Professional Documents
Culture Documents
323-Morphologyاولي شابتر مهم شامل
323-Morphologyاولي شابتر مهم شامل
323-Morphologyاولي شابتر مهم شامل
A lexeme family, or less formally a word family, is a set of lexemes that are
related. They should share some phonological properties and be related
semantically. The latter is easier said than determined.
E.g. print, printable, unprintable, printer, printability, reprint.
This list is not necessarily complete.
Sometimes a lexeme with an affix occurs but the basic form does not
exist:
E.g. dis-gruntled but not *gruntled, in-cognito, but not *cognito,
un-gainly, but not*gainly.
Sometimes the expected affix does not occur but another affix does:
E.g. natural-ness in place *natural-ity.
Or the expected affix occurs with another meaning:
E.g. cook, cook-er (an instrument for cooking, not a person who
cooks, which is simply the noun ‘cook’.
Compound *lexeme) refers to words that are made up of two or more lexemes:
doghouse, catfish, greenhouse, whiplash, tattletale, and so forth.
2.2 Morphemes
A morpheme is the smallest constituent with a function. I prefer this distinction to
‘smallest constituent with meaning. There are some forms that appears to be
constituents but have no discernable meaning, but have a function in terms of word
building:
E.g. doof-us, radi-us, cf. radi-al, radi-an.
Some inflectional morphemes have no true meaning, but they have a grammatical
function:
E.g. he, him; who, whom; they, them,
The suffix ‘-m’ marks the accusative (objective) Case. This is a syntactic relation and no
meaning can be associated with it.
The term function includes meaning.
To go one step further than H., the hierarchy for constituents is:
Sentence -> phrase -> word -> morpheme.
Phrases are very important constituents in syntax.
English has several words usually considered compounds, where at least one member of the
compound doesn’t behave like a normal prefix or affix.
E. g. tele-graph. Although graph may have lexical meaning, tele- does not. It does not
occur in isolation. The form is borrowed from Greek where it means ‘far’. It is
more like a root that cannot become a stem in its own right, but it may
be adjoined to a stem to form a new stem. This particular property makes it
look like an affix, or, why are affixes not roots?
2.4 Formal Operations
Some words such as derive imply a process. A true process is a historical phenomenon and
does not imply a process in terms of how language is represented in the mind (the grammar of
a language). For some yet to be determined reason, H considers affixation and compounding to
be concatenative, but inflection and other constructions he considers to be non-
concatenative.
Another non-concatenative structure include word whose final consonant becomes voiced, final
consonant becomes palatalized, or gemination of a root consonant.
E.g. Albanian: armik [-q] (Sg.), armiq [-c] (Pl.).
Note: [c] is not a palatalized consonant. The form came about through
palatalization, which is not visible/hearable.
E.g. English: hoof [hƱf] (Sg.), hooves [hƱvz] (Pl.).
E.g. Arabic causative verbs: darasa (noncausative), darrasa (causative).
Gemination is the doubling of a consonant.
Reduplication is the copying of a syllable or part of a syllable:
1. Prereduplication:
E.g. Ponapean: duhp (nonprogressive), du-duhp (progressive) ‘(be) diving.’
A weak syllable (no coda) is copied).
2. Postreduplication.
E.g. Mangap-Mbula: kuk (nonprogressive), kuk-uk )progressive) ‘(be) barking’
The rhyme of the syllable is copied.
3. Duplifixing is adding an affix and reduplicated part of the stem:
E.g. Somali: buug (Sg.), buug-ag (Pl.) ‘book(s;, fool (Sg.), fool-al (Pl.) .book’.
The vowel ‘a’ is like a suffix in that it is invariable. The consonants
‘g’ and ‘l’ are copied from the stem final consonant and placed after ‘a’.
2.4 Formal Operations
E.g. Tsutujil: saq (Sg.) ‘’white’, saq-soj ’whitish’.
‘s’ is reduplicated from the initial consonant of the stem, and ‘oj’ is a nonvariable suffix.
Weak suppletion if replacing one form with another form (allomorph) which share some common
phonological forms, but not all phonological forms are common to both:
E.g. sing, sang (/I/, /æ/), foot, feet (/Ʊ/ /I/).
The approach that I favour is set theory.To review Korean, there are two allomorphs (members) of
the set for the plural of nouns: {ul, lul} (also written as {{ul}, {lul}}. The standard to write morphemes
and allomorphs with hyphens to show that the morpheme or allomorph is an affix. I is not a
theoretical divergence. As I mentioned before one of the allomorphs of the plural morpheme is the
default. The nondefault allomorph must be marked with information indicating the contexts in which
the allomorph occurs. The default allomorph usually corresponds with the underlying form. The
default or underlying allomorph is normally determined, in part, at least, by is distribution. There are
fewer vowels than consonants in Korean. If -ul, which follows consonants, is the default, then the
selection of -lul has a more constrained condition. The rule writing form will be dealt with later.
In the Russian example on p. 27, H considers ZAMOK-I castles to be the underlying form for the
plural form. The suffix ‘-ok’ must be marked in its grammatical entry (the grammaticon) to indicate
that the vowel /o/ in the suffix /ok/ is deleted if the inflectional affix begins with a vowel. I, too, would
consider the allomorph /ok/ as the default. And I would marked the other allomorph with the same
information indicating that /k/ is chosen if the suffix begins with a vowel.
Lexical conditioning is the situation where on suppletive (weak or strong) allomorph is dependent on
a particular lexical item but not on a class. The English plural ‘-en’ occurs with only three nouns, one
of them nearly obsolete: ox-en, childr-en, and brethr-en. The suffix the result of a lexical property
called lexical conditioning.
2.6 Some Problems in Morpheme Analysis
H mentions a problem arising from suppletion. The plural allomorphs ‘-s’ and ‘-en’ in English are related
by suppletion. They share no exclusive phonological properties. H raises the question whether the two
suffixes are manifestations of the same morpheme. H leans toward this view. So do I.
My view is determined by the claim that all morphemes must have a form, a function and a sign. I will
illustrate with the progressive participle suffix ‘-ing’:
The program I am using to make graphics does not import unicode phonetics. I am using here ‘ñ’ for
engma, the nasal velar [ŋ].
[+Progressive] is the feature denoting the progressive aspect; the form is a suffix which is adjoined
to a noun host (base); and the sign is /ɩŋ/.
There are plural signs for nouns in English: /z/ and /ɩn/. These two allomorphs are strongly
suppletive. They are shown in the following grammeme (entry form for grammatical morphemes):
2.6 Some Problems in Morpheme Analysis
Grammeme: [+Pl]
+Suffix
+Host form
+Noun
The two allomorphs here form a ‘natural’ set, since they share the same function. The fact
that they are the same form supports this claim. If they are in the same set, then they must
be a member of the [+Pl]. And if they are in the same set they must be allomorphs.
A morpheme may consist of two or more features. For example, the English verbal suffix ‘-
s’ marks agreement with a third person singular subject and it marks the present tense.
The suffix in the above figure contains two subfeatures [+Host] and [+Noun]. Agglutinating
languages do not do this, with some minor exceptions. This cumulative expression is
also called fusion.
A zero expression ‘ø’ means that there is no overt affix to mark a function. ‘ø’ has been the
topic of notable debates. Until very recently I was opposed to the notion of ‘ø’ until I started
learning set theory. Set theory permits empty sets often written as ‘ø’. A zero expression
grammeme is not entirely empty; the sign and the form are empty. It is now considered
better to consider the singular morphological operation for nouns as ‘ø’. It thus has the
following grammemical entry:
2.6 Some Problems in Morpheme Analysis
Grammeme: [-Pl, +Noun]
[-Plural, +Noun] function
ø form
ø sign
Only the function is not empty; it merely has no form and no sign.
An empty morpheme is an affix that has no meaning, but has a function: it forms a base
to which certain meaningful affixes are adjoined. This occurs in English when nouns are
borrowed from Greek and Latin and retain their plural form. The singular ending occurs
in English an empty (ø) morph:
E.g. radi-us (Sg.), radi-i (Pl.); agend-a (Sg.), agend-ae (Pl.); phenomen-on (Sg.),
phenomen-a (Pl.).
The plural form is adjoined to the base, respectively: ‘I’, ‘ae’, ‘a’. In English the Sg. form
is morphologically null. The suffixes in the above three examples are stem-enders, an
empty morpheme required when there is no suffix adjoined to the word. This applies to
derivatives as well: radi-al, phenomen-al, and so forth. The grammemical entry for ‘-us’
is:
Grammeme: [stem extender]
stem extender when function
there is no affix, 'us'
class
[+suffix] form
us sign