Morpheme Identification Procedures Allomorph

 Morpheme Identification Procedures Allomorph

Definition of Morpheme

According to Gleason, "Morpheme is the smallest meaningful unit in the structure of a language."  Hockett has defined a morpheme as "the smallest individually meaningful element in the utterances of a language."  As for example, 'singer' /si  / has two morphemes: /si / is one morpheme and / / is also considered a separate morpheme, because in singer /si  /, 'er' has the same meaning as it has in the words dancer /d  ns / and player /plei /.

  But the above definition cannot be accepted in all cases, for there are examples of elements where status of morpheme is not disputed even though they cannot validly be said to have any independent meaning.  For instance, one infinite 'to' in "He has to go" is one standard example.  The other example is of the auxiliary 'do' in "They do not speak Greek."

  Indeed, the occurrence of these elements (to, do) is fully determined by syntactic construction and those elements cannot make an independent contribution to the meaning of the sentence.  

  So the meaningfulness is not a necessary condition for morpheme.  This illustrates the independence of syntax from

semantic one, and is not definable in terms of the semantic notion of meaningfulness.

  Thus the previous definition may be revised as: morpheme is the smallest or minimal grammatical unit in the utterance of a language.  Gleason says that, "morpheme is the smallest unit which is grammatically pertinent."

MORPHEME IDENTIFICATION PROCEDURES

An utterance may be made up of several morphemes, some or all of which may never be spoken alone. Therefore, we must have a procedure for identifying these minimal parts.

Morphemes can be identified only by comparing samples of a language.  If  two or more samples can be found in which there is some feature of expression which all share and some feature of content which all hold in common, then one requirement is met, and these samples may be tentatively identified as a morpheme and its meaning.  Thus boys /b iz/, girls / g rlz/, roads /rowdz/ are all alike in containing s /z/ and meaning 'two or more'.  We therefore identify s /z/ as a morpheme meaning 'plural'.  This is not actually sufficient.  "In addition, there must be some contrast between samples with similar meaning and content", some of which have the tentative morpheme and some of which do not.  Comparison of boy /b i/ will serve to confirm the example we have just discussed.  That such a condition is necessary is shown by the following words: bug /b g/, bee /bi:/, beetle /bi:tl/, butterfly /b t rflai/.  It seems ridiculous to suggest that since all these include /b/ and all mean kind of insect, /b/ must be a morpheme.  But this is only because, as native speakers, we know that / g/, /i:/, /i:tl/ and / t rflai/ do not exist as morphemes that can be associated with these words.  Finally, it is necessary to ascertain that what we have isolated are actually single morphemes rather than combinations.

The procedure is a process of substitution and comparing recurring partials. Two or more utterances partly alike but partly different are compared. The like parts, if they have the same meanings, are recurring partials. morpheme is a linguistic form that bears no partial phonetic-semantic resemblance to any other form

1.   Forms that have a common semantic distinctiveness and an identical phonemic form in all their occurrences constitute a single morpheme.

The principle means that such a form as –er that is added to verbs in such combinations as worker, dancer, runner, wolker, and flier is a morpheme. It always has the same phonetic form (identical phonemic form) and always has essentially the same meaning ( a common semantic distinctiveness) that is “the doer of the action” (also called agentive). Common semantic distinctiveness is a way of indicating that the meaning that is in common to all the occurrences of the suffix –er contrasts with the meaning of all other similar forms, such as –er in comparative adjectives, e.g. wider, broader, smaller, younger, cleaner, smarter and lower. Therefore, we can distinguish two morphemes on the basis of meaning.

In the series of the words boyish, girlish, bookish, dampish, yellowish, bearish and brownish, the morpheme –ish may be said to denote “a quality of”. The suffix qualitativizes the stems, i.eboy, girl, book, damp, yellow, bear and brown. Though many times you will also learn that this suffix generally adds an unfavorable connotation to the word.

The suffix –ly, such as in the words manly, motherly, cowardly, worldly, earthly, heavenly, and livelyalso identifies a quality, without necessarily bringing unpleasant situation associated with the words.

2.   Forms that have a common semantic distinctiveness but differ in phonemic form (i.e. the phonemes or order of the phonemes) may constitute a morpheme as long as the distribution of formal differences is phonologically definable.

            The principle means that when you can discover forms with some common semantic distinctiveness but with different phonemes or arrangements of phonemes, you can still put these various forms together as a single morpheme as long as you can discover phonological conditions that govern the occurrences of such phonologically different forms.

            For example, one negative prefix has more than a single form, such as the words intolerable, intransitive and impossible, improper. The forms in- and im- bear a partial phonetic semantic resemblance and the positions in which they occur are determined by the type of consonant or phoneme that follows. Before alveolar sounds, i.e sounds that are produced with the front part of the tongue on the alveolar ridge (the rough, bony ridge immediately behind the upper teeth), such as t and d, the alveolar nasal n occurs, e.g. intangible, intemperate, intolerant, indecent, indefensible, independent, and indirect. Before bilabial sounds, i.e. sounds produced using both lips, such as p and b, bilabial nasal m occurs, e.g. impractical, impersonal, improbable, and imbalance. So it can be said that the distribution (i.e. positions of occurrence) of in- and im- can be defined by the phonological characteristics of the forms with which they occur.

            In the series of the words illegal, illogical, illiquid, illiterate, and illegible, the morpheme il- is said to denote the meaning of “not” or it makes a contrary meaning of the word to which it is attached. Illegal means “not legal” and illogical means “not logical”.able, irreducible, and irreplaceable also identifies an opposite meaning of the word to which it is attached.

3.   Forms that have a common semantic distinctiveness but differ in phonemic forms in such a way that their distribution cannot be phonologically defined constitute a single morpheme if the forms are in complementary distribution in accordances with the following restrictions:

a.    Occurrence in the same structural series has precedence over occurrence in different structural series in the determination of morphemic status

b.    Complementary distribution in different structural series constitutes a basis for combining possible allomorphs into one morpheme that belongs to the same distribution class as the allomorphic series in question and that itself has only one allomorph, i.e member or variant of the same morpheme, or phonologically defined allomorphs.

c.     Immediate tactical environments have precedence over non immediate tactical environments in determining morphemic status.

d.    Contrast in identical distributional environments may be treated as sub morphemic if the difference in meaning of the allomorphs reflects the distribution of this forms.

4.   An overt formal difference in a structural series constitutes a morpheme if in any member of such a series, the overt formal difference and a zero structural difference are the only significant features for distinguishing a minimal unit of phonetic-semantic distinctiveness.

“An overt formal difference” means a contrast that is indicated by differences in phonemes or in order of phonemes. For example, the distinction between foot/fut/ and feet/fiyt/ or goose/guws/ and geese /giys/ is an overt difference since it contains a difference of phonemes. The contrast between the singular sheep/siyp/ and the plural sheep/siyp/ or the singular deer/dier/ and the plural deer/dier/ contains a zero morpheme and it is covert.

A member of a structural series may occur with a zero structural difference and an overt formal difference. For instance, feet/fiyt/ as the plural of foot/fut/ or geese /giys/ as the plural of goose/guws/ has a structural zero that is similar to the zero occurring with sheep/siyp/ as the plural of sheep /siyp/ or deer/dier/ as the plural of deer/dier/. This zero contains a significant absence of the suffix {-iz} that occurs in the cast majority of plural formation. This principle does not necessarily means that there is no zero occurring in the word feet/fiyt/, but only that the replacement constitutes a morpheme. For the purpose of this concept, it can be said that the word feet consist of three morphemes: (1) the stem, (2) the replacement of/u/ by /iy/ and (3) the zero suffix. But if the structural zero is disregarded and the other overt differences are considered as “do not exist”, the word feet consist of two morphemes: the stem and the replacement. The replacement constitutes an allomorph in the {-iz} series.

5.   Homophonous forms are identifiable as the same or different morphemes on the basis of the following conditions:

a.    Homophonous forms with distinctly different meanings constitute different morphemes.

b.    Homophonous forms with related meanings constitute a single morpheme if the meaning classes are paralleled by distributional differences, but they constitute multiple morphemes if the meaning classes are not paralleled by distributional differences.

6.   A morpheme is isolatable if it occurs under the following conditions:          

a.    In isolation. Boy, cow, girl, jump, up, he, this, and ouch are forms identified as morpheme since it is possible to utter all these forms in isolation.

b.    In multiple combinations in at least one of which the unit with which it is combined occurs in isolation or in other combinations.

ALLOMORPHS

Allomorph is variant form of a moprheme but it doesn’t chabge the meaning. Allomorph has different in pronuncation and spelling according to their condition. The condition depends on the relevan element that it attaches to. Allomorph is a variant sound of one morpheme, it has different pronuncation and spelling but is still has same meaning.

Morphemes may also be defined in terms of allomorph and for this the description of allomorph is necessary.

The  morpheme is an abstract unit. In actual speech, one morpheme may have several pronunciation or several phonological  forms. For instance, -ed is pronounced differently in rented, employed, and faked. Just as phonemes are abstract unit realized through allophones, morpheme are realized through allomorphs.

Allomorphs are any of the variant forms of a morpheme. The plural morpheme in English  {Pl} is realized through many allomorphs. Consider these examples, the words hats, dogs, and buses. Phonemically, these words are written as /hæts/, /dəgz/, /b٨səz/, from which it is apparent that plural endings are   /-s/, /-z/, and /-əz/.  These three allomorphs do not occur randomly; which allomorph occurs depend on the phonetic environment. Nouns that end in one of sibilant /s, z, ŝ, ž, ĵ, č take the /ez/ plural allomorph as in mazes, juges, and whishes. Nouns that end in a voiceless consonant (other than a sibilant) from their plurals with the voiceless allomorphs /-s/, as in caps, chiefs, and wicks.

All other regular nouns end in a voiced sound and take the voiced allomorph /-z/ as in joys, bums, and liquids. Some irregular allomorphs of the plural morpheme are /-ə/ as in oxen, /-rən/ as in children, and Ø as in deer. These allomorphs help to account for the differences in pronounciation of the various plural endings.

Additve Allomorps

For example, the past tense form of most English verbs is formed by adding the suffix –ed which can be pronounced as either /–t/, /–d/ or /–ǝd/:

ask + –ed = /ӕsk/ + /–t/, liv(e) + –ed =/lIv/ + /–d/, need + –ed =/nid/ + /–ǝd/.

Replacive Allomorphs

To signify some difference in meaning, For example, the /Ι/ in drink is replaced by the /æ/ in drank to signal the simple past. This is symbolized as follows:

/drænk/ = /drΙnk/ + / Ι > æ /.

Superlative Allomorphs

To signify some difference in meaning, For example:

go + the suppletive allomorph of {–D pt} = went;

The Zero Allomorphs

There is no change in the shape of a word though some difference in meaning is identified. For example, the past tense form of hurt is formed by adding the zero allomorph of {–D pt} to this word.

Allomorphs are of two types:  

1. PHONOLOGICALLY CONDITIONED ALLOMORPHS: When the allomorphs are conditioned by the phonetic nature of the preceding phoneme, they are said to be phonologically conditioned allomorphs.  For example, the three allomorphs of the plural morphemes are represented by /-s/ occurs after voiceless sounds, /-z/ occurs after voiced sounds and /-iz/ occurs after groove fricatives and affricates.  So these allomorphs are called phonologically conditioned allomorphs.

2. MORPHOLOGICALLY CONDITIONED ALLOMORPHS: When allomorphs are determined by the specific morpheme or morphemes forming the content, rather than by phonological features, they are called morphologically conditioned allomorphs i.e. / / which only occurs with three morphemes.  They are ox / ks/, brother /b r  r/, and child /caild/.