You are on page 1of 21

Hauptseminar The Phonology-Morphology Interface

http://ifla.uni-stuttgart.de/~jilka
Word Formation in Lexical Morphology
THE CENTRAL ROLE OF THE WORD
lexical rules must be structure preserving: output of each layer of derivation must be a possible word in the
language, i.e. in each cycle of morphological (e.g., affixation) and phonological rules within a level the result
must be a possible word of the language
Example for the effect of this requirement:
in various Bantu languages all words must end in a vowel, but morphemes need not
most Bantu verb roots and verbal suffixes end in a consonant, therefore a vowel (usuallly /a/) is added to
the end of every verb the so-called basic verbal suffix (BVS)
a. ba- lab- a they see b. ba- lab- agan- a they see each other
they see BVS they see each other BVS
c. tu- lab- is- a we cause to see
we see cause BVS
- example emphasizes the significance of the word (derivations must create acceptable words, not morphemes)
- in fusional languages with cumulative and overlapping representations of morphemes a morpheme-based
theory encounters major problems
- there are morphological processes whose input is a word and not a morpheme:
(i) compounding: school + teacher are the input to the rule producing school teacher
(ii) affixation: some affixes such as re- or ly need fully formed words as their input (re-open, re-write, open-ly, nice-ly)
(iii) conversion: changes word class of a word without any overt change in the shape of the input
(staffN staffV; narrowA narrowV; walkV walkN, coolA coolV)
Hauptseminar The Phonology-Morphology Interface
http://ifla.uni-stuttgart.de/~jilka
Word Formation in Lexical Morphology
STRATUM ORDERING REFLECTING MOPHEME SEQUENCING I
due to structure preservation the lexicon only accepts words that do not violate the canonical shape of
morphemes in the language however, this does not mean that having a permissible phonological
repesentation is sufficient to be a potential word
further condition: morphs representing morphemes must be arranged in a sequence allowed
by the word formation rules
grest-ifi-er and dis-preg-ment-at-ion are potential words of English
*grest-er-ify and *dis-preg-ion-ment-at(e) are not, despite being phonologically ok
Exercise:
Try to form words using the root and affix morphemes given below:
Root morphemes: priv popul port
Affix morphemes. de- -at(e) -ion
deprivation, populate, population, depopulate, depopulation, port, portion, deport, deportation
not allowed: *populionate or *deportionate (-ion must follow at(e))
knowledge of word structure includes knowledge of affix sequences
(the order of morphemes in a word is usually fixed - unlike in sentences!)
Hauptseminar The Phonology-Morphology Interface
http://ifla.uni-stuttgart.de/~jilka
Word Formation in Lexical Morphology
STRATUM ORDERING REFLECTING MOPHEME SEQUENCING II
lexical morphology predicts that level 1 affixes are closer to the root than level 2 affixes
example: ic and arian are level 1 (pre-accenting); -ism is level 2
athlet-ic-ism, attitud(i)-(n)arian-ism, antiqu-arian-ism, human-it-arian-ism
*athlet-ism-ic or *antiqu-ism-arian would be ungrammatical
Exercise:
Analyze the data below and determine at which level ize and al are affixed
computer-ize, privat-ize, patron-ize, real-ize
sentiment-al, department-al, homicid-al, medicin-al
- ize has no effect on stress or segmental structure phonologically neutral level 2
- al causes stress shift (if before suffix is heavy it will receive stress: homicidal if it is
light, then stress falls two s before suffix: medicinal) level 1
-al must be added to the root before ize: industri-al-ize, neutr-al-ize, verb-al-ize
Exercise:
At what levels are the suffixes ity and less found?
Explain how the hierarchical ordering of levels rules out words like *homelessity, *powerlessity, *mercilessity
-ity is a pre-acceenting level 1 suffix (necessary vs. necessity); -less is a neutral level 2 suffix
-less must be more peripheral than ity
level 1 processes precede level 2 processes
all lexical processes precede all postlexical processes
Hauptseminar The Phonology-Morphology Interface
http://ifla.uni-stuttgart.de/~jilka
Word Formation in Lexical Morphology
STRATUM ORDERING REFLECTING MOPHEME SEQUENCING III
Exercise:
a. Which of the following suffixes are neutral: -ful, -less and ness?
b. Can any of the neutral suffixes occur together in a word?
c. If they can, are they ordered?
d. If they are ordered, account for the order
- all suffixes are neutral (level 2) and occur together in a word, but in restricted order
- ness attaches to adjectives to form nouns, whereas ful and less form adjectives from nouns,
thus less or ful must be added to a noun first, before ness
home
N
-less
A
-ness
N
(*home
N
-ness
N
-less
A
) - care
N
-ful
A
-ness
N
(*care
N
-ness
N
-ful
A
)
- the right-handmost suffix percolates its category to the entire word and is its grammatical head
- within each level rules are not extrinsically ordered, i.e. there is no fixed sequence for all suffixes
- the lexical rules on the same level are intrinsically ordered, they follow universal principles which
control the sequencing of the rules in dependence of the environment (i.e. which roots, which
affixes are involved)
- rule A can feed rule B, i.e. provide input for it
(in homelessness ness can only be affixed because less turned the noun home into an adjective first)
- rule A can bleed (block) rule B, i.e. take away its input and make it inapplicable
(*powerlessful is ungrammatical because less changed the noun power into an adjective
- when on the same level derivational suffixes are always ordered before inflectional suffixes
(workers vs. *workser)
Hauptseminar The Phonology-Morphology Interface
http://ifla.uni-stuttgart.de/~jilka
Word Formation in Lexical Morphology
STRATUM ORDERING REFLECTING MOPHEME SEQUENCING IV
Summary
the lexicon contains morphological rules paired with phonological rules
(lexical rules)
lexical rules are organized in hierarchical levels/strata
rules belonging to the same level show structural similarities
lexical rules are cyclic (morphological rules trigger phonological rules which
can occur repeatedly on the same level)
the word is built up from the root outward, therefore level 1 affixes are closer
to the root than level 2 affixes
derivational affixes are nearer to the root than inflectional ones (when on the
same level)
Hauptseminar The Phonology-Morphology Interface
http://ifla.uni-stuttgart.de/~jilka
Word Formation in Lexical Morphology
STRATUM ORDERING AND PRODUCTIVITY I
- level 1 contains more idiosyncratic word formation processes, affixes tend to be
semantically less coherent (rarely with predictable meaning)
- level 2 affixes have a more general, more clearly defined meaning
compare level 1 suffix ous with level 2 suffix less:
- less: without N (pitiless, shameless, joyless, fatherless)
- ous: abounding in, full of, characterized by, of the nature of (dangerous, pious,curious, conspicuous,
courageous, odious, tremendous, rebellious, ridiculous)
compare level 1 suffix ity with level 2 suffix ness
- ness: nouns formed with ness mean either
i. the fact that something is X
Adj
or
ii. the extent to which something is X
Adj
or
iii. the quality of being X
Adj
- ity: nouns formed with ity can have one or more of the meanings listed for ness at the same time in
addition to yet other meanings
a. The variety of the fruit in the market surprised me - has meanings i. and ii.
b. Variety is seldom found in this desert - has meaning iii.
c. How many varieties of malt whisky do you stock? - has yet different meaning
Hauptseminar The Phonology-Morphology Interface
http://ifla.uni-stuttgart.de/~jilka
Word Formation in Lexical Morphology
STRATUM ORDERING AND PRODUCTIVITY II
relative unpredictability of the meaning of an affix has consequences for its
productivity (Aronoff 1976)
when speakers are unsure about the meaning they tend to use the safe
option, the more predictable level 2 affix, e.g. preferring perceptiveness to
perceptivity
-ity has the additional problem of potential phonological problems
rapacious rapacity (*rapaciousity) pugnacious pugnacity (*pugnaciuousity)
credulous credulity (*credulo(u)sity) generous generosity (*generity)
Possible factor in language change toward more regular (level 2) forms!!
Hauptseminar The Phonology-Morphology Interface
http://ifla.uni-stuttgart.de/~jilka
Word Formation in Lexical Morphology
STRATUM ORDERING AND CONVERSION I
head
N
head
V
Directionality problem: How do we know which is derived from which?
- semantic considerations are crucial: process of conversion adds an extra dimension of
meaning, thus the member of the pair that forms the basis of the semantic definition of the
other is the basic form (Marchand 1969)
head
V
= to function as the head of verb derived from noun
Problem: the semantic criterion does not always work: sleep
N
vs. sleep
V
(which is more basic?)
Using Lexical Phonology to analyze conversion - Example analysis:
Mark the syllable that receives main stress in the following pairs of nouns and verbs derived by conversion
Verb Noun Verb Noun
torment torment protest protest
digest digest progress progress
convict convict project project
the nouns have stress on the first, the verbs have stress on the second syllable
Conclusion: if stress is assigned on level 1 before any affixes are assigned (all lexical words
are required by the well-formedness condition to bear stress), then level 1
affixes can cause stress shifts
Hauptseminar The Phonology-Morphology Interface
http://ifla.uni-stuttgart.de/~jilka
Word Formation in Lexical Morphology
STRATUM ORDERING AND CONVERSION II
Kiparskys analysis (Kiparsky 1982)
Verb Noun
survey survey
torment torment
protest protest
Noun Verb
pattern pattern
advocate advocate
patent patent
lever lever
noun derived from verb at
level 1 (non-neutral stress
shift)
verb derived from noun at
level 2 (neutral no stress
shift)
Hauptseminar The Phonology-Morphology Interface
http://ifla.uni-stuttgart.de/~jilka
Word Formation in Lexical Morphology
STRATUM ORDERING AND CONVERSION III
In accordance with previous insights the formation of deverbal nouns is less common than
the formation of denominal verbs (the majority of nouns can have a verb formed from
them, but the reverse is not true) as it takes place on level 1
Further arguments for denominal verbs derived by conversion being created at level 2
come from irregular verb inflection:
+ verbs ending in ing or ink are usually strong and form the past by ablaut
sing sang stink stank shrink shrank
sink sank spring sprang ring rang
+ verbs that are derived from nouns by conversion do not undergo ablaut despite the similarity
link linked ring ringed (from N ring)
if the verbs are derived at level 2, then the ablaut has no access, ie., has
already unsuccessfully tried to apply on level 1 regular ed inflection.
Summary: Lexical Morphology predicts that irregular processes operating at level 1 have
no access to word formation processes applying later on level 2
Hauptseminar The Phonology-Morphology Interface
http://ifla.uni-stuttgart.de/~jilka
Word Formation in Lexical Morphology
STRICT CYCLE CONDITION I
Strict Cycle Condition: fundamental tenet of Lexical Phonology
(Mascar 1976, Kiparsky 1982, Goldsmith 1990)
Example analysis I
Trisyllabic Laxing Rule
[-cons, + tns] [- tns] / __ C [- cons, - stress] C [-cons]
(a long vowel is shortened/laxed when followed by two syllables, the first of which is unstressed)
/i:/: divine ~ divinity, confide ~ confident - /e:/: athlete ~ athletic - /:/: vain ~ vanity
Why do other words with the same structure like ivory and nightingale not undergo TSL as well, i.e. *[ntgl], *[v]?
words are root morphemes/underived words the SCC predicts that since
word formation did not take place on the same level, TSL cannot apply
Example analysis II
Velar Softening
[- son, -cont, -ant, vc] [+ ant, + str, vc] / ___ [- cons, - lo, -bck, -rnd]
(/k, g/ turn into /s, / respectively, when followed by /i:, , , , a/)
analog(ue) ~ analogy; regal ~ regicide; rigour ~ rigid; critic ~ criticism; medical ~ medicine; electrical ~ electricity
Velar softening does not take place in words such as kilt, geezer or bucket despite /k, g/ being followed by the same vowels.
the SCC does not allow the velar softening to apply to a form that has not been built on the same level (kilt and geezer
etc. are underived). Velar softening only applies across a morpheme boundary.
Hauptseminar The Phonology-Morphology Interface
http://ifla.uni-stuttgart.de/~jilka
Word Formation in Lexical Morphology
STRICT CYCLE CONDITION II
Strict Cycle Condition (SCC) - phonological version (Halle 1978)
A cyclic rule may apply to a string x just in case either of the following holds:
a. The rule makes crucial reference to information in the representation that
spans the boundary between the current cycle and the preceding one
b. The rule applies solely within the domain of the previous cycle but crucially
refers to information supplied by a rule operating on the current cycle
Bracket Erasure Convention (BEC)
Internal morphological brackets are erased at the end of each level
While all rules which are relevant at a certain level are scanned for applicability after every
morphological operation, at the end of the level all internal structural brackets (morpholological and
phonological properties) are erased and the word (the output of each level is a word) is opaque to rules
from the next level, i.e. its internal structure cannot be taken into account.
Example:
plural s rule only looks to see whether input is a noun, the internal structure of the word is irrelevant:
[defend]ant] [defendant]-s [defendants]
[[book][shop]] [bookshop]-s [bookshops]
[pet] [pet]-s [pets]
all internal information is wiped out outside of the lexicon therefore postlexical rules cannot refer
to any exceptional features of words and apply always without exception
Hauptseminar The Phonology-Morphology Interface
http://ifla.uni-stuttgart.de/~jilka
Word Formation in Lexical Morphology
THE ELSEWHERE CONDITION I
SCC limits rules to only those forms built on the same level, but what about the
order of rules on the same stratum?
a rule should always apply when its input requirements are met, however if two
rules apply in the same environment and have different output, then the rule that
applies first bleeds the second (i.e. takes input away from it)
a linguistic principle determines in such a case which rule applies first: the rule
which applies in the more restricted environment, the more special one, comes first,
the more general one follows if it can still apply (disjunctive rule ordering)
The Elsewhere Condition
(unless a special rule applies, elsewhere the general rule is relevant)
Hauptseminar The Phonology-Morphology Interface
http://ifla.uni-stuttgart.de/~jilka
Word Formation in Lexical Morphology
THE ELSEWHERE CONDITION II
Example:
plural larvae of larva is more restricted than other latinate plurals like a (strata) or i (cacti),
therefore it is assigned first
Conjunctively Ordered Rules:
if rule A applies to derive [y], a subsequently ordered rule must apply to [y], if [y]
satisfies its structural description: x y z
Disjunctively Ordered Rules:
Example In Sanskrit word-final [s] assimilates the precise place of articulation
of a following coronal consonant, elsewhere it turns to [h]
Rule A. s [ ant, distr] / __## [+ cor, ant, distr]
Rule B. s h / __ ##
if Rule A applies to [s]##[t], Rule B must be prevented from applying
the relation between Rule A and Rule B must be disjunctive
Elsewhere Condition - (Kiparsky 1982)
Rules A and B in the same component apply disjunctively to a form if and only if:
a. The structural description of A (the special rule) properly includes the structural description of B
b. The result of applying A to is distinct from the result of applying B to
In that case A is applied first, and if it takes effect, then B is not applied.
Hauptseminar The Phonology-Morphology Interface
http://ifla.uni-stuttgart.de/~jilka
Word Formation in Lexical Morphology
BLOCKING I
Quick summary:
blocking can involve rules on the same (Elsewhere Condition) or on different
levels (stratum ordering)
more productive processes apply later than less productive ones
(level 1 > level 2 > postlex)
Semantic point of view:
derivational and inflectional processes at lower levels tend to be more
idiosyncratic in their meaning
+ if both a level 1 and a level 2 affix may attach to the same base, semantic divergence occurs
Example: brother-s (level 2) more than one brother
brethr-en (level 1) members of a religious group
defend-er (level 2) someone who defends
defendant (level 1) the accused in a trial
Hauptseminar The Phonology-Morphology Interface
http://ifla.uni-stuttgart.de/~jilka
Word Formation in Lexical Morphology
BLOCKING II
Analysis exercise:
Show how blocking can be used to account for the ill-formedness of the words in columns
C and D below.
A B C D
profligate profligacy *profligaciness *profligateness
advocate advocacy *advocaciness *advocateness
decent decency *decenciness *decentness
complacent complacency *complacenciness *complacentness
aberrant aberrancy *aberranciness *aberrantness
constant constancy *constanciness *constantness
level 1 nominalization suffix in B (-y, which only attaches to ate, ant or -ent) blocks
level 2 suffix ness in D due to earlier assignment
the suffix ness also cannot add after the affixation of y because the base is not an
adjective anymore (case C)
Hauptseminar The Phonology-Morphology Interface
http://ifla.uni-stuttgart.de/~jilka
Word Formation in Lexical Morphology
BLOCKING III
In the following nouns which are derived from verbs, why is attachment of the er suffix blocked?
a. bore *borer b. applicant *applier
guide *guider accountant *accounter
spy *spier participant *participator
judge *judger intoxicant *intoxicator
- nouns in a. are formed by conversion on level 1, thus er affixation on level 2 is blocked
-suffixation of ant on level 1 blocks er with the same meaning on level 2
!! blocking is a tendency not a mandatory process !!
it is possible to have doublets (base with level 1 / level 2 suffixes) but with semantic specialization
Verb Noun Noun
divide divide (thing that divides) divider (person/device that divides)
guide guide (person that guides) guider (member of Girl Guides)
cook cook (person that cooks) cooker (appliance for cooking on/in)
drill drill (instrument for drilling) driller (person using drilling instrument)
(-er either turns the verb into an agentive noun referring to a human or, if not possible, into an
instrumental noun referring to an inanimate entity)
creation of synonyms is avoided (e.g. if there is an agentive meaning on level 1
then not on level 2, if no agentive meaning on level 1, then possible on level 2)
Hauptseminar The Phonology-Morphology Interface
http://ifla.uni-stuttgart.de/~jilka
Word Formation in Lexical Morphology
BLOCKING IV
How can we account for the existence of inflectional doublets?
syllabuses vs. syllabi; cactuses vs. cacti; ganglions vs.ganglia; automatons vs. automata; formula vs. formulae
blocking is not always complete!!
some irregular level 1 inflectional rules are obligatory (oxen, feet), others optional
(if an optional irregular plural, e.g. syllabi, is chosen, syllabuses is blocked, if it is not
chosen, then the regular plural is formed the same speaker may use both forms,
sometimes with different meanings: mathematical formulae vs. dental formula)
Analysis exercise:
How can blocking explain the non-occurrence of the regular plural?
ox ~ oxen foot ~ feet
irregular plural assigned on level 1 on level 2 already encoded as a plural noun blocking
Hauptseminar The Phonology-Morphology Interface
http://ifla.uni-stuttgart.de/~jilka
Word Formation in Lexical Morphology
EXERCISES I
1. Examine the following data:
Singular Plural
sheep sheep
salmon salmon
grouse grouse
(a) On what stratum is the zero plural suffix found?
(b) How are the plural forms *sheeps, *salmons and *grouses blocked?
2. (a) In the list of words below, separate those which undergo trisyllabic laxing from
those which do not.
(b) Write a rule to account for the application of trisyllabic laxing
provision baloney arena
Oberon sanity tunic
insane angelic stevedore
inclination application chastity
Hauptseminar The Phonology-Morphology Interface
http://ifla.uni-stuttgart.de/~jilka
Word Formation in Lexical Morphology
EXERCISES II
3. Study the following data
A B C
education educational educationally
theatric theatrical theatrically
finance financial financially
universe universal universally
artifice artificial artificially
adjective adjectival adjectivally
(a) Determine the stratum on which the suffixes al and ly are found
(b) Explain the order of the suffixes al and ly
(c) Write formal morphological rules using the notation introduced in the last chapter to
derive universal and universally
Hauptseminar The Phonology-Morphology Interface
http://ifla.uni-stuttgart.de/~jilka
Word Formation in Lexical Morphology
EXERCISES III
4. At what stratum should the prefix un- in the following data be placed?
unpalatable unbearable unmanageable unloveable unknown
unreadable unjust uncooperative ungrateful unnerve
5. Discuss the semantic specialization observed where doublets are formed by adding to
a base either the level 1 suffix ant or the level 2 suffixes er and or as in the
following:
servant - server
defendant - defender
protestant - protester
informant - informer
commandant - commander
stimulant - stimulator
refrigerant - refrigerator

You might also like