Andrew Radford - Linguistics An Introduction [Second Edition]

signal of tense.

Morphology across languages

167

The data also illustrate extended exponence. The -ie theme vowel

for the second conjugation preterite form is unique to the third plural

form, so this person/number property is signalled twice in the form

comieron (as is the preterite tense information). The unique future tense

endings are added to a special form which is almost always identical to

the infinitive. Thus, the property ‘future tense’ is spread over the -ar/er

form and the endings themselves.

2.

Analyse the following English verb forms to show how they illus-

trate cumulation, syncretism, inflectional allomorphy and extended

exponence. (Hint: you may find it useful to transcribe the verb forms

into IPA.)

(she) walks

(they have) driven

(we) walk

(he) walked

(you have) spoken

3.

Here are some verb forms in Italian (a language closely related to

Spanish). Segment the words into their components. In some cases,

this will not be straightforward, so comment on any difficulties you

have in deciding where the boundaries fall between suffixes. Then

indicate any instances of cumulation and extended exponence in the

data. Finally, identify any syncretisms you find in these paradigms.

(The present subjunctive is a form used in contexts where the speaker

isn’t entirely certain of the truth of the statement.)

number person present indicative present subjunctive past indicative

parlare ‘to speak’

1

parlo

parli

parlai

sing.

2

parli

parli

parlasti

3

parla

parli

parlò

1

parliamo

parliamo

parlammo

plural

2

parlate

parliate

parlaste

3

parlano

parlino

parlarono

credere ‘to believe’

1

credo

creda

credei

sing.

2

credi

creda

credesti

3

crede

creda

credè

1

crediamo

crediamo

credemmo

plural

2

credete

crediate

credeste

3

credono

credano

crederono

168

words

finire ‘to finish’

1

finisco

finisca

finii

sing.

2

finisci

finisca

finisti

3

finisce

finisca

finì

1

finiamo

finiamo

finimmo

plural

2

finite

finiate

finiste

3

finiscono

finiscano

finirono

4.

Below are some Chukchee words, slightly simplified. Segment them

into their component morphemes and provide a rough meaning for

each morpheme. Comment on the types of affixation found and on any

allomorphy you observe.

ekwetək

to set off

eretək

to fall

nəwilək

to come to a halt

rəgelək

to go in

rənwiletək

to stop someone

rərgeletək

to introduce

rərgelewək

to lure in

rərultetək

to move something away

rətejŋetək

to feed (something to someone)

rətenmawək

to prepare (something)

rekwetewək

to send someone off (on a journey)

reretək

to drop

rultək

to step aside

runtəmewetək

to calm someone

tejŋetək

to eat (something)

tenmawək

to get oneself ready

untəmewək

to calm oneself down

5.

In the data below we see examples of reduplication in the Palan dialect

of Koryak (a language closely related to Chukchee). What is the rule

for forming a noun of this kind in Koryak?

ʧajʧaj

‘tea’

həlwehəl

‘wild reindeer’

jiŋejiŋ

‘mist’

jilhejil

‘gopher’

kalikal

‘book’

liŋliŋ

‘heart’

mətqmət

‘fat’

milgmil

‘fire’

nutenut

‘tundra’

tərgtər

‘meat’

wətwət

‘leaf’

wiruwir

‘seal’

ʔawtaʔaw

‘flint’

6.

Some plural forms in Arabic are very difficult to predict from the

singular form. However, there are patterns. What is the common, invar-

iant component of the following Arabic nouns (the forms are slightly

Morphology across languages

169

simplified in some cases)? How can the plural be constructed from the

singular form in each case? (A doubled vowel, e.g. aa, represents a long

vowel, e.g. [aː]; representing long vowels in this way may make it easier

to see the principles that underlie this system. Note that the nouns come

in two groups depending on the form of the singular.)

singular

plural

meaning

qidħ

qidaaħ

arrow

ʤamal

ʤimaal

camel

ħukm

ħakaam

judgement

ʔasad

ʔusuud

lion

jundub

janaadib

locust

raʤul

riʤaal

man

ʕinab

ʕanaab

grape

nafs

nufuus

soul

saħaabat

saħaaʔib

cloud

ʔumθulat

ʔamaaθil

example

ʤaziirat

ʤazaarʔir

island

ħaluubat

ħalaaʔib

milch-camel

kariimat

karaaʔim

noble

marħalat

maraaħil

stage

7.

What deviations from agglutination are exhibited by the Swahili verb

forms shown below? (The data are slightly simplified.)

(a) i.

nilitaka

I wanted

tulitaka

we wanted

ulitaka

you (sg.) wanted

mlitaka

you (pl.) wanted

alitaka

he/she wanted

walitaka

they wanted

ii.

nitataka

I shall want

tutataka

we shall want

utataka

you (sg.) shall want

mtataka

you (pl.) shall want

atataka

he/she shall want

watataka

they shall want

iii.

ninataka

I want

tunataka

we want

unataka

you (sg.) want

mnataka

you (pl.) want

anataka

he/she wants

wanataka

they want

(b) i.

sikutaka

I did not want

hatukutaka we did not want

haukutaka

you (sg.) did not want

hamkutaka

you (pl.) did not want

haakutaka

he/she did not want

hawakutaka they did not want

ii.

sitataka

I shall not want

hatutataka

we shall not want

hautataka

you (sg.) shall not want hamtataka

you (pl.) shall not

want

haatataka

he/she/it shall not want hawatataka they shall not want

iii.

sitaka

I do not want

hatutaka

we do not want

hautaka

you (sg.) do not want

hamtaka

you (pl.) do not want

haataka

he/she/it does not

hawataka

they do not want

want

12

Word meaning

So far, we have not attempted to develop any analytic account of the semantic representations which appear in lexical entries. Indeed, in the examples in (115)

(section 10), what we see under the heading ‘semantics’ is taken directly from an ordinary dictionary. Whether such dictionary definitions can be regarded as supplying the meanings of words for the purposes of linguistic analysis is something we shall briefly consider later in this section after we have introduced some basic ideas.

As well as being concerned with the contents of lexical entries, a further matter which will arise in this section is that of the overall structure of the lexicon. In the Introduction (p. 4), we talked about the lexicon as a list of lexical entries, but it is at least conceivable that it has a more interesting structure than this. To say that the lexicon is no more than a list is to accept that there is no reason why items which are similar to each other in some linguistically relevant way are ‘close’ to each other in the mental lexicon. As we shall see, similarity of meaning is a rather rich notion, and as subsequent sections of this part of the book will show, it seems to play an important role in human cognitive processing. In such circumstances, it is important for our model of the lexicon to represent this notion properly.