at is added to other forms but it is that other forms are added to the consonant structure to derive new words, thus the consonant structure seems more like root morpheme. Notwithstanding the resemblances in terms of derivation, there are obvious differences between root morpheme and consonant structure. (2) So the next question would be: what are the differences between consonant structure and root morpheme? For these differences, it would be inappropriate to view the consonant structure as belonging to the category of root morpheme. At best, the consonant structure can be considered to be a kind of ‘submorpheme’ both for its lack of independence in language use and for its incompleteness in language form.
...........
Chapter 2 The Submorphemic Status of ECS
In this chapter, we will identify that ECS is not a kind of morpheme and analyze the submorphemic status of ECS. First, the fundamental concepts will be discussed, followed by a discussion of the classification of morphemes. Second, we will distinguish ECS from the morphemic unit. Third, the submorphemic status of ECS will be explained.
2.1 Morpheme and Word-formation
Many words in English can easily be split into smaller components. The smallest meaningful constituents of words that can be identified are called morpheme, which is constituted by the Greek word morphē (form) and the French suffix -eme (unit). Traditional linguistics often describes morpheme as the minimal linguistic sign. What this means is that the morpheme is the smallest meaningful constituent of a word which contributes to the overall meaning of the composite word. In other words, the morpheme is “the smallest functioning unit in the composition of words.”(Crystal, 1985:31) Take disappointment for example. This is one word, but it can be broken down into dis-, appoint, -ment, each having its own special meaning. These fragments cannot be further segmented into individually parts; otherwise, they would not make any sense. In nuts, both -s and nut are morphemes. Other examples of words consisting of two morphemes would be “break-ing, hope-less, re-write, cheese-board; words consisting of three morphemes are re-writ-ing, hope-less-ness, ear-plug-s; and so on.” (Haspelmath, 2010:3) Here, nuts and disappointment can be segmented based on the meaningful components which have to relate to the lexical meaning after the segmentation. The part of the morpheme we have referred to as its ‘form’ is called morph, a term coined on the basis of the Greek word for ‘form, figure’. Morphemes are realized in speech by morphs. “They a
