15. Units of word-formation

Mugdan, Joachim

doi:10.1515/9783110246254-017

Cited by 11 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 15 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Secara khusus, konstruksi derivasional dalam teori SD dipahami sebagai suatu sistem makna yang dihasilkan dari relasi antarunsur pembentuknya (Körtvélyessy et al, 2020;Mugdan, 2015;Padó et al, 2016;Raffaelli, 2013).…”

Section: Kerangka Teoriunclassified

Ciri Morfosemantik Afiks Derivasional {Ber-} dalam Konstruksi Verba Deajektival Bahasa Indonesia

Nugraha

2023

SAWERIGADING

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Indonesian language has a unique grammatical construction for verbs, which is the product of a derivational process that results in a deadjectival verb (VDaj). These VDaj constructions are morphologically marked by the affix {ber-}. This affix is commonly utilized in the Indonesian language and can be found, for instance, in the form of {berberat hati}, {berbulat hati}, and {berputih hati}. A recent study aimed to identify and describe the affix {ber-} use in VDaj construction as a phenomenon of morphosemantics. The study utilized data in Indonesian sentences in which the affix {ber-} of VDaj had been structured as one of its constituents. The data sources for this study were the Indonesian-Leipzig Corpora Collection (ILCC) and Kamus Besar Bahasa Indonesia (KBBI), and the data was obtained using the technique of textual documentation. The study analysis was done using the immediate defragmentation technique and referential comparison of meaning in the light of Derivational Morphology and Derivational Semantics. The analysis resulted in two main findings. First, the study found that the morphosemantic features of affix {ber-} could be construed to some extent if the affix had been distributed with one of the adjectival types. Second, the study identified at least three specific features of the affix in the VDaj of bI: (a) to form the VDaj in the type of STATE VERB, (b) to incorporate the semantic role of BENEFACTIVE in the argument of VDaj, and (c) in a narrow condition to create the RECIPROCAL meaning of VDaj. Overall, this study sheds light on the unique characteristics of the Indonesian language and provides valuable insights into the morphosemantic features of the affix {ber-} in VDaj construction. AbstrakVerba deajektival (VDaj) bahasa Indonesia (bI) merupakan salah satu struktur gramatikal yang dibentuk melalui derivasi. Kostruksi VDaj berpemarkah {ber-} merupakan struktur yang cenderung lazim dijumpai pada penggunaan bI, misalnya {berberat hati}, {berbulat hati}, dan {berputih hati}. Kajian ini bertujuan untuk memerikan karakter morfosemantis afiks {ber-} pada konstruksi VDaj bI tersebut. Data kajian ini berwujud kalimat bI yang berkonstituen konstruksi VDaj berpemarkah {ber-}. Sumber data kajian ini berwujud Indonesian – Leipzig Corpora Collection (ILCC) dan Kamus Besar Bahasa Indonesia (KBBI). Data dikumpulkan berdasarkan teknik catat atau dokumentasi tekstual. Data dianalisis berdasarkan teknik Bagi Unsur Langsung dan teknik Padan Referensial dengan mengacu pada teori Morfologi Derivasional dan Semantik Derivasional. Hasil analisis terdiri atas dua temuan sebagai berikut. Pertama, karakter morfosemantik afiks {ber-} pada konstruksi VDaj tercipta hanya jika afiks tersebut berdistribusi secara serial bersama salah satu jenis ajektiva bI. Kedua, secara khusus, ditemukan sekurang-kurangnya tiga kecenderungan ciri morfosemantik afiks {ber-}, yaitu (a) menciptakan VDaj bertipe KEADAAN, (b) melekatkan status peran semantis PENGALAM pada argumen penyerta VDaj, dan (d) mewujudkan makna gramatikal VDaj RESIPROKAL secara terbatas.

show abstract

Section: Kerangka Teoriunclassified

Ciri Morfosemantik Afiks Derivasional {Ber-} dalam Konstruksi Verba Deajektival Bahasa Indonesia

Nugraha

2023

SAWERIGADING

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Opaque prefixed words have been the objects of specific analyses in Chomsky & Halle (1968), using the '=' boundary but, after this boundary was rejected by Siegel (1974;, most authors have progressively stopped referring to these units, and those words are often listed among morphologically simple words. In the literature on morphology, the status of historically prefixed verbs such as contain, refuse or submit in contemporary English is a well-known problem (Aronoff 1976: 55;Anderson 1992: 55;Plag 2003: 30-33;Katamba & Stonham 2006;Harley 2009;Bauer et al 2013: 15-16;Mudgan 2015) because they contain recurring forms with no clearly identifiable meaning, which therefore constitutes a challenge to the standard definition of the morpheme as the minimal meaningful unit. 1 The aim of this paper is not to discuss how the constituents of opaque prefixed words should be called (formatives, pseudo-morphemes, etc.)…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Opaque morphology and phonology: Historical prefixes in English

Dabouis,

Fournier

2024

J. Ling.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In most of the literature on English phonology, historically prefixed words such as contain, respect or submit are seen as having no morphological structure synchronically. However, such words were treated as complex in the early generative literature and are still analysed in that way in part of the literature. In this paper, we seek to review the evidence for the claim that such words are simplex words, which predicts that they should pattern with words with no internal structure in their phonological and morphological behaviours and in psycholinguistic experiments. We show that the evidence does not support that claim and shows that these words should be treated as morphologically complex units, although they differ from words with productive morphology. As these words tend to be partly or entirely opaque semantically, this raises the question of how such structures may be learned. We argue that the recurrence of forms is the main factor leading to their identification and lay out a possible order of acquisition of various morphological structures. Finally, we argue that theories of phonology may account for this by allowing the reference to morphological constituents whose semantics are impoverished.

show abstract

The morph as a minimal linguistic form

Haspelmath

2020

Morphology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper makes a terminological proposal: that the old term morph can be used for a minimal linguistic form. Many linguists (not only morphologists) need such a term, because we often refer to minimal linguistic forms, but the various terms used by linguists in roughly this meaning are either unclear or do not refer to forms. The term "morpheme" has three rather different meanings, and other terms such as "vocabulary item" are too abstract. The term "morph" can be used as the basis for defining other widely used terms such as "root", "prefix", and "suffix", which are currently often defined as kinds of "morphemes". It can also serve as the basis for a clearer definition of suppletion (involving suppletive morph sets) and morph variants, thus avoiding the confusions surrounding the term "allomorph(y)".

show abstract

15. Units of word-formation

Cited by 11 publications

References 15 publications

Ciri Morfosemantik Afiks Derivasional {Ber-} dalam Konstruksi Verba Deajektival Bahasa Indonesia

Ciri Morfosemantik Afiks Derivasional {Ber-} dalam Konstruksi Verba Deajektival Bahasa Indonesia

Opaque morphology and phonology: Historical prefixes in English

The morph as a minimal linguistic form

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About