Rashidova Maftunaning “Types of morphemes in English” Mavzusidagi kurs ishi

4. Derivative and inflectional morphemes
We can make another distinction within the set of bound morphemes in English. One type of bound morpheme consists of derivational morphemes, which are used to create new words or to "make words of a different grammatical category from the stem".
For example, the addition of the derivational morpheme -ize modifies
normal adjective to the verb to normalize. Similarly, by adding -ful and less derivational morphemes to the auxiliary noun, we form auxiliary and non-auxiliary adjectives⁷.
The second type of bound morphemes consists of inflectional morphemes used to indicate some aspects of the grammatical function of the word. We use inflectional morphemes to show whether a word is singular or plural, past or not, comparative or possessive.
Indeed, inflection exists in many languages, but English has relatively few inflections compared to other languages ​​of the world. There are only eight inflectional morphemes in English today
Differences of derivational and inflectional morphemes
There are some differences between inflectional and derivational morphemes.
First, inflectional morphemes never change the grammatical category (part of speech) of a word. For example, high and tall are both adjectives. The inflectional morpheme -er (comparative) forms another form of the adjective tall.
However, derivational morphemes often change the part of speech of a word. Thus, when the derivative morpheme -er is added to the verb read, the noun becomes a reader. It's just that read is a verb, but reader is a noun. However, some derived morphemes do not change the grammatical category of the word[13].
For example, English derivational prefixes such as re- and un- usually do not change the word group to which they are attached.
Thus, both happy and unhappy are adjectives, and fill and filled are both verbs. The derivational suffixes -hood and -dom, as in neighbor and kingdom, are typical examples of derivational morphemes that do not change the grammatical category of the word they are linked to.
Secondly, when a derivational suffix and an agreement suffix are added to a word, they always appear in a certain relative order within the word. That is, adverbs of formation come after adverbs of formation. Thus, the derivative (-er) is added to the reading, and then the inflection (-s) is added to form the readings.
Similarly, in organize, the inflected -s come after the derivational -ize. When an inflectional suffix is ​​added to a verb, like an organizer, we cannot add another derivative.
additions. It is impossible to have an organic form, it is impossible to add -s after the derivative, because inflectional morphemes are outside the derived morphemes and are attached to the base or stem.
For these reasons, Akmajian et al. (2010, p. 46) derivational morphemes indicate the "inner" layer of the word, while inflectional suffixes indicate the "outer" layer of the word.
A third aspect worth noting is that some derivational morphemes serve to create new base forms or new stems to which we can add other derivational or inflectional affixes. For example, we use -atic to form adjectives from nouns, as in words like systematic and problematic.
We can then add -al to these two words to make the words systematic and problematic. Similarly, -ize is often added to form verbs from adjectives, as in modernize, and we can add -s (to modernize) to such -ize verbs. In conclusion, we can say that some derivational affixes create new members for a given word group, but inflectional affixes always add to the existing members of a given word group⁸.
Spelling of inflectional morphemes
Previous research on the spelling of inflectional morphemes has shown that children with SLI may be worse at spelling regular past tense and plural morphemes, and that these inflections are often more pronounced when compared to their CA and LA matched peers. will be omitted. However, it was found that children with SLI had similar language and spelling abilities to their peers when writing inflectional morphemes, but both groups of children were worse at spelling inflectional morphemes than their chronological age-matched peers. These results suggest that performance in spelling ability predicts how correctly these affixes are spelled, rather than morphological understanding. Other studies examining general spelling ability and spelling of word roots in children with SLI have reported similar results.
When the children failed to pronounce the turn correctly, the pattern of errors in the groups was almost similar. There was a preponderance of phonologically implausible errors and a very small proportion of phonologically implausible error types. Therefore, most children used an advanced strategy of using phoneme–grapheme correspondences when attempting to write these morphemes (indicating an error category). The small number of omission errors for the SLI group was surprising given previous research (Larkin et al., 2013). However, our large sample of children with SLI was slightly larger than that of Larkin et al. sample and show the benefit of longer experience in school
All groups showed a relationship between spelling of inflectional morphemes and phonological awareness. However, neither group showed a relationship between the spelling of inflectional morphemes and a measure of morphological awareness or our measure of expressive spoken language. Finally, there were strong associations between writing and reading of inflectional morphemes for all groups. Thus, it appears that in the present cohort, inflectional morpheme spelling was often related to the quality of the underlying orthographic and phonological representations associated with spelling and reading skills. Thus, although children with SLI appear to be delayed in spelling inflectional morphemes relative to chronological age matches, their spelling abilities are informed by the same factors as language and orthographic matches. This further confirms previous findings with children with SLI.
In contrast to other work with typically developing children, we found no correlation between inflectional morphological awareness and inflectional spelling in any of the sampled groups, although inflectional awareness appears to be generally developed. Therefore, although knowledge of inflectional morphemes may contribute to children's general knowledge of English spelling, phonological and orthographic knowledge may form the representational basis for spelling inflectional morphemes, rather than knowledge of inflectional morphemes.
Spelling of derivational morphemes
Despite matching the LA group for language and spelling, the SLI group was less accurate in spelling derivational morphemes than both controls, and they made phonologically ambiguous errors. This study included the phonological and orthographic changes of the SLI group
corroborates previous research showing that they may have difficulty writing words from base to derived forms. (2006). Children in the control group typically made phonologically logical errors. In contrast, the SLI group could not reliably apply phoneme-grapheme correspondences when attempting to write morpheme, such as -sed for -tion in focus and -ets for -ity in majority.
However, despite these differences in accuracy and error type, the SLI group and their LA counterparts showed similar associations between spelling of derivational morphemes, phonological awareness, and word reading. However, the lower phonological and reading skills of the SLI group prevented them from matching the LA group on these more difficult derivations. It can be hypothesized that children with SLI show difficulty in making semantic connections between language and spelling with respect to these derivational morphemes. However, the fact that they achieved parity with the LA group on the derivational morphological awareness task may rule this out. Instead, we hypothesize that the phonological and reading deficits of children with SLI are more strongly accentuated when the orthographic demands of bound morphemes increase, showing specific impairments in the underlying representations of these derivational morphemes. may be more reasonable⁹.
The older CA group showed a different pattern of interaction, in which successful writing of derivational morphemes was related to derivational morphological awareness rather than phonological awareness. They showed a close relationship between a complex language task and spelling ability. The reading abilities of the CA group also showed a correlation with derivational morphological awareness, unlike children in the SLI and LA groups, so derivational morphological awareness may be related to the corresponding level of reading.
Regressions provided consistent findings. Of the four main predictors tested, word reading was the only significant predictor of writing inflectional and derivational morphemes. The word reading advantage confirms the results of the study of general spelling ability. It is the strength of basic orthographic representations, not the dimensions of spoken language, that may primarily determine spelling achievement. This further demonstrates the close developmental relationship between word reading and spelling
As suggested by some studies of typically developing children, inflectional and derivational morphological awareness did not predict overall sample performance.
However, Nunes and Bryant note that precise understanding and knowledge of morphemes may not be crucial to the correct spelling of all morphemes, and that this often involves word-specific knowledge and, in relevant cases, phoneme-grapheme correspondences. they emphasize that it can be achieved through application. Therefore, like expressive verbal ability, morphological awareness may be more affected in later development. At this point, the associated morpheme spelling for the SLI and LA groups is determined by orthographic representations and, presumably, their association with phonological awareness rather than morphological awareness. Also, if there is ambiguity in writing derivational morphemes, children may fall back on phonological strategies because they are more difficult not only for the SLI sample but for all children in this age range.
Devoritation and flexion
One of the main differences between morphemes is between derivational and inflectional morphemes. Derivative morphemes fundamentally change the meaning of the root, while inflectional morphemes are used to mark grammatical information¹⁰.
Content:
1. Derivative morphology
2. Inflectional morphology
Derivational morphology
Structural morphemes are affixes added to change the meaning or function of a lexeme. They are used to make new, different lexemes (for example, -ly changes the adjective sad to the suffix sad).
Most derivational morphemes change the part of speech, for example -ance changes a verb like -ance into a noun like. Note that when the suffix "e" is added, it is deleted at the end of the similar verb.
Most derivational morphemes that do not change part of speech are prefixes, for example, adding happy does not change the meaning of the adjective happy, but it is still an adjective unhappy.
When affixes are added to a base or stem, there is usually a specific order in which they are added. Agreement suffixes are added last, and after they are added, no other derivational affixes are added. Below are examples of deconstructed words showing the order in which different affixes are added:
To obtain a deconstruction verb, the derivational prefix de- is added to the verb base
To obtain a deconstruction noun, the derivational suffix -ion is added to the verb stem
Finally, to obtain deconstructions, the inflectional plural suffix -lar is added to the noun.
A diagram showing the breakdown of the word "deconstruction" into four distinct morphemes
Inflectional morphology
Inflectional morphemes are affixes that have a grammatical meaning (eg plural -s in cats or progressive -ing in sailing). They do not change the part of speech or the meaning of the word; They work to ensure that the word is in the proper form, so the sentence is grammatically correct.
All inflectional morphemes in English are affixes, added after any derivational suffixes.
Most common infinitive morphemes are used in verb conjugation (e.g. -ed in race, -ing in race, -s in race), but there are suffixes for noun conjugation (e.g. plural -s and possessive -s in nouns ). Normally) and adjectives (for example, the comparative -er in the word fast, the superlative -est in the word fastest).
Productivity
Some types of affixes occur more freely than others. Regarding the derivational morphology used to create new words, we can say that some are more efficient than others. For example, the suffixes -able and -ise and the prefix un- are very effective because they can be easily used to create new words (photocopyable, accessorise, uncool), and the prefix per- is known from many Latin-derived languages. not as freely used as perception and perspiration (percell, although we can say excell, exception and expire)¹¹.