A Morphological Analysis
Tykena Grigg
Abstract
For our English 1200, Intro to Linguistics, final project we were challenged to
take what we have learned from the text and assignments and apply it to a realworld situation where we investigate different language structures. There were 3
different areas we could focus on: phonemic, morphological or syntactic analyses. I
chose to investigate a morphological analysis. During the investigation I interviewed
and recorded a subject and then selected 10 words and phrases that she used that
you would not find in an academic dictionary. I then took those ten phrases and
words and determined their morphological composition, analyzed the derivation of
each one, and created transcriptions and tree structures for each one.
Introduction and Review of Literature
Before starting this project I wanted to know if being educated, and living in
different parts of North America made a difference in whether or not a person might
use shortened, clipped, use clitics, and blends to create new words. I hypothesized
that an educated person living in Utah would use less of these than perhaps an
uneducated person would.
A morpheme is the smallest unit of a language that carries information. There
are free and bound morphemes, and variant forms of morphemes called allomorphs.
To fully derive and analyze a word you need to understand the word structure. Root
words belong to the lexical categories nouns, verbs, adjectives and prepositions.
Root words can have affixes (bound morphemes that cannot stand on their own),
that can often change the lexical category of the word.
There are other types of morphological changes that can change the meaning
of a word or help to create new ones. Many times people start them on accident, or
use shortened versions of words that end up being new words. These fall into two
categories, inflection and other processes. For the purpose of this project I focused
primarily on the other processes. These include cliticization, conversion, clipping,
and blends. Cliticization is the combination of clitics and host words. The clitics
must be attached to the host word. Conversion is the process that assigns an already
existing word into a new lexical category. Clipping is the process where you shorten
a longer word by deleting syllables in the word.
Methodology
I wanted to choose a subject that has lived extensively in areas all over North
America, and has a college education. My mother was the best option for me. I knew
her well enough that I hoped our interview would be light, and she would use a
more natural tone when speaking to me. She graduated with a degree in economics
from the University of Utah and has lived in Canada, Texas, California, and Utah each
for longer than 10 years. I used the Quicktime player on my computer to record our
interview. I created a list of interview questions to ask her, but I had the intention of
it sounding like a conversation rather than an interview.
After the interview I used our text to help me analyze the chosen words and
phrase structures. I hand wrote the tree structures and my transcriptions then
scanned the images into my computer and uploaded them into my official document.
Results
To make a stronger case for my hypothesis I would need to interview and
study more educated people living in North America. As far as it goes with my
mother I think my hypothesis was disproven. Here was an educated woman who
has been exposed to many different dialects of English, and though I would say her
English is standard English, with little to no accent, she still managed to create word
blends and cliticizations that would not be found in an academic dictionary. See
attached files in appendices.
Implications
I think that this study carries many implications, both professionally and
personally. I think it shows that few people, no matter how educated they are, will
speak perfect Standard English when speaking naturally and conversing. I assumed
my mother would not have very many morphological changes in her words and
phrase structures, and I did not even notice them when I was interviewing her. It
wasn’t until I was listening to the recording over again that I was able to find them. I
will enter work with the knowledge that just because someone uses slang, or
morphological changes it doesn’t mean they are uneducated or unintelligent. I will
take to heart that just because it is different does not mean it is wrong.
Appendices
Interview questions
1. Where were your parents born? Their parents were immigrants, where were
they from?
2. How long did you live in Canada?
3. Where else have you lived?
4. Where did you attend college?
5. What did you major in and how did you choose that field?
6. From your experience living in other regions of North America, do you notice
any major dialect differences between the U.S. and Canada? What about
between different areas in just the U.S.?
7. What are some common sayings or slang from Canada that you don’t often
hear here?
8. Did your grandparents speak English very well?
Glossary
Gonna- V. Shortened saying for going to.
Kinda- V. Shortened saying for kind of.
Not quite another- A. A lengthy way of saying not the same.
To make a long story short- V. A way of saying that you are reducing the story to get
your point across quicker.
Right off the cuff- V. A way of saying, right away.
Drive me nuts- V. Someone or something is bugging a person enough to make him or
her feel like they are going crazy.
Hafta- V. Shortened saying for have to.
Oh, gee- A. an expression, meaning oh my.
Coulda- V. Shortened saying for could have.