Use of CALL for the four skills
A number of studies have been done concerning how the use of CALL affects the development of language learners’ four skills (listening, speaking, reading and writing). Most report significant gains in reading and listening and most CALL programs are geared toward these receptive skills because of the current state of computer technology. However, most reading and listening software is based on drills. [5] Gains in writing skills have not been as impressive as computers cannot assess this well. [6]
However, using current CALL technology, even with it current limitations, for the development of speaking abilities has gained much attention. There has been some success in using CALL, in particular computer-mediated communication, to help speaking skills closely linked to “communicative competence” (ability to engage in meaningful conversation in the target language) and provide controlled interactive speaking practice outside the classroom. [3] Using chat has been shown to help students routinize certain often-used expressions to promote the development of automatic structure that help develop speaking skills. This is true even if the chat is purely textual. The use of videoconferencing give not only immediacy when communicating with a real person but also visual cues, such as facial expressions, making such communication more authentic. [6]
However, when it comes to using the computer not as a medium of communication (with other people) but as something to interact with verbally in a direct manner, the current computer technology’s limitations are their clearest. Right now, there are two fairly successful applications of automatic speech recognition (ASR) (or speech processing technology) where the computer “understands” the spoken words of the learner. The first is pronunciation training. Learners read sentences on the screen and the computer gives feedback as to the accuracy of the utterance, usually in the form of visual sound waves. [3] The second is software where the learner speaks commands for the computer to do. However, speakers in these programs are limited to predetermined texts so that the computer will “understand” them. [5]
[edit] Multimedia language centers
During the 1960s, language laboratories with cassette players and headphones were introduced into educational institutions. The use of this kind of center grew rapidly in the late 1960s and 1970s, but then went rapidly out of fashion."[9] Later, “digital language labs” were introduced, still following the traditional language format, such as teacher monitoring. What made them new what that they incorporated new technologies such as video. The term multimedia was originally used to describe sets of learning materials which included a book, audiocassettes and/or videocassettes. However, with the advent of computer-based materials, such packages tend to be called multiple media or mixed media - although there is not absolute consensus on this point. Nowadays multimedia refers to computer-based materials that can perform more varied tasks then the purely-audio mixed-media. Not only can such play pre-recorded audio and video material, it can create new audio and video recordings. It also has the capability of integrating the four basic skills of listening, speaking, reading and writing, as well as giving immediate, if limited, feedback to the student. However, like its predecessors, multimedia centers run the risk of being underutilized due to poor management. [10]
While multimedia computer-based materials can be used directly in the classroom, because of costs, such resources are usually found in a multimedia language center, fulfilling the role of the previous cassette-based and digital language laboratories. However, managing such a center requires knowledge of a wide range of equipment and the increasing expectations of such equipment from administrators, language teachers and students. Administrators often have the mistaken belief that buying hardware by itself will meet the needs of the center (often devoting 90% of a center’s budget to such and ignoring software and training needs) and will cut down on the number of teaching staff needed. [11]
While multimedia offers many opportunities for language learning with the availability of text, images, sound and video as well as interactive activities, the problem is that these opportunities have not been taken advantage of well. Most multimedia computer programs tend to be strong on presentation but weak as far as pedagogy and even interaction. One of the main promises of CALL is the ability to individualize learning, but like with past language laboratories, use of the facilities in many cases have devolved into rows of students all doing the same drills. The only advantage to the multimedia in these cases has been better sound and color images. Most modern language learning theories stress the importance of teacher guidance rather than control, giving students control over what they do, how fast they do it and even the ability to find and correct their own mistakes.[11]
Managing a multimedia language center properly requires not only knowledge of foreign languages and language teaching methodology, it also requires a certain amount of technical know-how and budget management ability as well as the ability to combine all these into creative ways of taking advantage of what the technology can offer. Often a center manager needs assistants for technical problems, for managing resources and even the tutoring of students. Multimedia centers lend themselves to self-study, and potentially self-directed learning, but such is often misunderstood. The simple existence of computers in a laboratory does not automatically lead to students learning independently. Significant investment of time is essential for materials development and creating an atmosphere conducive to such.
Self access language learning centers or independent learning centres have emerged partially independently, and partially in response to these issues. In self-access learning, the focus is on developing learner autonomy through varying degrees of self-directed learning, as opposed to (or as a complement to) classroom learning. In most centres, learners access materials and manage their learning independently, but have access to staff for help. Many self-access centres are heavy users of technology and an increasing number of them are now offering online self-access learning opportunities. Some centres have developed novel ways of supporting language learning outside the context of the language classroom (also called 'language support') by developing software to monitor students' self-directed learning and by offering online support from teachers (cf. [12])
Center managers and support staff need to have new roles defined for them to support students’ efforts at self-directed learning. In fact, a new job description has emerged recently, that of a “language advisor”[13].
[edit] Advantages of CALL
[edit] Motivation
Generally speaking, the use of technology inside or outside the classroom tends to make the class more interesting. However, certain design issues affect just how interesting the particular tool creates motivation. [6] One way a program or activity can promote motivation in students is by personalizing information, for example by integrating the student’s name or familiar contexts as part of the program or task. Others include having animate objects on the screen, providing practice activities that incorporate challenges and curiosity and providing a context (real-world or fantasy) that is not directly language-oriented.
For example, a study comparing students who used “CornerStone” (a language arts development program) showed a significant increase in learning (compared to students not using the program) between two classes of English-immersion middle-school students in language arts. This is because CornerStone incorporate personalized information and challenging and imaginative exercises in a fantasy context. [14] Also, using a variety of multimedia components in one program or course has been shown to increase student interest and motivation. [6]
One quantifiable benefit to increased motivation is that students tend to spend more time on tasks when on the computer. More time is frequently cited as a factor in achievement. [6]
[edit] Adapting learning to the student
Computers can give a new role to teaching materials. Without computers, students cannot really influence the linear progression of the class content but computers can adapt to the student. [5] Adapting to the student usually means that the student controls the pace of the learning but also means that students can make choices in what and how to learn, skipping unnecessary items or doing remedial work on difficult concepts. Such control makes students feel more competent in their learning. [14] Students tend to prefer exercises where they have control over content, such as branching stories, adventures, puzzles or logic problems. With these, the computer has the role of providing attractive context for the use of language rather than directly providing the language the student needs. [5]
[edit] Authenticity
“Authenticity” in language learning means the opportunity to interact in one or more of the four skills (reading, writing, listening, speaking) by using or producing texts meant for an audience in the target language, not the classroom. With real communication acts, rather than teacher-contrived ones, students feel empowered and less afraid to contact others. Students believe they learn faster and better with computer-mediated communication. [5] Also, students learn more about culture in such an environment. [6] In networked computer environments, students have a conscious feeling of being members of a real community. In situations where all are learners of a foreign language, there is also a feeling of equality. In these situations students feel less stressed and more confident in a language learning situation, in part because surface errors do not matter so much. This works best with synchronous CMC (e.g. chats) as there is immediate feedback but email exchanges have been shown to provide most of the same benefits in motivation and student affect. [5]
[edit] Critical thinking skills
Use of computer technology in classrooms is generally reported to improve self-concept and mastery of basic skills, more student-centered learning and engagement in the learning process, more active processing resulting in higher-order thinking skills and better recall, gain confidence in directing their own learning. This is true for both language and non-language classrooms. [6]
[edit] Problems and criticisms of CALL instruction
The impact of CALL in foreign language education has been modest. [3] Several reasons can be attributed to this.
The first is the limitations of the technology, both in its ability and availability. First of all, there is the problem with cost[1] and the simple availability of technological resources such as the Internet (either non-existent as can be the case in many developing countries or lack of bandwidth, as can be the case just about anywhere). [5] However, the limitations that current computer technology has can be problematic as well. While computer technology has improved greatly in the last three decades, demands placed on CALL have grown even more so. One major goal is to have computers with which students can have true, human-like interaction, esp. for speaking practice; however, the technology is far from that point. Not to mention that if the computer cannot evaluate a learner’s speech exactly, it is almost no use at all. [3][1]
However, most of the problems that appear in the literature on CALL have more to do with teacher expectations and apprehensions about what computers can do for the language learner and teacher. Teachers and administrators tend to either think computers are worthless or even harmful, or can do far more than they are really capable of. [8]
Reluctance on part of teachers can come from lack of understanding and even fear of technology. Often CALL is not implemented unless it is required even if training is offered to teachers. [8] One reason for this is that from the 1960’s to the 1980’s, computer technology was limited mostly for the sciences, creating a real and psychological distance for language teaching. [15] Language teachers can be more comfortable with textbooks because it is what they are used do, and there is the idea that the use of computers threatens traditional literacy skills since such are heavily tied to books. [15] [16] These stem in part because there is a significant generation gap between teachers (many of whom did not grow up with computers) and students (who did grow up with them).
Also, teachers may resist because CALL activities can be more difficult to evaluate than more traditional exercises. For example, most Mexican teachers feel strongly that a completed fill-in textbook “proves” learning. [16] While students seem may be motivated by exercises like branching stories, adventures, puzzles or logic, these activities provide little in the way of systematic evaluation of progress. [5]
Even teachers who may otherwise see benefits to CALL may be put off by the time and effort needed to implement it well. However “seductive” the power of computing systems may be[5], like with the introduction of the audio language lab in the 1960’s, those who simply expect results by purchasing expensive equipment are likely to be disappointed. [1] To begin with, there are the simple matters of sorting through the numerous resources that exist and getting students ready to use computer resources. With Internet sites alone, it can be very difficult to know where to begin, and if students are unfamiliar with the resource to be used, the teacher must take time to teach it. [5] Also, there is a lack of unified theoretical framework for designing and evaluating CALL systems as well as absence of conclusive empirical evidence for the pedagogical benefits of computers in language. [3] Most teachers lack the time or training to create CALL-based assignments, leading to reliance on commercially-published sources, whether such are pedagogically sound or not. [1]
However, the most crucial factor that can lead to the failure of CALL, or the use of any technology in language education is not the failure of the technology, but rather the failure to invest adequately in teacher and the lack of imagination to take advantage of the technology's flexibility. Graham Davies states that too often, technology is seen as a panacea, especially by administrators, and the human component necessary to make it beneficial is ignored. Under these circumstances, he argues, "it is probably better to dispense with technology altogether".[9]
Rody Klein, Clint Rogers and Zhang Yong (2006) studying the adoption of Learning Technologies in Chinese schools and colleges have also pointed out that the spread of video games on electronic devices, including computers, dictionaries and mobile phones, is feared in most Chinese institutions. And yet every classroom is very well equipped with a desk imbedded computer, Internetconnexion, microphone, video projector and remote controlled screen to be used by the teacher for multimedia presentations. Very often the leaders prefer to ban completely Learning Technologies for students at the dismay of many foreign ESL teachers. Books and exercise books still prevail. In order to enhance CALL for teaching ESL and other languages in developing countries, it would be also crucial to teach students how to learn by themselves and develop the capacity to practice self evaluation and enhance intrinsic motivation. Tests and quizzes should be designed accordingly to encourage and enhance students autonomous practice. Teachers using CALL should be computer literate and trained continously. Ideally each Foreign Language Department using CALL should hire an experienced Computer Scientist who could assist teachers. That expert should demonstrate dual expertise both in Education and Learning Technologies.
Selasa, 28 April 2009
CALL and computational linguistics
CALL and computational linguistics are separate but somewhat interdependent fields of study. The basic goal of computational linguistics is to “teach” computers to generate and comprehend grammatically-acceptable sentences… for purposes of translation and direct communication with computers where the computer understands and generates natural language. Computational linguistics takes the principles of theoretical linguistics with the aim of characterizing a language with computational applications in mind. [2]
A very simple example of computers understanding natural language in relation to second language learning is vocabulary drill exercises. The computer prompts the learner with a word on either the L1 or target language and the student responds with the corresponding word. The computer “understands” the input word by comparing it with a stored answer and gives feedback to the user. Cloze tests work on a similar principle, where the computer compares the words/phrases provided by the learner to a database of correct answers. [2]
On a superficial level, the core issue for humans and computers using language is the same; finding the best match between a given speech sound and it corresponding word string, then generating the correct and appropriate response. However, humans and machines process speech in fundamentally different ways. Humans use complex cognitive processes, taking into account variables such as social situations and rules while speech for a computer is simply a series of digital values to generate and parse language. [2] [3] For this reason, those involved in CALL from a computational linguistics perspective tend to be more optimistic about a computer’s ability to do error analysis and other pedagogical tasks than those who come into CALL via language teaching. [4]
The term Human Language Technologies is often used to describe some aspects of computational linguistics, having replaced the former term Language Engineering. There has been an upsurge of work in this area in recent years, especially with regard to machine translation and speech synthesis and speech analysis. The professional associations EUROCALL (Europe) and CALICO (USA) have special interest groups (SIGs), respectively devoted to Natural Language Processing (NLP) and Intelligent CALL (ICALL). See Module 3.5 at the ICT4LT website for further information.
[edit] Theoretical basis for CALL instruction design
Computers have become so widespread in schools and homes and their uses have expanded so dramatically that the majority of language teachers now think about the implications. Technology brings about changes in the teaching methodologies of foreign language unless they are used simply to automate fill-in-the-gap exercises. [5] The use of the computer in and of itself does not constitute a teaching method, but rather the computer forces pedagogy to think in new ways to exploit the computers benefits and work around its limitations. [1] To exploit computers’ potential we need language teaching specialists who can promote a complementary relationship between computer technology and appropriate pedagogic programs. [5]
A number of pedagogical approaches have developed in the computer age, including the communicative and integrative/experimentative approaches outlined above in the History of CALL. Others include constructivism, whole language theory and sociocultural theory although they are not exclusively theories of language learning. With constructivism, students are active participants in a task in which they “construct” new knowledge based on experience in order to incorporate new ideas into their already-established schema of knowledge. Whole language theory postulates that language learning (either native or second language) moves from the whole to the part; rather than building sub-skills like grammar to lead toward higher abilities like reading comprehension, whole language insists the opposite is the way we really learn to use language. Students learn grammar and other sub-skills by making intelligent guesses bases on the input they have experienced. It also promotes that the four skills (reading, writing, listening and speaking) are interrelated. [6] Sociocultural theory states that learning is a process of becoming part of a desired community and learning that communities rules of behavior. [7]
What most of these approaches have in common is taking the central focus away from the teacher as conveyor of knowledge to giving students learning experiences that are as realistic as possible where they play a central role. Also, these approaches tend to emphasize fluency over accuracy to allow students to take risks in using more student-centered activities and to cooperate, rather than compete. [5] The computer provides opportunity for students to be less dependent on a teacher and have more freedom to experiment on their own with natural language in natural or semi-natural settings.
[edit] Role changes for teachers and students
[edit] Teachers
Although the integration of CALL into a foreign language program can lead to great anxiety among language teachers, [8] researchers consistently claim that CALL changes, sometimes radically, the role of the teacher but does not eliminate the need for a teacher altogether. Instead of handing down knowledge to students and being the center of students’ attention, teachers become guides as they construct the activities students are to do and help them as students complete the assigned tasks. In other words, instead of being directly involved in students’ construction of the language, the teacher interacts with students primarily to facilitate difficulties in using the target language (grammar, vocabulary, etc.) that arise when interacting with the computer and/or other people. [6] [5]
Elimination of a strong teacher presence has been shown to lead to larger quantity and better quality of communication such as more fluidity, more use of complex sentences and more sharing of students’ personal selves. [6] However, teacher presence is still very important to students when doing CALL activities. Teachers should be familiar enough with the resources to be used to anticipate technical problems and limitations. [5] Students need the reassuring and motivating presence of a teacher in CALL environments. Not only are they needed during the initial learning curve, they are needed to conduct review sessions to reinforce what was learned. Encouraging students to participate and offering praise are deemed important by students. Most students report preferring to do work in a lab with a teacher’s or tutor’s presence rather than completely on their own. [6]
[edit] Students
Students, too, need to adjust their expectations of their participation in the class in order to use CALL effectively. Rather than passively absorbing information, learners must negotiate meaning and assimilate new information through interaction and collaboration with someone other than the teacher, be that person a classmate or someone outside of the classroom entirely. Learners must also learn to interpret new information and experiences on their own terms. However, because the use of technology redistributes teachers’ and classmates’ attentions, less-able students can become more active participants in the class because class interaction is not limited to that directed by the teacher. [6] Moreover more shy students can feel free in their own students'-centered environment. This will raise their self-esteem and their knowledge will be improving. If students are performing collaborative project they will do their best to perform it within set time limits.
CALL and computational linguistics are separate but somewhat interdependent fields of study. The basic goal of computational linguistics is to “teach” computers to generate and comprehend grammatically-acceptable sentences… for purposes of translation and direct communication with computers where the computer understands and generates natural language. Computational linguistics takes the principles of theoretical linguistics with the aim of characterizing a language with computational applications in mind. [2]
A very simple example of computers understanding natural language in relation to second language learning is vocabulary drill exercises. The computer prompts the learner with a word on either the L1 or target language and the student responds with the corresponding word. The computer “understands” the input word by comparing it with a stored answer and gives feedback to the user. Cloze tests work on a similar principle, where the computer compares the words/phrases provided by the learner to a database of correct answers. [2]
On a superficial level, the core issue for humans and computers using language is the same; finding the best match between a given speech sound and it corresponding word string, then generating the correct and appropriate response. However, humans and machines process speech in fundamentally different ways. Humans use complex cognitive processes, taking into account variables such as social situations and rules while speech for a computer is simply a series of digital values to generate and parse language. [2] [3] For this reason, those involved in CALL from a computational linguistics perspective tend to be more optimistic about a computer’s ability to do error analysis and other pedagogical tasks than those who come into CALL via language teaching. [4]
The term Human Language Technologies is often used to describe some aspects of computational linguistics, having replaced the former term Language Engineering. There has been an upsurge of work in this area in recent years, especially with regard to machine translation and speech synthesis and speech analysis. The professional associations EUROCALL (Europe) and CALICO (USA) have special interest groups (SIGs), respectively devoted to Natural Language Processing (NLP) and Intelligent CALL (ICALL). See Module 3.5 at the ICT4LT website for further information.
[edit] Theoretical basis for CALL instruction design
Computers have become so widespread in schools and homes and their uses have expanded so dramatically that the majority of language teachers now think about the implications. Technology brings about changes in the teaching methodologies of foreign language unless they are used simply to automate fill-in-the-gap exercises. [5] The use of the computer in and of itself does not constitute a teaching method, but rather the computer forces pedagogy to think in new ways to exploit the computers benefits and work around its limitations. [1] To exploit computers’ potential we need language teaching specialists who can promote a complementary relationship between computer technology and appropriate pedagogic programs. [5]
A number of pedagogical approaches have developed in the computer age, including the communicative and integrative/experimentative approaches outlined above in the History of CALL. Others include constructivism, whole language theory and sociocultural theory although they are not exclusively theories of language learning. With constructivism, students are active participants in a task in which they “construct” new knowledge based on experience in order to incorporate new ideas into their already-established schema of knowledge. Whole language theory postulates that language learning (either native or second language) moves from the whole to the part; rather than building sub-skills like grammar to lead toward higher abilities like reading comprehension, whole language insists the opposite is the way we really learn to use language. Students learn grammar and other sub-skills by making intelligent guesses bases on the input they have experienced. It also promotes that the four skills (reading, writing, listening and speaking) are interrelated. [6] Sociocultural theory states that learning is a process of becoming part of a desired community and learning that communities rules of behavior. [7]
What most of these approaches have in common is taking the central focus away from the teacher as conveyor of knowledge to giving students learning experiences that are as realistic as possible where they play a central role. Also, these approaches tend to emphasize fluency over accuracy to allow students to take risks in using more student-centered activities and to cooperate, rather than compete. [5] The computer provides opportunity for students to be less dependent on a teacher and have more freedom to experiment on their own with natural language in natural or semi-natural settings.
[edit] Role changes for teachers and students
[edit] Teachers
Although the integration of CALL into a foreign language program can lead to great anxiety among language teachers, [8] researchers consistently claim that CALL changes, sometimes radically, the role of the teacher but does not eliminate the need for a teacher altogether. Instead of handing down knowledge to students and being the center of students’ attention, teachers become guides as they construct the activities students are to do and help them as students complete the assigned tasks. In other words, instead of being directly involved in students’ construction of the language, the teacher interacts with students primarily to facilitate difficulties in using the target language (grammar, vocabulary, etc.) that arise when interacting with the computer and/or other people. [6] [5]
Elimination of a strong teacher presence has been shown to lead to larger quantity and better quality of communication such as more fluidity, more use of complex sentences and more sharing of students’ personal selves. [6] However, teacher presence is still very important to students when doing CALL activities. Teachers should be familiar enough with the resources to be used to anticipate technical problems and limitations. [5] Students need the reassuring and motivating presence of a teacher in CALL environments. Not only are they needed during the initial learning curve, they are needed to conduct review sessions to reinforce what was learned. Encouraging students to participate and offering praise are deemed important by students. Most students report preferring to do work in a lab with a teacher’s or tutor’s presence rather than completely on their own. [6]
[edit] Students
Students, too, need to adjust their expectations of their participation in the class in order to use CALL effectively. Rather than passively absorbing information, learners must negotiate meaning and assimilate new information through interaction and collaboration with someone other than the teacher, be that person a classmate or someone outside of the classroom entirely. Learners must also learn to interpret new information and experiences on their own terms. However, because the use of technology redistributes teachers’ and classmates’ attentions, less-able students can become more active participants in the class because class interaction is not limited to that directed by the teacher. [6] Moreover more shy students can feel free in their own students'-centered environment. This will raise their self-esteem and their knowledge will be improving. If students are performing collaborative project they will do their best to perform it within set time limits.
Definition
CALL originates from CAI (Computer-Accelerated Instruction), a term that was first viewed as an aid for teachers. The philosophy of CALL puts a strong emphasis on student-centered lessons that allow the learners to learn on their own using structured and/or unstructured interactive lessons. These lessons carry 2 important features: bidirectional (interactive) learning and individualized learning. CALL is not a method. It is a tool that helps teachers to facilitate language learning process. CALL can be used to reinforce what has been learned in the classrooms. It can also be used as remedial to help learners with limited language proficiency.
The design of CALL lessons generally takes into consideration principles of language pedagogy, which may be derived from learning theories (behaviorist, cognitive, and constructivist) and second language learning such as Krashen's Monitor Theory.
Others may call CALL an approach to teaching and learning foreign languages whereby the computer and computer-based resources such as the Internet are used to present, reinforce and assess material to be learned. CALL can be made independent of the Internet. It can stand alone for example in a CDROM format. Depending on its design and objectives, it may include a substantial interactive element especially when CALL is integrated in web-based format. It may include the search for and the investigation of applications in language teaching and learning. [1] Except for self-study software, CALL is meant to supplement face-to-face language instruction, not replace it.[2]
CALL has also been known by several other terms such as technology-enhanced language learning (TELL), computer-assisted language instruction (CALI) and computer-aided language learning but the field is the same. [3] For further information see the ICT4LT website, especially Section 1 of Module 1.4, headed "What is CALL?": Mobile Assisted Language Learning (MALL) is a subset of both Mobile Learning (m-learning) and Computer Assisted Language Learning (CALL).
Computers have been used for language teaching ever since the 1960s. This 40-year period can be divided into three main stages: behaviorist CALL, communicative CALL, and integrative CALL. Each stage corresponds to a certain level of technology and certain pedagogical theories. The reasons for using Computer-assisted Language Learning include: (a) experiential learning, (b) motivation, (c) enhance student achievement, (d) authentic materials for study, (e) greater interaction, (f) individualization, (g) independence from a single source of information, and (h) global understanding. The barriers inhibiting the practice of Computer-assisted Language Learning can be classified in the following common categories: (a) financial barriers, (b) availability of computer hardware and software, (c) technical and theoretical knowledge, and (d) acceptance of the technology.
Introduction
[edit] History
CALL’s origins and development trace back to the 1960’s (Delcloque 2000). Since the early days CALL has developed into a symbiotic relationship between the development of technology and pedagogy.
Warschauer (1996) divided the development of CALL into three phases: Behavioristic CALL, Communicative CALL and Integrative CALL (Multimedia and the Internet)[1]. Bax (2003) perceived the three phases as Restricted, Open and Integrated - and there have been several other attempts to categorize the history of CALL: see the ICT4LT website (Section 3 of Module 1.4)].
Behavioristic CALL is defined by the then-dominant behavioristic theories of learning of Skinner as well as the technological limitations of computers from the 1960’s to the early 1980’s. Up to the late 1970’s, CALL was confined to universities where programs were developed on big mainframe computers, like the PLATO project, initiated at the University of Illinois in 1960. Because repeated exposure to material was considered to be beneficial or even essential, computers were considered ideal for this aspect of learning as the machines did not get bored or impatient with learners and the computer could present material to the student as his/her own pace and even adapt the drills to the level of the student. Hence, CALL programs of this era presented a stimulus to which the learner provided a response. At first, both could be done only through text. The computer would analyze errors and give feedback. More sophisticated programs would react to students’ mistakes by branching to help screens and remedial activities. While such programs and their underlying pedagogy still exist today, to a large part behavioristic approaches to language learning have been rejected and the increasing sophistication of computer technology has lead CALL to other possibilities.
Communicative CALL is based on the communicative approach that became prominent in the late 1970’s and 1980’s. In the communicative approach, the focus is on using the language rather than analysis of the language, teaching grammar implicitly. It also allowed for originality and flexibility in student output of language. It also correlates with the arrival of the PC, making computing much widely available resulting in a boom in the development of software for language learning. The first CALL software in this phase still provided skill practice but not in a drill format, for example, paced reading, text reconstruction and language games but computer remained the tutor. In this phase, however, computers provided context for students to use the language, such as asking for directions to a place. It also allowed for programs not designed for language learning, such as Sim City, Sleuth and Where in the World is Carmen Sandiego? to be used for language learning. However, criticisms of this approach include using the computer in an ad hoc and disconnected manner for more marginal rather than the central aims of language teaching. It usually taught skills such as reading and listening in a compartmentalized way, even if not in a drill fashion.
Integrative/explorative CALL, starting from the 1990’s, tries to address these criticisms by integrating the teaching of language skills into tasks or projects to provide direction and coherence. It also coincides with the development of multimedia technology (providing text, graphics, sound and animation) as well as computer-mediated communication. CALL in this period saw a definitive shift of use of computer for drill and tutorial purposes (computer as a finite authoritative base for a specific task) to a medium for extending education beyond the classroom and reorganizing instruction. Multimedia CALL started with interactive laser videodiscs such as “Montevidisco” (Schneider & Bennion 1984) and “A la rencontre de Philippe” (Fuerstenberg 1993, all of which were simulations of situations where the learner played a key role. These programs later were transferred to CD-ROMs, and new RPGs such as Who is Oscar Lake? made their appearance in a range of different languages.
In multimedia programs, listening is combined with seeing, just like in the real world. Students also control the pace and the path of the interaction. Interaction is in the foreground but many CALL programs also provide links to explanations simultaneously. An example of this is Dustin’s simulation of a foreign student’s arrival in the USA. Programs like this led also to what is called explorative CALL.
More recent research in CALL has favored a learner-centered explorative approach, where students are encouraged to try different possible solutions to a problem, for example the use of concordance programs. This approach is also described as data-driven learning (DDL), a term coined by Tim Johns. See Module 2.4 at the ICT4LT site, Using concordance programs in the Modern Foreign Languages classroom.
CALL originates from CAI (Computer-Accelerated Instruction), a term that was first viewed as an aid for teachers. The philosophy of CALL puts a strong emphasis on student-centered lessons that allow the learners to learn on their own using structured and/or unstructured interactive lessons. These lessons carry 2 important features: bidirectional (interactive) learning and individualized learning. CALL is not a method. It is a tool that helps teachers to facilitate language learning process. CALL can be used to reinforce what has been learned in the classrooms. It can also be used as remedial to help learners with limited language proficiency.
The design of CALL lessons generally takes into consideration principles of language pedagogy, which may be derived from learning theories (behaviorist, cognitive, and constructivist) and second language learning such as Krashen's Monitor Theory.
Others may call CALL an approach to teaching and learning foreign languages whereby the computer and computer-based resources such as the Internet are used to present, reinforce and assess material to be learned. CALL can be made independent of the Internet. It can stand alone for example in a CDROM format. Depending on its design and objectives, it may include a substantial interactive element especially when CALL is integrated in web-based format. It may include the search for and the investigation of applications in language teaching and learning. [1] Except for self-study software, CALL is meant to supplement face-to-face language instruction, not replace it.[2]
CALL has also been known by several other terms such as technology-enhanced language learning (TELL), computer-assisted language instruction (CALI) and computer-aided language learning but the field is the same. [3] For further information see the ICT4LT website, especially Section 1 of Module 1.4, headed "What is CALL?": Mobile Assisted Language Learning (MALL) is a subset of both Mobile Learning (m-learning) and Computer Assisted Language Learning (CALL).
Computers have been used for language teaching ever since the 1960s. This 40-year period can be divided into three main stages: behaviorist CALL, communicative CALL, and integrative CALL. Each stage corresponds to a certain level of technology and certain pedagogical theories. The reasons for using Computer-assisted Language Learning include: (a) experiential learning, (b) motivation, (c) enhance student achievement, (d) authentic materials for study, (e) greater interaction, (f) individualization, (g) independence from a single source of information, and (h) global understanding. The barriers inhibiting the practice of Computer-assisted Language Learning can be classified in the following common categories: (a) financial barriers, (b) availability of computer hardware and software, (c) technical and theoretical knowledge, and (d) acceptance of the technology.
Introduction
[edit] History
CALL’s origins and development trace back to the 1960’s (Delcloque 2000). Since the early days CALL has developed into a symbiotic relationship between the development of technology and pedagogy.
Warschauer (1996) divided the development of CALL into three phases: Behavioristic CALL, Communicative CALL and Integrative CALL (Multimedia and the Internet)[1]. Bax (2003) perceived the three phases as Restricted, Open and Integrated - and there have been several other attempts to categorize the history of CALL: see the ICT4LT website (Section 3 of Module 1.4)].
Behavioristic CALL is defined by the then-dominant behavioristic theories of learning of Skinner as well as the technological limitations of computers from the 1960’s to the early 1980’s. Up to the late 1970’s, CALL was confined to universities where programs were developed on big mainframe computers, like the PLATO project, initiated at the University of Illinois in 1960. Because repeated exposure to material was considered to be beneficial or even essential, computers were considered ideal for this aspect of learning as the machines did not get bored or impatient with learners and the computer could present material to the student as his/her own pace and even adapt the drills to the level of the student. Hence, CALL programs of this era presented a stimulus to which the learner provided a response. At first, both could be done only through text. The computer would analyze errors and give feedback. More sophisticated programs would react to students’ mistakes by branching to help screens and remedial activities. While such programs and their underlying pedagogy still exist today, to a large part behavioristic approaches to language learning have been rejected and the increasing sophistication of computer technology has lead CALL to other possibilities.
Communicative CALL is based on the communicative approach that became prominent in the late 1970’s and 1980’s. In the communicative approach, the focus is on using the language rather than analysis of the language, teaching grammar implicitly. It also allowed for originality and flexibility in student output of language. It also correlates with the arrival of the PC, making computing much widely available resulting in a boom in the development of software for language learning. The first CALL software in this phase still provided skill practice but not in a drill format, for example, paced reading, text reconstruction and language games but computer remained the tutor. In this phase, however, computers provided context for students to use the language, such as asking for directions to a place. It also allowed for programs not designed for language learning, such as Sim City, Sleuth and Where in the World is Carmen Sandiego? to be used for language learning. However, criticisms of this approach include using the computer in an ad hoc and disconnected manner for more marginal rather than the central aims of language teaching. It usually taught skills such as reading and listening in a compartmentalized way, even if not in a drill fashion.
Integrative/explorative CALL, starting from the 1990’s, tries to address these criticisms by integrating the teaching of language skills into tasks or projects to provide direction and coherence. It also coincides with the development of multimedia technology (providing text, graphics, sound and animation) as well as computer-mediated communication. CALL in this period saw a definitive shift of use of computer for drill and tutorial purposes (computer as a finite authoritative base for a specific task) to a medium for extending education beyond the classroom and reorganizing instruction. Multimedia CALL started with interactive laser videodiscs such as “Montevidisco” (Schneider & Bennion 1984) and “A la rencontre de Philippe” (Fuerstenberg 1993, all of which were simulations of situations where the learner played a key role. These programs later were transferred to CD-ROMs, and new RPGs such as Who is Oscar Lake? made their appearance in a range of different languages.
In multimedia programs, listening is combined with seeing, just like in the real world. Students also control the pace and the path of the interaction. Interaction is in the foreground but many CALL programs also provide links to explanations simultaneously. An example of this is Dustin’s simulation of a foreign student’s arrival in the USA. Programs like this led also to what is called explorative CALL.
More recent research in CALL has favored a learner-centered explorative approach, where students are encouraged to try different possible solutions to a problem, for example the use of concordance programs. This approach is also described as data-driven learning (DDL), a term coined by Tim Johns. See Module 2.4 at the ICT4LT site, Using concordance programs in the Modern Foreign Languages classroom.
Do I Have to Pay Syntax?
Rim ember us poke in cent tense all most stall ways gun deigns word snot in ten did
Do you understand the sentence on the right? How in the world can you do it? Dr. Goodword invoked every trick in his bag to mislead you. Obviously, speakers must perceive things in sentences beyond what they receive, for there are two ways to interpret the sentence "Remember, a spoken sentence almost always contains words not intended;" yet, we respond to only one. Why? What stops us from interpreting this sentence the way it is presented in the graphic to the right?
Listening and reading are not passive activities. As your ears receive sentences in your language your mind must actively attack it for its contents. Its weapon: GRAMMAR! But 'grammar' in a different sense. Every sentence is full of ambiguities which you must resolve using your knowlege of sentence structure, word structure, and semantics. For example, what does "The British left waffles on the Falkland Islands" mean? The political left in England can't make up its mind on the Falklands? Or the mess sergeants didn't clean up after breakfast? The words and their order are the same under either interpretation. What else can there be in a sentence other than words and their order? Plenty.
Intonation, suffixes like the -s on waffle in the sentence above, word order-all specify grammatical relations between the concepts behind the words in sentences. Our mental dictionary, the list of about 50,000 words we keep in our heads, tells us that left and waffle can either be nouns or verbs. This means that the sentence "The British left waffles on the Falkland Islands," may be parsed in two different ways. Parsing is the way we understand how words in a sentence relate to each other. We can represent the relationships of words in sentences by parsing trees, like the two below. The branches on these trees tells us how each word is related to all the other words in the sentence.
The British left waffles on Falkland Islands
Looking at the two syntactical trees of the British headline, we see that the structure we assign to the sentence depends upon whether we decide that British is a noun or an adjective. If we decide that British is an adjective, then left must be the noun it modifies and waffles must be the verb, i.e. [The British left] [waffles on the Falkland Islands (issue)]. Only Tree No. 1 is possible. If, on the other hand, we choose The British as our noun phrase, left must be the verb and waffles then must be another noun, the direct object since it comes after the verb, i.e. [The British] [left waffles on the Falkland Islands], and only Tree No. 2 is possible. The point is that we must apply knowledge about words and sentence structures which is not present in the sounds in order to interpret such sentences as this one either way. Sentence structure is an invisible but essential part of the mental processing of language.
Syntactic ambiguity is important-and not just for politicians. It is a major component of humor in all languages. For example, did you hear about the child who returned from her first visit to Sunday School and when asked how things had gone, replied that she had learned a dumb song about some cross-eyed bear named "Gladly"? Further questioning brought out the fact that her class has been taught the hymn (Keep thou my Way) containing a line similar to "gladly, the Cross I'd bear". The unusual word order led the child to misanalyze (misparse) the title of the song and assign the phrase the wrong structure; that led to the major misunderstandiung of what the song was about.
So, language tells us much about ourselves, not only how we speak but why we laugh. It makes us laugh. Still, it has been the object of serious research for 4,000 years. The magic word, to repeat, is LINGUISTICS. When it turns on the relations of words in sentences, it is called syntax (which isn't a levy on misbehavior, as you can see). The best news is that you can find out much more about it right here at this web portal.
But There are no Such Things as Words! > < Back to Directory
*
alphaDictionary.com
Home • Language Dictionaries • Specialty Glossaries • Alpha Agora • Translation • Language Blog • Miss Spelling's Center
Dr. Goodword's Office • Word Fun • Laughing Stock • Today's Good Word • Privacy Policy • About Us • Contact us • Sponsor Us!
©2004-200
Rim ember us poke in cent tense all most stall ways gun deigns word snot in ten did
Do you understand the sentence on the right? How in the world can you do it? Dr. Goodword invoked every trick in his bag to mislead you. Obviously, speakers must perceive things in sentences beyond what they receive, for there are two ways to interpret the sentence "Remember, a spoken sentence almost always contains words not intended;" yet, we respond to only one. Why? What stops us from interpreting this sentence the way it is presented in the graphic to the right?
Listening and reading are not passive activities. As your ears receive sentences in your language your mind must actively attack it for its contents. Its weapon: GRAMMAR! But 'grammar' in a different sense. Every sentence is full of ambiguities which you must resolve using your knowlege of sentence structure, word structure, and semantics. For example, what does "The British left waffles on the Falkland Islands" mean? The political left in England can't make up its mind on the Falklands? Or the mess sergeants didn't clean up after breakfast? The words and their order are the same under either interpretation. What else can there be in a sentence other than words and their order? Plenty.
Intonation, suffixes like the -s on waffle in the sentence above, word order-all specify grammatical relations between the concepts behind the words in sentences. Our mental dictionary, the list of about 50,000 words we keep in our heads, tells us that left and waffle can either be nouns or verbs. This means that the sentence "The British left waffles on the Falkland Islands," may be parsed in two different ways. Parsing is the way we understand how words in a sentence relate to each other. We can represent the relationships of words in sentences by parsing trees, like the two below. The branches on these trees tells us how each word is related to all the other words in the sentence.
The British left waffles on Falkland Islands
Looking at the two syntactical trees of the British headline, we see that the structure we assign to the sentence depends upon whether we decide that British is a noun or an adjective. If we decide that British is an adjective, then left must be the noun it modifies and waffles must be the verb, i.e. [The British left] [waffles on the Falkland Islands (issue)]. Only Tree No. 1 is possible. If, on the other hand, we choose The British as our noun phrase, left must be the verb and waffles then must be another noun, the direct object since it comes after the verb, i.e. [The British] [left waffles on the Falkland Islands], and only Tree No. 2 is possible. The point is that we must apply knowledge about words and sentence structures which is not present in the sounds in order to interpret such sentences as this one either way. Sentence structure is an invisible but essential part of the mental processing of language.
Syntactic ambiguity is important-and not just for politicians. It is a major component of humor in all languages. For example, did you hear about the child who returned from her first visit to Sunday School and when asked how things had gone, replied that she had learned a dumb song about some cross-eyed bear named "Gladly"? Further questioning brought out the fact that her class has been taught the hymn (Keep thou my Way) containing a line similar to "gladly, the Cross I'd bear". The unusual word order led the child to misanalyze (misparse) the title of the song and assign the phrase the wrong structure; that led to the major misunderstandiung of what the song was about.
So, language tells us much about ourselves, not only how we speak but why we laugh. It makes us laugh. Still, it has been the object of serious research for 4,000 years. The magic word, to repeat, is LINGUISTICS. When it turns on the relations of words in sentences, it is called syntax (which isn't a levy on misbehavior, as you can see). The best news is that you can find out much more about it right here at this web portal.
But There are no Such Things as Words! > < Back to Directory
*
alphaDictionary.com
Home • Language Dictionaries • Specialty Glossaries • Alpha Agora • Translation • Language Blog • Miss Spelling's Center
Dr. Goodword's Office • Word Fun • Laughing Stock • Today's Good Word • Privacy Policy • About Us • Contact us • Sponsor Us!
©2004-200
An Internet Chat with Koko the Gorilla
This is the transcript of the AOL Live Internet Chat with Koko the gorilla. Which took place on April 27th, 1998, at 7pm EDT. In honor of the month long celebration of Earth Day. This event was the first ever live inter-species internet chat with Koko the gorilla. Brought to you courtesy of H.E.A.V.E.N. (Helping Educate, Activate, Volunteer and Empower via the Net), The Envirolink Network, The Gorilla Foundation, and AOL Live.
These pictures are of Koko's life, from the time she was baby being raised by Dr. Penny Patterson, to the years growing up at the Gorilla Foundation. In the past 26 years, she has raised kittens on her own, she has learned American Sign Language...with a working vocabulary of 500 words. Today, she has her own computer.
Penny Paterson and baby KokoPenny Paterson and baby Koko
The Gorilla Foundation was founded in 1976, to promote the protection and preservation of gorillas. Project Koko, which began in 1972, is the primary focus of the foundation.
HaloMyBaby is the moderator of the chat on AOL, DrPPatrsn is Koko's friend and trainer, and LiveKOKO is Koko the gorilla.
Scroll down to read the full transcript...
*****************************************************
Welcome, Dr. Patterson and Koko, we're so happy you're here!
DrPPatrsn: You're welcome!
HaloMyBaby: Is Koko aware that she's chatting with thousands of people now?
LiveKOKO: Good here.
DrPPatrsn: Koko is aware.
HaloMyBaby: I'll start taking questions from the audience now, our first question is: MInyKitty asks, Koko are you going to have a baby in the future?
LiveKOKO: Pink
DrPPatrsn: We've had earlier discussion about colors today
LiveKOKO: Listen, Koko loves eat
HaloMyBaby: Me too!
DrPPatrsn: What about a baby? She's thinking...
LiveKOKO: Unattention
DrPPatrsn: She covered her face with her hands....which means it's not happening, basically, or it hasn't happened yet.
LiveKOKO: I don't see it.
HaloMyBaby: That's sad!
DrPPatrsn: In other words, she hasn't had one yet, and she doesn't see it happening. She needs several females and one male to have a family. In our setting it really isn't possible for her to have a baby.
HaloMyBaby: Do you see that situation changing when you get the Gorilla preserve on Maui?
DrPPatrsn: Yes, we do.
LiveKOKO: Listen.
DrPPatrsn: Koko wants to hear on the phone as we're doing this.
HaloMyBaby: Hi Koko! I can hear her! She breathed at me! This is so cool! In case you're curious, here's how Koko is able to participate in this chat: Dr. Penny Patterson is signing the questions to Koko from the online audience and a typist is entering for her.
DrPPatrsn: I'm working to create a family. In Hawaii, we'll have the ability to do that; she's almost assured to have a family of her own.
HaloMyBaby: So she really is looking forward to this!
DrPPatrsn: She's making happy sounds now...
Question: EFRN asks, Would Koko like to have a kitten, a dog, or another Gorilla as a friend?
LiveKOKO: dog
DrPPatrsn: She actually has two dog friends right now one kitty and two gorillas.
HaloMyBaby: SBM87 asks, What are the names of your kittens? (and dogs?)
Koko's kitten
LiveKOKO: foot
DrPPatrsn: Foot isn't the name of your kitty
HaloMyBaby: Koko, what's the name of your cat?
LiveKOKO: no
DrPPatrsn: She just gave some vocalizations there... some soft puffing
HaloMyBaby: I heard that soft puffing!
DrPPatrsn: Now shaking her head no.
Question: Do you like to chat with other people?
HaloMyBaby: That was from Rulucky!
LiveKOKO: fine nipple
DrPPatrsn: Nipple rhymes with people, she doesn't sign people per se, she was trying to do a "sounds like..."
HaloMyBaby: BSikor439 wants to know, Koko, Which of your paintings do you like most? Is she still painting?
DrPPatrsn: She hasn't seen her paintings for awhile. She is still painting.
HaloMyBaby: Tell us what she's doing right now!
DrPPatrsn: She's re-arranging the furniture in her room, basically. Let me move some of these boxes back. There's a lot of stuff here. Let me ask her if she LIKES to paint...one second.
HaloMyBaby: Dr. Patterson, why is this such an important project?
DrPPatrsn: We're learning so many things on many levels, many of which I did not predict.
HaloMyBaby: You've devoted your whole life to it! What are we learning?
DrPPatrsn: I had started to simply see if another species could communicate with us in another language, such as sign language. She is very creative with that language and can talk about abstract things.
HaloMyBaby: I can see that!
DrPPatrsn: Surprising that she can be so creative. What I've discovered is that she has already got the system, it's not that I gave her this system. I simply share the vocabulary with her. It gives us a window into another species. They are our closest living relatives. It tells us so much about how we've evolved...learning so much about things such as reproductive physiology how they would like to see things happen in the future....she will respond to things at a sophisticated level...she actually discriminates phoning.
Question: I've heard people say she's not really communicating -- I think she's smarter than we are-- after all, how many of us can speak Gorilla!
DrPPatrsn: Exactly! She has learned our language but we haven't learned hers.
HaloMyBaby: What new things are there to learn after 26 years?
DrPPatrsn: It says a lot about her species. Well, every day brings new surprises in terms of learning about gorillas in order to save them, but also about learning about ourselves. The things she comes up with surprise me.
HaloMyBaby: A basic earthy question for Koko from Earth2Kim: Koko, what is your favorite food, fruit, or vegetable?
DrPPatrsn: Ok...she's thinking...
HaloMyBaby: People have a lot of stereotypes!
LiveKOKO: I like drinks.
DrPPatrsn: What kind are your favorites?
LiveKOKO: Apple drink.
HaloMyBaby: SickboyRE asks: Koko, have you taught other gorillas sign language, on your own?
DrPPatrsn: Good question.
LiveKOKO: myself
DrPPatrsn: part of that answer might be that she's taught us
HaloMyBaby: She's really creative!
DrPPatrsn: She's acknowledging that answer.
HaloMyBaby: She makes up some of her own terms, like Lips for woman.
DrPPatrsn: Right and foot for male.
HaloMyBaby: Another question from the audience: Does Koko like birds? I have the bird t-shirt she painted -- I'm wearing it now! (Available for purchase at KW Heaven!).
DrPPatrsn: She's very thoughtful today, she just walked away, she's looking out the window...
HaloMyBaby: She's looking at the birds!
DrPPatrsn: There are a number of blue jays that have been frequenting her play yard, exactly! She's going to look at the birds!
HaloMyBaby: Are there any birds out there now?
DrPPatrsn: One just flew by. She expresses herself with actions. This is typical of young children.
HaloMyBaby: This is a very abstract one for her: Are you content with your life? That was from Jedi114. I'm very curious to see what she might say to that! We know she might not be able to answer everything, but we're going for it anyway!
DrPPatrsn: Koko, are you happy?
LiveKOKO: fine
HaloMyBaby: Here's one: Koko, where would you like to visit?
DrPPatrsn: That's hard because Koko doesn't travel.
HaloMyBaby: We were wondering about that.
DrPPatrsn: Her concept of space is very limited even in terms of a child.
HaloMyBaby: Would she like to go to Hawaii?
LiveKOKO: Look.
HaloMyBaby: Me too!
DrPPatrsn: She actually has travel logs of Hawaii that she watches on TV.
HaloMyBaby: Does she watch TV?
DrPPatrsn: Only public broadcasting.
HaloMyBaby: LOL (laugh out loud).
LiveKOKO: Think.
HaloMyBaby: Storm 1004 asks, Dear Koko...I've watched you for years now...your gentle spirit is inspiration for many... I'd like to know what you'd like for your birthday.
HaloMyBaby: What a sweet question!
LiveKOKO: Birthday. Food and smokes.
HaloMyBaby: SMOKES?
DrPPatrsn: You have to understand...Smoke is also the name of her kitten.
Koko, Penny Paterson, Smoky the cat
HaloMyBaby: HMBarbari: asks Koko, Have you ever tried to teach your kittens sign language?
DrPPatrsn: She still has Smokey. She's looking out the window right now...Actually, I can tell you that she has not tried to teach them sign language but she has tried to nurse her kittens.
HaloMyBaby: Wow!
DrPPatrsn: It's very important to her. She's 310 lbs. I can't get her to turn around...
HaloMyBaby: LBratt0n asks, Koko do you have an email address?
DrPPatrsn: Koko does have an email address Koko@gorilla.org.
HaloMyBaby: JAM6860 asks, You like your trainer a lot don't you? (I think she means you, Dr. P!)
DrPPatrsn: no comment...LOL. She's thinking about it. LOL.
Question: Hi Koko, you are a beautiful gorilla. Was it hard to learn sign language?
HaloMyBaby: OceanFish asked that one! I agree -- she's the most beautiful gorilla I know! ReBeL1999 asks, do you dream at night? Wouldn't it be amazing to know what a gorilla dreams!
DrPPatrsn: I asked her this once... I had to explain it. I asked her if she heard, smelled, saw things. I needed to explain what a dream was.
HaloMyBaby: What do you like to do best, for fun, asks TrukkasW? Sounds like Koko might have had enough?
DrPPatrsn: Maybe she has...
LiveKOKO: Hear the phone.
DrPPatrsn: Is there anything you'd like to say, Koko?
HaloMyBaby: We knew she might only be able to chat for about a half an hour...
DrPPatrsn: She just gave a little vocalization. She wants a little refreshment here.
Question: Were you real real sad when your cat died?
HaloMyBaby: BDurant79 asked that.
DrPPatrsn: She does remember her cat that died.
HaloMyBaby: How long ago was that?
DrPPatrsn: She does react with emotional words...That was in 1985. She's having some snacks and food here.
LiveKOKO: lips, hurry, good, give me.
HaloMyBaby: Lips is woman, right?
DrPPatrsn: Right. She's got an alligator. She's playing with her alligator and her lady doll. Oh, my! She may be doing a little acting out here.
HaloMyBaby: She sounds like she's working out a bit of aggression! I'm trying to get a picture of where you are, what it looks like?
DrPPatrsn: We're in Koko's kitchen area. There are toys all around a refrigerator, television, stuffed animals, videos. It's got a lot of stuff including a harmonica but she pushed it away, doesn't want to play with that. I gave her a couple of fabric bracelets... she's looking at them. She's putting it on her head because actually these are scrunchies.
LiveKOKO: fake, hat that
DrPPatrsn: She's pulling one of them and it's not fitting her hair.
HaloMyBaby: Does she have hair? Or is it like fur?
DrPPatrsn: She has hair.
LiveKOKO: fine
DrPPatrsn: She has fine hair. It's beautiful!
HaloMyBaby: How big is she?
DrPPatrsn: She's about 5 feet tall and weighs about 300-310 lbs. She has a big tummy!
HaloMyBaby: Koko tell us what you look like in your words?
LiveKOKO: flower
DrPPatrsn: One of the scrunchies has a big flower on it.
LiveKOKO: eat now
DrPPatrsn: She wants some more of the snack, apparently.
LiveKOKO: sleep, red red
DrPPatrsn: She's indicating the red scrunchie.
LiveKOKO: sip
DrPPatrsn: I think it's about dinner time for her now.
HaloMyBaby: How do you feel about Michael?
LiveKOKO: foot, foot, good
HaloMyBaby: foot means male, right?
LiveKOKO: nipple
DrPPatrsn: Remember that foot=male, right.
LiveKOKO: good
DrPPatrsn: She's acting out a little here.
HaloMyBaby: What about Ndume?
LiveKOKO: bad
HaloMyBaby: Oh dear.
LiveKOKO: toilet
HaloMyBaby: Uh oh!
DrPPatrsn: That's her word for bad!
HaloMyBaby: I thought he was supposed to be her mate! What did he do to you today, Koko?
DrPPatrsn: I don't know... she doesn't have good things to say about him today.
LiveKOKO: down
DrPPatrsn: What did he do today? He did something that was obnoxious, but I didn't see what happened. Maybe they had a little tiff.
HaloMyBaby: This is interesting, from the audience, not sure how you'd ask this: Koko, do you feel love from the humans who have raised you and cared for you? Ely35150 asked that. We'll see what she says!
DrPPatrsn: She's reading a birthday card.
LiveKOKO: lips, apple give me
DrPPatrsn: People give her her favorite foods.
LiveKOKO: love, browse drink nipple
DrPPatrsn: Browse is like... the little foods/snacks we give them.
LiveKOKO: koko loves that nipple drink, go
DrPPatrsn: She's kissing her alligator.
LiveKOKO: lights off good
DrPPatrsn: That's like a closer.
HaloMyBaby: That sounds like a good segue!
Koko, Penny Paterson and a flower
DrPPatrsn: She makes that sign when Ron has the lights on the camera.
HaloMyBaby: Let's let her off the hook then! Tell us that about the Maui preserve, what you're hoping to do?
DrPPatrsn: Our dream is to establish a preserve, 70 acres of land donated on West Maui by Maui Land & Pineapple Company that would be a sanctuary for gorillas including Koko, Michael and Ndume. A place where they would be safe and would be able to raise a family.
HaloMyBaby: Will you be able to recreate a natural family unit there?
DrPPatrsn: We're hoping. Not only would we have a more natural environment because the climate is more like Africa, but also we'd be able to have one male, several females and their babies.
LiveKOKO: fake
DrPPatrsn: The alligator is biting the lady doll...
HaloMyBaby: What does fake mean to her?
LiveKOKO: gorilla
DrPPatrsn: She knows that what I'm saying hasn't happened yet.
LiveKOKO: brown
HaloMyBaby: She IS smart!
LiveKOKO: bad
DrPPatrsn: So, she's indicating that "fake" is not what she has now, even though I'm talking about it and the reason we haven't been able to make it happen yet is that we're working very hard to raise the money to make it happen. It will take about $7 million, and we're less than 1/2 way there.
HaloMyBaby: So everyone, buy t-shirts -- every one is a donation to the preserve! At Keyword:Heaven after the chat!
DrPPatrsn: We're hoping that corporations and the public will help us. We want Koko and her future family to share this dream. She very much wants to have a baby. She's indicated that this is what she wants.
HaloMyBaby: Is she about finished, do you think?
LiveKOKO: good, fine
DrPPatrsn: She's now putting a comb in the alligator's mouth.
LiveKOKO: have food lips
DrPPatrsn: Ok. She's ready for dinner!
HaloMyBaby: So we should say goodbye?
DrPPatrsn: She blew a kiss!
HaloMyBaby: Good bye and thank you Koko!
HaloMyBaby: Thank you Dr. Patterson!
LiveKOKO: look
HaloMyBaby: I would be happy to come see her so she could look at me!
LiveKOKO: hat that
DrPPatrsn: She's playing with her alligator.
HaloMyBaby: What will she do now when we get off the phone? What does she eat for dinner?
DrPPatrsn: She'll be very pleased to have her dinner. She has raw vegetables for dinner. She wants to hear, but the phone cord won't stretch.
HaloMyBaby: Hello Koko? (I just asked her about her dinner over the phone!)
LiveKOKO: visitor, koko loves lips
HaloMyBaby: I love her too!
LiveKOKO: good
HaloMyBaby: I'd like to see you some time!
DrPPatrsn: She's playing with her troll doll now!
DrPPatrsn: We'll sign off now!
HaloMyBaby: Thank you and good night!
[Home Button] Return to The Primate's Home Page
This is the transcript of the AOL Live Internet Chat with Koko the gorilla. Which took place on April 27th, 1998, at 7pm EDT. In honor of the month long celebration of Earth Day. This event was the first ever live inter-species internet chat with Koko the gorilla. Brought to you courtesy of H.E.A.V.E.N. (Helping Educate, Activate, Volunteer and Empower via the Net), The Envirolink Network, The Gorilla Foundation, and AOL Live.
These pictures are of Koko's life, from the time she was baby being raised by Dr. Penny Patterson, to the years growing up at the Gorilla Foundation. In the past 26 years, she has raised kittens on her own, she has learned American Sign Language...with a working vocabulary of 500 words. Today, she has her own computer.
Penny Paterson and baby KokoPenny Paterson and baby Koko
The Gorilla Foundation was founded in 1976, to promote the protection and preservation of gorillas. Project Koko, which began in 1972, is the primary focus of the foundation.
HaloMyBaby is the moderator of the chat on AOL, DrPPatrsn is Koko's friend and trainer, and LiveKOKO is Koko the gorilla.
Scroll down to read the full transcript...
*****************************************************
Welcome, Dr. Patterson and Koko, we're so happy you're here!
DrPPatrsn: You're welcome!
HaloMyBaby: Is Koko aware that she's chatting with thousands of people now?
LiveKOKO: Good here.
DrPPatrsn: Koko is aware.
HaloMyBaby: I'll start taking questions from the audience now, our first question is: MInyKitty asks, Koko are you going to have a baby in the future?
LiveKOKO: Pink
DrPPatrsn: We've had earlier discussion about colors today
LiveKOKO: Listen, Koko loves eat
HaloMyBaby: Me too!
DrPPatrsn: What about a baby? She's thinking...
LiveKOKO: Unattention
DrPPatrsn: She covered her face with her hands....which means it's not happening, basically, or it hasn't happened yet.
LiveKOKO: I don't see it.
HaloMyBaby: That's sad!
DrPPatrsn: In other words, she hasn't had one yet, and she doesn't see it happening. She needs several females and one male to have a family. In our setting it really isn't possible for her to have a baby.
HaloMyBaby: Do you see that situation changing when you get the Gorilla preserve on Maui?
DrPPatrsn: Yes, we do.
LiveKOKO: Listen.
DrPPatrsn: Koko wants to hear on the phone as we're doing this.
HaloMyBaby: Hi Koko! I can hear her! She breathed at me! This is so cool! In case you're curious, here's how Koko is able to participate in this chat: Dr. Penny Patterson is signing the questions to Koko from the online audience and a typist is entering for her.
DrPPatrsn: I'm working to create a family. In Hawaii, we'll have the ability to do that; she's almost assured to have a family of her own.
HaloMyBaby: So she really is looking forward to this!
DrPPatrsn: She's making happy sounds now...
Question: EFRN asks, Would Koko like to have a kitten, a dog, or another Gorilla as a friend?
LiveKOKO: dog
DrPPatrsn: She actually has two dog friends right now one kitty and two gorillas.
HaloMyBaby: SBM87 asks, What are the names of your kittens? (and dogs?)
Koko's kitten
LiveKOKO: foot
DrPPatrsn: Foot isn't the name of your kitty
HaloMyBaby: Koko, what's the name of your cat?
LiveKOKO: no
DrPPatrsn: She just gave some vocalizations there... some soft puffing
HaloMyBaby: I heard that soft puffing!
DrPPatrsn: Now shaking her head no.
Question: Do you like to chat with other people?
HaloMyBaby: That was from Rulucky!
LiveKOKO: fine nipple
DrPPatrsn: Nipple rhymes with people, she doesn't sign people per se, she was trying to do a "sounds like..."
HaloMyBaby: BSikor439 wants to know, Koko, Which of your paintings do you like most? Is she still painting?
DrPPatrsn: She hasn't seen her paintings for awhile. She is still painting.
HaloMyBaby: Tell us what she's doing right now!
DrPPatrsn: She's re-arranging the furniture in her room, basically. Let me move some of these boxes back. There's a lot of stuff here. Let me ask her if she LIKES to paint...one second.
HaloMyBaby: Dr. Patterson, why is this such an important project?
DrPPatrsn: We're learning so many things on many levels, many of which I did not predict.
HaloMyBaby: You've devoted your whole life to it! What are we learning?
DrPPatrsn: I had started to simply see if another species could communicate with us in another language, such as sign language. She is very creative with that language and can talk about abstract things.
HaloMyBaby: I can see that!
DrPPatrsn: Surprising that she can be so creative. What I've discovered is that she has already got the system, it's not that I gave her this system. I simply share the vocabulary with her. It gives us a window into another species. They are our closest living relatives. It tells us so much about how we've evolved...learning so much about things such as reproductive physiology how they would like to see things happen in the future....she will respond to things at a sophisticated level...she actually discriminates phoning.
Question: I've heard people say she's not really communicating -- I think she's smarter than we are-- after all, how many of us can speak Gorilla!
DrPPatrsn: Exactly! She has learned our language but we haven't learned hers.
HaloMyBaby: What new things are there to learn after 26 years?
DrPPatrsn: It says a lot about her species. Well, every day brings new surprises in terms of learning about gorillas in order to save them, but also about learning about ourselves. The things she comes up with surprise me.
HaloMyBaby: A basic earthy question for Koko from Earth2Kim: Koko, what is your favorite food, fruit, or vegetable?
DrPPatrsn: Ok...she's thinking...
HaloMyBaby: People have a lot of stereotypes!
LiveKOKO: I like drinks.
DrPPatrsn: What kind are your favorites?
LiveKOKO: Apple drink.
HaloMyBaby: SickboyRE asks: Koko, have you taught other gorillas sign language, on your own?
DrPPatrsn: Good question.
LiveKOKO: myself
DrPPatrsn: part of that answer might be that she's taught us
HaloMyBaby: She's really creative!
DrPPatrsn: She's acknowledging that answer.
HaloMyBaby: She makes up some of her own terms, like Lips for woman.
DrPPatrsn: Right and foot for male.
HaloMyBaby: Another question from the audience: Does Koko like birds? I have the bird t-shirt she painted -- I'm wearing it now! (Available for purchase at KW Heaven!).
DrPPatrsn: She's very thoughtful today, she just walked away, she's looking out the window...
HaloMyBaby: She's looking at the birds!
DrPPatrsn: There are a number of blue jays that have been frequenting her play yard, exactly! She's going to look at the birds!
HaloMyBaby: Are there any birds out there now?
DrPPatrsn: One just flew by. She expresses herself with actions. This is typical of young children.
HaloMyBaby: This is a very abstract one for her: Are you content with your life? That was from Jedi114. I'm very curious to see what she might say to that! We know she might not be able to answer everything, but we're going for it anyway!
DrPPatrsn: Koko, are you happy?
LiveKOKO: fine
HaloMyBaby: Here's one: Koko, where would you like to visit?
DrPPatrsn: That's hard because Koko doesn't travel.
HaloMyBaby: We were wondering about that.
DrPPatrsn: Her concept of space is very limited even in terms of a child.
HaloMyBaby: Would she like to go to Hawaii?
LiveKOKO: Look.
HaloMyBaby: Me too!
DrPPatrsn: She actually has travel logs of Hawaii that she watches on TV.
HaloMyBaby: Does she watch TV?
DrPPatrsn: Only public broadcasting.
HaloMyBaby: LOL (laugh out loud).
LiveKOKO: Think.
HaloMyBaby: Storm 1004 asks, Dear Koko...I've watched you for years now...your gentle spirit is inspiration for many... I'd like to know what you'd like for your birthday.
HaloMyBaby: What a sweet question!
LiveKOKO: Birthday. Food and smokes.
HaloMyBaby: SMOKES?
DrPPatrsn: You have to understand...Smoke is also the name of her kitten.
Koko, Penny Paterson, Smoky the cat
HaloMyBaby: HMBarbari: asks Koko, Have you ever tried to teach your kittens sign language?
DrPPatrsn: She still has Smokey. She's looking out the window right now...Actually, I can tell you that she has not tried to teach them sign language but she has tried to nurse her kittens.
HaloMyBaby: Wow!
DrPPatrsn: It's very important to her. She's 310 lbs. I can't get her to turn around...
HaloMyBaby: LBratt0n asks, Koko do you have an email address?
DrPPatrsn: Koko does have an email address Koko@gorilla.org.
HaloMyBaby: JAM6860 asks, You like your trainer a lot don't you? (I think she means you, Dr. P!)
DrPPatrsn: no comment...LOL. She's thinking about it. LOL.
Question: Hi Koko, you are a beautiful gorilla. Was it hard to learn sign language?
HaloMyBaby: OceanFish asked that one! I agree -- she's the most beautiful gorilla I know! ReBeL1999 asks, do you dream at night? Wouldn't it be amazing to know what a gorilla dreams!
DrPPatrsn: I asked her this once... I had to explain it. I asked her if she heard, smelled, saw things. I needed to explain what a dream was.
HaloMyBaby: What do you like to do best, for fun, asks TrukkasW? Sounds like Koko might have had enough?
DrPPatrsn: Maybe she has...
LiveKOKO: Hear the phone.
DrPPatrsn: Is there anything you'd like to say, Koko?
HaloMyBaby: We knew she might only be able to chat for about a half an hour...
DrPPatrsn: She just gave a little vocalization. She wants a little refreshment here.
Question: Were you real real sad when your cat died?
HaloMyBaby: BDurant79 asked that.
DrPPatrsn: She does remember her cat that died.
HaloMyBaby: How long ago was that?
DrPPatrsn: She does react with emotional words...That was in 1985. She's having some snacks and food here.
LiveKOKO: lips, hurry, good, give me.
HaloMyBaby: Lips is woman, right?
DrPPatrsn: Right. She's got an alligator. She's playing with her alligator and her lady doll. Oh, my! She may be doing a little acting out here.
HaloMyBaby: She sounds like she's working out a bit of aggression! I'm trying to get a picture of where you are, what it looks like?
DrPPatrsn: We're in Koko's kitchen area. There are toys all around a refrigerator, television, stuffed animals, videos. It's got a lot of stuff including a harmonica but she pushed it away, doesn't want to play with that. I gave her a couple of fabric bracelets... she's looking at them. She's putting it on her head because actually these are scrunchies.
LiveKOKO: fake, hat that
DrPPatrsn: She's pulling one of them and it's not fitting her hair.
HaloMyBaby: Does she have hair? Or is it like fur?
DrPPatrsn: She has hair.
LiveKOKO: fine
DrPPatrsn: She has fine hair. It's beautiful!
HaloMyBaby: How big is she?
DrPPatrsn: She's about 5 feet tall and weighs about 300-310 lbs. She has a big tummy!
HaloMyBaby: Koko tell us what you look like in your words?
LiveKOKO: flower
DrPPatrsn: One of the scrunchies has a big flower on it.
LiveKOKO: eat now
DrPPatrsn: She wants some more of the snack, apparently.
LiveKOKO: sleep, red red
DrPPatrsn: She's indicating the red scrunchie.
LiveKOKO: sip
DrPPatrsn: I think it's about dinner time for her now.
HaloMyBaby: How do you feel about Michael?
LiveKOKO: foot, foot, good
HaloMyBaby: foot means male, right?
LiveKOKO: nipple
DrPPatrsn: Remember that foot=male, right.
LiveKOKO: good
DrPPatrsn: She's acting out a little here.
HaloMyBaby: What about Ndume?
LiveKOKO: bad
HaloMyBaby: Oh dear.
LiveKOKO: toilet
HaloMyBaby: Uh oh!
DrPPatrsn: That's her word for bad!
HaloMyBaby: I thought he was supposed to be her mate! What did he do to you today, Koko?
DrPPatrsn: I don't know... she doesn't have good things to say about him today.
LiveKOKO: down
DrPPatrsn: What did he do today? He did something that was obnoxious, but I didn't see what happened. Maybe they had a little tiff.
HaloMyBaby: This is interesting, from the audience, not sure how you'd ask this: Koko, do you feel love from the humans who have raised you and cared for you? Ely35150 asked that. We'll see what she says!
DrPPatrsn: She's reading a birthday card.
LiveKOKO: lips, apple give me
DrPPatrsn: People give her her favorite foods.
LiveKOKO: love, browse drink nipple
DrPPatrsn: Browse is like... the little foods/snacks we give them.
LiveKOKO: koko loves that nipple drink, go
DrPPatrsn: She's kissing her alligator.
LiveKOKO: lights off good
DrPPatrsn: That's like a closer.
HaloMyBaby: That sounds like a good segue!
Koko, Penny Paterson and a flower
DrPPatrsn: She makes that sign when Ron has the lights on the camera.
HaloMyBaby: Let's let her off the hook then! Tell us that about the Maui preserve, what you're hoping to do?
DrPPatrsn: Our dream is to establish a preserve, 70 acres of land donated on West Maui by Maui Land & Pineapple Company that would be a sanctuary for gorillas including Koko, Michael and Ndume. A place where they would be safe and would be able to raise a family.
HaloMyBaby: Will you be able to recreate a natural family unit there?
DrPPatrsn: We're hoping. Not only would we have a more natural environment because the climate is more like Africa, but also we'd be able to have one male, several females and their babies.
LiveKOKO: fake
DrPPatrsn: The alligator is biting the lady doll...
HaloMyBaby: What does fake mean to her?
LiveKOKO: gorilla
DrPPatrsn: She knows that what I'm saying hasn't happened yet.
LiveKOKO: brown
HaloMyBaby: She IS smart!
LiveKOKO: bad
DrPPatrsn: So, she's indicating that "fake" is not what she has now, even though I'm talking about it and the reason we haven't been able to make it happen yet is that we're working very hard to raise the money to make it happen. It will take about $7 million, and we're less than 1/2 way there.
HaloMyBaby: So everyone, buy t-shirts -- every one is a donation to the preserve! At Keyword:Heaven after the chat!
DrPPatrsn: We're hoping that corporations and the public will help us. We want Koko and her future family to share this dream. She very much wants to have a baby. She's indicated that this is what she wants.
HaloMyBaby: Is she about finished, do you think?
LiveKOKO: good, fine
DrPPatrsn: She's now putting a comb in the alligator's mouth.
LiveKOKO: have food lips
DrPPatrsn: Ok. She's ready for dinner!
HaloMyBaby: So we should say goodbye?
DrPPatrsn: She blew a kiss!
HaloMyBaby: Good bye and thank you Koko!
HaloMyBaby: Thank you Dr. Patterson!
LiveKOKO: look
HaloMyBaby: I would be happy to come see her so she could look at me!
LiveKOKO: hat that
DrPPatrsn: She's playing with her alligator.
HaloMyBaby: What will she do now when we get off the phone? What does she eat for dinner?
DrPPatrsn: She'll be very pleased to have her dinner. She has raw vegetables for dinner. She wants to hear, but the phone cord won't stretch.
HaloMyBaby: Hello Koko? (I just asked her about her dinner over the phone!)
LiveKOKO: visitor, koko loves lips
HaloMyBaby: I love her too!
LiveKOKO: good
HaloMyBaby: I'd like to see you some time!
DrPPatrsn: She's playing with her troll doll now!
DrPPatrsn: We'll sign off now!
HaloMyBaby: Thank you and good night!
[Home Button] Return to The Primate's Home Page
Morphology (linguistics)
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
For other uses, see Morphology.
This article includes a list of references or external links, but its sources remain unclear because it lacks inline citations. Please improve this article by introducing more precise citations where appropriate. (April 2009)
Linguistics
Language
Theoretical linguistics
Generative linguistics
Phonology
Morphology
Syntax
Lexis
Semantics
Lexical semantics
Statistical semantics
Structural semantics
Prototype semantics
Pragmatics
Systemic functional grammar
Descriptive linguistics
Phonetics
Historical linguistics
Comparative linguistics
Etymology
Sociolinguistics
Corpus linguistics
Applied linguistics
Language acquisition
Language assessment
Language development
Language education
Psycholinguistics
Neurolinguistics
Linguistic anthropology
Cognitive linguistics
Computational linguistics
Stylistics
Prescription
History of linguistics
List of linguists
Unsolved problems
v • d • e
Morphology is the identification, analysis and description of structure of words (words as units in the lexicon are the subject matter of lexicology). While words are generally accepted as being (with clitics) the smallest units of syntax, it is clear that in most (if not all) languages, words can be related to other words by rules. For example, English speakers recognize that the words dog, dogs, and dog catcher are closely related. English speakers recognize these relations from their tacit knowledge of the rules of word formation in English. They infer intuitively that dog is to dogs as cat is to cats; similarly, dog is to dog catcher as dish is to dishwasher. The rules understood by the speaker reflect specific patterns (or regularities) in the way words are formed from smaller units and how those smaller units interact in speech. In this way, morphology is the branch of linguistics that studies patterns of word formation within and across languages, and attempts to formulate rules that model the knowledge of the speakers of those languages.
Contents
[hide]
* 1 History
* 2 Fundamental concepts
o 2.1 Lexemes and word forms
+ 2.1.1 Prosodic word vs. morphological word
o 2.2 Inflection vs. word formation
o 2.3 Paradigms and morphosyntax
o 2.4 Allomorphy
o 2.5 Lexical morphology
* 3 Models
o 3.1 Morpheme-based morphology
o 3.2 Lexeme-based morphology
o 3.3 Word-based morphology
* 4 Morphological Typology
* 5 See also
* 6 References
* 7 Further reading
[edit] History
The history of morphological analysis dates back to the ancient Indian linguist Pāṇini, who formulated the 3,959 rules of Sanskrit morphology in the text Aṣṭādhyāyī by using a Constituency Grammar. The Greco-Roman grammatical tradition also engaged in morphological analysis. Studies in Arabic morphology, conducted by Marāḥ al-arwāḥ and Aḥmad b. ‘alī Mas‘ūd, date back to at least 1200 CE.[1]
The term morphology was coined by August Schleicher in 1859.[2]
[edit] Fundamental concepts
[edit] Lexemes and word forms
The distinction between these two senses of "word" is arguably the most important one in morphology. The first sense of "word", the one in which dog and dogs are "the same word", is called a lexeme. The second sense is called word form. We thus say that dog and dogs are different forms of the same lexeme. Dog and dog catcher, on hand, are different lexemes, as they refer to two different kinds of entities. The form of a word that is chosen conventionally to represent the canonical form of a word is called a lemma, or citation form.
[edit] Prosodic word vs. morphological word
This article may require cleanup to meet Wikipedia's quality standards. Please improve this article if you can. (February 2007)
Here are examples from other languages of the failure of a single phonological word to coincide with a single morphological word form. In Latin, one way to express the concept of 'NOUN-PHRASE1 and NOUN-PHRASE2' (as in "apples and oranges") is to suffix '-que' to the second noun phrase: "apples oranges-and", as it were. An extreme level of this theoretical quandary posed by some phonological words is provided by the Kwak'wala language.[3] In Kwak'wala, as in a great many other languages, meaning relations between nouns, including possession and "semantic case", are formulated by affixes instead of by independent "words". The three word English phrase, "with his club", where 'with' identifies its dependent noun phrase as an instrument and 'his' denotes a possession relation, would consist of two words or even just one word in many languages. But affixation for semantic relations in Kwak'wala differs dramatically (from the viewpoint of those whose language is not Kwak'wala) from such affixation in other languages for this reason: the affixes phonologically attach not to the lexeme they pertain to semantically, but to the preceding lexeme. Consider the following example (in Kwakw'ala, sentences begin with what corresponds to an English verb):[4]
kwixʔid-i-da bəgwanəmai-χ-a q'asa-s-isi t'alwagwayu
Morpheme by morpheme translation:
kwixʔid-i-da = clubbed-PIVOT-DETERMINER
bəgwanəma-χ-a = man-ACCUSATIVE-DETERMINER
q'asa-s-is = otter-INSTRUMENTAL-3.PERSON.SINGULAR-POSSESSIVE
t'alwagwayu = club.
"the man clubbed the otter with his club"
(Notation notes:
1. accusative case marks an entity that something is done to.
2. determiners are words such as "the", "this", "that".
3. the concept of "pivot" is a theoretical construct that is not relevant to this discussion.)
That is, to the speaker of Kwak'wala, the sentence does not contain the "words" 'him-the-otter' or 'with-his-club' Instead, the markers -i-da (PIVOT-'the'), referring to man, attaches not to bəgwanəma ('man'), but instead to the "verb"; the markers -χ-a (ACCUSATIVE-'the'), referring to otter, attach to bəgwanəma instead of to q'asa ('otter'), etc. To summarize differently: a speaker of Kwak'wala does not perceive the sentence to consist of these phonological words:
kwixʔid i-da-bəgwanəma χ-a-q'asa s-isi-t'alwagwayu
"clubbed PIVOT-the-mani hit-the-otter with-hisi-club
A central publication on this topic is the recent volume edited by Dixon and Aikhenvald (2007), examining the mismatch between prosodic-phonological and grammatical definitions of "word" in various Amazonian, Australian Aboriginal, Caucasian, Eskimo, Indo-European, Native North American, West African, and sign languages. Apparently, a wide variety of languages make use of the hybrid linguistic unit clitic, possessing the grammatical features of independent words but the prosodic-phonological lack of freedom of bound morphemes. The intermediate status of clitics poses a considerable challenge to linguistic theory.
[edit] Inflection vs. word formation
Given the notion of a lexeme, it is possible to distinguish two kinds of morphological rules. Some morphological rules relate to different forms of the same lexeme; while other rules relate to different lexemes. Rules of the first kind are called inflectional rules, while those of the second kind are called word formation. The English plural, as illustrated by dog and dogs, is an inflectional rule; compounds like dog catcher or dishwasher provide an example of a word formation rule. Informally, word formation rules form "new words" (that is, new lexemes), while inflection rules yield variant forms of the "same" word (lexeme).
There is a further distinction between two kinds of word formation: derivation and compounding. Compounding is a process of word formation that involves combining complete word forms into a single compound form; dog catcher is therefore a compound, because both dog and catcher are complete word forms in their own right before the compounding process has been applied, and are subsequently treated as one form. Derivation involves affixing bound (non-independent) forms to existing lexemes, whereby the addition of the affix derives a new lexeme. One example of derivation is clear in this case: the word independent is derived from the word dependent by prefixing it with the derivational prefix in-, while dependent itself is derived from the verb depend.
The distinction between inflection and word formation is not at all clear cut. There are many examples where linguists fail to agree whether a given rule is inflection or word formation. The next section will attempt to clarify this distinction.
[edit] Paradigms and morphosyntax
Linguistic typology
Morphological
Isolating
Synthetic
Polysynthetic
Fusional
Agglutinative
Morphosyntactic
Alignment
Accusative
Ergative
Split ergative
Philippine
Active–stative
Tripartite
Inverse marking
Syntactic pivot
Theta role
Word Order
VO languages
Subject Verb Object
Verb Subject Object
Verb Object Subject
OV languages
Subject Object Verb
Object Subject Verb
Object Verb Subject
Time Manner Place
Place Manner Time
This box: view • talk • edit
A linguistic paradigm is the complete set of related word forms associated with a given lexeme. The familiar examples of paradigms are the conjugations of verbs, and the declensions of nouns. Accordingly, the word forms of a lexeme may be arranged conveniently into tables, by classifying them according to shared inflectional categories such as tense, aspect, mood, number, gender or case. For example, the personal pronouns in English can be organized into tables, using the categories of person (1st., 2nd., 3rd.), number (singular vs. plural), gender (masculine, feminine, neuter), and case (subjective, objective, and possessive). See English personal pronouns for the details.
The inflectional categories used to group word forms into paradigms cannot be chosen arbitrarily; they must be categories that are relevant to stating the syntactic rules of the language. For example, person and number are categories that can be used to define paradigms in English, because English has grammatical agreement rules that require the verb in a sentence to appear in an inflectional form that matches the person and number of the subject. In other words, the syntactic rules of English care about the difference between dog and dogs, because the choice between these two forms determines which form of the verb is to be used. In contrast, however, no syntactic rule of English cares about the difference between dog and dog catcher, or dependent and independent. The first two are just nouns, and the second two just adjectives, and they generally behave like any other noun or adjective behaves.
An important difference between inflection and word formation is that inflected word forms of lexemes are organized into paradigms, which are defined by the requirements of syntactic rules, whereas the rules of word formation are not restricted by any corresponding requirements of syntax. Inflection is therefore said to be relevant to syntax, and word formation is not. The part of morphology that covers the relationship between syntax and morphology is called morphosyntax, and it concerns itself with inflection and paradigms, but not with word formation or compounding.
[edit] Allomorphy
In the exposition above, morphological rules are described as analogies between word forms: dog is to dogs as cat is to cats, and as dish is to dishes. In this case, the analogy applies both to the form of the words and to their meaning: in each pair, the first word means "one of X", while the second "two or more of X", and the difference is always the plural form -s affixed to the second word, signaling the key distinction between singular and plural entities.
One of the largest sources of complexity in morphology is that this one-to-one correspondence between meaning and form scarcely applies to every case in the language. In English, we have word form pairs like ox/oxen, goose/geese, and sheep/sheep, where the difference between the singular and the plural is signaled in a way that departs from the regular pattern, or is not signaled at all. Even cases considered "regular", with the final -s, are not so simple; the -s in dogs is not pronounced the same way as the -s in cats, and in a plural like dishes, an "extra" vowel appears before the -s. These cases, where the same distinction is effected by alternative forms of a "word", are called allomorphy.
Phonological rules constrain which sounds can appear next to each other in a language, and morphological rules, when applied blindly, would often violate phonological rules, by resulting in sound sequences that are prohibited in the language in question. For example, to form the plural of dish by simply appending an -s to the end of the word would result in the form *[dɪʃs], which is not permitted by the phonotactics of English. In order to "rescue" the word, a vowel sound is inserted between the root and the plural marker, and [dɪʃəz] results. Similar rules apply to the pronunciation of the -s in dogs and cats: it depends on the quality (voiced vs. unvoiced) of the final preceding phoneme.
[edit] Lexical morphology
Lexical morphology is the branch of morphology that deals with the lexicon, which, morphologically conceived, is the collection of lexemes in a language. As such, it concerns itself primarily with word formation: derivation and compounding.
[edit] Models
There are three principal approaches to morphology, which each try to capture the distinctions above in different ways. These are,
* Morpheme-based morphology, which makes use of an Item-and-Arrangement approach.
* Lexeme-based morphology, which normally makes use of an Item-and-Process approach.
* Word-based morphology, which normally makes use of a Word-and-Paradigm approach.
Note that while the associations indicated between the concepts in each item in that list is very strong, it is not absolute.
[edit] Morpheme-based morphology
In morpheme-based morphology, word forms are analyzed as arrangements of morphemes. A morpheme is defined as the minimal meaningful unit of a language. In a word like independently, we say that the morphemes are in-, depend, -ent, and ly; depend is the root and the other morphemes are, in this case, derivational affixes.[5] In a word like dogs, we say that dog is the root, and that -s is an inflectional morpheme. In its simplest (and most naïve) form, this way of analyzing word forms treats words as if they were made of morphemes put after each other like beads on a string, is called Item-and-Arrangement. More modern and sophisticated approaches seek to maintain the idea of the morpheme while accommodating non-concatenative, analogical, and other processes that have proven problematic for Item-and-Arrangement theories and similar approaches.
Morpheme-based morphology presumes three basic axioms:
1. Baudoin’s SINGLE MORPHEME HYPOTHESIS: Roots and affixes have the same status in the theory, they are MORPHEMES.[citation needed]
2. Bloomfield’s SIGN BASE MORPHEME HYPOTHESIS: As morphemes, they are dualistic signs, since they have both (phonological) form and meaning.[citation needed]
3. Bloomfield’s LEXICAL MORPHEME HYPOTHESIS: The morphemes, affixes and roots alike, are stored in the lexicon.[citation needed]
Morpheme-based morphology comes in two flavours, one Bloomfieldian and one Hockettian.[citation needed] For Bloomfield, the morpheme was the minimal form with meaning, but it was not meaning itself. For Hockett, morphemes are meaning elements, not form elements. For him, there is a morpheme plural, with the allomorphs -s, -en, -ren etc. Within much morpheme-based morphological theory, these two views are mixed in unsystematic ways, so that a writer may talk about "the morpheme plural" and "the morpheme -s" in the same sentence, although these are different things.
[edit] Lexeme-based morphology
Lexeme-based morphology is (usually) an Item-and-Process approach. Instead of analyzing a word form as a set of morphemes arranged in sequence, a word form is said to be the result of applying rules that alter a word form or stem in order to produce a new one. An inflectional rule takes a stem, changes it as is required by the rule, and outputs a word form; a derivational rule takes a stem, changes it as per its own requirements, and outputs a derived stem; a compounding rule takes word forms, and similarly outputs a compound stem.
[edit] Word-based morphology
Word-based morphology is (usually) a Word-and-paradigm approach. This theory takes paradigms as a central notion. Instead of stating rules to combine morphemes into word forms, or to generate word forms from stems, word-based morphology states generalizations that hold between the forms of inflectional paradigms. The major point behind this approach is that many such generalizations are hard to state with either of the other approaches. The examples are usually drawn from fusional languages, where a given "piece" of a word, which a morpheme-based theory would call an inflectional morpheme, corresponds to a combination of grammatical categories, for example, "third person plural." Morpheme-based theories usually have no problems with this situation, since one just says that a given morpheme has two categories. Item-and-Process theories, on the other hand, often break down in cases like these, because they all too often assume that there will be two separate rules here, one for third person, and the other for plural, but the distinction between them turns out to be artificial. Word-and-Paradigm approaches treat these as whole words that are related to each other by analogical rules. Words can be categorized based on the pattern they fit into. This applies both to existing words and to new ones. Application of a pattern different from the one that has been used historically can give rise to a new word, such as older replacing elder (where older follows the normal pattern of adjectival superlatives) and cows replacing kine (where cows fits the regular pattern of plural formation).
[edit] Morphological Typology
Main article: Morphological typology
In the 19th century, philologists devised a now classic classification of languages according to their morphology. According to this typology, some languages are isolating, and have little to no morphology; others are agglutinative, and their words tend to have lots of easily separable morphemes; while others yet are inflectional or fusional, because their inflectional morphemes are "fused" together. This leads to one bound morpheme conveying multiple pieces of information. The classic example of an isolating language is Chinese; the classic example of an agglutinative language is Turkish; both Latin and Greek are classic examples of fusional languages.
Considering the variability of the world's languages, it becomes clear that this classification is not at all clear cut, and many languages do not neatly fit any one of these types, and some fit in more than one way. A continuum of complex morphology of language may be adapted when considering languages.
The three models of morphology stem from attempts to analyze languages that more or less match different categories in this typology. The Item-and-Arrangement approach fits very naturally with agglutinative languages; while the Item-and-Process and Word-and-Paradigm approaches usually address fusional languages.
The reader should also note that the classical typology mostly applies to inflectional morphology. There is very little fusion going on with word formation. Languages may be classified as synthetic or analytic in their word formation, depending on the preferred way of expressing notions that are not inflectional: either by using word formation (synthetic), or by using syntactic phrases (analytic).
[edit] See also
* Affixation
* Bound morpheme
* Bracketing paradox
* Dependent marking language
* Descriptive linguistics
* Descriptive marker
* Distributed morphology
* Double marking language
* Head marking language
* Inflected language
* Lexical markup framework
* Medical terminology
* Morphological typology
* Morphology (folkloristics)
* Nonconcatenative morphology
* Noun case
* Reduplication
* Righthand head rule
* Root morpheme
* Syntactic hierarchy
* Uninflected word
* Unpaired word
* Zero marking language
[edit] References
1. ^ Arabic Morphology and Phonology
2. ^ Für die Lehre von der Wortform wähle ich das Wort "Morphologie" ("for the science of word formation, I choose the term 'morphology'", Mémoires Acad. Impériale 7/1/7, 35)
3. ^ Formerly known as Kwakiutl, Kwak'wala belongs to the Northern branch of the Wakashan language family. "Kwakiutl" is still used to refer to the tribe itself, along with other terms.
4. ^ Example taken from Foley 1998, using a modified transcription. This phenomenon of Kwak'wala was reported by Jacobsen as cited in van Valin and La Polla 1997.
5. ^ The existence of words like appendix and pending in English does not mean that the English word depend is analyzed into a derivational prefix de- and a root pend. While all those were indeed once related to each other by morphological rules, this was so only in Latin, not in English. English borrowed the words from French and Latin, but not the morphological rules that allowed Latin speakers to combine de- and the verb pendere 'to hang' into the derivative dependere.
[edit] Further reading
(Abbreviations: CUP = Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; UP = University Press)
* Anderson, Stephen R. (1992). A-Morphous Morphology. Cambridge: CUP.
* Aronoff, Mark (1993). "Morphology by Itself". Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
* Beard, Robert (1995). Lexeme-Morpheme Base Morphology. Albany, N.Y.: State University of New York Press. ISBN 0-7914-2471-5.
* Bauer, Laurie. (2003). Introducing linguistic morphology (2nd ed.). Washington, D.C.: Georgetown University Press. ISBN 0-87840-343-4.
* Bauer, Laurie. (2004). A glossary of morphology. Washington, D.C.: Georgetown UP.
* Bubenik, Vit. (1999). An introduction to the study of morphology. LINCON coursebooks in linguistics, 07. Muenchen: LINCOM Europa. ISBN 3-89586-570-2.
* Dixon, R. M. W. and Aikhenvald, Alexandra Y. (Eds.). (2007). Word: A cross-linguistic typology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press
* Foley, William A. (1998) "Symmetrical Voice Systems and Precategoriality in Philippine Languages". Workshop: Voice and Grammatical Functions in Austronesian. University of Sydney.
* Haspelmath, Martin. (2002). Understanding morphology. London: Arnold (co-published by Oxford University Press). ISBN 0-340-76025-7 (hb); ISBN 0340760265 (pbk).
* Katamba, Francis. (1993). Morphology. Modern linguistics series. New York: St. Martin's Press. ISBN 0-312-10101-5 (hb). ISBN 0-312-10356-5 (pbk).
* Matthews, Peter. (1991). Morphology (2nd ed.). CUP. ISBN 0-521-41043-6 (hb). ISBN 0-521-42256-6 (pbk).
* Mel'čuk, Igor A. (1993-2000). Cours de morphologie générale, vol. 1-5. Montreal: Presses de l'Université de Montréal.
* Mel'čuk, Igor A. (2006). Aspects of the theory of morphology. Berlin: Mouton.
* Scalise, Sergio (1983). Generative Morphology, Dordrecht, Foris.
* Singh, Rajendra and Stanley Starosta (eds). (2003). Explorations in Seamless Morphology. SAGE Publications. ISBN 0-7619-9594-3 (hb).
* Spencer, Andrew. (1991). Morphological theory: an introduction to word structure in generative grammar. No. 2 in Blackwell textbooks in linguistics. Oxford: Blackwell. ISBN 0-631-16143-0 (hb); ISBN 0-631-16144-9 (pb)
* Spencer, Andrew, & Zwicky, Arnold M. (Eds.) (1998). The handbook of morphology. Blackwell handbooks in linguistics. Oxford: Blackwell. ISBN 0-631-18544-5.
* Stump, Gregory T. (2001). Inflectional morphology: a theory of paradigm structure. No. 93 in Cambridge studies in linguistics. CUP. ISBN 0-521-78047-0 (hb).
* van Valin, Robert D., and LaPolla, Randy. 1997. Syntax : Structure, Meaning And Function. CUP
[hide]
v • d • e
Lexicography
Types of reference works
Dictionary · Glossary · Lexicon · Thesaurus
Types of dictionaries
Bilingual · Biographical · Conceptual · Defining · Electronic · Encyclopedic · LSP · Machine-readable · Maximizing · Medical · Minimizing · Monolingual learner's · Multi-field · Phonetic · Picture · Reverse · Rhyming · Rime · Single-field · Specialized · Sub-field · Visual
Vocabulary topics
Focal vocabulary · Function word · Headword · Holonymy · Hyponymy · Idiom · International Scientific Vocabulary · Lemma · Lexeme · Meronymy · Morphology · Synonym · Vocabulary size · Word
Lexicographic topics
Controlled vocabulary · English lexicology and lexicography · Lexicographic error · Lexicographic information cost · Linguistic prescription · Specialised lexicography
Lexicographic projects
Lexigraf · WordNet
Other
List of lexicographers · List of online dictionaries
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Morphology_(linguistics)"
Categories: Linguistic typology | Grammar | Linguistic morphology | Greek loanwords
Hidden categories: Articles lacking in-text citations from April 2009 | Cleanup from February 2007 | All pages needing cleanup | All articles with unsourced statements | Articles with unsourced statements since April 2009
Views
* Article
* Discussion
* Edit this page
* History
Personal tools
* Log in / create account
Navigation
* Main page
* Contents
* Featured content
* Current events
* Random article
Search
Interaction
* About Wikipedia
* Community portal
* Recent changes
* Contact Wikipedia
* Donate to Wikipedia
* Help
Toolbox
* What links here
* Related changes
* Upload file
* Special pages
* Printable version
* Permanent link
* Cite this page
Languages
* Afrikaans
* العربية
* Aragonés
* বাংলা
* Bosanski
* Brezhoneg
* Български
* Català
* Чăвашла
* Česky
* Cymraeg
* Dansk
* Deutsch
* Eesti
* Español
* Esperanto
* Euskara
* فارسی
* Français
* Frysk
* Gaelg
* Galego
* 한국어
* Հայերեն
* Hornjoserbsce
* Hrvatski
* Bahasa Indonesia
* Íslenska
* Italiano
* עברית
* ქართული
* Қазақша
* Latviešu
* Lietuvių
* Lojban
* Magyar
* Nederlands
* 日本語
* Norsk (bokmål)
* Norsk (nynorsk)
* Novial
* Polski
* Ποντιακά
* Português
* Română
* Runa Simi
* Русский
* Simple English
* Slovenčina
* Српски / Srpski
* Srpskohrvatski / Српскохрватски
* Suomi
* Svenska
* Tagalog
* தமிழ்
* ไทย
* Українська
* Žemaitėška
* 中文
Powered by MediaWiki
Wikimedia Foundation
* This page was last modified on 25 April 2009, at 03:40 (UTC).
* All text is available under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License. (See Copyrights for details.)
Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a U.S. registered 501(c)(3) tax-deductible nonprofit charity.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
For other uses, see Morphology.
This article includes a list of references or external links, but its sources remain unclear because it lacks inline citations. Please improve this article by introducing more precise citations where appropriate. (April 2009)
Linguistics
Language
Theoretical linguistics
Generative linguistics
Phonology
Morphology
Syntax
Lexis
Semantics
Lexical semantics
Statistical semantics
Structural semantics
Prototype semantics
Pragmatics
Systemic functional grammar
Descriptive linguistics
Phonetics
Historical linguistics
Comparative linguistics
Etymology
Sociolinguistics
Corpus linguistics
Applied linguistics
Language acquisition
Language assessment
Language development
Language education
Psycholinguistics
Neurolinguistics
Linguistic anthropology
Cognitive linguistics
Computational linguistics
Stylistics
Prescription
History of linguistics
List of linguists
Unsolved problems
v • d • e
Morphology is the identification, analysis and description of structure of words (words as units in the lexicon are the subject matter of lexicology). While words are generally accepted as being (with clitics) the smallest units of syntax, it is clear that in most (if not all) languages, words can be related to other words by rules. For example, English speakers recognize that the words dog, dogs, and dog catcher are closely related. English speakers recognize these relations from their tacit knowledge of the rules of word formation in English. They infer intuitively that dog is to dogs as cat is to cats; similarly, dog is to dog catcher as dish is to dishwasher. The rules understood by the speaker reflect specific patterns (or regularities) in the way words are formed from smaller units and how those smaller units interact in speech. In this way, morphology is the branch of linguistics that studies patterns of word formation within and across languages, and attempts to formulate rules that model the knowledge of the speakers of those languages.
Contents
[hide]
* 1 History
* 2 Fundamental concepts
o 2.1 Lexemes and word forms
+ 2.1.1 Prosodic word vs. morphological word
o 2.2 Inflection vs. word formation
o 2.3 Paradigms and morphosyntax
o 2.4 Allomorphy
o 2.5 Lexical morphology
* 3 Models
o 3.1 Morpheme-based morphology
o 3.2 Lexeme-based morphology
o 3.3 Word-based morphology
* 4 Morphological Typology
* 5 See also
* 6 References
* 7 Further reading
[edit] History
The history of morphological analysis dates back to the ancient Indian linguist Pāṇini, who formulated the 3,959 rules of Sanskrit morphology in the text Aṣṭādhyāyī by using a Constituency Grammar. The Greco-Roman grammatical tradition also engaged in morphological analysis. Studies in Arabic morphology, conducted by Marāḥ al-arwāḥ and Aḥmad b. ‘alī Mas‘ūd, date back to at least 1200 CE.[1]
The term morphology was coined by August Schleicher in 1859.[2]
[edit] Fundamental concepts
[edit] Lexemes and word forms
The distinction between these two senses of "word" is arguably the most important one in morphology. The first sense of "word", the one in which dog and dogs are "the same word", is called a lexeme. The second sense is called word form. We thus say that dog and dogs are different forms of the same lexeme. Dog and dog catcher, on hand, are different lexemes, as they refer to two different kinds of entities. The form of a word that is chosen conventionally to represent the canonical form of a word is called a lemma, or citation form.
[edit] Prosodic word vs. morphological word
This article may require cleanup to meet Wikipedia's quality standards. Please improve this article if you can. (February 2007)
Here are examples from other languages of the failure of a single phonological word to coincide with a single morphological word form. In Latin, one way to express the concept of 'NOUN-PHRASE1 and NOUN-PHRASE2' (as in "apples and oranges") is to suffix '-que' to the second noun phrase: "apples oranges-and", as it were. An extreme level of this theoretical quandary posed by some phonological words is provided by the Kwak'wala language.[3] In Kwak'wala, as in a great many other languages, meaning relations between nouns, including possession and "semantic case", are formulated by affixes instead of by independent "words". The three word English phrase, "with his club", where 'with' identifies its dependent noun phrase as an instrument and 'his' denotes a possession relation, would consist of two words or even just one word in many languages. But affixation for semantic relations in Kwak'wala differs dramatically (from the viewpoint of those whose language is not Kwak'wala) from such affixation in other languages for this reason: the affixes phonologically attach not to the lexeme they pertain to semantically, but to the preceding lexeme. Consider the following example (in Kwakw'ala, sentences begin with what corresponds to an English verb):[4]
kwixʔid-i-da bəgwanəmai-χ-a q'asa-s-isi t'alwagwayu
Morpheme by morpheme translation:
kwixʔid-i-da = clubbed-PIVOT-DETERMINER
bəgwanəma-χ-a = man-ACCUSATIVE-DETERMINER
q'asa-s-is = otter-INSTRUMENTAL-3.PERSON.SINGULAR-POSSESSIVE
t'alwagwayu = club.
"the man clubbed the otter with his club"
(Notation notes:
1. accusative case marks an entity that something is done to.
2. determiners are words such as "the", "this", "that".
3. the concept of "pivot" is a theoretical construct that is not relevant to this discussion.)
That is, to the speaker of Kwak'wala, the sentence does not contain the "words" 'him-the-otter' or 'with-his-club' Instead, the markers -i-da (PIVOT-'the'), referring to man, attaches not to bəgwanəma ('man'), but instead to the "verb"; the markers -χ-a (ACCUSATIVE-'the'), referring to otter, attach to bəgwanəma instead of to q'asa ('otter'), etc. To summarize differently: a speaker of Kwak'wala does not perceive the sentence to consist of these phonological words:
kwixʔid i-da-bəgwanəma χ-a-q'asa s-isi-t'alwagwayu
"clubbed PIVOT-the-mani hit-the-otter with-hisi-club
A central publication on this topic is the recent volume edited by Dixon and Aikhenvald (2007), examining the mismatch between prosodic-phonological and grammatical definitions of "word" in various Amazonian, Australian Aboriginal, Caucasian, Eskimo, Indo-European, Native North American, West African, and sign languages. Apparently, a wide variety of languages make use of the hybrid linguistic unit clitic, possessing the grammatical features of independent words but the prosodic-phonological lack of freedom of bound morphemes. The intermediate status of clitics poses a considerable challenge to linguistic theory.
[edit] Inflection vs. word formation
Given the notion of a lexeme, it is possible to distinguish two kinds of morphological rules. Some morphological rules relate to different forms of the same lexeme; while other rules relate to different lexemes. Rules of the first kind are called inflectional rules, while those of the second kind are called word formation. The English plural, as illustrated by dog and dogs, is an inflectional rule; compounds like dog catcher or dishwasher provide an example of a word formation rule. Informally, word formation rules form "new words" (that is, new lexemes), while inflection rules yield variant forms of the "same" word (lexeme).
There is a further distinction between two kinds of word formation: derivation and compounding. Compounding is a process of word formation that involves combining complete word forms into a single compound form; dog catcher is therefore a compound, because both dog and catcher are complete word forms in their own right before the compounding process has been applied, and are subsequently treated as one form. Derivation involves affixing bound (non-independent) forms to existing lexemes, whereby the addition of the affix derives a new lexeme. One example of derivation is clear in this case: the word independent is derived from the word dependent by prefixing it with the derivational prefix in-, while dependent itself is derived from the verb depend.
The distinction between inflection and word formation is not at all clear cut. There are many examples where linguists fail to agree whether a given rule is inflection or word formation. The next section will attempt to clarify this distinction.
[edit] Paradigms and morphosyntax
Linguistic typology
Morphological
Isolating
Synthetic
Polysynthetic
Fusional
Agglutinative
Morphosyntactic
Alignment
Accusative
Ergative
Split ergative
Philippine
Active–stative
Tripartite
Inverse marking
Syntactic pivot
Theta role
Word Order
VO languages
Subject Verb Object
Verb Subject Object
Verb Object Subject
OV languages
Subject Object Verb
Object Subject Verb
Object Verb Subject
Time Manner Place
Place Manner Time
This box: view • talk • edit
A linguistic paradigm is the complete set of related word forms associated with a given lexeme. The familiar examples of paradigms are the conjugations of verbs, and the declensions of nouns. Accordingly, the word forms of a lexeme may be arranged conveniently into tables, by classifying them according to shared inflectional categories such as tense, aspect, mood, number, gender or case. For example, the personal pronouns in English can be organized into tables, using the categories of person (1st., 2nd., 3rd.), number (singular vs. plural), gender (masculine, feminine, neuter), and case (subjective, objective, and possessive). See English personal pronouns for the details.
The inflectional categories used to group word forms into paradigms cannot be chosen arbitrarily; they must be categories that are relevant to stating the syntactic rules of the language. For example, person and number are categories that can be used to define paradigms in English, because English has grammatical agreement rules that require the verb in a sentence to appear in an inflectional form that matches the person and number of the subject. In other words, the syntactic rules of English care about the difference between dog and dogs, because the choice between these two forms determines which form of the verb is to be used. In contrast, however, no syntactic rule of English cares about the difference between dog and dog catcher, or dependent and independent. The first two are just nouns, and the second two just adjectives, and they generally behave like any other noun or adjective behaves.
An important difference between inflection and word formation is that inflected word forms of lexemes are organized into paradigms, which are defined by the requirements of syntactic rules, whereas the rules of word formation are not restricted by any corresponding requirements of syntax. Inflection is therefore said to be relevant to syntax, and word formation is not. The part of morphology that covers the relationship between syntax and morphology is called morphosyntax, and it concerns itself with inflection and paradigms, but not with word formation or compounding.
[edit] Allomorphy
In the exposition above, morphological rules are described as analogies between word forms: dog is to dogs as cat is to cats, and as dish is to dishes. In this case, the analogy applies both to the form of the words and to their meaning: in each pair, the first word means "one of X", while the second "two or more of X", and the difference is always the plural form -s affixed to the second word, signaling the key distinction between singular and plural entities.
One of the largest sources of complexity in morphology is that this one-to-one correspondence between meaning and form scarcely applies to every case in the language. In English, we have word form pairs like ox/oxen, goose/geese, and sheep/sheep, where the difference between the singular and the plural is signaled in a way that departs from the regular pattern, or is not signaled at all. Even cases considered "regular", with the final -s, are not so simple; the -s in dogs is not pronounced the same way as the -s in cats, and in a plural like dishes, an "extra" vowel appears before the -s. These cases, where the same distinction is effected by alternative forms of a "word", are called allomorphy.
Phonological rules constrain which sounds can appear next to each other in a language, and morphological rules, when applied blindly, would often violate phonological rules, by resulting in sound sequences that are prohibited in the language in question. For example, to form the plural of dish by simply appending an -s to the end of the word would result in the form *[dɪʃs], which is not permitted by the phonotactics of English. In order to "rescue" the word, a vowel sound is inserted between the root and the plural marker, and [dɪʃəz] results. Similar rules apply to the pronunciation of the -s in dogs and cats: it depends on the quality (voiced vs. unvoiced) of the final preceding phoneme.
[edit] Lexical morphology
Lexical morphology is the branch of morphology that deals with the lexicon, which, morphologically conceived, is the collection of lexemes in a language. As such, it concerns itself primarily with word formation: derivation and compounding.
[edit] Models
There are three principal approaches to morphology, which each try to capture the distinctions above in different ways. These are,
* Morpheme-based morphology, which makes use of an Item-and-Arrangement approach.
* Lexeme-based morphology, which normally makes use of an Item-and-Process approach.
* Word-based morphology, which normally makes use of a Word-and-Paradigm approach.
Note that while the associations indicated between the concepts in each item in that list is very strong, it is not absolute.
[edit] Morpheme-based morphology
In morpheme-based morphology, word forms are analyzed as arrangements of morphemes. A morpheme is defined as the minimal meaningful unit of a language. In a word like independently, we say that the morphemes are in-, depend, -ent, and ly; depend is the root and the other morphemes are, in this case, derivational affixes.[5] In a word like dogs, we say that dog is the root, and that -s is an inflectional morpheme. In its simplest (and most naïve) form, this way of analyzing word forms treats words as if they were made of morphemes put after each other like beads on a string, is called Item-and-Arrangement. More modern and sophisticated approaches seek to maintain the idea of the morpheme while accommodating non-concatenative, analogical, and other processes that have proven problematic for Item-and-Arrangement theories and similar approaches.
Morpheme-based morphology presumes three basic axioms:
1. Baudoin’s SINGLE MORPHEME HYPOTHESIS: Roots and affixes have the same status in the theory, they are MORPHEMES.[citation needed]
2. Bloomfield’s SIGN BASE MORPHEME HYPOTHESIS: As morphemes, they are dualistic signs, since they have both (phonological) form and meaning.[citation needed]
3. Bloomfield’s LEXICAL MORPHEME HYPOTHESIS: The morphemes, affixes and roots alike, are stored in the lexicon.[citation needed]
Morpheme-based morphology comes in two flavours, one Bloomfieldian and one Hockettian.[citation needed] For Bloomfield, the morpheme was the minimal form with meaning, but it was not meaning itself. For Hockett, morphemes are meaning elements, not form elements. For him, there is a morpheme plural, with the allomorphs -s, -en, -ren etc. Within much morpheme-based morphological theory, these two views are mixed in unsystematic ways, so that a writer may talk about "the morpheme plural" and "the morpheme -s" in the same sentence, although these are different things.
[edit] Lexeme-based morphology
Lexeme-based morphology is (usually) an Item-and-Process approach. Instead of analyzing a word form as a set of morphemes arranged in sequence, a word form is said to be the result of applying rules that alter a word form or stem in order to produce a new one. An inflectional rule takes a stem, changes it as is required by the rule, and outputs a word form; a derivational rule takes a stem, changes it as per its own requirements, and outputs a derived stem; a compounding rule takes word forms, and similarly outputs a compound stem.
[edit] Word-based morphology
Word-based morphology is (usually) a Word-and-paradigm approach. This theory takes paradigms as a central notion. Instead of stating rules to combine morphemes into word forms, or to generate word forms from stems, word-based morphology states generalizations that hold between the forms of inflectional paradigms. The major point behind this approach is that many such generalizations are hard to state with either of the other approaches. The examples are usually drawn from fusional languages, where a given "piece" of a word, which a morpheme-based theory would call an inflectional morpheme, corresponds to a combination of grammatical categories, for example, "third person plural." Morpheme-based theories usually have no problems with this situation, since one just says that a given morpheme has two categories. Item-and-Process theories, on the other hand, often break down in cases like these, because they all too often assume that there will be two separate rules here, one for third person, and the other for plural, but the distinction between them turns out to be artificial. Word-and-Paradigm approaches treat these as whole words that are related to each other by analogical rules. Words can be categorized based on the pattern they fit into. This applies both to existing words and to new ones. Application of a pattern different from the one that has been used historically can give rise to a new word, such as older replacing elder (where older follows the normal pattern of adjectival superlatives) and cows replacing kine (where cows fits the regular pattern of plural formation).
[edit] Morphological Typology
Main article: Morphological typology
In the 19th century, philologists devised a now classic classification of languages according to their morphology. According to this typology, some languages are isolating, and have little to no morphology; others are agglutinative, and their words tend to have lots of easily separable morphemes; while others yet are inflectional or fusional, because their inflectional morphemes are "fused" together. This leads to one bound morpheme conveying multiple pieces of information. The classic example of an isolating language is Chinese; the classic example of an agglutinative language is Turkish; both Latin and Greek are classic examples of fusional languages.
Considering the variability of the world's languages, it becomes clear that this classification is not at all clear cut, and many languages do not neatly fit any one of these types, and some fit in more than one way. A continuum of complex morphology of language may be adapted when considering languages.
The three models of morphology stem from attempts to analyze languages that more or less match different categories in this typology. The Item-and-Arrangement approach fits very naturally with agglutinative languages; while the Item-and-Process and Word-and-Paradigm approaches usually address fusional languages.
The reader should also note that the classical typology mostly applies to inflectional morphology. There is very little fusion going on with word formation. Languages may be classified as synthetic or analytic in their word formation, depending on the preferred way of expressing notions that are not inflectional: either by using word formation (synthetic), or by using syntactic phrases (analytic).
[edit] See also
* Affixation
* Bound morpheme
* Bracketing paradox
* Dependent marking language
* Descriptive linguistics
* Descriptive marker
* Distributed morphology
* Double marking language
* Head marking language
* Inflected language
* Lexical markup framework
* Medical terminology
* Morphological typology
* Morphology (folkloristics)
* Nonconcatenative morphology
* Noun case
* Reduplication
* Righthand head rule
* Root morpheme
* Syntactic hierarchy
* Uninflected word
* Unpaired word
* Zero marking language
[edit] References
1. ^ Arabic Morphology and Phonology
2. ^ Für die Lehre von der Wortform wähle ich das Wort "Morphologie" ("for the science of word formation, I choose the term 'morphology'", Mémoires Acad. Impériale 7/1/7, 35)
3. ^ Formerly known as Kwakiutl, Kwak'wala belongs to the Northern branch of the Wakashan language family. "Kwakiutl" is still used to refer to the tribe itself, along with other terms.
4. ^ Example taken from Foley 1998, using a modified transcription. This phenomenon of Kwak'wala was reported by Jacobsen as cited in van Valin and La Polla 1997.
5. ^ The existence of words like appendix and pending in English does not mean that the English word depend is analyzed into a derivational prefix de- and a root pend. While all those were indeed once related to each other by morphological rules, this was so only in Latin, not in English. English borrowed the words from French and Latin, but not the morphological rules that allowed Latin speakers to combine de- and the verb pendere 'to hang' into the derivative dependere.
[edit] Further reading
(Abbreviations: CUP = Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; UP = University Press)
* Anderson, Stephen R. (1992). A-Morphous Morphology. Cambridge: CUP.
* Aronoff, Mark (1993). "Morphology by Itself". Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
* Beard, Robert (1995). Lexeme-Morpheme Base Morphology. Albany, N.Y.: State University of New York Press. ISBN 0-7914-2471-5.
* Bauer, Laurie. (2003). Introducing linguistic morphology (2nd ed.). Washington, D.C.: Georgetown University Press. ISBN 0-87840-343-4.
* Bauer, Laurie. (2004). A glossary of morphology. Washington, D.C.: Georgetown UP.
* Bubenik, Vit. (1999). An introduction to the study of morphology. LINCON coursebooks in linguistics, 07. Muenchen: LINCOM Europa. ISBN 3-89586-570-2.
* Dixon, R. M. W. and Aikhenvald, Alexandra Y. (Eds.). (2007). Word: A cross-linguistic typology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press
* Foley, William A. (1998) "Symmetrical Voice Systems and Precategoriality in Philippine Languages". Workshop: Voice and Grammatical Functions in Austronesian. University of Sydney.
* Haspelmath, Martin. (2002). Understanding morphology. London: Arnold (co-published by Oxford University Press). ISBN 0-340-76025-7 (hb); ISBN 0340760265 (pbk).
* Katamba, Francis. (1993). Morphology. Modern linguistics series. New York: St. Martin's Press. ISBN 0-312-10101-5 (hb). ISBN 0-312-10356-5 (pbk).
* Matthews, Peter. (1991). Morphology (2nd ed.). CUP. ISBN 0-521-41043-6 (hb). ISBN 0-521-42256-6 (pbk).
* Mel'čuk, Igor A. (1993-2000). Cours de morphologie générale, vol. 1-5. Montreal: Presses de l'Université de Montréal.
* Mel'čuk, Igor A. (2006). Aspects of the theory of morphology. Berlin: Mouton.
* Scalise, Sergio (1983). Generative Morphology, Dordrecht, Foris.
* Singh, Rajendra and Stanley Starosta (eds). (2003). Explorations in Seamless Morphology. SAGE Publications. ISBN 0-7619-9594-3 (hb).
* Spencer, Andrew. (1991). Morphological theory: an introduction to word structure in generative grammar. No. 2 in Blackwell textbooks in linguistics. Oxford: Blackwell. ISBN 0-631-16143-0 (hb); ISBN 0-631-16144-9 (pb)
* Spencer, Andrew, & Zwicky, Arnold M. (Eds.) (1998). The handbook of morphology. Blackwell handbooks in linguistics. Oxford: Blackwell. ISBN 0-631-18544-5.
* Stump, Gregory T. (2001). Inflectional morphology: a theory of paradigm structure. No. 93 in Cambridge studies in linguistics. CUP. ISBN 0-521-78047-0 (hb).
* van Valin, Robert D., and LaPolla, Randy. 1997. Syntax : Structure, Meaning And Function. CUP
[hide]
v • d • e
Lexicography
Types of reference works
Dictionary · Glossary · Lexicon · Thesaurus
Types of dictionaries
Bilingual · Biographical · Conceptual · Defining · Electronic · Encyclopedic · LSP · Machine-readable · Maximizing · Medical · Minimizing · Monolingual learner's · Multi-field · Phonetic · Picture · Reverse · Rhyming · Rime · Single-field · Specialized · Sub-field · Visual
Vocabulary topics
Focal vocabulary · Function word · Headword · Holonymy · Hyponymy · Idiom · International Scientific Vocabulary · Lemma · Lexeme · Meronymy · Morphology · Synonym · Vocabulary size · Word
Lexicographic topics
Controlled vocabulary · English lexicology and lexicography · Lexicographic error · Lexicographic information cost · Linguistic prescription · Specialised lexicography
Lexicographic projects
Lexigraf · WordNet
Other
List of lexicographers · List of online dictionaries
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Morphology_(linguistics)"
Categories: Linguistic typology | Grammar | Linguistic morphology | Greek loanwords
Hidden categories: Articles lacking in-text citations from April 2009 | Cleanup from February 2007 | All pages needing cleanup | All articles with unsourced statements | Articles with unsourced statements since April 2009
Views
* Article
* Discussion
* Edit this page
* History
Personal tools
* Log in / create account
Navigation
* Main page
* Contents
* Featured content
* Current events
* Random article
Search
Interaction
* About Wikipedia
* Community portal
* Recent changes
* Contact Wikipedia
* Donate to Wikipedia
* Help
Toolbox
* What links here
* Related changes
* Upload file
* Special pages
* Printable version
* Permanent link
* Cite this page
Languages
* Afrikaans
* العربية
* Aragonés
* বাংলা
* Bosanski
* Brezhoneg
* Български
* Català
* Чăвашла
* Česky
* Cymraeg
* Dansk
* Deutsch
* Eesti
* Español
* Esperanto
* Euskara
* فارسی
* Français
* Frysk
* Gaelg
* Galego
* 한국어
* Հայերեն
* Hornjoserbsce
* Hrvatski
* Bahasa Indonesia
* Íslenska
* Italiano
* עברית
* ქართული
* Қазақша
* Latviešu
* Lietuvių
* Lojban
* Magyar
* Nederlands
* 日本語
* Norsk (bokmål)
* Norsk (nynorsk)
* Novial
* Polski
* Ποντιακά
* Português
* Română
* Runa Simi
* Русский
* Simple English
* Slovenčina
* Српски / Srpski
* Srpskohrvatski / Српскохрватски
* Suomi
* Svenska
* Tagalog
* தமிழ்
* ไทย
* Українська
* Žemaitėška
* 中文
Powered by MediaWiki
Wikimedia Foundation
* This page was last modified on 25 April 2009, at 03:40 (UTC).
* All text is available under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License. (See Copyrights for details.)
Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a U.S. registered 501(c)(3) tax-deductible nonprofit charity.
CHAPTER 3: MORPHOLOGY: THE WORDS OF LANGUAGE
morphe (Greek) = shape, form
-ology = "science of"
MORPHOLOGY
The study of the internal structure of words, and of the rules by which words are formed.
To know a word, is to know
* spelling
* pronunciation
* definition
* part of speech
* history
* non-standard/slang
* whether the word is vulgar
* whether the word is obsolete
* examples
LEXICON
* The component of the grammar containing speakers’ knowledge about morphemes and words.
* a speaker’s mental dictionary.
Each word stored in our mental dictionaries must be listed with its unique phonological representation, which determines its pronunciation, and with its meaning. For literate speakers, the spelling or orthography of most of the words we know is also in our lexicons.
Other information listed in our mental lexicon includes:
* Grammatical category, or syntactic class such as nouns, verbs, adjectives, and so on
* Semantic properties (meanings).
Homonyms (homophones) ? Different words with the same sounds: bear bare
I. CLASSES OF WORDS
1. Lexical Content Words (Open Class Words)
* The classes of words that are defined as words which have stateable LEXICAL MEAING - The majority of words in the language apart from the few FUNCION words. Lexical Content Words are also called pen class words, since we can add new words to these classes.
Example: download : means to transfer information from one computer system to another (This entered English with the computer revolution)
Nouns (attached by the suffix -s to mark plural, take ’s to mark possessive)
One book, two books
John'sbook
Verbs (attached by the suffixes -ed, -s, -ing, -en): walked, walks, walking, brighten
Adjectives (attached by the suffixes -er, -est or use with ‘more’, ‘most’; occur with verbs like ‘be’, ‘seem’, ‘appear’)
taller , tallest, morebeautiful, most beautiful
be happy, seem happy
Adverbs (attached by the suffix -ly; or use with ‘more’, ‘most’)
nicely , more beautifully
* We can and regularly do add new words to these classes
2. Function Words (Grammatical Words) --closed class words
* The class of words whose role is largely or wholly grammatical and do not carry the main semantic content.
* They are also called closed class words since the number of function words are limited in a language.
Determiners articles the, a/an, some, lots of, few
Auxiliary can, could, shall, should, may, might, must
Negation no, not
Relations subordinate conjunction while
Intensifier very, too
Connectors and, or, but (connect two independent clauses)
Preposition in, of
Pronouns I, me, mine, he, she, and so on
II. MORPHEME
* the smallest unit of linguistic meaning.
* A single word may be composed of one or more morphemes.
Example: un+system+atic+al+ly ( the word unsystematically can be analyzed into 5 separate morphemes) A grammatical unit in which there is an arbitrary union of a sound and a meaning that cannot be further analyzed.
* * Every word in every language is composed of one or more morphemes.
One morpheme boy (one syllable)
desire, lady, water (two syllables)
crocodile (three syllables)
salamander (four syllables), or more syllables
Two morpheme boy + ish
desire + able
Three morpheme boy + ish + ness
desire + able + ity
Four morpheme gentle + man + li + ness
un + desire + able + ity
More than four un + gentle + man + li + ness
anti + dis + establish + ment + ari + an + ism
1. Free Morphemes : Morphemes which can be used as a word on its own (without the need for further elements, i.e. affixes)
Example: girl, system, desire, hope, act, phone, happy..
2. Bound Morphemes: Morphemes which cannot occur on its own as an independent (or separate) word.
* Affixes (prefix, suffix, infix and circumfix) are all bound morphemes.
Prefixes
Suffixes
Infixes
Circumfixes (discontinuous morpheme)
Bound morphemes which occur only before other morphemes.
Examples:
un- (uncover, undo)
dis- (displeased, disconnect),
pre- (predetermine, prejudge) Bound morphemes which occur
following other morphemes.
Examples:
-er (singer, performer)
-ist (typist, pianist)
-ly (manly, friendly) Bound morphemes which are inserted
into other morphemes.
Example:
fikas "strong"
fumikas "to be strong"
(Bontoc Language) Bound morphemes that are attached to a root or
stem morpheme both initially and finally.
Example:
chokma "he is good"
ik + chokm + o "he isn’t’ good"
(Chickasaw Language)
3. Root vs. Stem
Root
Stem
Non-affix lexical content morphemes that cannot be analyzed into smaller parts
(ex.) cran (as in cranberry), act, beauty, system, etc..
* Free Root Morpheme: run bottle, phone, etc.
* Bound Root Morpheme: receive, remit, uncount, uncouth, nonchalant, etc.
* When a root morpheme is combined with affix morphemes, it forms a stem.
* Other affixes can be added to a stem to form a more complex stem.
Root believe (verb)
Stem believe + able (verb + suffix)
Word un + believe + able (prefix + verb + suffix)
Root system (noun)
Stem system + atic (noun + suffix)
Stem un + system + atic (prefix + noun + suffix)
Stem un + system + atic + al (prefix + noun + suffix + suffix)
Word un + system + atic + al + ly prefix + noun + suffix + suffix + suffix
4. Derivational morphemes vs. Inflectional Morphemes (Bound morphemes)
Derivational Morphemes
Inflectional Morphemes
1. Derivational morphemes derive a new word by being attached to root morphemes or stems. 1. Inflectional morphemes signal grammatical information such as number (plural), tense, possession and so on. They are thus often called bound grammatical morphemes
2. They can be both suffixes and prefixes in English.
Examples: beautiful, exactly, unhappy, impossible, recover
2. They are only found in suffixes in English.
Examples: boys, Mary’s , walked
3. Change of Meaning
Examples: un+do (the opposite meaning of ‘do’)
sing+er ( deriving a new word with the meaning of a person who sings). 3. No change of Meaning
Examples: walk vs. walks
toy vs. toys
4. Change of the syntactic category (optionally)
i) Change of category
Noun to Adjective boy (noun) + ish ----> boyish (adj.)
Elizabeth (noun) + an ----> Elizabethan (adj.)
affection (noun) + ate ---->affectionate (adj.)
Verb to Noun sing (Verb) + er ----> singer (noun)
predict (Verb) + ion ----> prediction (noun)
Adjective to Adverb exact (adj) + ly ----> exactly (adv)
quiet (adj) + ly ----> quietly (adv.)
Noun to Verb moral (noun) + ize ----> moralize (verb)
Adjective to Noun specific (Adj.) + ity ---->specificity (noun)
ii) No change of category
friend+ship (Noun --> Noun)
pink+ish (Adjective --> Adjective)
re+print (Verb --> Verb)
4. Never change the syntactic category of the words or morpheme to they which they are attached.
* They are always attached to completed words
Examples: walk vs. walked or walks (V--> V)
boy vs. boys (N --> N)
eat vs. eating (progressive) (V-->V)
* In English, inflectional morphemes typically follow derivational morphemes
Examples: unlikelihood, unlikelihoods (not *unlikeslihood)
5. English Inflectional Morphemes Examples
-s third person singular present She waits at home.
-ed past tense She waited at home.
-ing progressive She is eating the donut.
-en past participle Mary has eaten the donuts.
-s plural She ate the donuts.
-’s possessive Disa's hair is short.
-er comparative Disa has shorter hair than Karin.
-est superlative Disa has the shortest hair.
III. MORPHOLOGICAL ANALYSIS: IDENTIFYING MORPHEMES
Suppose that we collected the following sets or paradigms of forms
Paku (textbook pp.96) ( the language used by the monkey people called Pakuni)
me "I" meni "we"
ye "you(singular)" yeni "you(plural)"
we "he" weni "they(masculine)"
wa "she" wani "they(feminine)"
abuma "girl" abumani "girls"
adusa "boy" adusani "boys"
abu "child" abuni "children"
To detemine what the morphemes are in such a list, what you have to do is to see if there are any forms that mean the same thing in different words, that is, to look for recurring forms. We find -ni occuring in all the words in the right column which are plurals. Therefore, we can conclude that ?ni as a separate morpheme meaning "plural" which is attached to as a suffix to a noun.
In more complex cases, the next step will be to make a list of all the morphemes we find including free morphemes (root) and bound morphemes and indicate what the meaning of each morpheme and also whether they are root morphemes or bound morphemes. When you find bound morphemes, you also need to indicate whether they are derivational morphemes or inflectional morphemes.
morphe (Greek) = shape, form
-ology = "science of"
MORPHOLOGY
The study of the internal structure of words, and of the rules by which words are formed.
To know a word, is to know
* spelling
* pronunciation
* definition
* part of speech
* history
* non-standard/slang
* whether the word is vulgar
* whether the word is obsolete
* examples
LEXICON
* The component of the grammar containing speakers’ knowledge about morphemes and words.
* a speaker’s mental dictionary.
Each word stored in our mental dictionaries must be listed with its unique phonological representation, which determines its pronunciation, and with its meaning. For literate speakers, the spelling or orthography of most of the words we know is also in our lexicons.
Other information listed in our mental lexicon includes:
* Grammatical category, or syntactic class such as nouns, verbs, adjectives, and so on
* Semantic properties (meanings).
Homonyms (homophones) ? Different words with the same sounds: bear bare
I. CLASSES OF WORDS
1. Lexical Content Words (Open Class Words)
* The classes of words that are defined as words which have stateable LEXICAL MEAING - The majority of words in the language apart from the few FUNCION words. Lexical Content Words are also called pen class words, since we can add new words to these classes.
Example: download : means to transfer information from one computer system to another (This entered English with the computer revolution)
Nouns (attached by the suffix -s to mark plural, take ’s to mark possessive)
One book, two books
John'sbook
Verbs (attached by the suffixes -ed, -s, -ing, -en): walked, walks, walking, brighten
Adjectives (attached by the suffixes -er, -est or use with ‘more’, ‘most’; occur with verbs like ‘be’, ‘seem’, ‘appear’)
taller , tallest, morebeautiful, most beautiful
be happy, seem happy
Adverbs (attached by the suffix -ly; or use with ‘more’, ‘most’)
nicely , more beautifully
* We can and regularly do add new words to these classes
2. Function Words (Grammatical Words) --closed class words
* The class of words whose role is largely or wholly grammatical and do not carry the main semantic content.
* They are also called closed class words since the number of function words are limited in a language.
Determiners articles the, a/an, some, lots of, few
Auxiliary can, could, shall, should, may, might, must
Negation no, not
Relations subordinate conjunction while
Intensifier very, too
Connectors and, or, but (connect two independent clauses)
Preposition in, of
Pronouns I, me, mine, he, she, and so on
II. MORPHEME
* the smallest unit of linguistic meaning.
* A single word may be composed of one or more morphemes.
Example: un+system+atic+al+ly ( the word unsystematically can be analyzed into 5 separate morphemes) A grammatical unit in which there is an arbitrary union of a sound and a meaning that cannot be further analyzed.
* * Every word in every language is composed of one or more morphemes.
One morpheme boy (one syllable)
desire, lady, water (two syllables)
crocodile (three syllables)
salamander (four syllables), or more syllables
Two morpheme boy + ish
desire + able
Three morpheme boy + ish + ness
desire + able + ity
Four morpheme gentle + man + li + ness
un + desire + able + ity
More than four un + gentle + man + li + ness
anti + dis + establish + ment + ari + an + ism
1. Free Morphemes : Morphemes which can be used as a word on its own (without the need for further elements, i.e. affixes)
Example: girl, system, desire, hope, act, phone, happy..
2. Bound Morphemes: Morphemes which cannot occur on its own as an independent (or separate) word.
* Affixes (prefix, suffix, infix and circumfix) are all bound morphemes.
Prefixes
Suffixes
Infixes
Circumfixes (discontinuous morpheme)
Bound morphemes which occur only before other morphemes.
Examples:
un- (uncover, undo)
dis- (displeased, disconnect),
pre- (predetermine, prejudge) Bound morphemes which occur
following other morphemes.
Examples:
-er (singer, performer)
-ist (typist, pianist)
-ly (manly, friendly) Bound morphemes which are inserted
into other morphemes.
Example:
fikas "strong"
fumikas "to be strong"
(Bontoc Language) Bound morphemes that are attached to a root or
stem morpheme both initially and finally.
Example:
chokma "he is good"
ik + chokm + o "he isn’t’ good"
(Chickasaw Language)
3. Root vs. Stem
Root
Stem
Non-affix lexical content morphemes that cannot be analyzed into smaller parts
(ex.) cran (as in cranberry), act, beauty, system, etc..
* Free Root Morpheme: run bottle, phone, etc.
* Bound Root Morpheme: receive, remit, uncount, uncouth, nonchalant, etc.
* When a root morpheme is combined with affix morphemes, it forms a stem.
* Other affixes can be added to a stem to form a more complex stem.
Root believe (verb)
Stem believe + able (verb + suffix)
Word un + believe + able (prefix + verb + suffix)
Root system (noun)
Stem system + atic (noun + suffix)
Stem un + system + atic (prefix + noun + suffix)
Stem un + system + atic + al (prefix + noun + suffix + suffix)
Word un + system + atic + al + ly prefix + noun + suffix + suffix + suffix
4. Derivational morphemes vs. Inflectional Morphemes (Bound morphemes)
Derivational Morphemes
Inflectional Morphemes
1. Derivational morphemes derive a new word by being attached to root morphemes or stems. 1. Inflectional morphemes signal grammatical information such as number (plural), tense, possession and so on. They are thus often called bound grammatical morphemes
2. They can be both suffixes and prefixes in English.
Examples: beautiful, exactly, unhappy, impossible, recover
2. They are only found in suffixes in English.
Examples: boys, Mary’s , walked
3. Change of Meaning
Examples: un+do (the opposite meaning of ‘do’)
sing+er ( deriving a new word with the meaning of a person who sings). 3. No change of Meaning
Examples: walk vs. walks
toy vs. toys
4. Change of the syntactic category (optionally)
i) Change of category
Noun to Adjective boy (noun) + ish ----> boyish (adj.)
Elizabeth (noun) + an ----> Elizabethan (adj.)
affection (noun) + ate ---->affectionate (adj.)
Verb to Noun sing (Verb) + er ----> singer (noun)
predict (Verb) + ion ----> prediction (noun)
Adjective to Adverb exact (adj) + ly ----> exactly (adv)
quiet (adj) + ly ----> quietly (adv.)
Noun to Verb moral (noun) + ize ----> moralize (verb)
Adjective to Noun specific (Adj.) + ity ---->specificity (noun)
ii) No change of category
friend+ship (Noun --> Noun)
pink+ish (Adjective --> Adjective)
re+print (Verb --> Verb)
4. Never change the syntactic category of the words or morpheme to they which they are attached.
* They are always attached to completed words
Examples: walk vs. walked or walks (V--> V)
boy vs. boys (N --> N)
eat vs. eating (progressive) (V-->V)
* In English, inflectional morphemes typically follow derivational morphemes
Examples: unlikelihood, unlikelihoods (not *unlikeslihood)
5. English Inflectional Morphemes Examples
-s third person singular present She waits at home.
-ed past tense She waited at home.
-ing progressive She is eating the donut.
-en past participle Mary has eaten the donuts.
-s plural She ate the donuts.
-’s possessive Disa's hair is short.
-er comparative Disa has shorter hair than Karin.
-est superlative Disa has the shortest hair.
III. MORPHOLOGICAL ANALYSIS: IDENTIFYING MORPHEMES
Suppose that we collected the following sets or paradigms of forms
Paku (textbook pp.96) ( the language used by the monkey people called Pakuni)
me "I" meni "we"
ye "you(singular)" yeni "you(plural)"
we "he" weni "they(masculine)"
wa "she" wani "they(feminine)"
abuma "girl" abumani "girls"
adusa "boy" adusani "boys"
abu "child" abuni "children"
To detemine what the morphemes are in such a list, what you have to do is to see if there are any forms that mean the same thing in different words, that is, to look for recurring forms. We find -ni occuring in all the words in the right column which are plurals. Therefore, we can conclude that ?ni as a separate morpheme meaning "plural" which is attached to as a suffix to a noun.
In more complex cases, the next step will be to make a list of all the morphemes we find including free morphemes (root) and bound morphemes and indicate what the meaning of each morpheme and also whether they are root morphemes or bound morphemes. When you find bound morphemes, you also need to indicate whether they are derivational morphemes or inflectional morphemes.
Langganan:
Postingan (Atom)