* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
Download Derivational Morphology in French - Journal of Language Sciences
Survey
Document related concepts
Polish grammar wikipedia , lookup
Symbol grounding problem wikipedia , lookup
Ojibwe grammar wikipedia , lookup
Classical compound wikipedia , lookup
Lexical semantics wikipedia , lookup
Word-sense disambiguation wikipedia , lookup
Esperanto grammar wikipedia , lookup
Untranslatability wikipedia , lookup
Compound (linguistics) wikipedia , lookup
Junction Grammar wikipedia , lookup
Distributed morphology wikipedia , lookup
Pipil grammar wikipedia , lookup
Agglutination wikipedia , lookup
Transcript
Journal of Language Sciences & Linguistics. Vol., 4 (4), 229-234, 2016 Available online at http://www.jlsljournal.com ISSN 2148-0672 ©2016 Derivational Morphology in French Khalil Nemat* Assistant professor of French Language and Literature, department of French, Sanandaj Branch, Islamic Azad University, Sanandaj, Iran * Corresponding Author Email: [email protected] ABSTRACT The theories of linguistics distinguish derivational morphology from inflectional morphology. Inflectional morphology uses only suffixes and understanding their meaning refers us to the syntactic context that is sentence. Derivational morphology returns to vocabulary and prefixes, roots, suffixes are used there. The meaning of a word is formed by the successive analysis of morphemes that constitute it. Derivational morphology allows to study the construction of new words formed by joining morphemes already known and used in other terms. In the present study which is related to the performance of words, only derivational morphology which is related to the word is supposed to be studied. Keywords: Morphology, Morpheme, Derivation, Derivative Affixes, Inflectional Affixes. INTRODUCTION Language is considered as an important and key element in human societies because it is used as an essential and primary tool for expressing individual and collective identities. Language is also the most important communicational device among people and groups. When the subject of finding some ways to live peacefully is discussed, the role which is played by language and verbal communication in human interaction is completely considerable. In fact, with all its shapes, language has close relationship with human social life and human doesn’t get it through genetic heritage. Learning language is acquisitive and its trend is wider and more complete from one generation to the other. Based on this, intellectual progress of a person is tightly related to his vocabulary growth and competence to use it correctly. The words are integral parts of the language. No language can exist without word. Assessing the richness of language is carried out considering the richness of words and the importance of terminology studies refers to it. Of course it has to be known that social developments, gradual development of sciences, changes which happen in the custom and culture of a country will inevitably bring some changes in language. In another word, the language is developed and completed in parallel with the development of the country which it belongs to. French hasn’t also remained stable and it has been developed, completed and richer over time. Contemporary France is the result of this historical gradual development. Main resources of French richness are semantic transformation of words, loaning from other languages and constructing new terms. Creating new words is through four methods: derivation, compounding, phonemes, abbreviations. Present study named derivational morphology studies derivation generally and investigates its different aspects. 229 J. Lang. Sci. Ling. Vol., 4 (4), 229-234, 2016 MORPHOLOGY Morphology includes investigating and studying the smallest units of form and meaning that are morphemes. Morphemes in fact constitute the words (Huot, 2005). 75 percent of morphemes in French are complex morphologically that is they have been compounded from one root and one or more affixes (ReyDebove, 1984). If look at word chaton up close, its concept is reduced from the morphemes which have formed it: chat and -on that is an affix named small. The study of morphology proposes some criteria that allows us to understand a word which is complex morphologically is formed through some meaningful elements and these elements are compounded with each other according to the logic which allows producing new words. Morpheme Morpheme is defined as the smallest semantic unit of language. Successive analysis of morphemes making up a word will lead to forming its meaning (Lehmann & Martin-Berthet, 2005). A morpheme can be compounded with other morphemes: morpheme chant can be compounded with morpheme -eur and make the word chanteur or can be compounded with morpheme -euse and create the word chanteuse. To make one part of word as morpheme, it should be able to be replaced with other morpheme (e.g. vol-er, chant-er, chant-eur). A fixed concept should be also linked to it. Therefore, a word may consist of only one basis (e.g. lait) or of one joined basis to one or several affixes (e.g. lait-ier). This is the basis which has the identity of the word, affix is an “attached element”. When all affixes are removed from basis and the basis isn’t in accordance with an independent word, it will be called “root” (Gardes-Tamine, 2002), for example the root of word ir-réalis-able” is -réalis- . Considering the location of affix, the prefixes which are at the beginning of the word will be distinguished from suffixes that are at the end of the word. Suffixes stretch the last syllable of a word in its right side and their changes are very general (e.g. feuillage in which suffix -age means “set of leaves”). Suffixes are featured in determining grammar form of word (sent-iris a verb, sent-iment is a noun). The number of prefixes which are located on the left side of the word is less. In fact, prefixes are old prepositions that are have been linked to the root and their meaning can be recognized better (re-faire, dé-faire). Therefore, the prefixes are added to the beginning of the word and allow creating new words. Derivational morphology Functionalism is first identified based on tending not to consider language structure as a reality which exists by itself and then based on its explanation according to balance among communicational needs as they are shown in a specific language community. It can be said, this is very definition that André Martinet (1979) proposes from functionalism. After 1871, the introduction of derivational morphology was affected by historical comparisons especially discovering Sanskrit at the end of the eighteenth century that intensified derivation with notable regularity. The study of words transformation was discussed another time but this time only related to their shapes and internal structure. 1- André Martinet who was born in April 12th 1908 and passed away in June 16th 1999 was French linguistic that is known as the father of applied analysis in French linguistics. He was the manager of Center for the Study in Applied Faculty of Paris Higher Education (1938, 1946, 1955, 1999). He was also responsible for managing International auxiliary language association in New York (1946-1948). He also used to teach in Colombia University and he became the head of linguistics group in there (1947-1955). Then he took the position of general linguistics at the Sorbonne University from 1955. He managed European community of linguistics as well (1966-1999). He was inspired by Literary Linguistics Assembly of Prague and became innovative in functionalism approach of syntax (language and role, 1962) and authored more than 20 important books in the field of Linguistics in Time (The economy of changing phonemes, 1955) and General linguistics (The elements of general linguistics, 1960; General syntax, 1985; Languages’ roles and dynamicity, 1989) that some of them are translated into several languages. He has also left an intellectual biography which is named “The memories of a linguistic, the experience of languages” in 1993. Organized study of word construction entered grammar in the book Root and constructing French (18531857) by Albin d’Abel de Cheval let. Ferdinant de Saussure continued this subject through writing completely theoretic articles such as the Philosophy of language science studied in constructing the words (1875) in order to perceiving comparative constructions. Since then, derivation found its place in grammar. For example, the word Chevalier (Horseman) is investigated: first is the infinitive or gerund of the word which is related to the person who belongs to medieval military aristocracy or the member of modern Knights system (distinction is obtained from individual merit). However, finding out that Chevalier is related to cheval (horse) is easy. Comparing other gerunds of 230 J. Lang. Sci. Ling. Vol., 4 (4), 229-234, 2016 other similar words (jardin > jardinier, sauce > saucier, école > écolier) it can be confirmed that there is a relatively organized grammar process and we mean constructing new words that are based on the gerund of word which exist. This morphological phenomenon is called derivation. Therefore, derivation is considered as word trend whose curtesy, the person can make new terms in order to increase his/her vocabulary. Derivation and compounding are traditionally considered as in contrast with inflection and distinguish them. While inflection is derived from grammar morphology and is related to shape variation of a word, compounding and derivation are considered as the morphology of constructing the words. In another word, a new word can be constructed through compounding and derivation while through inflection, only variety of shapes can be given to the word. In his study about derivational morphology, Danielle Corbin compared simple words with constructed words (Corbin, 1987). Unlike simple words such as table, fleur or dormir, constructed words are objective (motivational) that is their meaning is compounding because they can be analyzed based on their internal structure which is derived from involuntary combination. For example, défaire, refaire and parfaire are justified based on the root faire and lave-glace and vide-ordures based on their constituent elements. Therefore, compounding and derivation are considered as two methods for constructing new lexical units. 1- Albin d’Abel de Chevallet was born in 1812 in Or Pierre and passed away in 1858, he was French terminologist, linguistic and translator. He was the author of a three-volume work called “The root and construction of French” (1853-1857). France Large Institute of Linguistics gave this book the award of Prix Volney in 1850. In that very year big award of Grand Prix Gobert belonged also to this book. He also translated the book of “Poetic anecdotes of Phèdre” in 1840. 2- Ferdinant de Saussure, Swedish linguistic, was born in November 26 th 1858 in Genova and passed away in February 22nd 1913 in Vufflens-le-Château. He is known as founder of structuralism in Linguistics. He is also reputed because of his researches about Indo-European languages, formerly called Indo-German. Saussure established modern linguistics and laid the foundations of semiotics. 3- Danielle Corbin, French linguistic and novelist, was born in April 4 th 1946 in Toulouse and passed away in August 6, 2000 in Lille³. He was the master of linguistics in Lille 3 University. Well-known book of Derivational morphology and constructing words is written by him. Corbin had conducted many researches and activities about linguistics. Compounding includes creating a word through linking several roots that can be dependent or independent, for example, chou-fleur, auto-radio and hippodrome are formed through compounding: two first words include completely separate two lexical units (chou, fleur and auto, radio) and vice versa in last word, hippo- cannot exist independently from other root. Derivation by itself includes constructing derivations using two methods: through linking affixes to the root which is called affix derivation and converting that is called inappropriate derivation. Affix derivation Affix derivation allows consisting a derivation through adding one or several derivational affixes to a root or basis. Danielle Corbin discusses the concept of constructed word and defines it as: “Constructed word is a word whose guessable meaning based on its internal structure is completely compounding and is related to derivational operations of a big group of words (basis) that are applied by a kind of rule of forming words that related the operations of subject, semantics, syntax and morphology to each other” (Corbin & Corbin, 1991). Practically, derivational affixes related to derivation are needed to be recognized from those inflectional affixes that are resulted from inflection. Igor Aleksandrovič Mel'čuk¹ argues derivational and inflectional affixes respectively (Mel'cuk et al., 1994). Inflectional affixes are completely grammatical concepts that distinguish different shapes of a word and state symptoms of Morphology number (singular, plural), persona and time. For example, in cases below, letter s indicates the plurality of the word champion and identifiers ons, ez and aient clarify person, time and verb root of chant: Champion/-s; chant/-ons/-ez/-aient … Derivational affixes are concepts and terms that are used for constructing new lexical units that are called derivations. Of course, it has to be noticed that derivational affixes rarely work like independent words. Affix derivation based on the type of added affix to the basis (one or more basis), can be prefix, suffix or prefix-suffix simultaneously. Two prefix and suffix derivation are respectively adding a prefix or a suffix to the basis. Therefore, derivation repeindre through adding prefix re- to verb peindre and derivation pauvreté through adding suffix –té has been converted to adjective pauvre. Prefix-suffix form is the result of simultaneous joining of suffix and prefix to the basis. For example, the word 1- Igor Aleksandrovič Mel'čuk is retired professor of linguistics and translation group of Montreal University and graduated from linguistic group of Moscow state University. He has been working for language science institute in Moscow since 1956. He has also been one of developers of meaning-context theory since 231 J. Lang. Sci. Ling. Vol., 4 (4), 229-234, 2016 1974 and he is also the author of book the lessons of general morphology in five volumes. Mel'čuk has conducted many researches about linguistic science. Encolure by adding prefix en- and suffix –ure simultaneously to noun col and the word indécorable has been made by adding prefix in- and suffix –able to the noun décore. Inappropriate derivation or conversion Inappropriate derivation isn’t the result of structural change but it is the result of grammatical re-ranking. A word changes its group without changing its shape. For example, the verbs boire and manger in the expression of le boire et al manger has been turned to noun as the result of converting verb group to noun group; the noun bleu has been created following changing adjective group of bleu to noun in example: L’ouvrier portait un bleu tout couvert de graisse Now that we have studied two modes of affix derivation and inappropriate derivation, it has to be noted that not all lexical units of language have derivations. Considering that derivational complexes are made of more than one morpheme, derivational morphology studies the shapes of bound morphemes and free morphemes, their different types and semantic coverage of these contextual types. Each one of a derivation’s morphemes, whether basis or affix can have different shapes. Through observing these factors, it can be understood that affix morphology in any case is pure connection of two morphemes but it is often simultaneous change of basis and affix. Derived word is considered as a derivational compounding that is completely analyzable to two morphemes or more: one free morpheme or basis and one or several affixes. This position of affix is related to basis that specify one of situations below for that: - Prefix (when it is at the beginning of the word): ré- in réforme (1) - Suffix (when it is at the end of word): -ment in lancement (2) - Detached affix (when it involves basis): dé…ment- in dépassement (3) However, detached affix should be recognized for example in word dépassement (3) in which dé-…-ment indicates an affix in different parts of derivative evidenc from a set (one prefix+one suffix) for example in réélaboration (4) considering that constructed complex with basis (passe) and suffix –ment isn’t accepted (that is word passement doesn’t exist in language), while in example 4 the compounding elaboration in language has been accepted. In word réélaboration the prefix ré- is a prefix which is independent from –tion. While detached affix can be seen in the phrase, the derivation is called beyond compounding. Derivational affixes and inflectional affixes It has to be known that studying the range of combinability of affixes cannot separate them from identifiers that according to some of linguistics are called inflectional affixes. Derivational affixes are never clear as identifiers because this word is derived that can be defined separated from its constituent elements. On the other hand, the contrast between these two is clear: derivational affix isn’t combined with any bases while inflectional affix follows a completely regular compounding. The next contrast is that derivational affix often changes the group while identifier isn’t the same at all. Lexical production of affixes Derivational affix is the tool of producing the words while derivation is a production process of new derivational compounds. Talking about the capability of producing affixes is difficult because their transformation is complicated and their performance is very diverse. Comparing them that can help recognizing a dependent basis is misleading and cause ordinary user to make mistake; in series: tessiture, ouverture, culture, signature, candidature, aventure allure, température and législature, suffix –ure is capable of producing noun derivations whose basis belong to different groups. Therefore, from verb basis signer, derivation signature and from cultiver derivation culture is obtained and aller derivation allure but candidature has been taken from noun basis candidat and in simple morphemes temperature and aventure, there is tendency to eliminate suffix – ure that doesn’t exist in origin. Finally, only a morphophonemic can recognize suffix –ure in tessiture, the suffix which is joined to a unfree basis as the result of comaprign with word législature. Some affixes such as –tion and its variables: -ssion, -sion, -ition, -ation and –xion can create some derivations from all bases that indicate one type. For example, for verb variable bases, the cases below can be mentioned: Signifie…signification; créer…création; convaincre…conviction; voir…vision; réfléchir…réflexion; diriger…direction; décider…décision And suffix -ité can produce a noun derivation almost out of all adjectives especially those end to –able and –ible: 232 J. Lang. Sci. Ling. Vol., 4 (4), 229-234, 2016 Futile …futilité; incomparable … in comparabilité; capable …capacité; probable…probabilité; moral …moralité; vrai …vérité Basis, derivation, affix and their mutual relationships Derivative constituent elements are integrated and their regularity is very accurate. There are very complicated mutual relationships among them so that signifier forced linear structure brings similar semantic structure to sentence is some aspects. Derivation is a set which get meaning through its constituent elements, the elements that don’t have value by themselves in linguistic system and because of their correlation become important. The performance of a derivation is effective show of Saussure’s thought about its value. The relationships among constituent elements are as companion. This makes constrains for absolute freedom of sign. According to this, it is said that derivation is relatively motivational. Derivational motivation that is natural intra-language has an important role in being aware of regulate arrangement of derivation construction. Although this arrangement is putting some elements beside each other that exist before, semantic effect which is obtained is different and is distinguishable from set of constituent elements concepts. This shows that derivation isn’t pure and simple connection but it is the companion of living elements. Unlike basis, the affix doesn’t propose information about metalinguistic experience but it is more a unit that refers to a mental reality and does a kind of semantic activity on it. Whatever this action is multi value like basis action, it is generally coordinated with inside an affix set that affix is identified in it. In terms of semantics and syntactic, derivation enters the sentence as a simple unit but its difference with simple units is that it makes a picture with accurate arrangement of its components. Out of more or less regular sets, comparison helps us to consider these images as semantic forms but these semantic forms aren’t always overt: common point of a family word set should be in accordance with the common point signified. Common point of signifiers may be sometimes empty and deep phonetic changes such as loaning and calques from Latin and Greek make a hidden barrier that prohibits any kind of accessing the meaning for ordinary user especially foreigner. In fact, when the goal is describing the derivations of a series of wisely words next to another series of slang words by the same token, the application of relative motivation will be disturbed and identifying a concept inside a family of words will be impossible without help of natural motivation. In the set of derivations below, what reveals semantic relationship or inherent recognition of verbs sembler- similaire (similaire is a Latin word means being similar)? 1. Sembler, ressembler, ressemblance, semblable, dissemblable, dissemblance… 2. Similaire, similitude, dissimilitude, assimiler, assimilable, assimilation… 3. Simuler, simulation, simulacre, dissimulé, dissimulateur, dissimulation… Another deviating phenomenon is polysemy. Derivation also as a simple sign that is constrained as soon as being created, introduces an idea or a thing and gradually is used for other idea or thing as well and after a short time refers to both modes or returns to one of them and cut with the other one and therefore, it will follow this type of language system logic. Verb avorter (transitive verb) includes three concepts: 1. A premature childbirth 2. Not to reach full growth (in fruits) 3. Stopping in growth, failure, not succeeding And when this verb is intransitive, it has only one meaning; “force a woman into abortion”. And this last meaning that derivation avorteur/avorteuse (a person who commits abortion illegally) has accepted it. Moreover, nothing refers to “illegal” in its main concept while this feature is prominent in its accepted meaning. Semantic relationship can be expanded with basis unit or even eliminated completely while it paves the way for the phenomenon of polysemy that can be transformed either in basis unit or derivation differently. In this mode, the motivation will ruin and doesn’t play role at least for one of these cases: for example, derivation moineau has lost any kind of semantic relationship with its root moine. A derivation with polysemy can be single meaning, therefore, it is clear that this derivation refers to one of probable meaning of basis. Such derivation is usually a scientific word: Avulsion is a word that only exists in scientific language and means the action of supplanting (avallare is a Latin variable from verb arracher): L’avulsion de dent. And of course verb arracher in slang covers wide semantic scope. But how a user would recognize this meaning? The application of picture isn’t that much clear in there too and agreement on that each semantic unit, derivation or plain, seems rational to be always the center interaction of linguistics and social - cultural events phenomenon of society. 233 J. Lang. Sci. Ling. Vol., 4 (4), 229-234, 2016 CONCLUSION Different parts of this research show the importance of words in transformation and evolutionary of French. The words by themselves considering social, cultural developments and science progress haven’t remained stable and have been transformed and evolved. Contemporary France is the result of this historical gradual development. Therefore, we can see that a language lexicon isn’t a stable and invariable set. Besides existing lexicon resources, there are many various mechanisms of production change the concept of words. One of main resources of French lexicon richness is constructing new words that is carried out through four methods: derivation, compounding, phonemes and abbreviations. Derivation was generally studied in this research and its different aspects were investigated. Through investigating different modes of derivation, it was concluded that not all language lexicon units have derivation. Considering that derivation compounds are formed from more than one morpheme, derivational morphology studies the shapes of bound and free morphemes, their different types and semantic coverage of these contextualized types. Each one of a derivation’s morphemes, whether basis or affix can have different shapes. Through observing these factors, it can be understood that affix morphology in any case is pure connection of two morphemes but it is often simultaneous change of basis and affix. On the other hand, semantic development and accuracy cause the words to involve wider concepts. For example, compound word feu vert originally means green light in intersections but this word has been also used as permission for some recent years (for example, it is said that an X has shown green light to his friend). Many examples in this case can be found in French. The trend of semantic development and its complete recognition require comprehensive investigation that should be studied by the researchers of language field. Conflict of interest The authors declare no conflict of interest REFERENCES Corbin, D. (1987). Morphologie dérivationnelle et structuration du lexique, Tübingen, Niemeyer. Corbin, D., & Corbin, P. (1991). Un traitement unifié du suffixe –ier (e), Lexique 10. De Saussure, F. (1972). De, Cours de linguistique générale, Paris, Payot, 1972 Éléments de linguistique générale, (1960). Paris, Armand Colin. Gardes-Tamine, J. (2002). La grammaire: phonologie, morphologie, lexicologie, Paris, Armand Colin. Huot, H. (2005). La morphologie: forme et sens des mots du français, Paris, Armand Colin. Lehmann, A., & Martin-Berthet, F. (2005). Introduction à la lexicologie, Paris, Dunod. Martinet, A. (1979). (Sous la direction de), Grammaire fonctionnelle du français, paris, Crédif / Didier. Mel'cuk, I., Clas, A., & et Polguere, A. (1994). Introduction à la lexicologie explicative et combinatoire, Louvain-la-Neuve (Belgique), Duculot. Rey-Debove, J. (1984). Le domaine de la morphologie lexicale, Cahiers de Lexicologie, 45, 3-16. TLF= Trésor de la langue française, (1971-1994). Dictionnaire de la langue du XIXe et des XXe siècles, sous la dir. de P. Imbs et de B. Quemada, Paris, Editions du CNRS. 234