Introduction Chapter 5 Discusses Both Inflection and Derivation. It Also
1
Introduction
Chapter 5 discusses both inflection and derivation. It also showcases two views on the distinction between the two. The first view is called the dichotomy approach. The second view is the continuum approach. Below the main points of the chapter will be summarized.
Inflectional Values
- Inflectional affixes are called inflectional values (or inflectional feature values). For
example, English verbs uses the affix -ed to express the inflectional value ‘past’, as in
walked.
- It is worth-noting that the term ‘value’ is not used to describe derivational affixes.
Instead, derivation is described in terms of derivational meanings.
- The reason for the distinction between ‘values’ and ‘meanings’ is that while derivational
affixes, such as -er in walker, have a meaning, inflectional affixes do not have a clear
meaning. They only have syntactic functions.
- Different languages depict different amounts of inflectional complexity. For example,
English is poor of inflectional morphemes, compared to other languages like Spanish,
French, Italian, German, and Arabic. There are also languages that have no inflectional
affixes (e.g. Vietnamese and Igbo).
- Inflectional values can be grouped together into super-categories. If two values share a
functional property and cannot co-occur in the same context, they belong to the same
feature. For example, English present and past are two values that belong to the same 2
feature, which is tense. If a sentence has the present value on its matrix verb, it will not
have the past value on the same verb.
- Other features can have several inflectional values. For example, case can have the
following inflectional values: nominative, accusative, and genitive. Also, number can
have the values: singular, dual, paucal, and plural.
- Some languages may have inflectional markers for their adjectives. For instance, English
adjectives have inflectional markers of comparative and superlative degree (small,
smaller, smallest).
- In some languages, verbs may have passive voice inflection, which shows an unusual
association of semantic roles and syntactic functions.
Derivational Meanings
- There is more diversity in derivational meaning than there is in inflectional values. We
can use derivational affixes to make agent nouns (e.g. write (v.) and write-r (n.))
- Derivational morphemes usually change the word-class of the base lexeme. F a word is
derived from a noun, it is called ‘denominal’. If it is derived from a verb, it is called
‘deverbal’. And if it derived from an adjective, it is called ‘deadjectival’.
Derived Nouns
- Agent nouns are derived from verbs, as in English (drink (v.) and drink-er (n.)).
- Deadjectival nouns are derived from adjectives, as in Japanese (atarasi-i (adj.) ‘new’ and
atarasi-sa (n.) ‘newness’).
3
Derived verbs
- Deverbal verbs are derived from verbs, as in Korean (cwuk ‘die’ and ‘cwuk-i ‘kill’).
Derived adjectives
- Deverbal adjectives are derived from verbs, as in Basque (jan ‘eat’ and jan-garri ‘edible’).
Properties of inflection and derivation
- There are two views on the properties of inflection and derivation.
- The first view (dichotomy approach): inflection and derivation represent two separate
subsystems in morphology.
- The second view (continuum approach): inflection and derivation exist on a continuum.
Canonical inflection exists on the end of one side, and derivation exists on the end of
the other side. However, there are intermediary types of both.
- There are eleven properties that distinguish inflection from derivation (according to the
dichotomy approach). These properties will be summarized below.
1. Relevance to syntax: inflection is relevant to syntax, but derivation is not. ‘Relevant to
syntax’ means that the grammatical function or meaning expressed by a morphological
pattern is involved in syntactic agreement or syntactic government.
2. Obligatoriness: Inflectional features are obligatorily expressed on all applicable word-
forms. Derivational meanings are not obligatorily expressed. For example, Modern
Standard Arabic (MSA) has a case that must be expressed on subjects (nominative case)
and objects (accusative case), and speakers of MSA do not have the option of dropping
out the case. In contrast, -er can be added to verbs to derive nouns with the meaning of 4
agent (e.g. drink and drinker), but this does not mean that all nouns must express an
agentive meaning.
3. Limitations on application: Inflectional values can be applied to their base without
arbitrary limitations. But derivational affixations may be limited in an arbitrary way.
Within inflectional values, verbal paradigms have word-forms that express all the
tense=aspect-mood values that are relevant to the language. However, arbitrariness in
common in derivation. For example, conceivable derived lexeme may lack semantic
explanation. In English, we can use -ess in waitress, but not in *professoress.
4. Same concept as base: canonical inflected word-forms expressed the same concept as
the base. But canonical derived lexemes express a new concept. For example, the
inflected past form ‘walked’ does not expressed a different concept from walk.
However, the derived form ‘musician’ expresses a different concept from ‘music’.
5. Abstractness: inflectional values express a relatively abstract meaning. However,
derivational meanings are relatively concrete.
6. Meaning compositionality: canonical inflected word-forms have compositional
meaning, but canonical derived lexemes have non-compositional meaning.
7. Position to base: canonical inflection is expressed at the periphery of words, but
canonical derivation is expressed close to the root – not an absolute property
8. Base allomorphy: inflection induces less base allomorphy; derivation induces more base
allomorphy – but the opposite can be found 5
9. Word-class change: canonical inflection does not change the word-class of the base, but
derivation may change the base’s word class – this pattern strongly associates with the
continuum view of inflection/derivation
10. Cumulative expression: inflected values may be expressed cumulatively, but derived
values are not
11. Iteration: inflected values cannot be iterated while derived values can
Dichotomy or continuum
-the dividing line is not upon disagreement of the basic facts, but the importance of some sets of facts
-some morphologists believe the difference between inflection and derivation is arbitrary
-the eleven criteria above are used to judge the label of a morpheme
Inherent and contextual inflection
-a third choice to the continuum v. dichotomy debate is a tripartite approach
-inflection is subdivided into inherent inflection and contextual inflection
-inherent inflection: features relevant to syntax but containing additional
information
-inherent inflection includes locative, ablative and instrumental cases 6
-inherent inflection often shares some properties with derivation (see Dutch
example); they tend to be closer to the root and more likely to induce
allomorphy
-contextual inflection: features assigned to a word due to the syntactic
environment
-contextual inflection includes structural cases (nominative, accusative, genitive)
Inflection, derivation, and the syntax-morphology interface
-the relationship to the theory results in different formal morphological structures
Dichotomy:
-different grammatical principles explain inflection and derivation
-derivation is applied at the word level
-inflection is applied post-lexically
-referred to as the split-morphology hypothesis
-problems with this approach:
-inflectional suffixes that occur closer to the root than derivations
-inherent inflections behaving like derivations
***I’m not sure how this is a problem, considering that words are processed in a
cascade, and errors in words occur from input of multiple levels, not just one 7
Continuum:
-inflection and derivation occur within the same structure
-not consistent with split-morphology hypothesis
-single component hypothesis:
-syntax generates abstract structures containing morphosyntactic
representations but no lexical information
-the job of the morphological component is to provide word-forms whose
inflectional values match (or don’t contradict) those of the morphosyntactic
representation
-does not explain all of the differences that tend to occur between inflections
and derivations
-new hypothesis from psycholinguists suggest that the rule application may depend on language dependent lexical processing