1. Word Formation – Where do words come from?

The distinction between words and lexemes provides the basis for the division of
morphology into two branches: inflectional morphology and lexical word-formation.
Inflectional morphology deals with the inflectional forms of various lexemes. It has something
of the character of an appendix to the syntax, the major component of the grammar. Syntax tells
us when a lexeme may or must carry a certain inflectional property, while inflectional
morphology tells us what form it takes when it carries that inflectional property.
Lexical word-formation, by contrast, is related to the dictionary. It describes the
processes by which new lexical bases are formed and the structure of complex lexical bases,
those composed of more than one morphological element. The traditional term is simply 'word-
formation.'
Word formation deals with the question about how new words come into being, and the
resources that languages have at their disposal for building up and replenishing their existing
lexicon.
Why do we need new words? One obvious reason is that language users need new
expressions for new objects, or for new concepts. Once there is an entity or concept ‘‘factory for
the production of bottles’’, it is quite easy to be able to refer to such a concept with one word,
bottle factory instead of using a circumscription. Thus, word-formation has a labelling function.
Creating a word label for a new kind of entity, event, or property may have the additional
pragmatic advantage that it draws attention to the new concept involved. New verbs have been
created to express new types of events or actions, such as the English verbs in -ize: legal-ize ‘to
make legal’, tranquil-ize ‘to make tranquil’, that express the causation of an event or property.
However, this is not the only function of word-formation.
Basically, there are two ways of vocabulary building. One method consists of the creation
of new words by utilizing the words and morphemes that are already available. This method of
word formation consists of various processes, of which derivation and compounding (also
called composition) are the most common. Whereas in compounding the constituents of a word
are themselves lexemes, this is not the case in derivation. For instance, -ity is not a lexeme, and
hence taxability is a case of derivation. The word income tax, on the other hand, is a compound
since both income and tax are lexemes. Changing the word class of a word, as happened in the
creation of the verb to tax from the noun tax, is called conversion, and may be subsumed under
derivation.
Another dimension of this kind of knowledge about words assumed by dictionary makers
of English manifests itself in the fact that words that are quite common in English might not be
covered by a dictionary. For instance, one’s dictionary may not mention bottle factory, although
it does mention bottle baby, bottleneck, and a number of other words beginning with bottle. Yet,
we have no problem in understanding the title of the novel The Bottle Factory Outing written by
Beryl Bainbridge. What the dictionary presupposes is that the user of English knows the words
bottle and factory, and that the compound bottle factory refers to a particular kind of factory, not
to a particular kind of bottle: it is the rightmost of the two word constituents that determines
what kind of thing the compound denotes. This is a systematic fact of English. Therefore, one
can understand the meaning of bottle factory without having ever come across that word before.
That also applies to the even more complex word bottle factory outing. This example illustrates
the creative aspect of morphological knowledge: it enables us to understand or coin new words.
Morphological knowledge may thus lead to rule governed creativity in the use of language. If we
want to be understood, our new linguistic expressions must comply with the rules of the
language. It is these rules that enable every language user to produce and understand linguistic
expressions that she has never come across before.
The other means by which new words may come about is borrowing from foreign
sources. There is probably no natural language (as opposed to an artificially constructed
language like Esperanto and maybe computer language) that does not have the resources for the
increase of its word stock, though some languages may show preference for one device over
another. Thus, for instance, the process of word building by means of composition, that is, the
putting together of two bases (generally free morphemes), is not frequent in French, while it is
very freely used in languages like English and German. Compare, for instance, English summit
conference and German Gipfelkonferenz with French conférence au sommet ‘conference at the
summit.’

1.1 Derivation
Derivation is found in all Indo-European languages and, probably, most languages of the
world. It consists of taking an existing base –either free or bound morpheme- and adding to it
affixes- that is, prefixes or suffixes, or both. From the base form cloud, for instance, we can
form the verb becloud, the adjectives cloudy and cloudless, and the abstract noun cloudiness.
Many of the affixes used in modern English are survivals from Old English (OE), and some may
indeed have been independent words at one time. Such is the case with the English suffix –dom,
as in freedom, kingdom, and martyrdom, which represents OE dom ‘statute, jurisdiction,’ or –
hood, as childhood, parenthood, and priesthood, which derives from OE hād ‘quality, rank.’ In
addition to the native affixes, many English words are also made up of foreign elements that
have come into the English lexicon as a result of certain historical circumstances surrounding the
development of the language. While all languages borrow words from other languages, English
seems to have borrowed a higher percentage of them than most, an estimated 75 %.
Let us, first, consider some the native suffixes that are still in use:
a. The adjective suffix –ly (manly, girly, and homely) was an independent word at one
time, since it goes back to OE lic ‘body.’ Since the word was frequently used as a
suffix with the meaning of ‘having the body, shape, or appearance of,’ the long /i/
eventually became shorter and –lic became simply –ly. Conversely, the suffix –like,
in such recent formation gentlemanlike and homelike represents a regular historical
development of OE lic, which means that both suffixes are related, though there is
certainly a difference in meaning between, say, homely and homelike.
b. The suffix –y (OE –ig) forms adjectives from nouns, as in thirsty, bloody, greedy,
fishy, jazzy, folksy, chubby, iffy, and groovy. It should not be confused with the
common diminutive suffix –y (sometimes also spelled –ie), as in birdie, Charlie,
Billy, Kitty, Jackie, Jeanie, and Saify (diminutive of the author’s first name), which
simply imply smallness, affection, fondness, or familiarity.
c. The suffix –ish (OE –isc) also converts nouns into adjectives (childish, girlish, and
foolish) with the idea of ‘in the nature of.’ Originally, it implies nothing unfavorable
(e.g. OE fosisc) ‘folkish,’ in the sense of ‘popular’), but nowadays it often carries an
unfavorable and even derogatory connotation, as in bookish and old-maidish. When
added to an adjective, this suffix gives the general idea of ‘somewhat,; as in smallish,
longish, thinnish, and reddish.
 d. The suffix –ful forms adjectives, as in wonderful and sinful, as well as new nouns, as
in spoonful, mouthful, and handful. Indeed, this suffix is so productive that it is freely
added to words of foreign origin, as in useful, peaceful, beautiful, grateful, and many
others.
e. The suffix –less (OE –lēas) also forms adjectives from nouns, as in careless,
speechless, homeless, hopeless, and childless. Like the suffix –ful, this suffix is also
frequently found with nonnative nouns, as in useless, graceless, merciless, and
pitiless. It is related to the adjective loose and the verb lose.
f. The suffix –ship (OE –scipe) forms abstract nouns by denoting ‘quality, condition, or
state’ (friendship, fellowship), ‘rank or office’ (governorship, chairmanship), ‘status’
(lordship, ladyship), and even ‘ability or skill’ (leadership, penmanship). The suffix
competes with –ness, which is also used to form abstract nouns; it is used in new
formation, such as the recent coinage, brinkmanship (‘balancing on the brink of
disaster’).
g. The form –ness is one of the most productive suffixes for making abstract nouns from
practically any adjective, as in coolness, illness, manliness, girlishness, holiness,
highness, foolishness, and countless others. It has largely replaced the native suffixes
–hood, -dom, and –th (health, filth) in the formation of new abstract nouns. It is also
commonly added to adjectives of foreign origin that end in –ous (ultimately from the
Latin –osus ‘having characteristics of’), for example, graciousness, consciousness,
and covetousness.
h. The so-called noun-agency suffix –er (OE –ere), meaning ‘one who does something’,
as in baker, fisher, hunter, learner, and worker and many family names (such as
Weaver, Miller, and, of course, Baker, Fisher, and Hunter). It is a very prolific suffix
in modern English still and conveys meanings other than ‘doer of an action.’ Thus, it
may denote instruments or things, as in typewriter, eraser, and diner. In New Yorker,
Londoner, Icelander it denotes a resident of a certain place; it is also found in some
colloquialisms like fiver ‘five dollar bill,’ or breather in the sense of ‘breathing
space.’
An interesting variant of English –er is the suffix –ster as in spinster (originally
meaning ‘one who spins’), which goes back to OE –estre to form agent nouns of
feminine gender. This suffix also survives in family names like Baxter (OE
baecestre), meaning ‘baking woman,’ and Webster (OE webbestre) ‘weaving
woman.’ The corresponding masculine forms are, of course Baker (OE baecere) and
Webb or Webber (OE webba). The original connotation of ‘femininity’ having been
lost, the ending –ster has been used to form new nouns like teamster, roadster,
gangster, and speedster, as well as youngster and oldster, while the suffix –stress
(made up of the suffices –ster and –ess, the latter from French –esse, and ultimately
Greek -issa) came to be used to denote feminine agent, as in seamstress (rather than
seamster from OE seamestre).
Turning now to the native prefixes, we must note above all that they are far outnumbered by
nonnative, especially Latin, ones. A glance at a list of such prefixes in a grammar book also
concerned with the vocabulary of English will easily convince us of this fact. Take, for example,
the negative prefix un- (OE un-) as in unkind, unjust, unafraid, unclean, unbelievable,
unfriendly, and unruly. It is in competition with three other prefixes that signify ‘not,’ namely in-
(Latin), as in ineligible, incorrect, invisible, and incredible, as well as its allomorphic variants il-,
im-, and ir-, in illegal, illegible, immature, irresponsible, and irrational; non- (Latin and French),
as in nonconformist, noncombatant, and nondescript; and a- or an- (Greek), as in apathetic,
‘indifferent, unmoved,’ atheist ‘unbeliever,’ and anonymous ‘unknown.’ The native un- is
probably the commonest of them all, since it is freely used with both native and nonnative bases,
for example, unjust, unintelligible, uneducated, and ungracious, while its nearest competitor, the
Latin in-, is limited to words of Latin and French origin. It is often not easy to decide which is
the appropriate prefix to use in a given case. Why say, for instance, irresponsible but
unresponsive? After all, both the base respons- (actually made up of Latin re- ‘back’ and
spondere ‘to pledge’) and the suffix –ive are of Latin-French origin, just as the suffix -ible is.
Why not *irresponsive? Since there is no hard and fast rule which determines the use of one or
the other in cases like these, we must be governed by usage.
There is another un- prefix which is used with verbs only, for example, undo, undress,
unbind, untie, unfold, uncover, and unlock. It expresses the contrary or reversal of an action. The
separate origin of the two prefixes is not immediately apparent in English, but a comparison with
modern German is quite instructive. English un-, meaning ‘not,’ is also un- in German, compare
unknown versus unbekannt, unconscious versus unbewusst, and unclean versus unrein, whereas
the verbal prefix un- is German ent-, as in unveil versus enthÜllen, unclothe versus entkleiden,
and uncover versus entblÖssen.
Other native prefixes include (1) be- as in bemoan, bespeak (e.g. His charity bespeaks a
generous nature), becloud, befriend, and belittle; it is used in various ways, as shown by these
examples, and is still to some extent productive and often used merely as an intensifier, as in
bedeck and besmear. In addition to be- are the prefixes (2) for-, expressing negation, privation,
or prohibition when used with verbs, as in forbid, forgo, and forswear; and (3) mis- ‘amiss,
wrong or wrongly,’ as in mistake misunderstanding, misbehave, midhandle, misdeed, and many
others. In words like mischief, misadventure, and misnomer (that is, in words of French origin
that have the sense of ‘bad’), mis- is not a native but ultimately comes from Latin minus ‘less’ by
way of French mes-. (Compare French mesaventure and English misadventure.)
Some of these native prefixes are still occasionally pulled out of the lexicon to make new
words, though some of them, like the prefix for-, may be said to ceased to be a productive
formative element in modern English.

1.1.1 Foreign Elements

It was stated earlier that a great many derivational affixes used in modern English are
not native. In its earlier stage English made almost exclusive use of its own native
resources for purposes of word building; however, as its speakers entered into contact
with other cultures and civilizations, particularly the French and those of Greek and
Roman antiquity, they enriched the native word stock by adopting thousands of words
from these languages, either through the spoken tongue (in case of French) or the
written language (in the case of Greek and Latin). The widespread use of Latin
prefixes has already been noted. Some of them such as re- ‘again, back,’ as in revert,
resell, remodel, refurbish, and reread, are not only very common but have become
fully naturalized. Since Latin prefixes are very similar in meaning to native English
prepositions and adverbs, we could, of course, replace them by corresponding native
function words. Thus, instead of resell we might say again-sell and for remodel
something like again-model, using ‘again’ and ‘back’ as native prefixes. The word
againbite for remorse is still used in a fourteenth-century work entitled The Againbite
of Inwit ‘The Remorse of Conscience’ (published in 1340).
During the great revival of learning in Europe in the centuries that mark the
transition from the medieval to the modern world, the period commonly known as the
Renaissance, there was a whole importation not only of Latin but also of Greek terms.
Both languages had, of course, already left some imprint on English as a result of
cultural contact of the English people with Christianity in the sixth and seventh
centuries. With the progress of science, new words, many of them quite common, are
being coined from Greek roots (for example, thermometer, telephone, drama, and
sympathy). The interesting fact about Greek elements in English is that for the most
part roots rather than words have been borrowed from Greek and that these have been
combined to express new ideas. For example, from phil- ‘love’ and anthropo- ;man,’
the words philanthropy ‘love of man’ and philanthropist ‘lover of man, benefactor’
have been created. These coinages also include two widely used and thoroughly
naturalized Greek suffixes –y (earlier –ie, ultimately from Greek –ia borrowed via the
French suffix –ie) to denote abstract nouns (philosophy, jealousy), and the agent-noun
suffix –ist (scientist, moralist).
As a matter of fact, the Greek suffixes –ist, the corresponding verbal suffix –ize
(compare satirist-satirize, moralist-moralize), as well as the ubiquitous –ism have
become virtually indispensable for the creation of neologisms (Greek neos ‘new’ +
logia ‘speaking’ + ism). Add to this list the prefixes anti-, hyper-, pseudo-, and neo-,
and we have the principal elements for the expression of abstract thought, theories,
doctrines and systems. As a verbal suffix –ize (from Greek –izien through French –
ise) has become extremely popular and is responsible for such recent verb formation
as hospitalize, winterize, pressurize, slenderize, and finalize.
Sometimes a Greek root combines with a Latin one, as in television (from Greek
tele- ‘far’ and Latin visio ‘vision’), sociology (from Latin socius ‘companion’ and
Greek –logia ‘study’), these word formations are called hybrids, since their
constituent elements come from different languages. Hybrid forms are by no means
limited to nouns, as shown by such verbs as demoralize, decentralize, denationalize,
and deodorize, which contain the Latin prefix de- and the Greek suffix –ize.
With the influx of French words following the Norman Conquest of England in
the eleventh century and their complete assimilation in the English lexicon, English
also acquired a taste for using French derivative elements in combination with native
bases for building new words. Thus, the French noun suffix –age (voyage) gives rise
to words like shortage, shrinkage, breakage, and leakage; -ment (movement) gives
such hybrid forms as atonement and fulfillment; -ess (duchess) appears in
shepherdess, goddess; the adjectival ending –ous (gracious) is extended to native
bases like wondrous and murderous; and, what has probably become one of the most
productive suffixes in modern English, the suffix –able, which can be tacked on to
thousands of verbs to make adjectives, as in laughable, answerable, eatable,
drinkable, understandable, washable, and unforgettable.
Another French derivative element that is worth mentioning because of its
productiveness in modern English is the suffix –ee (also spelled –e). It conveys the
idea of a person to who something is done, as in lessee, mortgagee (as opposed lesser
and mortgagor), trustee, payee, consignee, nominee, refugee, employee, trainee, and
 draftee. Originally, a French participial ending in – é with passive force (for example
employé ‘employed’), this sense is not always apparent in English (consignee,
refugee, trainee), though in cases like employee, nominee, and draftee the passive
value is very much in evidence. This suffix, seems to have entered the language by
way of legal terminology and has long since gone beyond the scope of the vocabulary
of law, is but one more illustration of how formative elements coming from foreign
sources have acquired full citizenship in English.
English also uses some pseudosuffixes to create new words. They are called
pseudosuffixes because they are not real suffixes but have somehow come to be felt as
such in the popular mind. A classic example of such a pseudosuffix is –burger which
has been subtracted from the word hamburger (formerly called Hamburg steak) and
is now freely used to denote culinary specialties as cheeseburger, beefburger,
fishburger, and pizzaburger. Suffix –holic has now been the source of other words
from which workaholic ‘addicted to work’ (from the adjective alcoholic) a
pseudosuffix has been extrapolate. While the actual suffix is –ic as in alcoholic, new
formations like chocoholic ‘addicted to chocolate,’ and Nijiholic ‘addicted to Niji
(name of a music band).’
To sum up the derivation processes and the affixes that are involved in them, below are
some examples of derivational affixes in English:
Table 1. Some English Derivational Affixes
Affix - Category Change Semantic Change Examples
Suffix
–able verb -> adjective able to be X’ed repairable, portable
–ation verb -> noun the result of X’ing organization
-er / -or verb -> noun one who X’s teacher, actor
–ing verb -> noun the act of X’ing the shooting, acting
verb -> adjective in the process of X’ing the developing country
–ion verb -> noun the result or act of X’ing protection, action
–ive verb -> adjective having the property of doing X active, educative
– ment verb -> adjective the act or ressult of X’ing government
–al noun -> adjective pertaining to X national, actual
–ial noun -> adjective pertaining to X financial, managerial
–ian noun -> adjective pertaining to X Indonesian, Canadian
–ic noun -> adjective having the property of doing X organic, didactic
–ize noun -> verb put in X hospitalize
–ize adjective -> verb make X modernize, finalize
–less noun -> adjective without X shoeless, wireless
–ous noun -> adjective the property of having or being X dangerous, humorous
–ate adjective -> verb make X activate
–ity adjective -> noun the result of being X priority
–ly adjective > adverb in an X manner slowly, calmly
–ness adjective -> noun in a state of beingX happiness

prefix
ex- noun -> noun former X ex-president
in- adjective-> adjective not X incompetent
un- adjective-> adjective not X unhappy
verb > verb reverse X untie, undo
re- verb > verb X again redo, recheck
Source: O’Grady et al, 1993.
Each line in the above table can thought of as a word formation rule that predicts how words may
be formed in English. Thus, if there is a rule whereby the prefix un- may be added to an adjective
X , resulting in another adjective, unX, with the meaning ‘not X’, then we predict as adjective
like happy may be combined with this prefix to form the adjective unhappy, which will mean
‘not happy’. The rule provides a structure to the word given in figure 8.1.

Af A

un happy
Figure 8.1
In addition to prediction function, these rules have analyzing function. Suppose that we
find the word unhappy in a novel. Even though we may never have seen this word previously,
we will probably not notice its novelty, but simply use our unconscious knowledge of English
word formation to process its meaning. Indeed, many of the words that we encounter in reading
are new, but we seldom have to look them up, relying instead on our morphological competence.
Derivation can create multiple levels of word structure. Let’s take an example of the
word unhappiness. Although complex, unhappiness has a structure consistent with the word
formation rules given in the above table. Starting with the outermost affix, we see that –ness
forms nouns from adjectives, and prefix un-, although it does not change the word category, but
it does change the meaning adjectives, ‘notX’.
N
a N b
A Af Af N

Af A A Af

un happy ness un happy ness

Figure 8.2
By considering the properties of the affixes un- and –ness, it is possible to find an argument that
favors Figure Figure 8.2a over Figure 8.2b. The key observation here is that the prefix un-
combines quite freely with adjectives, but not with nouns as shown in the previous table. This
suggests that un- must combine with the adjective happy before it is converted into a noun by the
suffix –ness –exactly what the structure in Figure 8.2a depicts. Now look at Figure 9. and
Figure 10.
 N

A A Af

Af A Af A

un happy un happy ness

Figure 9. Figure 10.
Figures 9 and 10 depict that the word formation process for the word unhappiness proceeds in
two steps. First, the prefix –un is added to the adjective happy, resulting in another adjective, i.e.
unhappy as in Figure 9. The second step is to add attach the suffix –ness to the adjective
unhappy (see Figure 10.).

1.2 Compounding

Unlike derivation, the process of compounding or composition involves the joining of

two or more existing words to form new words. The meaning of the new combined words,
however, does not necessarily the sum total of the concepts expressed by its component parts.
Word formation by means of compounding has been characteristic of English, and of related
languages such as German. It is also widespread throughout the languages of the world. In
addition to its widespread nature, compounding is also very productive. In fact, modern English
has accumulated a great number of compounds and is producing new ones almost daily: sit-in,
tach-in, launching-pad, countdown, and blastoff. The possibilities are almost limitless. Here are
some of the more typical compound formation in English:
Compound nouns. The most common ones are those in which two nouns are joined
together, the first component qualifying the second one, as in bookcase, notebook, keyhole,
suntan, windmill, weekend, baseball, snowflake, and countless others. These are also called
primary compounds because they are made up of two single free forms. This kind of
compounding is very prolific in English and is perhaps the most typical.
The following are other frequent types of compound noun formation: adjective+noun
(bluegrass, blackbird, redcap, greenhouse); noun+adverb (fallout, check-up, mark-up,
countdown); adverb+noun or verb (underpass, upkeep, outcome, downfall); verb+adverb
(getaway, hideout, breakdown, knowhow); and verb+noun (breakwater, cutthroat, crackjaw,
daredevil, scarecrow), as well as many family names Shakespeare, Kilroy, Lovejoy, and
Drinkwater. This latter type, unknown at an earlier stage of English, is said to have become quite
productive under French influence, where such compounds are frequent, for example, passeport
‘passport’, passetemps ‘pastime’, porte-cigarette ‘cigarette holder’, and casse-coisette
‘nutcracker. This last example, furthermore, illustrates an interesting point. Whenever the
English noun object is placed before the verb, a combination of compounding and derivation
must be used to conform to the structure of the English language, which requires the object to
follow the verb. Thus, a person who keeps house is a housekeeper rather than *housekeep (along
the lines of cutthroat and daredevil), someone who owns land is a landowner, and a gadget with
which to crack nuts is a nutcracker and not a cracknut (like crackjaw or crackpot).
Compound adjectives. Many of them are formed by joining a noun with an adjective or
participle (bloodthirsty, penny-wise, heartbreaking, time-honored, peace-loving, old-fashioned,
hand-picked); and adjective or adverb with participle (low-flying, well-done, good-looking,
narrow-minded, full-grown); a participle with an adverb (worn-out, washed-up); and an
adjective with another adjective (light-green, dark-brown, red-hot).
Compound verbs. Since English nouns may be freely used as verbs, many compound
nouns are also used as compound verbs, for example, to skyrocket, to railroad, and to stockpile.
In addition, there are adverb+verb combinations, as in outshine, overturn, outbound, update,
undertake, and overcome. But by far the most widely used compounds are verbal phrases
consisting of a verb+adverb combination, as in back down, build up, break down, let up, sit
down, hold up, hand out, pay off, write down, and many, many others. In accordance with the
general principles of English stress patterns, compounds that consist of two separate parts are
given only one primary stress in the first part of the compounds, as in bluegrass, hothouse,
railroad, and blackbird. Whereas in non-compounds, the second element is stressed.

Table 2. Compounds versus noncompounds

Compound word Non-compound
expressions
greenhouse an indoor garden Greenhouse a house painted green
blackboard a chalkboard used in blackboard a board that is painted
classrooms black

wet suit a diver’s costume wet suit a suit that is wet

silkworm caterpillar that spins silk worm worm made of silk
silk (e.g. a soft toy)
hairnet net for covering hair’ hair net net made of hair
(the) White House residence of the US white house house that is white
President
*bold typed word indicates where the stress occurs.
A more complete discussion of the process of compounding would also have to include
the formation of compound adverbs (overhead) and compound prepositions (underneath), as
well as formations made up of more than two elements, such as sit-down strike, whodunit,
happy-go-lucky, hand-to-mouth, matter-of-fact, and commander-in-chief.
Structurally, two features of compounds stand out. One is the fact that the constituent
members of a compound are not equal. The lexical category of the last member of the compound
is the same as that of the entire compound. The first member is always a modifier of the second:
bottle factory refers to a particular kind of factory, not to a particular kind of bottle; light-blue is
a degree of blueness: it is the rightmost of the two word constituents that determines what kind
of thing the compound denotes. In other words, the second member or the rightmost of the word
constituent acts as the head of the compound, from which most of the syntactic properties of the
compound are derived, while the first is called dependent. The rule that dictates the head of the
compounds is the rightmost of the two word constituents is termed as right-headed rule (RHR).
Although compounds may consist of more than two words, such as in dog food box
(three-word compound), four-word (stone age cave dweller), and longer compounds (trade
union delegate assembly leader) are easy to find. But in each case, the entire compound always
consists of two components, each of which may itself be a compound, as shown in the following
Figure 10. The figure explains that the basic compounding operation is always binary, that is the
entire compound always consists of two components.
 N N

N N N N

N N N N N N

dog food box stone age cave dweller

Figure 10

8.3 Other Word Formation

Derivation and compounding are indeed the most common word formation processes in English,
but they are not the only ones. The following processes of word formation in English are also
employed:
8.3.1 Clipping. As its name suggests the process of word building involves the clipping
off of an unstressed initial or final syllable, or syllables, of a word. Abbreviated forms used in
lieu of full words occur frequently in the vocabulary of students, especially. For examples, prof,
for professor, lab, for laboratory, exam, for examination, prep, for preparation, and ad for
advertisement. However, no one field of human activities seems to have any particular claim on
the clipped words, as witnessed by forms like flu, mike, doc, auto, porn, bike, condo
(condominium), disco, demo, and sub.
English names can also be clipped by deleting parts of the base word, for example Ron is
from Aaron, Liz, from Elizabeth, Mike, from Michael, Trish, from Patricia.
Sometimes truncation or clipping and affixation can occur together, as with formations
expressing intimacy, or smallness, so-called diminutive. For example, Mandy (Amanda), Robbie
(Roberta), Andy (Andrew), Charlie (Charles), and Patty (Patricia).
Among words shortened by clipping off the initial syllable, let us mention wig (periwig),
spite (despite), fence (defense), lone (alone, sample (example), and fender (defender).
8.3.2 Acronyms and Alphabetism. Akin to the process of shortening is the use of
initials as regular words. Such are M.C. (or emcee) for master of ceremonies, C.B. (or seabee)
for construction battalion, V.P. (or veep) for vice president. If initials of a phrase is used instead
of the full phrased, and is pronounced individually exactly as if we spelled it, like M.C., C.B.,
and V.P., then they are called alphabetism. However, if the set of initial letters are pronounced,
hence treated, as a word, such as UNESCO, UNICEF, RAM, and many others, they are called
acronyms. Now, you are able to decide which of these set of initial letters are alphabetism and
which are acronyms: CD, C.O.D, BBC, NATO, radar (radio detecting and ranging), MoU,
MERS (Middle East Respiratory Syndrome), REM (Rapid Eye Movement), MU (Machester
United), USA, and UK.
8.3.3 Blending (also called Portmanteau). Unlike compounding which keeps the
elements of which they are made up intact, blending, involves the combination of part of one
word with part of another to perform a single new word which may share or even combine their
meanings. Blending is the amalgamations of parts of different words, such as smog (from
smog+fog), modem (modulator+demodulator), edutainment (education+entertainment), moped
(motor+pedal), motel (motor+hotel), squash (squeeze+crash), slide (slip+glide), smaze
(smoke+haze). Having seen the examples, now you may recognize the following blends:
infotainment, Interpol, telecast, Amerindian, Eurasian, and brunch.
 8.3.4 Backformation (reanalysis). This process involves the creation of a new word
from an existing one by cutting off a real or supposed suffix, as exemplified by the verb edit,
derived from the noun editor. In a sense, backformation is a kind of derivation in reverse and,
like derivation, it usually involves the change of one part of speech to another. Typically, this
process serves to make verbs out of existing nouns that give the appearance of ending with a
noun suffix, thereby implying the existence of a verbal base from which a given noun has been
formed. Thus, the word editor looks like a noun formed on the verb edit to which the noun-agent
suffix –or (as in realtor) has been added; actually, however, the –or ending is an integral part of
the word and does not denote “agent”, just as the –er in butcher, butler, and peddler has no
connection with the English suffix –er in baker, player, and driver. In other words, a major
source of backformation in English has been words that end with –or or –er and have meanings
of the agentive, namely the person doing the action, such as editor, peddler, stoker, burglar,
beggar, etc. In fact many words end in these affixes resulting from the process of affixation, it
was them perceived that these words were formed by adding –or or –er to a verb. By process of
backformation, people reanalyzed and concluded that edit, peddle, stoke, burgl, and beg do exist
as simple verbs.
Backformation is also called reanalysis –new words are unconsciously created by
speakers when they no longer analyze a word in its costituent morphemes and instead break it
down according to the way it looks. From the word inflammable came flammable, when people
perceived in- as negation morpheme. Resurrect was originally from resurrection. Enthuse was
from enthusiasm; donate from donation; and orientate from orientation.

Other examples:

alcohol-ic > alco-holic > worka-holic, choco-holic

hamburg-er > ham-burger > cheese-burger, veggie-burger
entertain-ment > enter-tainment > info-tainment, edu-tainment,
marathon > mar-athon > walk-athon, phon-athon
self-destruction > self-destruction
attrition > attrit
hairdresser > hairdress

8.3.5 Conversion or Zero Derivation: Changing a word category (part of speech) into
another category without any segmental change. For example, innovations in technology have
encouraged the transformation of the nouns network, Google, microwave, and fax into verbs.
8.3.6 Neologisms or Creative Coinages. Now and then, new products or processes
inspire the creation of entirely new words. Such neologisms are usually short lived, never even
making it into a dictionary. Nevertheless, some have endured, for example quark (coined by
novelist James Joyce), galumph (Lewis Carroll), aspirin and spam (originally trademarks), grok
(Robert A. Heinlein).
8.3.7 Internal Modification: mouse-mice, foot-feet, louse-lice, mouse-mice, long-
length, wide-width, high-height. We can find internal modifications as characteristics of verbal
conjugation or nominal declination in Arabic and Hebrew.
8.3.8 Invention –very imaginative people do invent new words from scratch (e.g.
googol, meaning a very large number). Invention of new technological and commercial products
leads to advertising creativity. In this way, names of products or brand names such as Xerox,
Kodak, Kleenex, etc. were originally proper nouns but ended up being used as common nouns (a
xerox, a kleenex), even as verbs (to xerox). The word spam, which was once name of a product,
is now commonly used on the internet to express the idea of unwanted mails or to send these
unwanted mails.
8.3.9 Loan-translation (calque) –special kind of loan, parts of words are translated, or
the meaning of the word from foreign language is borrowed and translated into the recipient
language. For example, English word telephone is taken from the Greek tele distant and phone
voice; other examples include loan translations from German Meisterstuck becoming English’s
master piece; Standpunkt, standpoint; Kettenraucher, chain smoker; and Schwanengesang, swan
song. German borrowed the concept of telephone and translated it into German word
Fernsprecher means distant speaker. Arabic hatif, whisper from distant, is also a calque from
telephone. Can you think of Indonesian words which you think are calques? Pesawat terbang
from Aeroplane/airplane? Kapal selam-submarine? Goal keeper-penjaga gawang?
8.3.10 Imitation of Sounds. Words are also created by onomatopoeia, naming things
by imitating the sounds that are associated with them: boo, bow-wow, tinkle, click. Language
may have words that have been created to sound like the thing to which they refer.
Verbs: Buzz, hiss, sizzle (the sound of boiling water).
Proper Nouns: click and knock.
Animal Sound: Cock-a-doodle-doo, meaow, chirp, bow-wow (English), kokekokko, nyaa,
pii-pii, wan-wan (Japan), kuk-kukauk, ngiau, tiririt, aw-aw (Filipino), chichchirichi (Italy).
Sounds of Objects: rat-tat-tat, bang-bang, thud, hong, knock-knock.

8.3.11 Borrowing. The majority of the words used in modern English have been
borrowed from other languages. Although most of our vocabulary comes from Latin and Greek
(often by way of other European languages), English has borrowed words from more than 300
different languages around the world. Here are just a few examples:

 futon (from the Japanese word for "bedclothes, bedding")

 gorilla (Greek Gorillai, a tribe of hairy women, perhaps of African origin)
 hamster (Middle High German hamastra)
 kangaroo (Aboriginal language of Guugu Yimidhirr, gangurru , referring to a species of
kangaroo)
 kink (Dutch, "twist in a rope")
 moccasin (Native American Indian, Virginia Algonquian, akin to Powhatan mäkäsn and
Ojibwa makisin)
 molasses (Portuguese melaços, from Late Latin mellceum, from Latin mel, "honey")
 muscle (Latin musculus, "mouse")
 slogan (alteration of Scots slogorne, "battle cry")
 smorgasbord (Swedish, literally "bread and butter table")
 whiskey (Old Irish uisce, "water," and bethad, "of life")

Languages in contact borrow words from each other. A language may not have a word
for new product or concept. Thus, when coffee became popular in Europe the Arabic qahweh
was used in various forms: coffee, café, Kaffee, and so on. Japan in turn borrowed kohi from the
European languages. Borrowing can be a one-way or two-way street. French borrowed weekend
from English and English borrowed bon vivant in return. Japanese took game from English and
gave it sushi. Indeed, Japanese is full of English loan words.

Japanese English Japanese English

keiki cake futuboru football
steiki steak gemu game
boifurendo boyfriend kisu kiss
garufurendo girlfriend mekurafu make love
painapuru pineapple sarariman salary
man

Indonesian has borrowed and used many words from many languages. Traditionally, Malay
language, which is the origin of Indonesian, had borrowed from Sanskrit and Arabic in extensive
way. Due to the arrival of the Europeans, the Portuguese and Spanish, the Dutch and British,
Indonesian has shifted to borrowing from the European languages. In fact, it is said that nine out
of ten words in Indonesian is borrowed from foreign languages. In using such a large number of
borrowed words, Indonesian treat the words in hybrid way. Therefore, many Indonesian words
and expressions are mixture of many languages. For examples:
 Kabinet persatuan (European – Malay)
 Amal bhakti (Arabic – Sanskrit)
 Wakil presiden (Arabic – European)
 Dwi fungsi (Sanskrit – European)

Did you know that these words are borrowed? lemari, sepatu, minggu, kemeja, bendera,
kontan, koper, kopling, sepeda, loteng, lihai, sampan, koran, majalah, hakun, bahimat, nakhoda,
and mualim.

History and Sources of English Borrowing Words

Many English words are made up of foreign elements that have come into English
lexicon as a result of the particular cultural and socio-historical circumstances surrounding the
development of the English language.
English, often called the world’s greatest borrower, has indeed displayed remarkable
powers of adaptation and assimilation by absorbing so many and such varied elements of
vocabulary from diverse sources.

The Earliest Borrowings

While the Anglo-Saxons were still wandering about the forests of northern Europe in the
early centuries of the Christian era, such words as street, wine, and cheese (from Latin strata,
vinum, and caesus, respectively) had come into their language as a result of contact with Roman
traders and soldiers. The first large-scale borrowing of foreign words, however, occurred around
the end of the sixth century when Roman and Irish missionaries came to Britain to convert the
pagan Anglo-Saxons to the Christian religion, bringing them into direct contact with the Latin of
the Church. Lacking the words to designate the new concepts surrounding Christian doctrine and
church usage, the new converts naturally adopted Latin words like altar, mass, creed, and
master. Since the original language of the New Testament was Greek, many of the church words
had previously been borrowed by Latin from Greek –for instance, angel, bishop, devil, priest,
monk, and school, as well as the word church itself, which comes from the Greek kyriakon. The
initial [k] sound of the Greek word is still reflected in the Scottish word kirk.

Danish Elements
About a century and a half the arrival of the Christian missionaries, Britain was once
again subjected to devastating raids by the Danish Vikings. It is often difficult to determine
linguistic contribution of the Danes to the language of the Anglo-Saxons, but many common,
everyday words in modern English are clearly attributable to the Danes –for instance, fellow,
husband, law, wrong, rotten, and especially words that begin with a [sk] sound, as in skip, skill,
skull, skirt (the corresponding Anglo-Saxon word being shirt), and skin. Possibly the most
important borrowings were the pronominal forms they, them, and their, replacing the Old English
plural forms hie, heom, and heora which were easily confused with the singular he, him, and her.
The verb are is also of Danish origin, replacing OE sind.

French Influence
In 1066 Duke William of Normandy (a region in northern France) and his army invaded
England. These Normans spoke French. For the next three centuries England was to become a
country of two languages: The French of Norman overlords –the ruling classes- and the English
of the masses of the common people. French was used in churches, the law courts, and the
schools, and in every important political and business transaction. It was during this contact, the
Normans had left a lasting mark of French influence on the English language: the introduction of
thousands upon thousands of French words. These are of all sorts. They refer to government
(parliament, treaty, and the word government itself); church (sermon, parson, religion, baptism);
food and cooking (bacon, cream, broil, fry, roast, toast, dinner, supper, beef, pork, veal, mutton);
household items (curtain, chair, lamp, parlor); leisure (dance, music, chess, conversation,
leisure); literature and science (story, romance, poet, study, grammar, logic, surgeon, anatomy);
occupations and crafts (mason, painter, tailor, carpenter draper); as well as thousands of
ordinary, everyday words like very (from Old French verai ‘true’), nice, gentle, flower, rich, cry,
count, sure, plain, and so forth.

Other Foreign Sources

In addition to the Scandinavian, French, and Greco-Latin elements, English has also
borrowed a great many words from other languages. These loans are further witnesses of the
commercial, political, military, and social contacts of English-speaking people have had with the
nations of the world in modern times, especially since the sixteenth century. Words of all sorts of
Italian origin are also widely used in the English language today. For example, in architecture
and fine arts as balcony, colonnade, corridor, mezzanine, fresco, chiaroscuro, and miniature;
while traffic, risk, cash, deposit, and bank (as well as bankrupt) reflect commercial contact
between the two nations. Burlesque, vogue, intrigue, and campaign are also of Italian origin.
Other examples taken at random include partisan, sentinel, costume, pilot, carnival, escort,
barrack, canteen, laundry, pants, studio, ghetto, piazza, concert, compliment, and, of course,
broccoli, ravioli, macaroni, pizza, and spaghetti.
Many nautical terms had come from words of the language of the seafaring nation, the
Dutch, such as buoy, deck, dock, hoist, moor, reef, skipper, yacht, and schooner, as well as the
interjection ahoy!
 Spanish had also lent its words to the English language like armada, escapade,
barricade, flotilla, and embargo. However, Spanish, and to a lesser extent Portuguese, serves
mainly as a carrier of words that ultimately come from the New World, the Americas, such as
alligator, avocado, barracuda, cannibal, chocolate, tomato, potato, hurricane, maize, mulatto,
and Negro, to name a few. Some of them, like desperado, poncho, bronco, burro, patio, plaza,
corral, rodeo, sombrero, bonanza, and aficionado, appear unchanged. A borrowed word that
deserves special mention is cafeteria, an American-Spanish term originally meaning “coffee
shop.” As it came to denote a self-service restaurant, it seems that the idea of self-service
became identified with the ending –teria, giving rise to form like valetaria, marketaria, fruiteria,
booketeria, and conserteria.
German loanwords do not abound ing English. Swindler, plunder, halt, stroll,
kindergarten, and poodle are some of the most common ones, while some literary and
philosophical terms, like Gestalt and Weltanschauung are used in their German form may never
become naturalized.
Among other languages that also have enriched the English vocabulary include the
following ones.
Contribution from Russia includes tsar, vodka, Bolshevik, kaviar, and kulak.
The words borrowed from Arabic have come, as a rule, through other languages (often
via Spanish, French, or Italian) and belong to a common stock of words appropriated from
Arabic culture with which Western European civilizations came into contact during the Middle
Ages. Here we find, first of all, terms relating to mathematics, astronomy, and science in general,
for example, almanac, algebra, alchemy, alcohol, zero, zenith, and cipher. Others suggest rare
food and drink, such as elixir, syrup, and sherbet, or luxuries and amenities such as those
reflected in alcove, lute, divan, cotton, hashish, mattress, harem, carat, and hazard (from al-zar,
‘the die’). The word assassin, which comes to English via Italian is, ultimately, derived from
Arabic hashashin ‘hashish-eaters’. The word coffee, which may take its name from the
Ethiopean province of Kaffa, also comes from the Arabic, though it seems to have reached
English by way of Turkish qahveh.
Direct loans from Persian include bazaar, caravan (and is shortened van), crimson, shah,
and shawl. Through Latin or Old French come the words azure, taffeta, scarlet, tiger, and
paradise; while candy, lemon, lilac, orange, and sugar (ultimately from Sanskrit carkara) were
brought to the West by medieval Arabs. The English word chess, which was borrowed through
Old French esches, ultimately goes back to Persian shah ‘king.’ Taken over by the Arabs with
the specific meaning of ‘king at chess’, ut gave rise to the expression shah mat ‘the king is dead’,
the source of English checkmate, German Schachmatt, and Italian scacco matto.
From the languages of India come loot, pundit (from Sanskrit pandita ‘learned man’),
rajah, jungle, punch (Hindi panch from Sanskrit panca ‘five’, referring to the number of
ingredients in punch), fakir (from which we get the verb to fake and the noun faker), coolie,
bungalow, shampoo, thug, curry, monsoon, mandarin (from the Sanskrit mantrin ‘counselor’
through Portuguese mandarim), pagoda, veranda, and pajama.
Words from African languages mainly denote names of local flora and fauna, as well as
names for certain customs; gorilla, guinea, zebra, voodoo, and its variant hoodoo. Jazz and juke
are said to be Americanisms of African origin.
To the American Indian languages English is indebted for words like moccasin, totem,
tomahawk, moose, skunk, hickory, toboggan, and caucus.
 Among other loans from languages of the Far east, let us mention the Chinese words,
tea, tycoon, typhoon, kow-tow, gung-ho, and possibly, silk: the Japanese words kimono, samurai,
geisha, hara-kiri, sushi, shabu-shabu, tofu, and sake; atoll, tattoo, and taboo from the South Sea
Islands; and boomerang, kangaroo, billabong are from Australia.
Last but not least, Bahasa Indonesia, the national language of Indonesia, also lent some of
its words to the English language. The words come in various fields. Here are some of them:
Words pertaining to fauna: babirusa (compound word from babi ‘pig’ and rusa ‘deer’),
bantam, cassowary from kasuari (Papuan), cockatoo from kakatua, dugong from duyung,
orangutan, pangolin from trenggiling, and tapir; flora: durian, mangosteen from manggis
(manggustan), rambutan, salak (also known as zalacca), bamboo, kapok, paddy from padi,
pandanus, rattan, acjuput (from kayu putih), and sago. Indonesian words designating musical
instruments are also borrowed by the English language, such as angklung, gamelan, and gong.
Indonesian food names are also used in English, like agar, satay, rending, and tempeh. Some
Indonesian words for clothes are also used in English, such as batik, koteka, sarong, and songket.
Other words of Indonesian origin that are used in English include amok (as in verb run amok),
kris, silat, tripang (from teripang), and lahar.

8.4. Inflection
Inflection is a morphological process that modifies a word’s form in order to mark the
grammatical subclass to which it belongs.
In the case of English nouns, inflection marks the plural subclass by adding the suffix –s.
In the case of verbs, inflection marks a distinction between past and nonpast subclasses –
usually by adding the suffix –ed to indicate the past tense.
In the case adjectives, inflection marks degree; positive, comparative, superlative.
Let’s look at the examples below:
Plural inflection Tense inflection

Singular Plural Present Past

Apple apple s work work ed
car car s jump jump ed
dog dog s hunt hunt ed

Note: because inflection applies after all word formation rules, the plural affix can be added to
the output of derivation and compounding as well as to a simple noun. Similarly, tense affixes
can attached to the output of derivation and compounding as well as to simple verbs.

Inflection of derived compound nouns Inflection of derived compound verbs

Derived form Compound Derived form Compound

worker s football s hospitalize d babysit s
creation s outlaw s activate d manhandle d
kingdom s blackboard s
work (V) + er (N) + s (N)
Please notice that some inflectional morphemes look just alike with derivational morphemes.
Morpheme –er in worker is derivational morpheme, because it changes the category of the verb
work into a noun, worker. Whereas, morpheme –er in shorter or longer is inflectional
morpheme. Inflectional morpheme does not change the category of the adjective hot and long
respectively, however, change in meaning, in the forms of degree of shortness and length takes
place in adjective hot and long.

Inflection and derivation

The primary distinction between inflection and derivation is a functional one: derivation creates
new lexemes, and inflection serves to create different forms of the same lexeme. Yet, this is not
always sufficient to determine in concrete cases of morphology to which domain a particular
morphological form belongs. Consider English comparatives. How do we know if bigger is a
different lexeme than big, or another form of the lexeme big?
We might define inflection as ‘the kind of morphology that is relevant to syntax’.
According to that demarcation criterion, the morphological properties that play a role in
agreement and government are clear cases of inflection. This comprises all contextual inflection,
but also those morphological properties of words that function as controllers for this kind of
inflection. The marking of number on nouns is often not an instance of contextual inflection
itself, but it may play a role in determining the shape of adjectives and determiners with which it
combines. Note, however, that we cannot say that derivation is completely irrelevant to syntax.
For example, when we create causative verbs by means of derivation, we create transitive verbs,
and transitivity is certainly a property that is relevant to syntax.
A second possible criterion is that inflection is obligatory, whereas derivation is
optional. This criterion does apply to contextual inflection, but at first sight not always to
inherent inflection. In the case of verbal conjugation, inflection is always obligatory: you have to
choose a specific form of a verb in a clause. This seems not to apply to nouns: a noun can be
used without any morphological marking for number. In fact, for many nouns the need for a
plural form will (almost) never arise, as is the case for the English nouns attention, accordance,
and adolescence. However, one may claim that English words are always inflected for the
relevant categories because an English noun is always either singular or plural. After all, these
latter three nouns behave as singular nouns in subject–verb agreement. So these nouns are
singular ‘‘by default’’. In this sense, inflection for number is indeed obligatory in English.
An additional argument for considering these word combinations as filling paradigm
cells is the following. Latin has a number of so-called deponent verbs, verbs with a passive form
but an active meaning. For instance, the verb loquor ‘‘to speak’’ is such a deponent verb. The
crucial observation is that a word-sequence such as locutus est receives an active interpretation
as well, and means ‘‘he has spoken’’. This parallelism in interpretation as active forms is to be
expected if these analytic forms belong to the inflectional paradigm of verbs.
A fourth criterion for distinguishing inflection and derivation is that derivation may feed
inflection, but not vice versa. Derivation applies to the stem-forms of words, without their
inflectional endings, and creates new, more complex stems to which inflectional rules can be
applied. This is the main reason for keeping the two kinds of morphology distinct. It is a cross-
linguistic generalization that inflection is peripheral with respect to derivation, formulated by
Greenberg as follows: “If both the derivation and inflection follow the root, or they both precede
the root, the derivation is always between the root and the inflection” (Greenberg 1963:93).

Inflection Derivation
1. Does not change either the grammatical 1. Changes the category and/or th type of
category or the type of meaning – does meaning –creates new word
 not create new word 2. derivational affixes must be closer to
2. inflectional affixes are positioned after the root
derivational affixes 3. applicable to restricted classes of stems
3. relatively free to be combined with
stems of the appropriate category

N V V N

N Af V Af A Af V Af

Book s work ed modern ize govern ment

(season (N)) + al (A))) (king ( ) + dom ( ))) ?

*neighbor s hood neighbor hood s

Root IA DA root DA IA

IA = inflectional affix DA = derivational affix