite lrrorganic things (Porphyry's minerals) arc inanintatc
pronouns exhibitmorphological
languagcs'ln thc flective In.o-European simiiantresrn marly .|.r:si |i cati ot.l ofani mal s (P orphy ry ' s brutes )as ani nratebei ngs deperrds c tuc i al l y otrtl re
ranguageswe fin<i t\r,o sets of
turdefinite
pronouns:the nominar set interroganvcand rtt|t.l 1rtc:tati onofthew ordani mate' E ty mol ogi c al l y thi s w ordmeans ..prov i dedl v i ..living,''
ths oul ' ' ([,ati n
hastypicJy Jnly two lbrms: ..Soul",)' but tn modcrn linguistic terminology this term means simply For
aninate beings(whct?)and another one used in inqurringaboul ./,1/t,l(t
one uscdaboutinanimate objccts and those of cut are
differentiates (whot?); thc adjectivar set rlf\l:rlrco, some scmantic features ol mttn are [+animate]' [lhuman]
genderin referenceto aninlate to capture
beirrgs.Latin formsaregivcn in (21). ofspecilying the lexis for semantic lealures
is clairned
I i ,rrrrnratc],f-hunranl. 1'his typc
languages. Many linguists enterlain the idea that the
( 21) ..rllrrilicant unlvefsat propertics ofhuman
Nominal
Set AdjectivalSet in tcn]rs of a finitc set o|senralrtic features
Masc r.l';t|lularies of all human languagescarrbe analyzcd
qui (quis)? ctc )' which are themse lvcs
Fem ] ortrt "who?" ) ,,r \crnantic components lsuch as [+animatel, [+countable]' [+male]'
quae? ..which
Neul | (one)?,, rl rr|t.l l entl entoftheparl i c ul ars emanti c s truc ttl reofagi v er-rl angrtage.ToquoteK atz (1966:156)
quid?"what?" quod? ) ,'..ctl tanl i cma rk ers ...c annotbei denti fi edw i ththew ofds orc x pres s i otrs ofthc l anguage' ' .

The adjectivalfotms areusedif |(l rtl tcr,theya retoberegardedaS c ons tnrc ts ofal i ngui s ti c theory .' ' C unerrtl y ,how erer.l i rl gui s ts
we demandadditionarinforrnation semantic featurcs are intimately linked
rvith
objectswhich havealreadybeen aboutanimatcbcingsor ,ilc lllore interested in the f'act that universal
mentioned.For instance,ifrhe discussion which are accessible to us through their
may demandadditionali'formation is about,.poets,,we ,,,nceptual structures ol- individual languages
by asking "which poct is thc
bcst (onc)?,,or in Latin l rr.rtpl tol ogi cal S y s tems .Letus as c ertai nw hetherw ec anus ethes emanti c .nrark er,ani mal etn
QutpoEtaestoprimus?However,if we wanted
to ask .out of the blue, aboutthe
i'the casewhcn "poet" would besrpoet (r.e., .l rl l rIyz-tngthegrammatl c al s y s temoIs umeri an(genc ti c al l y i s ol ated)' .l -hc bas i c di c hotomy oI
not be give'as the topic by the group of 'persons' vcrsus a group of
'lhings' with the
context),we courdusethe fo-. Srrrrrcrianlcxis is usua.ltyrcfererj to as a
quis: Quis est optinus poetu?
"who is the bestpo.tt,'. a firil
explanalionof this phenomenon rrrerttbcrshi Pa s s how n i n (23)'
 80 AN INTRODTJCTIONTO TIIE
S]'UDY OI- MORPHOI,OGY
I NIl-LC fIONAL CA'I-F.GORlESASSOCIAIIiD WffH NOI'lln-r\t' ELF'MliNTS 8t

substance | |IIr ,r,..ilr ,,r A lio-Asiatic languages.Examplcs of such grammatical systemscan bc lbund
among

rti rr, ( l rrl ki sh ) orA n]eri nrl i an (C ree) and E s k i mo-A l c ut l anguagc s(l nuk ti tut.t.' fhus i n' furk ish

rtr, 1,I l,(.rs Dronoun o is used in rci-erringto both male and lbmale beings and in translating lront
in cree lt'D,.r
trill,r ,lr rrc have to use "he" or "she" (or "it") according to tllc contcxt. Similarly,
epicene
, 11,I..:.(.sdll "hc", "she", and "it". lt is ofintcrest to note that in gendcrless languages
in English
r, ., ,..,, ()(.eur oven in the most unexpectcd cascs(epicene - common gendcr, e.g., cal
"brothcr" or "sister''i
,,r rr rfr.rrrrteliollt lom-&tt or (she-)cat).ln I'urkish ktrtlcS may denotc either
w e hav c to us c k r "gi rl " i n appos i ti on: k tz k unl es (l i tc ral l y
r,, l , l r.l tr)..sis tc r" unambrguous l y
organlslrr the epicene lexente tltttnu may denote eitlrer "sorl" or
mineral l, rrr,rft.sibling"). or in Sumerian
"daughtcr" unambiguously we have to use rni "wonlan" in apposrlion:
,l.rrry,lrtcr."; to refer to
,/t fi om J anl ero
.trt,,rrtrtti l l i rc ral l y "fbmal e offs pri ng"). A n unus ual ex ampl e of thi s naturc c ornes
,/\
an epi c ene l ex eme rz s denoti
rt ng c i ther
,/\ rl rr,,l rrl rt.l anguage,A fro-A s i ati c phy l um)' "r' hi c h has
animal ..wotnall".'Ihese by using r'vords arlk "male" and
Plant Ir,ilr ()r may be referre<lto unat-ubiguously

,,A. ac: l k as u"mal ehumarl bei ng"-' l nan"andmus k rts u"fbmal c httman
,rr,rr/, l L.rrrzr l C "i nappos i ti ol
.'wor-nau,,.ThC phcnornenon of common gender is not limitcd to 'cxotic' languages;
,/\ Lr rnli
what ls of intcrcst lionl 1he
,/\ , Drr(.ilc lcxcnlcs may be lbrLnclin all natural languages. Hower,'er,
heteronvms (hetel'onyllly
uman brute \ r, \\ ln)ilrt olanthropological linguistics, is thc balancc of epiceni:sand
hc l eronl ms s i nr' e
,,l l rr rl l )l x)sil c phenomenonofthec onrnrortgc ndc t;e.g..s trtl l i t,ttandl i l (tr(aft
Fig. 5.1 Porphyry'sclassificatron Heteronymy is nrrtcl] morc comtnon in the
of the universe rlrr,,t.lrvo words cannot be related morphologically).
,,r.,r.rrl tl omc s ti c ate< i ani mal s (rantv s .ew ,e,try tn,Terv s .groJ ec tc .);i l l tl tc c as eofw i l dani mal s '
(23) PERSONS processeslion ' lioness, liger
THINGS ,,rt t.,tts|atlguagesuse eplcene lexemes plus productive rlenr,ational
gods things erk ek "m' al e" andr/l ' s l "fc mal e"as E ngl rs h
/,r:/r,.\,!).T urk i s hi ndi c ates thc gc ndc rol ' ani nral s by
heroes abstracts r \\ l l h pronouns he and s he:
'f,"
humanbeings animals
tJ-l ) crk ek aY l hc -hear
This dichotomyis imposedon
rexisby gramnrar;for instance, digi aYI she-bear
plural by the suffix -eze.THINGS onry pERS.NS rnay form thcir
or their determiningadjectives
might scemvcry strangethat Sumerian have to be redupricated. It
grammartreatsanimals as TITINGS; \trrrtl at.l y,L ati rrc oul tl s pc c i |y tl renatural gentl erol .ani mal s denotc dby epi c c nc l c x el trc s hy
SumeriandichotomyPERSONS-THINGS but, obviously, the
is bestcxplainablein termsof .soul, "rttale" andJem i nct "female":
rrr,r.s
in that divine anrj
animars
oonot.con."quenly,
wemaywishtousethepair
iilllJ1:;,lffilij::,whereas "fox"
rHrNGsopposition*",ffi:-;:"jff I';'r,;:11*:":T:}'i,,",ffi
( )5) vulpesmas
"vixcn" or "shc-fox'
say' English is co-extensive'
It is of interestto note
t"lll"lli, vulpCsfElnina
lupus "w ol f '
that gro'ps of pERSoNs
colleclive]in Sumerianmay be l+animate "s he-w ol l '
treatedas THINGS lupa or luPuslemina
u'ork with the categoryof animacy [+inanimate]. Needlessto say,attemptsto
definedindependenttyof a particularranguagewould
doomedo priori. be
A l l theno uns ofmany l ndo.E uropeanl anguages c anbec l as s i tl edi ntothreegenders
It may come as a surprisethat for several grarnmatical phenomena:
some grammaticalsystemsdo
not reflect the.natural, rrr:rsculine,feminine anrl neuter in oKler to account
dichotornyof animatc(human
and non-human)beingsinto male-f-emale.
is nothing in them which would In other words,there
correspondto rhemas-cu'ne-feminine.ichotomy (r) occurrence ofspecific endings (suffixes)
of many Indo_
 82 AN INTROD(,ICTION
TO TIII S'TUDY OI 83
MORPIIOI-OGY I NI;I,ECTIONAL CATEGORIES ASSOCIAl'ED WIl H NOMTNAL F]LIlIVlFNI-S

(ii) adjectivalconcord(agreement)
(iii) | ,r,,p(.rn l al gu ages abounc l i n di s agreementsbel w c c n l i ngui s trc and non-l i ngui s ti c w orl ds .
pronominal referencc
(il) l'r,,r r rlrlrl cxamples come frorn Old L,nglish where u,y'"wil'e, womatl" a;ndrno:gtlen "maiden"
correspondenceto natural
gcndcr
,,, l{ ll(.ufcr.(as are their German coutltelparts das Weib and rtlcsMtidchen); among body parts
r,,,,,rr "lrrclst" and hEaforl "heacl" were neuter, but v'amb "belly" and eru,t/"shoulder" w'crc
^"t##:il;l,t;:j;.-t."ut paving atte'lion toaltthesc
rourpoinrs
wourrrbemisreadi'g. l, llrllllll(.

impossibre particurarrv
rcriabre.
Forinslance, ol lltc other [ra1d, some natural femir-rines(nouns denoting fcmale bcings) werc grammatl-
toassisn;;ff;j,',111[,jll'ffj;llnot ir is
clominu.s
"lord"rs graimatr"atty
of this criterion lf we say that
the noun i ne' . w l fnrann "w oman" and mrz gdenmtLnrl"v i rgi n". S i nri l al ex arnpl c s c oul d be
,,rl l 1 rrr;rscuf
it h mascurine
because
10make some rrrrrltrplretlliom all Inrlo-Europcan languages.lt is signilicant that diachronically these 'illogical'
provisions
toaccommodatc
nouns
by adjectival
,tu" #;:T;tt: *Jl:tffi;::";5ff; \ ,t, 1rs $,cre everywhere 'improved' on in essentiallytwo ways. On the one hand. thc
language
concord (n): manus longa,,along
hand,,. On the other hand, thc s y s tem more ' l ogi oal ' by
"peasant" is grammatically the nounogrtcokt r,,,t rr,l ol 'the gender s y s tem or, on the other hand, i t nl ade
mascurine even if it has
"woman" As these
the samc inflectionar suffix _c
asJEtnina lnorc agrcement betu,eennatural and grammalical gendcr' Standard L'nglish rvent in
, ,,r,rlrlrsltirrg
few cxampres show, a<ijectivar
concord and pronominar rl r, ti l :;l rl i recti onw hc ni ts ' i l l ogi c al ' s y s temofgendc rs tartc dtobteak c i ow nby thc c ndofthe
reference are more
gender
thannominarmorphorogy
(i).rhecriterion
;:H::':il.:;:T;'il]"'"ar ofadjedivar r rl,l I rrglrshperiod (11lhc.) and the result is the genderlesst1'pology of Modern English Thc loss
of grammaticalgenderthan
cnterion is useiess*h"n irdi.uro. natural g"nA". 1*y since this ,,,i l l rl l rc onl y parti al , as i s ex c rnpl i hetl by Frenc h, rv hi c h modi fi ed the three-w ay getrder
comesto tnanimatethings(concrete
etc.) objccts,partsof humanbody, ,lr'.trn(lron of Latin into a two-way {istinction (masculine - fernininc). On thc othcr hand, Slavic
l,rrrlirIr11us Modem creek preservedthc thrcc g(jnclersof Indo-F]uropeatland corlscclucntlyhad
ar-rcl
gran-rnratical
(26) t,' lrlr()(lucc various alignments of the'illogical' relationship between natural ancl
I II+ IJJ vs t-emaleanintatc
IV Ir.rr,lcr.In Czcch thc natural distinction male animatc (human or animal) being
Morphology Adjectival .lleutral' animatc being (i.e., functionally neutral young human or animal) is flequently
Natural Grammatical r,s.
I,r,rrr1,,
Concord Gen<.ler Gender irllclcd
1,,rr by thc thrcc-way grammatical distinction Considcr somc examples:
prononrinal

Reference N euter
(17) Mas c ul i ne Femi ui nc
d o min u s .,lo r d " _us b o n - us ntal c telc
nrascul i ne bik krdva
a g n to la .p e a sa n t" _a
b o n - us mal e "cow" "calf'
mascui i ne "bull"
tEmina "woman', _a
bon-a f.emalc l'cminine
manus ,.hand" _us
long_a j ehnd
lcmininc bcran ov c e
"rant" "cwc" "lamb"
For the purposesof Latin it
was not necessaryto deal with
criteria (ii) and (iii) separately.
However,in the cermaniclanguages
the situationis different;here,adjectivar
formal in being overriddenby concorais purery hiebec klisna hiibd
the morphologicalcriterion(i).
Thus in old Ilnghsh the noun "stallion" "mare" "foal"
w-tfirunn..vvoman"
*man,:sdg6daytnnann."i:il:iffiq:;!,;:;.::;,ilJ:"#;::::i?ff
showstl

pronomtnalreferencethe
noun wlfmawt behavedas feminine
],ff1; muZ i.ena ditd
in accortrancewith rts denoted "man "woman" "child"
naturalgender(it wasnccessary
Lo sayGesuwest 0n hte?..Didyou seeher?,,and
when referring to a woman). no1hine.,bin,,
instartco'
what is thc notionalbasisfor gender Smalleradjustments on the 'illogical' gendersystemarenumerousin dialects For
assignmentin Indo-E'ropeanranguages./ in Yiddish' rvhereas slarrdald
known, the three grammaticai genders As is we,_ Yitltlishrcassigned the genderof "horse";tter Pferd is masculine
n,ur"urirr", fcrninine and neuter found noltopushtlris
Europeanlanguagcsreflect the in lncro- riurrnankeepstheless'logical'neuterr/as Pferd.tlowever,weshouldbecareful
associationestabrished 'rany
by the traditionalgrammar theuoun
naturar gender (sex)and grammaticar between typcofreasoningtoo far. For instance, it woukl be hardto arguethatYiddishreassigned
gender.However,as is equalry ..waler,'(whrch ls neuterin Standardcennan dtts lla.sser') to the categoryof feminitte.
wen_knownail Indo_ ll rr,sser
 84 AN INTRODUCTION
1O 'I'HE STTJDY OI MORPIIOLOOY IN I . I , I ' C I O N A I -C A E G O R I E S A S S O C I A I ' F' D W I TI I N O N ' I I N A t -I ' ] L E N I E N ' t ' S 85

tlie Was,ser,for sonre

[::l*f#;;:T::il#::::
d But obviously
J;",:T:t,:1,,j"Jfiili
i];ff::;i:,ffi:':
J:J::
f ,,ll,,\i lllli llolls are feminine: burg"city",cettster"mililary camp"' sclr"col1ty")
,t,,t, r , ilr,llliltg universal on that phenonlcnon aS can be proven by examining other languagcs'
Montrc ul i s
'l'o criticize'illogical' f,l l ,, l i l r.frrrra mes ofc i ti es arel -Ieuterarrdi nC z c c hthoy c anbel ongtoany gender:
gendersystemsofvarious morphological critena
languagcs
from a universarrst ,,,,f., rlllrf(..l,rtrltu"P|agtte" is feminine, antl Toronto is ncutcr; in c--zech
viewpointthat
beings coul<l
belegitimarerv
subcatcgorized
;'3#A:"Jj:ff:''"t" inromascurine r ,rrl frrt ', l ). -d, -o) ov erri de thos e of s emanttc s '
and
specincreasons,,.,r"]rlll,ll;T:,::,;,",il:']:;:';:;::,:'"il*
kinds ofperennial problems
of linguistic semanticscmerge.
l *;;f ;llif;*; " \ruttl u r
l anguagesal l ov er the w orl d' ts
Latin The most generarprinciples Let us considersomeexamples l l r,.rl rsti n c ti onbet* ,c ens i ngul ar and pl ural , l ountl i n many
rrom
of gend". urrrr,r-"n, (not A l ogi oal c ounterpart of thi s
beings)in Latin can be fonnulated inclutjing nounsdenotrnganlmatc rr,, rr,,r,r com rl on rnani tes tati on of thc c atc gory ol ' number.
as fbllows: on thc rc oogni ti on of uni ty and
l l ri ,rrr'.trtcategory i s the c ategory of quanti ty rv hi c h i s bas c d
and objects can be enumerated as 'one' or 't.uany' - morc tlian
Masculine:namesof nations, IlIr nlil\ (i.c., persons, anrmals
rivers,winds andmonlhs.
..rr.1|ttct|i stinc ti onbetw een.one' an< l .morethanone' ,i ' c ' c ountabi |i ty i s |arfronrbei ri ga
Femininc:nzLmes
of trees,countries,islands
and cities. ,tr.rt1,Il l Irl t.wardrroti ons i trc c nrany enti l i c s ares i mpl y notc ountabl e.Iti s us ual l y c l ai medthat
imply that entities denoted by them are not
Thesesemanticprinciprcs ttm\\ nouns are not pluralizablc, which nright
overridethoseof morphorogy. i s tak en as a' s i ngl c obj c c t"' many
"Tiber" is mascurine, For exampre, the nver Tiheri.s ,,,'.t.rl l l c. H ow ev er, w ' e hav e ro k eep i n nti ntl , that w hat
evcn if thc morphorogicaty
identicarn.un (bcronging .,|r1r.tl s.'.gro upofobl ec ts ,orananrorphous .rnas s ,depen< J s toac otrs i derabl c degrc c ont[r.'
declinationalpattem)tu*is "tower" is fcminine. to the same
Ilowever,no nrreis u,ithourexceptions; |.rrr.rIl tttdmorphok l gi c al mak e.upofi ndi v i c l ual l anguages .B uttherei s nodoubtthatl he
riverA'ldtrona"Mame" is feminine, thusthc
the rcasonobviousrybeingits
what is the urtimateexplanation morphorogy, i.e. the suffix -c. r,,rr,rrl recategori es c ountabl e,mas s anc l c ol l ec ti v ehav etofi gurei nourdes c ri pti ons of
of the ,inherentmascu.linity,of
rivers,wintrsan<jmonthsin rrr.Itrl t|rta|l a nguagc s c v c ni fthes ematrti c c atc gori z ati trnofthew orl dv ari es l i oml anguagel tl
thecityof ..Rome,,
R6mais fbminine Lrnlirurgc. Indccd, languages diffcr drastically in their
grarnmaticalization of these semantic
ff;,:;:il,:li:i,i-"*rre: ancr
sois rhecityof
a universal category of all humiur
(corinthusisinnecte<r,J;::;ilT"r:.,T;:':,::;ffi , rrrrrt.rsuls.Assumi'g that thc notion of countability
is probably

'inherent femininity' of
citics, trecs, countries
ruf:;fiilj::'J#:l*l |.rtl ;i ttl tgcs,l v emay pl ac ei tunders ubs tanc ei nthefol l ow i nghi c rarc hy o|s ernanti c |eaturc s s l row n
ana isrands?That these problems rrt|'t1l ttre5.2 .]ti s fai rl y c ommontorec ategori Zec ertai nrrras s nouns aS c ountabl ei nc erl ai n
pseudoproblems and consequcntry are not
that thcy havetheir legitimatepiace \1}i|rc5at et,et1,nteul. Also sotle nouns catr be
of linguisticsystemsmay be proven in any coherentexposd I t ||||c\tS. suchas They drittk three or four tlifferent
by examininganot*,",language l l ' tv a' rnappl c '
of genderassignmentin Hebrew . I-et us comparep'ncrpres rr:,t.tf l rothaS rnas s orc ountabl e,ftrri ns tanc e,l l at' es omc ttppl c v s
with thoseof LaJn to (group ofobjects as opposed to many objects) is not grammattc-
theirseemingry behind I lrc catcgory ol-collective
iriogicar
sysrems
rhe Hebrew
*,*,J:: ;:jH;:ilT:,lll:;:ecper, ,rItzctl i nE ngl i s h,buti trs grammati c al i z edi rrmany otherl anguagc s .Fori ns tarrc ei l rA rabtc
or beings) arc a staning point in the
,,rllcr:tive nouns (nouns der-rotingnatural groups ofobjects
Mascu lrne:
nam esol. r unit ofwhat its basic noun denotes
Fcm
inine
:",_",",",;::::ffi:: ffi :H: ;:Tr.";j']ll , l,.rir ation ofsingulative nouns (nouns denoting an individual

[":T,l]:"'. . ollectively); the exatnples shown in (28) are florn Sy'ian

Arabic'

It appearsthat thereis far-rcaching

agreementbetweenLatin an<i,ebrew Singulative
to coincidence'Variousexplanations w.hichcannotbe tlue (28) Collective
have bccnproposcdrangingiiom
mythorogical ?amerkan "Americans" ?amerkan-i"anAmerican"
linguisticallybasedreasoning. to more
Thusif femareb"i,rg, Iru,ngin trces "llies" dabban-e "a f1y"
of a certainnation,it shourdnot make part of rhemythology debban
be surprisingto"find namesof.trees "cggs" b€dd-a "an egg"
genderin the languageofthis being assigncdfeminine bod
nation.countriesandcitiesarefblt
to be fcmrnrncfbr all
kinds of reasons(mother and her gramnlaticallysingular'
chirdren?),but it is worth mentioning'aturally that collcctives(exccptfor cthniccollcctivcs)are
are regardedas collectives (cf that very frequenry they !Vc havoto emphasize
3.3 and 5.2.2). Evidence for
'inherently feminrne' may collectivesbeing somehow I l r l s i s s h o wn b yth e r r a g r ccm cn ta si n th e se n to n ccb a i - i ttb a l b ,,f7 j ( th e ve r b i n si n g u l a r )
be found in a variety of languages
(e.g., in old lrngrish a, the , t t l l . , i h ( t h c n o u n i n i n tcn r a l p l u r a l ) ..In th e m o u n ta i n sl i ve w o l ve s.'.Itm a yb e sa i d th a ti n Ar a b i c
 86 AN INI'RODUCTION
TO ]'I]E STUDY OF MORPIIOLOGY 87
IN I]I-F]C]'IONAL CA'I'LCORIES ASSO(]IA'J'I'D WTfII NOMINAI- I]I-EMENTS

substance
,," /,qdlx\
./ f iiiiiii\\
/
/ r.iiiiiii:'l
1.,.
uxxxxxixxt

-,<.rn \"'.',

lx'lxl;:;gl{{*l/
ll;l;l;l;l;x;:x:;;1,.r{FFh-
,/\ \iiiiiiilrl/ f iiii:"ii:\
,\i*xi
^xrxxxxxxxxx\

anlmatc
/\,/\ fiii'iii:iiiiiil
Inanrmate concrete abstracl
\ \{tlL|iy.,
book milk ktve

non-human
dog lnternalPlural External plulal
(many individualsin a grouP) (rnan1' grttttPs)

Fig. 5.2 Hicrarchy of serlanlic

li:atures Fi g. 5.3 P l ural ofc ol l ec ti v es

collectivcsbehaveas massnouns
in Engrrsh.rn the latterranguage
obscr'c that hunrerstend to Arabic it is fonr-redby the sufl'ix
use words denotinganimal ADolher numcrical catcgory in Arabic is dual. In Classical
schoor orfish anint...,ti'ij;ffi'#J',:';,:^#i:::::"::;:":{":?:":#,,,.rn;:,,:i::, ,rr| (ligyptian -En) addcd to both masculinc (ruiul-uni"two
merl), and fenrinine anrl singularizcd

"two rvivcs" and iuiur-ut-dni "two tr-ees")'It possessesonly onc

collectives'In a sense,we may ,,rllt,clive nouns (znwlcl-r7nl)
tark about a aoubreplurar paraphrasabre ,.many/various oblique lorms in thc singular (-irr
groups"' shown in Figure as illrlrrlue forTn -ayni (both genitive and accusativc) vcrstls two
5.3. Since even singulativcs
are pluralizablewe may obtain or ouly onc oblique fonn (dcpcnding
differcntplurarswith many nouns. two r,r.nitive and -artaccusatlve).The plural may display two
The systen-rworks as shownin (2g) torEgyptian
Arabic. ,'r wlrcther it is formed inlema'lly or extemally):
(2o1 Singular Plural P l ural P l ural D ual
Singulativc samak_c,.a ljsh,, (10) S i ngul ar
samak-at"many,' (i nrc mal ) (c x l c r' rl al )
Collective sanrak ..(aschool
of) fish,, ?asmak "(varioustypes "clerk"
Singulative iagar_a ..atree,, of) fish, fishcs,, "king"
Sagar-at "(a ibw) trees" muluk-un katib-trna malik-ani
Clollective lagar ..(a Nonr maltk-un
lot of) trees,, ?algar "(diffcrcnr -a1' ni
kinds ol) trccs,, C en -l n -i tr -tnl
.an -an -rna l rY ni
In similarcasesthe plural ofa singulative A cc
(a countplural) standsin contrast
underlying collective (which indicates to thc plural ofthc
abundanceor variety and which possessing the categoty ofdual (lnuktitut'
numerals)'ln termsof is not uscd afterl I lris statc olaffarrs rs parallelecl by other languages
the singulative iagar-a'.a tree',is of markedncss (cf. 3.3) one expects
collcctivciagur "(a 'rorphology, regularlyreratedto the Sanskrit, Ancicnt Greck). ln terms of ur.rivcrsalprinciplos
o1)trees"or "trees"in generalby
the additionof the femi'rne sLrffix For itrstanccin Ancicnt Grcck tnasculine
(or -e), This sr.rffixis 'ot
lcngthenedand + adtletlto Ibrm tht -a Itwcr fonns in the nlarkcd catcgoriesof plural and dual.
four in thc plural and only t\lo in thc
suchasi agarat "la re*.1rrecs"occurmosr rrounsdistinguisl-rflve lbmrs (wilh vocatrvc) in thc singular,
commonr;
T#':"jJ#:t ;*T::J :";:t'': (31):
'doubleplural',calledprurar nrostmarked c ategoryof dual ' Thi s i s s how n i n
ofabundance,is formedby a bascpattern
change(.broken,prural):
SaGaRt c,ic,iR ..1diffe.entkrnds
of) trees,,.
 88 AN INTRODUCTION F'I-EMENTS 89
I,O I'}IE STI,TDY OF MORPI{OI-OCY lNILF(--TIONAL CA'flGOzuES ASSOCIAl'hD WI'l'H NOMINAL

(3 I ) Ancient Greekmasculine ,.man,,

nouns(o_stcrns) ,,,i ,., l r,t.cl {orne"and R onutnteo"l gotoR ome").[l ow c v er,notradi ti ol l al graml l ]arnl al l l tal ns
Singular Plural (basic mcaning) ex hausl s thc
Dual rtr rr l.rlx.ll ing cascsby their principal semantico-s;mtactlcfunctions
Nom rinthrop-os 6nthrop-oi grammars hav e to s pec i [y a w hol e array of
anth16p-o r,,r.rlnr(;uri ng ot-varl ou s c as esand al l tradi ti onal
Gen -ou -dn -oin .rr|,.trIt;ttY nl eani ngsi nl c ngthy s ec ti ons deal i rrgw i ths y ntac ti c ands etl antl c v al uc s ofc as es .
Dat -oy -ois i tr terms ol ' i ts total meani trg' l c t rts
-otn l l , t,rr( (l rscussl ngal templ s to s pc c i fy thc c ategory of c as c
Acc -on (grammatrcal functions) of
-ous _o , r,*rrr(. s.me of'the most cornrnon semantlco-syntacuc propcfiics
Voc -e ^: -o ,'r'.r'.|||l -ati n.Thetradrti onal paradi gmw l thpri nc i pal s enranti c o-s y ntac ti c i i rnc ti ons of
,rr,l rrrrl rr:tlc,asesi s gi ve n i n (33):
Givc'thc seeminguniversalityof the
notion of courrtabilityit may conre
sor.uelanguagcsdo not have as a sulprse that
wherethedisrinct ion,**;:'ffiiT lff i# :TTT* i?::::,:il:Tj";:ffj,:T: t{(} (i l sc
tlominus "lord"
Func ti on
Nominative subject of a serltencc
numeralbul it nray equa'y well be left unexprcsse<'.
othcr mcansor.cxpressingpluraliry in domlne Vocative name of addressee
languageswithout morphologicarprurar
include redupricationof the rexical tlomtnum Accusative direct object of transitivc verb
attribute.F'orinstanceMalay pluralizes itcm or of.its
as shownbelow: domini Genitive Possesslon
domin6 Dative indirect objt'ct
(32) orang orang-orang point of dcparture
domin6 Ablative (i)
"man" "people" (i i ) i ns truntent
perdmpuan pdr6mpuan-pdrempuan
woman "women"
S tarti ngw i ththege ni ti v c (tl rec as c of.pos s es s i on' )i ti s obv i ous thatthi s l abel i s fi tl i ngi l l
.r.tl tt1rIessuchasdrrn z rs tnetputri s ..my fatl rc r' s hous e' ' w here.,my father' ' i s apos s es s orandthe
Howcvcr'it shouldbe kept in ffrindthat
themorphologicalprocessol'reduplication .Itrrttsc,,hi spossession.H ow ev et.' rv ew i l l bei ntroubl c i Iw c try tous gthel abe[.pos s es s i v e' i n
only nu'erical plurality but alsoother expresses not
notionssuchas indefiniteness, intensityor 4istribution. (,r\essuohasartorpatri s .Thi s phras ei s ambi guous andc anbetratrs l ated(i )"l al hc r' s l ov e"or
Exarrplesfrom the sarnelanguageincrude
tujoh orung,,sevenpcople,'(not *tujoh
lama-lamadahuru"rong ago",m,ta rtrung_orang), {l |)..l ovctow ards|atl r c r,,.(1.rans |ormal i onal C rammarmai ntai ned:th^|(l morpatrl s i nrrrc atti ng
of rtmanuts
"eye" but mata-mura"policeman,,. "father krves [us]" ancl in meaning (ii) thal
Reduprrcation of thc {r) rs a trarrsfonttalion ol'puter am.tt
attributiveadjectiveis commonin Surnerian: tou'ard r.e" and "nly father's
gar,,big,,na-gur-gal..bigstones,,.
na',stone,,, raitrer,,l. obviously,..my father's love
of interestto noticethat onry nounsdenoting It is /,,r/,1''lr..we lovc Ior.rr] 'l'ratiitional this
granlmars recognize
THINGS areplura.lizable in the same rvay
by reduplicanon,nouns Irorrsc,,canhardly be sarcito bc 'posscssed'
denotirrgPERS'NS haveto be plurarizea
by thesuffix -ere,e.g.,rugar,,king,,rugar-ene..kings,,, |,retbyrei .erri ngtoth ec as ei n(i )as s ubj ec ti v c geni ti v e(..tl rc |athc rl ov c s ' ,)andthc c as c i n(i t)
cf . 5.2.1 ).
.rsrl bj ecti vegeni ti ve(..w el ov ethefathel ' );i nothc rw ords ,tl rey rec ogni z etl redi ||eretrts ourc c s
.,l tIrcgcni ti ve..l .ouseanotherex ampl e' thegeni ti v edec :emc utnorunri napl rras c puerdec enl
5.2.3Case
It|l ||()n4|71'l i t.boyol' teny ears ,.,teny earol dboy ' ' c annotbel abel l ed.l ,l os s es s i v e' .Its l ,ai uei s
It was recognizedby ancientgrammarians here an attribute ofthc
a rong time ago that caseis thc most important ,;rruply dcscriptivc ol a certain age ofthe boy; the genitive expresses
the inflectio'alcategories of
oflhe noun.In a traditionaldisplayofcascs,
suchasthat familiarrrom :;ttl rstanti ve(notcthatR us s i anw oul dus eanaj ec ti v ei ntl ri s c as e).Ifu' ec x ami rredas tr|fi c i ent
textbooksof Latin, Greek,old English purely syntactic
or German,eachcascis given a labelwhich thcre is a basic dichotonry between
suggestsat trrttttberof exalnples, it would appcar that
leastoue of its semanticfunctions.Thus
the nominative was the caseassociated
(or marking) the sublectof the wrth naming gcni ti vesandtheone s w i thnrores c manti c c ontc nt;thel brmerc anbes ubdi v i dedi ntothe
possessive'
sentence,the dative was the casedenoting into a numbcr of subtypcs such as
the receiver or rrrbjective and ob,iectivc g€nitives, thc latter
beneficiaryof giving.some linguiststend
to disregardthesetraditionaltaxonomiesas
worthless; rl escri pti ve,parti ti v e,etc .Thel as tmetl ti onc ds trbty peofthegc rri ti v e,theparti ti v egenl tl V e,
this attitude,however,is basedon taking
certaincasesat their .facevarue,(thusit is (|ctl otestol al i tyfromrv htc haparti s tak enout,e.g' ,l i braol el ..apotrndoIoi l ' ,' S eeFi gure5' 4.
easyto show
how 'illogical'the Latin casesysten is
by singlingout examplessuchas accusative [,etusexamtnesomeofthefunc ti orrs oftheabIati v c .]ts natl c (ub.l atus ts t|rc pas s i r,c
where Latin usesthe sane syntacticcase ofprace,
which is appropriatewith transitive verbs:
Rontam l xrrti ci pl eo|a-ferro..tak eaw ay ,,)S ugges ts thatoneofi ts s emanti c ftrnc ti ons i s l oc al (ors pattal )
 90 AN INTRODLICTION TO TIIE S.TT/DY OF MORPHOI-OGY IN F t . l -I C f I O N A I -C A ' | E G O R I E S A S S O C I A f t i D W I . I I I N O MI N A L I I L I " ME N I S 9 I

Gcnitive ('ornibustaun sCtltantur

"llulls defendthemselveswith horns"
l.acrimatgaudi6
"l Ie weepsfrom joY"
semantlc
fr,r,l rrrrrrrafl y .thes earec al l edabtafi v us quul i tdti s "abl ati v eofqual i ty ", abl ul l y us i ns tfttntetttl
eg
rrr,.lrilrrrental,, and ablativus causae "ablative of cause." These (and) some olhers, '
onutibtrs pro/iciscilttr..
c:opi'fs "caesar goes lvith all thc army '")
r,,ril,rrrtir,(,..with"(asin caesar
subjcctivc summarize our findings regardtng
objective possessrve descriptivc partitive ,rr, .,rrPlxrsetl to be subcategoriesof the instrumental. we may
5.5. In dc al i ng w i th the func ti ons erpres s edby the
rtr, rrrr.;rrri ngof thc Lati n abl ati v e i n Fi gure
Fig.5.4 Typesof thegenitive be made lt appears that there is a dichotomy
Lrtrn rrhlative an illtercsting observation can
.abs l r.ac t'(grammal i c al ) l -unc ti ons(s uc h as c onrpari s ott' tl LIal i ty . c aus c '
1,,rrrr.t.i l thc In orc
srncethrscasecourdcxpressthe 'point
ofdeparture,(i.e.,praceffom which): ' c onc rete' (' l oc al ' ) func ti ons (di rec tton' s pac e'
Rond exeo,,rgo ,r,,,,rr[xri l i me ntrns trumental i ty )and the more
fiom Rome" and domouheo"l
am leavingthe house".It shourdbe
mentionedthat prepositionress trrrrr';l l ti sdi sti nc tron,' grammati c al ' v s ' l oc al "i s tai rl y c ommoni nrnany treatmel rts ofc as e-
constructions of this typc were commononly
with propernamesof cities and smailer gravitates torvard.grammatical, funclions
isrands; ,r',|t.rtls lbun<litr a vanety o|languages. Since Latin
elsewhere it was necessary to usethc prcpositionex lturia e6,.r gofrom above) w'e may profit liom examining another
lbllorvingexampleswe can tark Itary,,.
However, rn the illrr. loss olthe old Latin locative was mentioned
of the point of dcpartureonry metaphoricary: .local' notions are more in balarrce.ful ideal language |or
Il||ll'||ltl]cwhcrc the 'grammatical, ar-r<i
,grarnmatical' cases(Nominati','e, Accusativc' Genitive)
tIlrl ;lttrposeis Turkish, whtch has three
(34) Venuslove ndtaet l)iona
.rrrtll l rrce'l ocal ' c as c s(D ati v c , Loc ati v c , A bl ati v e)'
"Vsnus bom from .lupiterand
Dione,,
NatLrsloco nobih
(l 6 ) Case }unction
"Bom from the noblefamilv,,
ev "house" Nominattve i) subject of a sentence
ii) indefinite dircct object
This abstractnuanceof meaning
of the fomrer concreterocal meaning Accusattve detinite direct object
ancicntgrammariansto justify was strongenoughto cv-l
a raberablath,usorigirtis..ablative Genitivc posscssive
of origin,,.1.hissubtypeof cv-l n
ablativecould onry co-occurwith
passiveparticiplesdenoti'g .,bom Dative i) indirect objecl
genitus, ortus, satus).we have from,, (such as nalrrs, ev-e
to introcruceanotherraberto describe
exampres ii) allativc; Place to (whither)
*I
AthEnts live in Athcns',o such as v^.,o
time at (when) Place in (wherc)
dearingwiththe.point"r;;:::::Kff
;l"J:,*:liJi:.:','il:J#llllli"llTi#]
ev-dc Locattve
Ablative place from (whence)
the traditional ev-<len
label abtdtlvus loc, et temporis..ablative
of place aml time,,. However, what
morphologicallythe genitive case is
could function in the samc way, e.g., ,,inRome,,, .local' oppositionsin Turkish is very simple:eve "to the house"'eyrle"in the
Corintht"in corinth" (historically, Rtimae llre systemof
herewe are dealingwith the old Latin
ablativehasto be usedwith proper locativein _i); rhe l v t u s e " e v de n "fr o m th e h o u se "Asi n L a ti n th e se th r e e ca se sm a yb e u se d i n a m o r e a b str a ct
namesof citiesand smater islandsif
they .grarnmatical,scnsesuchisthedativeofpurpose: Krzgigekdcrmic!eqrktl'oT"thegirlisgoing
Deciensionor if they are morphologica,y berongto the 3d
plural, e.g.,Athenae,,Athens,,). locativeofproperty:ktthverengin-dcbirsupku"ahatol'coflbc-colour";
semanticvaluesof the ablativecan Totally different rrrrrtopickflowers";
be observedin the fottowingexamples: lrom hunger".lt may be noledthat in contradts-
.,exhavsted
irlrlativeof cause:aqlk-truzbitkin
(35) Vir summ6ingenid l i r t c t i o n w i th L a ti n ,n o m i n a ti ve i sa m i sn o m cr |o r Tu r ki sh a n d th e te r m a b so l u ti v€ w o u l d b c
form
rrrorcappropriate. 'l'hereasonis the peculiarsyntacticbehaviorofthe absolute(suffixless)
"A man of greattalenl,,
w l r i c h c a n ap p ca r a sb o th a su b j e cto fa scn tcn ce a n r l a n i n d cfi n i tcd i r ccto b j ccto fa ve r b ,a s
shownin (37).
 92 AN INTRODUCI]ON TO THE STI]DY OF MORPHOLOGY INIIt,FC'I'IONAL CA I'EGORIES ASSOCIAI'ED \\'ITII NOMINAI-
Lt'EMENI'S 9l

Ablative massor part of a r'vholefrom which a parl is laken out

tal o- a Partitive
ti rl o-na tlsslve sldts

tal o- k s i Trans l ati v e c hangc ofs tatc

tul o -n Instrumental instrument, mcans

a h la tive Iocative Instrumenlai
Local cases
Ines s i v c "i n the hous e"
tal o-s s a f
' l nteri or' { E l ati ue "fi om (i ns i de) the hous e"
talo-sta
direction origin companson space ttme I "i ttto thc hous c "
quality inslrument talo-on I l l l ari uc
cause accompanrntent
f Adessive "atlnear thc housc"
tal o-l l a
I
l'ig. 5.5 Typesof the ablative 'Extcrior' I etrtative "from (outside) the house"
tal o-l ta
I Allotiu" "to/towards thc house"
talo-lle
(37) ev agrldr
"the housewasopened,,
(ant1 which are better not classifled as
l l r'r( i rte tw o morc c as es w hi c l t arc not local cases
cv aldrm
r,i l i l ttl ati C al ):
'.I boughta house,, '

Abessive "without the house"

tal o-tta
The accusativecasecan only be
usedifthe object is defined (i.e., Cornitative "\'!,ith tho house/s"
definiteobjectofa verb): the accusatrvemarks thc talo-rncnsa

(.orri paredw i thTurk i s htheFi nni s hs y s tc mofl oc al c as es i s moreprec i s el nmal k l ng

(38) cvi aldrm
t'\|}|i ci tl ythe c ontras tex teri orv s .i nteri or,s how ni nFi gure5.6.' I.l ri s ,ofc ortrs c ,i s notl oc l ai rn
"I boughtthe house,,
"frorr oulside the house" carlnot be madc
rlr.rrtlistinctions such as "fiom insi<lethe house" and
the house" does not shorv any
c:r'seanddefinitenessintersectin rrr ltrrkish. what is meant is that Turkish ablative ev-tlen"ftom
similar ways in other context or additional
suchas Hebrew,persia, anci ('\,(.11|nalking for onc o[-thc abovc distinctions and only ertra-linguistic
spanish'observe, for instance,that
in Spanishonehasto'anguages it; on the other hand, Finnish t(llo-Sta
formy prorbssor"(aefinite)but
sayBuscoa mi profes.sor,,lam looking |..rit:aI trratcrial (as in tlrc Bnglish translation) nray show
Buscoun professor..l am looking the hous e"
rbr a professor,,(indefinite). rrrci rnsunam bi guous l y "l rom i ns i dethc hous e"(el ati v e)andtul o-l ta"l i otttouts tdt
A morecomprexsystemof 'local'
oppositionsexistsin Finnish.Here vs' interior is cxplicit
oppositionof Turkish:"to" - "1n" - the three_way.rocal, lirblative), i.e., the rnarking for local col)trast
oxterior
"from" is combinedwith the features First of all, there is nrotphological
As irr Latin, therc arc a.lsogrammaticar exterior vs. interior. A few comments on the Fimish grammatical cases.
cases(Nominative,Geniti'c, Accusative c1. Turkish in (36);
and three ,11'tlcretism(tbrmal i<lentity)of the nominative and accusative II (o-suffix),
specificallyFinnishcascs). rhewholesystemconsrstsof l5cases(therecordisprobablyhcld .rrrtl thatol .t hegeni ti v ean< l ac c us ati v el (-l rs uffi x ).Thus thes uffi x l es s |ormi s tobeus edto
by Tabassaranfro'r thc North-East
caucasian family with 54 cases)which
shownbelow for /a/o ..house,,: can be arsplayedas erprcssbothas ubj ec t(e.g.,Tal oortk ork ea..Thehous ei s hi gh' ' )andadi rec tobj ec t;tobenrore
sl l cci l i c,onl y i nc ertai nmodal c ontex ts s uc has optati v eandi nrperati v e,ex empl i fi edi n(40).

(3e) ' l uteti or

GrammaticalCases 'Exterior
Case Function a l nes s tv e
talo "house" Nominative Adessive
-----+ Illative
subjectofa sentence Ablative
talo-n <- I llative
Cenitive possesstve Allative
talo-n AccusativeI directobject
talo AccusativeII directobject(in certalnmodal clauses) Fig. 5.6 The Finnishsystemoflocal cascs
 94 AN INTRODUCTION'I'O 95
]'HE S1'L1D\.O[ MORPH0I-OGY IN F I- E C TI O N A L C A I ' B O O R I E S A S S O C L \ ] ' E D w l l ' l l N O MI N A l - l t l -h N I L N I S

(40) Antakaa minu-lle

pullo vrrttr-d byl velikynlud6nnym(- INSTR)
l.ornon6sov
grve me-ALLA'I' boftle wine-PART "l,omonosovwas (- became)a grcatscholar"
"Cive me a bottle of
wine,,

l l l tttr nter tt
AccusativcI is to be usedelsewhere''l'his "
to the distribtrtion
(andactLrally
caseis morphorogicaily
identicalwith thegenitive l lrt. torm 'alignment' (cf. Harris & Carnpbell 1995:240) is used to rel'er
alsou,rththe insfrumerrlatl way to nominative-
thi, .as", tro* ,,| [ r,,rlrlurlogicalmarkers; the 'aligrunent ol'oase marking' refers in a tteutral
singurar).
rtisori'rercsr
roobserve
thar
rheSravic
of accusative a'd genitivc (with
,."rJ;I'jil;T;:ffiilI#l1or","tism cr r rn|ltive, ergative-absolutivc (and othcr pattems such :Lsdouble-oblique
and active-inactive)
animate ma.culine-nou,rs) rn 5.2.3 (Latin, Russian, Turkish, bul not Finnisli) arc of familtar
and of accusative and nominativc ilr, l,rril,,Lragcs rve stu<iied
(with inanimate mascurinc
and neuter nouns). Examine the agent (subiect of the
the fotowing Russian <iata: |,,il1n;rtivc-accllsativetypology which assigns tltc same suffix to both
l anguages 's uc l t as
Ir,l r,,rtr\cverb) and the s ubj ec t (ol the i ntrans i ti v ev erb). on thc other hand,
(41) Masculine M a scul i ne trrrrl l rl rrt(ti ski m o), Georgran,and H i ndi , are of l es s fami l i ar c fgati v c -abs ol ul i v cty pol ogy w hi c h
Animate v erb al l d thc pati ent (obj ec t of the
Inanimatc ,r,,.r;,rrs {he same s uffi x to thc s ubj ec t of the i ntrans i l i v e
' l ' he
Nominativc byk ,,bull,, (s o-c al l ed ergati v e c as e)
sto l' tabl e" rr.i l r,,rtrvc verb) w hi l e the agent i s rnark c d by a s pc c i al s utl i x
Genirive byk_6 sto l-ii !rtr,rl r()ni n Latin v s . H i ndi i s as fol l orv s :
Accu s aliv c by k _a sto l
(.1\ ) Lati n H i ndi
l'he so-calledpartitive is used
to denotetotality fiom whrch part Nominatrve-accusative lirgati ve-absolut ivc
"bortlcof milk") or intjefinite a is takenout Q:;uromuito,n
nrass. Aligmrcnt A l i gnnrent
Both essiveand transrativeare
useclto expressa complementin Agent
predication,i.e with vcrbs sentcnccswith equational -)-us I -nC
"be, become,,. choice betweenthesetwo is deterrnincd
in that the lexemeexprcssing semantrcary Subjcct ) Ia
so'rcone's (permanent)statehas -Llm I
to be realizedas the essive, Patient
whereasthe lexemeexpress.ing
somcone'spast or future state(i.e.,
expressed changedstate)has to be
as the translative.Contrastthe following "The fricnd sa'"va lrorse"
scntences: (,()nsidef Latin (44) and Hrn<ti (45) cquivalents ol-the tu'o sentenccs:
...I-he neu{ ral al i gnment \^ rth no
,rrrrl horse c antc " (i t may bc obs c rv erithal E ngl i s h di s pl ay s
(42) Velje-ni on opettaJa_na keskikoulu-ssa
rrr,rrphologicalnrattcrs for any of the thrcc scmantio functions):
Brother_my is reacher_ESShigh_schoot-INESS
"My brothcris a teachcrat (t.atin)
h.igh_school,, (44) Amic us equ-um vidit
lricndINOM borse' ACC see+PERF+3SC
Velje-ni +
aikoo ldiikiiri-ksi Patient
Agent
Brother_my wantsto become physician_1.RANS
"My brotherwantsto become
a physician,, E qu- us venit
hors etN C )M come+PITRF+3SC
Again, it may be of interesrto observe +
a similar situationin Russian.Here, Subject
prcdrcation in equatronar
spcakers havethechoiceofexpressingthestate
someoneis in aspermanent (by using
the nominative,co'csponding to (llindi)
the F'irmishJssiue)or as acquired ghor-a dekh-a
(by using instrumentar, (45) Dost:ne
co'espondingto the Finnishlransrative).
Examinethe fblrowingmini'raj pair
or.senrences: fricnd-ERG horse+ABS seel PP
A g c nt P ati ent
(43) Lomon6sovbyl velikyj uddnnyj
(: NOM)
"l,omonosov was a great scholar,,
 o7
96 AN INI'RODI]CTION WIT'II NOIV1INA t- EI'EMEN'I'S
TO THE S'I'UDY OF MORPHOLOGY I N! LEC'IIONAL CA'1'F-GORIFSA SSOCIAT'ED

Ghor-a ay-a RtsCOMMENDED READINGS

horsel ABS co m e tPP
- Subject
\l l ,frl ,,(frf,.rorrnM.r g|r.TheGramnrurofC as e.c rambri dge:c ambri dgerj ni v ers i ty P res s .
11r1rIr11.tIc.JosephR .l g5S .A ttotttl i tteoftheS trttc tureoJ ' S hi l ha.N c w Y ork :A meri c anC ounc i l
In Hindi ergative-absorutivearignment
is usedonry in the past tenseand the pcrl-cct ,,1 | carncd S ocl el tes .
aspecl .196g. Y ork :
(perfect,pluperfcctand futureperfect); ganns , ed. Ll ni t,ers al si n Li ngui s ti t' rl reor1. N c w
hencethe rabersprit ergative typorogy. f r,f,l l r,l .rnon w . & R obert T.
with (46) wherethenoun"ftend" appears contrast (45)
in thc absolutrvelbrm becausethe pre<licate l l ,'l l . R i nehaft a nd W i ns ton'
prescnttense: rs i' the
C l arendon P res s '
r ,rrrrl rl rt'lA l ,. 1959. Ol d E ngti s h Grammnr' Ox ford:
D.C.: ceorgetown
r ,,*r.il. Mark w. l964. A Re.ference Grantmar of syriun Arabic. washington,
(46) Ddst gh6r_a dekhta hai I l rrrvorsi tyP res s .
(ttindi.l
ftend IABS horse+ABS sce+pRT Langtnge New York: Frederick Ungar'
is t rr llf e, (;corge O. 1960. A (irttmmar of the Gernan
"l'hc liiend seesa horse', Moscow: Nauka
I rl,rkrllroff,Igor M. 1988. Afrasictn Languages'
der Spruche Gudeas von Lagtti Roma: Pontificium
| ,rfLcrtstcin, Adarn. 1949 Grammatik
If the ob.iectis dcfinitc (markedby
the DAT/ACC postposrrion :ko), rnl'e crgative Insl i tutum B i bl ic um.
verb is always in thc unmarked('masculinc') rensesrhe
B ac h & H arms 1968 1 88'
form in -a irrespectiveryof the nurnbcr I rl l rrurrc.C harl es.i . 1968. "' l ' he c as e for c as c "
of the
object.This is shownin (4?1: gender"' I' i nguaT 141' 186 -214'
| ,rrl rrr.l . 1959. "The ori gi n of grammati c al
||.rrrrs.A l i ceC '& Ly l c C ampbel l .|gg5.fl i s tori c al s y ntax i nC ros s -I' i ngui s ti r' P ers pec ti v e.
(47) i. Dost:ne ghor-e-ko ('anrbridge: Cambridge University Press'
dekh-a
liiend=ERG (eska mlrn'nice. Praha: Stdtni pedagogick6
horse+OBL-DAT/ACC see+PP lf ;ririinek, Bohuslav & Alois Jcdlidka. 19$.
"'l'he friend saw the horse',
naklaclatelstvt.
ctts' Etucle de grummaire glntrale Actu .lutlandica
f f relrrrslev.Louis. 1935. La catigorie tles
(47) ii. Dost:n€ ghor-6-ko dekh-a V t l . 1 . x i j 1 8 4an dIX'2 'vi i j 7 8 '
f iend-.ERG horse+OBL/pL-DA]./ACC scc+PP |;lktlbson'Roman.lg36,..tseitragzurallgemeinenKasuslehre''.SelectedWritingsII,23Tl'The
"The friend saw the horses"
Haguc:Mouton.
|.,ly,Andr6.lgT5....l.owardathcoryofgcnderinMotlemEnglrsh''.sltuliesinlingli'shcrumtnar
ll, however,the objectis indefinite,typicar de Lille'
ergativeagreementmay be observedin the prur.al cd. by Ardr6 Joly,229-281 Lillc: Presscsde I'Universite
Ncw York: Harperand Row'
frirtz,.lerroltlJ. 1966.ThePhilosophyttf Langrtage
(48) Dosl-n€ ghor_e dEkh_e |(trrylowicz,Jerzy'|964'InflectionalCategoriesoflntlo-European.Heidelberg:CarlWinter.
fricnd=ERG horsc+pL see+pp/pL (irummar' Oxford: ClarendonPress'
I cwis, Geoffrcy L 1967.Turkish
"The 1iiend saw horses" UniversitiesPress'
I cwis,M. B. 1968'Mulay. London:The English
Iyons,John.19./T.semanttcs.Volume2.Cambridge:CarnbridgeUniversityPress.(Chapterl5).
Morcland,FloydL.&futaM.Fleischer.|()T3.Latin..AnIntensiveCourse.Bcrkeley:University
of CalifomiaPress.
Londot'tlLongnrans
l{obins, Robert tl. 1961- A Short IIistotl ofLinguistics
The Hague:Moulon'
Itosen,Haiim B. 1917.Contemporaryllebrew'
Schachter,Paul. l985."Parts-of-speechsystems"'languageTypologyunds)'ntacticDescription
UniversityPress
Volume 1 ed.by T' Shopen,3-61' Carnbridge:Cambridge
98 AN INTRODUC,TION
1'O TIIF ST{JDY OI. 99
MORPHOI-O(iY tN! l.ECI'IONAL CATEGORIES ASSOCIA TED WI'IH n..OMINAL tiLEMENI S

tsXERCISES "Your (F) word"

122) deBardx
l. Analyzethe systemofpossessive (23) susoOaxl "Your (M) mares"
suffixesin Biblical Hebrew. 'his king"
(24) malko
(a) (25) malkan "thcir (Ii) king"
How are the sex and tl
number
orrhe0",.",;o"J;:;;:in:T*-ili:t;'*'-aticar gendcr
andthe (26) sifram "their (M) book"
(27) do0alah "her rvord"
(28) malkaxem "Your (M) king"
Hint: Beforc answeringthis qr-restio'construct
FotJR paracrigmatic
setsof Hcbrcw (29) melaxo9iw "his queens"
possessivesuffixeslor the following categories:
(30) sifraxen "Your (F) book"
(31) malkaOam "thcir (M) queen"
Possessed
Sg - posscssorSg pl - possessor
Possessed (32) melax6y "mY kirrgs"
Possessed Sg
Sg - possessor
pl pl - possessor
Possessed pl

and specify their sex/genrler l lrc basicfoms of the abovenounsand therrplural forms areas follows:
distinctio's in appropriatcpersons.
Englisli "your" which is four-way Be carerurr.vith
ambiguous:ntascSg, Masc pl, "king" malaxlm
F.emSg, Fem pl. milcx
,efe, "book" srl-arim
[Jsethe following data:
malk6 "queen" melixoO
Sir "sotrg slnm
(l) matki ..my
king,,
(2) ..their daf3ir "wortl" daParim
s[so0eh6n (F) mares,, ..
slsa "marc' -: 0
suso
(3) Sirexa
(4) mcraxooch6m
;:Ilil];::l;,,, (b) Describethe distributionof morphophonemic variantsoi'the root
(5) defJaii ,.my
word,, possessivestrffixcs'
(6) .'his (c) Comment on the'leak' in the systemof thc
malka0o queen,.
(7) 5ir€x6m ..your (d) Translateinto Llebrew:
(M) songs,,
(8) susa0ah .,her
mare,,
(9) .,our (33) "our words"
molax6nu kings,,
(10) suso06ha .,her (34) "or.rrsong"
mares,,
(ll) malk €n[ . . our k ing, , (35) "their words"
( 12) Sirexern .,your (36) "your (M) word"
(M) song,,
( l3) deBandn ,.your (37) "your (M) queens"
(F) word,,
(14) selhrdyix ,.your (38) "our songs"
(F) book,,
(15) Sirexa ,.your
(M) songs,, ').
(16) slsaOin ,.therr Analyze the system ofpossessive affixes in Coptrc'
(t ) mare,,
(17) difJr€xdn ..your
(F) words,,
(a) Flow al c thc sex, numbe r and person of the possessor, and the gender and the number
(18) malxexdm ..your
(M) kings,, two genders:
( 19) mclaxo06yix ..your of the possessedrealizcd morphologically'/ Note: coptic distinguishes
(F) queens,, "tooth"'
(20) silrexdn ..your masculine, e.g-, kas "bone" and femininc, e'g', ovhe
(F) books,, thc following data:
(21) sifrOx ..your (b) construct the paradigmatic set of coptic possessiveaffixes use
(F) books,,
 .F

r 00 AN IN1RODUC--1]ON
TO THE STLIDYOF MORPHOLOGY
INFLECTIONAL CAIIlGORIIlS ASSOCIATTD WlIll NOMINAI- LLFMFNTS 101

(l) pajor "my father"

lirrtleavor to nrake significant general statemenls regarding the distribution of lour
(2) pefkot "his basket"
pluralizing suffixcs and umlaut, and their interplay u'ith gendcr'
(3) pekkah "thy (M) earth"
(4) nefkot "his baskets"
"day" 'l'ago (M)
(l ) T ag
(5) penjot "our father',
(2) Bach "brook" Biiche (M)
(6) peukohit "their fire"
(3) Or*el "uncle" Onkel (M)
(7) tenk'ii "our hand"
(1) Sohn "son" Scthne(M)
(8) nenjot "our fathers"
(5) Hand "hand" Iilindc (F)
(9) tekbo "thy (M) tree"
((r) Otter "otter" Ottcr (M)
(10) netinovhe "your teeth"
(7) Jahr "year" Jahrc (N)
(l 1 ) roubo "thy (F) rree"
(8) Rand "margin" Riinder (M)
(12) tesmau "her mother"
(9) Vogcl "bi rd" V ogel (M)
(13) taape "my head"
(10) I"6we "l i on" Lc i w en (M)
(14) nekehe "thy (M) cows"
(l I ) Apparat "utensil" APParate (M)
(15) nakor "my baskets"
( 1 2 ) B i ss "bi te" B i s s c (M)
(16) nesojk "her breads"
( 1 3 ) F l u ss "river" Fliisse (M)
(17) teumau "their mothcr"
( l4) 'l'r0bsal "sorrow" Triibsale (F)
( I 8) tesk'id "her hand"
(15) Kunst "art" Kiinste (F)
(19) refehe nls cow -
(16) Tafel "tablct" 1 al'eln (F )
(20) teubo "their tree"
( 1 7 ) En d u n g "endi ng" E ndungen(F)
(21) tesovhe "her tooth"
( 1 8 ) En te "duck" Entcn (F)
(22) nouovhe "thy (F) teeth,'
(19) Schaf "sheep" Schafe (N)
(23) poujor "thy (F) father,'
( 2 0 ) Bi l d "pi c ture" B i l der (N )
(24) ncnbo "our trces"
(21) l{aus "hous e" l l hus er (N )
(25) perinlas "your tongue"
(22) Schloss "castlcl lock" Schlcisser(N)
(26) netinehe "your cows"
(23) Fcnstcr "windorv" Fenster (N)
(27) tetinbr) "your tree"
(24) Kloster "rnonaslety" Klcister(N)
(28) poukot "thy (F) basket"
(25) Auge "eye" Augcn (t'i-)
(29) ncukas "their bones"
(26) Oht "ezrr" Ohren (N)
(30) nckovhe "thy (M) teeth"
(27) Geist "ghost" Geister (M)

(2E) Kessel "k ettl e" K es s el (M)

Pl,ral formationin Germancan
be describedin its interplaywith grarnmaticar "beam" Balken (M)
F, N). There are severalplural suffixes gender(M. (29) Ualken
(_e,_er,-en, _e.) and.theroot can "ditch" Gribon (N1)
be umlauted(4 , (30) Grabcn
ri, u t 11,o-r d, au I du).
(31) Lelrcr "tcacher" Lchrcr (M)

(32) Vater "father" Viitcr (M)

(a) Elaborateas many plural pattemsaspossible
in the fbllowing data. (33) Bruder "brother" Briidcr (M)
(b) Reducetheir numberby disregarding.exceptions,
(singleoccurrences). (34) Bruch "fraction" Briiche (M)

(35) Mensch "ntan" N'[enschen(M)

(36) Buckel "hump" Buckel (M)

 t02 AN INTRODTiCIION 1.O l,IiE S,fTIDY OIi IVlORPHOLO(iY tNILEC'flONAL CATITGORIES ASSOC'IA fllD WffH NOMINAL ELttMEN'l'S 103

(37) Biichse "box" Biichsen(F) rIIt l l -ki l abu dax al at "the dogs came iu"
(38) Eber "boar" Eber(M) r I ') irl rnar?Atu daxalna "the rvomen came in"
(39) liinfahrt "enlrance" Einfahrten1t;1
(40) Einfhil "intrusion" in Biblical Hcbreu';
Einftillc (M) t lsingthe following dataelaboratcthe rulesof verbalagreemerlt
(41) Glas "glass" GlAser(N) do it scparatelylor the tuture and the past:
(42) Graf "count" Grafen (M)
(43) Gunst "favor" Giinste(F) ( I) tiSmorha-?iSSa "the womanu'ill protect"
(44) Gut "merchandise"
Giitcr(N.1 (2) yiqlcll ha-?apo0 "the fathersu'ill kill"
(45) I{aar "hair" Haarc (N) (3) baO,tiftohr "daughter'you will open"
(46) Ilacken "heel" Hacken(M) (4) ben,tiqtol "son, Youwill kill"
(47) Haifisch "shark" Haifische(M) (5) tilkodnahan-nairm "the womenwill catch"
(48) Hahn "rooster" Hrihne(M) (6) yiftah ha-?ap "the fatherwill open"
(49) Haile "hall" Hallcn(F) (1) nA5im,tismoma "women,you u'ill protect"
(50) t{en "lord" Herren (M) (S) ?cna5im,tiftohu "men, you will open"
(51) rlirn "brain" Ilime (N) (9) paOehahab-ba0 "the daughteropened"
(52) Itotz "wood"
Ildlzer (N) (10) Sameru han-na5inl "the womenprotcctcd"
(53) Floss "raft" Flcisse(N) (1 1) laxadhab-ben "the soncaught"
(54) F-loh "flea" Fl6hc (M) (12) qatelnha-?anaiim "the men killed"
(55) l'ohlen "loal" Fohlen(N)
(56) Flut "flood" Fluten(F) (b) T h e r e a r cth r ce p h e n o m cn a i n l l e b r e w ve r b a l a g r e e m e n tw h i ch a r e u tl kn o w n i n tl r e
(s7) Jude "Jew" .Iuden(M) Indo-European languagcs. ltlcntily themclearlyusingappropriateterminology
(s8) Jagd "hunt" Jagden(F) (c) Translateinto l{ebrew:
(59) .loch "yoke" Jochc(N)
(60) Order .'contrrrand"
Ordem (F) (13) "sons(= bantnt)'you will kill"
(14) "the fathcrprotected"
rhere are various phenomena
in atljectivaland verbal agreemcnt (I5) "daughter,you will protect"
languageswhich arc unknov found in the Scmitic
languagesDescribeat leastlour ( 16) "the women oPcncd"
using the rorowing 0"," of thcm
"r'J;:.::""iT#:'*-
1958):
tr. l]erber(Taielhit) spokenin southwestMorocco(accordingto Applcgate
(f ) al-rajulu wasixurr "the man is dirty"
(2) al-kalbu rvasixun "the dog is dir1y" ( 1) asif (M) "river" isafir
(3) al-mar?atuwasixatun "the woman
is dirty" (2) tagiif(F) "palm tree" ligLal
(4) al-rijalu wasixuna "the men aredifty', "stove" tihuna
(3) tzihanul(F)
(5) al-kilabu wasixatun "lhc dogsarediny', "{iiend" imdukal
(4) amdakul(M)
(6) al-nar?atu wasixatun "the womenaredirty"
(5) tamdakult(F) "friend" timdukal
(l) al-rajulu daxala "the man camein" "bird" igudad
(6) agudid(M)
(8) al-kalbu daxala "the dog camein"
(1) agadir(M) "fortrcss" igudar
(9) al-mar?atudaxalat "the womancamein"
(8) adrar(M) "mountain" rdram
(l 0) al-rijalu daxalD "the mcn oanrcin"
 F

104 AN INTRODI-ICTION TO,I]IE

SI'I/DY OF MOI{PHOLOGY INF-LECTIONAI, CAl'L(iOzuES ASSOCIAl't]D WII'H NONIINAI, iJLIJMI']N I S t0 5

(al Describethe formationof the plural

in Berber. bcsa fipparon "pcrrcil"
(b) What type of affix is usedtr
How
does
markingr:ffi1.3;.:ffiTffiJfiln"
",.,n. o,".",, | )r'scri hethe sem anti c v al ues ofTurk i s h' l oc al ' c as es .[J s e the fol l ow i ng data (from l -erv i s

7. Elaborate the rules of l ')tr7):

morphorogy
oI num
erars govc'ring
ill"::TlJff ""Hl |lo,i"TT:nlll,,',,,"0"., thc
I oei tuV e
II) su-da "in the water"
(l) ?issa ?aha0 "one woman" (.)) "in Ramadan" (the lnonth of fasting)
(2) R arnazan-da
?i3 ?ahad "one man"
( l) i hti yarl tk- ta "in old age"
(3) Sanayrm kelaBim "two dogs" (l ) "trventy ycars old"
(4) yi rmi yaqt n-da
Setayim na5rm "two womcn',
(s) bu fikir-dc degilint "I am not of t' l ri sopi ni orl '
(5) SAloS fanrn "threecities"
(6) Scloia kala0im "three dogs"
(7) A bl ati ve
?arbaf bano0 "four daughters"
(()) gehir.dcn ayrtldt "he departcd fronr the citY"
(8) ?arhafa rnclaxrrl "four kings" "he entercd by 1hc lvindorv"
(9) lll pencerc-dcn girdi
?arbaf' besim "four eggs"
{ lJ) on-dat] "for that rcason"
(10) ?arbafa fefronoO "four pencils" "Turkey is bigger than l-ebauou"
( I 1) hemi5ia (9) Tiirkiye l-iibnan-dan biiytik{iir
?alj<l0 "five flathers"
( l 0) nayl on-da n "of ny l on"
(l2) hamcs molaxoO "five queens" "onc ofthc noighbors"
(l l ) komqul ar -danbi n
( I2) bu elmalart kag-tan aldrn? "at w hat pri c c di d y ou buy thes e appl c s ?"
Translateinto Hebrew:

(a) "threewomen" I )alive

( l3) mektubu Ali-ye gcistcrdirn "l showed the lettcr to Ali"
(b) "one father"
( 14) Tiirkiye-ye dtindiiler "thcy rcturned to Turkey"
(c) "two queens"
( l 5) tal ebe i mti han-a haz rrl anry or "thc s tudc nt i s prepari ng l or the ex ami nati on"
(d) "threebooks"
( l6) bu clmalart kag-a aldrn'l "what was thc total amount you paid tbr theseapplcs?"
(e) "four bitches"
(i) "one egg"
(g) "rwo kings" Vocabulary:
yirmi "twentY" alma "applc"
(h) "two pencils"
bu "this" al-drn "You bought"
(i) "live women"
degilim "l anl not" mektub "letter"
0) "onc pcncil"
ayrll-dr "he deParlecl" gdster-dim "l shorvcd"

dtin-dij-ler "theYretumed" talebe "student"

Vocabulary:
hazrrlan-Iyor "he/sheis preparing"

kelep ..dog,'
?ap "farher,'
fir .,ciry,'(Fem)
malka "queen',
baO 'daughter" sdfer "book" (Masc)
melek ..king"
kalbA "bitch"
 F

INILEC]TIONAI- CATLGORIES ASSOCIATED WI'LH VERBAI, ELI]MEN'I'S l()7

Morphology Noun Verb

(irammar
CHAPTER SIX Syntax Subject Predicate
1NI,'LECTIONAI,CATECORIESASSOCIATED
WITH VERBAL ELBMENTS
[,ogic Agcnt A c ti on

6,7 Verb as a primary Grammatical Cstegory

As establishcdunder5. r . r , the verb could be
defi'ed asa primary grammaticarcategorythe Fig. 6.l Oorrespondencebctween grammatical and logical categones
domainofwhich incrudcssecon<lary categoriesofperson, number, tense,aspect,
mood, and
voice lt was alsomentionedthat Platogrouped gran-nraticalcategones
verbsan<iadjectivestogethcrsincehc considered rl,.rrrrl linglish, allow.sfor morphological prcdication using the secondary
themosttypicalfunctionof both beingthatof predication; possible to predicate a clifferent gramntalical
as we put it, verbsexpressdynamic ,,t l'(.rs()tland nuntber. with this particular verb it is
fcatureson substances(nouns)and adjectivesexpress ran away" or dif'fbrent grammalical
stalic lbatureson substances.whereasboth r ,rrr'1,rvvyof number in the samc pcrson (3'd):.fTgerunt"they
verbsand adjectivespredicate,the most typical function ran away" etc
ofthe noun is that ofnamrng the subject , ,rtr.110r.iesof person ln the samc number (singul ar):.figt"I ran away",filgi.sli"you
of predication'In other words, the definition of
thesetwo pnmary grammaticalcategonescannot ',r't l i rrtherdi scussi onunder 6.3.1.
be madeindependently ofsynlacticandlogicalconsiderations ,* subjectandnoun andpredicate
and verb are simply indissolublyassociatedin traditional and Participle
grammaticaland logical theory. A full tr.2 Quasi-Nontinal Categories of the Vetb: Infinitive
discussion offunctional categoriesofsubjecran<lpredicatewould
ofcoursebring us tar beyoncl Quasi -nomi na|ca tc gori es ' namel y ,i nfi ni ti v eandparti c i pl e(c al l edal s oi nfi ni teornon-
the domainof morphologyproper.Sufficc it to say Parliciples in hcavily llective languages
that thereis a lar reachingagreementbetween llrritc forms) sharc propcdies ofboth nouns ancl verbs.
the categoriesof logic and grammarin simple declarative the nominal catcgorics ol'number, case and
scntenccssuchasJrhn ran away where lrr.lurVelike adjectrvcs,r.e.,thcy can be inflected for
the individualperson(substance) is an instigatorofthe actlon. they can fonn thc positivc and superlative
similarly to a<ljectives,
;1.rulcr (to a limited degrce) and
Apparcntly,in all languages ofthe world, the individualpersonin sucha sentencewoukj
bc Il {)i |l i mi teddegree).W i thv erbs they s harc thec ategori es ofas pec l (toal i nri tc ddc grec )' andal s o
grammaticalizcdas a noun ancr its action as can be inflected only for the nourinal
a verb. Thus the correspondence between ,,1r.oicc and mood. Infinrtives are more abstract in that they
grammalrcaland logicalcategoricsare shownin with vcrbs they sharc the ciltegones of
F-igure6.1. {:rlc8ory ofcase (but not lbr gender anil nurnber), and
At this point,it is importantto cstablishthe dislinction esscntial vcrbal categories ofperson and
b€tweenmorphologicalandsyntactic ,r.pcct and voice. ln bolh rniinitives and participles tire
predication.The latterconcemsthe predication (opposed to finite vcrbal forms)' Participation
ofonc w,ortlon another,in this cascol.verbon t(.ilsc are missing: hcnce the label non-tinite forms
subject,suchas in Englishancll_atin: schematized as shorvu iu Figurc 6 2'
rrr nominal and verbal catcgorics may be
are not realized by syrlthetic rnorphology
Since many ofthese nominal and verbal categories
(i) Johnran away.
rrrl j ngl i sh,w emayusel -attnandGrc c k as ex ampl es i nthes ec as es .C i omparethec ontrtrs ts of
Ioamds efligit
ruspectand voice with the infinitive in thcsc languages'

However,in thc contextwhich is suitableto pronominal Greek

substitution,suchas in answering (3) English Lattn
the qucstionQuidfecit lottnnds"what did Johndo?", the epainein
strategiesof Englishan4 Latin will (to) Praise laudare
differ. Comparethe answersto this question: cpain6sai (Aorist), ep€ynck6nai (Perfect)
(to) have praised laudavisse (Perfect)
(to) be Praised laudan epaineisthai (Passtvc)
(2) He ran away.
Efligit.
T h e p e r f e c t i n fi n i ti ve r sr e a l i ze d syn th e ti ca l l y'i 'e ''b ym e a n so fi n fl e cti o n si n L a ti n a n d
(Aorist) and
(ircek (in Greek there afe two other infinitives in the passivc:epEvnethdnai
In this case, Latin displays morphorogicar predication,
which may be defineti as a c p O y n a s t h t t i ( P e r |e ct) ,cf.( 6 ) ) b u tb ym e a n so |th e g r a r n m a ti ca l a u xi l i a r yfta ve i n En g l i sh 'Th e
predicationwhich takesplacewithin the systcm ofthe of the gramrnaticalauxrliarybe in English'
Latrn verb. The Latin vcrb, in contrastto oassivcinfinitive is realizetlanalytically by means
 F-

108 AN INTRODUCTION I'O lHE STI,TDY OF MORPIIOLOGY 109

INFI-EC'IIONAL CATIGORIITS ASSO(IIA'I'DD WII H VERBAL L'l-EMITNTS

All theselanguages
allow for the aspectuar Nominal Fllements
contrastcvenrn the passiveinfinitive.
systemmay be porlraycdas a double Thc English
binary opposition:

(4) non-Perfect Perfect

Active (to) praise (to) havepraised
Passive (to) be praised (to) havcbeenpraised

The Latin systemmay be diagrammed

simirarlyand it is of interestto observe
formationin the perfect passiveinfinitive an anary,tic
(whereEnglishhastwo grammatic
al auxiliaies have
and be):
case gender numDer contpailson

(5 ) Infectunl perfectum
Quasi-Nominal Llements
Active laudare laudavisse
Passive laudan laudatumesse

Greekdistinguishesthc perfective (Aorist)

and retrospective(perfect)infinitives (see Paniciplc ( Vcrhal Adjecri r c )
under6.3.3)and realizesall thcscdistinctions rnore
synthcticaily:

(6) Imperfective perfective

Retrospcctivc
Active ePainein epain6sai ep€1,nek6nai
Passive epaineisthai epainethenai erreyn6sthai

gender number case comParlson aspcct

A parallelsituationexistsin the participre
in Engrishand Greek.Englishpossesses four
fomts Qtraising,beingpraised, havingpraisecr
andhaving beenpraised)and Greek six lbrms: Verbal tilements

(7) Im p e r fcclive p e r fe cr ive

Retrospective
Active epalnon epain6sas epeynek6s
Passive Vcrb
epainolmenos epainetheis epEyn€m6nos

Latin docs not possessthe aspcctualcontrast

ofperfectivity in its participial system:lauddns
"praisirg" is an activeparliciple and
rautrdtus.,praised,,its
passivecountcrpart.tsut Latin (and
alsoGreek)hasparticipleswhich havcmodal
meaning.Thc so-calrcdfuture participre (rormed
cunouslyfrom the passivebaseby the suffix
-ur-us:lautla+-ir-us) isusedonly with the auxiliary
e.r.re"to be" in phraseswhich imply 'volition' number tcnse aspect mood r tliec
person
on the part of the speaker.They correspondto
Engfish phrases"going to", "be about ro":
scrtpturussum means,.rintend to write,, or .,r am
going to wnre". FIosEsbeilum irtatirt erant
maybe translated..The enemywere likery to make F'ig. 6.2 Primary and secondary grammattcal catcgorles
wtn"' The so-calledgerundive (forme<tby the suffix
-nd-rs fromthe stem)is a passivepartrcrplc
whosecontextualmeaningsareclassifiableas
follows:
 r

I l0 AN INTRODIJC'I'ION'I'O ]'HE STIIDY OF INIl,lclflONAL CATEGORIITS ASSOCIATED WfrFl VF'RIIAL ILI]MLN fS il1
MORPHOLOGY

(i) the aclionwhich wilr be donein the future(i.e., ( l l )) N om l au darc

the temporarcaregoryol.futurity);
(ii) the actionwhich shourdbe done(i.c., the modal Gen larrdandi
categoryof necessity);
(iii) the actionwhich is underway (i.e.,the 'laudando
aspectuar categoryofprogessivity). Dat
Acc laudare ^ ad laudandunr
The modalmeaningis themostconlmon,for instance
nobtseundumesr.,wehaveto (or.lght Abl laudand6
lo) go", memorionobrsexercendaesr"we have to
train our memory,,, erc.rn hts librts regenits
infinitive is quile
"by readingthesebooks" the third mcaningcan be
cxemplilied. l lreseoblique cascs arc called gerunds (r'erbal nouns) T'l-redative ol'the
pay" (lit I arn not Iup] to
Let us nou'examine the nominal categoriesof participles
and infinitives. As mentronetl r,rr,., il occurs in constructions such as non sun soh'endo "l catrnot
above,inflectionfor gendermay be limitedin participlcs. thc
On the other han< 1, abl al i v e i s qui te c omnl on i n adv erbi al phras c ss uc h as i nl artc rs
Thus in Latin, thc active participre is 1,,r1rrrg).
not in{lectedfor threegenders,whereasthe passiveparticipre, and tleJbssus tllcendo "tired by (from) talking"' As
the future participle a'd t6e 1,r, rt,!t),'by(from) sustaining the injustice"
gerundivearc: the gcrundial phrase verbally (as above)
r,. rrcllrknown, English has the option of constructing
, ,r rl{rrninally "by sustaining ol' the injustice". Latin has an activc option (as above) or a passive
It is of iutcrcst to note that Greck has
(8) PresentParticiple Passiveparliciple Futureparticiplc ,1ttrlt tnitu.i-uferztrlrs',rvhere the gerundive has to be used.
Gerundive
the gerund i tr obl tque oas es '
Masc \ laudat-us laudatur-r.rs rr,rtl ri ngcomparabl c wi th Lati n i ni l ni ti v al i nl l ec ti on by means of
_l laudand-us (gentive tori' dative
fe nr laudhns r ,r()ekinflects its infinitrve sirnply by inflecting the preposed neuter article to
I
"not used to obey" would be
Neuter J -um -um /,,r.. accusative - nominative ro1. Greek uithEs tuti hupakotiein
-um
An example of the dative: NikEson
rrrrrrslatedby the gerund in Latin: ntsuEtus oboetlientlt.
"
Grsek, on thc other hand, inflccts unfailingly ail its six participres,
evcn the presenl ,,rRcn tq, logidzcsthai kalos "Wtt'r over wratl.t by correct rcasoning
participle, for thrccgcndcrs:
tt.3 Secondary Grammatical Categories Associoted with V'erbal Elements
(9) Latin Greek h.\.1 P erson and D ei x i s
Masc l eparnon Thecategoryo|.p ers oni s defi r"rabl er,v i tl rrc fc renc etothc noti ol l o|parti c i pati rrni nthe
*l to refer to her/hinrsclf as a subject of
I em ) la u d a n s eparno0sa rliscourse: the first person is used by the speaker
spoken to about her/hirr-rself;the third
Neuter J epaino0n rliscourse; the second person representsthe listener when
the speaker and acldresseeTcsntcre
person is usc<lto refer to the persons (or things) other tlian
As lar as caseand numberareconccrned,Latin and Greekparticiplesshow ( 1959) introduce<lthe lbuowing terms 1or these distinctions into French structural linguisttcs:
the samenumber
of forms as adjectives.It is astonishingto realizethat all the six participles
of Greek can be
inflectedfor threegenders,threenumbers(Sg, Dual, pl) and four cases. ( 1 1 ) 'o n t i f subjcct ofdiscoursc
It rentainsto demonstratethat the infinitive can be inflected for case.ln 'antiontif its antipode, i.e. addrcsscc
Latin thc syntactic
cases(nontinativeand accusative, calledalsodirectcases)areformally identicalwrth the usual 'anorltif neithcl subjcct nor addrcsscc, i.e. spokctt aboul
form in -are.Englishmay useeithertheinfinitiveor the verbalnoun -ing
in in the functionof the
catcgoryofpcrson (in that
subject:Errare himanfrm est "To err is human" or'.Erring is human".
similarly, English may use The first and the secondpersonarethe positivernetnbersofthe
both forms in the f'unctionof the object:Incipi| scibere "l startto write" t h e y r e f e r t o p a r t i c i p a n tsi n d i sco u r se ) ,u 'h e r e a sth e th i r d p e r so n i sa n cg a ti ve n o ti o n l ti so f
or.,I start writing,'. On
marking for the third personand its
the otherhand,neitherLalin nor English can usethe infinitive in instances
suchars scr[bendt,,art intercstto note that rn many languagestherels no overt
ofwriting". The genitiveofthe infinitive (andothersemanticcases,dativeand m e a n i n g i s g i v c n byth ca b se n ce o Ith cm a r ke r s{b r th e l l r sta n d se co n d p e r so n .C tl n si d e r th e
ablative,called
alsooblique cases)areficrmedllom the verb basein -zdplus the endingsofthe personal cndingsin l urkish.
o-stemmasculine
nouns:
 F

n2 AN INTRODUCTIONTO.t.Hrr 113
S.rt.rDyOF MOl{pilOLOcy INFLBCTIONAL CAI'EGORIES ASSOCIA'lED WITH VERBAL ELITMEN'lS

( 12) S g I gel-iyor-um "I anrcorning" Person

(-iyor: progressiveaspect)
2 -sun "you are coming"
3 -g "he/she/itis coming"

Paradoxicaty,in Englishit is the

negativcmemberof thecategoryof person + definite t dcfinite
ovenly by -s, whercasthe first whrchis marke<l
and secondpersonsare left unmarked. + proxlmate proximate
'
constetations Typologrcally, other r human
of markersarepossibre:(i) markersin I human
alrpcrsons,e.g.,Latin;(ii) no markers,
chinese,Japanese; (iii) first personunmarked,second c.g.,
and third marked.This is a very unusual
pattcrn which may be found in
old Norse: ek katta.,r ca,,, vs.0u
kurur anrlhann karar.
Howcver,in Modem Norwegianthe personal
suffix _r appearsin ali persons.
The third personis distingu'ished from the first and secondpersonsin
many respects.rrrst 'second' 'third'
ofall, the speakerand rhe addressee l i rst'
are necessariry presentrn any discourse;they corncide ,pcaker addressee spokenabout
someonetaiks to himself. while the if
speakerand the addressee arc alwaysgiven,otherpersons
and thingsto which referenceis made
may be absentin both tirne and spacc Fig. 6.3 The categoryof Pcrson
of discourse.In grammaticaltenns, from the situation
the categoryof the third personmay combine
suchas definiteness(definite vs. indefinitc) wrth categories
and proximity (proximatevs. remote). cv-i al-dt-m
hand,pcrsonalpronounsofthe first and on the other
secondp".ron u." nccessarilyonly definite house-ACC buY-PAS'I'-1SG
only proxlmatc(unlcsswe considersituations and typicary
suchas speakingon the tcrephone; here, "I boughtthe house"
theremoteness or-course.
is ofno'-linguistic relerentialcharacter).
Nomrally,pronounsoffirst and seconcl
personreferto humanbeings(unless
rveconsi<ieranthropomorphized or personificdanimalsand 'l'hecategoryof proximity plays an importantrolc with demonstrativepronouns (l/rls vs
things in the world of fairy-tales)whereas
pronounsot'the thir<ipersonn.rayrefer
to both categoryis obviouslydetermined
r/rrrr).'l'his in relationto the speaker(subjectof discoursc)7hi'r
inanimatethingsand animatebeings(human It may be
and non_human). SeeFigure6.3. ,|rtl here arc proxlmatc andthttt anJthere are remotewith lespectto the spcaker'
Let us exemplifythesenotions.we may proximity' Let us
be inclinedto think thatthc contrastsuch
asEnglish obsorvedthat other languageshavc a morc complex three-waysystemof
heisheandil (third persondefinite) versus pronouns:
sonteboclvandsomething(third person Latin, Turkish,and Englishsystcms ofdcmonstrattve
indefinite) is Iuxtapose
utttversal'I'urkish(andotherAltaiclanguages)cannotgrammaticalizethedrstinctronof.sexin
the third persondcfinitc (o refersto both
a male or femalebeing) but it has thc drstinction (14) Latin Turkish Eriglish (dialcctical)
definiteness: of
o "hclshe"vcrsusbr'"someone,,. The
samesituationobtainsin other ranguages, hic bu this this
e g in PlainsCree(Algonkianfarnily):
wtya "y"116",,verstsawiyak,sonreone,,. istc that
Furlhermore, $u I that
tn Turkishthe categoryofdefiniteness
hasto bc markcdobligatorilywith personarpronouns ille o J yon
the suffix -i (personalpronounsare by
definite), whereasthe marking with nouns
whetherthe noun is definiteor indefinite: .epends on
(: "that")
Latinhrc and Turkishbu (: "this") indicatcproximity to the speaker,rs'lcandfil
jcner)
I,ofnotenessllom the speaker, and i.lle and o (: "that", dialectical "yotl", c1-.Gernran
(13) sen-i grir_dii_m
rildicateremoleness fi'ornboththe speakerandtheaddressee. A morc sublledistinctionconncctr:tl
you-ACtC see_pAST_l
SG of old vs. new information (in functional
with three-waysystemshas to do with the notion
"I saw you" when refetringto old informalion,
scnlenceperspective).In Turkish the pronounba is used
rvhereasthe pronoun pa will be used when referring to new information introducedinto
CV al-dr-m tekliJ"thrs
corrsciousness oflistencrs by the speaker.llence,bu hasto be usedin the phrasebr,
house buy-pAST-lSG jusl been mentioned
proposal,,when rel-crringto the aforesaitlproposal,the proposal which has
"I boughta house" tekl(
(old infomration),whcreasifthe speakcrwantsto inlroducea ncw proposalhc hasto saysu
 _r-

tt4 AN INTRODT]CTION TO'i.IIE S'I,LJI]Y VFRBAI' EI-]IMFlNTS 115

OF MORPHOI,OG\ INFI-IICTIONAL CATEGORIIIS ASSOCIIA'l'ljD Wrf]l

"the following proposal",this proposal S I,)nglish S

which he is about r.o mention (new rnfbrmation). Latin
Similarly, in Ancient Greekhotreho /rigos
means.,thefolrowing word,,whereashoutosho
rogos
means"the aforesaidword". 'fhc threemembers
of the systemarc:hoilros,,Lhis,,,
horte,,this,trrat,,
eketnos"that".
'l'radilionally,
personhasbeenrcgardcdasa categoryofthe
verb sincei' flectrvelanguages
it is markedby the personalsuffixes.SinceL,nglish
and spokenFrencharepoor in this rcspect
we may profit from examiningricher morphological
systemssuchas thoseof Latin and l.urkish.

(15) Latin Turkish PRO V

V PRO
Sg I am-o sever_im ..1 urn- -o I love
love.,
2 _As _sin ..you
love,,
3 -at -A ..he/shc
lovcs,, Fig. 6.4 l" Sg derivedtry pronominalization

l-atinandrurkish (andmany other flectivelanguages) finglish S

[.a ti n
in contrastwith Bnglishand French n
do not needanall'ticspecification of the subjectsincetheyrely on morpliologicalprcdication..l.o /\
say"l loveyou" in Latin i1 is enoughIo sayft omo,or
in Turkish"serti severint.rfwe specriythe
/\
subjectby using the independent pronounegd (.orben in I'urkish)the meaning ot-ego /\
te amo V
wouldbe different The speakerin this caseemphasizcs V PRC) PRO
thatHE (or SHE) lovesthe addressee in tttYt
um- -0 I
contrastwith someonewho doesnot love (or hates,etc.)
the addressee. fhis contrast,o|course,
may only be implieda:rdnot realizedlinguistically.Thus
we may translateego E omlertherby
Fig. 6.5 DceP PRO
usmgsententialstress"l loveyou" or by a so-called
cleftedsentence.,I am the one who loves
you" Thelattervcrsiollmightbcpreferablewhenthecontrastisrealizedlinguistically
asinegr)
E amo non.frater tuus "It is I who loves you no1your t|,'\ti Jy.''|ntestl l l onles ' oarhs ,etc .butthi s l epres ents anotherty pc oIdi s c ortrs c ..I-hus ,i ti s
brother!". Given rhesedifl'erencesin not derived from
pcrsonal pronoul)s and other deictic elements as basic,
discoursestrategiesof analytic (English-type)and synthetic |rclbrablc to considcr
(Latin{ypc) languagcs,we may universal and that we cannot lmaglne a
wonderwhethertherearesimilardifferencesin what is called I tleep NP. Let us renrind oursclves that pronouns are
underlying or deepstructurc. It without adjectives or afticles'
seemsthat thcsediff'erences llnguage without pronouns' whcreas thcre arc languages
are herenon-existentsincein both caseswe have to postulate
an
abstractpronominalelenrentPRO (determinedwith respect
to personand number)which is the
subjectof thc vcrb, as shown in Figure 6.4. It might be (t.1.2 Tense
temptingto talk abouta prononrinal 'rhe term tense goes back to the l-atin *'ord lernpns meanitrg"time" (Latin temptts is calqued
element'replacing'the subject(or NP) to obtainmore unrversal
diagramsthan the usualS + time-t'elationswhtch arc
NP+VP,as shorvnin Figure6.5. Since antiquity, rhis terln has been useclfor labelling
on Greek lcftrr.rnr-rs).
as Latin luutlabat "heishe ptaiscd" vs' laudut
However,this would be a controversial exprcsscrJby systematic grammatical contrasts such
proccdure.First of all, pronounsas deicticelements
..hc/shcprai ses,,,orE ngl ts h(I)k l v edv s .l ov e.J ak obs on(1957)c harac teri z edtens eas adc i c ti c
depe'd o' olher elcmentsin discourse.Thc first person
is used by the speakerto refer to
her/himselfasa subiectofdiscourse,the seco'd person cat€gory,(ashi l .ter)w hi c hputs thenarratedev enti nreferenc etothes peec hev ent.S i nc ethe
to refcr to thc licarerwhen spokento ofthe narrated action (or event or state) can be
abouther/himself;on the otherhand,the third personis used time ofthe utterancc is always 'now" the tense
to referto persor.rs
or thingsother (future time), or'simultaneous-\vith-now' (present
than the speaker and hez*er. The repracementof oithcr 'beforc-now' (past tlm(]) or 'after-now'
the subject by pronouns (linguistic
pronominalization), in the realm of what is spoken ti me)'H cncc,thetyp i c al tl rrc e.w ay anal y s i s oftens ew hi c hprel ' ai l s i nmany tradi ti ona]grammars
about is quaritativerydifferent from
assumingthe role o1 the subjecl in discourse.To exempliry ofvari ousl anguages :P res ent,P as t,Futurc .E v ens onrc l i ngui s ts (e.g.J c s pers eni nhi s P hi l os ophy
this statement,it is a normar representativeof the 'natural' division of tirne
procedureto pronominalizein casessuchas.Iohncame , of Grantmar,l929) behcvcd this trichotomy to bc
he came burin I cantethe tirst person that this trichotonty' shown in (16) ts
(subjcctof discourse)cannotbe replacedby the noun../c,in. into 'present', 'past' and 'futurc' It is also noteworlhy
of course,we may sayI, John sntith, 'now" 'bcforc' and'aftcr''
reflected nicely in the system of a<lverbsof time:

I
 -_

r t6 AN INTRODUCTION,TO I'}IE S'N/DY

INFLITCTIONAL CA'|EGORIES ASSOCLATED wITII VIRI].{1. EI-EMLN'l S \1 7
OF MORPIIOLO(;Y

(16) belbre now

;,, r lt'r'tivc and imperlective should no1be confused with perfectum and infectum, tems used by
I'AS1' \r, r(.n(grammalians for similar notions referring to complction of action or process. Thus the
PRESIINT FIJI.URL
| ,rtrrrvolbal systcm may be analyzed along the follou'ing lines:
Thus Jespers'r talks aboul the past as
before-now and thc future as after-now.
prinrarl
distinctions ofthe past and future are then ( 19) A s pec t
subdivided by means ofa secondary application
're
ofthe
notrons'bcfore' (past) and .after' Tense Infcctum Perfectum
future):
P resett{ uttto ami v i
( 17) P ast atttabarn atndv erent
I ttture amdbo atnavcro

PRF,SENT IJ [J ' It_L

'before' ' a lle r ' I here are tlree binary conlrasts in this paradrgm:
'befbre' 'al l er'
plupcrfcct pre-presenl future perfcct futurc
( |) aspectualcontrast: perfect vs. nonperfect. Marking lbr thc pcrl'ect is -v (therc are olher
Thc result is a seventerm notionaltense-system,
which is suitablefor the analysisofthe types of marking for thc samc category, nrost notably -s, and reduplication);
relative aspect(or anteriority) in termsolits Pluperfect,pre-prcsent
and Futurci)erl.ect. (ii) temporal contrast: present time vs. non-present time. Marking for non-present is -b
in thc non-perfect forms arld -er in thc pcrfcct lotms;
6.3.3Aspect
(iii) temporal conlrast: experienced (past) time vs. non-experienced (future) time. This
It is fundamentalto distinguishbetwecntenseand
aspect.Both are concernedwith time conl rast op c ratc sonl y for non-pres el l tl i ntc .
(both aredesignators in Jakobson'sterms)but
in diffcrcnt ways. whercas,as pointetl out above,
tenseis a deictic categorywhich lelatesthe timc 'fhe morphological marking is less oonsistent and may lre best dcnlonslratcd for tlre l'' and
of thc acrron(or cvcnt or statc)to the time of
utterance which is 'now" aspectis concemedwith representing
differentpositionsof the subject .'"'' Clonjugation. Consider the paradigrn ofthc l" Conlugatton:
rvithinEvent rime' Put differently,aspectis concemed
with the intemaltemporalconstituency
ofthe cvcnt (situation-internaltime), whereaslense,
as we saw above,allocatesevent wrthin the (20) Past Future
coverof Universal Time.
S gl arn-a-b-a-m am-d-b-o
Usingverlicallinesto representthe initial and final limits -l-s
of an evcnt,wc rnay discernfive 2 -a-s
positionswithin EventTime:
3 -a-t -l-t
Pll -a-mus -i-mus
(r 8 ) A iB- - . - - - ' - - - - - - - - - - - - - - . . - . c -._..-.--DlH 2 -a-tis -i-tis
Prospectivc Inceptivc progressrve Perfect.ive Rctrospective 3 -a-nt -tl-nt

PositionA represcnts prospective aspect(I wirt wrire,Turkishyaz-uca{-rm);B is

represents In the majority of forms (2nd and 3d sg, lu and 2"d Pl) thc contrast Past vs. FuLure
inceptive (RussianTcv.i-pju"I will drink (: empty atler the marker
the glass)"); c represents progressiveor -4
itlentifiablc by thc contrast vs. -i. These contrastive vowels occur irnmediately
imperfective(I am wriring,Turkishyaz-ryor-um);D reprcsents rather
perfective(Russianja ry-pir,.1 lbr non-present time in the system of the non-perfect aspecl. Traditional grammars talk
drarrk(= emptiedthe glass)"or Greek 'aorist, eJu-s-a,,I tllat tliese are analyzablc.
solvcd"); and E rcpresentsretrospective it
lboutlmperfect and Future cndings -r7svs. -rs';ho'nvever, is obvious
(traditionalperfect:I havewritten or Greekgd-graph-a). may bc
B, c, D positionsrepresentimmanent l'hus the whole Latin system of aspcct and tense in tetms of its morphological markers
aspects(interiorto the event),while A and E represenr
transcendentaspects(exteriorto the ropresentedas shown in Figure 6.6 (thc final -/ marks the 3'd Sg)'
event).
Let us examine some simple exarnples for the values cnumerated above'
It is ofintereslto observethatthe term aspectis a translation
ofthe Russieur
word vld (lrom
videt"'see,view") and it was usedfor the first time in the
analysisof Russianand other Slavic
languages:soveriennyj - perfective andnesoveriennujr)id =
imperfective aspect. The terms

I
 INFLECTiONAI-CATEGoRIITSASS()ClA.IF]DwIl.HVLjltl]A|,F-l-I]]\,{IjN,|S
119
l r8 AN INTRODLICI'ION TO TI{E S'I'UDY OI, MORPHOLOGY

used with specification of

Ir rs rvell-latown that in English the present perfect may not be
hand' the
to say */ have seen lhu! flm ))esterda.)';on the other
f ,,r..rrllilc. Tlius it is irnpossible
to
that Bill is leuvittg is acceptable, although recentl)'refcrs
;rr r fr.t I in I have recenlly learned
the English type of incornpatibility of the perfecl with
,"rrr lx)int of time in the past However.
i ns tanc e,i n S pani s h thc -pc r[-ec tmay c o-
,r,l r,.r5i alol s past ri me i s far from bei ng uni v ers al .For
muerto (Perfecl) ay'e.7... se ha eslrelludct
non-Pcrfect Perfect ,,, r lll with arjverbs of'past time: Guslctvctf'erran ha
-g -v '||||,111(,et.l l osmonl e s rl etttev e..Gus tav oFc rrarrdi c dy es tertl ay .-' hec ras hedl as tni ghtonthe
.llr covcred mountains" (Stevenson, 1970:62)'
'\\
,/\ ,/\ georbc i tet (P erfec t),butttts
S i rni l arl y,i ti sposs i bl etos ay i nGerman Ges ternhabei thv i el
,/\ *l have worked (Perfect) nruch yesterdit.t'''l his restriotion on the co-
,/\ /\ rrrrlrrrssible to say in English
non-Present Present furthcr investigated in a varicty ol'
Present non-Presenl rr(( r|il.enceof temporal adverbs and thc pcrl'ect should be
-b -g -i -er may be exenrplifietl with the following
l,rrrl],uages. The contrast present time vs' non-prcscnt time
n .tm-.Fl um a-v-i-t
,/\ | ,rl l n scntences:
,/\
,/\ (23) Domum suam aedificat
ast Futurc Past Future
"He/she builds/is building (his/her) house"
-a -t -t
am-A-b-a4 am-a-b-i-t am-d-v-er-a-I am-a-v-er-i-t Domum suarn aedificabat
"He/she built/was brrilding (his/hcr) house"
l'ig. 6.6 Latin systemofaspecland tense Domum suam acdificabit
"Heishe will build (his/her) house"
(21) i. Dornun aedificat"hc buildsiisbuilding (his) house"
.l .heretsrroS pacel nani ntroduc tory book onmorphol ogy todi s c us s therv i dev ati ety ofl etrs e-
ii. Domum aedificavit"he built/hasbuilt (his) house"
Ncvcrtheless' we may be interested in cxanlining
;rsl)ectsystems found in drfferent languages'
of
of Latin. contrasted rvith Latin' the system
The first senlence with the imperfective verb aedificat suggests an incomplete event brrctly a rnore complicated systcm than that
aorist, \44lich tnay be analyzed as a perf-ecttve
(sornebody'sbuilding activity takesplace in the very momenl of the narrator'sutt€reulce).
It may Arrcicnt creek exhibits an additional form, called
the rerb /ri o "s ol v e" as an ex rmpl c:
be bcst translatcdinto English by the progressiveform "is building". The event is simply in .rspccl .Lct us use
progressand it will last for sometime after someone'sutterancehascome to an end. On the other
lmPcrlbctive Perfective Retrospecttve
hand,the secondsentencewith the perfectaedificault suggestsa completedevent at the time of (24)
l[-s-o (Futrrre) l6-lu-k-a(Perfect)
the utterance(somebody'sbuilding activity wcnt to its end beforethe narator's utterance).It is Non-past li-o (l'resent)
c-lh-on(Imperfect) 6-lu-s-a(Aonst) e-1e-l[-k-en(PltrPerfect)
usuallysaid that this form (calledtraditionallyperfect) covcrs simultaneouslythe perfective Past
aspectand the presenttime reference;in semanticterms,that it rclatesthe presentstatcto the past
this point, we may considerthe fbllowing pair of Englishsentences:
event.To demonstrate Conrpared\\,iththeLatlnsystemo|twoaspectsandthreetelrses,theCreekparadigmhasto
beanalyzedasconsistirrgol-theeaspectS:theimperlcctivc,pcrf.ccliveandrctrospectivc;andtwo
partialreduplication;the aoristby the suffix
(22) i. I havelost (Perfect)my wallet non-pastandpast.The perfectis fonled by
ronses:
ii. I lost (Preterit)my wallet - 'r . T c m p o r a l c o n tr a stn o n - p a stvs.p a sti sm a r ke d m o r p l r o l o g i ca l l yb yth e o p p o si ti o n o .vs.
a u g m c n t e - ( p l u s tl i i l 'e r e n tp e r so n a l e n d i n g s) .Iti ssu r p r i si n g to se e th e |tr tr 'r r e l i ste d r r r l d cr th e
The first s€ntencesuggeststhat my wallet is still lost, whereasthe secondone wilh the simple pcr|ectivcaspectbutthismaybejustifie<lmorphologrcally,sincebotlrtlreaorisland|utttreuse
past(preterit) may or may not (dependingon the context). This stipulation makesthe perfect a thcsuffix-s(olcourse,withdifferentpersonalendings).onsemanticglotlndsoncmayobsewe
markedform. as was areuedin 3.3. thattlrcperl.ectlvenon.pasteventmustnecessarilyrefertothefuture.Greck-sperformsvery

I
 F_
l
120 An- INTRODIJCTION TO TIIE Si.UDy OF MORpHOLOcy INFLEC'I'IONAL (IATIIGORIES ASSO(]IA l [lD WITH VERBAI. ELI:MH\l
S l 2l I
much the sametask as the Russianprefixesusedto perfectivize Creek aspects
the non-pasttenseand thus rcl'cr
to the future; compareGreekgrup-s o "r will write" with Russianja
ntt-pii-u. The traditional
term aoristis takenfiom Greekaoristos(meaning"unbounded,
unlimited, wrquarified,').we may
best understandthe meaningof the aorist vis-i-vis that of the perfect
and lhe imperfbct.In
Anclent Greekthe aoristdenoteda simplepastoccurrenceofthe event internal view external vielv
wherethe slbject ofEvent
Time is in position D (perfectiveaspect).The perfect,on the olher
hand,6enotedpast cvcnts
rcsultingin the presentstatcwherethe subjectis in position E (rctrospective
aspect).For instancc.
lhe perfectpepoiEketofito could be translated"he has (already)done
this" (1hepast event with
presentrelevance),whereasthc aoristepoidsetoito meanssimply ,.he impcrfective pcrfcctivc retrosPecuve
did this',. If we want to
cxprcssaspectualqualificationssuchasprogressivityor habitualitywe - DiE
haveto use the rmperl'ect \ lrr. " ' --" ' ---- " ' - - " -c- ' - - (Aorist) (Pert'ect)
epoieitotito"he wasdoingthis" or "he uscdto do this". Traditionalgrammars (lmPerf'ect)
maintainthat thc
aorrst narrates the e'ent whereasthe imperfect describes it; more
importantly, both arc
Immanent aspccts,whereasthe perlect in viewirrg the event externally !-ig. 6.7 GreekasPects
is classifiedas a
Transcendentaspect.1'hisis shownin Figure6.7.
It is ofinterest 1oobservcthat the tense-aspect systemofModem Greekis csscntiallythe (2(r) AncientGreekIndicativcand Imperative
same(tn terms of oppositions)even if pcrl'ectan<1future fbrms were replaced 2,d Sg 2tuPl
by ;uralytrcal
lbrmations(theperlectis nowadaysfonnedby meansof the auxiliaryixo,,have',and Indicalive leiPeis
the futurc ] tcip"tc
by da "will"). We may usethe verbpldzo,.play',as an examplc: Imperative leiPe J

ovefi indicationoftense;the pastls

(25) Imperfectrve Perfective Retrospective tt is no coincidencethat the imperativefonrs carryno
Prescnt pedz-o pek-s-o(modal fomr) 6x-o pdk-si r r r | c <j o u l b y t h c | a ctth a ti si n r p o ssi b l e to co m m a n <]so m e o n e to ca r r yo u tso l ]l e co u r se o fa cti o l l
Past 6pedz-a epek-s-a ix-a p6k-si ilrthepast.Theonlytensedistitrctiol$thatmaybcexpresscdintlrcinrperativealethoseofmore
prcsent vs future imperative
Future 0ap5dz-o 0a p6k-s-o 0a 6x-o pek-si antlmore renrotefuturity.The formal contrastof the
rrrrmediate
(A vs' -ga):
is lbund,fbr instancein Latin (-@ vs' to) andHindi
6.3.4Mood
l-raditionalgrammardistinguishesthreemain classesof sentences:
statements,questions (27) Craspetito,dabitur'Nunc abi' (Plautus)
and commands.ln termsof their grammaticalstructure,theseare referredto as declarative, "Tomorrow ask,it will be given' Now go away"'
'I'heterm commandcoversrequests,entreaties,
interrogative andjussive scntcnct;s. demands,
as well as comtnandsin the narrower sense.To avoid confusing these various sensesof l . l r e p r e s e n t i r n p er a ti ve o t- p e te r e ,.a sk',* ,o u l tl b cp e te ;i tsfu tu r cfo r fi p e ti to i n d i ca te sth a tth c
commandsomelinguistsemploythe term mand (e.g.Lyons, 1977:745). In many languagcsthc c o m p l i a n c e w i t h t h cco m m a tr d i sn o tcxp e cte d i m m cd i a te l yb u ti n th c|u tu r c( to m o n o r v'1 .
for tlroseactionsthat arc to bc donc aftcr
difference betweenmands and statementsis realized in terms of the grammatical category of Sirnilarly,in Hindi the futureimperativcwill be uscd
mood. For example,the 2"d Pers Sg imperativcform of the Latin ycrb luudare.,praise'.is somelapseof time. Contrastthe following two sentcnces:
laudaandthe2"dPersSgofthepresentrndicativeis laurtas.ltmaybeobservedthattheformof (l Ii ndi )
the 2"dPersimperativeis a bare stem(: root ldud + thematic vowel -a) with no overt indicalion (28) Bil d-rjie."Give [me] the bill (nght awav)!"
of personor tense.In contradistinctionwith English, Latin marks the person in the plural: Bil dijiega "Give lmel the bill (after a while)!"
luudate"praisc!" (2ndPersPl Imp) vs.laudati.s"you praise"(2,dpers pl Ind). other languages,
e g. Ancient Greck, indicate the pcrson in the plural but show no differencebetweenthe T h c p r c s e r r t i m p er a ti ve w o u l d b e u tte r e d b ya n i m p a ti cn tcu sto m cr w h o w a n tsto l ca \'cth c
may bring the bill at his letsurc'
indicativeand the imperative;(26) displaysthe pertinentforms of the verbleipein..toleave": restaurant, whercasthc futwe imperativcimpliesthatthc wartcr

-'
 -

t22 AN INI'RODTICTION TO 1}IE S'TTJDYOF

MORPHOT,OGY INI;l ECT1ONAI- CATEGORIES,\SSOCIA'I'ID Wnli VERBAI- Ill'l'MF'N1'S 123

As far as the aspectualcontrastsareconcemed,thcsc ( tl ) Mahyam imam (Acc) dehi "Cive me her!"

arepossiblein the imperalivebut aft
not particularlycommon.As in the indicative.Ancient Mahyam iyanr (Nom) diyatam "May she be given 10 mel"
Greekallows for a threc-wayaspectu,l
contrast:Present(: imperfective)_Aorist (: perfective)_perfect
(_ retrospective);cl the ficrms
of the verbleipein'leave'inthe2"dSs: 'fhe suhjur-rctivein thc maitr
Suh.junctivc scntcncesare another subset oijussivc scntonces.
, l,rrr:c is mosl typically used to express rvish and the subjunctrvc in this tunction is called
(29) AspectualContraslsin the Ancient GreekImperative ilptutive. In English we usc the s-less form in the 3'd Pers Sg and in French the
sulrjunctive

In d ica tive lmperative | \\ rl l r()ut{l e):

Present leipeis leipc
(imperfective) "youleave/areleaving" .,leave/bclcavrng!,, ( ll) Lor)g l i ve th e Queen!
Vive la rePublique!
Aortst elipes fipe
(perfective) "you left" ,.lcave!,, I r:,crlwith que in rhe3"r Pcrs, the subjunctive expressesa demand:

Perfecl l€loipas t6loipe (34) Qu'i l ecnve.

(retrospectrve) "you havc lefi" lit. haveleft! "May he w ri tel "

I'Russian wc alsofind the usualaspectuar a polite prohibition:

contrastimperibcrive- perfectivein the imperative: l lsctl with the negatrve particle in the 3'd Pers, the subjunctive expresses

(30) Imperfcctive pij v6dku ..drink

vodka" (35) Qu'i l s ne l e fas s c ntP as
Perfcctive vlpij v6dku "empty (this grassoi) vodka" (lit. haverlrunk) "MaY theY not do it!"

As far asthe categoryof personis concemed,it is implicit in the notionof commandrlgthat ln the 1" Pcrs the subjunctive may express indignation:
the commandis addrcssedto the personwho is cxpectedto carry it out.
In other words. the
subjectofan imperativesentencenormally refersto the addrcssec. However,many languages (36) Que jc vicnnc ir cctte heure'/
posscss a third-person imperativewhich is typicallyusedin a rnorepolite style,since "That I would comc at this hour'j"
the third-
personlmperatrvetypically requiresan intermediaryto transmit
a command.Examplesof the
third-personimpcrativeare availablefrom AncientGreekand Sanskrit; cxpresscs a wcak negative
their forms of the vcrb ljsed with the negatrve particle in the 1" Pers, the subjunctivc
"to carry" are contrastedin (3 I ): pair of sentences:
assertion. Contrasl thc following minimal

(31) 3'Person Imperativesin Ancicnt Grcck and Sanskrit (37) Jc nc sais rien (strong negattve assertlon)
Ancient Greek Sanskrit "l know nothing,"
2"dPersSg ph6r-e bhiir-a "carTy" Je nc sache rien (weak negative assenlon)
3'dPersSg pher-eto bhiir-atu "may hc carry" "I know nothing."

Anotherpieceofevidence that the subjectofa jussive sentencecontainingan whosc full tlcatlncnt bclongs
lmperatlve The sublunctrve rs uscd in a variety ofsubordinate clauses,
docs not have to coincidewith the adtlressee the subjunctive ifthe main clause cotrtains thc verb "to
is suppliedby the passiveimperative.Thus in to syntax. Thus in French we have to use
Sanskritwc havca choiceofconstructingthe commandin the activeor in the passivevorce. w i sh":
the
latterlypically in a more polite style.Contrast:
 124 AN INTRODUCT'iON TO I'}IF, S'I'TII)I.OIr 125
MORI'IIOI-OG'r INF-I,EC'I'IONAL C]A'IIi]GORILS ASSOCIAl'ED WTTH VERBAI- EI,EMEN'IS

(38) Je veux que vous le fassr.ez.

llrc past forms of the subjunctive are used most typically in hypothetical judgements (i.e.,
"I want you to do it."
rlr',,{. lrdgements which are qualified in tenns of possibility). In Latin, lior example, one may
, rrrrtr1st the real wish lcutdet "may he praise" (the present subjullctive) or lautla'erit "ntay hc
'l'he subjunctive
has to bc usea in a variety of subordinate
clauses(finar, consecutive lr,rre praise<1"(the pcrl'ect subjunctive) with the rvish whicl-r is not realizable (irrealis):
conditional, causal)alier their specilic
conjunction:
(.12) Si rne laudarct, amtcus meus cssct (Imperfect)
(39) It estcontenrqueje le lui aie dit.
"If he praised me, he would bc my fricnd"
"Hc is satisliedthat I havetold hirn.,,
Si me laudavisset, ar.nicusmeus fitisset (Plupcrfect)
"lf on'ly he had praised rne, he would have been rny friend"
In temls of r'orphology, Romance ranguages
presentiirll-fiecrgedsub-systemsof the
subjunctivethataretypicallyorganizedas
their indicativecounterpafls.Thusin l.atin we lind the I lr( sccond scntcncc strongiy implics that "he did not praise me"'
contrastspast- non-pastand perfectum
- infectumin thc subjunctive.contrast the non_modar
(indicative)and the modal (subjunctive)
fonns ofthc verbrcuttJare,praise, in the 3,dpers Sg: rt \ 5 l/oice
'l'he term voice (vox) was originally uscd by Roman grammariatrs itt two setlscs: (i) in thc
(40) Latin Modal Fomrs
,,(,nseof 'sound' (translating the Greek phonE "sourrcl"), hence the tenns 'vowel' (from Latin
Indicative lnlcctum pcrlccrum
trtnusvocalis)and 'voice' (the cffect ofthe vibration ofthe vocal cods); (ii) and in the sense of
Present laud-at -avit from
tlre 'form' of a lvord as oppose<ito its 'meaning' (in this sense, the term has disappeared
past _abat _dverat it
rrrodcm usage). 'fhc tcnn has devclopcd a third sense,deriving ultimately liom (ii)' in which
Future -abit -averit 'Ihe Greek lemr lor voice as a category of the
rclbrs to the activc and passive forms of thc verb.
vcrb was diathesis'statc', 'disposition', 'condition'.'l'hc two cxtreme positions in the state of
Subjurctivc 'being acted
;rlTairsexpressedby the preclicateare'acting upoll sollleone' (the active voicc) and
Present Iaud-et - a ve n I rrponby someone' (the passive voice). The middle voice can be thoughl of as being intermediate
Past -arct -dvissel l)otween the primary opposition of active and passive. It is lound most typically in reflexive
the
sentences where the use of the mitltlle voice indicates that the results of the action affect
T'hcSpanishsyslomis similar; herethe parallelisnr middle voice in the
is eve' morc complctcin that Spanrsh agent. We may contrast the active voice in I um u,ushing the huby with the
possesscsthc lirture subjunctive.In contradistinction
with Latin the rctrospectiveforms are reflexive sentence I unt wttshing mltself (ca\led,also 'pronominal' voice)' In some languages the
analytic(fomrcd by thc auxiliaryhaber"have',+ passive
participlern <tdo).The folrowing arc middle voicc rnay also bc uscd in a transitivc sontence with an objcct that is distinct from the
the fomrs of the verb trabujor..work,,in the
3d Se: agent but which typically belongs to the agerlt. Thus in Ancient Greek we rvould use the middlc
voice in louontai "I am washing myself ' (vs. the active voice in loio td tdhrcn "I am washing the
(41) SpanishModalFonns
baby") bur also in louontai tin khitona "l an washing (my) shirt". Here the implication of the
Indicative t-p.rf".tiu" Retrospective mitldle voice is that the action is being canied out by the agent for his/her own interest: ln our
Present trabaj-a ha trabajado case, it affects an object possessed by the agent. Some t'nodem languages have a similar
Past _aba "I am
habia construction, e.g., in French we would use the pronominal voice in both 7e me lave
Futurc -arh habrrl "i (mysell) a shir1"; similarly in Czech
washing rnyscll" andje nrc luve une chemise am washing
a
we would sayumy.vrlmse"l am washing mysclf' andurnyviim si koiili "l am washrng mysclf
Subjunctivc pronoun which can bc
shirt" (se is the accusative form and sl is the dative lorm oflhe reflexivc
Present trabaj-e haya and
uscd in any person). It is ofintcrest to observe that in many languages thc verbs ofsaying
Past -ira/asc hubier:r,iese ths
perception (verba dlcendr et sentiendl occur in middle voice (formally idcntical with
Future -arc the
passivc). These verbs are <liffercnt from typical transitivc vcrbs, such as kill' hil, etc ' in that
 .-

121
t26 AN INTRODUC'I'ION TO TI{E S'fTJDY OI; MORPHOI,OGY tNIll,['C.I.IoNALCATEGoRIESASSoCIA'I.ljDwITIIVERBAI,F),EIvlI1N.fS

voice called verha deponenlia

agentis affectedby the action(the speakernormallyhearshimselfthroughtotal fee4back;the ,,f \ ir(.c can be realized wrth thc vorbs which occur in the mi'Jdlc
Herc the passive participle has als<r
agentofperceiving is ratheran undergoerofperception).Thus in Latin we find the middle voice ,1,lrrrrcnt verbs, (lit. verbs which 'lay aside' cerlain fonns).
the participial tbrms of the transitir c
in loquor "I speak", hortor "r admonish" (called verba deponentia); in Ancient Greck in rlr,,rrreaningof the active retrospectivc participle. contrasl
akrodmai"I listen", theomai"l watch", aisthanomai"I perceive",etc. Verbs indicatrng changc anc lthos e ofthe dc ponent' v erbl oquor"s peak ":
', rl rl rtutl ure"prai se"
of state occuralsotypically in middle voice,e.g. Latin morior "I die", Sanskritmriye..l die,';
Perfectum lnfcctum Perf'cctun.t
Latin nascitur "he is born", s'anskitjavate "he is bom"; Greekgignetai "it becomes". (15) lnfcctum
locluens loclttts
ln termsof morphology,voice diflbrcncesin the verb may be expressed A cti r c l audans
analyticallyby the "hav i ngs P ok en"
"Praising" "s pc ak i ng"
auxiliaryandthe passiveparticipleofthc verb) or synthetically(specialendingsdifferentlrom
the activeones).Englishrealizesthe passivevoicc analyticallywith the auxiliary "be"; in German
laudatus locutus
the auxiliaryiswerden "become"and in Hindijand"go". P asstve
"praised" "sPoken"

(43) Das Buch wird geschrieben (German)

"'Ihe book is (being)written" l .|ri sanomal yi nt heparti c i pi al s y s tc mw as s ol v edduri ngal aterdev el oprrrentofR omanc e
|,rttl l ttagesw hentheaux rl i ary ..hav e' ' + .pas s i v eparti c i pl ei nthenl eani t-tgofthc ac tl l ' e
Yah kirab likhi gai (H i ndi ) r..Il trspeoti veparti c i pl erv as i ntroduc ed.Fl enc c Frc nc hdev el opedtheanal y ti c al parti c i pi al
*huhAns luud'7tun'
l-atin we cannot say
this book written+FEM gone+FEM , t1,,.r"iot u1'anlloui"having praisecl" w'hile in
"'Ihis book is written" l Il |rtncti onal pcrs pec ti v e(c f.under10.3),theus eofthepas s i v ehas todor,l ' i thdi f|erc nt

|||(.scl rtati onsofthes tatc ol ' aft.ai rs des i gnatedby thepredi c ati on.Intl rec as eofthc ac tiw v c' i vthoithe
cc
(A g); i n the pas s i v e v oi c e the s ubj ec t c oi nc i des
Latin and othcr archaicIndo-Europeanlanguagesmay bc usedto exemplify syntheticpassive rl r,,subj ectcoi nci de s w rththe agent
as marking thc entity whiclt
cither case the subjeot f'unction is interpreted
moryhology.(44) lists the forms of the 3'dPersSg in all tensesand moods for the verb lautlijre |;rrrcnt or goal (Go). In
prcsenling the state of al'lairs:
"praise".The fomrs of infectum are synthctic, the forms of perfectum analytic (formed by the rs laken as the pnmary vantagc point for
auxiliarye.sse"be" + passiveparticiple).
(46) Mary (Ag Subj) kissed 'Iohn (Co Obj)
(A g)
(44) Latin PassiveForms:Indicative Jol )n (U o Strbj ) w as k i s s etlhy Mury
Present lauddtur "he is praised"
Impcrfect laudabatur "he was praised" l nthepasstvcS cntenc c ourattc nti oni s rl raw ntothegoal rv hi c hbec onl es thet< l pi c al el ement
Future laudabitur "he will be praised" ()|.thesentence(|ordetai l s s eel 0.3).l ti s i mporl anttorc al i z c thatnotal l l arrguages l rav ethe
YidiJr); thosc
latrguagesin New Grtirlea' Zapotcc'
Perfect laudatusest "he hasbeenpraised" p:rssivevoice (e.g. Chadrc languages, tnany
Pluperl'ect laudatuserat "he had beenpraised" w l ri chhavethepass i v ev oi c edonothav etoreal i z etheagenti v ephras e,e.g.,i rrC l i rs s i c al A rabi c
Future Perfect laudatuserit "he will have beenoraised" l Ircabovepassi ves entc nc ew oul dbel i teral l y trans l atedas J ohnw as k i .s s erl ,k i s s ed-hi mMory ;
whicir have
in colloquial speech,even in languages
lirrthcrmorc, the passive is avoided, especially
Latin PassiveForms:Subjunctive l r|i rl l yproducti vebas tc pas s i v e(c f-.K eenan1985:248).Thus thc mos tnal ural l v ay ofs ay i ng..H e
"They killed him yesterday":
Present laud€tur "may he be praised" was killed ycstcrday" in l{ussian would be
Imperfect laudar€tur "might he be praised"
Perfect (47) Vderd eg6 ubili
laudatussit "may he havebeenpraised"
Pluperfect YesterdaY him killed
laudatusesset "might he havcbeenpraised"
"TheY killed him YesterdaY"

It may be saidthat Latin neutralizesthe contrastofvoice in its participial systemin that the
activeparticipleis imperfectiveand the passiveparliciple is retrospective.However, the contrast
 .r_

t28 AN INTRODUC'fION 1'() THF, S'|IIDY INFI-ECTIONAt, CATEGORI!S ASSOCIAl'ED WITII VL'RBAL ELEMENTS t29
OF MORPIIOT,OGY

Finally'it is worthmentioningthatin many RECOMMENDED READINGS

languagesevenintransitiveverbsarepassivizablt.
1eg', rn Turkish,Latin, sanskrit).For instancc,in Sanskritthe
verb ..togo,,rnaybe foundin botrr
impersonaland personal passiveconstructions:
| ,lflf rc, tlemard. 1976.Aspect:An Introtluctionto the Srutlvof VerbalAspect Cambridge:
t anrbridgeUnivcrsityPrcss.
(48) Maya gramam gamyate lt)85.Tense.Cambridge:CambridgeUnivcrsityPress'
lrINSTR village+ ACC go+pASS+3SC A GreekGranmtar.London:Macmillan'
r r,rrrrlwir, William W. 1894/1965.
f l | w s t r n . J o h n & v i tBu b e n i k.1 9 9 7 .Te n se a n d Asp e cti n In d o - Eu r o p e a n L a n g u o g e s'.Th e o r y',
Maya gr6mo gamyatc t ryn Iogy. Diachrony. Amsterdam:Benjanrins.
J+INSTR viltage r-NOM go+pASS+3SC f lrrflc, walter H. 1g75.Time,Aspectand thc vetb. Qu6bec:Pressesde l'ljniversite Laval'
t,rhrrfrson, Roman.1957.shifters, verbal Categoriesand tlte RussiunVerb.cambtidge,Mass.:
Both versionsmean"I arn going to thc viilage".
similarly, in I-atinwe ,'ay usethe rmpersona/ UniversityPress.
I I ar.,,ard
passrveof"to go" as in (49).
l( \l)L:rsen, Otto. 1929. ThePhilosophyof Gramntar.l.ondon:Allen and Unwin
h(.cnan,EdrwardL. 1985."Passivein the world's languages".LanguageTypologyand syntactic
(49) Sic itur ad astla Descriptioned. by T. Shopen,243 281.Cambridge:cambridgeuniversity Press.
Thus go+3SG+pASS to srars (-'arlWinter'
lr rrrylowicz,leruy. 1964.Inflectional (,'ategoriesof Indo Europearr.lleidelberg:
"This is the way (to go) to the srars."
I rwis, GcotfreyL. 1967.7iu"kishGramtnar.Oxlbrd: ClarendouPress'
I yons,John. 197J.Senruntic^s. Volumes 1 and 2. Cambridge:Can-rbridgc UnivcrsityPrcss'
Matthews,PeterH. 1972.InflectionalMorphology: A Study
Theoretical Basedon AspectsoJ
[,atin Verb Conjugation.Cambridge:CambridgeUniversity Press'
__. 1974. Morphology; An Introtluction to the Theory of lVord-structure' cambridge:
CambridgeUniversitYPress.
Mcillet, Antoine & Joseph venclryes. 1948. huite tle grammaire comparde tles langue-s
classiques.Paris:ChamPion.
'I'hctsnglishUniversitiesPress.
Mitchell,TerenceF.1962. ColloquiolArablc. London:
Moreland,Floyd L. & Rita M. Latirr.
1973.
Fleischer. An IntensiveCourse.Bcrkelcy:University
of Califomia Press.
I'almer,F'rankR. 1965.A Linguisticstudy oJ'theEnglish verh.l'ondon: Lotrgmans.
Schwyzer,Ecluard.1959.Griechische(irammatik.Miinchen:Beck'
Stcvenson, C. H. 1970.TheSpunishLanguageToday'Lon'Jon:Ilutchinson'
'[ csnicre,Lucien. 1959.Etdmentsde synturestructurale.Paris:Klincksieck.
' I zermias,Paul.1969.N eugriec hische Gruntntatik. Bem/Miinchen: Francke.

_l
130 Anv INI'RODIICTION TO lltlr S t.tjDy OF MORPI{OLOCn- INNIiLLClIONAL CATITGORIES ASSOCIAI tiD WLI H VFRBAI. FLE\"lllN'TS l3t

I]XERCISES { \ ) Perf'ect dakara "I have made"

(()) Plupcrfect adakram "l had ntade"
Ntalyzethe whole Ancie't Grcek systemof aspect ( /) Clonditional ak ari s y am "l w oul d mrk e"
alld tenscin termsof its morphologrcal
rnarkers.Use thc lbllowing data:
,\rralyze the aspcctual system ol Modem Hebreu,. considcr the ibllowing lbnns:
(1) Presenl leipo ..I leave,,
(2) Imperfect 6leipon ,,1lefi" ....was (|) dibber "hc/shc has spoken, had spoken, spoke"
leaving,,
(3) Aorist ilipon ..1 (.1) "is speaking, was speaking, speaks habitually"
lefl" nraclabber
(4) Future leipso ..I ( I) yedabber "will spcak, would speak, would be speaking"
will leave,,
(5) Perl'ect leloipa ..I havelcft,,
(6) Plupcrfect eleloipen ,.1had left', ( r) Establish three basic aspectual catcgories.
(l)) Describc their morPhologY.
lising the followingdata,analyzeanddescribethemorphological
make-upof the systemor.
lense and aspectin Hindi. Notc: 'rhe progressiverorms data Be
are built on thc past paruclpre Itlenlify the nrorphemcs marking tcnsc, aspcct and mood itr Spanish in the lollowing
rah-a of Ihe verbrahna..remain,'. ls fomral as possible.

Yerb hond "to be" (I ) trabaja "he/she works"

m€ nu "l am" (2) trabajaba "rvorketl"
mE thA "l was" (:l) trabaj6 "worked" - "has worketi"
me nuga "l will b e " (4) ha trabajado "has workcd"
(5) habiatrabajado "had worked"
II Y erb colna "to go" (6) trabajard "will work"
nrt catta nu "I go" (7) habri trabajado "will have worked"
rnF ialta tha "l wcn1" - "I used to go" (8) trabajaria "would work"
mF dal raha hi "l am going" (9) habriatrabajado "w,ould have worked"
mE dal raha tha "l was going" (10) trabalc "may hc/she work"
mE iala "I went" (l l) traba.ja "w ork l "
mt cala hu l n a ve g o n e
attelnpt to hierarchtze
m€ dala tha r nao gonc rr. ldentify thc morphemes marking tense,aspectand t]rood in ltalian, and
mt calu r may go themi natreetl i agram.N otc :Theaux i l i ary av ere,,hav e,,has l _i nS omc pc rs ons .
mE daliga "l will g o "
(l ) ama "he/she loves"
AnalyzethewholeSanskritsystcmof aspectandtensein terms (2) amr "may he/she love'
of its morphologicalmarkers
Usethe following data: (3) arra "l ov c !"
(4) amera "w i l l 1ov e"
(1) Present karomi "I make" (5) amerebbe "wou1d love"
(2) Imperlecr akaravam "I made" - ..I
was nraking,' (6) amava "loved"
(3) Aorist akarsam "I made" - ..I have made', (7) ha amato "has loved"
(4) I.uture karisyami "l will make" (8) aveva amato "had loved"

I
 t32 AN INTROIJI]CTION'fO.I]IE STI]DY
OF-MORPIIOLOGY INFLECTIONAL CA'ILGORIES ASSOCIA'l'FlD WITII VITRIJAI- ljLllMENl'S I t1

(9) avra amato ..will

have loved" r\rralyzc the Farsi (Modem Persian) systent of aspect, tense, and mood In temls ot lts
(10) avrebbe amato .,would
have loved,, rrrorphological markers:

Analyze the whole Russia'system

of aspect, tense and mood in temrs (l) porsad "he/sheasks"
of its morphologicar
markers. Usc the following data:
(2) miporsad "is asking"
( l) beporsad "rnay hc/sheask"
(l) n esl "l carry" (-1) porsrd "asked"
(2) n6s "carried" (s ) mrporsid "was asking"
(3) nesby "would carry" ( (r) porsidc ast "was asked"
(4) prinesf "will havcbrought" (t) mrpolsrdeast "has beenasking"
(5) prines "havebrought" (tii) miporsidebld "had bccn asking"
(6) prin6sby "rvould havebrought" ( e ) porsrdeba5ad "may he/shehavcasked"'"ifonly hcisiie(had)askcd"
(7) noS[ "am caryring"
( 1 0 ) porsrdebtd "had asked"
(8) nosil "was carrying" (ll) xvihad porsrd "will ask"
(9) bfdu nosit' "will be carrying" ( l 2 ) xvahadporsrdebld "will haveasked"
( 10 ) no silb y "would be carrying"
(l i) prinoSl "am bringing"
(a) Provide traditional labels for all thc fonns, c.g. (6) l'crl'ect
(12) prinosil "was bringing"
(b) Attempt ro hierarchize the malkers identifled in thc lbrnrs abovc itt a tree dtagram
(13) briduprinosir' "will be bringing" organized binarily.
(14) prinosilby "would be bringing,' 'Ihere are lwo fbrms which are difficult to accourmodateiu thc trec. Idcntily them and
(c)
cxpl ai n w h y . (H i nl : U s e the theory of mark ednes soutl i ned i n 3 3)'
S Analyze the whole Lithuanian systcrn of
aspect,tenseand moocl in terms of its nrorphological
markcrs. Use the fbllowine data:
10. t;sing the Word and Paradigm modcl, analyze thc Kurdish (dialcct o1'Suleimaniye) system
of tense, aspect, and mood in terms of its morphological markcrs. [rss the lbllowing data:
(I ) dirbu "I work" -."am working"
(2) dirbau "worked"
(l ) ak6wim "l fall"
(3) dirbdavau "usedto work"
\2) bikawim "if I fall" ^. "let me fall"
(4) dirbsiu "will work"
(3) k6wtim "fblf '
(5) dirbdiau "would work"
(4) ak6wtirn "kePt on falling"
(6) esirdirbgs "have worked" (5) bikawtimaya "would fall"
(7) buvai dirbgs "had worked" (6) kawtriwim "havc fallcn"
(8) bldavau dirbgs "had worked(at intcrvals)" (1) kawlibirl "if I should havc fallcn"
(9) b[siu dirbgs "will haveworked" (8) kawtiblm "had fallen"
( l0) btiiau dirbgs "would haveworked',
(9) (bi)kawtibam "would have fallen" - "ifI should havc fallen"
(l l) buvaubedirbQs "was working" *"1 would have had fallen"
(10) (bi)kawtibamaya
(12) bldavaubedirb{s "usedto be working"
^. (bi)kawtabnmaYa
(13) bnsiubedirb{s "will be working"

consider thc lbllowing data which rvill help you to analyre thc above fonns:

_l
 =F-

t34 AN IN'|RODT-IC'|ION TO THE SI'LJDY OF MORPIIOLOGY lNf LBCllONAl. CATF.CORIES ASSOCIATED WfrH Vtr'RLlAl- llLhNtEN t S I 35

ak6wi(t) '1ou fail" ..letmebe- (s) Cklwe slole"

Qi)bin
Itawti "faller" bu .'lwa'. lr,) €gspse(Aorist) 'haswittd" - "wtC'
abim "l a@' biwin ..thave l'/r exi disi hasdre$ed
becD..
($l ixeedpsi 'hadwriilen'
Ansq the following quesliotu: (e) ixe kl€psi "had stols"
(10) oa€aigrlpsi '\rill hav€witten"
(a) Attehpl to hienrcni@ rhe idotifi€d mdteB for tfls., 6p6t, and ( | r ) 0a ixe di6i "would havedressed"
moodin a rre
diaetumorga.iz.d li@ily. (12) plenete '1s wshed
(b) Povide tadilioml' l.belsfo.(l) (9),e.g.(6) pqf@l. (l.l) 0askot6n.le '\/ill bebeinskilled
-
(c) colmed @ ft€ absdceof bl in (7) ud il3 optiomlity (9) (14) oa di0i "willbe dEsed"
in ed (10).Hinr use I]l.
theoryofmdkedass ouuinedi! 3-3. (15) (e)vleplrtoe 'wd seen"
(d) \ndis hqpered' (non-pmtoiypical) oDrheseq@ceof mart6 in(s)md (10)? (16) slolooike(Aor) hdbedkilled _ laskilled'
(l?) €iiPli0i hasbd w6hed'
II Aralv@rheAncientcreeksysrem ofasp@i,true &rdvoiccin lems otiIs horphotogical (18) ixe skolooi hasbedkilled
mrke.s. Attenpl lo hiffirchi7r thesetrErkd€ in a ree dEgmm.u* lhe toliowins (19) oaiicdi0i rtouid halc beendressed
dala:

(l) ACei "hdshc leads" Answertle following questioN:

(2) esen -ted"
(3) Aksei .\xill lead'. (a) Hiqarchize the iddined markeB for renF, aspect'nd vo'.e n a trce o'asr.6
111 6gagen ts led"- "led" orgmiz.dbidily.
(5) 6ihe(n) ..hast€d'. (b) ftovide lBdidoml' tabelsfor all lhe idcntiii€d vnb to.ds
101 iitt'eir ..hadled, ic) commenron lhe leak'inth€syslcmoftens drd aspcct
(7) ,€et'i "le.ds for hinself'-'ls (beind lat, (d) rrmsl{t€ (20) (29) inio Modm cr€tk:
(8) .seto ..ledfor hjnself' .vas
- Oeins) led,.
(9) ,tsebi 'Vill leadfor himsctf' (20)'bdshewillbcclrryins"
(10) E&6geto h6 ledfor him&tf, - ..lcdfor hioself, (21),,hs$olen"
(11) 6khlai hastedfor hinsetf' - .hasb@nled, (22).wsdressed"
02) ethb 'hadled fd himself'-..had beentod {23) "hs s@" - "sad'
(13) akhhE h6tffited"-.vdled', p4)..wdwashed"
(14) akhthilebi 'willbe l€d- (25) '!ill beseen'
(26) "wonld hlve stolen"
12 usilcthc word bd P@digm model@tlze rhefollowing Modemcrek s)stenl (2D \polld hale beenkjlled"
of iense,
aspect,sd voiceir t€ms oI its horphologicalmrk€B. Note: Read@tullv B. (28) wouldhavesem"
Comne
(1976).Aspe.r(che{itq 4) beforeyou srartwo.king on this s$smenr. (29) 'hd bcenwshed" - wd vashed"

..he./she lemN oi its sorphological

(r) fLi canies,, 13.Anatyzerhe whote Latin systemofdpec! tcnseandnood in
(2) vl€pi '!€es" markenai sy$onarically asyou cd. Urc tre followinSduta:
(3) 0a pl6ni "will t€ washine',
(4) 0a vlepsi '\rill s@" (1) dncir "he/sle leads"

I
 .F

136 AN IN]RODUCTION TO THE STLJDY OI. MORPHOI OGY INFLIIC-|IONAL CA IEGORIES ASSOCIA ItTD Wtl tl VERBAl' ELI:\{EN I S t37

(2) dlxerit "he/shc will have led" I r anslatcthe lbllowing relativc clausesinto Turkish. Use the parliciplcs aud obsen'e the rules
(3) dlc€bat "led" ,rl rorvcl harmony:
(4) dilcat "may lead"
(5 ) ducet " w ill le a d " ( I l ) "the ntan who ought to die"
(6) dhcercl "would/might lead" ( l2) "the wontalt \l'ho is coming now"
(7) d[xit "has lcd" ( I I ) "those who will comc"
(8) d[xerit "may have led', (14) "the men who came/have come"
(9) d[xerat "had lcd" ( l-5) "the women who ought to bc loved"
(1 0 ) d u x i s s e t " w o u ld /m ig h t h a vc le d ' ,
Vocabulary:
t 4 Analyzc the wholc Turkish syslem of aspect, tense and mood in tenns of its
morphologrcal
ntarkers as systematically as you can. Use the following data: 6l - "di e" sev- "love"
ol - "be" adam
(1) geliyorum "I am coming" gel- "come" kadln "rvoman"
(2) gelecektim "would come', va/,- "write" -lar (pluralsuffix)
(3) geliyordum "was coming"
liom the rcprescll-
(4) gelmeliyim "ought to come" I rr ('omrie (191(t:52) notes that the perfcct is an aspect in a scusc dilfcrcnl
"sincc it tclls us nothing directly
(5) gelirinr "come" tatjo' of the intemal temporal constitulion of a situation
rathcr relates some slate to a preceding silttatiou". His rcason
(6) gelmeliydim "ought to have comc" about the situation in itself, but
"given the traciilional tcmrinology in which thc
(1) gelirdirr "used to comc" lbr w.riting a chapter on the pcrfect is that
to deal wrth thc perfcct in a book on
(8 ) geldim "ca m e " pcrfect is listetl as an aspect, it seernsmost convcnicttt
(9) gelecegim "will come" aspect".
perl-ect (as defined
(1 0 ) g e l d i y d i m "h a d co m e " comment on this ciilcmma. I-lint: Distinguisli carcftrlly bctwcen
traditionally) and perfective (as used in modern linguistics)'
l5 Atalyzc the 'Iurkish system of participial forms in tcrms of its morphological markers. IJse
the followir-rg data: /. l vl atthew s(1974 :139)i l l us tratc s thc r:onc epl of' fomal i v eambrgLri ty by mc atrs ofthepres enl
indicative and present subjunctive in Spanish:
(l ) yaz.anadam "the man w,howrites"
(2) yazryorolan adamlar "the men ir,'hoarewriting now." Indicative Subiunctivc
(3) yaztrlar "thosewho usuallyw,rite" Conjugation 1 compro 'l buy' comprc

(4) yazmrgolan adamlar "the men who wrote/havewritten" compras 'You buY' colllpres

(5) yazacakolan adam "the man who is aboutto \,t,rite" compra'he/she buYs' conlpre
(6) yazilryor olan mcktuplar "thc lcttersthat arebcing written"
(7) yazrlrrolan mcktup "thc lctterthat is usuallywritten" Conjugation 2 como 'l eat' coma
(8) yazrlmrgolan mektup "the letterthat was/hasbeen*,ritten" comes 'You eat' comas
(9) ya lacak olan mektuplar "the lettelsthat will be written" come 'he/she acts' coma

(10) yazrlmalrolan mektup "the letterthat ought to be written"

in saying that 'SI'.tRJt]N('TIVIfis an eletlent
Then he wonders: "what is thc poilt '
obviously rve cAN say
in sequencewhich is located in its allomorphs e or rr specilically'l

a
 --

138 AN INTRODUCTION .I'HE

1,O S1'UDY OF. MORPHOLOGY

so if we must.But the traditionalvicw seemsmore reveali'g.

Mood is a calcgoryof rvortls
as wholes,which is idertified by the oppositionsof whole
ste'rs or word-fonns in trie
individualparadigm."
Explain,asbestyou can,these1woviewpoints.Hint: Think of thc two CHAPTER SEVEN
basicapproaches
to the sludy of morphology:the ltern and A'angement modcl vs. thc MOR}HOSYNTACTIC AND TIII]IR I]XPONENl'S
PROPERTIES
word and paradiunr
model.

Sccondary grammatical categories, such as gender and numbcr (see Chapter Five), and
'morphosynlactic'
1,t'rsun, number, tense and aspcct(see Chapter Six) are frequently refcrcd to as
r rrtcgories.Their individual terms (such as Masculine, Singular, Third Person, Pas1,lmperfective)

.rrc called morphosyntactic properties sinco thcy are properties of the word u'l-rich play rolcs
rrr both motphology and syntax.
In the framework of the Word and Paradigm modcl thc clemcnts which identify morpho-
syrrtacticpropcrtics arc called exponents. For instance,in Moroccan Atabic t-ittJ'-tt"you see" the
prcfix t- is an exponcnt ofthe 2ndPers antl the suffix -a is an exponeut ofthe Plural. ln Latin, on
rlrc other hand, exporlcnts of Pcrson and Number arc fused in a suffix wlrich is not analyzablc lor
l l l osetw o propenl es:

(1) Moroccan Arabic Latrn

"you see" t-Suf vid-es
"yc see" t-duFu vid-etis

Examination ofa sufficient numbcr oftypologically divergent languages cnabled linguists

to establish five types ofexponence:

(i ) cunrul ati ve
(ii) lused (originally seParate)
(iii) cxtcndcd
(iv) agglutinativc (non-cumulativc)
(v) overlapping

7.1 C um ulative versus Agglutittative Exportenence

The best examples ofcumulative exponencc can bc found in Ancicnt or conservative lndo-
lluropean languages (Latin, Russian). Iftve examine the norninal paradign ofLatin o-stcnrs it
rvill becorne obvious that there is no exponent which could be said to identify consistently Plural
versus Singular.

_l
 140 AN INIRODLJC'TION TO I'HIi STLiDY
OF MORPHOLOGY MORPHOSYN'l'AC'rtc PROPER'llFS AND'll llrlR EXPONEN'IS r4l

Morphology Semantics Srrrrilarly,in'furkish verbalparadigms,Numberis not fusedwith Personwhereasin I-attn

rt r', l.ot us contrastthe followine vcrbal forms liom Turkishaud Latin:

l)olysemy r -ffil,'.i l;_:i:.il:l (1) ]'urkish [-atln

t ral 5g (@_sl ems)
Sg I gtir-iiyor-um"l see" vid-e-o 'I see"
2 -surr -E-s
Polymorphy
;#ftx;-*," Pl 1
3-o

2
-uz
-sunuz
-e-mus
-c-tis
Fig. 7.1 polysemy and polymorphy in Latin 3 -lar -e-nt

(2) Caseand Nurnberin Latin (o_stcms)

lrr'l'urkishwe may identifuthc pluralmorphenre-zz (in the l" and2"dperson)at'rd-lur in the
Singular Plural r"'l,crson.Surprisingly,the l't PersPl is not the expected*gdr-iiyor-um-uz;
rigidly agglutinative
Nominative serv-us,.slave" serv-i I rrrrrs,however,obtainin possessivc pronounsas shownin (5).
Accusative serv_um serv_6s
Genitive serv_r serv_orum (5) "my hous e" ev-im-iz "our house"
cv-i m
Dalive scrv-o serv_is "thY house ev-in-iz "your house"
ev-in
Ablative serv_6 serv.is
A srnrilarmorphologicalanalysisis simply impossiblefor Latin (cf' 5' l 2)'
In other words, in ['atin, Numbcr is 'fuscd'
with case in the sensethat the rnl.lectional of coursc,we arespeakingof a continuum.The following
As lvith all typologicaldistinctions,
suffixesmark the lexicaritem for a particular an intermediate
cascand a particularnumbersimurtaneously. tlatatrom Moroccanand SyrianArabic may demonstratc that Arabic t'rccupics
A
resultof this situationis polysemyof individual *'
suffixes(whenthc samesuflix marksdifferent rxrsitionbetweenLatin antl Turkishon the scaleof cumulative agglutinativccxponcncc:
combinations ofcaseandnumber)cmdpolymorphy of syntactic
firnctions(whenthecombrnation
of a panicular case and a particularnumber
is marked by different sulfixes in dircrent (6) MoroccanArabic SYrianArabic
declensions). SeeFigure7.1.
Sg 1 n-3uf"I sce" 5[f"l see"
The situationin Turkish is diametricallyopposed
in thatNumber is not fusedwith c_.ase. Bolh 2rn t-Suf t-s[f
numberand casearemarkedby their own exponents
and rn all instancesit is possibleto establish f t-suf-i t-stf:i
the boundarybetweenthem.unrike in I-atin,
Turkishnominarsuffixesare arwayssegmentabre 3rn i-Suf Y-5hf
andconstantlor all nouns;while Latin hasfive pattems
ofdecrension, Turkishhasonly one.This f' t- suf t-5[f
type ofcxponenceis calledagglutinative(or
non_cumulative). PI I n-Suf'-u n-5[f
2 t-iuFu t-S[f-u
(3) Caseand Number in l'urkish
3 i-iuf-u Y-iuf--u
Singular plural
Nominative ev..housc', ev-ler Person(n- - 1"t,/- - 2'r, i- - 3'") and
ln MoroccanArabicit is possiblcto idcntityseparately
Accusativc ev_i ev_lcr_i = : that wc arc dealing with agglutinative
Number (-o Se, -u P1),and we may concludc
Genitive ev-in ev_lcr_in Pcrsu'c aredealingwith cumulative
cxponence.on thc otherhand,in SyrianArabic in the I "
Dative ev-e ev_ler_e (O- - 1'+ Sg,n- - l{ + Pl).
oxponencc
Locative ev-de ev_ler-de
Ablative ev-den ev-ler-den
 F

I na
AN INTRODUCTION TO lHE STIIDY OF'MORPHOI,OGY t43
MORPHOSYN'I'AC]'IC PROPERTIES AND THEIR EXPONENTS

(7 ) MoroccanArabic (AgglutinativeExponence) .,tr,r1rsl l .'1hus

i t ma y be s ai d that i n thi s c as e the rc s ul ti ng I' us ed ex ponenc e i s underl y i ngl y
rggfrrti nati ve.Thec ones pondi ngs ubj unc ti v e l omtv i v ui s "may y el i v e"di s pl ay s aggl uti nati v e
n-Suf-O n-Su1-u r \p,lrr:nce at both levels (underlying and surface). These matters are surveyed in Figure 7.2.
tl rl Arr()ther type of exponence-relationship is that of extended exponence. It is customarily
I'I Sg lil Pl classioal examples are supplied by German plural fbrms
rr l(.rrcd to as double marking.
rrrr,,lvirrgsimultaneous use of the process of umlaut and the sullixation. Consider the lbllorving
(8 ) SyrianArabic (CumulativeExponence)
t ,( ilnlur plural formations:

@-slf n-s[f
>.\\
I' t Sg
>\
l sr Pl
( l o) 'Iag "day"
Vater "father"
Tag-e "daYs"
Viiter "fathers"
Mann "man" Mdnn-er "men"
Iiuss "foot" Fiiss-e "l-eet"
However' in both Moroccanand syrian Arabic, Gender
is expressedidenticailyby two
dilI'erentstrategies:suffixationin the 2ndpers Sg (a vs.-i = Mascvs. Fem) by both
and prefixationin I lrr.rr plural is in<licatedcither by the suffix ( ?Lg-e) or by thc proccss of urrlaut ( trtller) or
the3'dPcrsSg [v- or r- vs' /-: Mascvs. Fem).Thusin both
MoroccanandSyrianArabicmarking q,\!titttter,Filss-e). The latter strategy (cornbining rllorplrological process and suffixation) is in
for morphosyntacticpropertics of Person and Gender is
of an agglutinative character.onc ,r \(.nse'redundant' as the later state ofaffairs present in Dutch and English may indicate.
Thus
observes,however,polysemyof the form tiuf 2d f Masc
- or 3.d+ l.em; this is a consequence I rrlifish relies only on umlaut in distinguishing plural counterpartsof man and./botQnen andfeet,
ofthe fact that prefixationis usedprirnarilyfor markingperson. pre-Old
rr.:'ectively); their plural sulllxes which caused umlaut in the root u'ere lost during the
I'rrgl i shperi od.
7.2 F'used, Extended and Overlapping Exponence
Another example of extended exponence is availablc liorn Ancient Greek which dottblc-
It is more difficull 1odistinguishcumulativerrom fused
exponence.we saw in (4) that in Irrirrksits past verbal catcgorics by thc augrnent and secondary cndings (cf. 6.3.3); sce some
Latin Personand Number arc identifiedcumulatively;in
Latin, ir is impossibleto analyzefurther r('l)fcsentativeexarnples in (1 1):
the suffixesappearingafter the thcrnaticvowel. Now, let
us cxaminc thc marking for thcsc two
propertiesin Spanish.Considerthe followins data:
(I I) l ei p-6 "l l eav e" 6-l ei p-o-n"l w as l eav i ng"
l6-loip-a "l have left" e-le-loip-6-n "l have 1e11"
(9) Spanish
Pl i vivimos .'we live" (cspccrally in
I lrc sccondary suffix carried nrorc 'weight' and the augment could be lcft out
2 vivis
l l onreri c Greck).
3 viverr
Ancl finally, linguists recognize a fifth type of exponence, called overlapping. Strictly
Pl I llamdmos..wccall,'
spcaking,this is lot a ne$,t)?e ofexponence but rather an 'interplay' or 'interdigitation' oftwo
2 llam6rs
3 ll6man
2ndI'crs Pl lndicative

In Spanishviv-is"ye live" the ending-rs identifiesthe form as present

Indicative+ 2ndpers
Pl. However,examiningrhe restof the sameparadigmancl paradigm
the of the r.,conjugation
(llumd-is "you/ye call") we would predict a form *vivi-r^r.
l'he samelorm can be estabhshedon vivis lndicative-i 2"dPersPl -is
thc basisof an Indicative- Subjunctivecontrast(*viviis vivais)butthis 2''dPetsPl -l.i
- fomr simply doesnot ^+' vivdis Subjunctivc-ri
'surface'sinceits occurrcncewould violatephonotactic
nrlcs ofSpanish. (Spanishallows for
vocalicclusterssuchas zo and ao but not for homorganic*ii). Fig.7.2 Fusedexponencein Spanish
consequently,we may treatthe
form vivis as a form resultingfrom underlyingvivi + rs by a regular
phonologicalprocessin
 F-

t44 AN INI'RODUC'I'ION TO THE STI.]DY OF MORPIIOSYNTACTIC PROPER1IES AND l tlIilR EXPONtrN'lS 1,15
MORPHOLOGY

extended exponences. In Ancient Grcek the categories RECOMMENDED READINGS

of aspect, tenseand voice pattemin tlr,.,
fashion. Let us examine the following verbal
forms:
ed. by P . D . S trev ens ,
. rarl cs B . l 96 6. "t,i ngui s ti c ty pol ogy ". F' i v eInaugural Lec trtres
l t,r,,,.l l('l
(12) Active Present lu - e i.,h e so lve s,' ") 49. Londoll: Oxford Univcrsity Press.
D.C : Georgetorvn
Imperfect 6_l[_e(n) ,.he was solving,, r ,,rvr.ll,Mark w. 1964. A Reference Grantnnr of syrian Arubic. washington,
Perfecl l6-lu-k-e(n)..he has sotved,, I lrriversity Press.
y'rablc. washington, I) C :
Pluperfect e_lc_ljr_k_ci(n)..hehad solved,, f f ,rrrclf. Richard s. 1965. A Short Reference Grammar of Moroccan
Mediopassive perfect 16-lu{_ai .'it has becn solved,, ( icurgetown IJniversitY Press
Press'
Pluperfect e_16_lu-fo.,it had been solved,, | , w rs, Ceofliey L. 1967. Turkish Crummar' Oxlbrd: Clarendon
l4/onl-struclure
Nl,rlrlfcws, Pster H. 1974. Morph,logy: An lfltroductiott lo the T'heon'of
The active pluperfcct shows the overlap of markers
for tense, aspect and vorcc in the ( lmbridge: Cambridge University Press' (Chapter 8)'
following fashion:

(13) Active Pluperfect(Arcient Greek)

rerlect
Perlbct Active 3'd S g

The mediopassivepluperfectshowsthe overlapof markers

lor tense, aspect and voice in the
following fashion:

( l4) Mediopassivepluperl-ect(AncientGreek)

Perf'ect 3'oSg Mediopassive

In ( 13), the perfectis markedby the suffix -t andtwo processes(reduplication

of the root and
the shorteningof the root-vowellu r lu).The suffix -t also
marksthe activc voicc vs. medio-
passlve-/ tn (14); hcre the perl'ectis only double-marked
by the two processes ofreduplication
andvocalicshortening.As mentionedabovethe categoryof tense(past)
is arsodouble-marked
at both extremitiesof the word rcsultingin the line crisscrossing
the lines with aspectualmarkers.
consequently,this stateofaffairs may fittingly be describedby the
term overlappingexponence.

I
I
 =F-

t46 AN INTRODUCIION'I'O HE STI JDY OF MORPIIOI-OGY MORPHOS\NTACITIC PROP!.R f lES AND Tl l IllR f,XPON trN'I S 147

EXERCTISES l ';rs( Sg I katabt "l wrote" ktebt "l wrote"

2 (M) katabt ktcbi
Identifyand cxcmplify the lollowing typesof (F) katabti ktebti
cxponence:
(M) katab kteb
(a) cumulative (F) katbet ketbct
(b) fused
(c) extended Arralyze scveral granmatical fonns of the five aspectual catcgorics of Ancicnt Greek (ci
(d) agglutinativc r'.1.3)i n terntsol thei r ex tendedand ov erl appi ng c x ponenc c .Y ou s houl d c ons ul t Matl he\ts
(e) overlapping ( I 974: I 48 - I 49) before working on this question.

2. It is claimed that Sanskritinflectionalendingsshow 1" Sg l " Pl 3't Pl

a considerable
degreeof fusronor
grarnmatical
meaningswhereasthoseofagglutinatinglanguages l 'r'csent l-:
-
[ -o l l -omc n tu-ous l
aretypically courposcdol
a sequcnceof morphemes, with eachmorphcnrecorresponding l nrperl 'cct d -l u-ort e l l -omc n 6-l u-on
to one meaning.Discussthis
statementusing the following data: A rrri st i '-l [-s r c -l [-s a-mc n e-lt-sa-n
I'erfect [6-lu-ka lc-lu-ka-men le-lir-ka-si
Sanskrit F in n ish I'luperfect e-le-hi-k-cn c-le-lf-ke-mcn e-le-Ll-ke-san
Sg Nom glhanr,'housc" talo "house"
Gen grhasya talon l.anguagcs are lrequently classifled into structural types of isolating, agglutrnatlvc,
Loc glhe talossa (Incssive) llective/inflcctional (thc lattcr subdivided into inflected externally and intemally).
Abl glhar talolta
Pl Nom glhani talot (a) Dcfine thcse tluee tYPcs.
Gcn glhanam talojen (h) Demonstrate that this classification is ultimatcly basotl on thc distinction between
Loc grhesu taloissa (Inessive) morpheme and sememe.
Abl ghebhyas taloilta

3. Markrngfor the verbalcategoriesof personand numbcr

in SyrianArabic dilfers from that
ol-MoroccanArabic. nescribeand explainthe foilowing data
in termsof cumuratrveand
agglutinativeexponence:

SyrianArabic Moroccan Arabic

Present Sg I S[f"I sec" nSuf"I see"
2 (M) tsfif tSuf
(F) tsufi tSufi
3 (M) ysnf iSuf
(F) rsrf tSuf
Pl 1 n5uf nbufu
2 tiufu tSufu
3 y5[fu iSufu

I
 .5

MORPHEME AND ALLOMORPH t4 9

,l rrtrrl ruti onal l yl he maj or v ari ant (to us e the P rague S c hool term) of thc pl ural (and the
thus be lavored as most convctricnt for thc
lr,r,,\(.ssivcand thc 3'd Pcrs Sg) morpheme and may
pllrrrr'tic representation of the undcrlying morpheme'
CHAPTER EIGHT variation
l lrc process description (in tcmrs of Gcnerativc Phonology) o1'this allomorphic
MORPIII]ME AND ALLOMORPH /c/
rvhich nt"nt tshwa
,r,rrrltl run along these lines. we havc to postulate an epenthcsis rulc
liicatives
tr.t\\,cc. a stem final sibilant and the suffixed /z/. Sibilants (alveolar and alvco-palatal
+coronal] The
8.1 The Alternation of Allomorphs ,rrr,l ;rl'liicatcs in English) comprise the set of sounds which are l+strident
ol lr'l to lhe
It wasmcntionedin chapterTwo that a particularmorpheme ,,f ( [f rcnce of /s/ after voiceless consonants would be attributed to assir-nilalion
is quilc oftcn represcnted
nor preceding and ofcourse no conditioning would occur after
rr,,rrrralvoicelcssncssofthe consonant,
by the samemorph but by differentmorphsin differenl contexts.'l-hese
alternatercpresentations
of a particularmorphemearecailedailomorphs. one of \ r'r( e(l non-stlidetlt consonants. Schcmatically:
the importanttasksof morphorogy is to
accountfor theseallomorphicaltemations. For instance,theprurarmorphemein English,whiclr
rrr l s l ps + 7l 11rp1+z.l ldog+ z.l
is homophonous with lhe possessive nounsuffix or the verb suffix lor the 3d persSg lndicativc
rs regularlyrepresented Epenthests c
by the allomorphs/sl, lz/ and/ez/:
Devoicing S-

(1) Igle sazl [kretsl [dcgzl

Plural Possessrve 3'dPersSg
/ezl glasses glass's (he) sneezes
thc plural morpheme as the
/s/ cats Ir may be noted that if we hatl chosen the minor variant /s/ of
cal's (he) meets 'fhis
rrrrtlcrlyingform we woukl have to posit a voicing rule. rule would voioe /s/ aller a voiced
/2./ dogs dog's (he) feeds
( r)tts()nant
or vow el:

Thcse thrce allomorphsoccur in three mutuaily excrusiveenvironments.

If the morph /kct I s/ /dcg + s1
representurg (3) /gl c s + s /
thc noun r.'orphemewith which the plural morphemeis combined
endswith J
Epenthesis
7 7
(i) a (strident)alveoraror alveo-paratar V oi ci ng
sibirantrricarrversr,itr, ftr, 12/or a (stndent)
Iglrcsaz] Ikrctsj ldcgzl
afliicale /t/,lj/,the plural morphemeis representedby lez/;
(ii) a voicelessconsonantothcr than the strident/sl, lil, /n/, the plural
morpherneis it is possible lbr a language
represenledby /s/; It may be argued that; is a less common sound than ^s(notice that
in its phonemic inventory) blrt. on the othcr hand, to
(iii) elsewhcrcthe plural morphemeis represented rurt to include any voiced obstruents
by /z/. to be vcry natural given the uuiversal
postulate the final devoicing nrle for English scems
voiceless olle in the same syllable coda' Another
It may be observedthatthe orthographical eonstraint that no voiced consonant follows a
conventionsofEnglish distinguishonly two ofthese (rr and /) such has
ending in sonorants
threeallomorphs,with -s or - r representingboth /s/ and/zr, and,-es , ,s r.casonwhy {z} is preferable to {s} has to do with rvords
or representlng/ez/. 7he of the plural morpheme, the
questlorlariseshow to representthe morphemeunderlying /rr,rrs,srrs, andfrtlts, e//s, If we chose {s} for the representation
thesethreeallomorphs,or, rn othcr do not voice their final s after
u'ords,what is thepho'ic substance voicing rule would have to be made sensitive to other words which
of the underlyingmorpheme?obviously, wc havca choice
bllt
fttenz,l hence fttensl;sins /sln:/ but ince
.s lstnsl;ftlls lfolzl btrtJhlse llolsl ' ells ltlzl
between lsl ;truJlzl Those linguistswho favor the latter altcrnant tt t>rl; hens
rely on the distributional
account;if the contexts(ii) and (iii) as listed abovearc brought bul clsc lelsl.
within the scopeof a nrore 'l'hcre is another lamrhar casc of allomorphic altemation in English which is sirr-rilarto the
systematrcstatementit will appearthat /z/ occursin more environments
than /s/. Sinceall vowels parlic iplc are /cd/' h l and ldl''
ofEnglish are voiced,the environmentofls/ includesonly three voiceless atrove.'l'hc allonrorphs of the re gular past tcnse and past
stops/p, t, k/ and two
voicelessfricatives/fl , /81:on the otherhand,the environmentof /z/
includesthreevorcedstops
lbl,ld, lgl, two voiced liioativcs rv,r6r,threenasals/m/, ln/, rnr two riquitls /ad/ in Petted, Paddcd
/l/, /r/, Iive tense
vowels iil, /ei, /ul, ror, /o/ and three diphtho'gs, raj/, /awr, ojr Itl ki cked,...
.'I'he allomorph /z/ is

I
I
 1 50 AN IN'I'RODUCTION.I'O ]'HE
SI'T]DY 0F MORPHOI,OGY 151
MORPIIEMI AND AI-I-OMORPH

/d/ begged,...
(vi i i ) l ormul ae. l aw ae

The environmentsfor thesethreeallomorphs (r\) cri ses,thes es

can be statedas follows:
( x) indices/indexes

(i) tadt after/tL,/d/;

plural
(ii) /t/ after voicelessconsonantsother than ll is obviously lrue that the plural of ox or goose has the santc kind o1'meaning as thc
/t/: thc
(iii) /di elsewhere. ,rl r.rrl; in a1l these instances rve are dealing with nrorc than oue individual. Horvcvcr, ott
wc are dc al i ng w i th di fferent morphc tttc s c x prc s s i ng thc s attl c Inc atti ttg'
l l r,'i l ()l oB i calsi de.
rr,rrrre ly plurality. Consequently, the equation in (5) holds semantically but not morphologically
T'heallomorphrepresente<.I
by a voicedconsonant only (in this casethe voicedalveolarstop
/d/) provesagainto be a major variant rrrtlrat tlil'ferent morphemes represent the same semantic unrt'
The processdescnptronofthis alionrorphic
hasto work with two phonologicalrules arternation
sirnirarto thoseof the plural morphcme, Mot'Pheme,
namery,the rule (5) Polymorphy:
insertingschwa(epenthesis rule) and the rule of devoicins: ----/
Sememe MorPheme'
:-
\ Morphcmc.,
(4) /pd I dl /ktk+ dl l btg+ d/
Epenthcsis o
cat coose
Dcvoicing
-o* gecsc
cats oxcn
Ipetsdl [ktkt] [begd]
root vowel
wc may concludethat I lrc nouns in (i) do rnI add lazL and lzl but/on/; in addition, the last two changc thcir
{zrrand {d} shouldrepresent
prurarandpasttensemorphemesrn Enelish (ii) a O-suffix. It is notable that the words
,tttl chilcl also adtls -r before -an.The nouns in have
course,
8.2 Morphotogical vs.phonological Conditioning rrrrhis group are the names of edible domesticatedatrd galne animals (fish and birds). of
o!.Allomoryhs
Thc alternationficundin thc suffixcsofthe l l rercaresi mi l arw ords w i l haregul arpl ural :pr' gs , F4oats ,pheas onts ,duc k s -B uti ti s ofrnteres t
plural anclthe pasttensein Englishhas of hunters:
been attributedto the phonologicarshape thus far til note that some have both forms, the forms *'ith thc o-sullix appcaring in thc dialect
of thc precedingnominar or verbal stem. not dcaling
ahernations,which areexplicableon purely such ir larmer who has dur:ks onhis pond nlay go out hunting duck. ht such cases wc arc
phoneticgroundswithout reference in (iii) exhibit a vowcl change
to the notions rvrth plural forms but rather with collectives (see 5.2.2). The louns
of morphology,are saidto be phonologically
conditioned.I{owever,the distribution t l i l ,l aw / a l aj l ,l 5,l ' -r /ei . The nout' tsi tr (i v ) repl ac ethc (Lati n)
of some of vanous ty pes :/u/
{rrrrrl aut)
morphemescannol.be accountedfor phonorogicalry.
In sucha case,it is i'evitable to list thc plural suffix -a /e/. The nouns in (v) replace the (Latin) singular suffix
spccificset of lexemeswith which eachirregular srrrgularsuffix -zrn by the
altemateoccurs.when somemorphemes beside
distributedin this manner,we haveto say arc l.i by the plural suffix -i lall andthe nouns in (vi) keep the (Hebrew) plural suffix /tm/'
that they areconditionedrexicary. this state of
Familiar examplesrnay be found in English. tlrr;rcgular plural in lzl.l'here are vanous terminological problems connccted with
The plural morphemebesideshowingthree pluralizing sufllxes lsl , /zl , lazl'
phonologicallyconditionedallomorphs ;rflairs. If we use the term allomorph indiscriminatcly for all thc
/z/, /s/ and/a;d dispraysalsoseveralother plural
morphemes
pluralizing ttnl,l@1, lel, lajl, lml, it will bccone impossible to statewhat the phonic substance of the
which may be classifiedinto tcn groups:
prefer
rrrorphemcis, sincc only the first thrce arc phonologically related. Consequently,we should
for the
(i) oxen,children,brethren to talk about six differcnt pluralizing morphemes and to keep the temr allonrorph
variants. This admittedly is a somewhat pcdantic lnslstcncc on
(ii) deer,sheep.. .; bass,pike. . .; quail,grouse. lrlronologically conditioned
.. problem is a marginal area of English grammar. what is essential
(iii) geese,teeth,feet,lice, mice,men,women tcrminology since the whole
morpheme of
( rv) rrlier all is the tact that we may identify phonologically the regular pluralizing
data,media,memorand:r,/memorandum s, curricula,/curriculunr
s as exceptional (regardless ofwhether rve
(v) radii, fungi lrnglish as {z} and the residuum has to be considered

(vi) cherubim/chcrubs, tlccide to label /an/ etc. morphemes or allomorphs)'

seraphim/seraphs where il IS
(vii) criteria, phcnomena However, the situationis more complicatedwhen we deat with languages
is found tn
irnpossibleto identify the regular pluralizing morpheme.This state of affairs

I
 -
152 AN INTRODI]C'IION TO TIIE
SI'TJI)Y OF MORPHOI-OGY MORP}IEME AND ALLOMORPI{ r53

languageswhich subcategorize their nounsinto variousinfleclional Plural

classes.For rnstance,it is Semantics
rmpossible to talk aboutregularpluralizingnorpheme
rn Latin without speciSiingthe cleclension
(andgenderand case)ofthe noun'
suchas in the nominativecasco-stcms
take -rifthe noun is
e d_a if t he
m a sculin an
_r,
andthcir
dismrutionloall'es;:::::,ff1i:illlllljllH::j;i:::Jill*il;,",l^j Morphology
phcnomcna'r'hesituationin Syrian
Arabic can be o'tlined arongthe following
iines:

(i) -rn is uscdwith nounsdenotingmaie

human beings:mf'ailenr.,tcacher,, -t mfctilmur
and nrost occupationalnouns of the pattem
C,aCrCraC,:nuiiar ,,carpenter,, t Phonology l'tl /sl lazl
na!!arI n;
(rr) -e is used with nouns enrting
in the suffix -ii or -i: xadorii i.green-grocer,,) Fig. 8.1 Polymorphy and allomorphy in Bnglish
xaduriiyye; Itardmi ..thief ' + haramiyye;
also with many occupationalnouns of the
pattem C,aCrCrACj:sarraf ,,moneychanger,, _,+sarrafe; Semantrcs Plural
(iil) -at is uscdwith femininederivatives:
xar"(matemar)uncle,'+ .rare,,aunt,xarat
and
with singulativcs(see5.2.2):ZaZ..chicken(s),
iaie,.a chicken,,) aaidt,,sonle
cnlcKens.

Morphology
Thereareother subgroupswhich we may
ornit at this point but what is of intcrest ls
the fact
that the suffix -dt is usedwith most loanwords.
This might indicatethat this suffix is the most
productiveoI' the threepl uralizingmorphemes
:

Phonology /e/ /al

(6) babor'.stcamship"+ 6n6o.u,
?amiral..admiral" r ?anriralat
Fig. 8,2 Polymorphy and allomorphy in Arabic
beb€"baby" I bebiyar
tren..train" ) lrenat

Retumingto our theoreticaldiscussion, we cannotcall thesethreepluralizingsulfixes

ol'syrian
Arabic allomorphssincc thcy arenot phonologically
related.For similar rcasonsas in Bnglishwe
may keepthe term allomorphfor a phonologically
conditionedvariantof the morpheme which
obtainsafterpharyngeals -e
or r (e.g.,bahhdr"sairor" t bahhdra.,sairors,,).
Thus in both English
and Arabic we are dealingwith porymorphy
of the plural meaning(one-to-manyrerationships
betweensemanticsand morphology),cf. Figuresg.l
and g.2.
a
8.3 Turkish Vowcl Ilarmony
wc may be intercstedin examininglesslamiliar
examplcsof phonologicalconditioningof
allomorphsthan thoseof thc Englishplural
andpasttcnssmorphcmcs.we saw abovethal
this
particularaltemationwas ultimately re<lucible
to phonologicalassimilatory processes.In Fig. 8,3 Turkish Vowcls
Turkish,the altemationsfound in ailomorphs
of case,plural, and possessive
suffixesare also
 .!F

15 4 AN INTRODUCTION'I'O TIIE S]UDY OF

MORPHOI,OCiY MOR P H E MEA N D A I,LOMOR P II I55

roducibleto assimilatoryprocessesHere the altcrnations "name" "forehead" "measure"

affectvowels and they are liequenll.r, ( lJ) "fcar"
relerredto as vowel harmony. alrn 6l9ii
Sg Nom isinr korku
For the purposesof the following discussion,we have tilgiiYi.i
to classifyTurkish vowelsby thrct. Acc ismi alnt torku)ri
pa irso ffamilia rfc at ur es : lr ont v s . bac k ( i, e, t i, ov s . r , a , u , o ) h i g h v s . altrra tilgtiYe
l o w ( r , r . i r, , u v s . e , o , ( t . Dat isme korkurr
o) and unroundedvs. rounded(i, e, 4 a vs.ri, d, u, o).
we may portraythis three-dimensional
systemasa cubein Figure8'3. The first setofdata in (7) contains
all the caseforms ol-Turkislr I lrtsc lbrms show that our prcvious tentative conclusions were cofttct. inilrt

(i ) the plural sulfix or the case (Dat, Loc, Abl) contain the rrows17.7 vowcl
iitiipreccding
"house" "room" "eye" "friend" wc may simplily (ii),
outr,nr",,',1tunder
is front (/i/, lel,lnl,l6l); fufihernrore,
Sg Nom ev oda g6z dost (ii) the casc (Acc, Cen) contains: the vo'a'el /i/ if thc preccdinguoryjli,ttont utrrounded
Acc evi odayr notice +d"
gcizii dostu (lil,leD;the vowel /r/ if the preceding vowel is back unrounqr.(irr,f)
Gen evin odanr gciziin dostun thc vowel iu" if
t alnt;the vowcl iiV if the preceding vowel is front roundqd,,ii,,.iii'l
Dat eve odaya g6ze dosta the preceding vo'*'el is back roundcd /u/, /o/.
Loc evde odada g6zie dostta
Abl evden odadan gciztlen dosttan Let us use atlditional data for elaboraling on the seqtlence ofnrorp[,r*.rr,,]fhis allonrorphic
Pl Nom evler odalar tltesc forms as
gi,zler dostlar ,rllernation. The possessive suffixes nreaning "my" and "our" canbi addcdl0
Acc evleri odalarr gcizleri dostlarr ,i l r()w nbcl ow :
Cen evlerin odalarrn grizlerin dostlarrrr
Dat evlere odalara gijz.lere dostlara "my house"
(9) evrnl
Loc evlerde odalarda gijz,lerd,e dostlarcla "ofmy housc"
evi mi n
Abl evlerden odalardan gtizlerden dostlardan "our house"
evl ml z
evi mi zi n "of our house"
l C a s e1
The orderof morphemesin this datais as follows: RooT
I pt / case. Thesemorphemes cvlcrim "mY houscs"
are rcalizedby variousmorphs:the prurarsuffix is rearjzed "of my houscs"
by two morphs/ler/ - lar/; the evlerimin
accusative(and genitive) su{fix is realizedby four morphsshowing "our houscs"
the altemationli/ - /r/ - lw - evlerimiz
/u/; the dativc (locativeand ablative)suffix is realizedby "of our bouses"
two morphsshowingthe altemation evlcrimizin
/e/ - /a/; furthermore,if the plural morphemeintervenes
betweenthe lexical rool and the case
eventhe accusative(and genitivc) is realizedby only tw'omorphs 'lny room"
/ i/ - /t/ . So far, the conditionine odanr
lor this distributioncan be expressed alongtheselines: "ol-my room"
odamtn
odamtz "our room"
(i) the plural suffix or the case(Dat, Loc, Abl) containsrhe vowel
/el if thepreceding odanrtzrn "olour room"
vowel is fronl(/el,/ril); elsewhere.it is /a/:
(ii) thc case(Acc, Gen)contains:the vower/ir if theprecedingvower
is row fiont /e/; the odalanm "mY rooms"
vowcl /t/ if the precedingvowel is low back(/'a/);thevowel/iil "of mY rooms"
if the precedrngvowel odalanmtn
is low front rounded/cil; the vowel /u/ ifthe precedingvowel is low "our rooms"
back rounded/o/. odalarrmtz
odalanmtzln "of our rooms"
We necd additionaldatato completeour analysis.Below are
listcd words which contarnhish
vowels(only threecaseswill be nccessary,
thc restofthe paradigmis predictable):
 1s6 AN INTRODUC'IION'I'O 1'HE STIII)Y OF MORPHOI,OGY MORPI II-ML AND ALLOMORPH t5 1

('use i/c

rer<-\___ casci/c
Roo,+P'1< eurri{
\
Root ( I'n., case i/e
\ z t' as er/a
\ n ""{ =
,,.,,1 r ",.,
\ I ' r2- case
( ,a se
'a
Fig.8.4 The sequence
of morphemesin Turkishnouns Fig. 8.6 Turkish two-way vowel harmony

Case i/e +high +high

_.2 Case ile +back +back
P,r ssi{ -round r +round
--.\ u
pl i.- (.ase iie
Case r/a
,--- Case tla i
I' o ss r { +high +high
--'\ pl i- -back -back
Case
Case u,/a 'a -round *round
Case ula
Poss u ( -.2 , -hich I -h i rrh
\ (ase t/a
pl u , +Uict, r-back
Case ii,/e I *round
Case u/e i .:u*. ... I o
I't-rssii (
_.- "
\ I'1, (,ase i i /c
e
-hi oh -high
I.'ig. 9.5 Turkish four-way vowel harmony
-back -back
-round +round
(other forms arepredictable rhusgdztinr"my eye",g6zrerint,.myeyes,,erc.;dostumuz,,our
flriend",etc.).The sequence of morphemes seenin (9) canbe visualizedin Figureg.4.The forms Fig. 8.7 Turkishvowels
which do not havea plural suffix interveningbetween
the lexicalroot and the case/possessive
suffix exhibi*he rype of ailomorphyshown in Figure g.5. ( l0) (r, ii, r, u) (i) (i, e)
This type of allomorphy is frequently '
ret'erredto as four-way vower harmony. tf the prural
suffix intervenesonly two-way vowel
harmony resultsas shownin Figureg.6.we may wish to J i -back I
formarizetheseconcrusions. First,we [+high] f-backl
haveto cxpressthc eightvocalicphonemesofTurkish i,l
as'bundles'ofthree dislinctivefealures: , -rouno l L-roundl C ,,+ C ,,
thisis sh ownirr Fig ur c8. 7.
As we saw above,rhe suffixesundergoingthe four_wayvowcl (ii) (u, oJ
lposs ,,r, { lil } nu._on,
have to agreewith the precedingvower in two features,
namely backnessand roundness(the
featureofheight is irrerevant,i.e.,it doesnot matterifthe preceding I f-bac k l C o+ C l o
vowel is i or e, the vowel
of the suffix hasto be i etc.).Thus in (10) we write the four f-back I ll
rulesof agreementin two features. I lroundl I I t roundl

_t
 158 AN INIRODIICTION TO t.Iilr S.I.UDY OF MORPHOLOCY MORPH E:{E ANI] A I,I,OMORI'II 159

(r.) (t, a) (l) Arabic or French words ending in clear / [l]: e.g. mahstil"produce" lonns its accusative
*rnuhsttlu;
mahsulii,nol according to thc rules of vowel harmony which would givc
-r (l r) A rabi cw ords en< l i ngi n k :i drak "perc epti on"l omrs i l s ac c us ati v ei z /rc l rl ,i ns teadofthe
f+backI
/L-round / f+back I c., + C" _
lll"
i L-roundl prcdicted * idrukt;
(rrr) A rabi cmo nos y l l abi c w ords w i thanrz fi rl l ow edby f$' oc ons onal l ts (thc s c c ondofw hi c h
*
(u) (u, o) is a front consonant): harp "w ar" forms its accusati ve harhi, nol harbt '

words. For
7 1'+backI C,,+ C,, llrr.rr.arc exceptions to the nlles of vowcl harntony cvcn among native Turkish
f+back 1 /l
I+round I / l+roundi fl rl f;l l l fc,thel ol l ow ings i mpl ew ords c ontai trbothbac k andl rontv ow el s : el ma"appl e"' k artl eE
+ "day" -t bugiln
f Irrf lrcr.".Bxamples can also be found among compound words: bl "this" gtin
LJsingthe usual conventions crl'cenerative phonology : buTniifettt+"clticf
wc may collapse these four rules into :r t,tl;ii" (ltilgtirtcan bc hcard sontetimcs), brrq"head" + miifettis "inspector"
s rn g l e r u l e : (': Frenoh)
lor". Many loanwor<ls do not show any effects of vowel hatmony. ntikro|t
rrr.,1rt.t
(< Grcck) "bishop". on the other hand, many
|ne rohe",feribot (< English) "ferry boat"prsftcpos
Arabic rnumkin "possible" >
l,,.rrr\v0rdshave been turkicized by undergoing vowel harmony:
[ ' high] '+ nback C"+C. f rrrl.rslr rmr'irilftirt> nriimktin;French dpuuletre > T'urkish apolel (sce Lewis 1967 lor more
1 c rb a c ik 7 1
l [3 ro u n d .J
/ i Bro u nd] , \iilil1)lcsl.

The suffixes undergoingthe two-way vowcr N.l ll'lorphonology

harmony1tt, 331 nuu" ,o agreewirh the 'l 'frubetzkoy
{ }) l'hc term morphonology was proposed 70 years ago by rubetzkoy ( i 929). For
precedi'gvowel in a singreI'earure,
namerybackness.we may ,i,f,?'r]" folowi.jtwo (distinct from phonology dealing
ruresof. ||r,)rl)honologywas a partlcular section oflinguistic descriptions
agreement: dcaling with thc systctrt of
rrrtlr the system of phonenres and distinct frorn morphology

ttt.trtr|tcmcs)w hi c hs tuti i es themorphol ogi c al uti l i z ati onofphonol ogi c al di ||ererrc es (1929:85).
(t l) (e,a/ ) (e) (r, e, ii, d) "hand" and ruinoi "manual" the
f rr rrsc Trubetzkoy's example, in the Russian words ruka
-l'hesetwo allomorphs are he ld together on
irlIrrDorphs/ruk/ and /rud/ represonl one motpheme.
ihieh I , there are more rnstances
[ -back] l-backJ C" + C., rlrc phonological side by the rcgular alternation ft - f (regular means that
/
] .ou.ai ,.rrclras oko "eye" oinl'j"ocular", kulak"fist" kuluin'i"having to do with the llst") and they are
would rcveal that wc
lrilkc<lto the sante semantic unit (the pemsal of similar numcrolls examples
(a) adjectives fi'om nouns)'
(I, a, u, o) ,rre tlealing with a productive process of the forming of derived
/rud/ represent one morpheme "which exists in linguistic
lv Aecording to Trubetzkoy /ruk/ and
r [+back] / unit". Thus morphophonemes, tn
[+back] C" I Co, t.orrsciousness... in the form ntk/i,where k/i, is a complex
nature, are complex units of two (or rnore)
(.()[trast to phonemes which are of strictly unitary
Thesetwo rulesmay be collapsedinto a single and l(l are two distinct
rule given bclow: lrlrrrrrcmes capable of altemaling in one and the same morpheme. That /k/

;rl rtrrrcmesof R ussianc anbes how neas i l y by mi ni mal pai rs s uc has htma"godmol hc r"v s ' i untti
( 12) v IhaI
'.1rlaguc,,.Fufihermore, it is not thc phonetic context of thc dcrivational suffix -no/ny
r [aback] I [u back] C" + C" - 'clrangcs' the lW of ruka into thc lU of ruin6j, sincc /k/ is rctained in oftno "rvindow"
This of
l,n'r n.i
Lroundl naturc' for exantple'
/
r.oLrrse is not to say that all of thc altcmations k - c' are of a rnotphophoncrnic
in the verbal sct of skukltt' "to sping": 'skukal
rvc arc dcaling with true phonological conditioning
our story would be incompretewithout discussingexceptions ..lre springs" (herc & ri before front vowel
to the rules of vowel harmony. used to spring" vs. skiiei"you spring," skiiet"he
This mea's preparinga list of morphemesafter tbrms of ruki; lor instance, the
which suffixesdo not undergothe changes ,,). A problem, however, ifises if we examine other inllectional
predictedby the rulesabove.Somcexamples
follow.

I
 r
1 60 AN T\ITRODUCTION1'O THE STTIDY
OF MORPHOLOGY MORPHEME AND ALLOMOI{PH I6l

Dat Sg is [ruk'dJwhich hasto be phonemicized

is /ruke/ herethe [k] of { l.l) PenultimateStrcss Antepenuhimatc
Strcss
frukd]arremates with
[k'] of [ruk'6] in the samephoneticenvironmentof the front
vower e (k , k, / _e)..rhis is wh1, fu6co "fire" fu6chi m6dico "doctor" m6disi
some linguists would prefer to consider
even the above artemation of ruka _ ntinoj antico "ancient" antichi m6naco "monk" m6traci
phonologicallyconditioned.This assurnption, as
however,necessitates the introductionofvcrl ligo "lake" l6ghi magnifico "magnificent" magnifici
abstractunderlyingrepresentations suchas /ruk + in + 6jl from which the correct
phonetic fonn albcrgo "hotel" alb6rghi
[ruinriil hasto be deriveaby meansof morphophonemicrures,
bypassingthe phonemicrevcl
ol'representation'Thus more recentrythe
crassicalphonemics/k/ I lrcre are, however, sevcral exceptions 1o these accentual rules. T'he words unrico, nemtco
- tkr - tk'r - [n] antl
morphophonemics(morphonology)
{k} - M - /t/ have been co'apsed in Generative , n.ttty" , porco "pig" and Gr'lcc't "Greek" although accented on the penult palatalizc thc velar
Phonology,which namedrrubetzkoy's morphophoneme
systematicphoneme..r.helatteris a , i!f 15()1ant;on the other hand, stomacrs"stomach" and ctirico "load", although accented on the
buildingunit ofunderrying representations.
Thc undcrryingrepresentation containsonry parr ,rrrttpcnult, do not palatalize their velar consonant bclbre -1.
of the informationaboutthepronunciationof
the morphemestoredrn the lexicon,and the Another typical morphophonemic alternation exists between a voicelcss consonant and its
other
aspectsof pronunciationare determinedby phonological
rureswhich apply to morphemesof the r ,,rr r.tl counterpart. The limiliar cxamples come from English which has thc alternation bctwecn
language.Thus the pronunciationofiruk + +
in si1is detcrminedby at leasttwo phonological | ,rrrtlr'vl in the forms knife/knives, wife/wites,lectf/leaves etc. Here the rnorphophoneme {f} is
rules: the rule which palatalizesand affricates
t before the front vowel i and the rule which r,.,rlrzc<las /? in the allomorph /najfl occurring in the singular, and as /v/ in the allon-rorph lnajvl
subscquently dclctesi after it hastriggeredthe palatalizatron
and arliication: ,'t ( urr-ing in the plural. In German llcl "advice" and Rad "wheel" are both represented
obstrucnts are devoiced syllable-
(13) ;rlrrrrromicallyas lra'.I/(as is well-knowtr, in German voiced
ruk _ in _ tij trrrrrlly).However, this analysis fails to account for the fact that /ra:t/ "advicc" altemates in thc
palatalization/aifrication i grlrrralwith ire:ta/, while /ra:t/ "wheel" alternates with /re:der/. In the second word t is a
deletion @ rrr,,rplophoneme {t} which is realized as /t/ in the singular hut as /d/ in the plural This analysrs
phonctic output
fruin6j] r\ r)l)cnto objections if we want to pay due attention to the tacts of morphology. lf we consider
rlrc whole paradigm of Rad "whcel" we havc 1o conclude that the form with a final itl is a minor
Needlessto say,this type ofanalysiscannot
be consideredas tmly synchronrcanarysisi' r';rli;rntin thar it occurs only in the Nom/Acc Sg whcrcas in thc remaining six Ibmrs exhibiting
termsof 'hereandnow'. The altemation
of k - i in ruka - ruinoj isonry a regacyof.diachrony r'l lixcs -es, -e, -er, -ern the vowel ofthe suffix does not allow for thc devoicing. tsven bcttcr
which cannotbe explainedphonetically
exceptby referenceto conditionswhich have lrurnples woultl come lrom Slavrc languages which have longer nontinal paradigms For
become
obsoletefor many centuries;the derivational
suffix -ln was a produclivesuffix in prehistoric f lrstancc, to insist that the morphophonemic representation of Russian dub
"oak" is {dup}
times(ci Greekphegos "beech"and its adjectivar derivaLive
ph'igino-s)n"r,,. i,,rn fronr vower tl(ussian has the same rule of devoicing voiced obstruentssyllable-finally as Gem-ran)
is strangc
was reducedto schwaand subsequcntly lost in Modem Russian. paradigm contain 6 before a
To use an example from a Romance language. ltrvcn thc facl thal the remaining ten members of the inflectional
Are we dcaling with purely phonogicar t,ow cl Ql ubdGenS g, dubti D ats g,tl uboml ns trS g, tl ubdLoc s g,dubi N onrP l ,etc ).Thus w e
conditioningin the caseof Itali an amico"frend,'famiko]
whoseroot is pronouncedIamri] before rrrly favor process-analysis which would derive a phonetic rcprescnlation [dup] from the
the plural suffix -i? Therearehundredsof words
undergoingthe samechange:mecrico..doctor,,, rrrorphological representation {dub} by means of thc rulc of devoicing b
+ p before word or
medici;civico "urban", civici, etc.However,
Italians haveno difficulty in pronouncrngk In()rphemeboundary. The fruitfulness of this approach may be dcmonstrated by working out a
before
thesamepluralformi'.stonnco"stomach",stomachifstomaki],antico,,ancient,,antichifantiki].
:.6lutionof more complicated data such as the lollowing lrom Latin, I-atin verbs bclonging to the
Since/k/ andr(/ aretwo distinctphonemes
of Itarian,how do we explainthis altemation? l',rconjugation show two allomorphs of the verbal root: one with the voiced obstrucnt /g/ in thc
The
usualexplanationhas to do with the accentpattem
- the words which are accentedon their rrrlinitive and anothcr one with the voiceless /kJ in the passive parliciple:
penultimatesyllable keep their velar
consonants(t g) unchangedbelore the plural
suffix,
whereasthoseaccentedon the antepenurt
show the effectsofpalatalization(c,/). consider (15) agere "act" ectus
thc
lollowine data:
legere "read" lectus
frangere "break" fractus
pangere "fix" Pactus

-)
 :F-

162 AN INTRODUCI'ION TO THE

STUDY O!.MORPHOI,OGY MORPHEME AND ALLOMORPII 163

lngere "create" fictus RECOMMENDED READINGS

pingcre ..paint" prctus
pungerc.-hit" punclus of
\rrrft.rson, Stephen R. 1985. Phonology in the Twentieth Century. Chicago: University
crngerc .'gird" cinclus ('l ri cago P ress .
(Chaptor
lll,rrrrrrllcld, Leonar{. 1935. Language. L.ondon: Allen and Unwin. (Rcviscd cdition )
Given the facl that the form wilh /g/is
a major variantwe may attcmptto account tt).
form with /l</by deriving it frorn underlying for thc
{agrus}. we will needthe rule devoicrngrh€ root_ f rr|rslcr, wolfgang u. 1985. Morphonologt: fhe Dlnamics of L)erivatiott. Ann Arbor: Karotna
final consonantg in the cluster-gt-
and the rule of compensatorytengthening I'rrbl i shers.
for the lossof voice).Furthemrore (compensatrng
somefoms simplify the crusternfu by H. A. 1961. An Introduction to Descriptive Linguistic. New York: IIolt, Rinehafi and
I rfr.;rsrrf.l.
rosing the nasal:nlir
frr' 'rhus the processtrescriptionofthese
- forms can be elaboratedarongtheserines: Winston. (Revised edition.)
llrr'kctt. Charles F. 1958.1 Course in Modern Linguistics. New York: Thc Macrnillan Company
(16)
ag{us liang_tus fing_tus cing{us (('hapters 32-35)-
ClusterSimplification _ @ A lllnrirn, Larry M. 1975. Phgnctlogv: T'heory^antl Anulysis. New York: Ilolt, Rinehart and
De vo icin gk lk k
Winston. (Chapter 3).
Compensatorylengthening
n _ i I r'rvis, Geofliey I'. 196'7.Turkish Grammar. Oxford: Clarcndon Press'
1.
aktus fraktus Ilktus cinktus l \f.rrti net.A ndr6. 1 965. "D e l a morphonol ogi e". Lu l i ngui s ti rl ue l ' 16-31'
Prttgue '
I r rrlretzkoy, Nikolai S. 1929. "Sur la morphonolog re" . Tra.vaux du cercle linguistitlue de
| .85,88.
..Das morphonologische System der russichen Sprache". Travuttx du cercle
1934.
linguistique de Prague. Volumc 5,t'art2.

_t
 F

t64 AN TNTRODUCTION'fO,II{E
STt]DY OF MORP]IOLOGY MORPIIEMI A:.1t) A L.LOMORPH 165

EXERCISES lrr.scribeand try to explainas bestasyou can motphophonemicvariantsof the root in the
l,rlk*ving setsof Hcbreu'nominalfonrrs:
Describethe allomorphyin Sanskritverbal
fonns whosestemconlainsa nasalinfix (i'
presentandtheimperfect):.vu,ri-"tojoin".Therootissecnrnthepassive tlrt
participle:yukrttt
'Joined".

(l) naBi "proPhet"

Present
Sg I yunijmi "Ijoin" Imperfect iiyunajam "my proPhet"
(.1) ncpi?i
2 yundksi iyunak ( l ) na0i?oxcn1 "your (Pl) prophet"
3 yunAkti 6yunak (.{) rlopi'/irr "prophcts"
( 5) napi'lexern "your (Pl) prophcts"
Pl I yulrjmris ayuljma
2 Yunkthri ayugkta tl
3 yulrjdnti ayulrjan
(l) daBir "word"
Describcthe allomorphyseenin thenounswhose "mY w'ord"
ste'r is fbmredby -qn(t)in Vcdic Sanskrir. (l) depan
Monosyllabicnounsareto be takenasa basisfor your "your (Pl) word"
predictionsrcgardingthc locationof (I ) deparx6m
(1) dapanm "words"
(5) diprex6m "Your (Pl) words"
"king" "soul" "eatir1g" ..voice"
Sg Nom rala atma ad6n uik il1.
ACC raJanam e tm a n a m a d d n ta m ui cam
Instr ripa itm An d a d a ta ( l) "ki n g '
vaca m6lcx
Dat r6pc a tn r d n c a d a tc (2) "mY king"
vdce malki
Gen raj.pas a tm 6 n a s a d a td s (l) "Your(Pl) king"
vacds malkax6m
L,oc ralnl atmrini adati (1) "kings"
vaci melaxim
(5) malxdxem "Yourkings"
PI Nom rajanas atminas addntas ui"r,
Acc raJlas atmenas variatiotrin the ficllowtng
atiatas vacas l )escribeand try to expiainas bestasyou can nrorphophonemic
lnstr rajabhis atm6bhis addbhis vagbhis setof Latin verbalfomls:
Dat r6;abhyas atm6bhyas adridbhyas vagbhyris
Gen r'i.31ranr atrn6nam adat6m vac6m l " Sg Perfcct
l " Sg Present
Loc rijasu atmhsu adatsu viksu "tum" ve(i
(l) verto
(2) lodio "dig" lbdl
(a) Startby identifyingthe roots,the stem_forming "Pour" fndi
elementsand the suffixes. (3) lundo
(b) Specifythe distributionof allomorphsof individuals1ems. "break" ruPt
(4) rumpo
( c) Apply the IP
'rodel,
i.e., specify the phonologicaland morphologicalconditionins ( s) Iindir "split" fidi
which accountfor the shapeof the allomorphsof the stems. "split" scidt
(6) scindo
(1) defendo "Prolect" dEf'endi
(8) prehendo "grasp" Prehendt

t
 ._

DERIVATIONAI- MORI'LIOI,OCY 161

Dictionary of Words
Rulesof Word Formation DxceptionFiltcr
All inflectedIorms

CHAPT ER NINE
DERIVATIONAL I\{ORPHOI,OGY

9.7 Theory of Word F'ormation

word formation may be defined as that branch of linguistics Fig.9.l Word formationaccordingto IIalle (1973)
which "studles the palcnrs urr
which a language fbrms new lcxical units, i.e.
words" (Marchand, 1969:2). According r.
Marchand, word furmation is concetned only with PI-AY PlaY,PlaYs,PlaYcd,PlaYing
composites or complcx lexemes (derivati'es
and compounds) and not with simple one-morphemc derivatives replay play, plays'played,playing
words which are the subjcct matter ol
lexof ogy and rnorphology. For instance, simple nouns " PlaYer PlaYers
and verbs such as hruin, birtl utd mttke ca,
be studied morphologically (as shown in Chapters Fivc
antl Six), but not derivationally since
thesewords are not composites. On the other hancl, their ( )hviously,the first proposal,which dc lactoenshrines the grammarin the lexicon,would be
derivatives such as hrainl:(tbrmed by
suffixation) or re-make (formcd by prelixation) or compourrds lrrlllrlyimpracticalin the caseof heavilyflective languages wherethe numberolinflections may
such as bird-bruin may be studietl the
I rilrrrrl()thehundreds(versus5 inflectionsofEnglish, 1 1 inflectionsofFrcnch) Furthermore'
dcrivationally lor their motivatiorr, semantic restriction, etc.
For reasons given undcr 4.1 wc tn
to the lists of cxccpttons
cannot consrder word formation either as a part of inllectional tlrrr.ti0ningof the 'exceptionfilter' (correspondingessentially
morphology or as a parl or.thu the dictionaty
lr,ulrtionalgrammars)is surrounderl by uncertainty.The secondassumptiotl that
lexicon as suggestedby gcnerative-lexicalistssuch as Chomsky (1971))antl
Aronofl-(1976). The of Sanskritand
most obvious counlcr-argument to the ratter hypothesis comcs rilrrstbc organrzedinlo derivational paradigms is nothing new. Diclionaries
fronr polysynlhetic ranguages
(such as Imrktitut or Ainu) where lexicalists have to r\r;rlricwereorganize<.I in rhis fashioncenturiesago.we may examinethe lexicalentryfor barad
store w'holc sentcncesin the lcxrcon in order
which hasnot
to account for'sentencc-words'. lrr.or becomecold" in any traditionalrJictionaryof Arabic (i.e. any dictionary
A n i n t e r e s t i n g a ( i clc wa s d e vo te d to th is p r o b le m b y M. IJal l e (1973),"vho t,r.cnorganizedalphabeticallyin imitationof dictionariesof Europcanlanguagcs):
enteftai nsthc
{bllowing model of the coexistence of morphology and lexology;
see Figure 9. l. However, a
(l) barad "be or beconrecold" (Verb, ClassI)
closer scrutiny of IIalle's article will reveal that Hallc did nor
distinguish clearly between
bard "coldness" (VerbalNoun, ClassI)
inllcctional and derivational morphology (p. 7, "the nrles ofword fomration gcncrate
the infiected
barad "hail" (VerbalNoun, ClassI)
forms"). This conlusion is, of course, a result of hantlling both inflcctional
and dclvational
burud "coldness,frigiditY" (VerbalNoun, ClassI)
morphology by means of an oversized transformational component (or,
in other wotds, ol
barrad "refiigerator" (OccupationalNoun, see9.5)
handling morphology syntactically). Hence, [{alle's attempt to accommodate
both inflectional
barid "cold" (Adjective: Participle,Classl)
and derivational morphology in the dictionary: (i) the dictionary contains only
(and all) lLily
barrad "make cold, cool" (Verb, ClassII = Causativc)
inflected fbrms ofthe languagc, (ii) the dictionary must be organized
into derivational paradignrs.
tabnd "cooling" (VerbalNoun, Classll)
Thus, according to Halle, the lexical enh'ics for WRIT'E and pLAy are
organized along these
mubanid "cooling,refieshing" (Parlicipete,ClassII)
hnes :
?abrad "enter upon the cold season" (Verb, ClassIV)
tabanad "refreshoneself' (Verb, ClassV)
(l ) Inflected Forms
?ibtarad "becomecold" (Verb, ClassVIII)

wRr; *;;o-"u"r,*,,",'i,.i,ing,*rr,,"n
derivativcs rewritc write, writes,wrote,writing, written Actuallythe first informationgiven will be a vowel in the stemoIthe imper|ective:
" writer writers

a
I
4
 -AFT--

1 68 AN INTRODI]CTION I'O THE DDRIVA'I'IONAL MORPHOI,O(JY t6 9

STIJDY OF MORPIIOLOGY

(3) barada
(u, bard r,, tlr(. r'olc of delerminant in a syntagma where the determinatum is a dependent morpheme"
A
I
I
tr r1, I I ). Whcreas in the compoun d steamboat the determinatum was a noun boal, in the derivativc

Pcrfcctive
rl
I

Vowel in the stem

\t,,rnt,t. the detcrminatum is a derivational suffix -er. On thc othcr hand, derivational prefixes
f r,rrr. f tr lre classified as d€terminants; anti- in antifascist detennines thc dctenninatum fascist.
Verbal Noun
of the Imperfective 'l rildrtionally, the area of word formation was treated as consisting of derivation and

r mrpounding. The fonner was subclassified according to whether the derivational affix was
This,of course,is far fiom including
'only (andail) fully inflecredforms, shown in Figure 9 2'
in the dictionary,sirrtr l,r, lrrcrl or suffixed in prefixation and suffixation,
all theselorms wiil haveto appear
in the grammar.Thusthe grammarof
Arabic -.- .rot rts lexic.' ll.wever, as was shown by Marchand (1969:i1), it is possible to regroup this traditional
- contalnsthe informationon
deictic categoriesofperson (1,2 an<t
3) and the category()l r, lrr.rrraby subsuming prefixation and compouuding under oue heading of expansion. l\{archand
number(Sg' Dual and Pl)' All this
seemsto be rathertoo obvious,but let
us recail the fact thrrr rh lrrrr:sthc expansion as "a combination AB in which B is a free motphenle (word) and whrch
themorphorogyoftenseandaspect
is a grammatical(not rexicar)issue
in a varietyofranguages ysable on the basis of the formula AB - B". This means that AB (black-bird, couttter-
r,, ,rrrirf
However, the lattcr (actually the
Aktionsart, i.c., rexicaraspect)has
to be handledin trrt. ,rrl,,.y'i)belongs to the same lexical class to which B (birtl, ultock)belongs. Put differently,
dictionaryin the cascofsravic ranguages.
SinceSerniticlanguagesco,apse aspect , ,[[tx)unds and prefixed words share the 'expanding' of tht' frcc dcterminatutn:
both will appearin the dictronarv: and tensc.

(5) Determinant Detemrtnatunl

(4) barada ( -brud- ) free morpheme free morPheme
++ Compound
btack bird
ll
ll
Perfective I hc stemtll.thc Derivative boundmorpheme fiee morphcme
Impcrfcctive,Aion-past
prefixed word fore see

Similarly' the dictionaryof Russianwill boundmorpheme

haveto list the perfectivecounterpart ot-rhe liec morpheme
"to beat"sinceits lexicalmeaning verlsbit , suffixedword
haschanged:u_bit.,,to kill,,. ktns dttm

9,2 Derivation versusCompounding

Oonsequently, we may wish to keep the term derivativeonly to derivativcsformed by
A derivative (derivedor comprexrexeme) ,,rrllixation(derivingby bound morphernes), as shown in Figure 9.3.'Ihis rcasoningmay be
is a lexemewhosc stem is formed riom
stem (derivationarbasc) by some kind a srnrpler
of morphorogicarmodification (most ,,rrppofledon semanticgrounds. As recogtrizedby traditional grammarians,an important
commonry
affixation)'For instance'the Englishsutfix
-ic derivesdenomi'al adjectivesas i,
tlemocrat t rlrlh:rcncebetweenprefixesand suffixeslies in the fact that the formerhavea distinctmeatlit]g
democratic.A compound, on the other of
hand,is a lexenrewhosestemis fonned by
combining ill thcir own (evcn if they are not usetlas independentwoKls), whereasthe latter do not'
lwo or more stems(which'ray be scparated -I'heprefixesa- and be- to
appear have no distinct
by an interfix (cf. 2.3) as in huntsman).For (.()rrrse,
thereareexceptlons onboth sides. [a]
insta'ce,
bhckbird ts a compouudlexemewhose
stemis formedby combining the adjective
black and the rrrr:aningof their own andto serveonly as meansof trimsferringa word from one lexical category
noun bird.
The formcr derivespredicativeadjectivesfiom intransitive verbs (l[e is asleep) and
t0 rrrrotlrer.
Accordingto Marchanrt(1969:t l) the coining beliUle,
of new wordsproceedsby way of .,combining llfc fatter derives transitive verbs fiom nouns' adjcctivcs and verbs (bespectercled,
linguistic elementson the basisof a determinant/determrnatum grammatically;
relationshipcalled syntagma,,.In Itt,tnoan).on the otherhand,the meaningof suffixesis usuallybestdescribed
termsof semantics,the determinatum represents -t [t is rathcr
that memberof the compositelexemewhich rrrurrysuffixes convert one part of speechinto another,e.g. k.ind kindness.
rs modified or rather'determined'by the
determinant. For instancc,in the composite
rexeme t.xccplional to find a sulfix which modifiesthe lexicalmeaningof its determinant;for instance,
steamboqt thc basic word boat underwent "X" into
a semantic restriction or determination
by the thc,suffix -jsft a<ldedto adjectivesdenoting color changestheir lexical meaning fiom
dctcrminant5'/eam'Marchandusesthe same +
categoriesfor thc analysisof derivativeswhere "ratherX": blue bluish.
dcterminaturn the
is the derjvationalsuffix; in his words,denvatron
is,.the transpositionor.a word

_l
 5

17 0 AN IN.IRODUC.TIONTo THE ST I-DY

oF MORPIIOLOGY DERIVATIONAL MORPHOLOGY t7 1

Word Formation ((r) Englishprefixes:

a- [o] adrift, asleep, awash, a-flicker

a- [er] amoral, asexual
Derivation Compounding ante- anteroom, antediluvian
black-bird anti- antichrist, anti-aircraft
arch- archbishop, arch-enemy
au1()- automobile, autobiography
Prefixation Suffixation be- bespectacled,bcsmear
counter-ailack king_dom
bi- bilingual, bisexual
co- co-operate, co-education
Fig,9.2 Word formation
countel- counter-a1tack, counteract
de- decodc, delrost, dehumanize
Word lrormation
dis- dishonour, disagree
en-,em- ernbed, endanger, enslave
ex-prenller, ex-scFr'lceman
cxtra- extraordinary, extra-mural
Derivation Expansion fore- foreground, forervord, foresee
hyper- hypcr-critical, hyper-sensitrve
in-, im-, il-, it'- inaudible, impolite, illegible, irreligious
inter- intcmational, interschool
S u llixa tio n Prefixaticln Con-rpounding mal- malad.justment, malodorous
king-dom counter-ailack black-bird mislead. misconduct
mis-
non- non-payment, non-exlstent
Fig. 9.3 Word fomation accordingto Marchand
0969) post-war, pos!reformation
post-
9.3.1l,reJixation pre- predate, pre-war (c1. Premature)

Prefixes may bc detined as bound morphemes pro- pro-German (cl. ProPel)

which are preposedto free (or bound)
morphemesAs mentioncdunder 9.2, they re- rebuild, refuel, rcbirth (cl rernain, remotc, t'ccovcr)
function as determinantsof the words (or bound
stems) to which they are prefixed. For instance, seml- semivowel, semicircle
the adjective nuturar may serve as a deter-
minatumin variousderivativessuchasan-naturttl, sub- submadne, subwaY
super-natural aftdcounter-nulurel.TheboLrnd
stemy'er may serveasa determinatumin re-fer, super- supermarket, superstructure
de-fer,md pre-fer.prcfixes un-, super-,countcr-
aretakenliom the list ofEnglish prefixeswhich rans- transalpine, transPlar-rt
rnay be studiedfor their origin and productivity
in various grammarsin English. The rist of productive ultra- ul tra.r' i ol c t. ul l ra-c ons erv ati v e
English prefixes, taken from Zandvoorl
(1966:291-298),is reproducecl u11- unhappy, unkind, unrest' undress' unearth
in (6).
As is well known, almostall productive('living,)
Englishprefixesare of non_Germanic trl
ongin, with thc cxceptionof a- (in asreep),be-,fore-, with both Germanicandnon-Germanicwords Howcvet',this typc
rulrelcasthc restconrbrnes
mis- unrun-;fnr- as in forget andwith_ as Synchronically, arc
lrnguists
inh'ithhold areusually not includcd sincethese ,,trrtlyof derivational
morphologybelongs ratherto diachrony.
words aresynchronicallyunanalyzable.It can be
pretixeswith various lexioal
observedthat negative a-, auto-, hyper-, anrl r.lcrostedin semantrcrestrictionson combinabrlityof various
mul- combineonly with non-Germanrcwords. thc
(nouns,verbs,adlectivcs,advcrbs).Why is it, Ibr instancc'that we may combinc
. Iltss{.:s

I
 I!F-

t7 2 AN IN]RODT]CTION TO TIIE
S'I' TDY OF MORPHOLOGY DEIUVAl'IONAL MORPHOLOCY I t)

prefix/e- with both liee stems

andboundstems(suchas -fer and_zril) lr, ,rrrrrrgfulelement (or more prccisely the clement connectedwith a pafticular sememe) does not
hut the prelix./ore_o'rr
with fi'eestems?Furthenrorc,we
may combinesub- with-mit but'ot lr,rlrl llor.vever,they arc morphemes as distributional elements.
w.ithfer. Tolacilitatetht
study of theserestrictionsringuists
construclvariousderivationar paradigms.
paradigmof the latinateverbsis The fbilowinir
takcnfrom Aronoff(1976:12)and 't | ; ,\ulJixulitttt
it includcsonry verbswhiclr
arestressedonthcstcmsuchas: refer,excrudingverbsstressedonlheprefixsuchas: Sulfixes 1-raybe defined as bound rnorphemes whicb are postposed to liec morphenles. As
the systemof sound purtern o/ Engtish surJbr.(,t
by N. chomsky and M. I{ate this
class ilr.iltioned under 9.2, they function as dctcrminata of sirnple or compositc (i.e. compotrnd or
phonologicallyby the presence rs markctr
ofa specialboundarys),rnbolized 'l'hcir origrn and
as _): free morphcmes: king-dom, color-blirul-ness, clis agree-mertt.
'l'.lr\irlive)
g,r,rlrrctivity may be studied in various grammars of Bnglish or in the study by Marchand (I969).
(7) Derivarionalparadigmof LatinateVerbs
l ,,r Practical purposes, it is important to distinguish betwecn two types of derivalrorr by mcatis
X:fer X-nit X:sume X-ceive X=duce ,,t ,,rrllixation:(l) suffixation on a native base and (ii) suffixation on a lbreign base (also called
refcr remit resume receive reduce l.Jr.rrl.atin base). The fonner method can bc subdivided as follows (Marchand, 1969:215):
defer demit deceive dcducc
prefer presume (if ) Dcrivation by native suffixes (good t gootlness) with no allomorphy
infer
rnduce (lr) Derivation by impo(ed suffixes (lot'e + lovuble) with no allomorphy'
confer commit consumc concerve conduce "' historicit)', dhle I
(c) Derivalion by imported suffixes involving allomorphy: histrjric
transfer transmit lransduce ability.
submit subsume
admit assume adduce I l re l attermethod ca n be s ubdi v i ded as fol l ow s :
pcnnit percerve
extsts ts
(d) The suffix is added to a Latin stem which closely rescrnbles a word that
Aro'offuses this data to <Iemonstrate that neitherthe prefix nor thc stem has
any ,fixcd English: scient- ) scientist (cf. science)'
meaning'.obviousry,this statcmcntis only English
harf-truesincewe may estabrisha .basrc,mearring (o) Tl-re suffix is added to a Latin (or Greek) stem which has no adopted
of someof theseprefixesandboundstems.
It scemsreasonable to assumethatthe basrcmeanlng equi val ent:!i ttgu-.l i ngttul ,c ' hrott.s c ' hroni t' (bul s eec rony ,,anol dc hunr' ' ).
oftrans- is "across,beyond,through,,(transfer..move
from X to y, trunsmit, (make) pass
on/along",trctnsduce "draw across").simirarly, we may sullixes and (ii)
assumcthat thc basicmeaningof _/cr. ,\ rrr6retraclitionaldistinction would be sirnply (i) dcrivation by mcans of native
is"give,bring,send"(confer"give,grant",transfer"sendacross,,, sullixation on either
rtefer.,deray,postpone,,).we rlt.rrvation by means offoreign suffixes - thc lattcr bcing dividcd into
couldproceedalongtheselineswith cerlain synchrony and diachrony)'
otherwords from the char1.Howevcr,this analysis rr;rtrve or foreign bases.(It may be noted that both approachesconrbine
would be impossiblein olher caseswhen resulting grarnmatical category; thus we
the meaningis too abstract;pre.fer,,rikebetter,, Another subdivision of suffixation is based on lhe
obviously difficult to anaryzein this vein. is
verbs and adverbs. Thc list o1'theprotlucttve
Thus we have to assumethat in some cases
thc rrrrryclistinguishsuffixcs dcriving nouns, adjectives,
meanrngof the vcrb is associated
with the wholelexeme.Thereis nothingparticularly (1966:299 122)'
disturbing l'rrrrlish suffixcs shown in (8) was adopted fiom Zandvoort
on this solutionand English offcrs a host
of similar exampresof morphorogicaropacrty..fo
exemplify this phenomenonwith native
words we may try to analyzecompoundsw,ith (8) (i) Suffixes dcriving nouns:
a
determinatum -ben1- sucl-tas cronberry,
strawberrlt, raspberr.1,,bluckherry, bluebern,.
gooseher.' It rs no problem to identify
deten'ninarrtsin thesecompoundsbut therr semantic (a) Pers onal and c onc rete non-pers onal nouns
analysisis anolherproblem.cran- doesnot occur
independently in standardEnglishor in other
compoundsandblackberriescan be greenor emploYee
addressee,
red. Doesanybodyconnect geese andgooseberries
or straw and strawherrie.s?we have to simpry profiteer
mountaineer,
acknowledgethat cran- and simrlar bound
morphemesare semi-morphemic elements hunter,writer. rooster,boiler
since the usual definition of nrorphemeas a -ef

-ess hostess,murderess, actress,lioness

I
 F

n4 AN INI'RODU(]TION TO.IHL 175

STTIDY OF MORPIIOLOGY DERIVATIONAI,MORPTIOLOGY

-t5t vrolinist,copyist,loyalist wooden, carthen

-lte Sybarite,Wagnerite Chinesc, Viennese
-ese
-ster gangster,trickster,songster -esque l)antesque, picturesque
-fold twofold, nanitbld
(b) Diminutives
-ful beautilul, cheerful
-l an Dickcnsian, Shavran, Canadian
-et(te) kitchenette,owler,islet empl-ratic,phoneli o, classic, historic
-i c
-rc/y Annic, Johnny,piggie,doggie classical, historical
-ical
_kin catkin,lambkin -lng amusing, chamting
_let booklet,leaflet,ringlet,piglet -ish Danish, Jewisli, gir|sh
-ling duckling,fledgeling,weakling,gosling -i vc attractive, instructlve
-l ess endless, countless
(c) Abstract and collectivenouns -1i ke childlike, heartlike
-l y lovely, manly, deadlY
-agc mil(c)age,orphanage,drainage,pcrccntagc -ous dangerous, mountainous
-al approval,arrival troublesotne, toothsorne
-some
-(i)ana Shakesperiana,Newfoundlandiana fourth, sixth
-rh
_ance furtherance,ulterance -ward backwar<l, forward, i nward, outward
-ation starvation,sedimcntalion -v noisy, catchY, ernPtY
_cy accuracy,diplomacy
-dom dukedom,freedom,kingdom t i i i ) S u f f i r e sd e r i vi n gve r b s
Jrood childhood,neighbourhood
-head godheail,maidenhead -en blacken,darken,rvorsen
ing bedding,mailing certrfy,salistY
fy
-ism despotism,Calvinism,Americanrsm civilize, organtze
_rr r s
:t:^

appendic it r s
-rty idenrity,visibitity (iv) Suffixcsdcriving adverbs
-ment shipment,defcmrent
-ness drunkenness, foolishness greatly, namelY
-ly
-(e)ry rivalry, chemistry, nursery -ways lengthways,sidewaYs
-ship friendship,scholarship -wtse lengthwise,sidewise

(ii) Suffixesderivingadjectives:
tr.1 ('ompounding
lncliscrrssingthcstatusofcompourrds,lingtListsusuallyrelyonthreecriteria:theunder|1'ing
-able unrcliablcasth(j
breakable,eatable ('onccpt,stressand sp€lling.However,all thesethreccriteriaarenotoriously
(ible) convertible,discernible
r r t . l t t s a l o f v a r i o u str e a tm e n tso fco m p o u n d i n g r n a yd e m o n str a tc.Fo [i n sta n cc,H .Ko zi o l 'th e
-al cultural,musical publishedin 1931in Gcmarl' claitns
,rrrlf rorof the first monographon Englishword formation,
-an Indian, Lutheran ofa combination'obviously' cvcn
tlilt rhc criterionof a compoundis the psychologicalunity
-cd landed,wooded,blue-eyecl functionaspsychological urrtts
,.rrrr;rctic groupssuchasthe Hob RomuncatholicChur<lt nray

-I
 aF-

176 AN INI'RODU(]'fION TO THE S NJDY OF MORPIIOI,OGY DERIVAI IONAI- MORPIIOI,OCY 111

andthusit is extremelydifficult, if not impossible, |,,1r1)()undassumes the fonn of the stem and the second member takcs thc dual lrom (singular
to establisha clearcut distinchonbetwecnir
compoundanda syntacticgroup' Stresshasbeen | ,,|.ri.r,plural fal'D.lt is also notable that at this stage the first membcr of the compound loses
usedasa criterionby Bloomfield(l 935:22g):
"Accordingly, whereverwe hearlesseror leaststress lt,, slrcss (compare English lfcrtinl or ltcrl{nl). More complicated examples to analyzc are
upon a word which would alwaysshow higlr
strcssrn a phrase,we describeit asa compoundmember: pair of groups is to bc denoled; for
ice-crenml'ajs-,kr.ijm/ is a compountl. ;rlrrrlliz.cd coordinatc compounds. They arc fomrcd whcn the
brr ice cream/'ajs 'krijm/ is a phrase,althoughthereis lff\l:rlrcc,uiava.yasmeans "(the 11ockof) goats and (the flock oQ shcep". 'lllogically" they show
no denotativedifferenceof meaning,,.1.hc
criterionofstresswas rejectedby Jespersen (1942:8.12):"lfwestuckto thecritenonofstress. rlrr.stcnt-fom in the first-mcmbcr;md the plural lorm in the second-tncmber (the accent is on the
we shouldhaveto refusethe nameof compoundto trrrrrlsyllable of the second member avis "sleep"). There are other types of relationships which
a rargegroupof two,rinketrphrasesthat are
generallycalled so, such as headmasteror srone rrr,r' lrc lbund in coordirrate compounds. For instance, English hitter-sh'eel means roughly
"swcet
waff,. The spelling is, of course,the worst
criterion,sincesomecompoundsarehyphenated, othersarenot, and othersarespelledwith no n rllr ap a4mrxture or aftertasteof bittcmcss" (OED). Ilere we are no1 dealing with a pail but with
separationbetweenthe constituents,e.g.gold+ail, stonewall, ir ilil\turc of two properties (one being predominant). Sirnilarly, in rcligious terminology God-
blackbi.rtl.pcrhapsthe two-strcssctl
syntactrcgroups(s/one w{Jil, paper bag, etc.) shouldbe excluded rrr,rrr((ienrran Gotrmensch, French llomnte-Diett, all of them calqued o1 Grcck theinthropos)
riom word formation.However,
it is of intercstto note thatmany suchcombinationshave r[''.lcs SolTreonewho is both God and man, i.e., a mixture Of two propertics one bcing
developedforestress(e.g.boyfrientt,
nnnsemant)'Furthetmote,they may be classifiedas compounds in terms such as Hari-Ilttra (Vishnu-
in languageswhrch indulgeirr lrrt.rfrrnrinant).Religious tcrminology of Hinduism abounds
cotrpounditrgmore than Englishdocs.Tlt.;,sSteinmauer"stone ,,lnl\, Artlhanarffvrrra (Hcnnaphrodite Lord) and 5'a4,a-Cundra (sun-moon). The deity known
wall" is classil'iedas a comoouncl
in Germanbut stone wall is rathera syntacticgroup in English. (trident in
,1,I llri-[ lara was representedwith Shiva characteristics tbr the right side of the body
compoundsare usualrystudiedaccordi'g to their membershipin tbr the left side of the body
the partsof speech(as lrr: Irand. snakes on hls arms, etc.) and with vishnu charactcristics
grven by their determinatum):(i) compound nouns (steamboat, on head, and halfofthe traditional V nlark
lr rrrrchshell in his hands, necklace offlowers, cro\4'11
brackbird) (ir) compountl
adjectives(color-blind, hearr-breuking)and (iii) compoundsverbs(outbil, the right
ovedlow, unttertuke). ,rl Visluu on the forchead). Ardhananshvara shows the male characteristics of Shiva on
'l'hcre are also
compound pronouns (mvselfl adverbs (somewhere.), preposrtrons(lirto). ,,llc anrl the fcmalc oncs ol Par,zation the left (accortling to an ancient legend Shiva and Parvati
corrJunctrons (whenever)and intcrjections(heigh-ho).Howevcr,in this being)'
book a differenttype of ,,rrcecngaged in such a violent sexual intercoursethat they merged into one androgynous
classification will bc adopted-'that which waselaborated Hemraphroditc combines malc and female sexual f-eatures in a
centuriesagoby Hinclugrammanans: As is well known, the Greek
the son of l{ermes and Aphroditc grew togcther with lhc
rhllurent way (here the myth tells us that
(i) Coordinatecompounds obviously, the 'notional compounding' differs
rryrrrphSalmacis while bathing in her fountain).
(ii) termrnology
Determinativecompounds(thesecan be of two types-.subordrnate or
dcscriotive) Irorrrculturs to culture. 'I'o take an example lrom a tota'lly different area, scier-rtific
(iii) Possessive whose cap is both
compounds ,rfxrrrrtdsin tcrms such as russzla cvunoxtuttha.which is a "milk-mushroom"
(rv) Syntacticcompounds '',lrrrk-bluc" (Greek kuuneos) and "yellow" (Greek xanthos). The mixture of these lwo colors in
with yellorv spots'
rlrrscasedoes not yicld green;the cap of this mushroom is bis'ically dark blue
9.4.1C'oordinuteCompounds Srrnilar examples could be multiplied from any scientific terminology'
Somecoordinate compoundsare additive. In modernlanguagesthis rclationship rilorphology
obtains More interestlng exantples come flonr languages which do not have dcrivational
most typically in numerals;for instance,rfaurteen js..four" + ,.ten',(we may note that For instance, chinesc fonns its abstract trouns by
on the iilr(l have to rely totally on compounding.
phonologicalsidc thesenumeralsmay be realizedwith doublc strcss/fcftin/ , orrrpountling two adjectives ofexactly opposite meaning (antonynrs):
or single final stress
lfcrtinl)- Hindu grammariansapplie<1 the te.- dvanclvato this typc of compound.This tenr
translates literally"two" + "two" but it means..pair"or.,couple".This .illogicality, rs (9) ta-hsiao literally "big" + "little" "size"
explained
by the fact that in Rigvedic compoundsof this type (ncarly alwaysnamesof deities) ch'ang-tuan "long" + "short" "length"
eachmembcr
of the compoundis ibrmally dual. For instance,mitrd-varuna means,,Mitra and yuan-chin "far" +'hear" "distanco"
varuna,, (: 1r,yi11
deities)and not, as morphologysuggests,*"two Mitras and two varunas" (singular kuei-chicn "dear" + "cheap" "price"
Mitras,
RigvedicdualMitrA). Similally matara-pitarameans"mother and lather"even
if morphologi-
cally we aredealingwith fwo duals.More 'logical' compoundsof this type appearin 'ilrc mental proccss illustratcd by these chincse examples is quitc diffcrent lrom Indo-
tatcrpost-
Vedic documents,for instance,indra-vayu"Indra and Vaya" where the first membcr docs not mean "taste" bttt
of the l,rrrrrpcancoordlnate compounds quoted above. English bitter-sweet

J
 F

17 8 AN INT'RODUCTION TO THIJ MORPI{OLOGY t19

SIUDY OF MORPIIOLOGY DBRIVA'I'ION,{I

"sweet with bitter

aftedaste".on the other hand, a family" (with genitiveja.s, Nom.iru) and dit'i-t'itj
"worshtpptng tn
thesechinese examplesmust be N,,rrrrfi,l),jas-p ati"lordof
figurativcly' more specificallyas iuralyzerr
examplesof metonymy (usually l rr',r\cn" l w i th l ocati v e di r r)
definedas a semantlctransfer
basedon ternporaror spatial contiguity).
This derivationaltype is extremely |)r:scri pti vecompounds w i ththeadj c c ti v c as adc temi nant(thety pebtac k bi rd\arerarei n
Europeanranguages;nevertheless, rare in rn<10- is
some exampresmay be found in
Flindi or persian.For \,rrrskrit:krsnu,lukuni"raven" (lit. "black" + "bird"). Ihis typc ofdetemrinative compounds
lnstance,in the latter I combinations with adjectives
,e.,,and \(.ry common in Germanic languages. In English, here belong
nguratively.,rrarnc,,
,,:::ii,";::;:;;:(:::n:f::i:",:.];;:;:lJll broadside, shortcuke;taste:
,ft.rrtrtingcolor:bluebird, redfsh,blackboard;dimension: Iongboat,
meaning "star"rdingin thc
,tr,.ttlreod, sourdough;genealogical compountls rvith the determinant
9.4.2DeterminativeCon
ryouncls ',,,rrrtcl degreeofances try ordes c ent":grtuul i tther;ethni c names :E ngl i s hnun' l ri s hnatt'
Thercarebasicallyt\\'o tlpes of determinative in all flectrve languages' They have
compounds.A noun may be determined
by Specific morphological problcms in compounding appear
an adjcctiveas in btackbirtr.Similarly, analytic during their history and
adjectivesmay be determinedby thc rrr tlo with the fact that many flective languages bccamc
tn color-blind or thcy may be determined stemor.a noun as
glamlnaf in the analysis of compotrnds'
by anotheradjectiveas in ic1,_colcl.In
traditional |,|ltscquently it is hard to use the terminology of the case
grammarsthe first type is calred of the type craJismen whcrc
subordinate(depcndent).on,'oouno,,t" I frrs problem is rathcr margrnal in English rvhich has few compounds
descriptive compound lt is possible secondlype
to classify subordinatccompountls in modem English this type is not producttve,
accordingto the r lc;lresents the old gcnitivc ending. |lowever,
grantmaticalmeaningwhich the
determinanthas at the level of the undcrlying r,.al ffonnati onssuch as hnnl s nutn,k i ngs manetc .w erefbmredi nprev i ous c enturi es B uttn
lnstance'thefbllowingthreecompound sentence.For
conrpounds
adjectives arequitedifferentat the levelofthe underlying ( r(.illtanthis problem is morc scrious. on thc one hantl, we fitrd parts of subordinate
sentence:heart-break-ing,easy-goittg (Cotlesdiensl "divine service" vs'
andnran-matre.The first one refers to trre rrrr.lras l/o/hsfti.,rde "folklore" vs. Viilkerkunde
"ethnography"
sentence: objcct ofthc (of
griefbroke his heart -, heart-breaking Ltinderkunde "regional geography
grief;thcsecond one is basedon an adverbiar t;t;ilcr(licnsl"i<lolatry"; Landeskuncle"areal studies" vs.
phrase,and the third one refersto ri er. This might irlply that speakers of
the subjectofthe underlyingsenrcnce: rlrllcrcnt countries),'wrth the opposition (e).svs.
mctnmadethe hut ,
man-madehut' 'r'hcreare dilrerentrelationships
in combinationssuchas color-blinclorg.r.rrs (t(.||l l ansti l l i denti fythes c s uf|rx es onthedetermi nantofthec ompoundw i ththec as eendi ngs
green' The first o'c is paraphrasable "brind
as with regardto color,,,or possibly ..hedoes
colors"whereastrreotherone is bascdon not scc ''Il hcgeni ti V esi ngularv s .thc geni ti v epl ural .l { ow ev er,thes eex ampl es arei s ol atedandi ti s
the comparison..asgreenasgrassis green,,. we woultl postulate a genitive plural: fbr
This type il)oro colnmoll to find -s- in environments where
ofanalysiswas elaboratedcenturiesago "bishops' conl'erence" (not
in Ancicnl India for Sanskritby panini and tlr\fafrce,we find Bi.schoJiniitze"rnitre" but also BischofskonJbranz
his follorvers.
SinceSanskritis heaviryflectivethey described ettv i rotrtttc w l l c rc w c noLtl d pos tul atc
nts
subordinate compounds(cared tat_purusa,rtt. ,z ). thc otl rerhund. ( )/- oc c ursi n
,tl t.s,.hci Ji ,konJetc on
his man) by identifying the case function of a child", Hiihnerkeule "cl-ricken lcg" etc'
the detenninantwor.rldhave at thc lever
of rhe ,r genitive singular: Kitulermtirtler "murderer
urrderlying scntcnce. Thusin thesubordinate while it never appears irl the declenston
compoundgo-ghna,,cow-sraying,, thc dcterminant I rrrthcrmorc, -s- can appear with f-eminine determinants
"cow" is a dircctobjcct(accusative the form in the genitival group has a
in Sanskrit)underlyingly(cornpareEnglish ,rf tlrc feminine nouns..wohnungsinhaber "tenant" but
heart-breuking).
In the compound adjcctive ugni-dagdha"bumt
with fire,,, the determinant,.fire,, is an t}suffi x:ei n]nhuber der||/ohttuttg.Forthes ereas ons v ari ous grammars ofGetmanhandl ethi s
tnstrumentalin Sanskit' Thc unrJerlying .boundary markcr, to go inlo lengthy
sentencehas to be constructedin the medropassive a \f,ugenzeichenJ and they havc
lllrrticular morplrene as
vorce'.agninadahytite:"he is burnt with
fire" or .,hebums himself rvith fire,,(where rlr'scri;rtions of its phonological shape: e,
(e)n' er' (e)s' ens' ln Scction 2'3 we called this
agntnarc
morphologicallyan inslrumental).In the
compoundadlcctivego-ja..producedrrom rrrornhemean intcrfix.
cows,,the
determinant"cow"isanablativeatthelever
oftheunderlyingsentence: gobhyasjayate,,itis
producedfrom cows" (where g6bhyas
is morphorogicailyan ablative). 1.hemost
common type ') .l I Po.sses.slvc
Conpounds
ofsubordinatecompoundsin Sanskritare
the nounsdetemrrned by the genitive(in the broadcst P ossessi vecompounds areanal y z edas c ombi nati ons w i thac orl pounddetenl i nantatrda
sensc)Thc compoundnoun suchas raja putrri '.king,s relationsh'ip between the two members of
the
son,,isanalyzableas a nomrnalphrase zcr. determinatum..l.hese are cases where the
riiias putrciswhere raiiiasis morphologically
the genitiveoforigin. In historicalperspectrve, tl )l tl poundtJoesnotprov tdethees s enti al meani ngandanex temal el ementmus tbeadded.For
in all thesecaseswe areclealingwith syntacticgrorp, rather a "stupid person"' i.e. "someone having
a
1ph."...) bec'ming compounds.In Vedic rlfstarrca,a birdbruinis not a..bird's brain" but
Sanskrit it is stirl possibleto find compountls ..a or (by
w,hosedeterminantsretain the caseending: can denote both back with a hunrp,,
|lrrrlbrain',' on the other hand, humpback
ubhuyam-kard"producingsecurity"(with accusativ
e, nor *abhaya-kara),linesit' ..drivenby |||ctonymy)'.apers onw i thahumpedbac k ,' .fl enc e,a< l j ec ti v al t]eri v ati v es fi ompos s es s i v e
dogs"(rvithinstrumental s:lnd,r-om.fvZi),rtivo-ja..produced riom heaven,,(with ablatrvednzis. ..,tl tpoundssuchas httnl pbtl c k ed,pal efuc er' l ,gtc .Forthi s reas on' thes c c ompounl ds arc c al l c d

I
 .F

180 AN TNTRODLICTION TO I'IIE SI,IJDY OF DI-]RIVA'f IONAL MORPHOI,OGY 181

MORPIIOLOGY

exocentric,as opposedto endocentric compounds tt.5 Noun Derivation in Arabic

including coordinateand dcterminativc
compounds' A.'other common term coming fiom paninian
grammar is bahuvrthi meaning It is often said that the absence of compoundittg is one of the typical fcaturcs of word
litcrally "someonewhose rice is plentiful" (vasya
vrlhir bahur asti).In Sanskritadjectival lorrrrationin Semitic languages.This statementwill not stand the scrutiny and it is really possiblc
possesslve compoundswereformedfrom bolh descriptiveand subordinate tI lln.1.-" examples of cornpounding. Some of them are based on lbrcign models. Thus Arabtc
compoundsand this
proccsswas accompaniedby a shift ofaccent from l,,ti,muftntii "chiefinspector" or hAi,kAilb "chicfclerk"etc. are calqucd on Turkish compounds
the final memberofthe compoundto the lirst.
prelix
For instance'a descriptivecompoundbrhad-aivit "great
horse"could be transformedinto an /rr; "lrcad" * bukun "minister" - "prime ministcr" (synchronically, bal may be takcn as a
adjectivalpossessive rrr Arabic). Modcrn Hebrew has formations w'hich have to be analyzed as dctemrlnatlve
compoundby the shift ofaccent brhdcr-aivu,.possessing greathorses,,.
"appearance" + dok
Sinrilarly,a subordinatecompoun<Iraja-putrii,,king,s son (: pnnce)', r ()rnpounds; for instance, ram "high" + ftoi "voicc" - "rnicrophone"; ra?i
could be transformedinto
an adjectivalpossessivecompoundraja-putr.a"having ''tlrin" "hom" + a/"nosc": "rhinoceros". The latter lype
kings as sons,,.l.he most commo' - "microscopc"; kurn (<keren\
possesslvecompoundsare thosewith numeralsas a "sonleone whose nose rs horn" corresponds lairly closely to thc posscssive (exocentnc
determinantfound in all lnclo-tsuroocan
c oul d be nrul ti pl i c d but i t rv i l l
languagcs:Sanskrita.sta-pad"eight-rootcd". Greekoktopous..ocropus... ,,,rrrpounds)ofIndo-E uropean l anguagc s .E x ampl es ofthi s ty pe
I.atin brpes ,.two_
footed".The accentualshift can be found elsewhere, ,,,xrrrbecome obvious that we are deating rvith syntactic groups rather than with compounds: /ol)
most notablyin Ancient Greek,wherethe
slressed syntactrc
parrssuchasthe followingcanbe found:p atro-kt1nos,.patricide,'
vs.patr6_ktonos..killed /,,/,.'kindheartcd", rak leb "mild-hearted". As mentioncd under 9.4, the two
by the
father";thErct-tropfto^s from word formation; here the use of 'slorueas a
"feedingthe beasts"vs. thErolrophos..nourishedby
the beasts',.However. l1rtrupssuch as stonc wallhave to be excluded
may exclude Hebrew
the relationship bctweenthemis ratheractivevs. passiveat the level ofthe underlyrng prcucljunct is a pr.rrelysynlactic phenomenon On the same grottnds wc
sentence
(kteineitdn pal<ira"he ktlls the father" , pdtro-ldonos vs.hupd "golden dish(es)" ffom word fonnation, sincc the use ol zuhob
toti patrds kteinetai..hcis ki lled r rflfslructions suchas kali ztthLlb
by the father" pat6-ktonos). Possessive ''11rl d"asapostadj unc ti s as y ntac ti c phc nomenon(s o-c al l eds tatus c ons truc tus ) S i mi l arl y has
' compountlsare fairly common in Sanskritpoetic
"plemier minister" C)n the other
discoursewhich aboundsin opaqueformationssuchas vrl<srj-fte.ia "whose treesare like hair,,or rrrlrc evaluated roi hammerniala 1it. the hcad of the govcrnment
"tree-haired"- "mounlain" or tapo-rlhana"whosewealth as a compound. Nevertheless' we
is penance": ..ascctic,' lr,uul,jo.iebro.i lit. sitting-head "chairman" nay be considercd
of lorming ncw words in the
rr|iry somewhat misleadingly state that the only viablc stratcgy
compound Scmitic languagcs
9.4.4 Sl,ntactic( ;ompounds Scrnitic group of languagesis derivation. where English or Getman
Fhrgzeugtrilger "aircraft carriet'"
Ary syntactic group or phrasemay havea meaningthat is not the same
as the sum ol-the fravc to usc syntactic groups. Thus versus German conrpoun<l
Otherwise they have
meaningsof its constituents.Lexicalizedprepositionalgroups are exlremely
common; here rve llrrd Arabic slntactic group naqiltt aHA?irAl (lit the carrier of aircrafts)'
"almored ship" would
belongexanrplessuchas ladyinwaiting,maitlofhonor,maninrhestreet,good-Jbr-nothing,cat frf (lr.awon their dcrivational potential; for lnstancc, Gcrman I',unzerschilJ
o'-ttinelails' etc. In many casesthe processoftheir lexicalization,as analyzcd (both thcsc wortls are dcrived lrom the base dir|
by Jespersen lrt. translated as darra\u or clari|u in Arabic
(l!)42:8.83),wasa lengthyone.This is shownespeciallyby thc uncertainty ''l urnor").
as to the placeofthe 'l'hc discussion of
examincd
plural morphemein llarly Modem English and it may often be attached
to the whole combrnation In u,hat follows nomrnal derivatives in Syrian Arabic will bc
fact that Arabic does not use tlre
insteadof the determinatum.The following forms for sons-ln-law ftomKing Lear
may exempli$i vt.rbal derivation woukl actually be more interesting (given the
not make it a suitable topic for
this point: sonnein lawes,sonnesin raw, sonsin laws (arsohyphenatedson.sin,Laws). vcrbal prehxes), but it is of consi<ierablecomplexity which does
Another comnon type is represented by derivationsliom a verbal phrasesuch as looker-on. ;rrritrtroductory course in morphology'
true of ('lassical Arabrc) are
hanger-on,listener-in,passer-by.Theirpluralizationby'inlixed' -s showsthat
we arenot dealins Nominal dcrivatrves ol Syrian Arabic (the same holds
or semantic categones:
with a compound. rrlltlitionally classificd as belonging to one of the iollowing morphological
Anothercontmontype is represented
by additivephrasessuchas breuclnnd buler, soap-ttnd-
trydter,deaf-and-dumband,of course,by (archaicand dialcctal) numcrals:fve (i) Abstract
ururtwenty. rt rs
of interest to note that German uses exclusivelythe latter typc in forming its (ii) Verbal (or gerundial)
numerals
(fiinfundzwanzig) whereas Standard English uses exclusively coordinate twenty-five. (iii) Singulattve
As
mentionedin 4.2, Czechhas both additivepdtadvaceland coordin ate(h)acetpdt. (i v) Femi ni n e
(v) OccuPational
(vi) Instrumenta'l

_l
 ".-

r82 AN INTRODUCI'ION DERIVAlIONAI, MOI{PI IOLOGY 183

TO THE STUDY OI.- MORPHOI,OGY

unit of what tl-reirbasc

(vii) t_ocative Singulative nouns are denomitlal derivatives denoting an individual
(viii) Hyposratic collectively or generically. Thc dcrivational suffix is -e'
'lerrotes
(rx) Diminutive
(x) Elative (-'ollective Singulative
xass "lettuce" xass-c "a head oflettuce"
Abstract noufls are denominal and deadjectival ba?ar "cattle" ba?ar-a "a cow"
derivativcs ibrmed on the pa'errrs
C,aCraCre,C,C2[C g, and C eC (e); it will be naxl "ciate palms" narl-c " a date palm"
e observedthat _e is lowered to -a aftcr
pharyngeals,
? andr.
convefled into feminillc llouns
Many mascultne nouns (denoting male bcings) can be
(10) Adjective AbstractNoun t,l enoti ng femalc bc i ngs l by the s ame s uffi x -e:
Seial "brave" SaZafa "bravery"
satb "difficult,' ( l3) Masculine Femrntne
sflbe "difficult"
kbir "large" kebr lamm "(patemal) uncle" famm-o "(patemal) aunt"
"large size"
"dog" kalb-e "bitch"
kalb
Noun
sadi? "iiiend" sada?a "fricndship" Occupati on al nouns ar€mos tl y dev erbal deri v ati v c s (thc rc areal s os omerl entl mi nal
term suggests'only nouns denoting human
saheb "friend" sohbe "friendship" ,lt'r'rvatives)formcd on thc pattern C'aC"CriC"' As the
?abb "father" ?ubuwwe "fatherhood',(< earlier?ubuw_) hcings belottg herc:

verbal nouns (or gerundialnouns)aredcverbalderivatives (14) Verb OccuPationalNoun

formedon a varietyofpattems.
In the caseof simple triradicalverbsthereis no sureway predicling ra?as "clance" ra??as "dancer"
of which pattem is to bc
used. Some of the patternsare: C,aCrCr,C,eCrC,, falah "cultivate" fallah "peasant"
C,aCraC.,C,aCrdCr,C,(r)CraCr(e),
C,(u)CruCr,C,aCraCran, and C,eC,C.dn.
Noun
(11) Verb VerbalNoun hadid "irori' traddad"blacksmith"
i.arah "cut, wound', iarh .,cutling,
wounding,, lahm "mcat' lahham "butcher"
hakam 'Judge" hakm .Judging,,
talab "request" talab ..requesting,, Instrumen ta|nouns arerl ev erbal deri v ati v es |onrrec l onl hepattel s :C .aC ,C 2aC .e,
naiah ..succeed" ,.succeeding,,
naZah rrr.rC,Cr aCr(e), and maC'C.aC.,(e):
tabad "worship" fbade .,worshipping,,
nezel "dcsccnd" nzol .,descending" ( 15) Vcrb lnstrumentalNoun
raiaf "tremble', raLafan ..trembling,,
lar "fly" (root TYR) tayyara"airplane"
feref "know" ferlin ,.krowrns" fatah "open" meftah "key"
darab "hit" mcdrab "bat"
vcrbal nounsof many simpletrilitterarverbshavesingulatives
dcrivedfrom them:
l . o c a t i v en o u n sa r e m o stl yd e ve r b a l d e r i va ti ve sfo n n e d o n th e fo l l o w i r r g p a tte m s
(12) Verb Verbal Noun Singulative andmaC,CreCl:
rrra(l'C,aC3(e)
darab "hi1,strike" darb "hitting" darb-e "blow"
dafat "push" daff "pushing" daff-a "a push"
 18 4 AN TNIRODIJC.TION TO THtr DERIVA]IONAI- MORPHOI,OGY 185
S-l.LrDy OF MORIHOLOGY

(16) Verb LocativeNoun RECOMMBNDED READTNGS

?afad "sit" ma?fad ..seat,'
daras "study" madrase..school,, in worclfornation"Lunguttge Tvpolugl'
R. l985."Typological<listinctions
Stepl-ren
Arlderson,
Zalas "sit" maZles ..session Shopen'3 56 Cal-rbridge:Cambridgc
room,, anrl Syntacticl)escrtption Volume 3 ed' by T
UniversitYPress.
Noun
Arono|f,Mark.1976.||ordFornttttiottin(ienerative(iranmctr,Cambridge'Mass.:MITPress.
ktab "book" and Unwin'
maktabe"library" lJloomfield,Leonard.lg35 Lunguuge Lontlon:Allen
the conditions for thc coining,usc and undcrstandtng
ltrcklc, HerberlE. 1978."Reflcctionson
So-called hypostatic nouns are deverbal XII\' 1CI (Vienna' 1977) lnnsbruck'
derivatives formed on the patterns liste<t
lbr (15), of noninal compounds"Proceedingsof the
( I 6) and several others; they denote
an abstract result or object ofthe activity (.homsky,Noam.lgT0...Remarksonnominalizations,'.RecdillgsinEnglishTransformational
denoted by their
Cinn
(]rantmared.by R. Jacobs& P Rosenbaum'184 229' Waltham'Mass':
derivational basc:

Pattent of English-New York: Ilarper & Row'

- & MauriceHalle. 1968.Sound
( I 7) Verb I IypostataticNoun (.owcll,MrrrkW.|964.AReferenc'eGrttntmurofsyrianArubic.Washington,D.C':Georgctown
?asad"intend,aim at" ma?sad ,.intent,goal,, UniversitYPress'
nim "sleep"(root NWM) mandm ..dream,, | ) l . c s s l e r , Wo l f g an g U '1 9 7 8 '..El e m e n tso fa p o l yce n tr i sl i cth e o r yo fw o r d |o n n a ti o n ''.
Proceedittgsof the XI/' 1C'1-(Vienna, 1977) Innsbruck'
Diminutives aredenominalderivativesformed
on the pattcrrrC,C, ayy(eC,): |,rhen'Johannes.lgT5.tiittfiihrungindiedeurscheWortbiltlungslahere.Ber|in..Schmidt.
lrloischer,w.lgT5.Wortbildungderclettlschen(iegenwttrtsspruclrc'Iiibingen:Niemeyer'
IV'3 16.
(1 8) No un Diminulive to a tlreoryof word formation'''LittguisIic'lnqulrl
..Prolcgonrcna
Ilallc, Matrricc.1973.
zgir "child" zgayyer"little one" . | c s p e r s e n , o t t o .l g 4 2 .AM o tl e r n En g l i sh Gr u n tn n r o n H i sl o r i cttl Pr i n c'i p l e s.Pa r tVl .
'lebn "son"
bnayy "little son" Morphologt'.London: Allen andUuwtn
Koziol,Herbert.|937.Ilandbuchc]erlinglist:henWorthildwtgslelrre.Ileide|bcrg.
So-calledelatives:Lremoslrydeadjectivar BloomingtomThellague:
derivativesfonnedon thc pattem?ac,Crac,. 1.he l.ccs. Robert B. 1963. The (]runtnrurtf English Nominalizalions.
mcanlngofelative conespondsto both comparative
and superlativeofEnglish, cf. 1.4. lntlianaUnivcrsityl)ress(2"JPrinting)
l , i p k a , L c o n h a r dl g T5 ...Pr o l cg o m cn a l o .I,r o l cg o m e n a 'to a th o o r yo fr vo r d fb r m a ti o n ''.7 1 c
(19) Adjectivc Elative 'l 'r u n s f <t r m ati o ttttl - Ge tr e r ttti ve Pu r a d i g m u n d M o d e r n L i n g u i sti cT'h e o r ycd 'b yE'FK
sahl "easy" ?ashal "casier,easiest" Kotncr.Arlstcrdam: Bcnjanttns'
tawil "long" ?atwal "longer,longcst" oxford: oxford LlniversityPress'
.4 VerlicGrumnmrfor stu(lenls.
Arthur A. 19'16.
lr4irc<lonell,
Noun I{ans..lg6g.T.heCategoriesantlTl,pesofPresent-DayEnglishllordFormalictn'2d
N4archand,
sob "hot weather" ?a5wab..hotter,hottestweather,,
Edition.Munich: Beck'
reL:Zal"man" ?ari.al .,moreof a man, most manly,, |{ohrer,Christopher.lgT4...Someproblemsofword|omration''.LinguistischeArheiten|4.
Tiibingen:NiemeYer.
Hebreu''The Hague:Mouton' (Chapter6)'
f(trscn,Haiimts. Ig17. Conlempctrttm
Englewoodcliffs: Longtrans'
Rcinardw. lg66- A Hanclbookof EngtishGrutnntur.
/,:rndvoorl,

_l
 t86 AN INTRODUC'I'ION DF,RIVA'I]ONAL MORPHOl-OGY 187
1.O THE STT]DY OF MORPHOLOCiY

EXERCISES (r. Provide two examplcs for each of the following:

1' Traditionaliy, the area of word

formation was treatedas consisting Compoundnouns
compounding lf we want to keep of dc'vatron and
the term derivativeonly to derivatives (a) noun + noun
sulfixationwe haveto introduce formcd by
a new term expansion.Explain antJ
exemplify. (b) verb i noun
(c) noun + verb
2. In the analysisof compounds
it becamecuston (d) verb * verb
coordinatc,
dcterminarive,
descriptive,
possessivc
J;""riili.:ffi:1 (e) adjective1 noun
give somegood examplesfor each. ;:?:li"'#"ff;
(f) pafiicle + noun
(g) vs1fo+ Particle
3 comment on the appropriatcncss of termsfbr compountiscoinedby Hindu
(dvandva, karmadharayo, bahuv grammarians
rlh i, Iatpurusa). II Compoundverbs
(h) noun* verb
4' Below area groupof Frencl]words
containingdcrivationalsuffixes.compile
a lrst of them,
(i) vcrb + noun
and classifythem accordingto (a) the
word classcsthey atrachto (b) and the
word classes 0) vsltr * vcrb
thcy form. Add to this list any add.itional
suffixesyou can think ol (k) adjective+ vcrb
(l) particle+ noun
(1) intenogation (17) maisonnctte (33) divisible (m) noun 1 noun
(2) 6clairage (1g) ourson (34) courageux
(3) commcncemerlt(19) travailleur (35) porteur III Conrpoundadjecttvcs
(1) dependance (20) connaisseuse (36) Genevois (n) noun+ adjcctivc
(5) largeur (21) horloger (37) chimisle (o) verb + adjective
(6) gentillesse (22) pompier (38) sucrier (p) adjectiveI adjective
(7) bonti (23) marxiste (39) compteuse (q) adverb + adjecttve
(8) exactitudc (24) Hongrois (40) n6grillon (r) noun I noun
(9) marxisme (25) respiratoire (41) trentaine (s) vcrb + noun
(10) canonnadc
e6) dcpcnsier (42) limaille (t) adjcctivc+ noun
(ll) soir6e (27) enfantin patliclc + noun
(43) apprentissage (u)
(12) plumage (28) th6orique (44) cuillerde (v) verb * verb
(13) pienaille (29) sportif (45) glissade (w) adjective/adverb+ verb
(14) vingtaine (301 pornru (46) difficult€ (x) vslb I Particle
(15) finesse (311 connaissance (47) relioidissement
(16) traduction (32) guerison (48) exposition

Compilea similar list of words containing

dcrivationalsuffixesin a langr.rage
you know or
study and classifythem accordingto (a) the
word classcsthev altach to (b) and the word
classesthey lonrr.

_l
 1'IltloRl-l lCAL MODlll-S Ol] MORPHOI-OGY 189

c0

------t--------
NP
CHAPTER TEN
.I'H
EORETICAI,
MODELSOFMORPHOLOCY
I
C1

NPV
----------rr--

l0,l Morphology and Fornal Syntctr

Onc ofthe promises made by the gencrativistswas to come
up with a fon.nal analysrsol'tonso
I
c.
-z
and aspcct. Lntheir Beginning Engrish Grammar (1976:35s)
J. Keyser and p. postar suggeslcd
that "a natural way to treat tense in the present grammar ls ----^---\ ---\
to assumc that present and past, like -"'
the 'future' will, are vcrbs in initial structure". This assumption NP
resulterJin monstrous .lnlfial,
structures for very simplc sentenccs such Joan has been
singing, reproduccd herc liom Keyser I
& Postal (1976: 359), as shown in lrigure 10.l. cl3
'fhis represents a rather
extravagant proposal (with six clauses and seven ver-bs) for
the
structure containing one tense (present) and two aspccts (perfect NP
and progressive; perfectivc is
a misnomcr), cl. 6.3.3. Nevertheless,the authors maintain that "il
is not hard to develop a lbrmal I
ana l y s i s o f t c n s c a n t l a sp e cta lo n g th e lin e s o fth is n o te ... but l,^
thi s l i cs bcyond the scope ol 'an
inlroduclory work". -\\
Fourteen years latcr, to judge by Haegeman's Introtluction to Govennteril
-.' ---^---
NPV

rl
& Binding Theo,
( I 991 ), the contemporary lormal syntax still rnakes no provision
fior the stucly of grammatical ancl
lexical aspect. As lar as tense is concemcd, it is assumcd that C5
thc tense specification of the
sentcnce is scparate fi'om VP and it is associatedwith the AUX node;
the lattcr node rs thc sitc
on which tense is realized. In all sentences,with or without overl auxiliaries,
undcr a scparate node, labelled INFI-. Senlences are viewed as possessing
tcnse is located --^.-----
N P vl
I
INFL lakes a VP category as its complement and an NP (the subject) as its
INFL as therr head;
I
specifier. Given the (-.
fact that an actual word such as the morlal auxiliary can appear in the INFL position
the label
AUX is dispensed rvith. Under this analysis the senlences hn sctw the boss
-/o anrJ.Johnwill sec NPV
the boss possessidentical structures. This is shown in Figures 10.2 Presenl
and 10.3. Progressivc [6e, Auxl Pcrlective [irn'c, Aux]
Joan [siirg. PV] ldu. Auxl
In view of the long-established morphological practice to labcl thc bouncl
morphemo -erl
inflectional suffix, to use the label INFL for the modal auxiliaries such as wll/
is most regrettable Fig. l0'l Tcnscand aspcctaccortlingto Keyser& Postal( I 976:359)
and misleading. Furthermore, as the label Inflectional phrase (for Sentence)
suggests,INFL is
a node which is taken to dominate all verbal inflection including person and number. andmodalauxiliariesof
The larter A proposaspect,Haegeman( 1991:106)mentiousthatthc aspectual
two categones are taken as agreement markers which may be very restricted (Latin amabo"I shall love"'
as, lor instance, oftencorespondto tnflectionalaffixesin otherlanguages
l,.rrglish
in English Haegeman (1991:102) claims that there is always abstract agreement in the lbnltal apparattts
which is often ttnruttr.,Ihave lovetl") but no complex aspectuallorms are analyzed
not morphologically realized (the difl'erencebetween English and Latin woukl be to
assume that u,ith two featuresallo'*'sfor four cotnbinatiorls:f+'l ense
Proposerlabove.The inflectronalmatrix
thc abstractACR has lewer morphological realizations in English than l,atin, i.e. not l-Tense-AGRI; and
that English i ACR] is foundin tensedclauses;inltnitiveslack both tenseand agreel'nent
lacks AGR). Untier the assumption that INFL dominates not only the tense feature of the claimed to illustrate certaininfinitivals
verb but tlrcothertwo optionsL-tense +AGRI and l1lense -AGR]are
also its agreementproperties (AGR), the above two sentenceswould be representedas the typological mcrits ofthis proposal,oue
Fig. 10.4. ilr Portugueseand English.fesp€ctively. whatever

I
 ,IIIEORI]TIC]AL 191
190 MODET-S OF MORPIIOLOG Y
AN INTROI]I]C'IION'fO THF, STUDY OF MORPHOLO(;Y

S (:Infl P) ;rspectwhich cannot be accomplished without duc attention to their senlantics' Givcn the cument
errrancipationofmorphology in generative circles, onc has to read monographs on formal syntax

NI'
-----7-:-- / vp t oncLrnently with those on morphology, such as Spcnccr (1991). The synthesis of
rnorphology

tt,,\INFL
rrrrdsyntax ls yet to comc.

NP
IPast] lll.2 Morphology and Generative Phonologlt

I
I
Det N
It u,as only fairly recently that generativc phonology acknowledged the
ignored or taken
existencc of
for granted or
rrurrphology(in thc sixtics and seventies nlolphology was either

Joln -ed
I ll cvcn denred).It is ofspecial interest to note that the rise ofthe more concrete lype
ofphotlology
the boss a retunl to
(so called Natural Generative Phonology, I{ooper 1976) has becn to a large degree
of morphology.
trarlrtional pre-generative notions in phonology accompanied by enlancipation
Fig. 10.2Johnsaw.theboss
( )rrc of thc cardinal mistakes ol the orlhodox linc of abstract generative phor-rology was thr-
,rrrorphcme-invariance hypothesis' (versrts traditional concept of variants in paradigmatic
S (-lnfl P)
'surface variants' only
,rrrangements). ln other words, orlhodox generative phonology considered
---tf----.-
N P/v P ;rsa by-product ol-rhc all-important deep processes operating on abstract invariant morphemesl
generalizations about surlacc fonns (lbr

N
tt INFL
{.()nsequently,it q,as not interested in looking for true
ilrstance, the so-called cxccptions which are explained in traditional n-rodels in tcrms of
NP machinery of reordered
IPresentl rrrorphology and semantics, havc to bc explained by cumbersome
these important theorctical poinls by analyzing cenain
lrlronological rules). We will elucidate
Det N to both phonology and
rrrtrrphophonemicphenomena of'acccnt. As is u'ell-known, acccnt bclongs

.lohn will sce

rl
the boss
rilorphology. To the lbrmer by its nature (accent as an interplay
of phonctic lbaturcs o1'loudness'

by its inherent properties (word-accerlt, wlrich nray bc a mattcr of

IiIllc aM lengtlr), to the laltcr
verbal forms. The paradtgrns
\lress or tone or both). Let us examine the accent pattem olspanish
Fig. 10.3Johnwill seelhe boss stress indicated by the acute:
bckrw represent the completc sct of simplc lorms with the

S (:Infl P) P rc s entS ubl unottv e

(I) Nonfinitc P rc s eti tl ndi c ati v c

-----f----'-
N Pl v p
"to love"
amar S gl irmo 6me
I 1 ,,\ am6ndo 2 6mas ames
N INFI- NP 3 ama dme
am6do
f+'Iensel Pl I amirmos amernos
L+AGR]
Det N 2 amiis amels

ll 3 aman amcn
Joln -ed see the boss
John will see the boss Preterit ImrrerfectIndicative ImperfectSubjuncttve

Sg I am6 am6ba amara

Fig. 10.4Tenseand aspectaccordingto Hacgeman(1991 am6bas amaras
) 2 amAste
3 am6 am6ba amara
canobjectthat it is basedon the confusionof relationship(agrecmcnt)with
entity (tense).And
11certainlydoesnot take us anywherewith respectto thc analysisof lexical
and grammatical
 t92 AN INTRODUC'I'ION TO THE STTIDY OII tr,IORPHOLOGY
.IlILORETICAI-
MODELS OF MORPIIOLOGY l 9-l

Pl I am6mos am6bamos amdramos I fooper (1976:26) in An Introduction to Naturul Generalive Phonolog'one cannot clainl that
2 am6steis am6bais amarals tttn(ir. dmd, anto, omurd and amara rcccive stressby a penultimatc stress ru]e. Whereas liarris
3 amdron am6ban am6ran t.ounts syllables liom the end in order to assign slress to individual verb forms, Hooper prefers
lo look at the wholc paradigmatic display and makes a simple observation that the most striking
Future Conditional rxrint about stress in the verb lorms is not the fact that thc majority of forms have penultimate
Sg I amard amaria srross,but that for each tcnse (except present) all persons havc stress on the same syllable in
2 amaris amarias relation lo the stem. ln the inrpcrfcct, the 1'rand 2'd Pl fom-rsarc not exccptional because they do
3 amar6 amaria rrot have penultirnate stress.Rather thcir antepenultimate stress t.nakcsthcm regular in that lhe
Pl 1 amar6mos amarianros strr:ss lalls on the same vowel (thematic vowel) as in all other persons.'fhus a sct-nrittg
2 amar6is amariais rrrcgularity (cxception) in phonology tums out to bc a morphological regularity. Of coursc, it
3 amarin amarian rgcansthat wc have to recognize that stress has a morphological function in language and make
pllcc for traditional morphological notions such as thematic vowcl in our descriptit'rns.It is fairly
J' W Harris (1969)proposedto accountfor this accentpattem in the framework rr cll-knorvn that stressin Spanish is actually one ofthe markers oftense and mood, i e., that stress
of gcnerativc
phonologyhy a rule thatstresses
the penultimatesyliableof all verb forms exceptthe l"rand 2"u rs irn important motphophoncmic category; witness the minimal pairs such as umrt "l love" vs.
Pl of the lmpf 2"randSubj: rrtnrj"he loved" (Pret), ame "thaI l/he love" (Subj) vs. amd "I loved" (Pret). (ln Gencrative
l'lronology, these forms would be considcrcd only as accidental products ofabstract derivation)'
y + [lstress]/- (([-perfl)C"V)C,,#1,.,0 It rnay bc noticetl that even if we work tvith rrore concrete phonology and morphological notions
u'c still do not do a*,ay with exceptions. That is, ifwe claim that in Spanish cach tense stresses
This rule hasthreeexpanslons: rr ecftair.rvowcl in all pcrsons, we still have to say that the 1"'and the 2"d Pl Prcs arc cxccptional
for thc abstract
1;rsslrowr1abovc, lorms such as imo - amamos, etc. fumished the bcst evidence
(i) the first expansionappliesonly to the l,rand 2.dpl of the imperi'ectand places r*:lultimate rule). However. we may bc intercstedin looking at Spanishdialects
which abandoned
the
stressone syllablebeforethe imperfectmorphemes-ba and_ra; lltc penultimaterule in favorof arulethat stressesthe stcm vowel in all persons. For instance, in
(ii) the secondexpansion/-c"vc.#]"",b assignsstressto all penultimatevowels; Ant.lalusianSpanish the subjunctive forms ofthe second and third conjugations strcss the stem
(iii) the third cxpansion/-C,#j.",bassignsstressto monosyllabicforms. in all persons (cona, c6manos, c6mais, c6nton). It is ofintcrcst to notc that historically
'rwcl
tlrc satnehappened in the imperfect when a penultimate rule of Latiti was given up in favor of a
ln otherwords,accordingto this rulc all verb forms,exceptl" and 2ndpl Impf, rrrlc that slressed the thematic vowel:
are stressed on
the penultimatesyllable.The fonns which arc acccntedon thc last syllable(lnlinitive
amar 1,,
sg PreLame,3'dsg Pretamo, sgFut amar6,amaras,amurd),arederivedby Haris riom (2) Latin Spanish
more
abstractunderlyingrepresentations which havepenultimatestrcss.Thus the infinitrvc amar has Sg I amabar-n am6ba
1r -
a final vowel -e in the underlying form, which is deletedafter stressassignment;thc pretcritc I^ amaoas am6bas
formsttmtandamoarederivedfrom/am+a+Vand /am+a+U/,respectively.Thcpenultrmatc 3 amibat amiha
vowcl is stressed by the generalrule, then altered,and the final vowel is deleted(noticcthat thc Pl I amabamus amAbamos
deletionrule must be extrinsically ordere<lafterthe stressrule). The future and conditional I amarrans am6bais
fomrs
arederivedby Harris from the combinalionof two separatewords: infinitive and auxiliary. 3 antabant amAban
Stress
is assignedto both words: [[amarela].The infinitive is stressedon the penult, and stress
is
assignedto the singlc syllableof the auxiliary. Later a generalrule removesall but the rishtmost \trcsson the lu and2"dPl wasretractedandtheresultwasa regularparadigm.Whatdoesall this
stress,leaving strcsson thc auxrliary:amurri. One of the conclusionsis that native
tcll us aboutthe internalizetlgrammarof nativespeakers'l
Obviously,Harris'sabstractanalysisis not a truegeneralization
aboutsurfacelorms and ,,pc:rkersdo not make useof the rule order and abstractunderlyingfolr-ns.When the phonolclgical
he has to rely on rule orderingto give a systematicaccountofexceptions.As pointedout by becomestoo abstractthe speakersobviouslypreler the motphologicalanalysis.In the
,rrrillysis
 1.94 AN INTRODUCI'ION TO 1HI] STT]DY OI.-
MORPHOI,OGY
MODELSOF N4OI{PIIOI,O(;Y
THEORETICAT, 195

caseabovc,when vowel lengthstoppedfunctioningclistinctively a. John (Ag Subject) gave the book (Go Object) to the lriend (Rec)
at a certainpoinl rn the history
ofSpanishthepenultimaterure 'acccntthe heavypenult' b. The book (Go Subject) was given to the frienrl (Rec) by' .lohtt (Ag)
had to give w.ayto a more transparcnt
rule suchas 'stressthe thematicvorvel'. In olherwords, c. The fricnd (Rec Subject) r.vasgiven thc book (Go) by John (Ag)
the originalphonologicalrule ofl-atin
hasbeenmorphologized in Spanish.As mentionedabove,dialectalevidencepoints
in the same
direction'Native speakerssimply preferto considerphonological Subjcct and Object terms are typically tied to specific positions in the clause; thus in English
variationsmeaningfulrather
than meaningless(and phonologicallypredictabre).Summing rlrc Subject is typically the leftmost temr, *'hereas in languages with a rich case marking systetn
up, we cannot do abstract
phonologyascamouflaged morphology.Morphologyhasto be studiedin its own nghts rlre Subject may appear in any position in the clausc. ln Latin, sentences(a) and (b) allow fbr 2'l
an<jside
by sidc with concretephonology. pcrmutations, since thc semantic functions are unarnbiguously specified by case uarkcrs. Flerc
i rrc some possi bl e tr ans l ati onsof (a):
10.3 Moryhologt itt Functional Grammar
In FunctionalGrammar (Dik 1990,r 9s9) morphologyis deartwith (4) i. IoannEs(Ag) libmm(Go) amrco(Rec) dedit.
by usingthe expression
rules Thesedetenninethc way in which functionallyspecified ii. Ioannes(Ag) amrco(Rec) librum(Go) dedit.
undcrlying predicationsare
mappedonto the linguisticexpressionsby meansof which they can be realizcd.'l hc lbllowinu iii. Librum(Co) Ioannes(Ag) amico(Rcc) dedit'
sorlsof expressiondevicesaredistineuished: iv. Librum(Co) amico(Rec) IoamCs(Ag) dedtt'

(i) the form in which termsarerealized Scntences (i) (iv) arc nol equivalent pragmatically: (i) may be taketr as representing thc
thc focus,
(a) casem;Lrking rrormal stare of aft-airs; (ii), (iii) and (iv) put the Goal, Recipient' and Agent in
(b) adpositions(prepositionsandpostpositions) constitute a third layer of lunclional specificalion of thc
respectively. Pragmatic functions
(ii) the fomr in which thc prcdicateis realized (.()nstituentsof pre<lications in F'unCtional Gratnmar. Two pairs of pragmatic functions lre

(a) voice differencesin thc verb Focus' 'l'he tbmer two characterize
tlrstinguished, namely Theme and Tail, and Topic and
'fail to
(b) auxiliaryelements rnirterial outsidc thc prcdioation (Theme is assigned to constituents which prcccdc, and
ofthc
(iii) rh eo rdcrofth c c ons r iluenr s r.onstituentswhich follow the predication). Topic and Focus are assigned to constitueuts
(iv) strcssandintonation. pletlication proper. They are defincd as follows:

The expressionrules arc sensitiveto the lunclionalspecificationofconstituents.Semantic (5) Topic: The Topic presents thc cntity about which the predicatiorr predicates
functions(Agcnt,Goal,Rccipienl,tseneficiary, Instrument,etc.)will most usuallybe expressed something in the given scltlng'
through casemarking (5.2.3)or adpositions,or a combinationof these.Terms with Focus: 'l'he Focus presents what is relatively the rnost intportant or salient inlbma
only a
semanticfunction are normally not strongly ticd to specificpositionsin the ti on i n thc gi v c n s etti ng'
clause(2.1.3).
syntactic functions (sub3ect,objecf) are also expressedtluough case marking
and/or
adpositions. and they have their
Typically,the casesusedfor subjectand objectarethe most unmarkedcasesofthe Pragmatic funclions rnark thc infOrniational stalus of'the constituents
language(cf. the situationin TurkishandFinnishunder5.2.3).Different assignments ( ()nsequenceslor the fom in which a given underlying predication is to be expressed' Certaitr
of Subject
pragmatic functions,
and Objectwill usuallybe codedin the verb in termsofvoice distinctions.For a ditransitive
verb, l;urguages(e.g. Japanese)have special markcrs for constituents with giVen
suchasgive' diffcrentassignments cxpressing pragmatic
ofsubject functionwill resultin the useofthe passivevoice: ;rrulprobably all languages use special ofdering and prosodic pattcms lbr
stress
trilrctions.The Topic is typically unstressed,whereas the Focus usually carrics sentential
(3) Agent Goal the Focus the later (or the final) position in the clausc ln our
Recipienl I lrc l opic often lavors the initial,
a. Subject Objecr (iv) the most salient pieces of information are the Goa1, Recipicnt and
lltin sentcnces (ii)
b. yields the follorving represerrtation:
Subiect AHcnl, rcspectively. 1'he assignmentofpragmatic functions
Subjcct
 196 AN IN'IRODTJCTION
TOTIrlrS,t.UI)y TIIEORE'fICAL MODF,l,S OF MORPI{OLO(;Y 197
OFMORpHOLOcy

(6) ii. Ioannes(Ag lop) amlco (Rec)librum

(Go Foc) dedit. I ll.4 N at u ral M o rp h olo gy
iii. Librum(Go Top) loannEs (n B) amico(RecFoc)ciedit. Natural Morphology is au approach to morphology dcvcloped in (iermany arrd Austria
l v. Librum(Go fop) amico(Rec)loannes rlrrring tl-re 1980s by W. Dressler, W. Mayerlhaler and W. Wurzel. Its namc was adopted m
tAg Foc)dedir.
rrrltation of the titlc Natural Phonology, coincd by D. Stampe for his approach to phonology
Their Englishcquivalents:
1| Xrncgan and Stanrpe 1979).
'l5e Natural Morphologists operatewith severalexplanatory principles: universals, typology,
(7) ii. .tohngavethe fiiend a BOOK (i.e.,nor a
knife). rystcm-dependence, paradigmatic structure and naturalness'
iii. Johngavethe book to a FRIEND (i.e.,
nor to his brorhcr).
rv. I'he book was given to thc friend by JOIIN
(i.e.,notby Fred). ltl.4.l Llniversuls
(
t tnderuni versal s thc mai n c ()nc em i s the rel ati ons hi pbc tw een c x pres s i onen(l nl eanl ng l l )
It will be obscrvcdthat in Latin (and
other inflectional languages)Topic and Focus rl rt.i rrermi nol ogy. l hc rel ari ons hi pbetueen s i gnanti o and s i gnata c ottc s pondl tl g l o S aus s urc ' s
expresslonneutralizcthe cxpressiondiflbrences
connectedwith the syntacticfunctionsofa given ttuttiftmts and signtfds).ln the eighties (Mayerthaler) naturalnesswas understood as the inverse
term Thus in Lati'it is impossibreto tlefine
the subjectand object purely positionally(as ,,1 an all-pervasive notion of markedness. Markedness applies essentially to rnorphologioal
in
English) In l,atin, it is impossible1oassign
Subjectfunctionto the Recipicntas in English
tie syrrrbolization (or coding), i.e. to thc relationship of Ihe signans (sign(iant) Io iB signatunr
Jrienclwas gi,en the book by John; Amrco (Rec) riber (Go) .atus signata of wfiich one rs morc
est a loanne(Ag), bur not ltirndii). An unmarked, or natural. symbolization lbr a pail of
"Amrcusliber datus est a loanne. nrore markerful (thc latter tenx'
rrurrkcd is such that the signans of the marked one is also
on the otherhand,in Englishif someterm hasboth world
a semanticand a syntacticlirnctionit is ,.rrlcluedon Gcrm an merkmulhuft, is somewhat unfortunate becausein the lrnglish spcaking
usually the casethat the expressionfor the syntactic (merhnalhaft). 'I'his typc ol'
function overridesthat lor thc semantic llrc telrn marked is used lor both marked (nmrkiert) and markerful
function'This ca' bc dcmonslrated lrequently whct]
by meansorthe rorrow.ingschema(Dik r 9g0:r g): t rxling is claimed to be constructionally iconic; it is the type rT'hichis met most
in 3-3, it is rlot
,lcaling with inflectional morphologics of various languages. But as rve sarv
(8) Ag Go (or 'nlarkcrful') than
Rec Ben rrlwaysthe case that the marked forrned is phonologically morc substantial
by John John to John for John rts unmarked counte4lart.
by him him (i c fon]led by suffixes)
to him for him For instance,thc marke<iplural lorms are quite commonly markerful
processes such as umlaut (tnutt -+ men) are
l)rft they may also bc markcrless when motphologica'l
Ag Subj Go Subj remove thc singular suffix (e.g' tn
RecSubj Ben Subj rrsccl.Even lcss natural plural formation process would be to
John John termirrology' the plural
John John Syrian Arabic zulttm-e "man" t zalm "men"); in Natural Morphologists'
he he he he lirrnration by umlaut is non-iconic, that by subtraction counter-iconic:

Go Obj Rec Obi Ben OQj (9) "man" Plural Marked

John John John Lati n (v i r) r' i r-i t i c oni c
him him hi m E ngl i sh (man) men I non-i c oni c

Arabic (zalam-e) 'zelnt + counter-icotlic

The termswith only a semanticfunction (as in Latin)
are alrvaysdistinct form eachother in
fotm' whereastermswhich havealso Subjectfunction nouns
and termswhich havealso ob,ect firnction Anotherfamousexampieof counter-iconicityis thc gcnitiveplural form of I'emintnc
areidenticalin forms and areonly distinguishedfrom vis-ir-vistts
eachother in the caseof pronominalterms. ril liussian.This one is suffixless(markerless)in spite of being double-marked
This sort of situationis typical for thc effect of u'ith tl-rcir Latin
Subjectand objcct assignmenton the lbrmal rurrninativeslngular counterpart.contrast the following Russian foms
expresslonof terms. iconic:
trl uivalentswhich are constructionally
 t 98 AN INTRODU(]TION TO TIIE SI'UDY ]'HI]ORE'I'ICAI" MODEI,S OF MORPIIOLOCY 199
OF MORPHOI,OG\

(10) Latin Russian fn 'l'urkish, on thc other hand, the ablative srffrx -dan locates its nominal root vcly vaguely in that
Sg Nom schol_a Skol-a , rllrcr iormativcs (such as the plural or the posscssivesuffix) could intervene (udu-lar<lun "ftom
Sg Gen -ae -v rslrrnds",oda-nrrz-dan "from our island").
Pl Nom _ae -v
Pl Gen _arunr -@ I t!.4.3 System - Dependence
ln addition to typology, there is anothcr mcdiating lactor between univcrsals and language-
Both languages treatthe Gen Sg and Nom pl as markedcategories .;pccific phcnomena, namely system-dependent naturalness. In simple temls, two languagcs
(marketrcorresponds
to
markerful)bu1the RussianGen pr is anomarous
in being markerressin spiteof berngdoubre- rrr:rydiffei as to which is the dominant pattem for each language. As an example wc lnay mentlon
markcd (for number and caseas shown
nicery by the disyrabic Latin suffix -irum). rlrc plural formation in Arabic and English with both languages cxhibiting intemal and extemal
rrrl l ecti on(cf.2.2.2 and 4.3):
10.4.2Typology
According to Dressler(19g5) ringuistictypes Arabic Lnglish
mediatebctwcenuniversarprinciplesand (12)
language-particular issuesSettingasidcthedifficulty ofdefining Plural Singular Plural
clearlythe five morphological Singular
types(isolating, fusionar,introflexive, aggrutinative, Riia] MaN MeN
porysynthetic)the NaturalMorphologists lntemal R.r-iul-
arefacedwith severaltypologicaldilcmmas. peasant pcasants
one of them rs why the fusionartype shouldexist External FaLL,aH Fal,LaHtn
at all given the optimality of one-to-oncrelationship
betweenmorphology and semanrrcs.
DresslcrcomparestheLatin andrurkish ablativeplural all Etlglish
forms"Iiom our islands,,inthis resDect: ll't as we ibund out, rnost Arabic nouns exhibit intemal intlection, whereas ncarly
constitutes
rrounsexhibit extemal inflection in their plural fonnation. External inllection theretbre
(ll) i. insul-is being system
nostr_is
(Latin) .r system-defining structural propefty of English; its intcrnal countcrpart, not
island-ABlipl our_ABL/pL e0ngruent, is open to elimination (we know fror-nthe history of English that thcre
wele many
by cxtcrnal ones)'
nurrc intcrnal plurals, such as bdc "book" - 6ec "books", which were replaccd
ii. ada-lar-rmlz-dan plurals are vulnerable to erosion (e.g. in Gulf Arabic
(Turkish) It rs the other way in Arabic where extemal
islan d-P L- our - AB
I orrc forms plurals of oocupational nouns on the pattem xabbaz "baker" - xabahtz "bakers'

plurals of literary Arabic xabhaz-tn'

\tt,ntrnk"fisherman" - sttntnmlt "fishcnncn", vs. extemal
The T'urkishversionin (ii) is perfectrydiagrammatic
in displayinga one-to-onerelatronship \ttnmak-tn).
betweenthe signifiersand signifieds(-rar - pL",-rmtz- ,'our,,,
-rtan - A1r.),whereas in Latin the
ablativeandpluralarcrealizedby a singlepolysemous
sufrx -rs.ln adtlitionthe samesuffix -rs | \).1.4 P urutligmaltc sl ru(:lure
encodesalsothedativeplural(vs.Turkish-lar-a: exponcncc is tltt-
-1L-DAT),andtwo olherfunctionswrth other one ofthe salient lbatures ofthe languages with fusional and cunlltlattve
lexicalitems(accusalive piurarwith r-stems,czy-B,,citizens,', (.\rstenccofi nfl ecl i on c l as s esl tradi ti onal c onj ugati onsand dc c l ens i ons ).Thei r rc ry ex i s l enc e
and2"dSg with verbs,aacl-rs..you
hear").IIencethe legitimatequestionwhy the fusional in that it inrplies lack
type is so wide-spread(csp.rn the Indo_ rs somcw.hatembarrassingfor universal principles of Natural Morphology
Buropeanphylum oflanguage)and diachronically Not all the instancesof polynlorphy (such as English
so persistent.Dresslermaintainsthat this is ,rl rrniformity in morphological expressions.
so by two other criteria of naturalness,namely,word-size synchronically; but some are
and indexicarity. As far as the average , ,rr -en for Nom Pl; Latin -r or,is fbr cen Sg) are rationalizable
lengthof words is concemed,Dressler(1985)claims lexical or semantic)' To
that it is betweentwo and threesyllables .rr loastpartly motivated by extramorphological factors (phonological,
(noticethat this figure coincideswith the optimar determined
sizeof a prosodicfoot in phonology).This :,rily with nouns, their referential animacy wrth its lcxically and scmantically
beingso the Latin cxamplein ( l 1.i) is 'more natural' aggrcgates'
thanthe Turkish one in (l r.ii). In general , lrirracteristicsmay be used to rattonalizc polymorphous rcalizations of casc-Number
tems one can say that thc cumulativeand fusional nouns) rnay be realizecl
exponencels more economicalthan the l,o[ instance, in Slavic languagcs the accusative singular (ofmasculine
agglutinativewhich resultstypically in four- and with animate nouns and -O with inaninrate nouns ( in
five-syllablervords.c)n the dimensionof trv cithcr -a or -O, with -u bcing appropriate
indexicality, Latin also scoresbettcr than Turkish Sg and -(4 the Masc sg)'
in thal its polysemoussuffix _^ locates .rrltlrtionboth -a and -o are polysemous in that -a marks also the Gen
preciselythe root insul- in the sensethat no other
formative may intervenebetweenthesetwo. ,rsshow n i n Fi eure 10.5.
 200 AN INI'RODUCTION TO
THE ST{-IDY OF MORPHOLOGY
1'II!ORE'| ICAL MODEI-S OF N,IORPHOI-OGY

(13) Urnlaut
"student" S gl geb-c
uienik-a
2 gib-st
Ianimatel 3 gib{
ACC
PlI gcb-en
Iinanimatc] 2 gcb-ct
"table" stol-O
3 geb-en

Morphologicalregularity(naturalness), however,may be restoretlhy proportional analogy

Fig. 10.5Animacy and Case protlucingthe l " Sg form gib; thenthe allomorphsacquiresemanticvalues:igrbi - Sg, /ge:bi -
in Slavic languages
Pl.
Anothcrconcernof thc Natural
Morphologistsis what constitutes
crassand its comprementary the unmarked inflection
rerationship to othcr inflection
Gemran nouns ending in vowels classcs.
1.o usewurzel,s examples,
(other than schw
differenr classes:
Auto.,car,,,
"on,pi"r,"nluf ,",:lr^;;:::::;i
schem.ta: Firma "[trm", Firmen. !:i:;r"tr::r;;;::[:::l
The crasswith Auto isthe
cxrstcnceo['altcrnativc plural unmarked one becauseof the
forms Cellos, Schemas,I,_irmas.
.size,ofparadigms,
handledby what is callcdparadigm
,", il":T;:::":l;f" economy,
possibre
toacertain
*offiffi;UT;Ir.ilil*iffi
(one lbr thematicnouns,
I & II, and one for athematic
:H"fii::il;i
suchasshorr eurd rong rhematicvower, zero.rro.
cmphasisfrom the word"r;ilJ;;:lrr#l;tTTTi:;H:;
ferms,onc has to shift thc
paraaigm
and (wp) model to the Item and
Process(Ip) rnodcl(cf.2.5).

10.4.5Morphological and phonologicctl

Nulurulness
of the Natural Morphorogists
.""0::1".,";:n:rT,]]j,#*'mas are rhc intercomponenrial
narurarness mavobstructthe achievemenr
or
in morphology,'n
#T:1ff';#,:::T'"tv
thephonorogicut,
."o.pi*orogicar
and
mo.pr,orogi";;[T:iTffi::i;:,t].lJ:JiTI
instance,the morphonorogicar rureproducingan artlmatlon
to be more naturarthan the erectri[k/_ erectrifs/ityrs
rure producingfr.ion u. in craimed
concru[crJ-.concrufiJn;or the .weak,
supplelion seenin chirer
- ch,trren i, mor" natu.al than its ,strong,
Glaswegianor Halifax _ Hutigoniun. counterpartin (,asgow _
A famousintercomponential
naturalncssconflict is the Germanicumlaut
phonologicalmotivation whrch losesits
and resultsin irregular(unnaturar)
following setof Gcrmanverb morphology.For instance,rn
forms umlautco'eratesneithcr the
with numbernor with person:
 1
202 AN INTRODUC-IIONTO'II{E STUDY
OIi MORPHOLOGY
II
l
RECOMMENDED READINGS

Carstairs-McCarthy, Andrew. 1992.CurrentMorphotogl:.I_ondon:

Routledge.
Dik, SimonC. 1980.Stucliesin Functionul REFERENCES AND SIILDCT I]IBLIOGRAPHY
Grammur.London:Aca.emic press.
1989. The Theory ofFunctionar Gramntar.
Dorirrccht: Foris.
Doncgan' Patricia J' & David Starnpe
1979."The study of Natural phonorogy,,.
current
Phonol<tgicurrheo* ed,.by D. A. Dinsen, 126 IT3.Bloomington: .,\rrtlerson,JohnM. 1911.The Granmur of cuse. cambridge:cambridgelJniversrtyPrcss.
llryoac.hes^to
prcss. In<liana
Lrntverslty Arrderson, StephcnR. 1985."Typologicaldistinctionsin word fbrmation".I'angttageTypology
o*r:t::.Y"tuang u. r9g5.Morphonoroglt:TheDynamicsof Derivation.Ann ctntl s.vntucticDescription.Volume 3 cd. by T. Shopen,3 56. Cambrrdge:cambrtdge
Arbor: Karoma
ruDtts.ners_ UniversityPress.
w' Mayertharer,o. panagr,& w. u. wurzel, SyntacticL)escripliorr'Volume 3
-' eds. I9g7. Leitmotifs in Naturor Morphorrgy. -. 1985."lnflectional morphology".LanguageTl,pologr-and
Amsterdam:Benjamins. by T. Shopen,150-201.Cambridge:CambridgeUniversityPress
e<1.
Hams, JarncsW. 1969.Spanishphonologl,.Cambritlge,
Mass.:MIT press. _. 1985.Phonologvin the Twentiethcenlury. chicago: university of ChicagoPress.
-' l9T5 "Morphologyin generative grammar:Voweraltemationsin spanish
verb rorms,,.E/ Applegate,JosephR. 1958.An Outlineof thestructureoJShilha.New York: Americancounctl
espafioly la ringtistica generativo-trans-forntucionur of LeamedSocieties.
ed,.by.1.Guitart & J. Roy. Erarcerona:
Ediciones62, peninsula. Aronofi Mark. 1976.l|/ordFormationin GenerotiyeGrummar.cambridge,Mass.:
MIT Press.
Haegemar,Liliane. 1991. Introtruction to by ltsetf.stemsand Inflerional Classes.cambridgc, Mass.:MIT Press.
Government& Bincling Theory. oxford: Brackwell. .1993.Morphology
Hoopcr,JoanB. 1976.An Intt"oductionto Natural T. Harms, cd. 1968. (Jniversals
in Theorv.
Lirtgtristic Ncw York:
Gerterativepltonolog1,.psv/ york: Acadentic flach, Emmon W. & Robert
Press. Holt, Rinehartand Winston
Hudson,R. A. 1976.Argumentsfor a Non-Transformationar
(iramnrar. chicago: University IJauer,l-aurie. Ldinburgh:l-dinburghllniversity Press'
1988.IntroducingLinguisticMorphok',g.t'.
of
Chicagopress. D.
tJazell,clrarlesE. 1966."Linguistic typology".liive InuugurulLecturescd. by P. Strevens.
Itkonen,Esa. r 976. "The useand misuse
of the principleof axiomaticsin linguistics,,. 29--49.London:Oxlbrd UniversityPress.
Zingaa
38.I 85_220. llloomfield,Leonard.1935.Lunguagc.London:Allen and unwin. (Rcviscdedition)
Keyser,samuelJ. & paurM. postal.1976.
BeginningEngrishGramnnr.New york: llrekle, Ilerbefi F.. 1972. Semttntik. Eine EinJiihrtotg in die spntchwissenschaftliche
Harper&
Row. Miincl-ren:Fink.
Becleutungslehre.
Kiparsky,Paul l968. "Tenseand mootl in ..Reflcctionson tl-reconditionsfor the coining, use and undemtanding
of nominal
Indo-European
syntax,,.Foundation.g
oJLanguctge ._. 1978.
4.30_57. (Vienna, 1977) Innsbruck-
compoun<ls".Proceedingsof the XII|' rcL
I-i, CharlesN. 1976.Subjectantl Topic.Newyork: and Forn
Academicprcss. ftybce, Joan. 1985' Morphology: A Studl' of the Relation BetweenMeuning
Lightfoot,Davi<i r 975. NaturarLogic and : Benjamins.
the GreekMootis.The Haguc:Mouton Atnstcrdam
Spencer'Andrew' l99l ' Morphological Iheory: ('anrpbell,A. 1959.Okl Engtish(]rammar.Oxford: ClarendonPress'
An Introducrionto worcl srracture in Generalive
(i r ummur. Oxford: Blackwell. ( .arstairs-Mccarlhy,
Andreu,.1992.Cuft ent M orpholog. London:Routledgc.
Steinbcrg,Dany D' 1975' "chomsky: From Readingsin English Truttsfornntiortttl
('fromsky,Noam. 1970."Remarkson nominalizations".
formarism to mentalism and psychorogical
invalidity". Glossa9.93_l 17.
G r a m n t a r e d .b yR 'Ja co b s&P'R o se n b a u m ,1 8 4 2 2 9 'Wa l th a m 'M a ss:Gtn n
Stockwell'RobertP' 1977' Founclations English'NervYork: Harper& Row
of syntrcri( Tlteory.Englewoodcliffs: prentice-lIall. - & MauriceHalle. 1968 SoundPatternof
('omrie, Bernard. 1976.Aspect:An Introductiol'tlo lhe study of verhal Aspect.cambridge:
CarnbridgeUniversitYPress.
-.1985.Iense.Cambridge:CambridgeUnivcrsityPrcss'
Grammarof syrian Arubic.washington'D.c.: Georgetown
('owell,Mark w. 1964.A Reference
UniversitYPress.
(.urme,Georgeo. 1960.A GrammaroJ'theGerntanLanguage.New York: FredcrickUngar'
 201

Diakonof{ Igor M. I
Dik, Simon C. 19g0.
_,e8e,,",0""1j!f
AN INTRODI/CTION
TOTIIE5l UDYOFMORPHOI-OGY

9gg.A,frasianLanguages.Moscow:
Nauka.
REFERENCES AND SITLECT BIBLIOGRAPHY

f lewson,John & Vit Bubenik. 1997.Tenseantl Aspectin Intlo-Eto'opean Languages"Theory,

ll
f.)::,::::;,:;::7#;fi Typotogy,Diachrony. Amsterdam: Benjamins. l
Donegan,ParriciaJ.
& David ,o_0. .
*.fi*car,emicpress Prcssesdc I'LJniversileLaval'
f tirtle,WalterH .1915. 'I'ime,Aspectand the L'erb.Quebec'. l
,nin.

I
Approache.s," studyof Naturatphonotogy,,. tles cas.Etudede grammaire gendrttle'Actu 'Iutlundica
rrrrr)",),";;:::,:? .t*
Theoryed' by D'A' (.urrent lljelmslev, Louis. 1935.La c:utdgorie
university,r""".'o'otor'cal Dinsen, ,ru tri.eio-ingron,
Indiana Vll.1.xij 184andIX.2.viij 78
Dressler,WollgangU. .,lllements Itockctt,CharlesF. 1954."Two modelsof grammaticaldescription".lt/ord 10.210 231'
lg7g. of a
P,o""ertingso\"thexrrh theory or word rormation,'. ._. 1958.A Coursein MoclernLinguistics.New York: The Macmillan company.
rcr,(Vienna, ,rr, ,liltollliistic
- lgg5' Morphonorogv: Ncw York: Academtc
llooper,JoanB. 1976.An lntroductionto NaturalGenetativePhortolog],.
TheDynamicso1:oirror.r.Ann
-;X#:1ilTfif;,i:*tr& Arbor:Karomapubrishers. Press.
w u w'-"i,'"4..1e87.
Leitmotifs
inru)iu,ot (irammnr. Clhicago:Universityof
uo,pr,orog,, f ludson,R. A. 1976.Argumentsfora Non-TrunsJbrmutional
Erben,Johannes.1975 ChicagoPress.
Einfilhrung in die tleutsche
ll.ortbildungslehre. Berlin:Schmidt. Rinehart and
F.alkenstein,aOam. f
i crammailk der Sprache llyman, Larry M. 1975.Phonologv: Theory^and Anall:sis.Ncw York: llolt,
lnstirurum Bibli"";1 Gudeas ;.,, ;;r;";;ma: pontrficium Winston.
Zlngua
Fillmorc,Charles J. 196g...The
casefor case,,.Bach & Itkonen,L.sa.1976."T'heuseand misuseof the principleof axiomaticsin linguistics"
Fleischer,W. 1975.Il/o Harms I 96g.I gg.
()egenwart'r'sprac&e. 3 8 . 18 5 - 2 2 0 .
II' 23 7l ' ]'he
Fodor, I. 1e59."rhe Tiibingen: Niemeyer. .fakobson,Roman. 1936."Beitrag zur allgcmeincnKasuslehre".selectetlwriting.s
Fromki n,Victori j;il;ffi;:1,,i;:f:":;;
"r'i!!i:::"^f:de.urs.chen Lingw,7 1_41,186_2 ;
a. Hague:Mouton.
troduction to Longuage.
^
Rinehart and winston. New york: Holt, - . l g 5 1 . S h i J i e r s,Ve r b a l C a te g o r i e sa n d th e R u ssi a ttVe r b ,C a n b r td g c,M a ss.:H a r va r d
Gleason,Henry A. l96l UniversityPress.
to Descriptive Lingui'stic.New york:
and winston. ,*"rr","!'"1ir'ii!lction Holt, Rineharr .lcnsetr, J. 1990.Morphology.Amsterdam:Benjamins'
Goodwin,William W.
lg94/1965.A GreekOrammar.London: .lespersen, otto. 1929.ThePhilosophyof Granmur. London:Allen and ljnwin.
*"Tl""li;llllll,"illl. I'anguoge Macmillan.
-. 1942.A Modern English Grammur on llistorical
Pritrciples.PartYI. Morphologl" London:
u,unoo^ speciat
Refere,,"
-'iii,n to-.F"otu,"
Hierarc.hies. Allen and Unwtn.
Grammar
In*oduction
to Government .foly, Andr6.1975."Towarda theoryof genderin ModemEnglish".stu(liesin English
;fi::il::*lt|if;r:t)i" & Bindingrheory oxford:Brackwerr de l'Universitede l-ille'
o'"tot"na to a theory ed.by Andre loly,229 287.Lille: Presses
of word formatio,r'. lnguutir-rnquiry
Halliday, Michael o. *.
1967'"Noteson transitivity ry.3-16. Katz,Jerrold J. 1966.The Philosophv oJLanguage' New York: HarperandRow'
Linguisti.s3.37-gl. anclthcmet" u"rt*i, 0"" LanguageTypologyand Syntuctic
languages".
t," Journal of Kcenan,Edrward L. 1985."Passivein the world's

ererence Descriptioned.byT.Shopcn,243-281'Cambridgc:CambridgcUniversityPress'
"Tl;I#t;j,T:##:J:- Grammar
ofMoroccan
Arabicwashington, Yolk: Harpcr&
Dc : Keyser,SanruelJ. & Paul M. Postal.1976.BeginningEnglishGrarnrnur.New
Row.
"":'#;:r.:.:#i:-:Tffi svntax
in Cross-Linguistic
perspecti.,,e. syntax".Foundationsof Language
,:;ti"::"*'"at Kiparsky,Paul. 1968."'I'enseand mood in Indo-European
Harris,JamesW. 1969. 4.30 57.
Spanishphonology.Cambridge,
Mass.:MIT press. ofsynlax and phonologyin cliticization"'['artguuge
- Klavans,Judy. 1985."The independence
srammar:
Vowi artemarion,
in spuni.hverbrorms,,.
"]tJl;,ii;-,!:J::,:generative E1 61.95 120.
EdicionesOZ,peninsulienerativo_trunsfr.trmacionuled.by J. Guitarf , ** Barcclona: Koziol, Herberl. 1931. Ilanrtbuch tler Englist'lten wortbildungslehre Heidclberg.
"
instructurat Krimskli,,Jiii. 1969.The lilortl as a Linguistic Unit The Haguc:Mouton'
Linguistics
chicago:
university
ii;tJ]'?i, ilJr];T'?,^
rors Jedliika. 1963.
press.
orchicago Kurylorvicz, lerzy. 1964.Inflectional categories of Indo-European.Heidelberg:
carl wintcr'
ieskd mluvnice.,*n", Brace Jovanovich.
nakladatelstvi. ,,Ur, Oedagogickd Peter.l 975.A Coursein Phonetics.
l ,a<lefoeed. New York: Harcourt
 206 AN INTRODUCTION
TO THESI'UDYOFMORPHOL(X;Y
REFERENCIESAND SITLITCI BIBLIOGRAPHY 207

Lees, Robert ts. 196

The (irammar of English
Nominalizations.Bloomington/The (English
Indiana Universi Hague: tlc Saussure,Ferdinand.7955.Courstle linguistiquegt)ndrale5'hEdition' Paris:Payot'
r ewis,Georrrer r,:;:i " translationby wade Baskin, cburse in General Lingttistics.Ncw York: Philosophical
;,f;;r:;:::.,, o xrbrcr: c raren
L e w i s , M . B . l9 6 g ..il, donpress Library,1959.)
Li,charresNreT6;:;",i:::";;:"_:TTl,llffi,::?i;: Schachter,Paul. 1985."Parts-of-spcechsystems".Luttgtnge Typology-and 's\'ntildic
Descriptiotl'
Lightfoot,David. 1975. V o l u m e l e d . b yT.Sh o p e n ,3 6 l .C a m b r i d g c:C a r r r b r i d g cU n i ve r si tyPr e ss.
Natural Logic ara ,n"
Lipka, Lconhard ts7i. ,];;:::::.::a,the.Gleek l, Moods.rhe Hague:Mouton.
Schwyzer,Erluard.1959.GriechischeGramnmtik'Miirrchen:Beck'
to 'Proiegomena' to a
theory or\,./oro formation,,. in Generalit'e
Transformationor'^otot"to-ena The Spcncer,Andrew. l99l. Morphologicul Theory:An lntroduttion to ll/ctnlstructure
and Modern Lingztisttc
Kcimer. oln.,".0rlno,."Ji#l; "t*u*' Thte.,v ,a. avE. F Grumna r. Oxlord: Blackwell.
K.
psychological
Lyons, John. 196g.Introtluction
,.- .v
lo ,,.cv,e,,Lut
Theoretic,alLtngu6tics. Steinberg,Dany D. 1975. "chomsky: From formalism to mentalisnr and
press. Lit cambridge:cambridge
university invalidity". Glossa 9.83- l 1'7.
-. 1977. Senontics. I and 2 cambridge:cambridge Stcvenson, C. H. 1970.TheSpanishI'anguageToda.ttLondon:Ilutchinson'
university press. Prcntice-Hall'
Macdonell,Arrhur A. ,Y:f916.i":A l/ectic(irunmar Stockrve ll, RobertP. 1977. Foundationsof slntocticTheory.Englewoodcliffs:
Marchand,Ha's. I969. fbr Stttdents. OTford,:O*i.A Uni*rsity press. Paris:Klincksieck.
'l csnidre,Lucicn. 1959.Eldmentsclesyntaxestr"ttcturdle.
antl r1'peso/ Present-Da1' clePrague
Eclition. Munich: u::;.'*"to""t English w'o)rt ror*otion.2.u lrubetzkoy,Nikolai S. 1929."Sur la morphologie".Travanrtltr cerclelinguistitlue
Martinet,Andre. 1965. 1.8585.
tu morphonologic,,. La linguistiquel.16_31.
Matthews,peter IL rnr..O"
- . l g s 4 . . . D a s mo r p h o n o l o g i sch e systcm d e r r u ssi ch e n Sp r a ch e ''.Tr a va u r d u ce r t:l e
,erbr",,,rij,.!i!iili*,::ry::^^^r:?;#:::,:,:;;:,:!, a^"aonAspects
Lutin or littguistiquede Prague.Volume 5,Part2'
7 (English
-r::i:ry:#:":,?;:;"::'"i""""'o'-0""rheoryorword-structurecambridge: -. 1939.(iruntlziigederPhonologie.TruvanctlucerclelinguistiqlrctlePrague
Angeles:Universityof califomia Press, 1969)'
translation by c. A. M. Baltaxe,Berkeley/I-os
Meillet, Anloine & Joseph 'l.zcrmias,Paul. 1969.Neugriec'hische Grammalik.Bern/Miinclren:Francke.
Vendryes. 194g.Traitd
classiques.Paris:champion. de grummaire comparde lo Littguistics.New York: McGraw.}{i,||,
des langues Wardhauglr, Rorrald.7972.Introduc'liolt
I and 2. cambridge:
Mitchell' TerenceF' 1962.
ColroquialArabic.r,ondon:The wright, w. 1896-1898.A Grantmar the Arubic Lunguugc.Volttntes
of
r".iiil;,lli,1i.:,1," M Freischer
EnglishUnivcrsitiespress.
CambndgeUniversitYPress.
tstt t,.ti, a, rntensive
Course";;;"r,university cliffs: Longmans'
Zandvoort,Reinardw. 1966.A Ilantlbookof EnglishGramnrar.Englewood
Nida, EugencA. l94g.It4
Mich.:univcrsiry Analvsis
of ll/ords.2"dEdition.ArurArbor,
^ ,r'i*lilr#r!"D.escriptive
ogden' charres K' & I' A. Richards.
rg46-The Meaning of
Routledge& Keganpaul. Meaning.g,hEdition. London:
* (First cdition 1923.)
Palmer,Frank R. 1965.I
peirce, charles studv of the Engltsh l/erb.London:
,hilosophical
s. I 955. !::!'""' Longmans.
llruings of peirce ed.
Dover. by Justusg".h;.. New york:
Robins, Robert H. 19i9. ..In
defensevr of yvr
Wp,,.. rransactions
Trt
57.116-144. of the philological Societt,
_. 1967. A Short History of
Linguistics. London; Lo'gmans.
"Someprobrem'
or*o,a ro..nation".
-"T;,:fr:'iii:":::' Linguistische
Arbeitent4
Ros6n,Ha.iimB. 1977.
ContemporaryHebrew. TheHague: Mouton.
 allomoryhy,19 21, 148 150
INDLX Ot- LATNGIIAGES

gender,83
109 1I
a s p e c tI, 1 8 - 1 1 9 ,1 8 8 - 1 9 1 ovcrlapPingdistribution,36 l
compounding,169, 1'75-'176 pronotninalforms,73
INDEX OF LANGUAGES subjunctive,123 I24

Arabic (tucludesClassical
Arabic)
conditioningof allomorphs,i 50-l 5l '
153
pronounswith regardto
dcmonstrative
suppletion,I 8
vo i ce ,1 2 5
I
Bedawye(Kushitic) proximitYattdremoteness,113
adjectives,6
pronomrnalforms, 74 German
allography,l6 derivationalParadigm,172
deteminativccompounds,118 179 adjectives,6
consonantal root, 6
Berber: aspect,I I 9
dcrivationalparadigm,167 l69 expansion(in word formation),169
circumfix,2l
FunctionalGrammar, 194 196 exponence,I 43
elative,6
suppletion,1g gender,8 I determinativecomPounds,I 79
grammat.icalword,22
infinitive,l07 108 dirninutivcnouns,55 56
infixation,2l
Cantonese g e n d cr ,8 3 - 8 4 ,8 5
intemalinflection, l g, 26 markcrsofperson, I 12
pronomrnalfonns, 76
nrorphological andsYntactic morphonologY,16 1
markedness, 43
predication,107 passive(analYtic)'126
number,8597, 199
Chinese
morphonologY,l6l pronominaltbrms,73
prefixation,21
compounding,
lTT neutra'lalignment,95 stent-foImingclcment,55
pronomrnalforms, 74
number,8g
number,85 strongnominaldeclension,58
serni-agglutinative,
6 l_63
particiPles,108 umlaut,55,200 201
semi-fusional,
61_63
Cree(Algonkian) voice,I 26
transfixation,
2 l, 26 positionalmobilitY,14
gender,8 I
prefixation,170 173 weak nominaldeclension,58
vocalicpattems,l g
pronomrnal forms, 76
pronominalfoms, 73
third person,i 13 ofwords, l7 l8 Grcck,Ancicnt
Arabic, Egyptian segmentability
verbal fomrs, 25 accent,I 5
collectivenouns,40, go semanticfeatures,3
subjunctive,123 adjectives,6
singularization,
40, g6
Czech allograPhY,l 6
suffixation(in word Ibmratlon),
accent,15
1 1 3 - r '75 a sp e ct,l 1 6 ,1 1 9 1 2 0
Arabic, Moroccan
adjectives,6 clitics,24
exponcnce,
139,141 142 slmtacticcomPounds,180
aspect,43
t h i r d P e r s o n,1 1 3 dcmonstrativcpronounswith regardto
diminutivenouns,55_56 proximitYand rcmotcness,I 14
Arabic, Syrian voice, I 26
gender,83, g5 exponcncc,143-144
conditioningol'allomorphs,I 52
153 positionalmobility, 56 imperative.122
derivation(of nouns),I g 1_l g4 l 'i n n i s h
pronomrnalforms,75 i n fi n i ti ve ,1 0 8
exponence,l4l_142 case,92 94
voice, 125 markedness,43
iconicity, lgT
middle voice, 125
number,85 l,rcnch
English number,88
pronominal forms, 74 accent,15
adjectives,6,71 particiPles,108 110
clitics,24
suPPlction,l8
 2t 0

voice,125 126
AN INTRODUCTION
TO TIII S'I'LJDYOF
MOR?HOLOGY

discontinuousmorpheme,25 t )ltl H,nglish

INDEX OT. I-ANOTJAGES

Spanish
lI
Greek,Modern exponcnce,139-l4l adjectivcs,72 acccnt,191-194 l

I
dislributionalinclusion, Functional Grammar, gender,83, 85 aspect,119
36, 42 lg5 196
gender,g3 fusionaltype,59 case,92
strongnominaldcclcnsion,57 58
tense_aspect, gender,gl g4 57 58 clitics,24
120 weaknominaldeclension,
grammaticalword,22 exponence,142-143
I{ebrew rmperatives,l2l ( )ld Norse subjunctive,124
clitics,24 infinitives, 107 l0B
markersofPcrson, I 12
derivation(of nouns), gl irrealis,I25 Sumerian
I
gender,g4 middlevoice,126 gender,80
l'L:rsian
graphemes,l6 mood,120,124 pronouns,77 numbcr,88
possessive
reduplication,7 moryhologicalpredication,
I 06
morphonology,161_162 Turkish
l(Lrrnantan
Ilin di nasalinfix, 23, 26 adjectives,7 I
clitics,24
ergative-absol nominative_accusative agglutinatinglanguage'I l6
utive alignment,95 alignment,95
imperative,121 overlappingdistributron, aspect,59-60
37 l{ rrssran
passive(analytic), I participles,108_llt ca se ,9 19 2
26 animacY,119 200
personalpronouns,73 passive(synthetic),I 26 definitenessandpersonalpronouns,
aspect,I I 6
personalsuffixes,I l4 112 ll3
reduplication,7 avoidanccof Passive,I 27
vorce,126 positionalmobility,I4 demonstrative pronounswith regardto
case,94-95
possessivepronouns,77 7g ProximitYand remoteness,1 l3
iconicity,198
Italian pronominalforms,75 cxponcnce, 140'-141
imperative,122
morphonology, sememes,2 gender,8 1
160-l6l m o r p h o n o l og Y,1 5196 1
subjunctive,124 l2S markersofPerson' I 1I i l2
syncretism,44
Janjero(Kushitic) suppletion,26 personalsuffixes,I l4
gender,g I rypology,l9g mobilitY,14' 56
posrtional
Sanskrit
verba deponentia,127 possessivePronouns,76 77
coordinatecomPounds,176 118
Latin voice,126 127 pronominalibrms, 75
detemrinativecompounds,l'18 1'79
accent,16,93 imperative,122 123 semcmes,2
Lithuanian thirdPerson,ll3
adjectives,6, 7l middlevoice,126
adjectives,72_73 typologY,198
allomorphy,i6l passiveconstruction,'l28
aspccr,I l7_119 comPounds,
possessive 179 i80 vowef harmonY,2l, 152 159
Malay
casc,88-92 voice,125-126
clitrcs,24 number,gg Yiddish
reduplication,7 gender,83
dcclensions,
5g,{l Slavtc
demonstrativepronouns gender,84
with regardto Modem Norwegian
proximity and remoteness,
I l3 personalsuffixes,I l2
diminutivcnouns,55_56
 GENt]RAI, IND[X I3

, r t tirb u t c ,7 0 cl o se dcl a ss,7 3 ,1 1 4

rrrrl,,rtrent,
143 collectivenoun,40,85

l
GENERAL INDEX comitative,91
lr,rsc,
2I cornmand,120
meaning,172
lr;rsic comparison,70
ablative(- ahlat:us),g9 lengthening,162
compensatory
Aktionsart,l6g I 'e r r c l i c i a r y , 8 8
causae,90 lrrrrirism,4l complementary
alignment, g5
instrumental,90 lr,rttlld(msrpS.rne),13 distributron,35
active-inactivc,95
locl et temporis, g0 hrrrndary,
24 rclationship,200
double_oblique, 95
ortginis,90 Inorpheme,24 units,35
ergatrve_absolutive,
95
qualitatis, g0 complex(definite)adjectivc,72
neutral,95 word, 24
ablaut,57 oomplexlexeme(- composite), 166
nominative-accusative,
95
absolutive(case),60, 9t componentialanalysis,3
allograph,l6 , l l q u i n g ,5 6
abstractagreement,I gg composile(- complexlexeme)'166
alfomorph,1, 19,20, 14g r 'r r s o7,0 , 8 8 , 1 1 0
abstractnoun,70, 174, lg2 compound,166,\16
allomorphy,vi ablative,90,91
accent,lg1 additive,176
allophone,I absolutivc,9 1
accusative,8g coordinate,I 76
alloseme,I 88
accusative,
ofplace,gg comitative,91 57
copulative,
ambiguity,137
action.70 descriptive,178
analogy(seeproporlional) d a t i v e 8, 8 , 9 1
aclive,125, 127 dctcnninativc, 6, 118
1"7
analyic (morphology),107,126 ergative,95
additivecompound,I76 endocentric,180
animacy,g4 essive,94
addressec, 75 exocentric,I 80
anrmate(being),79 genitive,89
adjectivalconcord,g2 91 176,179
possessiv€,
anteriority(relativcaspect),1l6 irrstrumcntal,
inflection,Tl subordinat€,I 78
antonymy,777 locative,9l
adjective,
70,174 syntactic,176
aorist,1l9--120 nolninative, 88, 9l
simplc(indefinite)in tsaltic,72 obliqtre,I l0 co m p o u n d i n g1,6 8 ,1 6 9
arbitrariness,4
complex(definite)in Baltic,72 partitive,89,94 co n ce p t,51, 7 5
article,70
adposition,
I94 concretenoun,70, 173
aspect,70, 107, 116, 168 translative,94
adverb,70, I 75 conditionalclause,I 24
immanent,l16, 120 cascrnarking,194
atfix, 12 condilionrng
imperfective,116, 121 .ausalclause,124
affixation,168 l cxi ca l ,2 l , 1 5 0
rnccptive,I l6 t:hangeofstate, 70
agent,95,125 morphological, 53, 150
pcrfectivc,116,llg, l2l crrcumfix,21
agcntivcphrase,127 phonological,20 21, 150
progressrve, clause,124
I l6
agglutinating(language),vi, 59, 6l 71
congruence(: agreement),
prospectrve,I l6 causal,| 24
agglutinative 23
conjugation(s),
relative(antenority),I l6 conditional,124
typology,61,198 consecutive,124 conjunction,70
retrospective,I l6
exponcncc,140 final,124 consecutiveclause,124
transcendent,116,120
agreement
(: congruencc)
, 71, g2 subordinate,124 constructionaliconicitY'197
assertion,123
marker,188 clitics(= grammaticalwords).23 contrastiveunits,35
assimilaloryprocesses,I 52
 2t 4 AN INTRODU(]'IION

coordinatecompound,I 76
copulativecompound,56
g5
countability,
TO THE STUDY OF MORPHOLOGY

diagrammatic(rclationship),
( - voice.).125
diarhesis
l 9g Irlcrnal inflection,I 8
, rllrnsic (ordcringofrules), i92
GIJNL,RAL INDEX

gender,74, 79
word, 13
2t 5
l
diminutivenoun, 174, lg4 grammaticalwords (- clitics),23
countablenoun,g5
discontinuous morpheme,2, 25 I t 'r r r i n i n8el, 8 5 , i 81, 1 8 3 grapheme,16
counter_lconic,
I 97
discourse analysis,12,3g lnul clause,124
cumulation(of significates),
59 distinctivefeaturcs,l, 3 l r s t p e r s o n1, l I , I 1 3 ,1 1 5 heteronym,8'l
cumulative(exponence),139
distribution,35, 42 lrrr:dmeaning,I 72 hetcronynry,44,8i
complementary, 35 krcus,195 of pcrsonalpronouns,77
dativc,88
overlapping,36 lorcignbase,173 hypostaticnoun (in Arabic), 184
ofpurpose,gl
distributional l,rlm,vi, 4, 5 hypothetical(udgment), 125
declarativc(sentence),I 20
equivalence,
35 lirrmalsyntax,188 191
declension(s),
23
inclusion,36 37,42 lirrmativeambiguity,I 37 icon, 5
strong,57, 72
double marking (: extended lirnctionalcategories,I 06 iconicity,197
weak,57,72 exponence),
143 frrrnctional
Grammar,194 196 scaleof, 7
deepstructure,I l4
dual,86 lused(exponence),142 | 43 ir-nage,5
definite(complex)adjectrve,72
lirsion(of significates),59, 66 immanent(aspect), I 16, 120
dcfinitencss,
9I, 92, 112
elative(in Arabic),6. lg4 lirsional(typology),61, 198 imperfect,119,121
dcgreeof mark edness,42, 92
endocentriccompound,I g0 Iuturetense,I 15"I l6 impcrfcctive,116,120, 122
deicticelements(pronouns),I l4
cplcenelexcme,gl l i r t u r et i m e , I l 5 I 1 6 inrperative,121
deixis,73
equationalpredication,94 third person,122
demand,123
equrpollent(opposition),4 I gcnder,70 impersonal passive,128
demonstrative
(pronoun),I l3
ergative(case),95 grammalical,74, 82 inanimate(thing),79
dependent(subordinate)
compound,I 7g essive(case),94 natural,74, 82 inccptivc(aspccl),I 16
dcponcntvcrbs, 127
EventTime, l l6 (jenerativePhonology,160, 191 194 inclusive(in thc 1" PersPl), 76
dcrivation,52, 169
exceptlonfilter, 167 gcnitive,89 indefiniteness,92, I l2-l 1'3
dcrivational
exclusivc(in thc I', pcrs pl), 76 descriptive,89 index,5
affix,23
exocentriccompound,I g0 objective,89 indexicality,198
b ase,5 3,l6 g
expansion(in word formation),t 69, g6 partitive,89 indicative,124
morphology,4, 54, 166, l68 I
exponence,139 possessivc,
89 indignation,123
paradigm,166, 172
agglutinative,140 subjcctive,89 infectum,117, 126
dcrivative,166,l6g
cumulative,139 syntactic,80 infinitive, 107
description,120
extended(= doublcmarking), 143 gerund, I I I passive,108
descriptivecompound,I 7g
tused,i42, 143 gerundial(verbal)noun, 182 perfectpassive,108
designator,I l6
ovcrlapping,143 gerundive,108, I 10 perfective,108
determinant,l6g, 170, l7g l79
underlyinglyagglutinative,143 grammaticalanalysis,l6 108
retrospective,
determination,l6g
ex po n e n t , 1 3 9 grammalicalcategories,vi infix, 2l
determinative compound,176, l:g
expressionrule, 194 primary,vi,23 intleclion(inflexion),52
determinatum,168,l7g
extended(exponence),143 secondary,vi, 23 adjectival,72
diagram(subcategoryoficons), 5 exterior(with local cases),92 grammatical cl a sse s,1 9 9
 216 AN INTRODT]C'ItON -IO'THE
STUDY OF MORPTIOLOGY GONLRAL INDEX 217

extemal,lg
listener,1I I (functionof the nominative),88
rr,rrrring obliquecasc.I 10
rntemal,lg
local case,92 93 ruuratedevent,1I 5 occupationalnoun, I 83
inflecrionalaffix, 23, l8g
locative,9l r r i r t i vbea s e ,1 7 3 old infonrration,I l3
inflectional (flective) language,
2, | 67 ofproperty, lg3 rrlturalgender,74,82 6
onornalopoeic,
Inflectionalphrase,I gg
noun,183 Phonology,vii, 191'
Natural(Cenerative) opcnclass,73
rnstrumental
197 opposition
case,9 l
macroparadigm,200 Nirtural vii, 197
MorphologY, equipollcnt,41
noun,I 83
mands,120 x,
rrirturalness,197 privative,4l
Intercomponential conflicts, 200 markedness,
40, lg7 assertion,123
rrr'gative optative,123
rntcrfix,2l, 16g,l7g
degreeof,42 rrcrrter,83 orthographicalrvord, I 3
interior(with local cases),92
m;rkerful, 197 rrcwinformation,113 overlappingdistribution,36 37
inte4'ection,70
masculine,82 r r o r n r n a l i z a t i o n ,7 1 ovcrlairpingcxPoncrlce,I 43
inlemal
massnoun,85 r r o n r i n a t i v e , 8 3 , 9l
coh esion14, , 56
meanrng(linguistic),5 nrrn-cumulative (exponence),140 142 paradigmeconomY,200
inflection,l g
metaphor,5 n()n-cxperienced time, 1I 7 paradigmatic,vt
plural,40, 85
metonymy,178 (verb
rron-finite fonns), 107 relations,37 39
interrogative
middle voice, 125 126 197
rurn-iconic, structurc,197
pronoun,7g
minimal pair, 36 time, I l7
r)()n-present parole,39
sentence, 120 minimum flee fomr, l3 I 16
rrotionaltense-sYstem, participationin discourse,I I I
introflecting(language),26
mood,70, 106,120 70,107
participles,
rntroflexive(typology),| 9g
morpheme-based
derivationalrnorphology, active,110
incalis,125 <A
r r o u n s , 7 01,0 6 fu tu r c,1 0 8 ,1 0 0
isolating(typology),198
morpheme,vi, l-3, 12,16_17 abstract,'70,114, 182 gerundive,I l0
Item and ArrangementMod,el,vi,24 ,25
morphological collective,85,111 passive,I l0
Item and ProcessModel, vi,27
conditioning,53 concrele,70,173 present,I 10
identity(- syncretism),44, 52 countable,85 partitive,94
lu ssive ,12 0 partsofspeech,70
markedness, 40 4l diminutivc,114, 184
predication,106 gerundial(- vcrbal),I 82 passivc,125 128
language
morphology1definirion1.vi hypostatic(in Arabic), 184 p a stte n sel ,1 5 1 1 6
definitionof, 4
morphophoneme, 159 instrumental,183 p a stti m e ,1 1 5 1 1 6
lcvels,I
morphophonemic rule, 160 locative,I 83 patient,95
langue,39
morphonology,i59 mass,85 penultimatesYllable,vi
lexeme,vi, l, 13
morphosyntactic occupational,183 perfect, ll'l 120
lexeme-based derivationalmorphology,54 I 16, I l9
categories,139 personal,173 perfective(asPect),
lexology,l3
propertres,I 39 s i n g u l a t i v e , 851,8 3 perfectum, l17 , 126
lexotactics,4, 38
morphotactics,
4, 38 verbal(: gerundial),182 person,70, I 06
linear character,38
mutatron(= umlaut),55,143,201 n u m b c r , 7 0 , 8 51, 0 6 personal
linguisticpronominalization,I I 4
mutuallyexclusiveenvironments,I 4g n o u l r ,1 7 3
linguisticsign,4
passive,I 28
obiectivegenitive,89
 21 8 AN INTRODTJC]TIONTO
]'IIE SI'UDY OF MORPHOLOGY GENIIRAL INDDX 2t9

pronoun,77
prohibition,42,116 (: features),79
( ()nlponents subject,I 04
phone,I
pronominal reference,g2 rrrarkedness,40 ofdiscoursc,I I I
phoneme,I
pronomrnalvoice, 125 functions(- properties),
rr:urtico-s),'ntactic of intransitiveverb,95
sysremahc,160 '
pronouns,70, 73 ii () olpredication,106
phonological
demonstrative,I l3 rrretttc, l -3 subjcctivcgcnitivc,89
analysis,I 3 ",
rndefinite,7g '.,rui l ggl uti nati v c , 6l subjunctive, 123 124
conditioning,53,150
interrogativc, 7g ,.,.rrrrl Lrsi onal ,6 l subordinate
unit, I
possesstve, 76 ',, rrri rnorphemi c,172 clause,I 24
word, 13
relative,7g compound,I 78
(dependent)
phonotacticrule, 4 ',(ni l ol i cs, 5, 8
proportional analogy,6, 20 1 ',,rrl cttce,38 subphonemc,36
phonotactics,3g
prospecttvc(aspect),1I6 t l cl l ed, l 14
1
subsystem,
plural, 85
proximate,ll2_113 rl ccl arati ve,l 20 suffix,21, I 73
broken(: intcrnal),40
proximity,73,112_l13 intcrrogative, 120 suffixation,143, 169
ofabundancc,g6
suppletion(: polymorphy)'2, 18' 26
ofpaucity, g6 l rrssi ve,122
quantrty,85 rr:l l exi ve, 125 syrnbol,4
plurality,85
quasr-nominal(verb forms), 107 ..,rrl crtti alstress ,I l 4 syncretism(- morphologrcalidgntrty)' 44.
polite prohibirion, 123
questron,120 ,,l rrl i ur(tonsc),115 52,93
potymorphy(: supplelion),
vt,2, 140 syntactic
p olyse my,vi,2 ,61, 140 'ty.n(" si gne),4
real(wish),125 (- sigrrifier), 197 compound,176
polysynthetic(language),vi, 'r3rrlts
l9g receiver,88 .,n;n(ttum(: si gni fi ed), 197 funclions,I 94
popularformation,54
reduplication,T, gg \ t (u lilnt (: signifi er), 4 g r o u p ,1 7 6 ,1 8 0
positionalmobility, 14, 56
referencc,5 (= signified)' 4 predication,I 06
possessive 'r.tltilii
pronomrnal,g2 .,rrrrplc ( indefi nile) adjective, 72 syntagmatic,vi
comp ou ndlj6
, , 179, 1g1
referent,4 :rrrl l trl ari zati on40
,
relations,3T39
pronoun,76
reflexivesentence,125 37
syntagmatics,
posscssor, ';rngtrl ati ve,40
76
relative noun,85, 1 83 synlhcticmorPhologY'I 07
pragmaticfi.rnctions,
195
aspect(anterioriry),I i6 .rpe:rker,75 systctnconglucnce,199
predicate,I 06
sentcnce,125 system-dePendence,197
predication,106 event, 1 15
:,grccch
pronoun,78 ,,pcl l i ng,175 naturalness,I 99
system-dependent
morphological,106
remoleness, l12 l13 ,.plrl crgative tYPologY, 96 systematicPhoneme,160
syntactrc,106
resultative(aspect),42 .,1xrkr:nabout,
ll l
prefix,21,170
retrospecttve (aspect),I I 6, I l9 ',l i rl e.70
tail (pragmaticfunction),195
prefixation,169
root,12,21 change of, 70 tcn sc,7 0 , 1 0 6 ,I 1 5 - 11 6 , 1 6 8
preposition,70
consonantal,1g ..tl rl t'ntent,
I 20 text,38
presenttense,I 15
then-ratic vorvel,vi, 21, 58
presen ttine11
, 5,ll 7 '.t:rl usconstl 'uc tus(i n S emi ti c ), 181
s ec o n d p e r s o lnl l,, i 1 3 ',r('lr.f vi , 12,21,l 7l
theme,195
privative(opposition),4 I
secondaryendings, 143 ',tt'nr l i rrmi ng el ement' 55
th i r d p e r so nl,l l , l l 3
processmorpheme,17
segmentability,l7 ',tress,175 ti m e , 1 1 6 l 1 7
progressrve(aspect),42, 116
semantic Event,116
',tr()ng(nomi na l dec l ens i on),57, 72
 220
cxpencnced,I I 7
AN INTRODTJCTION TO
TIIE S'IUDY OF MORPHOLOCY
I anguagesof the World/Materials
fu turc,l15 ll6
underlyingrcpresentation,
I I 4, 160 I lN(;OM'sDescriptive Grammar series
u n i t s ,v i , l , 3
non_experienced,I I 7 l,r'r, (( lassicallthioPic) St
untty,85 ' 8l Akkadian Sh. Izre'el
non_present, 1I 7
UniversalTime, I l7 ',, h r onrerr1l'olynesim)I-.
pa st,l1 5_ l16 l rrrl trrrn & J LYrch'
universals,197 ,' I ttlhrlilnhu (Warnbo,Nanibia) D.
p resen t,l15 117
umnarked(inflectionclass),
Universal,I l7 200 rr' trlirrininn A. Danylenlio& S.
to pic,19 5 ,, I rntoncscS.-Y.KillilglcYa
variants(in phonology) ,r ' h"t'ti\rh I{. Schulz& A. Eberle
transcendent(aspect),I | (t,
120 il{ | r, ( Kirrlvclian)U.J.LUde$
malor, l4g
transfix, 2 I r,r h,,ltrrl (l'apuan) T.E. Dutton*
mrnor,149 I t l,uilir/Kwilli (non-Parna-Nltngan)
transfixation,26
verba deponentia,l2T w M ( ( i r c gor *
translative(case),94
l r lr.r ( l uuS,usic) A.L Malchukov*
verhal(gerundial)noun, lg2
t, Ilhl(llc DgyptianR SchuL ct al
typo log y,1 97
verbs,70,106 I i \rnrLril I). Killingley & S.-Y
agglutinative,6l,l9g l. rllilrllcv'
ofsaying and perception,125 l ,Irtrtr(il Otomi (Otommgucan)Y
fusion al,6 1,I9g
I rrrll,r'
voice(= diarhesis),
70,106. 107,125 '0 lllrrrri l( llarlou'*
introflexive,lgg
vowel harmony,154 'I ( htr(lirn Arabic S Abu-Absi*
rsolating,l9g ! ' (lurrlrrtr E{stern) Armenian N.A
1.., tttl:cvul
polysynthetic,I9g 'r
:: hhrrclhoe W. Ilmcke
weak (nominaldeclension),57,
semt-agglutinative, 72 t' I'rstnrrquodrlY-Maliseet
6I
wish ,1 2 3 ,1 2 5 t Alxruxluiur) R. Leavitt*
semi-fuslonal,6l r x llnr sl Palcstiniatr Arabic (Abu
Word and paradigmModel, vi, 25_27,l3g
split ergativc,96 iilrrrshrrdial.) K.N. Shahin*
word, 4, 13 il Northcrn Sotho L.J. Louweus, l.M
t.r,rlr & A.E. Kolzer
fomration,l6g I | :rrliha (Wcstcm Occanic) I I
undergoer,126
size,198 Mrltla
I I lVl\'rl (Algic) K.V. Teeter
| | \lnhrla .l W. ( icir & J Paolillo'
| | | rrnnnaco ((larib, extinct) Sp.
tirIlcrr&S M€ira
rr | /.tr|{ s Ii. Ilosch & G. Poulosa
i / ( ,rn!rticn (Llantu) Aluned-Chmaga
rli I olrlnuan (f()lyrcsiun) R Hooper*
,'r hutrrnra M L. Ilender'
r" ll lrrussian A.Ja. SuPrun & U
I I'lrsrlral
r M{t(liyian/DiYehi J.W Oair & U.
',
{ trilI
r, I llogun V. l)lunglan'
r,i (irrrc M. (iiacoulo'Mrccllesii
rn, lltrlq{rc J. Feuillet*
r,x sunrtrian J.1,.IIaYes*
,,'r lltriilicutcse (Ital. dial.) R. Bigalke*
lrr lrl (;!llrgo J.A. Pcrcz Bouzar
/ | l'|trrtr llajo (Uto-Aztecan)
I , t ttritnlcz*
/ | htrlrlrrr; (Romaili) L.N.
l, h tettlov & M.F Herrrscltink
/ | Al'r uzzcsc (ltal. dial.) R. Bigalke'
/ | | hrsil Tibctan S. DulanceY
/N l.trrlin dla Val Badia L Craflbnara
,') soul( lin (llasque dial.) tJ J Luders
{o ( r(!,lcsc ((iulanese Creole) H.
l' .,r ,"ffi
1I
l
145Russian ll Andre$s
Devonish
146 Uzbek l.L). Cirtautas
82 Canaano-AkkadianSh lzre'el' 147 Georgian M. Chercht
148 Serbo-Croatiin S Kordic*
83 Papismetrtu(Creole)S.
Kouwenberg& B Mutray* 150 Azcri A. Rodrogligcti l
8,1Bcrbicc Dutch Creolc S. l5l Tagalog L. Shkaban
152 Central Breton I WmlTre*
Kouwenberg
85 Rabaul CreoleGerman (PaPua l5l Demotic St. Vurson
New Guinca) C Volkcr 154Polci R. Cosper
86 Nalik (Austronesran)C Volker I 55 Bashkiri A. Bodrogligcti
158Vogul T. Ricse
88 Nyulnyul (non-Pama-Nlangan)W
159 Mandan (Sioun) Mauncio
Mc(iregor*
89 Warrua (non-Panra-Nlungan)W Mixcor
McGregor' 160UpperSorbian G Schaarsclundt
92 Icari (Dargwa) N.R Surnbatova& 16l Toura (Mmde) th. Bearth
R.O. Mutalov 162West Greenlandic J M Sadock
93 Daur (Mongolic)ChaoluWu 165Dagaarc(Gur) A Ilodomo
(Ujiycdirr Chuluu)' 166Yuchi M.S. Lirut
l6? ltelmen J. tsobaljik
| 00 Bare (Arawak) Alcxandra Y
Aikhcrvald' I 68 Apache W de Reuse
l 0 l A c a d i a nFre n c hI ) J o ry & V ' 169Modqrn Greek B.D. JosePh
MotaPan!ane' 170Tol D. Iloltr
102Polabian(Slavic)W SuPrun& ll l7l Sccrct Lsnguage of Cbincsc
l rolescntl Yarbir) Qu
101Chamling K. Ijbertr 172Lummi (Salish)R. I)emers
l{}4 Kodav{ (Dravidian)K EBERI' 173 Khamnigan Mongol Juha
I05 Romancs(SiIrti)D l{olzinger' .Tanhulren
106 Sepccides-Romani P Ccch& 174Ncpali Balthasarllickel & J.
M.F. Ijeilschirili* Petcrson
l0? Roman (Rornani)D.W. I lalwachs l?5 ComccrudoR.C. frcike
et. al. 176 Panamint (Central Numic, lltu-
109 Ksruchny (Turkic) St Sccgmiller* Aztecm) J Mclaughlitl
I I I Nivkh E. Gruzdeva 179 Toba U.lr. Manelis Klem
I l4 Hittite S Luraghi* 180DegemaE.h. Kmt
I l5 hwer Sorbian (lilavic)(i SpieB l{ll Kupeio J. I{ill
I l6 SonghaYR. Nicolai& P. Zima' 182 Cayuga ll -J. Sasse
I l? MacerlonianV A. !'riedmm 183Jaqaru MJ Hardntan
I I 9 Abkhaz Sl. Chirikba 1 8 4 Ma d u re s eW D D a v i s
120Ainu J.C Mahcr 185Kamass A. KiimaP
l2l ArlygheR. Smeets 186 Enets A. KtituraP
122 Tuki (Niger Kordofan) [i thloa 187Guajiro J. Alvarez
I2:] Hindi MahendraK Vema 188Kurdish G. Haig
124Q'eqchi'(MaYan)J DeChicchis l8') Salar A.M DwYcr
125 Czcch L. Janda& Ch E. Toursend 190Esperanto Ch. Gledhill
l9l Bonan ChenNai-Xiong
127 Modcrn Hcbrew O schuarzu'ald
l2ll Turin PiedmonteseD Ricca I 92 Maipure (Ararvakt Raoul lanporri
129SicilianoR. tsigalker 193Kiliwa (Siouan)M Mixco
l30Ratahan N.P Hirrunehnatur& I99 Miluk Coos (Coosm) Anthony
J.U. Wollil Grant
| 3 I El nihuatl rle Tezcoco Valcntin 200 Karbardian (Hast Circassran)John
Peralta Colmsso
Z. [strada 133Tsakhur W. Schulzer 201 Irish Aidim DoYle
135Latc Cornish I. Wntflre* 202 Qae Evelln'todd
136Fyem D. Ncttlc' 2{)3Bilua Evel}n Todd
137Yingkarta A. Denah' 20.1Ket Edwud J. Vajda
138Jurruru A. I)ench 205 Finnish llodc Vfiiluzikr
139svan K. lurte' 2tlt' Antashinu Quechua S llcnru'
14l Evenki N.Bulatova&L Greloble Aguilu
142 Modcrn Hcbrcw O Schurzwald 207 Dtmxna (Clubclu) Mda Tnilos
143 Okl Armenian N Kozintseva Alnatat
I
 208 Emb{a (Chun) Duiel Agrurre.
209Hiligaynon / Itonggo WalLL.
SpiE
210 kbire Moss KlvadGKan.@u
2l I Fering (Northliisian, Gemauc)
KrflEbert
212 Udmurt (Finnrugdc) Erbedtrd
Wfurkls
2 | 3 Aocient Greek Silvia I uaphi
214 Chiwcre Sioua" N l;;;;'
Furbce& Jill D Davirlson
2 I 5 Chuckchee(l'aleosiberim)
Alexander Volodir
2 I 6 Chiriguano Wolf Dietrich
217 Latyian Nicole Nau+
222 Tyvan GregoryAnderson
225 SkrvenianCh. Gribble
227 Mala;-alam RodneyMoas
242 Modern Scotsnlexanderll..
Bergs
25 I Xakas GregoryAnderson*
252 Old Saron Janes E. Cathey
254 Saho(EastCushiticlGiorgio
255 UrteghctTungus_ManchuiAlbina
Barrti
H.Gir[arrova
256 Newari/Nervar E. Austin
llale
257 TJvan (TrrrtrctCregoryfutdcrson
258 Biri (pama-Nyungm; Angela
Itnill*
260 Ostyak (Uratic) Irina Nikolaeva
261 Lingala Michael Meeuwis*
262 Klallam Tinlolhy Montlcr
263 Manchu CarsleuNaeher
266 Chuj Judith Maxwell
267 Kaqchikel JudirhMaxwell
268 Unk Lawoi' David l{osan.
273 Bubburc Ardrcrv Haruna
274 RomanianCynthiaM.
Vakarcliy"-ka
275 Aragon6s Carlos lnchaunalde
276 Chagatay A. ljodroRliseti
277 Turkish A. Bo,lroeliscl
278 lslci0 Spanirh Fclici Coles
298 Gheg I'andeli pani
300 Nuu-chah-nulrh (Nooaka)
1..
Nakal.ma
l0l Oneid; C. Abbou
302 Sapuan P. Jacq& p. Sidurll*
103 Oi P. Jacq& p. Sidwell
.304Talicng p Jacq& p. Sidwell
305 Ostyak L Nikolaeva
J06 Otroman A. tJodroelieeti
l(17Factsr NaonriNagv
308 Choctow p. Krrutchko
-l I I Juang Manrdeepapatraik
li2 Karitiana L. RaccmelloStorto
320 Kawerqar OwAguilu F.
32t Turkish A. Borlroeliscri
.122ShanghaiSear Zhu
323 SantaliLukasNeukom
324 Karaj K. David Hmison
325 Piteni Ashild Nass
326 Echie Ozo-Mekuri Ntlimele
327 Judeo-Ambic Benjantin
Hary
328 TobeloGary Holton
329 Ogbronuagum E. Kari
330 Old Nubiar Gerakl M. Ijrome
33 | TaiwaneseLilly L. Chen
312 Kiswahiti Saliari B. Salone
333 Wotof t'allou Ngom
3.14Karao Sheni Ilrainarl
335 Japrnese yoshihiko Ikesmi
llb East Fricrland yaron M-atras
aiertrud Reershmius
&
337 Sclayarcre Hasanllasri
338 Old Church SlavonicBoris
Gasparov
339 Malagasy ChadesRandria_
masimanatta
Languagesof the
World/TextCollections:
0l Evcn- Texts Arrdrtj Malchulov
05 Pslcslinian Terts KimarvN.
Shahil
07 Tariana Text$ (North Anwak)
Aleurdru Aiklrcnvald*
08 Chinu,k Jaryon Z.vjetJna Vrac
l)9 Westem Apache Terts W de
Reuse
I I Camling -Terts Krm Ebert
12 Itclmcn - Texls Jonatharlhvid
Ilohrljik
14A Collectionof Iaz SpokenTexts
(+CILROM) Silvia Kutschq & Nur:ur
Scvim(ieng*
l5 Saho
Texts ciorgo llilti
16Mbsy Terts JotutM. Keem
l7 Der OsJfrdnkischcBasisJialektvon
HctzlesKlausGepr
Languagesof the
World/TextLibrary:
0 | Minhe Mangghucr Folktales
ilhu
Yorrg,lrrrng.Warg Xiryhou, Kerth
Siiltcr& Kcvin Stwt
02
Salar Folklore Ma Wie,
-Xunhua
Ma Jiauhong & Kevrn Shrart
03 Huzhu Mongghul Folklorc
Lin6ishidcn & Kevin Shnt
04 Huzhu Folklore Seleclions
Lirrrusishidor
& KcvrnStul (eds.)
^. Dic udirchen fvangelien
05
Gebrider Be)anov(l893)
der
WolQang Schulze
fti Anlhology of Menominee Sayingr
Tirnothy Guilc
0Z l{aresqar Tcxts ( )u Aguilu
F.
Languagesof the
World/Dictionaries:
0 | Minhe Mangghuer _ Enslish
Dictionary Wug Xianzhmc
(Qinglni Madical t'oilcg4l
/hu
Yongdrwg (ZhonAch uan J uni or
Midd le Schoot), Kerth Slatu
(Qingha i Junior Teachers, College),
& Kevin Snat (t/rrversity of
Caltfumia, Santa Barbaia)
0l Dicaiotr8ry of MbsJ.John
Krcga.
05 Dictionary ofSrngo lJmdford&
Bradford
06 A Dicflonary ofNegerhollands
Robn Sabino& AnnsKatrin
timnbag
07 Dcgema- English Dictionarv
Ethelbert Kari
()8EudeveDictionary
Davitl SIuul
09 A Short.Bonrn-EnglishDictirrnarl
Chm Nai-Xionp
t0 A Short Dongiiang-English
Dictionary Chm Nai-Xione
I I A Short Mongour_fnglist
Dictionary Chor Nai_Xone
l2 A Shorr East yugour_Enqlish
Dictionary Chm Nai-Xione
l3 A Short Dagour-English
Dicaionsry Chm Nai_Xions
l4 Tlvan dictionary Gregor/
nnderson
I 5 Xakar diclionary Gregory
Andcrson
l 6 N haheun- F r enc h Ens l i s h
- theory of the s]-ll?I:
I*xiton Michcl Ferlus(ed. hv t,.
Jacq& P. Sidweil)
2l ComparetiveWest BahDaric
Dictionary p. Jacq& p. Srdrvell
22 PalesrinianArsbic-English/
English-PslestiniaoArabic
Dictiolary Kimary Shahn
23 laven (Jruq) Consolidated
hxlcon pasale Jacq& paul
Sidwell
Arrlntroductionto the Studyof Morphology
V II I]U B E N IK
MottttvialUniversity of Newfoundland
|i l ''l |()hapl er(w i th theex c epti onofthel as tone)i s prov i dedw i thperti nentex ercyears
i c es .l ts
last twenty
,ldtrrafe taken from tanguagsthe author has been researchingoverthe
Sanskrit, R.ussian)' lts €rgumentaliol it-P1l
ti ,,rrrr creex, turfish,-Rrinic, Hebrew,
with scholarssuch as
u,,,,,|l,1 thu major turning points in lhe historyof morphologylinked
Bauer (1988)' spencer
i'r,, i,,ir tigs+i Matthews(1974), Bybee (1si85),Dressler.(1985)'
(19.93)' .l nthe l as t c hapterthe author
tru0t), darsti i rs-M c c arthy(1992);nd A ronoff
relation-to
nrlrlr.atesa cognitivelyconce;;; suUdisciptineot tr'loipnologyin its 59Tal
Natural Morphology'
r,yrrtax,Generitive Phonology, Functional Grammar, so-called
IhtrvorsalGrammar,and Typology.
(:(liltents: Introduction,Grammatical Units, Paradigmaticand SyntagmaticRelations'
Associatedwith Nominal
lillh'dionaland DerivationalMorphology,InflectionalCategories
categori;s Aslociated with verbal Elements, Morphosyntactic
I tfrncnts, Inflectional
DerivationalMorphology'
i',,,po,il." and their Exponents, Morpheme and Allomorph'
I lrroreticalModels of Morphology,References'
t,.ilN 3 89586 570 2.
I INcOM Coursebooks in Linguistics 07'
r d ./?0 pD. USD ,18 / DM 72 / € 28
in NaturalLanguage
Structureand lnterpretation
MARC AUTHIER& LISA REED
n,c Pennsylvania State UniversitY
llro central objective of this book is to present an integrated
one which combines ihe most recent advances in the generative
,,,,i,"nii.t interiace,
r,,un"*orfw i ththebas i c tenets ofmodel -theoreti c s emanti c s Thethreeopenl ng lo
an approach
r:hirplersdevelop, in a step-by-step and highly accessible fashion'
',lruclureand meaningin ihese terms
rhe remaining chapters sno* no* lhis approach shed.s.light 9l ]lf.:-l::-9.-,tl::d:f tne
presuppos.it|ons'
|!,suesin formal-grammar:the treatmentof ''syntactica||y.triggered,'
conditiont:
lroatmentof some notabteexceptionsto the generativebinding thgit?',1
"19lssue' rt.r>
to tne llrsl
r,l lhe relative autonomy of syntax and semanties With respect can b-e
presuppositions
,,irr,,"otn"i t compositionaliieatment of syntactically-triggered
to spggilc cfss
lorrnulatedas a condition wnrcn tes pre;uppositionallriggers -9 9f
:,v"i""tifiotriS"rations definable in lerms oi devices found in Minimalist syntax' A
of so-called Bare-Outpul
lrl)sequent chapter demonstratesthat the empiricalcoverage to
(:ondttionsin generativesyntaican be increasedif such conditionsare made sensitave
informationwhich have sometimes been recognized in model-
llro two types of semantic
expressions',Finally'
lheoreticsemantics;thal ls, ;{ension expressionsand implicature
,,,"piri""f evidenceis aOOuceO'wnicn the view that there are two distincttypes of
make referenceto features of tree geometry
"rpp'ort"
,,orilanticconstraintsand thai those which
Economy Gonditions'
|;Ut, under specific orcumatances defined by representalional
ov(,rridelhose which do not.
psycho-linguisls' cognitive
RuJi"n."' Linguists, philosophers, computational and
in these fields'
.,crentists; advancedunderg;duates, graduaiestudentsand researchers
6032.
t:,llN3 89586
I lNcoMStudies in Theoletical 14'
Linguistics
.'1r)DUpS D70/ D M1121E 42.
 lntroductionto LinguisticField
Methods
BERT
VAUX& JuslN Co'open
HaNard lJniversity LINCOMCoursebooks
in Linguistics
The present volume addresses
the need for an
comprehensiveintroduction
ro,rn"_"ii"ir"iio-n- .upto_date, accessible, and
mrormants. oi"iiniliru" darafromnativespeaker
. The material,
followingan introcuctori-.Ii hr this series:
enterprise
orrierdresearch.'is-orsani;"Jini;';;;il;";':?::J;H;tJli,,l!"r,"ii.'flx
anthropotogicat
inreresr:phondti=, .'ili;nrogy.
uocrotrnguistics/
Diatectology, Ln",i"iigl:
Lexicography,Fbfiioi"l syntax. semanrias

n:#,'J"rX3,'""#nifJ#:l ui".i
"q:1, i ",-"'.i,ilJ;:#i
"nO !liiJ3li,:'1ff
':ffi|
:? ttl BertVaux& JustinCooPer lntroductionto
LinguisticFieldMethods
grry
li"r"e,"r,"t"","c; fi","#:alifji:iit,ffi::"p;ifi*in l"f,.*J
Inese, in lurn, are followed by
suggested ,"aOings'a;irllrustralive
cnapler' Emphasis is praced,not
on oeuetopinj;d;;ty
exercises,or each
02 JohnNewman Coursebookin FeatureGeometrY
providing enrighteninq suooestions.ano of fierd work, bur rarher on
studentsdown their ornnpeL-on"tpath ;i"*o,"" designed ro guide
""i"n""i"i"g"
to linguistic discoverv.
tllrFernandoGarcfaMurga El Significado.
lsBN3 895861987 Una introducciona la Sem6ntica
inLinsuistics
b'$?Jffi11$H?ks o1'
ttl Vit Bubenik to the StudY
An Introduction
of MorphologY

Gledhill
l'l ChristoPher of FrenchSYntax
Fundamentals
Goursebookin FeatureGeometry
JoHNNEWMAN to Non-
Semantics:an Introduction
MasseylJniversity 12 Paul Bennett
LexicalAsPectsof Meaning

The Coursebook in Feature rlan undergraduate courseintroducingstudentsto

currentphonorogv througha?":!:ry
sustained
wrren as a coherenr'accessibre, ,ru o; i;";;iire Geomerryframework. rt is
Fearureceomerry,rocusino.on and wet-itustrateJlniroouction to the key ideasot
.ut.t or 20 unirsand 40 exercises.
takesthe readerstep-bv-ste-o rnrougrr ""rimilii;;.;"'ii! ir
tne coursebookattemptsro presentrt'r i,Jpi.i"i,ilii,i"i'o"uir", of Fearureceomerry.
wav' rarherrhan artemprins the core ioei"'oiluaturu ceometry in a unifie-d
everyaspecrof the rheorv.The. 61-n1ii#0,"1 debaleconcerningalmosr
version r".rJi" 'b-!",ir",ry underrying
1"^i1g-porri"-tr'"
is basicatlyrharfoundin Saoey,s "r rhe coursebook
n" n"u.riitiiiiii'i1"tur", in non-tinear
withthe -i;;; phonotoov
E!Ei"l,flili,"!,!":ff::fl1;* 'r"i'i-"i'i"r,i,i'andEvansj ";;;i:x:^
i::iiilih:"H';;,f,$i:1.'' theDepartmenr
or Linsuisrics€ndsecond
rheauthor Lansuase
universiiyC"rii"iri. trisa pnDi" Irii,iiii,, i'il.iiXi
"r "it;;B;yn;:''"'o
rsBN 3 89586t02 2.

i:t;ii r";;;Tffi'5;inLins
uis'ics
02'