Word structure. Morphemic analysis of English words.

Most of the English lexicon is constituted by word which have several morphemes. (75 % engl. Words ? polymorphemic words).

In ME most English vocabulary arises grows by making new lexemes out of old one, by adding an affixation to previously existing forms altering their words class and meaning by combining the existing words (basis) to produce compounds: derivatives, derived words (friendly ? unfriendly, teapot, bag bone).

The contribution of word formation to the grows and development of English lexicons is second to none, although a great deal belong to borrowing and semantic derivation.

1. A complex word structure ? the result of different word-formation process (illegal, discouraging, uninteresting)

2. A complex word structure may be connected with borrowing and further identification of certain morpheme in the system of language recipient.

Moreover similar international structure may be the result of different word formation process. E.g. discouraging ? discourage + ing; uninteresting ? un + interesting ? morphologically(structurally) they are the same.

The morphemic analyses and derived analyses they are differ in the aims and basic elements.

To eye ? monomorphic (root word)

It?s a derived word.

A morpheme ? the smallest meaningful language unit.

Morphemes may be classified:

1. from the semantic point of view. Semantically morphemes fall into two classes:

ü root-morphemes - is the lexical nucleus of a word, it has an individual lexical meaning shared by no other morpheme of the language. The root-morpheme is isolated as the morpheme common to a set of words making up a word-cluster, for example the morpheme teach-in to teach, teacher, teaching, theor-in theory, theorist, theoretical,etc.

ü non-root or affixational morphemes include inflectional morphemes or inflections and affixational morphemes or affixes. Roots and affixes make two distinct classes of morphemes due to the different roles they play in word-structure.

Roots and affixational morphemes are generally easily distinguished and the difference between them is clearly felt as, e.g., in the words helpless, handy, blackness, Londoner, refill,etc.: the root-morphemes help-, hand-, black-, London-, -fillare understood as the lexical centres of the words, as the basic constituent part of a word without which the word is inconceivable.

Affixes are classified into prefixes and suffixes: a prefix precedes the root-morpheme, a suffix follows it. Affixes besides the meaning proper to root-morphemes possess the part-of-speech meaning and a generalised lexical meaning.

2. Structurally morphemes fall into three types:

ü A free morpheme is defined as one that coincides with the stem or a word-form. A great many root-morphemes are free morphemes, for example, the root-morpheme friend? of the noun friendshipis naturally qualified as a free morpheme because it coincides with one of the forms of the noun friend.

ü A bound morpheme occurs only as a constituent part of a word. Affixes are, naturally, bound morphemes, for they always make part of a word, e.g. the suffixes -ness, -ship, -ise (-ize),etc., the prefixes un-,dis-, de-,etc.(e.g. readiness, comradeship, to activise; unnatural, to displease, to decipher).

Many root-morphemes also belong to the class of bound morphemes which always occur in morphemic sequences, i.e. in combinations with ? roots or affixes. All unique roots and pseudo-roots are-bound morphemes. Such are the root-morphemes theor-in theory, theoretical,etc., barbar-in barbarism, barbarian,etc., -ceivein conceive, perceive,etc.

Semi-bound (semi-free) morpheme are morphemes that can function in a morphemic sequence both as an affix and as a free morpheme. For example, the morpheme welland halfon the one hand occur as free morphemes that coincide with the stem and the word-form in utterances like sleep well, half an hour,?on the other hand they occur as bound morphemes in words like well-known, half-eaten, half-done.Speaking of word-structure on the morphemic level two groups of morphemes should be specially mentioned.

To the first group belong morphemes of Greek and Latin origin often called combining forms, e.g. telephone, telegraph, phonoscope, microscope,etc. The morphemes tele-, graph-, scope-, micro-, phone-are characterised by a definite lexical meaning and peculiar stylistic reference: tele-means ?far?, graph-means ?writing?, scope ? ?seeing?, micro-implies smallness, phone-means ?sound.? Comparing words with tele-as their first constituent, such as telegraph, telephone, telegramone may conclude that tele-is a prefix and graph-, phone-, gram-are root-morphemes. On the other hand, words like phonograph, seismograph, autographmay create the impression that the second morpheme graphis a suffix and the first ? a root-morpheme. These morphemes are all bound root-morphemes of a special kind and such words belong to words made up of bound roots. The fact that these morphemes do not possess the part-of-speech meaning typical of affixational morphemes evidences their status as roots.

The second group embraces morphemes occupying a kind of intermediate position, morphemes that are changing their class membership.

According to the number of morphemes words are classified into monomorphic and polymorphic.

Monomorphi? or root-words consist of only one root-morpheme, e.g. small, dog, make, give,etc.

P?l?m?rphi? words according to the number of root-morphemes are classified into two subgroups:

1) polyradical words, i.e. words which consist of two or more roots.

Polyradical words fall into two types:

ü polyradical words which consist of two or more roots with no affixational morphemes, e.g. book-stand, eye-ball, lamp-shade,etc. and

ü words which contain at least two roots and one or more affixational morphemes, e.g. safety-pin, wedding-pie, class-consciousness, light-mindedness, pen-holder, etc.

2. Monoradical words fall into two subtypes:

ü radical-suffixal words, i.e. words that consist of one root-morpheme and one or more suffixal morphemes, e.g. acceptable, acceptability, blackish, etc.;

ü radical-prefixal words, i.e. words that consist of one root-morpheme and a prefixal morpheme, e.g. outdo, rearrange, unbutton,etc. and

ü prefixo-radical-suffixal, i.e. words which consist of one root, a prefixal and suffixal morphemes, e.g. disagreeable, misinterpretation,etc.

Three types of morphemic segmentability of words are distinguished: complete, conditional and defective.

Complete segmentability is characteristic of a great many words the morphemic structure of which is transparent enough, as their individual morphemes clearly stand out within the word lending themselves easily to isolation.

Conditional morphemic segmentability characterises words whose segmentation into the constituent morphemes is doubtful for semantic reasons. The morphemes making up words of conditional segmentability thus differ from morphemes making up words of complete segmentability in that the former do not rise to the full status of morphemes for semantic reasons and that is why a special term is applied to them in linguistic literature: such morphemes are called pseudo-morphemes or quasi-morphemes.

Defective morphemic segmentability is the property of words whose component morphemes seldom or never recur in other words. One of the component morphemes is a unique morpheme in the sense that it does not, as a rule, recur in a different linguistic environment. A unique morpheme is isolated and understood as meaningful because the constituent morphemes display a more or less clear denotational meaning. The morphemic analysis of words like cranberry, gooseberry, strawberryshows that they also possess defective morphemic segmentability: the morphemes cran-, goose-, straw-are unique morphemes.

Morphemic analyses ? the aim is to state the number and type of morphemes the word possess.

The procedure generally employed for the purposes of segmenting words into the constituent morphemes is the method of Immediate and Ultimate Constituents. This method is based on a binary principle, i.e. each stage of the procedure involves two components the word immediately breaks into. At each stage these two components are referred to as the Immediate Constituents (ICs). Each IC at the next stage of analysis is in turn broken into two smaller meaningful elements. The analysis is completed when we arrive at constituents incapable of further division, i.e. morphemes. In terms of the method employed these are referred to as the Ultimate Constituents (UCs). For example the noun friendlinessis first segmented into the IC friendlyrecurring in the adjectives friendly-lookingand friendlyand the -nessfound in a countless number of nouns, such as happiness, darkness, unselfishness,etc. The IC -nessis at the same time a UC of the noun, as it cannot be broken into any smaller elements possessing both sound-form and meaning. The IC friendlyis next broken into the ICs friend-and -lyrecurring in friendship, unfriendly,etc. on the one hand, and wifely, brotherly,etc., on the other. Needless to say that the ICs friend-and -lyare both UCs of the word under analysis.

The morphemic analysis according to the IC and UC may be carried out on the basis of two principles: the so-called root principle and the affix principle. According to the affix principle the segmentation of the word into its constituent morphemes is based on the identification of an affixational morpheme within a set of words; for example, the identification of the suffixational morpheme -lessleads to the segmentation of words like useless, hopeless, merciless,etc., into the suffixational morpheme -less and the root-morphemes within a word-cluster; the identification of the root-morpheme agree- in the words agreeable, agreement, disagreemakes it possible to split these words into the root -agree-and the affixational morphemes -able, -ment, dis-.As a rule, the application of one of these

11. Derivational analyses.

The nature, type and arrangement of the ICs of the word is known as its derivative structure. According to the derivative structure all words fall into two big classes: simple, non-derived words and complexes or derivatives. Simplexes are words which derivationally cannot? be segmented into ICs. Derivatives are words which depend on some other simpler lexical items that motivate them structurally and semantically, i.e. the meaning and the structure of the derivative is understood through the comparison with the meaning and the structure of the source word.

The basic elementary units of the derivative structure of words are: derivational bases, derivational affixes and derivational patterns. The relations between words with a common root but of different derivative structure are known as derivative relations. The derivative and derivative relations make the subject of study at the derivational level of analysis; it aims at establishing correlations between different types of words, the structural and semantic patterns words are built on, the study also enables one to understand how new words appear in the language.

Derivational base: is defined as the constituent to which a rule of word-formation is applied. Structurally derivational bases fall into three classes:

1) bases that coincide with morphological stems of different degrees of complexity, e.g. dutiful, dutifully; day-dream, to day-dream, daydreamer.

Derivationally the stems may be:

ü simple, which consist of only one, semantically non motivated constituent (pocket, motion, retain, horrible).

ü derived stems are semantically and structurally motivated, and are the results of the application of word-formation rules (girl ? girlish, to weekend, to daydream)

ü compound stems are always binary and semantically motivated (match-box, letter-writer)

2) bases that coincide with word-forms; e.g. paper-bound, unsmiling, unknown. This class of bases is confined to verbal word-forms ? the present and the past participles.

3) bases that coincide with word-gr?ups of different degrees of stability, e ,g. second-rateness, flat-waisted, etc. This class is made of word-groups. Bases of this kind are most active with derivational affixes in the class of adjectives and nouns, e.g. blue-eyed, long-fingered, old-fashioned, do-gooder, etc.

Derivational affixes: Derivational affixes are ICs of numerous derivatives in all parts of speech. Derivational affixes possess two basic functions: 1) that of stem-building and 2) that of word-building. In most cases derivational affixes perform both functions simultaneously. It is true that the part-of-speech meaning is proper in different degrees to the derivational suffixes and prefixes. It stands out clearly in derivational suffixes but it is less evident in prefixes; some prefixes lack it altogether. Prefixes like en-, un-, de-, out-, be-, unmistakably possess the part-of-speech meaning and function as verb classifiers. The prefix over-evidently lacks the part-of-speech meaning and is freely used both for verbs and adjectives, the same may be said about non-, pre-, post-.

Derivational patterns: A derivational pattern is a regular meaningful arrangement, a structure that imposes rigid rules on the order and the nature of the derivational bases and affixes that may be brought together.

There are two types of DPs ? structural that specify base classes and individual affixes, and structural-semantic that specify semantic peculiarities of bases and the individual meaning of the affix. DPs of different levels of generalisation signal: 1) the class of source unit that motivates the derivative and the direction of motivation between different classes of words; 2) the part of speech of the derivative; 3) the lexical sets and semantic features of derivatives.

The first principle of classification that, one might say, suggests itself is the 1)part of speechformed:

ü Noun-suffixes (-er, -dom, -ness, -ation)

ü Adjective-suffixes (-able, -less, -ful, -ic, -ous)

ü Verb-suffixes (-en, -fy, -ise)

ü Adverb-suffixes (-ly, -ward)

2) Suffixes may also be classified into various groups according to the lexico-grammatical character of the base the affix is usually added to:

ü deverbal suffixes (those added to the verbal base), e.g. -er, -ing, -ment, -able, etc. (speaker, reading, agreement, suitable, etc.);

ü denominal suffixes (those added to the noun base), e.g. -less, -ish, -ful, -ist, -some, etc. (handless, childish, mouthful, violinist, troublesome, etc.);

ü de-adjectival suffixes (those affixed to the adjective base), e.g. -en, -ly, -ish, -ness, etc. (blacken, slowly, reddish, brightness, etc.).

3) A classification of suffixes may also be based on the criterion of sense expressed by a set of suffixes:

ü the agent of an action, e.g. -er, -ant (baker, dancer, defendant, etc.);

ü appurtenance, e.g. -an, -ian, -ese, etc. (Arabian, Elizabethan, Russian, Chinese, Japanese, etc.);

ü collectivity, e.g. -age, -dom, -ery (-ry), etc. (freightage, officialdom, peasantry, etc.);

ü diminutiveness, e.g. -ie, -let, -ling, etc. (birdie, girlie, cloudlet, squireling, wolfling, etc.).

4) From the angle of stylistic reference:

ü those characterised by neutral stylistic reference such as -able, -er, -ing, etc.;

ü those having a certain stylistic value such as -oid, -i/form, -aceous, -tron, etc.

5) Suffixes are also classified as to the degree of their productivity.

Productivity: Distinction is usually made between dead and living affixes. Dead affixes are described as those which are no longer felt in Modern English as component parts of words; they have so fused with the base of the word as to lose their independence completely, e.g. -d in dead, seed, -le, -1, -el in bundle, sail, hovel; -ock in hillock; -lock in wedlock; -t in flight, gift, height. Living affixesmay be easily singled out from a word, e.g. the noun-forming suffixes -ness, -dom, -hood, -age, -ance, as in darkness, freedom, childhood, marriage, assistance, etc. or the adjective-forming suffixes -en, -ous, -ive, -ful, -y as in wooden, poisonous, active, hopeful, Stony, etc.

Origin: the division is make between native and foreign affixes, e.g. the suffixes -ness, -ish, -dom and the prefixes be-, mis-, un- are of nativeorigin, whereas such suffixes as -ation, -ment, -able and prefixes like dis-, ex-, re- are of foreignorigin.

Many of the suffices and prefixes of native origin were originally independent words (-hood = OE state, -dom = OE judgement, -ly = OE body). In the course of its historical development the English language has adopted a great many suffixes and prefixes from foreign languages. Among borrowed derivational affixes we find both suffixes, e.g. -able, -ible, -al, -age, -ance, -ist, -ism, -ess, etc., and prefixes, e.g. dis-, en[em]-, inter-, re-, non- and many others.

The adoption of foreign words influence the system of English word-formation, so Hybrid words appear: 1) Cases when a foreign stem is combined with a native affix, as in colourless, uncertain. 2) Cases when native stems are combined with foreign affixes, such as drinkable, joyous, shepherdes

Convertion.

Conversion is one of the principal ways of forming words in Modern English and it is highly productive. Conversion consists in making a new word from some existing word by changing the category of a part of speech, the morphemic shape of the original word remaining unchanged. The new word has a meaning which differs from that of the original one though it can more or less be easily associated with it: work ? to work; love ? to love; paper ? to paper; brief ? to brief,etc.

Conversion can be described as a morphological way of forming words. The following indisputable cases of conversion have b??n discussed in linguistic literature:

2. formation of verbs from nouns and more rarely from other parts of speech, and

3. formation of nouns from verbs and rarely from other parts of speech.

The treatment of conversion as a morphological way of forming words was suggested by prof. Smirnitsky. Other linguists define conversion as a non-affixal way of forming words pointing out that the characteristic feature is that a certain stem is used for the formation of a different word of a different part of speech without a derivational affix being added. Others hold the view that conversion is the formation of new words with the help of a zero-morpheme. There is also a point of view on conversion as a morphological-syntactic word-building means, for it involves both a change of the paradigm and a change of the syntactic function of the word. Besides, there is also a purely syntactic approach commonly known as a functional approach to conversion. They define conversion as a shift from one part of speech to another contending that in Modern English a word may function as two different parts of speech at the same time. The two categories of parts of speech especially affected by conversion are nouns and verbs. Verbs made from nouns are the most numerous amongst the words produced by conversion: e. g. to hand, to back, to face, to eye, to mouth, to nose, to dog, to wolf, to monkey, to can, to coal, to stage, to screen, to room, to floor, to blackmail, to blacklist, to honeymoon, and very many others.Nouns are frequently made from verbs: do (e. g. This is the queerest do I've ever come across. Do ? event, incident), go (e. g. He has still plenty of go at his age. Go ? energy), make, run, find, catch, cut, walk, worry, show, move, etc.

Basic Criteria: the problem of the criteria of semantic derivation: which of the two words within a conversion pair is the derived member? The first criterion makes use of the non-correspondence between the lexical meaning of the root-morpheme and the part-of-speech meaning of the stem in one of the two words making up a conversion pair. In cases like penn ? penv, fathern? fatherv, etc. The second criterion involves a comparison of a conversion pair with analogous word-pairs making use of the synonymic sets, of which the words in question are members. For instance, in comparing conversion pairs like chatv? chatn;showv? shown; workv? workn, etc. with analogous synonymic word-pairs like converse ? conversation; exhibit ? exhibition; occupy ? occupation; employ ? employment,etc. we are led to conclude that the nouns chat, show, work,etc. are the derived members.

Of more universal character is the criterion based on derivational relations within the word-cluster of which the converted words in question are members. It will be recalled that the stems of words making up a word-cluster enter into derivational relations of different degrees. If the centre of the cluster is a verb, all derived words of the first degree of derivation have suffixes generally added to a verb-base. The centre of a cluster being a noun, all the first-degree derivatives have suffixes generally added to a noun-base

Of very wide application is the criterion of semantic derivation based on semantic relations within conversion pairs. It is natural to conclude that the existence within a conversion pair of atype of relations typical of, e.g., denominal verbs proves that the verb is the derived member.

Of late a new criterion of semantic derivation for conversion pairs has been suggested.¹ It is based on the frequency of occurrence in various utterances of either of the two member-words related through conversion.The most universal are the semantic and the frequency criteria of semantic derivation.

Conversion is a convenient and "easy" way of enriching the vocabulary with new words. The high productivity of conversion finds its reflection in speech where numerous occasional cases of conversion can be found.

Compounding

Compounding: This type of word-building, in which new words are produced by combining two or more stems, is one of the three most productive types in Modern English, the other two are conversion and affixation. Compounds, though certainly fewer in quantity than derived or root words, still represent one of the most typical and specific features of English word-structure.

Compounds, on the one hand, are generally clearly distinguished from free word-groups, on the other hand they borderline between them display close ties and it?s sometimes difficult to identity where is a compound word and where is a word phrase. So there are some criteria which are used to differentiate them: phonetic criterion, morphological, semantic and graphic.

Ph?neti?all? compounds are marked by a specific structure of their own. No phonemic changes of bases occur in composition but the compound word acquires a new stress pattern, different from the stress in the motivating words (key, hole = keyhole, each possess their own stress but when the stems of these words are brought together to make up a new compound word the latter is given a different stress pattern). Compound words have three stress patterns:

ü a high or unity stress on the first component as in ?honeymoon, doorway, etc.

ü a double stress, with a primary stress on the first component and a weaker, secondary stress on the second component, e.g. ´blood-`vessel, ´mad-`doctor.

ü It is not infrequent, however, for both ICs to have level stress as in, e.g., ?arm-'chair, ?icy-'cold, ?grass-'green,etc.

Graphically most compounds have two types of spelling ? they are spelt either solidly or with a hyphen. It is true that hyphenated spelling by itself may be sometimes misleading, as it may be used in word-groups to emphasise their phraseological character as in e.g. daughter-in-law, man-of-war, brother-in-arms. The two types of spelling typical of compounds and this makes the problem of distinguishing between compound words and word-groups especially difficult.

Semantically compound words are generally motivated units. The meaning of the compound is first of all derived from the? combined lexical meanings of its components. In compound words semantic relations between the base and the stem on which the word is built is more obvious.

Morphologicallycompound words are characterised by the specific order and arrangement in which bases follow one another. The order in which the two bases are placed within a compound is rigidly fixed in Modern English and itis the second IC that makes the head-member of the word, i.e. its structural and semantic centre. The head-member is of basic importance as it ?preconditions both the lexico-grammatical and semantic features of the first component.

The meaning of the compound is derived not only from the combined lexical meanings of its components, but also from the meaning signalled by the patterns of the order and arrangement of its ICs. The semantic centre of the compound is the lexical meaning of the second component modified and restricted by the meaning of the first.

There are different classifications of compound words:

1. From the point of view of degree of semantic independence: coordinative compounds ? the two ICs are semantically equally important (oak-tree, girl-friend, Anglo-American); and subordinative compounds - the components are neither structurally nor semantically equal in importance but are based on the domination of the head-member which is, as a rule, the second IC. The second IC thus is the semantically and grammatically dominant part of the word, which preconditions the part-of-speech meaning of the whole compound as in stone-deaf, age-longwhich are obviously adjectives, a wrist-watch, road-building, a baby-sitterwhich are nouns.

2. From part of speech they form: compound words are found in all parts of speech, but the bulk of compounds are nouns and adjectives. Each part of speech is characterised by its set of derivational patterns and their semantic variants.

3. From the point of view of the means by which the components are joined together compound words may be classified into: words formed by merely placing one constituent after another in a definite order; compound words whose ICs are joined together with a special linking-element ? the linking vowels [ou] and occasionally [i] and the linking consonant [s/z] ? which is indicative of composition as in, e.g., speedometer, tragicomic, statesman;

Compounds may be also classified according to the nature of the bases: Compounds proper are formed by joining together bases built on the stems. Derivational compounds, e.g. long-legged, three-cornered, a break-down, a pickpocket,those that have derivational affixes in their structure ? blue-eyed, golden-haired, film-goer, lady-killer).

4. 4) The description of compound words through the correlation with variable word-groupsmakes it possible to classify them into four major classes: adjectival-nominal (snow-white, age-long, care-free), verbal-nominal (office-management, price-reduction, wage-cut, hand-shake), nominal (windmill, horse-race, pencil-case) and verb-adverb compounds (break-down, runaway, castaway).

Abbreviation.

Shortening is a comparatively new way of word-building, which has achieved a high degree of productivity nowadays, especially in American English.

Shortenings are produced in two different ways:

1. To make a new word from a syllable of the original word. The word may lose its beginning (phone ? from telephone, fence ? from defence) , it?s ending (hols ? for holidays, vac ? for vacation, props ? for properties, ad ? from advertisement) or both the beginning and the ending (flu ? from influenza, fridge ? from refrigerator).

2. To make a new word from the initial letters of a word group:

ü If the abbreviated written form tends itself to be read as though it were an ordinary English word and sounds like an English word, it will be read like one. The words thus formed are called acronyms,U.N.O. ['ju:neu] from the United Nations Organisation, NATO ? the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation, SALT?Strategic Arms Limitation Talks.

ü The other subgroup consists of initial abbreviation with the alphabetical reading retained, i.e. pronounced as a series of letters. B.B.C. from the British Broadcasting Corporation, M.P. from Member of Parliament. This type is called initial shortenings. They are found not only among formal words, such as the ones above, but also among colloquialisms and slang. So, g. f. is a shortened word made from the compound girl-friend.

Both types of shortenings are characteristic of informal speech in general and of uncultivated speech particularly. Here are some more examples of informal shortenings: Movie (from moving-picture), gent (from gentleman), specs (from spectacles), exhibish (from exhibition), posish (from position), Billery (Bill+Hillery).

Date: 2016-06-12; view: 1042