English Morphology

Lecturer Prof. Dr. [Link] Assapari., M. Pd.B.I

Group member:Ardianii Safitri,Hijjul Arya Mahmudi,M Ilham Rafly

Morpheme forms: morphemes and allomorphs; article

Abstract

This essay
explores the concepts of morphemes and allomorphs in morphology, emphasizing the
complexity of the relationship between form and meaning in word formation. Although the
ideal model depicts a word as a simple series of morphemes, various phenomena such as
portmanteau morphs, empty morphs, ablauts, null morphs, and supplements challenge this
view. The essay also discusses the concept of allomorphs as variations of a single morpheme
form, as well as the concept of morphomes as groupings of morphemes based on grammatical
function. Finally, the essay considers an alternative perspective that focuses on word forms
rather than morphemes as the primary unit of analysis. A comprehensive understanding of
morphemes and allomorphs is essential for an in-depth morphological analysis.

Introduction

The study of
morphology focuses on word formation and its internal structure. The concept of
morphemes, as the smallest units of meaning in language, is the main foundation in
morphological analysis. In simple terms, a word can be thought of as a neatly ordered string
of morphemes, similar to beads on a string. However, the reality of language is much more
complex. Many phenomena show that the relationship between form and meaning is not
always simple and [Link], this essay will explore various challenges to the simple
view of morphemes, including phenomena such as portmanteau morphs, empty morphs,
ablauts, null morphs, and supplements. Furthermore, it will discuss the concepts of
allomorphs and morphomes to provide a more comprehensive understanding of the
complexity of word structure, and finally consider alternative perspectives in morphology that
focus on word form.

Morphemes and Allomorphs: An In-Depth Exploration into Word Structure

Therefore, this essay will explore various challenges to the simple view of morphemes,
including phenomena such as portmanteau morphs, empty morphs, ablauts, null morphs, and
supplements. Furthermore, it will discuss the concepts of allomorphs and morphomes to
provide a more comprehensive understanding of the complexity of word structure, and finally
consider alternative perspectives in morphology that focus on word form.
1
Challenges to the Simplified View of Morphemes:

The text above highlights some significant challenges to an oversimplified understanding of

morphemes:

- Portmanteau Morphs (Cumulation): Often, a single morph is capable of carrying

several inseparable meanings. This "accumulation" of meaning on a single form contradicts
the assumption that each morpheme has a unique and independent form. An example can be
found in French, where certain adverbial forms are derived from feminine adjectival forms,
yet they do not carry feminine meanings. This phenomenon shows that meaning and form do
not always have a simple one-to-one relationship. Therefore, this essay will explore various
challenges to the simple view of morphemes, including phenomena such as portmanteau
morphs, empty morphs, ablauts, null morphs, and supplements. Furthermore, it will discuss
the concepts of allomorphs and morphomes to provide a more comprehensive understanding
of the complexity of word structure, and finally consider alternative perspectives in
morphology that focus on word form.

- Form without Meaning (Empty Morph): On the contrary, we also find morphs that are
present in physical form but have no clear lexical meaning. French again provides a relevant
example, as do interfixes-elements inserted between morphemes without contributing lexical
meaning. The existence of these morphs challenges the definition of morphemes that focuses
solely on meaning.

- Ablaut (Vowel Change): Vowel sound changes in a word, as seen in the English verbs
"sing," "sang," and "sung," present their own challenges. Analyzing these changes as vowel
replacement infixes or morphs proves tricky. The text suggests that the ablaut phenomenon
may be more accurately understood as a form of meaning cumulation, where the vowel
change simultaneously marks the grammatical aspect (time) and preserves the core meaning
of the verb.

- Zero Morphs and Reduction (Zero Affixes): The absence of physical form (zero
morphs) or material reduction (subtraction) in word formation also makes it difficult to apply
the definition of morphemes as units of form. An example of a null morph can be found in
the English plural formation of the word "sheep", where the plural form is identical to the
singular form. This shows that grammatical meaning (plural) can be expressed in the absence
of an actual physical form.

- Supplements: The existence of completely different forms to represent the same

morpheme, as in the verbs “go” and “went” in English, is another challenge. These
supplements show that the relationship between form and meaning is not always regular and
predictive.

Allomorphs: Diverse Manifestations of a Single Morpheme:

The text then introduces the concept of allomorphs, which are concrete realizations of
abstract morphemes. Allomorphs show that a single morpheme can have various physical
2
forms depending on the context.

- Phonologically Conditioned Allomorphs: The plural “-s” in English, for example, has
different pronunciations depending on the consonant sound that precedes it (e.g., “cats” [s],
‘dogs’ [z], “churches” [ɪz]). These variations are determined by phonological factors
(surrounding sounds).

- Lexically Conditioned Allomorphs: Irregular plurals like “children,” “geese,” and

‘oxen’ do not share the same form as the regular “-s” plural. However, they still perform the
same grammatical function of marking the plural. The text proposes that these forms are
lexically conditioned allomorphs, where form selection is determined by the base word
(lexicon) being modified. This view prioritizes grammatical function over uniformity of
form.

Morphemes: Categorizing Morphemes Based on Function:

To clarify the terminology, the text also introduces the concept of morphome, which is
the set of morphemes that share the same grammatical function. This concept is broader than
the traditional morpheme concept as it focuses on grammatical function rather than physical
form.

- Example: Perfect Participles: Perfected participles in English (e.g., "came," "hit,"

"walked," "swum") have various forms. The morphome {perfect participle} includes all such
forms, regardless of their similarity to the base form, past tense, or other forms. It also
includes perfected participles and passive participles, as they are synonymous in English.

Formative: Word Forming Elements with Formal Implications:

The "-mit" element in words like "commit," "remit," and their derivatives are examples
of formatives. While they don't have a consistent lexical meaning, these formatives have
formal implications that affect the formation of related nouns (e.g., "commission," "remission

- Example: Perfect Participles: Perfected participles in English (e.g., "came," "hit," "walked,"
"swum") have various forms. The morphome {perfect participle} includes all such forms,
regardless of their similarity to the base form, past tense, or other forms. It also includes
perfected participles and passive participles, as they are synonymous in English.

Formative: Word Forming Elements with Formal Implications:

The "-mit" element in words like "commit," "remit," and their derivatives are examples of
formatives. While they don't have a consistent lexical meaning, these formatives have formal
implications that affect the formation of related nouns (e.g., "commission," "remission").

Key Differences between Morphemes and Alomorphs:

3
- Abstract vs. Concrete: Morphemes are abstract units of meaning, while allomorphs are
concrete realizations of morphemes.

- One Meaning vs. Same Meaning: Morphemes represent one meaning, while allomorphs
represent the same meaning with different forms.

- Basic Unit vs. Variation: Morphemes are the basic unit of word formation, while allomorphs
are variations of the morpheme form.

Key Differences between Morphemes and Alomorphs:

- Abstract vs. Concrete: Morphemes are abstract units of meaning, while allomorphs are
concrete realizations of morphemes.

- One Meaning vs. Same Meaning: Morphemes represent one meaning, while allomorphs
represent the same meaning with different forms.

- Basic Unit vs. Variation: Morphemes are the basic unit of word formation, while allomorphs
are variations of the morpheme form.

Challenges to a simple understanding of morphemes are outlined through phenomena such as

portmanteau morphs, empty morphs, ablauts and supplements, which demonstrate the
complexity of the relationship between form and meaning. The concept of morphomes, which
categorizes morphemes based on their grammatical function, expands our understanding of
word formation.

In addition, the discussion of formatives underscores the importance of word-forming

elements that have formal implications.

Finally, an alternative perspective in morphology that rejects morphemes as the primary unit
of analysis shows that word form-based theories can also explain linguistic data in different
ways. By understanding the difference between morphemes and allomorphs, we can deepen
the analysis of word structure and meaning in language.
Key Differences between Morphemes and Allomorphs:

- Abstract vs. Concrete: Morphemes are abstract units of meaning, while allomorphs are
concrete realizations of morphemes.

- One Meaning vs. Same Meaning: Morphemes represent one meaning, while allomorphs
represent the same meaning with different forms.

- Basic Unit vs. Variation: Morphemes are the basic unit of word formation, while allomorphs
are variations of the morpheme form.