4.3. Morphological classification of words
According to the morphemic structure: non-segmentable (monomorphic); segmentable (polymorphic) Ws.
Monomorphiс (root-Ws) consist of only 1 root-morpheme: small, dog, make, give.
Pоlуmоrphiс Ws according to the number of root-morphemes: monoradical & polyradical. Monoradical Ws: 1) radical-suffixal: acceptable, acceptability, blackish; 2) radical-prefixal: outdo, rearrange, unbutton; 3) prefixo-radical-suffixal: disagreeable, misinterpretation.
Polyradical Ws: 1) with 2 / more roots & no affixational morphemes: book-stand, eye-ball, lamp-shade; 2) with 2 roots & 1 / more affixational morphemes: safety-pin, wedding-pie, class-consciousness, light-mindedness, pen-holder. (Classification by R. S. Ginsburg)
4.4. Morphemic & word-formation analysis
Morphemic analysis is limited to stating the number & type of morphemes that make up the W: girlishness has 3 morphemes: the root girl- & 2 suffixes -ish & -ness. The morphemic analysis establishes only the ultimate constituents that make up the W.
A structural W-formation analysis studies the structural correlation with other Ws, the structural patterns Ws are built on, with the help of the principle of oppositions – studying the partly similar elements, the difference between which is functionally relevant. Girl & girlish are members of a morphemic opposition. They are similar ← -girl-. Their distinctive feature is the suffix -ish, due to which the 2nd member of the opposition is a different W belonging to a different part of speech. This binary opposition comprises 2 elements.
А соrrelatiоn is a set of binary oppositions. It is composed of 2 subsets formed by the 1st & the 2nd elements of each couple. Each 2nd element is derived from the 1st element by a general rule:
girl child woman monkey spinster book
girlish childish womanish monkeyish spinsterish bookish
It is possible to conclude that there is in English a type of derived adjectives consisting of a N-stem & the suffix -ish. The stems are mostly of animate Ns, which permits to define the relationship between the structural pattern of the W & its meaning. Any W built according to this pattern contains a semantic component common to the group: ‘typical of / having the bad qualities of’.
The results of morphemic & structural W-formation analysis do not always coincide. The morphemic analysis is insufficient in showing the difference between the structure of inconvenience v & impatience n; it classifies both as derivatives. From the point of view of W-formation pattern they are fundamentally different. It is only the 2nd that is formed by derivation:
impatience n = patience n = corpulence n
impatient a patient a corpulent a
The correlation that can be established for the V inconvenience is different:
inconvenience v = pain v = disgust v = anger v = daydream v
inconvenience n pain n disgust n anger n daydream n
Ns denoting a feeling / state are correlated with Vs causing them; no difference in stems between the members of each separate opposition. Whether different pairs in the correlation are structured similarly / differently is irrelevant. Some are simple root Ws, others are derivatives / compounds. In terms of W-formation the V inconvenience compared with the N inconvenience shows relationships characteristic of the process of conversion.
This approach – a possibility to distinguish between compound Ws formed by composition & by other processes. Honeymoon n & honeymoon v are compounds, containing 2 free stems; the 1st is formed by composition: honey n + moon n > honeymoon n; the 2nd by conversion: honeymoon n> honeymoon v.