Mohamad Nizar, [email protected]. Institut Teknologi Nasional, https://www.itenas.ac.

id/

WORD FORMATION:
An introduction to the study of syntax in English

Intoduction
Interpreting a speech immediately involves observing the meaning of the words. A
sequence of words, such as a sentence, each word has a concept called inflectional form and it
contains a basic lexical unit (lexeme). Chaer (2007: 2-6) stated that a lexicon is "a set of
lexemes", which presents all information about the concept, use and pronunciation of words in
a language. Thus, it provides lexical knowledge. A set of lexemes is not a large homogeneous
bundle, but consists of categories of nouns, verbs, adjectives, prepositions, inflections,
determiners, degree adverbs, and complementizers which Newson et.al (2004: 5-6) said are
categories of words. A speech contains structured categories of words and is a study of the
contexture of words in phrases, clauses and sentences in the language system (syntax). Newson
et.al. (2004: 6-10) explained word categories, which divided into two typologies, they are
thematic and functional1. Nouns, verbs, adjectives and prepositions are thematic categories.
Function categories are inflections, determiners, degree adverbs and complementizers. The
categories are embedded in a speech, which is where syntax is concerned. Observation of words
becomes very crucial when they are closely related to all language events. It appears that words
have a depth of reasoning in terms of linguistic units in terms of phonological and even
orthographic units (concrete), as well as syntactic or grammatical units (abstract). The matter
stated does not yet explain the paradigm of words in the ablative case in several languages and
the accusative case (see Mathews 1974: 20-30).
Observing words is sophisticated and this is important for linguistic researchers who are
responsible for maintaining the consistency of the rules of the English. The importance of
research is aimed at English language teaching where teachers are responsible for guiding how
English works whether written or spoken, mother tongue or foreign language. Teachers are
responsible for guiding how to interpret other languages into English accurately. This is the
current concern of linguistic studies in English. This article only presents the thoughts of
linguistic experts about words and the case examples present more of the thoughts of Mathews
(1974 and 1981). This would encourage researchers to explore a number of lexeme case
paradigms, which provide a broad field for syntactic research in English. That's why this article
is written simply as an introduction to word analysis, assists linguistics students or novice
researchers of syntax in English. This article is open to criticism for improvement in future
discussions of the word. Here's a list of symbols to make it easier to read this article.

[…] phonetic element

/…/ phonological element
|…| form of word
+ morpheme boundary
{…} grammatical element
… intermission
* ungrammatical or unacceptable
= equivalent
Ø zero

1
Thematic typology is categories of words with lexical content. Functional typology is categories without lexical
content, fulfilling some grammatical function in a given structure (see Newson et.al:2004).
Phonological Level and Morphological Process
The existence of words is distributed in series or structures consisting of various levels
in linguistics2. Identifying words in terms of phonological unit, such as syllables that are formed
systemically from the smallest element of the secondary articulation3, for example, [collect] is
phonetically concrete, consisting of the syllables /kə/ and /ˈlekt/, and the smallest elements of
the first independent syllable are /k/ and /ə/ and so on. Bloomfield (1933:178) stated that words
are free forms, which consist entirely of (two or more) smaller free forms. In short, a word is
the smallest free form. A number of words in English are monosyllabic or have only one
syllable, such as |bar|, |both|, |since|, |strengthted|, and also the definite article or definite article
|a| or |an|. Morphologically, a word is a unit of language, in the form of a single or combined
morpheme, or independent (free morpheme). Even at the morphology, words are the largest
units and the smallest units are morphemes. Observing words also includes terms of word form
and lexemes, for example, |collect| is a form or appearance of a word, it is a verb element that
fills the predicate function in morphosyntactic studies (see also Mathews 1974:20).
Kridalaksana (2008:110) defined a word as the smallest unit in syntax, it arises from a lexeme
through a morphological process.

Gramatical Relationships
Observing words in syntactic diagrams (grammatical units) is abstract. At the syntactics,
words are the smallest units, hierarchically become components or elements that form larger
syntactic units, they are phrases, clauses and sentences. As the smallest unit in syntax, words
act as fillers for syntactic functions, and as markers of syntactic categories, as well as as
connectors in units or parts of syntactic units. In a conversation, words act as fillers for syntactic
units in the form of full words or function words. Full words are words that lexically have
meaning and have the possibility of undergoing morphological processes. They are an open
class, and can be independent as a unit of speech, for example, |house|, |wind|, |man|. Function
words are words and lexically have no meaning, do not undergo morphological processes. They
are a closed class and cannot be independent in speech, including prepositions, conjunctions,
articles and pronouns.

2 The considered aspects of language structure can be investigated independently. They are the levels of phonology, grammar,
and lexicon.
3 Ladefoged (2023) explained, “When an approximant articulation occurs at the same time as another articulation is being made

at a different place in the vocal tract, the approximant is said to form a secondary articulation. There are special terms for
some of these possibilities. Added lip rounding is called labialization; it occurs in the formation of several English sounds—
e.g., during the pronunciation of the palato-alveolar fricative at the beginning of the word shoe. Raising of the front of the
tongue while simultaneously making another articulation elsewhere in the vocal tract is called palatalization. … English; e.g.,
in the first consonant in the word leaf. Raising of the back of the tongue to form a secondary articulation is called velarization;
it occurs in the last consonant in the word feel, which therefore does not contain the same sounds as those in the reverse order
in the word leaf. Retracting of the root of the tongue while making another articulation is called pharyngealization; ….”
Chandler (2021) explained, “At the level of first articulation the system consists of the smallest meaningful units available
(e.g. morphemes or words in a language). In language this level of articulation is called the grammatical level. The meaningful
units at this level are complete signs, each consisting of a signifier and a signified. Where codes have recurrent meaningful
units (such as the Olympic sports pictograms and textile care symbols), they have first articulation. In systems with double
articulation, these signs are made up of elements from the lower (second) level of articulation. At the level of second
articulation, a semiotic code is divisible into minimal functional units which lack meaning in themselves (e.g. phonemes in
speech or graphemes in writing). These purely differential structural units (called figurae by Hjelmslev) are recurrent features
in the code. They are not signs in themselves (the code must have a first level of articulation for these lower units to be
combined into meaningful signs). These lower units are nonsignifying sign elements. In a code with both levels (a 'double
articulated' system) the function of these lower units is purely to differentiate the minimal meaningful units. In language, the
phonemes /b/, /p/ and /t/ are elements of second articulation, the function of which is to distinguish between words, such as
/pin/, /bin/ and /tin/, which are elements of the first articulation of language. In language, the level of second articulation is
thus a phonological level.”
 Lexeme terms are applied to paradigmatic4 phenomena to analyze English data, for
example, |sleeps|, |slept|, |sleeping|. The three of them are grammatically different, but they are
the lexeme |sleep|, their difference lies in the inflectional paradigm5. Observe (1), |sleeping| is
a derivational paradigm6 or change in word form or the verb lexeme |sleep| to the noun
|sleeping|. Word form |sleeping| in (2) is the inflectional paradigm of the verb lexeme |sleep|.
Two cases of |sleeping| is homonymous which is the same as the cases in (3) and (4). Word
form |matches| in (3) is an inflectional paradigm, it comes from the noun lexeme |match|. Word
form |matches| in (4) is the inflectional paradigm |matches|, |matched|, |matching| which comes
from the verb lexeme |match|. A number of examples have been shown by Mathews (1974:23)

(1) A sleeping bag

(2) She is sleeping soundly
(3) Wrestling matches were watched in stadium
(4) The commettee matches two footclubs on sundays

which contain identical lexemes and try them with other words. Cases (5) and (6) are clearly
different. Word form (5) is the past tense and (6) is the perfect tense. They are from the verb
lexeme |run|, which is identical to the inflection of the perfect verb |run|. Other identical cases
are in (7) and (8), also show the same scene. Two forms of the word |jumped| are very identical
phonetically and in spelling, but grammatically have different boundaries of situations or
events. Word form |jumped| in (7) is the past tense but (8) is the perfect tense, both are
inflectional paradigms of the verb lexeme |jump|.

(5) She ran away

(6) She has run away
(7) She jumped
(8) She has jumped

Analyzing a word in the perfect tense of the verb |disappeared| as stated by Mathews
(1981: 50-54), it is a form in an inflectional paradigm of the verb lexeme |disappear|. Try other
words that can be analyzed in (9). Separate it successively into three units, |Gembols Bank| as
a proper name, |‘s| is added which is the reduction |has|, and the perfect verb |unorganized|.
Note, the perfect verb |unorganized| has the smallest unit, un + organize + ed, which is one
form in an inflectional paradigm of the verb lexeme |unorganize| and is different from the verb
lexeme |organize|. Placement of the verb |unorganized| in this paradigm, it must be viewed from
the case of morphology and syntax or also called the case of perfect morphosyntax. The cases
are two complex root forms according to morphological construction7.

(9) Gembols Bank’s unorganized

The prefix |un-| is an affix (bound morpheme), designates the meaning 'not' or 'the lack of', is a
stem (nonnucleus) or not a root (nonroot). Then, combined with |organize| (free morpheme), is
the stem/nucleus as well as the root. Suffix |–ed| is a syntactic process, so the form |organized|
4 Paradigmatic relationship is a linguistic phenomenon, the interchangeability of relationships between language elements at a
certain level and other elements outside the level. A sentence like I wrote an article, noun |I| can be exchanged with |he|, |we|,
etc., the verb |write| can be exchanged for |read|, |see|, etc.
5 Changes in word forms that show various grammatical relationships; includes declension (change) of nouns, pronouns,

adjectives. Verb conjugation also includes changes in word form, it is a classification of verbs according to tense. Changes
in word form due to an element being added to a word to show a grammatical relationship.
6 A process of adding non-inflectional affixes to the origin (base word) to form words.
7 In general, if a number of morphemes combined to indicate a word, it would be explained in morphology. If a number of

morphemes combined to show a phrase, it would be explained in syntax (Nida 1963:78).

is a morphosyntactic process. Suffix |-ed| is a syntactic process in one inflectional paradigm of
the verb |unorganize| or realization of the perfect tense of the verb |unorganized|. Thus, structure
(9) has at least five smallest units, Gembols Bank + ‘s + un + organize + ed. Another view, in
the syntax of ‘s + unorganized is not made up of two units but five, each of which is related in
one construction relationship {have} + {3rd singular} + {un- + organize + past participle}.
Reduction of |has| is |'s|, a realization of the verbal morpheme |have|, as well as an inflectional
morpheme which is conventionally called the third singular included in the second order. The
next morpheme is |un-| which is usually called a prefix, then |organize| which is accompanied
by the perfect tense, appears as an accompanying morpheme into one construction in a series
of sounds /ˈôrɡəˌnīz/ plus /d/. Another syntactic analysis, the inflectional morpheme |has| is as
a realization of the verbal morpheme |have|. This is due to the demands of |Gembols Bank| as a
proper name and as a third singular subject. Even though the inflectional morpheme |has| bound
by the subject, but also bound by the perfect tense of the verb |unorganized| which demands the
presence of the verbal morpheme |have|.
Cases (9) and 10 are the same, they are again divided into three units, and the
phenomenon |has| is a crossword boundary analysis except |un-| which precedes the morpheme
|organize|. The perfect tense of the verb |unorganized| can be substituted by the present
progressive verb |unorganizing|, and this is also an inflectional morpheme. Inflectional

(10) Gembols Bank’s unorganizing

paradigm of the verb lexeme |unorganze| is the morphosyntax of the present progressive tense
in (10). In other speech, the suffix |–ing| is a syntactic process in an inflectional paradigm of the
verb |unorganize|, and its realization is the present progressive tense of the verb |unorganizing|.
Thus, the reduction |‘s| after |Gembols Bank| as a proper name no longer |has| but rather |is|.
With this explanation, there is a attentive choice regarding determining words as phonological,
grammatical and lexical units.
A discussion of words is not enough to show that morphemes, if they are arranged in a
phrase, must have a syntactic function with the analysis as has been explained. Observe (11)
which discusses the form |thinner| as a comparative adjective |thin|. Traditionally, |thinner|
demands the presence of |than| then in broader units the composition is |than Enji|. Observing
|thinner than Enji|, get |thinner| replaced by |cuter| on (12) or |smarter| in (13), and |–er than| can
be removed to become (14), but cannot be accepted in (15), (16), and (17). So, |-er than Enji| is
a syntactic unit with the inflectional |–er| is exactly parallel to the word |more|. Likewise, |-er|
is a syntactic unit called a comparative morpheme. The next case is |more graceful| in (18).

(11) Echa is thinner than Enji

(12) Echa is cuter than Enji
(13) Echa is smarter than Enji
(14) Echa is thin

(15) *Echa is thin than Enji

(16) *Echa is thinner Enji
(17) *Echa is thinner than

(18) Echa is more graceful than Enji

(19) Echa is more diligent than Enji
(20) Echa more friendly than Enji
(21) Echa is graceful
 (22) *Echa is graceful than Enji
(23) *Echa is more graceful Enji
(24) *Echa is more graceful than

The word form |more| is a comparative form of adverb to accompany an adjective |graceful|.
Observing |more graceful than Enji|, the word form |graceful| replaced by the adjective |diligent|
as in 19 or |friendly| at (20). Also, |more … than| can be leaved, so as in (21), but constructions
(22), (23), and (24) are not acceptable. Thus, the adjective |graceful| is a syntactic unit and |more
… than Enji| is other syntactic unit that have interdependence between each other (see Mathews
1981:55). The case |more graceful than| is about grammatical relationships not with inflection,
but is called feriprastic which is expressed in separate words because there are more than two
syllables. The case |–er than| is non-periphrastic because it is inflectional.
After periphrastic formation was discussed, Mathews (1981:59-63) showed that the
phenomenon of two nouns can be related to the genitive. Observe (25) as Methews has shown.
Particle |of| is a grammatical morpheme, it is useful as a link between lexical morphemes |dress|
and |queen|. In such constructions, it is as a grammatical marker or expressing a grammatical
modifier, indicating (a function in a word or) a form in a construction identified as genitive (or
of genitive construction), because it refers to a signal relationship that can be perceived (cue)
between the two morphemes. Noun |queen| has the potential to be replaced by other nouns or

(25) The dresses of queen = Queen’s dresses

proper names, including plurals or nominals. It may also be preceded by the article modifier
|the dress| or |a dress|, quantifier |some dresses|, no article |Ø dresses|, or plural demonstrative
|these dresses|. Case (25) is an open set case because it accepts additional elements in the word
class. In contrast to (9), the case |has| and |organized|, {have} + {3rd singular} + {organize +
past participle}. Past participle verb |organized| in (9) was a form in an inflectional paradigm
of the verb lexeme |organize|, or has gone through a grammatical process that only required the
presence of |have| as a past participle binder. This phenomenon showed the past participle of
the verb |organized| not open to accepting the addition of other elements except |have| as a past
participle marker. This case is called a closed system (closed set).
The verb lexeme |want| and |ask| in (26) and (27) as an infinitive construction that is not
meaningful enough without being connected by |to|. The function of |to| is a marker or modifier
of the infinitive, and also a substitute for the construction of |–ing| in participles, or |–ing| as a
participial marker. Form |to| and |-ing| in such constructions, they are grammatical markers or

(26) I want to go
(27) She asks to leave

indicate grammatical characteristics (determinants). They also indicate (a function in a word

or) a form in a construction identified as the infinitive |to| and participle |–ing|.
Morphosyntactically, they show the morphemic or syntactic process of words. Such an
approach also provides an argument for |the|'s pararticle case and |an| as a noun marker or
auxiliary verb |have| and |has| as a past participle marker.

Conclusion
The existence of words is not only seen in phonological units, but also in grammatical
units (syntax). The existence of words can also be discussed at the morpheme level (including
discussions about roots, stems, nucleus and non-nucleus) in broader units. Arguments about the
structure of morpheme units arise because of inflectional cases, so, discussions about words
would be even more interesting. Observe words in agglutinative languages that tend to show
phonological units, such as in the case of morphosyntactic characteristics of the present
participle which must refer to person, gender and number. As a result, word analysis does not
only refer to parts of words, but actually to each character in each word as a whole. This
phenomenon clearly shows that the words are not separated in a series. Again, for observers of
syntax in English, words in their various phenomena are an abundant area of research in
linguistics.

Works Cited
Bloomfield, Leonard. (1933). Language. The University of Chocago Press, Ltd., London.
Chaer, Abdul. (2007). Leksikologi dan Leksikografi Indonesia. Jakarta: Rineka Cipta.
Chandler, Daniel. (2021). Semiotics for Beginners, Last modified: 11/23/2021 [accessed
December 15, 2023]. http://surl.li/opuft.
Kridalaksana, Harimurti. (2008). Pembentukan Kata dalam Bahasa Indonesia. Gramedia
Pustaka Utama.
Mathews, P.H. (1974). Morphology. An Introduction to the theory of world-structure.
(Cambridge Text-Books in Linguistics, I.) London: Cambridge University Press.
------- (1981). Syntax. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Newson, et.al. (2004). Basic English Sintax with Exercise. [accessed December 15, 2023].
http://primus.arts.u-szeged.hu/bese/contents.htm
Nida, Eugene. (1963). Morphology. The Descriptive Analysis of Words. University of Michigan
Press.
Peter N. Ladefoged. (2023). Phonetics: Linguistics, Fact-checked by Last Updated: Dec 5, 2023
• Article History [accessed December 15, 2023]. http://surl.li/opulg ,