Module 2: Words and Morphology
Module 2: Advanced Unit
WORDS AND MORPHOLOGY
Contents of Advanced Unit:
1. Morphosyntax
Before moving on to word categories, let’s ponder morphemes, and the meanings they contribute to a sentence, a little more. We’ve seen how a change in derivational morphemes can either change a sentence’s meaning, or make a sentence ungrammatical. Consider the sentences below:
(1a) My friend likes pizza.
(1b) My friend dislikes pizza.
These mean different things, but the only difference is the presence of the derivational morpheme {dis-} in (1b). Now consider (2a) and (2b):
(2a) *My friend likens pizza.
(2b) *My friend likeness pizza.
The addition of derivational morphemes {-en} and {-ness} makes the sentences ungrammatical. While likens is still a verb, (2a) is missing something. But likeness is no longer a verb—it’s now a noun—and hence it doesn’t make sense in the same slot. This is what derivational morphemes do: they add/change lexical meaning, and often in the process they change the word category from noun to verb, adjective to adverb, etc. So swapping/changing derivational morphemes can change not only the meaning of a sentence, but also its grammaticality, since word categories might be altered.
Let’s look a little at how this plays out with inflectional morphemes instead. Consider (3a-d):
(3a) My friend likes pizza.
(3b) *My friend like pizza.
(3c) *My friend liking pizza.
(3d) *My friends likes pizza.
In these cases, the referential content doesn’t seem to have changed: we are still clearly using like as a verb, and it has a positive connotation. Rather, (3b-d) are ungrammatical for different reasons. Taking away the {-s} morpheme from {like} in (b) causes ungrammaticality. So does adding the {-ing} morpheme to {like} in (c), and adding the {-s} morpheme to {friend} in (c). What information is changing in all these cases? Not the reference of like or friend, but their grammatical properties.
The structure and grammaticality of a sentence is sensitive to morphology, both derivational and inflectional. This is what we call morphosyntax: the interrelationship of morphological patterns and syntactic ones. Many of the patterns that help us describe English grammar pertain to connections between morphology and syntax. Check out these sentences:
(4a) The ballerina danced beautifully.
(4b) The choir sang loudly.
(4c) The joggers ran quickly.
Now, let’s say I make up some new words using morphology rules I know as an English speaker:
Where would you put these words in the following sentences?
You might have put these in the middle slot instead of the end, but I bet $20 you didn’t put them in the first one! These words all share the same {-ly} morpheme we saw in action up above, and so we will naturally use them in a sentence in a way that resembles the patterns we already know. Just another example of how morphology and syntax are not really separate, but work together in the rules of English grammar.
One final note: if you’ve ever studied certain other foreign languages, you might have used the terms declension or conjugation. These are ways of referring to the paradigm of inflections in a language. Nouns (and sometimes other words that accompany them) are said to decline and verbs are said to conjugate. This just means they change inflections to signal different grammatical meanings. For nouns, this is typically number, case, and in some languages, gender. For verbs, it is typically tense, number, aspect, and mood. But the kind of grammatical meaning encoded in inflections varies widely across languages, and English’s system is actually quite impoverished compared to many languages (remember, only 8 inflectional morphemes!).
2. Test Yourself: Quiz for Module 2, Advanced Unit
Complete this before moving on to the next unit!