DOCSLIB.ORG

Lexical Morphology: Structure, Process, and Development

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Lexical Morphology: Structure, Process, and Development Top Lang Disorders Vol. 33, No. 1, pp. 57–72 Copyright c 2013 Wolters Kluwer Health | Lippincott Williams & Wilkins Lexical Morphology: Structure, Process, and Development Linda Jarmulowicz and Valentina L. Taran Recent work has demonstrated the importance of derivational morphology to later language devel- opment and has led to a consensus that derivation is a lexical process. In this review, derivational morphology is discussed in terms of lexical representation models from both linguistic and psy- cholinguistic perspectives. Input characteristics, including types of frequency (lexical, surface, affix, and relative) and transparency (semantic, phonological, and orthographic), are examined as key factors that affect processing and acquisition. We introduce the possibility that lexical prosody and syllabic characteristics are relevant to lexical representation and affix separability, and we pro- pose that derivational morphemes can emerge to different degrees in a system that is sensitive to both sound and meaning. Finally, morphological development with a focus on children’s sensitiv- ity to input characteristics is briefly reviewed, and we conclude with a perspective of how lexical representation can be a framework for derived word study in therapeutic or educational settings. Keywords: derivational morphology, lexical representation, school-age language HAT IS MORPHOLOGY? Based on a The morpheme-based view of morphology W quick look in a textbook for stu- has been replaced by lexeme-based mor- dents of communication sciences and disor- phology (Aronoff, 1994; Feldman, 1995) and ders, the answer is along the lines of the more recently by noncompositional theories “ . rules that govern the use of morphemes that view morphology as an emergent struc- inalanguage...”(Berko-Gleason&Bernstein ture (Bybee, 2006; Hay & Baayen, 2005; Ratner, 2013, p. 401). The traditional view, Seidenberg & Gonnerman, 2000). that discrete meaning-based morphemic units Morphology is not isolable from semantics, can be systematically combined to make new syntax, or phonology, and its effects extend words, like stringing beads, may be a sim- beyond rule identification and application. Be- ple way to present morphology; however, cause morphemes are units of meaning, mor- morphology is not just the study of rules. phology and the study of the mental lexicon are interconnected. Morphology’s role in syn- tax through inflectional paradigms is promi- nent, and until fairly recently morphosyn- Author Affiliation: School of Communication tax was the archetype of rule-based morphol- Sciences and Disorders, University of Memphis, ogy. Morphology and phonology also interact, Memphis, Tennessee (Drs Jarmulowicz and Taran); such as in allomorphic variation, lexical stress and Iris Speech Solutions, LLC, Arlington, Tennessee (Dr Taran). distinctions (e.g., record (N) and re cord This work was supported in part by the Center for Re- (V)), and derivational alternations (e.g., di- search Initiatives and Strategies for the Communica- vine/divinity). Morphology is also repre- tively Impaired at the University of Memphis. sented in orthography. So, if morphology is The authors have disclosed that they have no signif- peppered throughout language, perhaps the icant relationships with, or financial interest in, any question should be: What isn’t morphology? commercial companies pertaining to this article. In the first part of this paper, we review Corresponding Author: Linda Jarmulowicz, PhD, descriptions of morphological structure from School of Communication Sciences and Disorders, Uni- versity of Memphis, 807 Jefferson Avenue, Memphis, TN the field of linguistics and evidence of the 38105 ([email protected]). nature of lexical representation and process- DOI: 10.1097/TLD.0b013e318280f5c0 ing from psycholinguistics. In addition, we 57 Copyright © 2013 Lippincott Williams & Wilkins. Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited. 58 TOPICS IN LANGUAGE DISORDERS/JANUARY–MARCH 2013 discuss key factors that affect processing and 2003). Inflection alters words to fit in differ- acquisition, such as distributional character- ent grammatical contexts, creating new word istics and transparency. In the second part forms, but not new lexemes. The two pro- of the paper, we discuss developmental data cesses are ordered such that inflectional mor- on morphological derivation, with a focus on phemes can be added to either a stem (e.g., children’s sensitivity to input characteristics help + ed[past]) or a derived word (e.g., help and how the data fit with current lexical mod- + er[agentive] + s[plural]), but a derivational els. We conclude with a brief review of how morpheme cannot be added after inflection understanding of lexical representation can (e.g., *help + ed[past] + er[agentive]∗). Un- be a framework for derived word study. like inflectional morphemes, derivational suf- fixes vary in their productivity and tend to STRUCTURE be pickier about the types of bases to which they attach. In sum, inflection is grammatical For at least 20 years, linguists have ob- morphology and derivation is a type of word served that morpheme-based theories, in formation, or lexical morphology. which words are reducible to morphemes Another area of linguistic theory that that combine by rules, are insufficient to ac- touches on morphology is lexical phonol- count for all of the phenomena encompassed ogy (Plag, 2003). Despite its name, lexical by morphology (Aronoff, 1994; Beard, 1995; phonology is as much about derivational Plag, 2003). Current linguistic accounts fre- morphology as it is about phonology. The quently posit two types of representation: the literature on lexical phonology describes lexeme and the morpheme. The lexeme is two classes of English suffixes that exhibit represented in the lexicon and is much like different kinds of phonological behavior (see a bare stem or a citation form (i.e., dictionary Lieber, 2010, for overview). For historical entry). The morpheme includes affixes, redu- reasons, English has Latin-based suffixes plication, and by some accounts modifications borrowed primarily through French (e.g., of phonological representation that change -al, -ive, -ic, -tion, -ity), suffixes borrowed a lexeme (Beard, 1995). The lexeme unites through Greek (e.g., -graph, -ology, -ist), grammatical and phonological forms (Stump, and native Germanic-based suffixes (e.g., -er, 2005). For example, the verbs am, was,and -ful, -hood, -less, -ness). These two classes been have distinct phonological and grammat- of suffixes (borrowed and native) behave ical forms, but all are related to the abstract differently. First, native suffixes can easily lexeme BE, which links these forms together. attach to borrowed suffixes (e.g., nativeness, Morphemes traditionally divide into in- signifier), but the reverse is generally not true flectional and derivational types, based on (e.g., *sorrowfulity,*boredomic). The Latin- their function in a language. Empirical data based borrowed suffixes have no trouble support the distinction in adult and pedi- attaching to other Latin-based suffixes (e.g., atric populations (Badecker & Caramazza, sensitive + ity, exception + al). Second, 1989; Clahsen, Sonnenstuhl, & Blevins, 2003); borrowed suffixes can attach to bound bases however, there are parallels in terms of (e.g., nutri + tion), whereas native suffixes how the two morphological systems operate attach only to free bases (e.g., *nutri + ful). (Deacon, Campbell, Tamminga, & Kirby, Finally, borrowed suffixes may alter the 2010; Hay & Baayen, 2005; Stump, 2005). segmental phonology or stress pattern of the An incontrovertible distinction between in- stem (e.g., sacrifice/sacrificial and active/ flection and derivation is that the latter is a type of word formation that creates new lexemes in the lexicon typically through the addition of affixes, which include prefixes, ∗We will use the linguistic convention of placing * before suffixes, and infixes (Aronoff, 1994; Plag, ungrammatical or incorrect examples. Copyright © 2013 Lippincott Williams & Wilkins. Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited. Lexical Morphology 59 activity for segment and stress changes, sentation. The lemma bridges the conceptual respectively), whereas native suffixes do not. and the formal aspects of a word. The sec- In addition, certain suffixes prefer to attach ond level of lexical representation includes to others in what is called base-driven selec- the formal characteristics, such as morpho- tion (Plag, 2003). For example, if one wanted logical and phonological information, which to googlize his Web site, the likely noun are mapped to or from the lemma. The prod- from this verb would not be *googlizance uct of the lemma plus the result of form cod- or *googlizal or *googlizage;rather,tocom- ing is called the lexeme.∗ For production, the plete the sentence, I will not comment on lemma must be accessed first then mapped to the googliz____ of his website,mostEnglish the phonological representation. For recogni- speakers would add the suffix -ation,asin tion, the form (phonology for spoken, orthog- googlization. The suffix -ize appears to se- raphy for visual) representation is the entry lect -ation as the de-verbal suffix. Some of point to the system. these effects might best be explained by Note that the levels are free to connect and frequency of co-occurrence, as we discuss interact with other stored representations. So, below. awordlikecake might link to chocolate, ice cream, cookie,orcupcake at the lemma PROCESS level whereas the same word might
Load more

Recommended publications
  • What Is the Relationship Between Language Production and Comprehension?
    Journal of Memory and Language 89 (2016) 1–7 Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Journal of Memory and Language journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/jml Editorial Same, different, or closely related: What is the relationship between language production and comprehension? The historical tradition in psycholinguistics has largely became a hot issue through Lee’s (1950) discovery of the been to study either language production or comprehen- delayed auditory feedback (DAF) effect. When you hear your sion. Almost all of nineteenth century psycholinguistics, own speech delayed by some 150 ms, speech fluency dra- for instance, concerned the production of language, culmi- matically breaks down. Based on these observations, Lee nating in Wundt’s two-volume Die Sprache of 1900. This designed an engineering model of self-monitoring, which also held for research in language acquisition which, lar- required feedback to take place within the syllable being gely based on diary data, almost exclusively concerned spoken. the child’s production of speech until Eimas, Siqueland, Almost simultaneously, Broadbent (1952) demon- Jusczyk, and Vigorito (1971) introduced the experimental strated that participants were unable to understand a study of speech perception in infants. During the 1970s new question while answering a previous question. Atten- psycholinguistics became almost exclusively comprehen- tion can focus on one or the other task, but not on both sion research. Johnson-Laird opened his review of experi- simultaneously. This insight led to Broadbent’s famous fil- mental psycholinguistics in the 1974 Annual Review of ter model of selective attention. The issue kept returning in Psychology with the statement: ‘‘The fundamental problem psycholinguistics.
    [Show full text]
  • The Function of Phrasal Verbs and Their Lexical Counterparts in Technical Manuals
    Portland State University PDXScholar Dissertations and Theses Dissertations and Theses 1991 The function of phrasal verbs and their lexical counterparts in technical manuals Brock Brady Portland State University Follow this and additional works at: https://pdxscholar.library.pdx.edu/open_access_etds Part of the Applied Linguistics Commons Let us know how access to this document benefits ou.y Recommended Citation Brady, Brock, "The function of phrasal verbs and their lexical counterparts in technical manuals" (1991). Dissertations and Theses. Paper 4181. https://doi.org/10.15760/etd.6065 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access. It has been accepted for inclusion in Dissertations and Theses by an authorized administrator of PDXScholar. Please contact us if we can make this document more accessible: [email protected]. AN ABSTRACT OF THE THESIS OF Brock Brady for the Master of Arts in Teaching English to Speakers of Other Languages (lESOL) presented March 29th, 1991. Title: The Function of Phrasal Verbs and their Lexical Counterparts in Technical Manuals APPROVED BY THE MEMBERS OF THE THESIS COMMITTEE: { e.!I :flette S. DeCarrico, Chair Marjorie Terdal Thomas Dieterich Sister Rita Rose Vistica This study investigates the use of phrasal verbs and their lexical counterparts (i.e. nouns with a lexical structure and meaning similar to corresponding phrasal verbs) in technical manuals from three perspectives: (1) that such two-word items might be more frequent in technical writing than in general texts; (2) that these two-word items might have particular functions in technical writing; and that (3) 2 frequencies of these items might vary according to the presumed expertise of the text's audience.
    [Show full text]
  • The Interaction of Suffixation with Synonymy and Antonymy a Thesis
    University of Alberta The Interaction of Suffixation with Synonymy and Antonymy Laura L. Sabourin 0 A thesis submitted to the Faculty of Graduate Studies and Research in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science Psycholinguistics Department of Linguistics Edmonton, Alberta Fall, 1998 National Library Bibliothèque nationale l*l ofCanada du Canada Acquisitions and Acquisitions et Bibliographie Services senrices bibliographiques 395 Wellington Street 395. rue Wellington Ottawa ON K1AW OttawaON K1AW canada Canada The author has granted a non- L'auteur a accordé une licence non exclusive licence allowing the exclusive permettant à la National Library of Canada to Bibliothèque nationale du Canada de reproduce, loan, distribute or sell reproduire, prêter, distriilmer ou copies of this thesis in microform, vendre des copies de cette thèse sous paper or electronic formats. la fome de microfiche/nlm, de reproduction sur papier ou sur format électronique. The author retains ownership of the L'auteur consenre la propriété du copyright in this thesis. Neither the droit d'auteur qui protège cette thèse. thesis nor substantial extracts fkom it Ni la thèse ni des extraits substantiels may be printed or otheMnse de celle-ci ne doivent être imprimés reproduced without the author's ou autrement reproduits sans son permission. autorisation. Abstract This thesis reports on two psycholinguistic experiments that explore the question of how synonyms and antonyrns are linked in the Mental Lexicon. The experirnental results confirm theoretical expectations that synonymic and antonymic links are fundamental cognitive relations among lexical items. The results also suggest that the nature of these relations may not be identical because it was found that synonymic and antonymic pairs behaved differently in the two experirnental paradigms and that they also showed differences in the way they interacted when suffixation was added as a factor.
    [Show full text]
  • The Generative Lexicon
    The Generative Lexicon James Pustejovsky" Computer Science Department Brandeis University In this paper, I will discuss four major topics relating to current research in lexical seman- tics: methodology, descriptive coverage, adequacy of the representation, and the computational usefulness of representations. In addressing these issues, I will discuss what I think are some of the central problems facing the lexical semantics community, and suggest ways of best ap- proaching these issues. Then, I will provide a method for the decomposition of lexical categories and outline a theory of lexical semantics embodying a notion of cocompositionality and type coercion, as well as several levels of semantic description, where the semantic load is spread more evenly throughout the lexicon. I argue that lexical decomposition is possible if it is per- formed generatively. Rather than assuming a fixed set of primitives, I will assume a fixed number of generative devices that can be seen as constructing semantic expressions. I develop a theory of Qualia Structure, a representation language for lexical items, which renders much lexical ambiguity in the lexicon unnecessary, while still explaining the systematic polysemy that words carry. Finally, I discuss how individual lexical structures can be integrated into the larger lexical knowledge base through a theory of lexical inheritance. This provides us with the necessary principles of global organization for the lexicon, enabling us to fully integrate our natural language lexicon into a conceptual whole. 1. Introduction I believe we have reached an interesting turning point in research, where linguistic studies can be informed by computational tools for lexicology as well as an appre- ciation of the computational complexity of large lexical databases.
    [Show full text]
  • Measuring Lexical Access During Sentence Processing
    Perception & Psychophysics 1980,28 (1),1-8 Measuring lexical access during sentence processing MICHELLE A. BLANK Bell Laboratories, Whippany, New Jersey 07981 The results from "on-line" investigations of sentence comprehension are often difficult to interpret since it is not always apparent what component processes are reflected in the re­ sponse measure. The results of two experiments reported here indicate that response latencies from phoneme-triggered lexical decision (PTLD) reflect the time needed for lexical access during sentence processing. Listeners were presented with sentences and were asked to make a word/nonword judgment for items beginning with a particular word-initial target phoneme. Speed of lexical access was manipulated by varying the semantic predictability of the target­ bearing word. WORD judgments were faster for words that were preceded by semantically related verbs than were WORD judgments for words that were preceded by neutral verbs. The present results are consistent with other studies showing semantic facilitation of lexical access during the processing of fluent speech. It is argued that the phoneme-triggered lexical­ decision task is a more suitable measure of lexical access during sentence processing than phoneme monitoring (Foss, 19691 or word monitoring (Marslen-Wilson & Tyler, 1975l. In addi­ tion. it is pointed out that the phoneme-triggered lexical-decision task lends itself to modifica­ tions which should enable investigators to study various aspects of on-line sentence processing. The problem of discovering how listeners understand sentence processing. A few examples of tasks that have spoken language is unquestionably a formidable one. A been assumed to reflect ongoing sentence processing first step taken by psycholinguists toward solving this include speech shadowing (e.g., Marslen-Wilson, 1973), problem has been to view sentence comprehension in phoneme-monitoring (e.g., Foss, 1969), word monitor­ terms of several component processes.
    [Show full text]
  • 12 Morphology and Lexical Semantics
    248 Beth Levin and Malka Rappaport Hovav 12 Morphology and Lexical Semantics BETH LEVIN AND MALKA RAPPAPORT HOVAV The relation between lexical semantics and morphology has not been the subject of much study. This may seem surprising, since a morpheme is often viewed as a minimal Saussurean sign relating form and meaning: it is a concept with a phonologically composed name. On this view, morphology has both a semantic side and a structural side, the latter sometimes called “morphological realization” (Aronoff 1994, Zwicky 1986b). Since morphology is the study of the structure and derivation of complex signs, attention could be focused on the semantic side (the composition of complex concepts) and the structural side (the composition of the complex names for the concepts) and the relation between them. In fact, recent work in morphology has been concerned almost exclusively with the composition of complex names for concepts – that is, with the struc- tural side of morphology. This dissociation of “form” from “meaning” was foreshadowed by Aronoff’s (1976) demonstration that morphemes are not necessarily associated with a constant meaning – or any meaning at all – and that their nature is basically structural. Although in early generative treat- ments of word formation, semantic operations accompanied formal morpho- logical operations (as in Aronoff’s Word Formation Rules), many subsequent generative theories of morphology, following Lieber (1980), explicitly dissoci- ate the lexical semantic operations of composition from the formal structural
    [Show full text]
  • The Pervasive Role of Pragmatics in Early Language
    The pervasive role of pragmatics in early language Manuel Bohn Department of Psychology, Stanford University, Leipzig Research Center for Early Child Development, Leipzig University https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6006-1348 Michael C. Frank Department of Psychology, Stanford University https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7551-4378 Short Title: Pragmatics in early language ​ Author’s Note: We thank Erica Yoon and Bahar Köymen for comments on an earlier version of ​ this paper. MB received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under the Marie Sklodowska-Curie grant agreement No 749229. MCF received funding from the Jacobs Foundation Research Fellowship program. Please address correspondence to [email protected]. 1 Abstract Language is a fundamentally social endeavor. Pragmatics is the study of how speakers and listeners use social reasoning to go beyond the literal meanings of words to interpret language in context. In this review, we take a pragmatic perspective on language development and argue for developmental continuity between early non-verbal communication, language learning, and linguistic pragmatics. We link phenomena from these different literatures by relating them to a computational framework (the rational speech act framework), which conceptualizes communication as fundamentally inferential and grounded in social cognition. The model specifies how different information sources (linguistic utterances, social cues, common ground) are combined when making pragmatic inferences. We present evidence in favor of this inferential view and review how pragmatic reasoning supports children’s learning, comprehension, and use of language. Keywords: Language development; Social cognition; Pragmatics; Computational modeling; ​ Communication 2 Introduction From a toddler pointing at a toy and saying “dat!” all the way to a lukewarm letter of recommendation, human beings use language to communicate an infinite range of meanings both flexibly and efficiently.
    [Show full text]
  • Studies in the Linguistic Sciences
    UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS Llb'RARY AT URBANA-CHAMPAIGN MODERN LANGUAGE NOTICE: Return or renew all Library Materialsl The Minimum Fee (or each Lost Book is $50.00. The person charging this material is responsible for its return to the library from which it was withdrawn on or before the Latest Date stamped below. Theft, mutilation, and underlining of books are reasons for discipli- nary action and may result in dismissal from the University. To renew call Telephone Center, 333-8400 UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS LIBRARY AT URBANA-CHAMPAIGN ModeriJLanp & Lb Library ^rn 425 333-0076 L161—O-I096 Che Linguistic Sciences PAPERS IN GENERAL LINGUISTICS ANTHONY BRITTI Quantifier Repositioning SUSAN MEREDITH BURT Remarks on German Nominalization CHIN-CHUAN CHENG AND CHARLES KISSEBERTH Ikorovere Makua Tonology (Part 1) PETER COLE AND GABRIELLA HERMON Subject to Object Raising in an Est Framework: Evidence from Quechua RICHARD CURETON The Inclusion Constraint: Description and Explanation ALICE DAVISON Some Mysteries of Subordination CHARLES A. FERGUSON AND APIA DIL The Sociolinguistic Valiable (s) in Bengali: A Sound Change in Progress GABRIELLA HERMON Rule Ordering Versus Globality: Evidencefrom the Inversion Construction CHIN-W. KIM Neutralization in Korean Revisited DAVID ODDEN Principles of Stress Assignment: A Crosslinguistic View PAULA CHEN ROHRBACH The Acquisition of Chinese by Adult English Speakers: An Error Analysis MAURICE K.S. WONG Origin of the High Rising Changed Tone in Cantonese SORANEE WONGBIASAJ On the Passive in Thai Department of Linguistics University of Illinois^-^ STUDIES IN THE LINGUISTIC SCIENCES PUBLICATION OF THE DEPARTMENT OF LINGUISTICS UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS AT URBANA-CHAMPAIGN EDITORS: Charles W. Kisseberth, Braj B.
    [Show full text]
  • WORD ORDER and W O R D ORDER Chatjge
    Linguistics WORD ORDER AND WORD ORDER CHAtjGE The University of Texas Press Austin 1975 REVIEWED BY JAMES M. DUNN Princeton Unlversi ty This is a collection of twelve of the thirteen papers pre- sented at the Conference on Word Order and dord Order Change that was held at tne University of California, Santa Barbara, on January 26 - 27, 1974. The first eight deal with the diachk'onic aspect of word order, while the other four represent a synchronic treatment of the subject. In the preface the editor acknowledges the influence of Joseph Greenberg on these proceedings. Bis 1961 paper, Some universals of grammar with particular reference to the order of meaningful elements' , is seen as ' the starting point* for mos't of the papers in this volume. The papers in this collection appeal to a great diversity of interests r sign language, languages of the Niger-Congo group, Chinese, Indo-European, drift, discourse grammar, rnetatheory, the evaluation me-tric, and, of course, language typology. Obviously, their common purpose is to move toward a clearer ex- planation of the causal relationships between the surface con- stituents of a sentence both synch~onicdllyand diachronically. 54 But many of the papers actually share more than the commom denom- inator of interest in word order. At several points where other mutual interests overlap, the discussions assume the nature of a dialog (or, more often, a debate), and the reader finds transi- tion from paper to paper relatively smooth. I shall withhold further comment on the merits of this book as a whole until the conclusion of this review.
    [Show full text]
  • A Tutorial on Lexical Classes
    A tutorial on lexical classes Ricardo Bermúdez-Otero University of Manchester INTRODUCTION Goals of the tutorial §1 Our brief: L to address the key issues arising from exponence phenomena in which the lexicon is divided into arbitrary subsets, notably (a) inflectional classes and (b) cophonologies. §2 Our focus: L to explore the advantages and drawbacks of theories that model such phenomena by means of diacritic features. Overview §3 The discussion will touch upon the following questions: • Architectural issues How must the grammar be organized in order to guarantee the syntactic inertness of inflectional class features? Can syntactic features like gender be sensitive to inflectional class membership, and can inflectional class membership be determined by phonological properties? • Perspectives on inflectional class features (1): denial To what extent can inflectional class features be eliminated by (a) storing complex items in the lexicon and (b) invoking replacive mechanisms of exponence (‘overwriting’)? • Perspectives on inflectional class features (2): strengthening Instead of eliminating inflectional class features, do we rather need a more elaborate theory (e.g. one based on feature decomposition) capable of accounting for a wider range of phenomena (e.g. cross-class syncretism)? • Class features in phonology: cophonologies Can patterns of overlap between cophonologies be captured through the decomposition of cophonology diacritics, just like syncretisms between inflectional classes? Can derived environment effects in phonology be analysed in terms of the percolation of cophonology diacritics within morphological structures? http://www.bermudez-otero.com/WOTM4.pdf Workshop on Theoretical Morphology 4, Großbothen, 20 June 2008 2 ARCHITECTURAL ISSUES Basic properties of inflectional classes §4 Inflectional classes are traditionally defined by two properties: • arbitrariness and • syntactic inertness.
    [Show full text]
  • CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION This Chapter Presents Background of The
    CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION This chapter presents background of the research, statement of problem, research objective, research significance, and definition of key terms. 1.1 Background Morphology is a branch of linguistics which deals with the study of a word and its internal structure which affects the change of meaning. Moreover, Geert (2005: 7) states that morphology term refers to a study of the structure of the word, systematic word, the formation of word that has a relationship with its meaning. Morphology also covers how users of a particular language understand complex words, and find lexical items. Thus, Morphological studies in this research are used to analyze the word and how the word is formed that the word has a form and a meaning. Morphological process is the formation of a word in the form and meaning according to need in a single act of substitutions. Moreover, morphological process is a process of word formation by connecting one morpheme to other morphemes. The definition of morphological process according to Chaer (2012: 25) is the formation of a word from a base form of words through affixation and reduplication process. The formation of words will undergo another one of two processes, inflection and derivation. Derivation in particular is a process of forming a word that produces new lexeme. According to Ba’dulu and Herman (2006:12) 1 2 morphological derivation takes one word and turns it into another word. In other words, derivation is creating a new lexical word or creating a word from another syntactic category. Derivation is uses lexical meaning to make (or derive) new words and to change a word from grammatical class to another.
    [Show full text]
  • Morphemes by Kirsten Mills Student, University of North Carolina at Pembroke, 1998
    Morphemes by Kirsten Mills http://www.uncp.edu/home/canada/work/caneng/morpheme.htm Student, University of North Carolina at Pembroke, 1998 Introduction Morphemes are what make up words. Often, morphemes are thought of as words but that is not always true. Some single morphemes are words while other words have two or more morphemes within them. Morphemes are also thought of as syllables but this is incorrect. Many words have two or more syllables but only one morpheme. Banana, apple, papaya, and nanny are just a few examples. On the other hand, many words have two morphemes and only one syllable; examples include cats, runs, and barked. Definitions morpheme: a combination of sounds that have a meaning. A morpheme does not necessarily have to be a word. Example: the word cats has two morphemes. Cat is a morpheme, and s is a morpheme. Every morpheme is either a base or an affix. An affix can be either a prefix or a suffix. Cat is the base morpheme, and s is a suffix. affix: a morpheme that comes at the beginning (prefix) or the ending (suffix) of a base morpheme. Note: An affix usually is a morpheme that cannot stand alone. Examples: -ful, -ly, -ity, -ness. A few exceptions are able, like, and less. base: a morpheme that gives a word its meaning. The base morpheme cat gives the word cats its meaning: a particular type of animal. prefix: an affix that comes before a base morpheme. The in in the word inspect is a prefix. suffix: an affix that comes after a base morpheme.
    [Show full text]