WORD STRUCTURE IN MODERN ENGLISH WORD STRUCTURE IN MODERN ENGLISH
I.
The morphological construction of a word. Morphemes. Types of morphemes. Allomorphs.
II.
Structural types of words.
III.
Principles of morphemic analysis.
IV.
Derivational degree of analysis. Stems. Types of root. Derivational types of words.
I.
The morphological construction of a word. Morphemes. Types of Morphemes. Allomorphs.
There are two degrees of attack to the survey ofword- construction
: the degree ofmorphemic analysis
and the degree ofderivational
or word-formation analysis.
Word is the principal and basic unit of the linguistic communication system, the largest on the morphologic and the smallest on the syntactic plane of lingual analysis.
It has been universally acknowledged that a great many words have a composite nature and are made up of morphemes, the basic units on the morphemic degree, which are defined as the smallest indivisible two-facet linguistic communication units.
The termmorpheme
is derived fromGrecian morphe
& # 8220 ; signifier & # 8221 ; +-eme
. The Grecian postfix& # 8211 ; eme
has been adopted by lingual to denote the smallest unit or the lower limittypical characteristic
.
The morpheme is the smallest meaningful unit of signifier. A signifier in these instances a repeating distinct unit of address. Morphemes occur in address merely as constitutional parts of words, non independently, although a word may dwell of individual morpheme. Even a casual scrutiny of the morphemic construction of English words reveals that they are composed of morphemes of different types: root-morphemes and affixational morphemes. Wordss that consist of a root and an affix are called derived words or derived functions and are produced by the procedure of word edifice known as affixation ( or derivation ) .
The root-morpheme
is the lexical karyon of the word ; it has a really general and abstract lexical significance common to a set of semantically related words representing one word-cluster, e.g. ( to )Teach, instructor, learning
. Besides the lexical significance root-morphemes possess all other types of intending proper to morphemes except the part-of-speech significance which is non found in roots.
Affixational morphemes
include inflectional affixes or inflexions and derivational affixes.Inflections
carry merely grammatical significance and are therefore relevant merely for the formation of word-forms.Derivational affixes
are relevant for constructing assorted types of words. They are lexically ever dependent on the root which they modify. They possess the same types of significance as found in roots, but unlike root-morphemes most of them have the part-of-speech significance which makes them structurally the of import portion of the word as they condition the lexico-grammatical category the word belongs to. Due to this constituent of their significance the derivational affixes are classified into affixes constructing different parts of address: nouns, verbs, adjectives or adverbs.
Rootss and derivational affixes are by and large easy distinguished and the difference between them is clearly felt as, e.g. , in the wordshelpless, ready to hand, inkiness, Londoner, refill
, etc. : the root-morphemeshelp- , hand- , black- , London- , fill- ,
are understood as the lexical centres of the words, and & # 8211 ;less, -y, -ness, -er, re-
are felt as morphemes dependent on these roots.
Differentiation is besides made of free and bound morphemes.
Free morphemes
coincide with word-forms of independently working words. It is obvious that free morphemes can be found merely among roots, so the morphemeboy-
in the wordmale child
is a free morpheme ; in the wordunwanted
there is merely one free morphemedesire-
; the wordpen-holder
has two free morphemespen-
andhold-
. It follows thatedge morphemes
are those that do non co-occur with separate word- signifiers, accordingly all derivational morphemes, such as& # 8211 ; ness, -able, -er
are bound. Root-morphemes may be both free and edge. The morphemestheor-
in the wordstheory, theoretical,
orhorr-
in the wordshorror, atrocious, dismay ; Angl-
inAnglo-Saxon ; Afr-
inAfro-asian
are all bound roots as there are no indistinguishable word-forms.
It should besides be noted that morphemes may hold different phonemic forms. In the word-clusterplease
, delighting
, pleasance
, pleasant
the phonemic forms of the word base in complementary distribution or in alternation with each other. All the representations of the given morpheme, that manifest alternation are calledallomorphs
/or morphemic variants/ of that morpheme.
The uniting form allo- from Greek allos & # 8220 ; other & # 8221 ; is used in lingual nomenclature to denote elements of a group whose members together consistute a structural unit of the linguistic communication ( allophones, allomorphs ) . Therefore, for illustration,-ion/ -tion/ -sion/ -ation
are the positional discrepancies of the same postfix, they do non differ in significance or map but show a little difference in sound signifier depending on the concluding phoneme of the predating root. They are considered as discrepancies of one and the same morpheme and called itsallomorphs
.
Allomorph
is defined as a positional discrepancy of a morpheme happening in a specific environment and so characterized by complementary description.
Complementary distribution
is said to take topographic point, when two lingual discrepancies can non look in the same environment.
Different morphemes are characterized byincompatible distribution
, i.e. if they occur in the same environment they signal different significances. The suffixes & # 8211 ;able
and& # 8211 ; ed
, for case, are different morphemes, non allomorphs, because adjectives in& # 8211 ; able
mean & # 8220 ; capable of existences & # 8221 ; .
Allomorphs will besides happen among prefixes. Their signifier so depends on the initials of the root with which they will absorb.
Two or more sound signifiers of a root bing under conditions of complementary distribution may besides be regarded as allomorphs, as, for case, in longa
: lengthN
.
II.
Structural types of words
.
The morphological analysis of word- construction on the morphemic degree purposes at dividing the word into its component morphemes & # 8211 ; the basic units at this degree of analysis & # 8211 ; and at finding their figure and types. The four types ( root words, derived words, compound, shortenings ) represent the chief structural types of Modern English words, and transition, derivation and composing the most productive ways of word edifice.
Harmonizing to the figure of morphemes words can be classified intomonomorphic
andpolymorphous
.Monomorphic
orroot-words
consist of merely one root-morpheme, e.g.little, Canis familiaris, make, give,
etc. All polymorphous word autumn into two subgroups:derived words
andcompound words
& # 8211 ; harmonizing to the figure of root-morphemes they have. Derived words are composed of one root-morpheme and one or more derivational morphemes, e.g.accept
able, outmake
, Disagree
able, etc. Compound words are those which contain at least two root-morphemes, the figure of derivational morphemes being undistinguished. There can be both root- and derivational morphemes in compounds as inpen-holder, light-mindedness
, or merely root-morphemes as inlamp-shade, eye-ball
, etc.
These structural types are non of equal importance. The hint to the right apprehension of their comparative value lies in a careful consideration of: 1 ) the importance of each type in the bing wordstock, and 2 ) their frequence value in existent address. Frequency is by far the most of import factor. Harmonizing to the available word counts made in different parts of address, we find that derived words numerically constitute the largest category of words in the bing wordstock ; derived nouns comprise about 67 % of the entire figure, adjectives about 86 % , whereas compound nouns make about 15 % and adjectives approximately 4 % . Root words come to 18 % in nouns, i.e. a trifle more than the figure of compound words ; adjectives root words come to about 12 % .
But we can non neglect to comprehend that root-words occupy a prevailing topographic point. In English, harmonizing to the recent frequence counts, approximately 60 % of the entire figure of nouns and 62 % of the entire figure of adjectives in current usage are root-words. Of the entire figure of adjectives and nouns, derived words comprise about 38 % and 37 % severally while compound words comprise an undistinguished 2 % in nouns and 0.2 % in adjectives. Thus it is the root-words that constitute the foundation and the anchor of the vocabulary and that are of paramount importance in address. It should besides be mentioned that root words are characterized by a high grade of collocability and a complex assortment of significances in contrast with words of other structural types whose semantic constructions are much poorer. Root- words besides serve as parent signifiers for all types of derived and compound words.
III.
Principles of morphemic analysis.
In most instances the morphemic construction of words is crystalline plenty and single morp
haems clearly stand out within the word. The cleavage of words is by and large carried out harmonizing to the method ofImmediate
and andUltimate Components
. This method is based on the binary rule, i.e. each phase of the process involves two constituents the word instantly breaks into. At each phase these two constituents are referred to as the Immediate Constituents. Each Immediate Component at the following phase of analysis is in bend broken into smaller meaningful elements. The analysis is completed when we arrive at components incapable of farther division, i.e. morphemes. These are referred to Ultimate Constituents. . This method is based on the binary rule, i.e. each phase of the process involves two constituents the word instantly breaks into. At each phase these two constituents are referred to as the Immediate Constituents. Each Immediate Component at the following phase of analysis is in bend broken into smaller meaningful elements. The analysis is completed when we arrive at components incapable of farther division, i.e. morphemes. These are referred to Ultimate Constituents.
A synchronous morphological analysis is most efficaciously accomplished by the process known as the analysis into Immediate Constituents. ICs are the two meaningful parts organizing a big lingual integrity.
The method is based on the fact that a word characterized by morphological divisibility is involved in certain structural correlativities. To sum up: as we break the word we obtain at any degree merely ICs one of which is the root of the given word. All the clip the analysis is based on the forms feature of the English vocabulary. As a form demoing the mutuality of all the components segregated at assorted phases, we obtain the undermentioned expression:
un+ { [ ( gent- + -le ) + -man ] + -ly }
Interrupting a word into its Immediate Components we observe in each cut the structural order of the components.
A diagram showing the four cuts described expressions as follows:
1.
un- / gentlemanly
2.
un- / gentleman / – ly
3.
un- / gentle / – adult male / – ly
4.
un- / gentl / – vitamin E / – adult male / – ly
A similar analysis on the word-formation degree demoing non merely the morphemic components of the word but besides the structural form on which it is built.
The analysis of word-structure at the morphemic degree must continue to the phase of Ultimate Constituents. For illustration, the noun friendliness is foremost segmented into the ICs: [ frendl & # 305 ; – ] repeating in the adjectivesfriendly-
looking and friendly and [ -n & # 305 ; s ] found in a infinite figure of nouns, such assadness, inkiness, sameness,
etc. the IC [ -n & # 305 ; s ] is at the same clip an UC of the word, as it can non be broken into any smaller elements possessing both sound-form and significance. Any farther division of& # 8211 ; ness
would give single speech-sounds which denote nil by themselves. The IC [ frendl & # 305 ; – ] is following broken into the ICs [ -l & # 305 ; ] and [ frend- ] which are both UCs of the word.
Morphemic analysis under the method of Ultimate Constituents may be carried out on the footing of two rules: the allegedroot-principle
andaffix rule
.
Harmonizing to the affix rule the splitting of the word into its component morphemes is based on the designation of the affix within a set of words, e.g. the designation of the postfix& # 8211 ; er
leads to the cleavage of wordsvocalist, instructor, swimmer
into the derivational morpheme& # 8211 ; er
and the rootsteach- , sing- , drive- .
Harmonizing to the root-principle, the cleavage of the word is based on the designation of the root-morpheme in a word-cluster, for illustration the designation of the root-morphemeagree-
in the wordsagreeable, understanding, disagree.
As a regulation, the application of these rules is sufficient for the morphemic cleavage of words.
However, the morphemic construction of words in a figure of instances defies such analysis, as it is non ever so crystalline and simple as in the instances mentioned above. Sometimes non merely the cleavage of words into morphemes, but the acknowledgment of certain sound-clusters as morphemes become dubious which of course affects the categorization of words. In words likeretain, detain, contain
orreceive, deceive, conceive, perceive
the sound-clusters [ R & # 305 ; – ] , [ d & # 305 ; – ] seem to be singled rather easy, on the other manus, they doubtless have nil in common with the phonetically indistinguishable prefixesre- , de-
as found in wordsre-write, re-organize, de-organize, de-code
. Furthermore, neither the sound-cluster [ R & # 305 ; – ] or [ d & # 305 ; – ] , nor the [ -te & # 305 ; n ] or [ -s & # 305 ; : V ] possess any lexical or functional significance of their ain. Yet, these sound-clusters are felt as holding a certain significance because [ R & # 305 ; – ] distinguishesretain
fromdetain
and [ -te & # 305 ; n ] distinguishesretain
fromreceive
.
It follows that all these sound-clusters have a derived function and a certain distributional significance as their order agreement point to the affixal position ofre- , de- , con- , per-
and makes one understand –tain
and & # 8211 ;ceive
as roots. The differential and distributional significances seem to give sufficient land to acknowledge these sound-clusters as morphemes, but as they lack lexical significance of their ain, they are set apart from all other types of morphemes and are known in lingual literature as pseudo- morphemes. Pseudo- morphemes of the same sort are besides encountered in words likerusty-fusty.
IV.
Derivational degree of analysis. Stems. Types of Stems. Derivational types of word.
The morphemic analysis of words merely defines the component morphemes, finding their types and their significance but does non uncover the hierarchy of the morphemes consisting the word. Wordss are no mere amount sums of morpheme, the latter reveal a definite, sometimes really complex interrelatedness. Morphemes are arranged harmonizing to certain regulations, the agreement differing in assorted types of words and peculiar groups within the same types. The form of morpheme agreement underlies the categorization of words into different types and enables one to understand how new words appear in the linguistic communication. These dealingss within the word and the interrelatednesss between different types and categories of words are known asderivative or word- formation dealingss
.
The analysis of derivative dealingss purposes at set uping a correlativity between different types and the structural forms words are built on. The basic unit at the derivational degree is theroot
.
The
root
is defined as that portion of the word which remains unchanged throughout its paradigm, therefore the root which appears in the paradigm ( to )ask
( ) ,asks, asked, inquiring
isask- ;
thestem of the wordvocalist
( ) ,vocalist & # 8217 ; s, vocalists, vocalists & # 8217 ;
issinger- .
It is the root of the word that takes the inflexions which shape the word grammatically as one or another portion of address.
The construction of roots should be described in footings of IC & # 8217 ; s analysis, which at this degree aims at set uping the forms of typical derivative dealingss within the root and the derivative correlativity between roots of different types.
There are three types of roots: simple, derived and compound.
Simple roots
are semantically non-motivated and make non represent a form on analogy with which new roots may be modeled. Simple roots are by and large monomorphic and phonetically indistinguishable with the root morpheme. The derivational construction of root does non ever co-occur with the consequence of morphemic analysis. Comparison proves that non all morphemes relevant at the morphemic degree are relevant at the derivational degree of analysis. It follows that edge morphemes and all types of pseudo- morphemes are irrelevant to the derivational construction of roots as they do non run into demands of dual resistance and derivative interrelatednesss. So the root of such words asretain, receive, atrocious, pocket, gesture,
etc. should be regarded as simple, non- motivated roots.
Derived roots
are built on roots of assorted constructions though which they are motivated, i.e. derived roots are understood on the footing of the derivative dealingss between their IC & # 8217 ; s and the correlative root. The derived roots are largely polymorphous in which instance the cleavage consequences merely in one IC that is itself a root, the other IC being needfully a derivational affix.
Derived roots are non needfully polymorphic.
Compound stems
are made up of two IC & # 8217 ; s, both of which are themselves stems, for illustrationmatch-box, driving-suit, pen-holder,
etc. It is built by fall ining of two roots, one of which is simple, the other derived.
In more complex instances the consequence of the analysis at the two degrees sometimes seems even to undertake one another.
The derivational types of words
are classified harmonizing to the construction of their roots intosimple, derived
andcompound
words.
Derived words are those composed of one root- morpheme and one or more derivational morpheme. Derived words are those composed of one root- morpheme and one or more derivational morpheme.
Compound words contain at least two root- morphemes, the figure of derivational morphemes being undistinguished. Compound words contain at least two root- morphemes, the figure of derivational morphemes being undistinguished.
Derivational compound
is a word formed by a coincident procedure of composing and derivational.
Compound words
proper
are formed by fall ining together stems of word already available in the linguistic communication.
