Every language is a part of a certain culture. Languages reflect the whole course of the history of a nation that speaks this or that language. Learning a language, we can see all the historical events that accompanied the development of this language together with the nation it is spoken by. From this, it is clearly seen that the image of every language, i. e. its grammatical and lexical structure, its nature, and usage, are predetermined by the development of this or that language. It is this fact that explains numerous differences and similarities that characterize various languages of the world.
As is widely know, the majority of the languages spoken in the world can be divided into synthetic and analytic ones. This division is based on the character of the language and its morphology in particular. To make the essay more specific, here are the definitions of both types of languages (Carstairs-Mccarthy, 1992).
An analytic language is a language in which all relations between members of a phrase or a sentence are conveyed by grammatical means only, i. e. by means of the fixed word order, by the place of a certain word in a sentence and its combinability with other parts of this sentence. An example of an analytical language can be English. In this language, the role of a word in a sentence is demonstrated by its position, and its relations with other words in this sentence are also revealed by this word’s position and function in a sentence (Moulton, 1981).
A synthetic language is a language where the above-mentioned relations between the members of a phrase or a sentence are demonstrated not only by the word order but, to a much larger extent, by morphological means, i. e. inflections, and affixes that showcase relations of words and thus determine functions of each of them in a sentence. An example of this language type is Russian. In this language, the word order is much freer than in English, and the relations between words in a sentence are demonstrated mostly by means of inflections (Cook, 1997).
Driving from this difference, we can state that analytic languages are characterized by the use of derivational morphology, and inflectional morphology is more typical of synthetic languages. And what is the main difference between the two types of morphology in world languages? The answer is simple – the main factor that determines this or that type of morphology is the aim of a certain affix.
Derivational morphology is a phenomenon that deals with deriving, i. e., making up new words on the basis of already existing ones by means of adding derivational affixes to their stems. Thus not only new words but also new parts of speech are formed, for example, when a noun is derived from a verb or vice versa. In English, the noun “runner” is derived from a verb “to run” with the help of adding the derivational morpheme “-er” to the stem of this verb (Kiraz, 2001).
Inflectional morphology, as has been stated above, is more typical of synthetic languages. Its essence lies in showing the relations between words in a certain language unit, for example, in a sentence. For example, in Russian, the function of a word can be seen only from its inflection. У меня есть ручка (subject, as the inflection “a” shows that it is Nominative case). – Я купил ручку (object, as the inflection “y,” is the marker of the Accusative case) (Stump, 2001).
Another example can be found in the Turkish language, where the plural form of nouns is made up by means of derivational suffixes. The noun ev means “a house,” and its plural is even-ler, where ler is a plural-forming suffix. Case relations in the Turkish language are also demonstrated by means of derivational morphemes: EV-ler-den in the form of the Ablative case with the suffix den functioning as the indicator of this very case.
Japanese presents another interesting example of morphology, in this case, inflectional one. The plural form of a noun can be formed in this language not only by means of evident inflections but also with the help of zero inflections having the same meaning. For example, the Japanese word hito, which is translated as “a person,” has a plural form that coincides with the singular due to the usage of zero inflection to form the plural in this case. So, in the plural, we have hito as well.
One more feature of derivational morphology is its ability to express more than one meaning with the help of a single derivational suffix. The Greek language is one of the richest sources of examples for this point. The Greek word safety can be translated into English as “was being written,” so in this case, the morpheme –ete is the marker of such grammatical meanings as passive voice, durative, past tense and 3rd person singular (Johnson, 2006).
The Malay language presents a feature of the derivational morphology that can be observed very seldom in the languages of the world. It is called reduplication and lies in the doubling of the word stem in order to make up its plural form. The Malay word Anak means “a child” in English, and the plural form of this noun will be Anak-Anak in the Malay language.
In the Arabic language, the derivational morphology can be observed within such a phenomenon as the vowel interchange in the stem of the word. For example, the word rajulun means “man” in English, and its plural is going to be rijalun that corresponds to English “men.” So here, we can see certain similarities with English.
As we can clearly observe from the above-presented information, the differences between derivational and inflectional morphology are considerable. The former helps to create new words or word forms. While the latter lies in the possibility to show the relations of words to each other.
Works Cited
Carstairs-Mccarthy, A. (1992). Current Morphology. New York: Routledge.
Cook, V. (1997) Inside Language. Arnold: London.
Moulton, J. & Robinson, G. (1981) The Organisation of Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Johnson, S. (2006) Linguistic Typology. New York: Routledge.
Kiraz, G. A. (2001). Computational Nonlinear Morphology: With Emphasis on Semitic Languages. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
Stump, G. T. (Ed.). (2001). Inflectional Morphology: A Theory of Paradigm Structure. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.