PAPER OF MORPHOLOGY – SYNTAX

MORPHOLOGY

Arranged by:

Muhammad Febliyansyah (1811230053)

Deo Prancisco (1811230061)

Yorin Ramadina (1811230040)

Anisa Menti Ulandari (1811230056)

Yuliza (1811230062)

Class :

GKB lt.3 ruang 21/ 5B

Lecturer :

Pebri Prandika Putra, M.Hum

ENGLISH DEPARTMENT TARBIYAH AND TADRIS FACULTY

IAIN BENGKULU

2019/2020

1
 PREFACE

Praise the authors pray to Allah SWT who has given his grace and grace, so that we
can still enjoy the beauty of His creation nature. At this time and thanks to Allah SWT the
author can finish this paper on time entitled "Morphology".

With the completion of this paper can not be separated from the help of many parties
who provide input to the author. For that the authors say many thanks. The compilers also
thanked to Sir Pebri as the teachersor tutor in Morphology – Syntax subject.

The author realizes that there are still many shortcomings of this paper, both from the
material and presentation techniques, given the lack of knowledge and experience of the
author. Therefore, constructive criticism and suggestions that the authors hope for the
achievement of perfection of this paper.

Author

2
 TABLE OF CONTENS

PREFACE......................................................................................................... 2

TABLE OF CONTENTS ................................................................................ 3

CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION .................................................................... 4

1.1 Background of the paper

1.2 Purpose of the paper
1.3 Problem fomulation

CHAPTER II THEORY AND DISCUSION...................................................... 6

A.Outline of Subject
Morphology............................................................................................................. 6

B. History of
Morphology............................................................................................................. 7

C. Definition of Other Linguistic

Branches................................................................................................................... 10

CHAPTER III CONCLUSION............................................................................ 25

3.1 Conclusion
3.2 Suggest

REFERENCES................................................................................................... 27

3
 CHAPTER 1

INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background of the paper

People must understand structure of language and can use it as well as possible; language
is needed by people so far they need to interaction with each other. Therefore, we must
understand it. People not only understand but also how the way uses a good language to
commutate each other. As we see today, communication is very need by all people
because first tool of interaction is language. Wedrana Mihalicek et al (2011: 7) said
“when you use language, you use it to communicate an idea from your mind to the mind
of some else”.
Human life in the world need to interaction with the other people to cover our need. In
addition, we cannot life as individual in this world and we must make interaction and
communication each other. In their interaction and communication, we must use tool to
understand what we want. Language as a toll of communication so if we understand and
be able to use it as well as we can interact and communicate with each other but if we do
not understand and cannot use it as well as, we cannot interact and communicate with
them.
As we know in our interaction, language as tool of communication to express our need
like thoughts and feeling and this fact like A.S Hornby (1995: 662) say “language is
system of sounds and word used by human to express their thoughts and feeling“.
Therefore, we must learn language to understand people’s thoughts and feeling and to
understand and use language we must understand the pattern because language has some
of pattern to construct it sentence, phrase and word, like how to mike like become dislike.
English is one of popular language in this era and English has some of pattern to construct
it word, phrase and sentences.
One of pattern in English language about how a word has same meanings because of
addition some of Alfa bates in beginning or end of word. This pattern called morphology
in English. Morphology in English language has different processes and some of them
make new meaning and part of speech.

1.2 Purpose Of the Paper

1. To know what is meant by morphology

2. To know what is the history of morphology

3. To find out how lingustic branches are defined

1.3 Problem Formulation

1. To know what is meant by morphology

4
2. To know what is the history of morphology

3. To find out how lingustic branches are defined

5
 CHAPTER II
THEORY AND DISCUSION

A. OUTLINE OF SUBJECT MORPHOLOGY

In linguistics, morphology is the study of words, how they are formed, and their
relationship to other words in the same language. It analyzes the structure of words and parts
of words, such as stems, root words, prefixes, and suffixes. Morphology also looks at parts of
speech, intonation and stress, and the ways context can change a word's pronunciation and
meaning. Morphology differs from morphological typology, which is the classification of
languages based on their use of words, and lexicology, which is the study of words and how
they make up a language's vocabulary.

While words, along with clitics, are generally accepted as being the smallest units of
syntax, in most languages, if not all, many words can be related to other words by rules that
collectively describe the grammar for that language. For example, English speakers recognize
that the words dog and dogs are closely related, differentiated only by the plurality morpheme
"-s", only found bound to noun phrases. Speakers of English, a fusional language, recognize
these relations from their innate knowledge of English's rules of word formation. They infer
intuitively that dog is to dogs as cat is to cats; and, in similar fashion, dog is to dog catcher as
dish is to dishwasher.

By contrast, Classical Chinese has very little morphology, using almost exclusively
unbound morphemes ("free" morphemes) and depending on word order to convey meaning.
(Most words in modern Standard Chinese ["Mandarin"], however, are compounds and most
roots are bound.) These are understood as grammars that represent the morphology of the
language. The rules understood by a speaker reflect specific patterns or regularities in the
way words are formed from smaller units in the language they are using, and how those
smaller units interact in speech. In this way, morphology is the branch of linguistics that
studies patterns of word formation within and across languages and attempts to formulate
rules that model the knowledge of the speakers of those languages.

Phonological and orthographic modifications between a base word and its origin may
be partial to literacy skills. Studies have indicated that the presence of modification in
phonology and orthography makes morphologically complex words harder to understand and
that the absence of modification between a base word and its origin makes morphologically
complex words easier to understand. Morphologically complex words are easier to
comprehend when they include a base word.The discipline that deals specifically with the
sound changes occurring within morphemes is morphophonology.

6
 B. HISTORY OF MORPHOLOGY

Interest in the nature of language has included attention to the nature and structure of
words — what we call Morphology — at least since the studies of the ancient Indian, Greek
and Arab grammarians, and so any history of the subject that attempted to cover its entire
scope could hardly be a short one. Nonetheless, any history has to start somewhere, and in
tracing the views most relevant to the state of morphological theory today, we can usefully
start with the views of Saussure. No, not that Saussure, not the generally acknowledged
progenitor of modern linguistics, Ferdinand de Saussure. Instead, his brother René, a
mathematician, who was a major figure in the early twentieth centuryEsperanto movement
(Joseph 2012). Most of his written work was on topics in mathematics and physics, and on
Esperanto, but de Saussure (1911) is a short (122 page) book devoted to word structure, in
which he lays out a view of morphology that anticipates one side of a major theoretical
opposition that we will follow below.

René de Saussure begins by distinguishing simple words, on the one hand, and
compounds (e.g., French porte-plume ‘pen-holder’) and derived words (e.g., French
violoniste ‘violinist’), on the other. For the purposes of analysis, there are only two sorts of
words: root words (e.g. French homme ‘man’) and affixes (e.g., French -iste in violoniste).
But “[a]u point de vue logique, il n’y a pas de difference entre un radical et un affixe [. . . ]
[o]n peut donc considérer les affixes comme des mots simple, et les mots dérivés au moyen
d’affixes, comme de véritables mots composés. Il n’y a plus alors que de deux sortes de mots:
les mots simples (radicaux, préfixes, suffixes) et les mots composés par combinaison de mots
simples.” (de Saussure 1911: pp. 4f.) The simple words are then treated as ‘atoms’, each with
an invariant sense and potentially variable content, and the re-1mainder of the work is devoted
to the principles by which these atoms are combined into ‘molecules’, each a hierarchically
organized concatenation of the basic atoms.

While the notion of the linguistic sign as an arbitrary and indissoluble unit combining
form and meaning would be associated as an innovation with his bother Ferdinand,René here
lays out a picture of word structure as a matter of structured combination of basic signs, units
corresponding to what would later be called morphemes. His principal interest is in providing
an analysis of the content of these basic elements from which it is possible to derive the

1
Stephen R. Amderson, “Short History of Morphological Theory”, Dept. of Linguistics, Yale University, Page 1

7
meanings resulting from their combination, but this is grounded in a picture of complex
words as essentially syntactic combinations of units that cannot be further decomposed.

The word violoniste is thus composed of two equally basic units, both nouns: violon
‘violin’ and -iste ‘person, whose profession or habitual occupation is characterized by the
root to which this element is attached.’ This may seem rather straightforward, and indeed
much subsequent thinking about morphology would take such a position as virtually self-
evident, but it can be contrasted with the view of complex words taken by René’s brother
Ferdinand. Rather than treating all formational elements found in words as equally basic
units, and complex or derived words as combinations of these, de Saussure (1916 [1974])
distinguishes basic or minimal signs from relatively or partially motivated signs. Thus, arbre
‘tree’ and poirier ‘pear tree’ are both signs. The former is not further analyzable, and thus
basic, but in the case of the latter, the form and content link it to other pairs such as cerise
‘cherry’, cerisier‘cherry tree’; pomme ‘apple’, pommier ‘apple tree’, etc. It is the parallel
relation betweenthe members of these pairs that supports (or partially motivates) the meaning
of Poirier in relation to that of poire, not the presence of a structural unit -ier ‘tree, whose
product is characterized by the root to which this element is attached’.

Ferdinand de Saussure was clearly familiar with the equivalent in various languages of
the German word morfem ‘morpheme’ which appeared in the earlier work of Jan Baudouin
de Courtenay (Anderson 2015) in much the same sense as René de Saussure’s ‘simple
words’. He does not use it, however, and does not present the analysis of complex derived
words as a matter of decomposing them into basic units or minimal signs. Rather, he treats
morphological structure as grounded in the relations between classes of words: similarities of
form reflecting similarities of content and vice versa directly. The two brothers were no doubt
familiar to some extent with one another’s views, but there is no evidence that Ferdinand was
persuaded to adopt René’s mode of analysis.

Although much later writing would identify the notion of the morpheme as it emerged
with the minimal sign of de Saussure (1916 [1974]), and thus assume that “Saussure’s”
treatment of morphologically complex words involved breaking them down into components
of this sort, such an analysis is really most appropriate for the work of René de Saussure, and
not for Ferdinand. In the work of the two, we can already discern a difference between

8
something in René’s work corresponding to what Stump (2001) would later call a lexical
theory and something in Ferdinand’s that could be called an inferential one.

Such a basic dichotomy of morphological theory is not the only anticipation of later
distinctions that we can find in work of the early twentieth century. In both the practice of the
grammars that appear in the Handbook of American Indian Languages and its introduction
(Boas 1911: see also Anderson (1985: chapter 8)), Franz Boas maintains a theory of
morphology with some distinctly modern features. In particular, the treatments of
morphological structure in these descriptions are divided into two parts: on the one hand, an
inventory of the grammatical processes employed in the language (e.g., prefixation,
suffixation, internal modification such as Ablaut, etc.), and on the other, 2 an inventory of the
ideas expressed by grammatical processes, such as number, tense or aspect, causativity, etc.
In practice, this division was deployed in much the same way as under the Separation
Hypothesis of Beard (1995), according to which a language’s morphology consists of a
collection of possible formal modifications any of which can be used to express any of the
categories of content signaled by the form of a word.3

Before nineteenth century, morphology did not emerge as a distinct sub-branch of

linguistics. But now, morphology is a distinct sub-branch of linguistic.In 1786, Sir William
Jones claimed that Sanskrit, Latin, Persian and Germanic languages were descended from a
common ancestor. In 1816, Franz Bopp supporting Sir Jones’ finding. His evidence was
based on comparison of the grammatical endings of words in these languages.

In 1899, under the influence of Darwinian Theory of evolution, Mark Muller delivered
his lectures in Oxford that the study of the evolution of words illuminated the evolution of
language just as in biology morphology. His specific claim was that the study of the 400-500
basic roots of the Indo-European ancestors of many of the languages of Europe and Asia was
the key to understanding the origin of human language.

In 1993, Katamba argues that such evolutionary pretensions were abandoned very early
in the history of morphology. He said that in this country, morphology is regarded as an
essential synchronic discipline, which is a discipline focusing on the study of word-structure
at one stage in the life of a language rather than on the evolution of words.

2
Stephen R. Amderson, “Short History of Morphological Theory”, Dept. of Linguistics, Yale University, Page 2

3
Stephen R. Amderson, “Short History of Morphological Theory”, Dept. of Linguistics, Yale University, page 3

9
 Linguistic analyses also proposed a separation of Levels in linguistic:

Semantic level (dealing with meaning)

Syntactic level (dealing with sentence-structure)

Morphological level (dealing with word-structure)

Phonology / Phonemics (dealing with sound system)

The analyst producing a description of a language was seen as one of working out, in
separate stages. The levels were assumed to be ordered in a hierarchy. The first
pronunciation, second the word-structure, third the sentence structure and finally the meaning
of utterances. But, in 2002, Hanafi added pragmatics to the separation of linguistic levels,
because language use cannot be described without reference to syntax and semantics.

Pragmatic level (dealing with language in use)

Semantic level (dealing with meaning)

Syntactic level (dealing with sentence-structure)

Morphological level (dealing with word-structure)

Phonology / Phonemics (dealing with sound system)

C. DEFINITION OF OTHER LINGUISTIC BRANCHES

A. Phonetics

The word semantics in Indonesian comes from the Greek sema (a noun meaning "sign"
or "symbol." What is meant by a sign or symbol. Here as the equivalent of the word sema is a
linguistic sign, as suggested by Ferdinand de Saussure (1966) , which consists of interpreting
components, which are in the form of language sounds and components that are interpreted or
the meaning of the first component.4

4
Chaer, Abdul. 2007. Linguistik umum. Jakarta. Rineka Cipta

10
 The word semantics is then agreed as a term used for the field of linguistics that
studies the relationship of linguistic signs, in other words semantics is a branch of linguistics
that studies the meaning contained in a language, code, or other types of representation.5

1. Meaning

According to the theory developed by Ferdinand de Saussure that meaning is an

understanding or concept that is owned or contained in a linguistic sign.

2. Types of meaning

Language is a tool used for communication and various purposes in everyday life, so the
meaning of the language varies from a different point of view. The meanings are as follows:

a. Lexical
b. Grammatical
c. Contextual
d. Referential and non-referential
e. Denotative
f. Conotative
g. Conceptual
h. Associative
i. Idiom
j. Proverb

3. Relationship meaning

The meaning relation is a semantic relationship that exists between one language unit and
another. In the discussion of meaning relations, it is usually discussed problems called
synonyms, antonyms, polysemy, homonymy, hyponymy, ambiguity, and redundancy.

a. Synonym

Synonym or synonymy is a semantic relationship which states that there is a similarity in

meaning between one unit of utterance and another.

b. Antonym
5
Verhaar, J. W. M, 2008. Asas – Asas Linguistik.Yogyakarta: Gajah Mada University Press

11
Antonyms or antonyms are semantic relationships between two utterances whose meaning is
to express the opposite, contradiction, or contrast between one another.

c. Polysemic

Polysemy is a unit word that has more than one meaning. For example, the word head has
various polysemic meanings.

d. Homonymy

Homonymy is two words which are one utterance that "happens to" be the same, but have
different meanings.

e. Ambiguous

Ambiguity is a symptom that can cause multiple meanings due to different grammatical
interpretations.

f. Redundancy

Redundancy is excess - the excess of a segmental element in a form of speech.

4. Change of Meaning

Synchronic the meaning of a word or lexeme will not change but diachronic there is a
possibility to change. The meaning. In a relatively short time, the meaning of a word will
remain the same, not change, but in a relatively long time there is a possibility that the
meaning of a word will change6. The changes are caused by several factors:

a. Developments in science and technology.

b. Socio-cultural development
c. Development of word usage

B. Phonology

Phonology is the branch of linguistics concerned with the study of speech sounds with
reference to their distribution and patterning. Adjective: phonological. A linguist who
specializes in phonology is known as a phonologist. Etymologically, Phonology from the
6
Chaer, Abdul. 2007. Linguistik umum. Jakarta. Rineka Cipta

12
Greek, means "sound, voice".The aim of phonology is to discover the principles that govern
the way sounds are organized in languages and to explain the variations that occur.

Whereas phonetics is the study of all possible speech sounds, phonology studies the
way in which a language's speakers systematically use a selection of these sounds in order to
express meaning. There is a further way of drawing the distinction. No two speakers have
anatomically identical vocal tracts, and thus no one produces sounds in exactly the same way
as anyone else. Yet when using our language we are able to discount much of this variation,
and focus on only those sounds, or properties of sound, that are important for the
communication of meaning. We think of our fellow speakers as using the 'same' sounds, even
though acoustically they are not. Phonology is the study of how we find order within the
apparent chaos of speech sounds7

1. Suprasegmental features

Suprasegmental features are faetures of fundamental frequency, intensity and

duration, according to a common defenition. First, there is a problem with defenition,Leshite
(1970) defines suprasegmental as features of ‘pitch, stress and quantity. The other problem
with a restricting is there are other phenomena that might otherwise be covered by the
definion intonation purpose here8. Suprasegmental or prosodic phonology involves
phenomena such as stress (intensity) and tone (pitch).

An accentual pattern involves the deployment of suprasegmentals within a word (for

example, the stress differences between the noun insert--with stress on the first syllable--and
the verb insert--with stress on the second syllable--), whereas an intonational pattern involves
suprasegmentals within the framework of a sentence (for example, all the words in Mary
worries Martin are accentually stressed on the first syllable, but the stress in Martin is
intonationally most prominent). Because the sentence characteristically constitutes the
framework for intonation, and because sentences are fundamentally syntactic constructs,
intonation is one phonological phenomenon whose domain goes beyond morphology.9

C. Lexical

7
David Crystal, How Language Works. Overlook Press, 2005
8
D. Robert Ladd, International Phonology Second Edition, ( United States of America: Cambridge University
Press,  2008), p. 4
9
D. Robert Ladd, International Phonology Second Edition, ( United States of America: Cambridge University
Press,  2008), p. 5

13
 The term lexical in linguistics means vocabulary. The word itself is often called a
lexeme. The branch of linguistics that deals with the lexical is called lexicology. This term is
rather rarely used, because the main concern of lexicologists is the compilation of
dictionaries.Each language has a fairly large vocabulary covering tens of thousands of words,
each word has its own meaning or meaning, and lexicographic matters are none other than the
description of the meaning of each lexeme, for example the word forgot: visual. The only
difference between them is the difference between / l / and / r /, so it is clear that the task of
the two phonemes is to distinguish between their lexemes.10

D. Syntax

Syntax is the study of the principles and processes by which sentences are constructed
in particular languages. Syntactic investigation of a given language has as its goal the
construction of a grammar that can be viewed as a device of some sort for producing the
sentences of the language under analysis.   (Chomsky, 2002)11

The study of syntax is the study of how words combine to from phrases and ultimately
sentences in languages. Because it consists of phrases that are put together in a
particular way, a sentences has a structure. The structure consists of way in which the
words are organized into phrases and the phrases are organized into larger phrases. The
study of phrases and sentences structure is sometimes called grammar. (Tserdanelis and
Wong, 2004)

The syntax of a language is the set of properties which determine the construction of
sentences in that language. If a sentence is constructed according to those properties it
is well formed or grammatical. If a sentence is constructed  in violation of those
properties it is ill-formed or ungrammatical. The study of syntax involves uncovering
those properties of language which are involved in the construction of grammatical
sentence in particular languages. (Hawkins, 2001)12

Syntax is the system of rules and categories that allows words to be combined to the
form of sentence. The data that linguists use to study syntax consists primarily of
judgments about grammaticality of individual sentence. Roughly speaking, a sentence

10
Lyons,john(1997).SEMANTICS,2 VOLS.Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.
11
Chomsky, N. (1957 & 2002). Syntactic Structures. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter GmBH.
12
Hawkins, R. (2001). Second Language Syntax: A Generative Introduction. Massachusetts: Blackwell
Publishers .

14
 is considered grammatical if speakers judge it to be a possible sentence of their
language. (O’grady, at all.,1989).

Syntax is that part of our linguistics knowledge which concerns the structure of
sentences. Knowing a language also means being able to put words together to form
sentences to express our thoughts. (Fromkin and Rodman,1983) 13From the experts’
explanation above we can conclude that syntax is the study of internal structure of
sentences. In this case, it explains how words are arranged become phrases and clauses
for constructing sentence. It is commonly we call structure. Structure manages how
words can be combined with another for creating good sentence.

b. Basic idea of syntax

1.  Word ordering and meaning
The order of words in a sentences or phrases is connected to its literal meaning. The basic
underlying word order in an English sentence is subject-verb-object (S-V-O). (Murcia and
Freeman,1999). Consider the English sentences :
a. Joe writes poetry
The factors determines the meaning of sentences: (1) the selection of words plays a role in
determining the literal meaning of the sentences, (2) the orders of words play a role the
literal meaning of the sentences. (Tserdanelis and Wong, 2004). See the two examples:
a).   The mat is on the cat
b).   The cat is on the mat
2. Ambiguity
As we have studied before, there is factor determining what a sentence means. Considerthe
following examples:
a). Can you tell me the time?
b). We had the president for dinner.
c). We need more intelligent administrators.
d). Pat shot the soldier with a telescope.

All three sentences are ambiguous-that is, they have more than one meaning. The first
sentences is ambiguous because it can be used either as a straightforward question (“ are
you able to tell me the time?”) . we  call this pragmatic ambiguity. The second  sentence

13
Fromkin, Victoria, Robert Rodman. (1983). An Introduction to Language. New York: CBS college publising.

15
 is ambiguous because the expression have for dinner can mean either “ host for dinner” or
“ have for dinner”. This type of ambiguity is called lexical ambiguity. The third sentence ,
this sentence also has two meaning. On one meaning, we need administrators who are
more intelligent. On the other meaning, we need a grater number of intelligent
administrators. The type of ambiguity is called structure ambiguity. (Tserdanelis and
Wong, 2004).14

b. Phrase Structure
1.Lexical categories
In English the main categories are Nouns(N), Verb(V), Adjectives(A), Prepositions(P),
and Adverbs(Adv).

2.Phrasal categories
The phrasal categories are built up from the lexical categories (their head) in the ways that
we have already illustrated. The phrasal categories are NP(noun phrases), VP(verb
phrases), AP(adjective phrases), PP(preposisition phrases) , AdvP(adverb phrase).
(Tserdanelis and Wong, 2004)
a).Noun phrases is any phrase which can act as a complete subject, object, etc. in a
sentence; e.q.  “The big red block”, “ Most of the three coaches”.
b).Verb phrases is basically a verb plus its complement (s); e.g. “ gave the
parcel to the clerk”
c).Prepositional phrases may be required (for instance, by a verb that it comes
after) to contain a particular preposition.
d). Adjective phrases usually consist of single adjectives, but it is possible for
these to be accompanied by an indication of degree ad some number of adverb
as modifier, as in “very commonly used”.15
E. Semantics
a. definition

14
Tserdanelis,G. and Wai Yi Peggy Wong. (Eds.). (2004). Language File: Material for an Introduction to
Language & Linguistics (9th ed.). Columbus: Department of Linguistics, The Ohio State University Press.

15
Tserdanelis,G. and Wai Yi Peggy Wong. (Eds.). (2004). Language File: Material for an Introduction to
Language & Linguistics (9th ed.). Columbus: Department of Linguistics, The Ohio State University Press.

16
 Semantics is the study of meaning in language Hurford&HeasleyThe (1983).
Semantics is the study of meaning communicated through language Saeed (2003).
Semantics is the part of linguistics that is concerned with meaning Löbner (2002).
Linguistic semantics is the study of how languages organize and express meanings
(Kreidler, 1998). (Sutrisno, 2012).
Nowadays, there are two ways of approaching semantics. The formal semantics
approach connects with classical philosophical semantics, that is, logic. It should not be
forgotten that semantics was a part of philosophy for many centuries. Formal semantics
tries to describe the meaning of language using the descriptive apparatus of formal
logic. The goal is to describe natural language in a formal, precise, unambiguous way.
Related (though not identical) denominations for this type of semantics are truth-
conditional semantics, model-theoretic semantics, logical semantics, etc.
The other approach to semantics we could call psychologically-oriented semantics or
cognitive semantics. This approach does not consider the logical structure of language as
important for the description of the meaning of language, and tends to disregard notions
such as truth-values or strict compositionality. Cognitive semantics tries to explain
semantic phenomena by appealing to biological, psychological and even cultural issues.
They are less concerned with notions of reference and try to propose explanations that
will fit with everything that we know about cognition, including perception and the role
of the body in the structuring of meaning structures.
So, we can conclude that Semantic is the study of meaning. It is a wide subject within
the general study of language. An understanding of semantics is essential to the study of
language acquisition (how language users acquire a sense of meaning, as speakers and
writers, listeners and readers) and of language change (how meanings alter over time). It
is important for understanding language in social contexts, as these are likely to affect
meaning, and for understanding varieties of English and effects of style. It is thus one of
the most fundamental concepts in linguistics.
b. The systematic study of meaning
Linguistic semantics is an attempt to explicate the knowledge of any speakers of a
language which allows that speaker to communicate facts, feeling, intentions and
products of the imagination to other speakers and to understand what they
communicate to him or her.
Three disciplines are concerned with the systematic study of ‘meaning’ in itself:
psychology, philosophy, and linguistics. Psychologists, they are interested in: how

17
 individual human learn, how they retain, recall, or lose information; how they classify,
make judgments and solve problems. In other words, how the human mind seeks
meanings, and works with them; Philosophers of language are concerned with how we
know, how any particular fact that we know or accept as true is related to other possible
facts In other words, what must be antecedent to that fact and what is a likely
consequence, or entailment of it; what statements are mutually contradictory, which
sentences express the same meaning in different words, and which are unrelated;
Linguists want to understand how language works. Just what common knowledge do two
people posses when they share a language that makes it possible for them to give and get
information, to express their feelings and their intentions to another, and to be understood
with a fair degree of success.
According to Alsayed (2012) meaning covers a variety of aspects of language, and
there is no general agreement about the nature of meaning. Looking at the word itself, the
dictionary will suggest a number of different meanings of the noun “meaning” and the
verb “mean”. The word mean can be applied to people who use language, i.e. to speakers,
in the sense of “intend”. And it can be applied to words and sentences in the sense of “be
equivalent to”. To understand what meaning is, one has to keep in mind whether we are
talking about what speakers mean or what words (or sentences) mean.
It may seem to you that meaning is so vague, insubstantial, and elusive that it is
impossible to come to any clear, concrete, or tangible conclusions about it. We hope to
convince you that by careful thought about the language you speak and the way it is used,
definite conclusions can be arrived at concerning meaning. Lewis Carroll had brilliant
insights into the nature of meaning (and into the foibles of people who theorize about it).
In the passage above, he is playfully suggesting that the meanings carried by words may
be affected by a speaker’s will. Lewis Carroll’s aim was to amuse, and he could afford to
be enigmatic and even nonsensical. The aim of serious semanticists is to explain and
clarify the nature of meaning. (Hurford, Heasley and Smith, 2007).16
Semantics deals with:
1.  Words meaning
Language is used for communication. In communicating, speakers or writers
communicate meaning to listeners or readers. The nature of the meaning of a word is its
referent. The referent of a word can be an object, an event, a state, a process, or an action

16
Lyons,john(1997).SEMANTICS,2 VOLS.Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.

18
here in this world. Word meaning can also said lexical meaning (Lyons, 1985) : the
meaning of lexemes depends upon the of sentences in which they occur.  (Sutrisno, 2012)
Examples :
a). hot is : [ a state of having a high temperature ]
b). to sew is : [ an action of working with a needle and thread
c). drizzling is : [ the process of raining in small drops ]
d). a party is : [ an event of the gathering of persons, by invitation, for pleasure ]

2. Sentence meaning
According to Hurford, Heasley and Smith (2007), sentence meaning is what a
sentence means, i.e. what it counts as the equivalent of in the language concerned.
According to Lyons,( 1985) as in Sutrisno (2012), the meaning of sentence is the
product of both lexical and grammatical meaning (the meaning of the constituent of
lexemes and of the grammatical constructions)

Examples :
1. This is a beautiful garden flower
2. This is a beautiful flower garden
In sentence (1) the focus is on flower, where as in sentence (2) the focus is on garden.
It is clear that the conceptual  meaning of the sentence depends on the reference and
the structures of the words.
3. Utterance meaning
Speaker meaning is what a speaker means (i.e. intends to convey) when he uses a
piece of language. (Hurford, Heasley and Smith, 2007),    In communication, the
meaning of an utterance is not only determined by the conceptual meaning of the
sentence but also by paralinguistic features such as stress, pitch, intonation, juncture,
body movements, head movements, hand gestures, eye-contact, and the distance
between the interlocutors.
Examples :  “It’s one o’clock”, can be interpreted as “It’s really one o’clock” or “It’s
time to have lunch” or “It’s time to stop the lecture.” So the meaning does not only
depends the reference, conceptual sentence but also context, gestures, intonations etc.

c.The definition of  Sentence, Utterance and Preposition

19
A sentence is a grammatically complete string of words expressing a complete thought.
This very traditional definition is unfortunately vague, but it is hard to arrive at a better
one for our purposes. It is intended to exclude any string of words that does not have a
verb in it, as well as other string. Utterances of non-sentences, e.g. short phrases, or
single words, are used by people in communication all the time. People do not converse
wholly in (tokens of) well formed sentences. But the abstract idea of a sentence is the
basis for understanding even those expressions which are not sentences. In the
overwhelming majority of cases, the meanings of non-sentences can best be analyzed
by considering them to be abbreviations, or incomplete versions, of whole sentences.
(Hurford, Heasley and Smith, 2007)

An utterance is any stretch of talk, by one person, before and after which there is
silence on the part of that person. An utterance is the USE by a particular speaker, on a
particular occasion, of a piece of language, such as a sequence of sentences, or a single
phrase, or even a single word.
Utterance may consist of a single word, a single phrase or a single sentence. They
may also consist of sequence of sentence. It is not unusual to find utterances that
consist of one or more grammatically incomplete sentence-fragments. In short, there is
no simple relation of correspondence between utterances and sentences. Utterances are
physical events. Events are ephemeral. Utterances die on the wind. Linguistics deals
with spoken language and we will have a lot to say about utterances in this book. But
we will concentrate even more on another notion, that of sentences.
A sentence is neither a physical event nor a physical object. It is conceived abstractly
a string of words put together by the grammatical rules of a language. A sentence can
be thought of as the ideal string of words behind various realizations in utterances and
inscriptions. We have defined a sentence as a string of words. A given sentence always
consists of the same words, and in the same order. Any change in the words or in their
order makes a different sentence for our purposes.
It would make sense to say that an utterance was in a particular accent (i.e. a particular
way of pronouncing words). However, it would not make strict sense to say that a
sentence was in a particular accent, because a sentence itself is only associated with
phonetic characteristics such as accent and voice quality through a speaker’s act of
uttering it. Accent and voice quality belong strictly to the utterance, not to the sentence

20
 uttered. Not all utterances are actually tokens of sentences, but sometimes only of parts
of sentences, e.g. phrases or single words.

d.The definition of Reference and Sense

Sense and reference are two very distinct ways of talking about the meaning of words
and other expressions. Sense deals with the relationships inside the language. The sense
of an expression is its place in a system of semantic relationships with other expressions
in the language.
Examples :
1. The relationship between “big” and “small” is oppositeness of meaning
(antonymy).
2. The relationship between “rich” and “wealthy” is sameness of meaning
(synonymy). We will talk more about sense relations in a coming lecture. In some
cases, the same word-form can have more than one sense.
3.  Look at the word-form “bank” in the following sentences:
“I have an account at the bank.”
“We took the boat to the other bank of the river.”
In these examples, “bank” has a different sense in each sentence.
Reference is a relationship between parts of a language (words and phrases) and things
outside the language (in the world). By reference a speaker indicates which things and
persons in the world are being talked about. E.g. My son is in the house. “My son” here
refers to a person in the world and “the house” refers to a thing in the world.
To make the term reference clearer to you, hold a book in your hand and describe it in a
sentence. For example: “This book is about Semantics.”
The English expression “this book” is part of the language. This expression can refer to
any book. In the example, we used it to refer to part of the world which is the book you
are holding in your hand. “Reference” is the relationship between the language
expression and the real world object.17
F .Pragmatics
Pragmatics, one of the underlying trend is the developmnt of pragmatic Lakoff and Ross.
In the syntax, as proposed by Yule (1996: 4), learned how linguistic relations, how these
forms are strung together in a sentence, and how the circuit may be expressed
17
Saeed,john(2003).Semantics(2nd edn).Oxford:Blackwell

21
 grammatically well-formed. In general, the syntax does not question the meaning of the
designee or the user language, so it forms like a cat raking leaves, although it can not be
empirically verified, it still can be expressed syntactically slick. In everyday life, the use
of language is not solely based on the principle of wellformed in the syntax, but on the
basis of interest in order to keep the communication going. More precisely, following the
trend in ethnometodology, the language used by the speech community as a way of
understanding the interaction of the participants what they say.18

On this basis, first, to understand, and often we find that communication can still run
even if the language is not syntactically slick, and second, for the needs of the members
of the speech community to mangorganisasi and understand their activities, in addition to
grammar, meaning also a thing that can not be ignored in the analysis of language. Thus,
it is understood that the main difference between syntactic and pragmatic, as well as
stating the importance of pragmatic studies in linguistics, is the meaning of the user's
speech and language. Discussion of the meaning brings us to the importance of
semantics, namely the level of linguistics which studies the relationship between
linguistic forms (linguistic forms) and entities that are outside of language, the language
analysis. Based on the truth conditional semantics, to be declared righteous, a statement
must be empirically verified or should be analytical. Thus, swept the cat form is a form
that is semantically unacceptable, because it can not be empirically verified and not
including a statement of logic. However, the discussion of the semantic meaning
inadequate, because they overlooked the language of the user, so the form as if I could
stand I would not be able to stand and I will come tomorrow morning, although this form
may be encountered, can not be substantiated for the first violation and a second logic
could not be verified immediately. In other words, to explain the phenomenon of the use
of everyday language, in addition to syntax and semantics, it is also pragmatic in this
case I understand as a field that examines the relationship between the structure used
speakers, the meaning of what is spoken, and the purpose of the speech. Pragmatic
usefulness, that are not in syntax and semantics, in this case can be demonstrated by, for
example, how politeness strategies affect the use of language, how to understand
conversational implicatures, and how Felicity conditions that allow for a follow-up

18
Austin, John L. 1962. How to Do Things with Word (edisi kedua). Oxford: Oxfod University

22
 speech. Furthermore, to see the importance of pragmatics in linguistics, I will express
opinions Leech (1980). 19
According to Leech (in Eelen 2001: 6)the difference between semantics and pragmatics
to, first, examine semantic meaning (sense) sentences are abstract and logical,
pragmatic while examining the relationship between the meaning of speech and power
(force) pragmatiknya, and second, semantically bound the rules (rule-governed), while
bound to the pragmatic principle (principle-governed). On the difference of the first,
although the meaning and power are two different things, they can not really be
separated, because the power includes the meaning. In other words, the semantic
meaning of the speech reviewing spoken, while study pragmatic meaning of utterances
are communicated or communicated.Furthermore, in contrast to the principle of rule by
its nature. Descriptive rules, absolute or absolute, and have clear boundaries with other
rules, while the normative principles can be applied or relative, may conflict with other
principles, and have restrictions pertaining to other principles. Furthermore, in language
teaching, as expressed Gunarwan (2004: 22), there is a relationship, that pragmatic
knowledge, in a practical sense, it should be known by teachers to equip learners with
the knowledge about the use of language in a particular situation. In the Indonesian
language teaching, for example, this knowledge is essential for guiding learners to use a
variety of language appropriate to the situation, because in addition to true, the
language used should be good. In foreign language teaching, knowledge of the
pragmatic principles in language that is essential for good communication skills in the
language. In general, it can be concluded that the relation between pragmatics and
language teaching is in terms of communicative competence that includes three kinds
of competencies other than grammatical competence (grammatical competence), the
sociolinguistic competence (sociolinguistic competence) related to socio-cultural
knowledge of a specific language, discourse competence (discourse competence) that
are associated with the ability to pour a good idea, and strategic competence (strategic
competence) that relates to the ability of exploring ideas through a variety of styles that
are specific to each language.20

19
Brown, Penelope., dan Stephen C. Levinson. 1978. Politeness: Some Universal in Language
Usage. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

20
Thomas. Jenny. 1995. Meaning in Interaction: an Introduction to Pragmatics. London/New
York: Longman.

23
24
 CHAPTER III
CONCLUSION

3.1 Conclusion

A lexical item (or lexical unit/ LU, lexical entry) is a single word, a part of a word, or a
chain of words (= catena) that forms the basic elements of a language's lexicon (≈
vocabulary).

 Examples are cat, traffic light, take care of, by the way, and it's raining cats and dogs.
Lexical items can be generally understood to convey a single meaning, much as a
lexeme, but are not limited to single words.

Lexical items are like semes in that they are "natural units" translating between
languages, or in learning a new language. In this last sense, it is sometimes said that language
consists of grammaticalized lexis, and not lexicalized grammar.

Word have 2 characteristics :

1. They have meaning that are unpredictable and so must be listed in dictionaries
(lexical item)
2. They are building-blocks for and word phrases.

Although this may be broadly true, the two characteristic do not always go together. Many
words have meanings that are predictable, there is nevertheless a tendency for these meaning
to lose motivation overtime. Many of the lexical items that are phrases or sentences have
meanings which can be seen as metaphorical extensions of literal meaning, so do that extant
interpretation remains motivated. But the two characteristics do not always go together. It
will be helpful to have district terms for items with each of the two characteristic.

1. Lexical item for items with characteristic1.

Words have unpredictable meaning
2. Word for items with characteristic 2.
They are the building-blocks for words and phrases.
 Morphology the branch or sub field of linguistics that studies the way in which words
are constructed or arranged of smaller meaningful units.

25
  Syntax the branch or sub field of linguistics that studies the internal structure of
sentences and phrases and the interrelationships among the internal parts.
 Semantics the branch or sub field of linguistics that studies the nature of the meaning
of individual words, and the meaning of words grouped into phrases and sentences.
 Pragmatics the branch or sub field of linguistics that studies the use of words (and
phrases and sentences) in the actual context of discourse.

3.2 Suggest

We are as the writer want to opology for the shortage of this paper. We know that this
paper is still far from perfect. So that we need the suggest from the reader for the perfection
of this paper. Thank you very much for the reader.

26
 REFERENCES

Anderson, Stephen R. (n.d.). "Morphology".Encyclopedia of Cognitive Science.Macmillan

Reference, Ltd., Yale University.Retrieved 30 July 2016.

Aronoff, Mark; Fudeman, Kirsten (n.d.)."Morphology and Morphological Analysis"

(PDF). What is Morphology?.Blackwell Publishing.Retrieved 30 July 2016.

http://4-learningenglish.blogspot.com/2013/05/history-of-morphology-and-
morphological.html?m=1Accesed on Tuesday,October 20,2020.16:20

Stephen R. Amderson, “Short History of Morphological Theory”, Dept. of Linguistics,

Yale University.

Brown, Penelope., dan Stephen C. Levinson. 1978. Politeness: Some Universal in

Language Usage. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Thomas. Jenny. 1995. Meaning in Interaction: an Introduction to Pragmatics.

London/New

York: Longman.

Saeed,john(2003).Semantics(2nd edn).Oxford:Blackwell

Austin, John L. 1962. “How to Do Things with Word (edisi kedua)”. Oxford: Oxfod
University

Lyons,john(1997).SEMANTICS,2 VOLS.Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.

Tserdanelis,G. and Wai Yi Peggy Wong. (Eds.). (2004). Language File: Material for an
Introduction to Language & Linguistics (9th ed.). Columbus: Department of Linguistics, The
Ohio State University Press.

Chomsky, N. (1957 & 2002). Syntactic Structures. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter GmBH.

Hawkins, R. (2001). Second Language Syntax: A Generative Introduction. Massachusetts:

Blackwell Publishers .

Fromkin, Victoria, Robert Rodman. (1983). An Introduction to Language. New York: CBS
college publising.

27