Chapter 4: Morphology

PART
-
WHOLE
barrel chair:
„a chair that is shaped like a barrel‟ 
 
COMPARISON
bedchair: 
„a chair that be turned into/is also a bed‟
 
IDENTITY
cane chair: 
„a chair made from cane‟
 
 
 
SUBSTANCE
,
MATERIAL
deck chair: 
„a chair that is found on the deck of ship‟  
 
LOCATION
high chair: 
„a chair that is unusually high‟
 
SIZE
swivel chair: 
„a chair that allows you to swivel‟ 
 
FUNCTION
A similar problem arises in the analysis of suffixations and prefixations, where form-meaning 
ambiguities are also very common. The noun declaration is a good example of the widespread 
phenomenon that nominalizations can highlight different aspects of activities, processes and 
states:
(2) 
declaration 
„action of declaring something‟, e.g. his declaration took two hours 
„result of declaring something‟, e.g. I did not believe his declaration 
„product of declaring something‟, e.g. they signed a declaration 
The relations between prefixes and their bases can also vary considerably, even when the 
same prefix is used. What this shows is that an analysis and description of the internal 
semantic structures and relations must complement that of the morphological forms and 
structures.
KEY POINTS: Analysis and description of word-formation types 
An adequate account of the structure of complex lexemes should consist of information on 

their morphological forms, 

their morphological structures in terms of immediate constituents and modifier-head 
relations, 

and their internal semantic structures and relations. 
This now puts us in a position to have a systematic look at the system of word-formation in 
English, beginning with a general survey of the basic patterns.