HOW TO SOLVE MORPHOLOGY PROBLEMS

When a linguist comes in contact with a new language, one of his major tasks is to
discover the meaningful units, or morphemes, out of which the language. Just as with
discovering phonemes and allophones, it is important that the linguist have procedure for
discovering these minimal units, since it is impossible to isolate morphemes by intuition.
In sum, then the initial step in doing morphological analysis is:
1. Comparing and contrasting partially similar forms.
To give yourself practice, identify and translate the morphemes in the made-up data
below, from a hypothetical language:
house
tree
the house
the tree
to the house
to the tree
Sometimes just comparing and contrasting partially similar forms is not to allow a
complete morphological analysis. Consider the following examples:
A. If we compare the following English words:
Work
broad
Worker
broader
We notice the morphemes spelled er and pronounced [r] for both [bradr] and [wrkr].
However, if we think about it for a minute, it is an apparent that er has two different
meanings even though phonetically it looks like the same morpheme. The er in worker is the
same er that shows up in words like painter, killer, lover, and actor. In each of these case, -er
attaches to verbs to form a noun, and means something like one who paints, one who kills,
one who loves, etc. The suffix er in these cases is known as the agentive morpheme.
The er in broader, on the other hand, is the same er that shows up in words like
wider, longer, colder, prettier, and so on. In each of these case, -er attaches to adjectives to
form a new adjective, with the extra meaning more. The suffix er in these cases is known
as the comparative morpheme.
We will want to argue, then that [r] represent two separate morphemes [r] as an agent
marker, and [r] as a comparative marker even though they are same phonetically, i.e. are

homophonous morphemes. The [r] which is added to verbs to yield nouns and the [r] which is
added to adjectives to yield new adjectives clearly have distinct meaning.
B. If we compare the following set of words in (a), (b), and (c), we notice that each
word has a prefix which means not.
(a) Imbalance
[imblens]
(b) Inability
[inbilti]
(c) Incomplete [inkmplit]
The problem here is the inverse of the problem in example (1). Whereas in examples
(1) we had the same phonetic forms representing two different meanings, in examples (2) we
have three different phonetic forms with the same meaning. Since the phonetic forms of the
morpheme meaning not here can be predicted on the bias of phonetic environment.
[Im] before labials[p], [b], [m]
[I] before velars- [k], [g]
[In] elsewhere (before vowels and other consonants)
We conclude that even though the forms differ phonetically they belong to the same
morpheme, since they have the same meaning. We call [Im], [I], and [In] allomorphs of the
same morpheme. Another example of allomorph in English is the plural morpheme which is
realized as either [s], [z], or [z] depending on the form of the root to which it attaches.
PROCEDURE FOR DOING MORPHOLOGICAL ANALYSIS
Goal:
Given a set data in phonetic representation, you are asked to perform a constituent
morphological analysis of the forms.
Procedure (Keys to Analysis):
1. Isolate and compare forms which are partially similar.
2. If a single phonetic form has two distinctive meaning, it must be analyzed as representing two
different morphemes (as in example 1).
3. If the same meaning is associated with different phonetic forms all represent the same
morpheme (they are allomorphs of the morpheme), and the choice of form in each case
should be predictable on the basis of the phonetic environment (as in example 2).
Some Cautionary Notes
People frequently assume that language is pretty much the same in terms of what
each language marks morphologically. For example, English speakers often assume that all
language mark the plural of nouns with an ending or that the subject and the verb agree in

person and number in other language. This is simply not true. For example, Tagalog does not
usually mark the plural of nouns (in most case, the number is clear from the context). When it
is necessary to be specific, a separate word, mga, is used to indicate plural.
the child
the children
When a number is specifically mentioned, no plural marker appears in Tagalog, though the
plural marker is obligatory in English (Three dog is ungrammatical):
two
two children
five
five children
[] is a linker that links numerals and adjective to the nouns they modify, English does not
use this type of device).
There is also subject verb agreement in Tagalog for example in English / eat but he
eats. Other language also makes distinctions that we dont. While English has only singular
versus plural, some language have a dual when just two are involved. Consider
Sanskritjuhomi I sacrifice juhavas we (two) sacrifice, and juhumas we (pl) sacrifice.
Some languages also have two kinds of first person plural pronouns-that is, English
we. Notice that English we in we are going, for example, may include everyone in the group
the hearer is addressing (we, every one of us) or it may include some hearer(me and him, but
not you). Many language distinguish these two wes : Tagalog has tayo (inclusive, i.e you and
I) but kami (exclusive, i.e. he and I)
The lessons to be learned here is that you cannot assume that another language will
make distinctions in the same way that English does. For example, while every language has
some method of indicating number, no all language do so in the same way or under the same
way or under the same circumstances. As weve seen, English uses an affix, Tagalog uses a
separate word, and Indonesian reduplicates the word to show plural. Nor can you assume that
the distinctions English makes are the only ones worth making. Language must be examined
carefully on the grounds of their own internal structures.
To sum up, how to solve morphology problem:

Compare and contrast forms that are partially similar in meaning and form
Identify the morphemes

Normally, you will find a one-to-one correspondence between a certain phonetic form and

a morpheme
If a single phonetic form has two meanings, then it represents two different morphemes

e.g. hear vs. here

Sometimes, we find the same meaning is associated with two different phonetic forms,
then we should identify the phonetic contexts in which the allomorphs occur e.g. ed.