VILNIUS UNIVERSITY Živilė Nemickienė SYSTEMATIC MORPHONOLOGICAL ANALYSIS OF ENGLISH LONG AND SHORT VOWEL OPPOSITIONS Doctoral dissertation Humanities, philology (04H) Kaunas, 2009 VILNIAUS UNIVERSITETAS Živilė Nemickienė SISTEMINĖ MORFONOLOGINĖ ANGLŲ KALBOS ILGŲJŲ IR TRUMPŲJŲ BALSIŲ OPOZICIJŲ ANALIZĖ Daktaro disertacija Humanitariniai mokslai, filologija (04H) Kaunas, 2009 The research was carried in 2004-2008 at Vilnius University, the Kaunas Faculty of Humanities Research supervisor: Prof. Hab. Dr. Olegas Poliakovas (Vilnius University, Humanities, Philology – 04H) Disertacija rengta 2004-2008 metais Vilniaus Universitete Kauno humanitariniame fakultete Mokslinis vadovas: Prof. habil. Dr. Olegas Poliakovas (Vilniaus Universitetas, humanitariniai mokslai, filologija – 04H) CONTENTS INTRODUCTION………………………………………………..…………….. 7 1. INVESTIGATION INTO THE OBJECT AND THE DEVELOPMENT OF MORPHONOLOGY ………………………..………………….…..15 1.1. Overview of the Development of Morphonology……….……..………… 15 1.2. Circumference of Morphonological Field of Investigation………..……… 30 1.2.1. Linguistic Components of Phonology and Morphology ……..…… 31 1.2.1.1. The nature of the syllable ………..………..……………..…. 32 1.2.1.2. The structure of the syllable…………………..………..…… 33 1.2.1.3. Phonological oppositions……………....………….……… 34 1.2.1.4. Morphological decomposition of words…..…..…….....… 36 1.2.1.5. The base, derivational and inflectional morphemes…….…… 38 1.2.1.6. Allomorph theory and morpheme…………..………………39 1.2.2. Linguistic Components of Morphonology…………………………41 1.2.2.1. Morphonological programme by N.Trubetzkoy……………..42 1.2.2.2. Morphonological alternations………………………………..44 1.2.2.3. Principles of morphonological descriptions………………….50 1.2.2.4. Sign character of morphonological phenomena. The basic morphonological unit …..…………..……………………….51 1.2.2.5. The problem of morphoneme………...……………………...55 1.2.2.6. Tasks of morphonology……..………………………………58 2. SYSTEMATIC STRUCTURAL MORPHONOLOGICAL ANALYSIS OF LONG AND SHORT VOWEL OPPOSITIONS IN THE ENGLISH LANGUAGE………………………………………………………………….60 2.1. Structural Morphonological Analysis of ʊ-uː Oppositions ……….…….…65 2.1.1. Opposition ʊ-uː in the root morpheme ……………..……………….66 2.1.2. Opposition ʊ-uː in the root with the derivational morpheme …….….66 2.1.3. Opposition ʊ-uː in the root with the inflectional morpheme………... 67 2.1.4. Opposition ʊ-uː in the root with the derivational and inflectional morpheme …………………...……………………………………..70 2.2. Structural Morphonological Analysis of ɒ-ɔː Oppositions ……..….....……71 2.2.1. Opposition ɒ-ɔː in the root morpheme ..……..…..……………….......71 2.2.2. Opposition ɒ-ɔː in the root with the derivational morpheme ….……..75 2.2.3. Opposition ɒ-ɔː in the root with the inflectional morpheme …..……..78 2.2.4. Opposition ɒ-ɔː in the root with the derivational and inflectional morpheme ...………………………….……………………………85 2.3. Structural Morphonological Analysis of ʌ-ɑː Oppositions ……….……….88 2.3.1. Opposition ʌ-ɑː in the root morpheme …………..………………….88 2.3.2. Opposition ʌ-ɑː in the root with the derivational morpheme ……..…91 2.3.3. Opposition ʌ-ɑː in the root with the inflectional morpheme ……..….94 2.3.4. Opposition ʌ-ɑː in the root with the derivational and inflectional morpheme……………………...………………………………….102 2.4. Structural Morphonological Analysis of e-ɜː Oppositions …………...….108 2.4.1. Opposition e-ɜː in the root morpheme …………………………….108 2.4.2. Opposition e-ɜː in the root with the derivational morpheme..……....112 2.4.3. Opposition e-ɜː in the root with the inflectional morpheme …....…..116 2.4.4. Opposition e-ɜː in the root with the derivational and inflectional morpheme …………………………………..……………………124 2.5. Structural Morphonological Analysis of ɪ-iː Oppositions ………...….…..129 2.5.1. Opposition ɪ-iː in the root morpheme ……………………………..130 2.5.2. Opposition ɪ-iː in the root with the derivational morpheme ……..…135 2.5.3. Opposition ɪ-iː in the root with the inflectional morpheme ……...…138 2.5.4. Opposition ɪ-iː in the root with the derivational and inflectional morpheme………………..…………………………………….…149 2.5.5. Opposition ɪ-iː in the derivational morpheme ……………………156 2.5.6. Opposition ɪ-iː in the inflectional morpheme and the root…………161 3. SYSTEMATIC FUNCTIONAL MORPHONOLOGICAL ANALYSIS OF LONG AND SHORT VOWEL OPPOSITIONS IN THE ENGLISH LANGUAGE ……………………………………………………….……….163 3.1. Functional Morphonological Analysis of ʊ-uː Oppositions…………… 164 3.1.1. Opposition ʊ-uː discriminating the lexical meaning…….....………164 3.1.2. Opposition ʊ-uː discriminating the lexical and grammatical meaning...166 3.2. Functional Morphonological Analysis of ɒ-ɔː Oppositions……...………167 3.2.1. Opposition ɒ-ɔː discriminating the lexical meaning……….……….168 3.2.2. Opposition ɒ-ɔː discriminating the lexical and grammatical meaning...171 3.3. Functional Morphonological Analysis of ʌ-ɑː Oppositions………...……177 3.3.1. Opposition ʌ-ɑː discriminating the lexical meaning……….....…….177 3.3.2. Opposition ʌ-ɑː discriminating the lexical and grammatical meaning...181 3.4. Functional Morphonological Analysis of e-ɜː Oppositions………………187 3.4.1. Opposition e-ɜː discriminating the lexical meaning……...…..…….187 3.4.2. Opposition e-ɜː discriminating the lexical and grammatical meaning...191 3.5. Functional Morphonological Analysis of ɪ-iː Oppositions………….……199 3.5.1. Opposition ɪ-iː discriminating the lexical meaning………..……….199 3.5.2. Opposition ɪ-iː discriminating the lexical and grammatical meaning….206 CONCLUSIONS………………………………………………………………. 219 REFERENCES……………………………….…………..……………………..221 APPENDICES………………………………………...………………………233 INTRODUCTION The doctoral thesis “Systematic Morphonological Analysis of English Long and Short Vowel Oppositions” belongs to the domain of structural linguistics. According to the Encyclopǽdia Britannica 2008, structuralism is a term for a number of linguistic approaches in the first half of the 20th century which are based on the works of Saussure but strongly divergent from one another. Structuralism includes the linguistic theories which focus on an isolated investigation of the language system. The most important centers of structuralism are the Geneva School concerned with the work of Saussure, the Prague represented by Trubetzkoy, Martinet, and Jacobson, the Copenhagen Linguistic Circle with Hjemslev’s glossematics, London Firthian linguistics, and American structuralism, following the works of Bloomfield (Bussman 1998, 457-458). Morphonology has not yet received enough attention and appreciation either in the world or in Lithuania. Insufficient research and complexity of morphonological problems and the non-heterogeneity of the phenomena caused a significant variety of viewpoints almost in all aspects of morphonological analysis. Moreover, until now, the concept of morphonology has not had a recognized understanding in linguistics – the uncertainty of its object, tasks and status among other linguistic disciplines, remains in force. There is neither a general theory of morphonology nor any unanimous opinion concerning the boundaries of this linguistic division among other branches of linguistics. The question, what exactly belongs to the morphonology but not to the bordering phonology and morphology, is solved by the researchers differently. Morphonology, as well as other transitional disciplines, is difficult to define. In practical treatment it involves the investigation of phonological variations within morphemes, alternations intermediate between morphology and phonology, the analysis of phonological structure, properties and relations of morphologically complex words, etc. Since morphonology is a controversial area of linguistics, there are various opposing viewpoints concerning its object and parameters. Though it remains as if in 7 the periphery of the language the problems it raises are central to the study of linguistics. The field of morphonology is in the zone of crossing phonological, morphological and word-building processes. Morphonology, according to the Encyclopǽdia Britannica (2008 CD), is the part of linguistics studying the phonological structure of various types of morphemes and using those differences for the sake of morphology. In a narrow sense, the morphonological object is described as alternations of morphs in one morpheme. According to the founder of morphonology Trubetzkoy (2001, 76), the object of investigation comprises three major areas. Firstly, it includes the investigation of phonological structure of morphemes of various types and possible ways of their distinctions and oppositions. Secondly, it studies the alternations of morphemes, after they have joined into morphemic orders, in the process of word building and form building. And thirdly, it examines the changes and various phenomena at the boundary of intersection of two morphemes. The general purpose of the investigation of morphonological phenomena is to realize, maintain or to reinforce differentiation of forms on the morphological level. The phenomena of the phonological structure of morphemes and alternations are common in many languages of the world. The fundamental structuralist concept is the “distinctive principle”, the principle of contrast. Linguistic signs form a system of values which stand in opposition to one another. Accordingly morphonology investigates phonological structure of morphemes, the ways of their distinctions and oppositions, alternations of morphemes and the phoneme modification at the boundary of intersection of two morphemes. Trubetzkoy, having laid the main principles of morphonology, has instigated a lot of discussion, not infrequently