The terms learners referred to in this article are software designers, in this group of 23-26, tasked with producing software products for the travel industry. They were selected based on their performance in a terms assessment and identified as intermediate users of the language.
All of these had studied British for 10 years in school and later at the university British was the medium of instructions.
A few of them were risk takers, ready to take on duties regardless of any mistakes they may make. There have been those who had been spurred on by the likelihood of their lacking language skills impacting their job graph; they were also ready for self-learning and happy to have responsibility for his or her learning. Some were hesitant, unsure of the knowledge and fearful to make errors.
All of them were, however, comfortable with technical dialect, but were very diffident to face situations that called for regular communication. They needed help with each day vocabulary to converse effectively with fellow workers and clients.
If we consider words as indie/freestanding models with meaning, a notion proposed by McCarthy (1990), then we can easily see that these products of so this means can further be divided and re-combined to form other words. Though the word ‘terminated’ can be an independently meaningful item, under deeper observation it becomes clear that this word contains two devices ‘cancel’ and the past tense marker ‘-ed’. The linguistic item ‘cancel’ is a freestanding expression in English, but there is no such term as ‘-ed’ in British, even though ‘-ed’ is a meaning-bearing product. Such linguistic items which are not freestanding are reported to be bound and these varieties may appear only in mixture with other forms. The two significant parts, ‘cancel’ and ‘-ed’ are called morphemes.
Katamba (2003) defines morphemes as the atoms with which words are built. Morphemes will be the smallest device of lexical and grammatical meaning and they are came to the realization by morphs, as morphemes do not have a physical representation. A single morpheme can be manifested as multiple complementary morphs in particular phonological or morphological contexts. Why don’t we go through the history tense marker -ed to understand the distribution of these complementary morphs known as allomorphs.
Free morphemes can stand alone as words; whereas bound morphemes such as ‘-ed’ are only used in mixture with other morphemes. You can find word forms that have but an individual unbound morpheme as well as others which includes more than one morpheme. Words like talk, eat and mend are types of freestanding morphemes and words such as predictable and reflection are formed by incorporating many morphemes.
Affixes are destined morphemes mounted on a stems either to make a new phrase or a phrase form. Affixation of morphemes can be either inflectional or derivational.
Katamba (2003) posits that the British language has little inflections because of its inclination to be an isolating vocabulary. The few inflections it includes are suffixes. These suffixes are destined morphemes and are attached to the stem to inflect or change words to express grammatical features, such as the changes in anxious, number, ownership, and examples of adjectives.
There are 8 inflectional suffixes in British and they are:
In British derivational affixes include both prefixes and suffixes. Katamba (2003) says that the purpose of derivation is to make lexical items rather than to create grammatical items that will easily fit into confirmed syntactic position. The three important derivational procedures in English are: affixation, transformation and compounding.
Affixation is one of the most typical methods of creating words in British. Derivational affixes can be either prefixes, the ones that are added before the basic, or suffixes, that are attached after the platform. Word forming procedures like creating nouns from verbs, adjectives from verbs and verbs from adjectives are types of a few derivational practices in British.
Derivational affixes are different from inflexional affixes in many ways:
They change the term category as well as the meaning of a phrase to which it is connected – energy (n) +- ise – energise (v)
Even though they incorporate to make a new term they aren’t affected by syntactic relations outside of the phrase, they could be separated and recombined with other morphemes to form other combos.
Derivational morphemes can be attached only to certain stems.
*drumist is no acceptable expression.
Conversion or zero derivation is the predominant method of making lexical items in English. In this process a lexical item is assigned to a new syntactic category. The word ‘permit’ can be used either as a noun or as a verb; the phonological representation and the grammatical framework where it is located are the two aspects that can alert the change in the word-class. (Permit (v) and perMit (n). Crystal (2012) quotes from Shakespeare, ‘Petruchio is Kated’ for example of change – the name of any person learning to be a verb – to further his debate that transformation was a customary word-formation process even during Shakespeare’s time.
Compounding is the procedure of joining two bases to make a new expression; of the two words, the one that is syntactically dominant is definitely the head and the other as the modifier. Usually the modifier is located before the head and any suffix that may later be added to the compound word is mounted on the head. Compound words are different from phrases; this is of a compound word, unlike a phrase, is not the total of this is of the base products that form the word. Iin a compound word the principal stress is on the first word and in a key phrase the primary stress is on the last word.
Meaning of the compound
. Blue print
an early on plan or design for a project
a building used for growing plant life that require warmth
A cost/profit analysis of the learning of term parts should be reason enough for a learner of English language to study word parts. Nation estimates from Roberts (1964), Grinstead (1925) and Parrot (1987, 1990) to indicate that around 60% of the British vocabulary comes from German, French, Latin and Greek and that a large proportion of the words make use of affixes. The research of the LOB Corpus completed by Bird unveiled that 97% of the words in the LOB corpus were derived from around 2, 000 roots. Nation preserves that the origins of the English vocabulary and the regularity of expression parts validate the analysis of word parts.
The two quarrels levelled against the teaching/learning of term parts derive from the contention that, your time and effort involved with learning term parts is not commensurate with dialect output.
The first discussion against the teaching of word parts is the fact the meaning of any phrase is not the sum of its parts (Deighton, 1970); This debate has been countered by White, Power and White (1989) drawing on their own as well as Nagy and Anderson’s (1984) empirical evidence that almost all of the affixed words – ‘probably at least 80% – present this is their parts suggest. Katamba (2003) argues that compositionality is the main element to understanding a word. He says that if we know this is of small units which will make up the bigger models we can decipher the meaning of the whole. For example, if we realize the meaning of the suffix -ful (filled with x), and the meaning of the base to which these suffixes are fastened, then the so this means of words like useful, careful, fearful and cheerful become self-explanatory. Most of the morphemes that form a phrase have regular/secure so this means; for example, the prefix re- means ‘again’ in virtually all the words in which it occurs.
In the light of the empirical evidence and the example we observed we can conclude that the meaning of the majority of the British words is exactly what its parts suggest and therefore knowledge of this is of the parts can help a learner understand a expression across contexts and utilization. If we were to extend this debate further we’re able to say that this knowledge combined with the contextual signs would be useful in decoding even the metaphorical so this means of a phrase; a brain hunter would thus lose the sinister overtones of days gone by and acquire the current meaning of somebody who recruits people into key business positions.
The next discussion against teaching/learning of word parts would be that the knowing the parts of a word might not familiarise a learner with all the members of that expression family (Schmitt 1998, 1999, Schmitt &Meara 1997). Nation argues that the notion of expression family is psychologically real and a word is to be regarded as a member of a expression family. Understanding of the term parts can help the learners understand a word in its relation to the other members of the family. For instance, knowledge of the various inflections of English and the meaning of the base of the term predict can familiarise a learner with all the possible mixtures (family members) of predict; predict- predicted- predicting- predictable and prediction are are just some of the members of this family.
Nagy, Anderson, Schommer, Scott, and Stallman (1989) highlights that the swiftness of recognition of the word is dependant on the frequency of incident of the customers of that term family. They price the studies of Stanners, Neiser, Hernon, & Hall (1979) to progress their discussion that related words are associated in the mental lexicon. So there are linked entries for create, creates created and creation and being able to access any word out of this family can partially activate other family members. Word parts are not simply associated in the mental lexicon, but morphologically purchased to stand for the connection.
Another discussion against learning word parts is the fact that L2 learners by using this for guessing this is of a word may cause the learner to misinterpret the term. Schmitt quotes Haynes (1993) to validate this debate; Haynes found that learners prolonged with the incorrect meaning even though it didn’t donate to the context. For instance Inflammable is often misinterpreted to signify non-flammable. Clarke and Region (1980) caution that term parts strategy should be utilized to check the guesses drawn from the context.
Furthermore, knowledge of the term parts empowers the learner by instructing him to use his understanding at the receptive and fruitful level. In the receptive level it instructs him a) to recognize the different the different parts of a complex phrase, b) to be aware that these word parts may be used to make other words, c) how the meaning of the various parts combine to make a new meaning, and d) the way the amount of the parts relates to the dictionary interpretation. At the effective level it makes him aware of the way the formal changes can affect the spelling, pronunciation and the term class of the base when a intricate word is formed. (Country)
Learning term parts presents a couple of challenges to language learners. The greatest challenge is that of time and exposure. Studies conducted by Nagy, Diakody, & Anderson (1993) explain that L1 learners do not acquire effectiveness in morphology until their high school; if this takes so long to build up in L1 learners despite their good thing about maximum vulnerability, then L2 learners will probably take more time to learn this aspect (Schmitt). Even though the learners in my group had studied English for a decade, they have discovered inflectional suffixes only within grammar exercises and also have never been explicitly trained derivational affixes. Their exposure to morphological forms had not been commensurate with the duration of their review. They have got used these varieties productively without much knowledge about the guidelines that guide almost all of these formations; ‘Though I have putted remainders because of this tasks, accidently the remainder was unanswered’; ‘the assembly is preponed to three in the evening’, ‘he is very private during presentations’ are types of the common errors.
Schmitt points out that lack of regularity in affixation can cause problems even if the meaning of the parts is clear. He gives the example of the suffix -ist.
Another challenge for the L2 learner is having less awareness that not absolutely all words can be destroyed into parts. Learners sometimes make an effort to decompose words like refuse, repel, replicate, revamp and attempt to use the recognized stem, producing a meaningless expression.
Learners frequently have difficulty with the formal changes that occur with affixation in spelling and pronunciation. Some derivational affixes lack consistent spelling and has to be learned separately.
Gairns & Redman records that affixation sometimes produces changes in stress and sounds in a word.
Derivational suffixes have to be – do not follow rules
A good starting place for any instructor wishing to cure this situation would be to train the learners to break, the intricate words that are already known to the learner, into its components and to help them understand the practical meaning of these components. encourage the learners to become more aware of these morphological instill in the mond of the learner that aspects of dialect learning is incremental an beA professors activity has probably never been well defines just as this situation Language learning is incremental An excellent idea to treatment t
Nation shows that learners should be educated intricate words as unanalyzed wholes before they begin to analyze phrase parts. teacher I would explicit teaching of select morphological units appropriate to the learner level, training the learners the. A educator needs to expose the learners to sophisticated words before these are trained to analyse the various elements of that expression.
Because morphological acquisition is incremental in nature explicit teaching of level appropriate affixes, encouraging them to notice the correct forms encountered in newspaper publishers regular coverage through exercises and receptive material.
This guidelines out the possibility of a totally graded approach; instead I’d gather words for examination from their
Not all words can be destroyed into parts
Affixes are not clear – Some affixes are used mor frequently than others – so have to be selective
Guessing a wrong meaning and sticking on get back explanation though it made no sense. (Haynes 1993) -Clarke and Country (1980)- phrase parts best used to verify/verify this is.
Difficulty in speculating the word class & choosing an appropriate stress, formal changes in spelling, phonetics and term forms
Derivational suffixes need to be learned individually – do not follow rules
Furthermore, it empowers the learner by teaching him to use his understanding at the receptive and fruitful level. With the receptive level it teaches him a) to recognize the different the different parts of a complex word, b) to keep yourself updated that these phrase parts can be used to make other words, c) the way the meaning of the several parts combine to produce a new interpretation, and d) how the sum of the parts relates to the dictionary so this means. At the effective level it makes him aware of the way the formal changes can affect the spelling, pronunciation and the term class of the bottom when a complex word is developed. (Nation)