DOCSLIB.ORG

Worlock Pope, Catherine (2015) Placing Come

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Worlock Pope, Catherine (2015) Placing Come Placing Come and Go: Locating the Lexical Item Catherine Worlock Pope, BA, MA Thesis submitted to the University of Nottingham for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy July 2015 2 In memory of David and the promise I made him 3 Abstract By examining language simultaneously along the paradigmatic and syntagmatic axes, Sinclair (2004a) identified the lexical item as an object of the discourse comprising an obligatory core and semantic prosody, and optional collocates, colligates and semantic preferences. This research investigates Sinclair’s theoretical model by locating the lexical items that are associated with the complementary verbs come and go in the spoken and written discourses in a selection of the International Corpora of English (ICE). The corpora selected are ICE-Canada, -GB, -India and –Jamaica. This research is innovative in that it adapts Sinclair’s methodology to examine high frequency lexical items across different discourses and different World Englishes It establishes that there is a significantly greater difference in frequency of the lexical items associated with come and go within the different discourses of the ICE corpora in comparison to between the ICE corpora. It replaces the core with the node, it introduces structural preference and discourse preference as co-selection components of the lexical item, and it substitutes semantic force for the term semantic prosody as defined by Sinclair: the ‘reason why [the item] is chosen’ (Sinclair 2004a: 144). Thus the lexical item comprises an obligatory node and semantic force, and optional collocates, colligates, structural preferences, semantic preferences and discourse preferences. As a consequence of these theoretical and methodological adaptations, this research shows that semantic forces with the associated co-selection components can function in tandem and that semantic forces, again with the associated co-selection components, can function in layers. The research concludes that the lexical item is not an identifiable object in the discourse, but it is the syntagmatic realisations of a paradigmatic choice. 4 Acknowledgements There have been many wonderful people who have supported me over the past few years so it is with some reservation that I am singling out just a few to acknowledge here: Michael Hoey and Mike Scott for their inspirational lectures, their abounding enthusiasm both for their subject and for their students, without which I would never have thought I might undertake this research; Michaela Mahlberg for her help and guidance in getting started; and Michael Stubbs for his discussions on philosophy and his valuable advice, without which I might have abandoned this research along the way. There are my supervisors, Svenja Adolphs and Ron Carter; who have continually given me constructive suggestions and positive encouragement. In addition, Ron has also guided me skilfully through the whole doctorate process and supported me when “life” has unfortunately interfered with my research. Without his kindness, his understanding, his patience, and his invaluable input I could not have completed this research. There is Lydia Wallman, in the School of English office, for always knowing the answer to my queries, and for always sorting out my problems. And there is Kevin Harvey, my internal examiner, for his positive approach, considered feedback and help through the final stages of my doctorate. Of my friends I must single out Vincent Docherty for always reminding me that it is what one does not do rather than what was does in life that one invariably regrets; Rosemarie and Eric Hutchinson, for sharing their experiences with me; and Richard Thorne, without his backing, encouragement and practical support this research might never have been finished. Finally I must mention my children, Fredrik Fuglesang and Anna Lisa Fuglesang, who have always been there cheering me on. 5 Contents Abstract ............................................................................................................. 3 Acknowledgements ........................................................................................... 4 Chapter 1 The Introduction ......................................................................... 8 1.1 Research question(s) .................................................................................... 9 1.2 Paradigmatic and syntagmatic axes ......................................................... 10 1.3 Lexical Bundles .......................................................................................... 11 1.4 Concgrams .................................................................................................. 11 1.5 Pattern Grammar ...................................................................................... 12 1.6 Lexical Grammar ....................................................................................... 13 1.7 Lexical Priming .......................................................................................... 14 1.8 Linear Unit Grammar ............................................................................... 15 1.9 The Data ..................................................................................................... 15 In the chapters that follow …. .............................................................................. 18 Chapter 2 The lexical item ......................................................................... 21 2.1 The Whole................................................................................................... 22 2.2 The Parts..................................................................................................... 25 2.2.1 Collocation ........................................................................................... 25 2.2.2 Colligation ........................................................................................... 26 2.2.3 Semantic Preference ............................................................................ 28 2.2.4 Semantic Prosody ................................................................................ 29 2.2.5 Core...................................................................................................... 32 In summary ............................................................................................................ 33 Chapter 3 Come and Go ............................................................................. 35 3.1 Multi-word verbs ....................................................................................... 38 3.2 Deixis ........................................................................................................... 39 In summary ............................................................................................................ 40 Chapter 4 The Corpora .............................................................................. 42 4.1 Spoken v. written language ....................................................................... 42 4.2 The International Corpus of English ....................................................... 45 In summary ............................................................................................................ 49 Chapter 5 Organising the data .................................................................. 51 5.1 Frequencies ................................................................................................. 56 5.2 Statistics ...................................................................................................... 57 5.2.1 Data ...................................................................................................... 57 5.2.2 Non- parametric v. parametric ............................................................. 57 5.2.3 Between and within ICE corpora ......................................................... 57 5.2.3 Pairwise Comparisons.......................................................................... 59 5.2.4 Further Test .......................................................................................... 62 In summary ............................................................................................................ 64 Chapter 6 Examining the data ................................................................... 65 6.1 The co-selection components..................................................................... 66 6.2 Deictic co-selection components of come and go ..................................... 67 6.3 Ante and Post co-selection collocations .................................................... 67 6.4 Location ...................................................................................................... 68 6.5 Familiar idioms .......................................................................................... 68 6.6 Post pre-set collocates ................................................................................ 69 6.6.1 go and................................................................................................... 69 6.6.2 come back ............................................................................................ 70 6.6.3 go back ................................................................................................. 71 6 6.6.4 come from ............................................................................................ 72 6.6.5 come in and go in ................................................................................. 74 6.6.6 go into .................................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 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]
  • Vol. 70, No. 1: Full Issue
    Denver Law Review Volume 70 Issue 1 Article 12 January 2021 Vol. 70, no. 1: Full Issue Denver University Law Review Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.du.edu/dlr Recommended Citation 70 Denv. U. L. Rev. (1992). This Full Issue is brought to you for free and open access by the Denver Law Review at Digital Commons @ DU. It has been accepted for inclusion in Denver Law Review by an authorized editor of Digital Commons @ DU. For more information, please contact [email protected],[email protected]. DENVER UNIVERSITY LAW REVIEW VOLUME 70 1992-1993 Published by the University of Denver DENVER College of Law UNIVERSITY LAW 1992 Volume 70 Issue 1 REVIEW TABLE OF CONTENTS Foreword Editor's Note ARTICLES Restraint of Controversial Musical Expression After Skyywalker Records, Inc. v. Navarro and Barnes v. Glen Theater, Inc. : Can the Band Play On? Blake D. Morant Imminent Threat to America's Last Great Wilderness Anthony R. Chase Nexus: The Next Test of RICO's Text Melissa Harrison BOOK REVIEW Protecting Trade Secrets, Patents, Copyrights and Trademarks Thomas G. Field,Jr. 111 NOTES True Equality for Battered Women: The Use of Self-Defense in Colorado Joan L. Cordutsky 117 The Colorado Consumer Protection Act: Panacea or Pandora's Box? David Benjamin Lee 141 COMMENT The Immutable Command Meets the Unknowable Mind: Deific Decree Claims and the Insanity Defense After People v. Serravo Margaret E. Clark 161 FOREWORD INTRODUCTION This year, the University of Denver College of Law celebrates its centennial. We were unaware when we began law school that we would be honored to graduate in the 100th class.
    [Show full text]
  • The Distribution of the Lexical Component in ELT Coursebooks and Its Suitability for Vocabulary Acquisition from a Cognitive Perspective
    International Journal of IJES English Studies UNIVERSITY OF MURCIA www.um.es/ijes The Distribution of the Lexical Component in ELT Coursebooks and its Suitability for Vocabulary Acquisition from a Cognitive Perspective. A Case Study 1 RAQUEL CRIADO LACELL RESEARCH GROUP – UNIVERSIDAD DE MURCIA ABSTRACT The psycholinguistic and neurolinguistic perspective of language acquisition requires some essential conditions in vocabulary acquisition: a) repetitive practice, which allows for data to reach long-term memory, and thus become proceduralised and automatised; b) how relevant the lexical items are regarding the communicative needs of the learners insofar as communicative relevance is linked to frequency in general linguistic usage; c) the potential in vocabulary acquisition, which will necessarily relate to the amount of new lexical items introduced in each one of the units in textbook; d) the way words are taught, i.e. whether aimed at explicit or incidental learning. In order to analyse and evaluate these issues, we will study the lexical items presented in a specific textbook from the point of view of frequency, distribution along the manual, opportunities for rehearsal and repetition (which will depend on frequency), and the nature of the activities centred on vocabulary. The results of this case study will allow us to check whether or not they may stand a comparison against the findings of psycholinguistic and neurolinguistic research on vocabulary acquisition. KEYWORDS : vocabulary acquisition, ELT, frequency, practice, corpus linguistics,
    [Show full text]
  • The Polysemy of PO in Mandarin Chinese
    The Polysemy of PO in Mandarin Chinese Harvey Hsin-chang Ho National Taiwan Normal University [email protected] Abstract The present paper notes that the lexical item PO, literally meaning ‘to break’, bears multiple semantic imports in Mandarin Chinese. Given the lack of well-documented research on the semantics of the lexical item, this paper aims to explore the various meanings of PO. By examining the collocations of PO, thirteen meanings are identified, with predicative and attributive senses. It is proposed that the manifold meanings are interrelated with each other and that several meanings are derived from the core verbal meaning of the lexical item. Three generalized metaphors are observed to assume a mediating role in the semantic extensions of PO. In light of the semantic relatedness of the various meanings, the polysemous nature of the lexical item PO is substantiated. Key words: PO, polysemy, semantic extension, lexical semantics 1. Introduction Since a growing number of psychological studies shed new light on human cognition in 1970s, the field of semantics has witnessed flourishing cognitive-oriented approaches to semantic representations of lexicon and grammar—especially lexical semantics and cognitive semantics (Rosch 1973, 1977, 1978, Lakoff and Johnson 1980, Lakoff 1987, 2002, Johnson 1987, Langacker 1987, 1990, 1999, Geerearts 1993, Talmy 1985, 2000a,b, Taylor 1989, 2002a,b, 2003, among others). These cognitive-theoretic proposals have spawned a voluminous literature pertaining to conceptualization, categorization, semantic extension, and grammaticalization of polysemous lexical items in Mandarin Chinese, such as guo ‘to cross’ (Wang 2002, Hsiao 1997, 2003, Wu 2003), gei ‘to give’ (Huang 2004), and kai ‘to open’ (Tsai 2006).
    [Show full text]
  • Helter Skelter” and Sixties Revisionism “Helter Skelter” Et L'héritage Polémique Des Années 1960
    Volume ! La revue des musiques populaires 9 : 2 | 2012 Contre-cultures n°2 “Helter Skelter” and Sixties Revisionism “Helter Skelter” et l'héritage polémique des années 1960 Gerald Carlin and Mark Jones Electronic version URL: http://journals.openedition.org/volume/3407 DOI: 10.4000/volume.3407 ISSN: 1950-568X Printed version Date of publication: 15 December 2012 Number of pages: 34-49 ISBN: 978-2-913169-33-3 ISSN: 1634-5495 Electronic reference Gerald Carlin and Mark Jones, « “Helter Skelter” and Sixties Revisionism », Volume ! [Online], 9 : 2 | 2012, Online since 15 June 2014, connection on 10 December 2020. URL : http:// journals.openedition.org/volume/3407 ; DOI : https://doi.org/10.4000/volume.3407 This text was automatically generated on 10 December 2020. L'auteur & les Éd. Mélanie Seteun “Helter Skelter” and Sixties Revisionism 1 “Helter Skelter” and Sixties Revisionism “Helter Skelter” et l'héritage polémique des années 1960 Gerald Carlin and Mark Jones EDITOR'S NOTE This text was published in Countercultures & Popular Music (Farnham, Ashgate, 2014), while its French translation appeared in this issue of Volume! in 2012. “Helter Skelter” and the End of the Sixties Volume !, 9 : 2 | 2012 “Helter Skelter” and Sixties Revisionism 2 1 In late August 1968, within a few days of each other, new singles were released by the Beatles and the Rolling Stones. The unusual proximity of release dates by the world’s two most significant rock bands was echoed by the congruity of the songs’ themes: the Stones’ “Street Fighting Man” and the Beatles’ “Revolution” were both responses to the political unrest and protest which characterised the spring and summer of 1968.
    [Show full text]
  • Words You Should Know How to Spell by Jane Mallison.Pdf
    WO defammasiont priveledgei Spell it rigHt—everY tiMe! arrouse hexagonnalOver saicred r 12,000 Ceilling. Beleive. Scissers. Do you have trouble of the most DS HOW DS HOW spelling everyday words? Is your spell check on overdrive? MiSo S Well, this easy-to-use dictionary is just what you need! acheevei trajectarypelled machinry Organized with speed and convenience in mind, it gives WordS! you instant access to the correct spellings of more than 12,500 words. YOUextrac t grimey readallyi Also provided are quick tips and memory tricks, such as: SHOUlD KNOW • Help yourself get the spelling of their right by thinking of the phrase “their heirlooms.” • Most words ending in a “seed” sound are spelled “-cede” or “-ceed,” but one word ends in “-sede.” You could say the rule for spelling this word supersedes the other rules. Words t No matter what you’re working on, you can be confident You Should Know that your good writing won’t be marred by bad spelling. O S Words You Should Know How to Spell takes away the guesswork and helps you make a good impression! PELL hoW to spell David Hatcher, MA has taught communication skills for three universities and more than twenty government and private-industry clients. He has An A to Z Guide to Perfect SPellinG written and cowritten several books on writing, vocabulary, proofreading, editing, and related subjects. He lives in Winston-Salem, NC. Jane Mallison, MA teaches at Trinity School in New York City. The author bou tique swaveu g narl fabulus or coauthor of several books, she worked for many years with the writing section of the SAT test and continues to work with the AP English examination.
    [Show full text]
  • 12208 Prokhorova 2020 E.Docx
    International Journal of Innovation, Creativity and Change. www.ijicc.net Volume 12, Issue 2, 2020 The Multistatutory Nature of the Adjective “Right” in Adjectival English Lexicon Olga N. Prokhorovaa, Igor V. Chekulaib, Marina N. Klochkovac, Elena V. Pupyninad, Anna I. Kononovae, a,b,c,d,eThe National Research University “Belgorod State University” This article provides an outline on an adjective in modern English language, and in particular, the multistatus lexical item “right”, which carries different meanings in different variants of combinatorics. The authors analyse the combinations used with the adjectival lexical item “right” and identify categories that determine the semantic content of each given statement. The need for a detailed study of this lexical item is caused by the necessity for a general theoretical understanding of its multi-categorial nature, identification and description of the mechanism that determines the change in categorial and functional statuses, the characteristics of this item at the formal-syntactic, semantic and conceptual levels and the criteria for the formation of its categorial meanings within the context, where it can be used. However, currently in most cases individual functional-semantic features of poly-status lexemes are studied without due regard to other categorial statuses. Key words: English adjective, polysemy, lexical item “right”, multistatus lexical item, multistatus lexeme, eurysemy, multistatutory. Introduction This linguistic study is devoted to identifying and studying the functional and semantic features of the polystatus lexical item “right” in modern English, determining its essential characteristics showing new categorical and functional statuses in this lexical unit. Polystatus lexemes in linguistics are usually those lexemes that exhibit the feature of grammatical status diversification, i.e.
    [Show full text]
  • Unit 13 Lexical and Grammatical Studies
    Unit 13 Lexical and grammatical studies 13.1 Introduction We noted in units 10.2 and 10.3 that lexical and grammatical studies are probably the areas that have benefited most from corpus data. This unit presents four excerpts which discuss the use of corpora in these areas. The first excerpt, Krishnamurthy (2000) demonstrates the use of corpora in collocation analysis, which is followed by an excerpt from Partington (2004), which studies semantic preference. For grammatical studies, Carter and McCarthy (1999) explore the English GET-passive in spoken discourse while Kreyer (2003) compares genitive and of-construction in written English. 13.2 Krishnamurthy (2000) In this excerpt, Krishnamurthy briefly reviews the British tradition of text analysis, from Firth to Sinclair, which is closely tied to collocation. On the basis of this review, Krishnamurthy discusses the relevance of corpus linguistics to collocation analysis. This excerpt provides background knowledge for case study 1, where we will explore collocations in the BNC and discuss the implications of our findings for pedagogical lexicography. Krishnamurthy, R. 2000. ‘Collocation: from silly ass to lexical sets’ in Heffer C., Sauntson H. and Fox G. (eds.) Words in Context: A tribute to John Sinclair on his Retirement. Birmingham: University of Birmingham. 2 Collocation theory We are generally indebted to Firth for channeling the attention of linguists towards lexis (Halliday 1966: 14) and specifically for originating the concept of collocation. Writing from the perspective of stylistics, and viewing meaning as dispersed in a range of techniques working at a series of levels, Firth said: ‘I propose to bring forward as a technical term, meaning by collocation, and to apply the test of collocability’ (1957: 194).
    [Show full text]
  • Stylistics Lecture 3 Morphemes & Semantics
    Stylistics Lecture 3 Morphemes & Semantics MOAZZAM A L I MALIK ASSISTANT PROFESSOR UNIVERSITY OF GUJRAT Words & Morphemes Words are potentially complex units, composed of even more basic units, called morphemes. A morpheme is the smallest part of a word that has grammatical function or meaning. we will designate them in braces { }. For example, played, plays, playing can all be analyzed into the morphemes {play} + {-ed}, {-s}, and {-ing}, respectively. Basic Concepts in Morphology The English plural morpheme {-s} can be expressed by three different but clearly related phonemic forms /iz/, /z/, and /s/. These are the variant phonological realizations of plural morpheme and hence are known as allomorphs. Morph is a minimal meaningful form, regardless of whether it is a morpheme or allomorph. Basic Concepts in Morphology Affixes are classified according to whether they are attached before or after the form to which they are added. A root morpheme is the basic form to which other morphemes are attached In moveable, {-able} is attached to {move}, which we’ve determined is the word’s root. However, {im- } is attached to moveable, not to {move} (there is no word immove), but moveable is not a root. Expressions to which affixes are attached are called bases. While roots may be bases, bases are not always roots. Basic Concepts in Morphology Words that have meaning by themselves—boy, food, door—are called lexical morphemes. Those words that function to specify the relationship between one lexical morpheme and another—words like at, in, on, -ed, -s— are called grammatical morphemes. Those morphemes that can stand alone as words are called free morphemes (e.g., boy, food, in, on).
    [Show full text]