5.1. Morphology. Morphological and derivational (юогй4оппат|оп) analyses

Morphology. Morpheme. Types of meaning in morphemes. Classification оГ morphemes. Variants of forms in morphemes (allomorphs). Procedure оГ morphological analysis. Types of word-segmentahility. Morphemic structure ап4 morphemic types of words. Derivational (word-formation) analysis. Derivative structure. Derivational types of words. Degree of derivation

Il. Morphology. Morpheme. Morpholotty vs. Lexicology

Morphology is а branch of linguistics that studies morphemes — the smallest meaningful non-segmentable parts of words. Lexicology is closely connected with morphology. Moreover, it includes part of morphology as its integral part because one of its objectives is investigating all meaningful units in а language.

As mentioned above, lexicology studies only part of the morphemes that morphology is interested ш. It studies only derivational morphemes that are the smallest meaningful stem building or word building lexical units, as in reason-аЫе, ил-reason-able. It does not study form building, or inflectional morphemes, as in smiled, smiles, is smiling.

field /1933:222/ referred to inflections as the outer layer of morphology of word md derivation as its inner layer, because inflections are added when аП derivational mpositional processes are already complete as in (ntotor+bike)+-s but not in r+-s)+bike or '(motor+-s)+(bike+ s). So, lexicology is чету closely connected orphology but it studies only derivational morphemes that make up the шпет layer phology.

в ol meaning ia morphemesl

sts have used the term morpheme for over а century. What part of а word can be в morpheme геваии а question, however.

"ely formal grounds а morpheme is identified as а segment regularly recurring in exemes. But is cat- in саШе, or -able in table а morpheme? Definitely not, as the ng segments must have the same meaning to be called а morpheme. Vice versa, :ically identical segments, having different distribution, may not have identical

as in price — precious. Are they still morphemes? In modern linguistics emes are identified by а combination of structural, distributional and semantic i taking into account the meaning of the segment under consideration. But what mean for а morpheme to be meaningful?

oblem is that meaning in morphemes has а difTerent character in comparison with exical units, namely words.

:sumed, that like words, some word building morphemes (further 'morphemes' for may have lexical meaning: denotational (especially revealed in root-morphemes, girl-) and connotational (the suffixes in piglet and horsy have diminutive and ing meaning). Connotational meaning may range from positive to derogative as in llowing suffixes with denotational meaning of similarity: womanly, woman-like,

t-ish.

з lexical meaning many morphemes (except roots) may possess part-of-speech пЯочегп-tnent, teach-er) as all words 4о.

itrast to words and to inflectional endings like -ed for the Past Indefinite, word ig morphemes do not possess grammatical meaning. For example, the root eme -вил- in мяп-ly, «n-ванНу, possesses neither grammatical meaning of case anber, nor part-of-speech meaning, while the word а ntan does.

lition to the types of meaning observed in а word, morphemes possess specific ngs о~йе~т own. They are differential and distributional meanings.

entlal meaning serves to distinguish one word from another (over-cook, under- pre-cook) and distributional meaning is the meaning of morpheme arrangement in d (certain morphemes usually follow or prec

ede the root as in uneffecttve, some

morphemes may occupy different positions like in ring finger and finger-ring, player and player-р!апо, billboard and board bilL But difference in their arrar provides differences in lexical meanings of the nominative units they form).

l3. Classificstion of morphemesl

SemanticaUy English derivational morphemes, which here are called morphet short, are divided into roots — lexical-semantic centres of words without which 1 not exist, and архея — prefixes and suffixes with modifying meaning.

Both roots and affixes have definite lexical (denotational and connotational) t) meaning (-dad-, -let, -у).

Боте morphemes тау have all major types of meaning characteristics, like

рйЫо!оря1, while some have predominantly lexical (over-, under-) or fun meanings (-ment, -dom).

But some of the stem building morphemes called pseudo-morphemes are seman deficient. Word segments like re- in receive or con- in contain bear по теап relation to the morphemes re- in rewrite and con- in confirm. They can hardly be as йейпйе lexical or functional meaning in modern English, though diachronically йе~ usually full morphemes in the language of origin (usually Latin or Greek). differential and distributional types of meanings are presented there. They m observed in combinations with other segments forming meaningful words (cf.:, retain, remain; con- in conclude, conceive), and thus тау be regarded as units sim prefixes (pseudo-prefixes). The remaining segments of these words like ceive in ri and — tain in contain are also observed in many олег words (for example, per detain) but as radical elements they are also problematic for the same semantic reaso

Structurally morphemes fall into three groups: фее, bound and semipee (semi-hour,

А free morpheme coincides with а word form висЬ as /пепИ in frietidsltip. The ma~ of English roots are free morphemes.

А bound morpheme is always а part of а word (friend--ship). The major part of af and some roots, especially in loan words such as histor- in history, сог- in cordial, or in notion, are bound.

Боте bound morphemes seldom or never occur in обжег words. They are un morphemes (ham-let, _#_otting-liam, Prince-ton) and are mostly observed in native w that became partially demotivated.

Besides free and bound there are also semi-bound morphemes that can occur both as and bound (to do н ell and well-Жопе, take а half о~it and half-eaten).

group of word 1p~

о word аерпеп1ыя made и Q by the so-called соп«ваа««в1п. д fortsss

.'е Latin or ~гс p w words. These combininy 6:эггпв аг сlс words or arts os

lasslcal сотро ЗУ. +hotographic, teiephorsa-, telagrarat) m ounds (phoetolo ,п Йе isnguagc of borrowtng.

iglish is not quite clem y t. Some of the combining for«re> us~ as tl«e ;omplexcs печег оссиг ая атее wor+s and thus 1оо1 тоге like pr е«fixes аз erican, panchronianc, Ра™геисотМа с 1. д, afe ргес(очаг««папа

«п4 elements i omp ех©а апи 1с,«о(с morc 1«1се suff«xes аз ~gia in

рlехев ав grpl - апй "g '" ngrарйсв«~ md /,. h, р~~е~ааодч ат and

iese elements iii сотр1ехез do not ]~ «. h me>ning- but th

d ma ье ге arded аче р -о -$Р ey .ical meaning ai™у е генг '4я гоогя. Ъ'е1 йеу ге not &е~ roots as

nd rlngfinger " . derivational potential, ~©~«ах«Оса аг«д The also differ in

endence from Ь bound гоо1а like anx

in anxious, anxjety, a d hence re,..

' combining forrns.

„1«)се [fl] in «чоган ~~~т«п~ moДm gu

~field calls them Звоаае~1с sem fBloomftcld 1933:244/.

«rms ш а«е Ьепзев sllomo

~«cnt р1«опет' 1«рс~ ( 1. hemes may have су'а.

Ь — иве

part — partial, .). etc.). However th %sc differently soundii«R parts may be

; morphophonemic чаг«апсз of йе sam влетев due to serssantic and criteria. These rePresentations, a1tе < з оГ mo~herries, иге cailed Momorphs гпау involve vowel and/or consonantal rr«orphc«phonemic

д л „вгга«ес1 in the given above e~

mples.

ns under which the вагпе morpheme xlerivcs two or more differently' sounding

11 not quite сlеа~ Mmy moq hophoqemic alternations and allophories as their пе accounted fpr еф«~о/о~гса! reasa««s (cf peace [L g. pFr] prarifist [L])

il (sound change and the Great Vow~i Sh«ft" п divine tliainity), analogica/ will be pronounced ав е!есМсйу), апв1 even excePtionalfactors (as in equate— here we observe t — у а11егпа1«оп «посад ог the more productive alternation elate — relation).

~«гесодпые а morpherr«e i~ its d~ffе~ „1 гпа"«пк тогр)«о1офса1 апп бепча6о~~1

:w ords.

IS. Procedure of morphological aastysisi „:'йй

In order to know how many meaningful parts there are in а word, scholars employ., procedure called the method of Immediate and Ultimate constituents (the IC and UI method).

This method is based on the identification of two meaningful and recurring component, that the word under analysis falls into (immediate constituents, or IC) in other word until it is broken into the smallest meaningful parts (ultimate constituents, or UC). pp example, /йеи~Ии~еы is divided into the component /Неп~Иу- occurring in such words а friendly, friendly-looking, and the component -леля as in dark-ness, happy-ness. Thei /Иеийу- is divided into /НеМ- and -ly (cf. also: wife-ly) which are ultimate constituent of the wordfrtеnййnеss.

This method is of special value in morphological analysis of а word in an unknowi language.

l6. Types оГ word-seamentabilityl

There are three main types of word-segmentability:

— Complete segmentability takes place when segmentation into morphemes (&ei or bound) does not cause any doubt for structural or semantic reasons as in teach-er. Th~ constituent morphemes of the word recur with the зале meaning in а number of othe words: the free root morpheme — Феей- is observed in the verb to teach and noun teacli ing, and the suf5x — ег takes place in many English words like work-er, paint-er.

Segmentation into morphemes of such words as stud-ent and nat-ive may also bi considered as complete. Though the roots in them are never free but bound morpheme! they possess а clear lexical meaning and are recurrent in other words: study, studio an< nature, native, naturaL

— Conditional word-segmentability is observed when segmentation is doubtful fo! semantic reasons, as the segments (pseudo-morphemes) regularly occurring in othe! words can hardly Ъе ascribed any definite lexical meaning (re-tain, 4е-йи», con-сеЬе de-сеЬе, per-ceive, re-сеЬе; ас cept, ex cept, сок cept, per cept, pre сер!).

— Defective segmentability takes place in cases when segmentation is doubtful fo! structural reasons because one of the components (а unique morpheme) has а specifi< lexical meaning but seldom or печет occurs in other words (ham-let, росы-et, dis-тау, з~тин -berry).

р. Mornbemic structure and пюгрЬеппс types of wordsl

All words can be classified as шопошогрЫе or polymorphic according to the пшпЬег о1 their morphemes.