Download WRITING IV

VISI (2007) 15 (3) 10 - 21
THE PRODUCTION AND INTERPRETATION OF THE ENGLISH
COMPOUND WORDS
Bloner Sinurat
ABSTRACT
Tulisan ini ialah tentang kajian kata majemuk bahasa Inggris. Masalah yang
dikaji berkenaan dengan pengetahuan penutur bahasa Inggris pada pembentukan
dan pemahaman kata majemuk. Adapun tujuan penelitian ialah untuk
mengungkapkan kaidah-kaidah yang dimiliki oleh penutur bahasa Inggris dalam
pembentukan dan pemahaman kata majemuk tersebut. Metode penelitian yang
dilaksanakan ialah penelitian kepustakaan. Temuan penelitian ini dapat
memberikan manfaat teoritis dan praktis dalam pengembangan konsep
pengetahuan penutur bahasa Inggris pada kata majemuk.
_________
Key Terms: pembentukan, pemahaman, kata majemuk
1. INTRODUCTION
The Language that human speak contains a set of rules which govern them
to produce and interpret it. Its discrete linguistic units, such as phonemes,
morphemes, words, phrases, sentences, paragraphs, and the ones which are bigger
than the paragraphs, are so functional in context (Halliday, 1994). A functional
unit means a unit which is meaningful, while its context refers to other linguistic
unit(s) which come(s) before and or after the unit. The units function as a tool for
the native speakers’ communicative interaction in their daily routine (Elgin, 1973).
In relation to the proposition that words are discrete meaningful linguistic units in
context, so the question which is interesting to answer in this article is “What
knowledge do the English native speakers know on the structure of their mental
vocabulary as the mental inventory of the total set of words in their language?” In
relation to this, another question which can be important to answer deals with the
set of rules which govern them to construct more words, for instance such as
compound words, from the [60.000] basic words. Linguists are necessary to seek
answers to such two questions in order to reveal the principles to establish a true
conceptual knowledge which contains some philosophical values that can explain
how the native speakers produce and understand the language they use in their
daily routine. Accordingly the focus of this research paper then is to survey the
English native speakers’ knowledge on the rules of the production and
interpretation of the compound words as part of their mental vocabulary, which are
functional in the context of their daily routine.
307
_____________
ISSN 0853 - 0203
VISI (2007) 15 (3) 10 - 21
2.THE REVIEW OF THE RELATED LITERATURE
2.1. Defining the language
The term language refers to a set of intricate rules which function as a
medium of human system of communication (Els, 1984). Its native speakers are in
the nature of having the ability to get access into the system of its production and
interpretation. It is understood as an entity having discrete units which each of
them indicates structural hierarchy as boundaries of their identification. In
addition, the native speakers also recognize the lexical meanings that each unit
loads to accomplish its structural functions both in a unified and coherent
structural hierarchy, and the interpretative meanings which each of the coherent
unit carries to be comprehended in the system of their communication. The results
of an analysis on how the native speakers produce and interpret their language are
very important for the construction of a conceptual knowledge on the natural
language specifically and the universal language generally. So by studying a
language we can understand the rules which govern its native speakers to produce
its structural aspects and interpret the meanings they potentially load on the basis
of their lexical meaning in an actual communication.
2.2. Exploring the Language aspects
Structurally language is viewed as a continuous segmental speech sounds
(Pike, 1975; Roach, 2000; Elgin, 1973). The entity of the speech sound sequence
[lines of letters in written] can be analyzed into aspects, i.e., phonemes,
morphemes, and sentences. Phonemes are the smallest segmental distinctive aspect
(Roach, 2000) which in combination forms larger meaningful aspect which is
defined as a morpheme (O’grady and Dobrovolsky, 1996). Morphemes can be
classified into free and bound morphemes. The entity of a free morpheme is called
a word. But a word can have one or more than one morpheme plus one or more
bound morphemes. A sentence is the aspect into which words such as simple
words and compound words, or group of words, i.e., phrases function as
constituents (Falk, 1978).
A formal analysis views that a sentence has two immediate constituents,
i.e. the constituent noun phrase and the constituent verb phrase (Els, 1984). This
means that the basic rule for a sentence construction is “S→NP+VP”. . In this
construction rule “S” stands for “sentence”, “NP” stands for “noun phrase”, and
“VP” stands for “verb phrase. The nucleus or head of the noun phrase is a noun.
What ever number of words the noun phrase has in it, the analysis to understand
its structure is always treated by binary division up to its smallest constituent can
not be divided into two divisions anymore. At the lowest level analysis, it can be
identified what ever class of word a noun phrase may have in it. A possible rule of
the noun phrase construction is “NP → {(Art) + (V+ing orV+ed) + (Adj) + (N) +
N + (Adv) + (Prep+NP)
+ (Vwith to)}.
308
_____________
ISSN 0853 - 0203
VISI (2007) 15 (3) 10 - 21
The verb is the nucleus or head of the verb phrase. It also functions as the
label of the phrase. What ever number of words the verb phrase has in it, the
analysis to understand its structure is always also treated by binary devision up to
its smallest constituent can not be devided into two devisions anymore. At the
lowest level analysis of the verb phrase can be identified what ever class of word it
may have in it.A possible rule of the verb phrase construction is” {VP →(Aux)+ V
+ (Adv) + (Prep+NP)}
2.3. Conceptualizing the Words
The concept of words can be discussed in two points of view. In the
spoken language, the values of words which are used as the tool of the actual
communicative interaction must be the result of the analysis of a sequence of
speech sounds occuring in actual daily routins of a language society (Katz, 1966).
Whatever value the words have in the context of their use in the language society
are the real knowledge of the native speakers about the words of their language
(Platt and Platt, 1975). In the written language, the values of words which are used
as the tool of comunication must come from the analysis of the sequence of letters
on paper such as in the literature works.
By the integration of the two approaches discussed above, words are
viewed not only from a single concept at all. First, they can be viewed from the
linguistic approach. By this view words are defined as the smallest independent
meaningful units (Falk, 1978). They are the units which are potential to be
individual members of a certain word class . As units of the word class, they show
characteristics of devision (Rosenberg and Travis, 1971). In addition to this, they
also show the characteristics of formation with other linguistic units to a bigger
construction (Falk, 1978). Second, they can be viewed from the unit of
performance used in speech. By this view words are defined as parts of the speech
which are segmentable and showing the ability to be pronounced in isolation
(Falk, 1978) and are still meaningful units of the speech which can be substituted
by the other words of the same class of the related meaning in context of use
(O’grady and Dobrovolsky, 1996).
Third, they can be viewed as units of performance in writing. By this view
words can be difined as the smallest meaningful combination of letters which can
be isolated and still show their indepency and potential charateristics for devisions
of having one or more independent part (Falk, 1978). So in general, words can be
defined as the minimal units of language which have meanings.
2.4. Assuming the Mental Lexicon
The native speakers of a language up to their high school time knows
about 60.000 words , they know that the forms and meanings of the words are not
derived from those of other words, and they also know some other countless words
which are constructed from the basic words (O’grady and Dobrovolsky (1996:
111). They store, organize and internalize them in their mental dictionary.
Lexicology deals with the organization if these words in the dictonary. It defines
309
_____________
ISSN 0853 - 0203
VISI (2007) 15 (3) 10 - 21
the mental dictionary by using three synonymious terms. The three of them deals
with the total stock of words of a language that exist in the mind of the native
speakers (Jackson and Amvella (2000). The first term is called “lexis”, the second
is “vocabulary”. The third is lexicon. The term “vocabulary” is rather familiar,
while the term “lexis” is less and more in a general notion. But the term “lexicon”
is technical. It is more learned and commonly used to represent to the extent of
scientific analysis in linguistics. Since the term “lexicon” is more scientic, then in
this article, it is used to represent the other two words to mean the total stock of
words a language.
2.5. Assuming the Lexicon Creativity
As a tool of communication, language is assumed as human behaviour and
mind (Katz, 1966). In such a theoritical concept, it is assumed not as a static entity,
but it is rather a dynamic aspect of human being. This assumption is subject to the
view which receives the existance of some principles which govern the formation
of new words from the basic words. So part of the competence of the native
speakers of a language involves with the ability to increase the total set of the
words in their language.
The native speakers know the principles of the construction of those other
words. They know that the components of the word formation are the basic word
and a morpheme (Cf. Chomsky, 1965). In morphology a basic word is defined as a
free morpeme (Falk, 1978). While the morpheme into the basic word is attached is
called as a bound morpheme. A free morpheme does not always have a variant
form. Intuitively the native speakers can identify the components of the
morphemes and clasify these element in terms of their distribution to the meaning
and function of a larger word. This knowledge is of course the base to the ability
of the native speakers to produce and understand words in their language. In the
view point of language as a system of human’s communication, the 60.000 basic
words function to represent at least 60.000 basic units of experience. For instance
the word “go” functions to code a verbal action experience. However, human does
not stop at a certain number of experiences, but the reality shows that he
encounters new experiences from time to time. The question to post is then, “ How
is he able to code all those new experiences with the limited number of that basic
words?”. To the linguists, this problem is a natural phenomenon of the language
they use, that is the language creativity. In the linguistic hyerarchy, it is suggested
as the lexicon creativity. The rules of this creativity allows the native speakers to
create new word formation to realize the set of their new experiences they
encounter in their daily routine.
O’grady and Dobrovolsky (1996: 111-148) conceptualize that the part of
the linguistic competence involves the ability of the native speakers to construct
and interprete new words. The construction is called as word formation. The
internal structure of the new words can be identified into the componential
morphemes in terms of their distribution to meanings and functions in the new
larger words. The word constructions can be classified into derivation,
310
_____________
ISSN 0853 - 0203
VISI (2007) 15 (3) 10 - 21
compounding, conversion, clipping, blends, backformation,
onomatopoeia, word manufacture (coinage), and inflection.
acronyms,
2.6. Compound Words
Compounding is one of the word formation process in English . Falk
(1978: 43) observes it from the view point of the word class of two roots which
combine to form a compound word. To illustrate she says that in English, it can be
made up of an adjective and a noun, such as in Englishman, but not Germanman
and greenhouse, two preposition, such as in upon and into but not inthrough, a
verb and a preposition, such as in puton and takeover but not jumpinto, and a noun
and a verb such as in sunbathe and earthquake but not rainstand. In morphology a
root is usually a simple word which does not undergo affixation. Typically it is
any of the 60000 words that exist in the mental lexicon. The words book, box, put,
take, sharp, clever, to, and on are words which do not undergo a process of
affixation. They are categorized to simple words. Morphologically, they can not be
analyzed into two smaller parts which have meaning. Further Julia goes on saying
that words such as text book, classroom, and matchbox (match-box or match
box—not necessarily written as one word) are compound words. Although her
concept can cop lots of compound words, but it can not definitely govern the
native speakers to produce and interprete the whole occurences of compounding
in English.
According to O’grady and Dobrovolsky (1996: 127) compounding differs
from language to language,while the practice in English deals with the
combination of some lexical categories, such as noun, adjectives, verbs, or
preposition in which the right most morpheme is called as the head that determines
the category of a compounding. This concept reveals the the ease of the native
speakers to identify the class type of the coumpound they produce. They are
specified to the possible combination of the lexical catagories they can produce as
mentioned in the following. Four types of compound words into which all lexical
categories can combine are noun and noun such as in street light, campside, and
bookcase, adjective and noun such as in bluebird, happy hour, and high chair, verb
and noun such as in swearword, washcloth, and scrub lady, and preposition and
noun such as in overlord, outhouse and in-group O’grady and Dobrovolsky (1996:
121). The the lexical categories between Both Falk (1978:43) and O’grady and
Dobrovolsky (1996: 127) are different in ther combinations. Falk mentions no
combination of verb and noun, and preposition and noun, while O’grady and
Dobrovolsky mention no combination of preposition and preposition, verb and
preposition, and noun and preposition. Assuming the reality of the compound wors
in English, so the potential lexical categories which can combine are as follows:
NN, AN, PP, VP, NP, and PN.
Jacson and Amvela (2000:79-86) formulate a clear and simple proposition
of the English native speakers’ knowledge on the process of compounding by
saying,”Compounds may be defined as stems consisting of one root. For example,
betside, black market, car-wash, waste paper basket. ...Some are written as one
311
_____________
ISSN 0853 - 0203
VISI (2007) 15 (3) 10 - 21
word...while others are written as two or more words...in some cases, one of the
roots of a compound may be modified by an inflecion as in bird’s-eye, driving
license,and homing pigeon”. They further say that in English compounds may be
distinguished from phrases on phonological, syntactic, and semantic grounds. This
means that in some process that compounding can resemble the other process of
syntactic construction like phrases such as in black board and hard cover. But they
can be distinguished from each other in their phnological, syntactic, and semantic
ground.
2.7. Compound Words Production and Interpretation Theory
The production of compound words refer to the process of combining two
words of the 60000 basic words that exist in the native speakers’ mental
dictionary. It is governed by a set of rules in which each of the two words in the
process is called as a root of a certain lexical category such as noun, adjectives,
verbs, or preposition. The resulting word is called as a compound word in which
the right most root functions as the head determining the word class of the
compound words.
The interpretation of a compound word is different from the one of a
phrase. The first rule which governs the native speaker to differenciate the
interpretation between them is by distinguishing their phonological properties. A
compound noun is pronounced with a primary strees on the first root, while all
lexical words receive a primary stress in a noun phrase. The second rule which
governs them to differenciate the interpretation betweem two is by distinguishing
their syntactic properties. A compound word is not an interuptable unit, such as
the form of overripe can not be interrupted. For instance, dividing it into two units
such as in over ripe will not result a compound word anymore. While a phrase can
be interrupted to make it smaller or bigger. For instance the form a good book can
be divided into a good book, or another lexical category can be added into the
form such in a good new book. The third rule which govern them to differenciate
the interpretation between the two is by distinguishing their semantic properties.
A compound word tends to acquire a specialized meaning, it resembles an idiom
very much. For instance the meaning of blackboard is not necessarily be black and
made of wood. Its color and material can be anything else. While a phrase always
acquire the meaning of its head word and modified by all its potential modifiers.
2.8. Summary
To integrate and summarize the three points of observations above, so a
working definition which can be established in this paper is that compound words
refer to the process of combining some roots of lexical categories, such as noun,
adjectives, verbs, or preposition to become a stem having a structure like NN as in
handbag, AN as in Englishman,VN as in jumsuit, PN as in outhouse PP as in unto,
VP as in take over, VN as in sunbathe. The right most root in the resulting roots
functions as the head determining the word class of the compound words which
312
_____________
ISSN 0853 - 0203
VISI (2007) 15 (3) 10 - 21
can be distinguished from phrases their phnological, syntactic, and semantic
ground.
3. THE PRODUCTION AND INTERPRETATION OF COMPOUND
WORDS
The analysis of the production and interpretation of compound words in
this section is subject to the working definition which is already established. The
presentation of the data observation is given according to their phonological,
syntactic, and semantic ground (Jackson and Ampella, 2000). Followings are the
examples of some potential compounding process.
3.1. Noun Head Word
A noun head word is a process of a compound production in which the
native speakers add (the symbol → means that the previous lexical category is
added to the following one) a noun or adjective class lexical categories infront of a
noun lexical category. The process results a new word which is called a noun
compound word in the mental dictionary.
a. Noun→Noun
1. fire→engine = ‘fire engine
2. arm → chair = ‘armchair
3. hand→bag = handbag
4. body→guard =bodyguard
5. school→boy =schoolboy
6. girl→friend =girlfriend
7. night→guard =night guard
8. text→book =textbook
9. hand→book=handbook
10.history→book=historybook
b. Adjective→Noun
1. white→house =whitehouse
2. green→house =greenhouse
3. blue→bird =bluebird
4. black→sheep=blacksheep
5. blue→collar=bluecollar
6. white→collar=whitecollar
7. red→head=redhead
8. white→people=whitepeople
9. black→people=blackpeople
10. black→market=black market
c. Verb→Noun
1. scrup→nurse=scrupnurse
2. jump→suite=jumpsuit
3. pick→pocket=pickpocket
313
_____________
ISSN 0853 - 0203
VISI (2007) 15 (3) 10 - 21
d.
4. dare→devil=daredevil
5. run→way=runway
6. kick→boxer=kickboxer
Preposition→noun
1. after→thought→afterthought
2. in→laws=inlaws
3. up→grade=upgrade
4. under→graduate=undergraduate
5. down→grade=downgrade
6. up→town=uptown
7. down→town=downtown
8. on→time=ontime
9. in→time=intime
10. over→night=overnight
3.2. Verb Head Word
A verb head word is a process of a compound verb production in which
the native speakers add (the symbol → means that the previous lexical category is
combined to the following one) a noun, or adjective, or preposition, or verb class
lexical category infront of a verb lexical category. The process results a new word
which is called a verb compound word in the mental dictionary.
a. Noun→Verb
1. spoon→feed=spoonfeed
2. steam→rool=steamrool
3. baby→sit=babysit
4. brain→wash=brainwash
5. house→keep=housekeep
6. book→keep=bookkeep
b. Adjective→Verb
1. white→wash=whitewash
2. dry→clean=dryclean
3. sweet→talk= sweettalk
c. Preposition→Verb
1. over→look=overlook
2. over→estimate=overestimate
3. over→come=overcome
4. over→do=overdo
5. over→take=overtake
6. out→look=outlook
7. out→put=output
8. in→put=input
9. uder→estimate=underestimate
10. under→go=undergo
d. Verb→Verb
314
_____________
ISSN 0853 - 0203
VISI (2007) 15 (3) 10 - 21
1. drop→kick=dropkick
2. break→dance=breakdance
3. dive→bomb=divebomb
3.3. Adjective Head Word
An adjective head word is a process of a compound adjective production
in which the native speakers add (the symbol → means that the previous lexical
category is combined to the following one) a noun, or adjective, or preposition
infront of a verb lexical category. The process results a new word which is called
an adjective compound word in the mental dictionary.
a. Noun→Adjective
1. nation→wide=nationwide
2. sky→blue=skyblue
3. navy→blue=navyblue
4. razor→sharp=razorsharp
5. blade→sharp=bladesharp
6. ice→cold=icecold
7. car→sick=carsick
8. sea→sick=seasick
9. air→sick=airsick
10. ox→eyed=oxeyed
b. Adjective→Adjective
1. red→hot=redhot
2. deep→blue=deepblue
3. dark→brown=darkbrown
4. light→brown=lightbrown
5. dark→blue=darkblue
6. light→blue=lightblue
7. light→yellow=lightyellow
8. blue→green=bluegreen
9. metallic→green=metallicgreen
10.south→west=southwest
c. Preposition→Adjective
1. over→ripe=overripe
2. in→grown=ingrown
3. near→sighted=nearsighted
4. off→white=offwhite
3.4. Preposition Head Word
A preposition head word is a process of a compound preposition
production in which the native speakers add (the symbol → means that the
previous lexical category is combined to the following one) a preposition infront
of a preposition lexical category. The process results a new word which is called a
preposition compound word in the mental dictionary.
1. in→to=into
315
_____________
ISSN 0853 - 0203
VISI (2007) 15 (3) 10 - 21
2.
3.
on→to=onto
through→out=throughout
4. CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTION
4.1. Conclusion
The production of compound words refer to the process of combining two
words of the 60000 basic words that exist in the native speakers’ mental
dictionary. It is governed by a set of rules in which each of the two words in the
process is called as a root of a certain lexical category such as noun, adjectives,
verbs, or preposition. The resulting word is called as a compound word in which
the right most root functions as the head determining the word class of the
compound words.
The interpretation of a compound word is different from the one of a
phrase. The first rule which governs the native speaker to differenciate the
interpretation between them is by distinguishing their phonological properties. A
compound noun is pronounced with a primary strees on the first root, while all
lexical words receive a primary stress in a noun phrase. The second rule which
governs them to differenciate the interpretation betweem two is by distinguishing
their syntactic properties. A compound word is not an interuptable unit, such as
the form of overripe can not be interrupted. For instance, dividing it into two units
such as in over ripe will not result a compound word anymore. While a phrase can
be interrupted to make it smaller or bigger. For instance the form a good book can
be divided into a and good book, or another lexical category can be added into the
form such in a goog new book. The third rule which govern them to differenciate
the interpretation between the two is by distinguishing their semantic properties. A
compound word tends to acquire a specialized meaning, it resembles an idiom
very much. For instance the meaning of blackboard is not necessarily be black and
made of wood. Its color and material can be anything else. While a phrase always
acquire the meaning of its head word and modified by all its potential modifiers.
4.2. Suggestion
The object of this article needs more analysis to result more detail findings
for more specific propositions. It is suggested to those who are interested in this
topic to run an analysis by using different approaches for more reliable valid
results. The resulting findings then can be very important to the formulation of
conceptual knowledge of the English native speakers on their natural production
and interpretation of compound words.
REFERENCES
Chomsky, Noam. Aspects of the the Theory of Syntax. Cambridge, Mass: MIT
Press. 1965.
316
_____________
ISSN 0853 - 0203
VISI (2007) 15 (3) 10 - 21
Elgin, Suzette Hadin, What is Linguistics? New Jersey: Prentice Hall Inc. 1973
Els, Theo Van. Applied Linguistics and the Learning and Teaching of Foreing
Language. London: Edward Arnold, 1984.
Falk. Julia S. Linguistics and Language: A Survey of Basic Concepts and
Implications. New York: John Wiley & Sons. 1978.
Halliday, M A K, Functional Grammar. London: ARNOLD. 1994.
Jackson, Howard & Ampella, Etienne Ze’. Words, Meaning and Vocabulary.
Cassel: Wellington House, 2000.
Katz, Jerrold J. The Philosophy of language. New York: LARPER & R OW,
Publishers. 1966.
Pike, Kenneth L. Phonemics: A Technique for Reducing Language to Writing.Ann
Arbor: The University of Michigan Press. 1975.
Platt, John T. and Platt, Heidi K. The social Significance of Speech. Amsterdam:
North-Holland Publishing Company. 1975.
Roach, Peter. English Phonetics and Phonology: A Practical Course. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press. 2000.
Rosenberg, Jay F. and Travis, Charles. Reading in the Philosophy of Language.
New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, Inc. 1971.
317
_____________
ISSN 0853 - 0203