In traditional grammar the study of the morphemic structure of the word is based upon two criteria – positional and semantic (functional). The positional criterion presupposes the analysis of the location of the marginal morphemes in relation to the central ones. The semantic criterion involves the study of the correlative contribution of the morpheme to the general meaning of the word. In accord with the traditional classification, morphemes at the upper level are divided into root morphemes and affixal morphemes (lexical and grammatical) (Blokh, 2000).

Synthetic and analytic languages

In linguistic typology, there are synthetic and analytic languages. Synthetic languages compose (synthesize) multiple concepts into each word, while analytic languages break up (analyze) concepts into separate words. The distinction is a matter of degree: the most analytic languages consistently have one morpheme per word while, at the other extreme, in polysynthetic languages, a single inflected verb may contain as much information as an entire English sentence (URL:.

The English language refers to the languages of the analytic type. The modern forms of the English verb (are doing, has been studying) are formed analytically, because they consist of a part devoid of lexical meaning and transmitting the required grammatical categories, and a part conveying a semantic meaning (root morphemes: do, run).

The categorial structure of the word. The notions of grammatical meaning, grammatical form, grammatical category. Oppositional theory. Oppositional reduction.

Notional words possess some morphemic features expressing grammatical meaning. These features determine the grammatical form of the word. Grammatical meanings are very abstract, general meanings, therefore, the grammatical form unites a whole class of words, so that each word of the class expresses the corresponding grammatical meaning together with its individual concrete semantics. The most general meanings rendered by language units and expresses by systemic correlations of word forms, are interpreted in linguistics as categorial grammatical meanings. For example, previousness and simultaneousness of action is expressed by perfect and non-perfect forms, so they form the category of correlation (категория временной соотнесенности), or retrospective coordination (Blokh, 2000).

Some grammatical categories exist only in a certain class. They are closed within this word class. They are immanent categories (constant) – the verbal categories of tense, voice, mood. Other categories may transfer from one class to another and reflect in it. They are called reflective categories. They are: gender, number. The category of number of nouns is reflected in the verb: boy goes – boys go. In Russian the category of number is reflected in the verb and the adjective.

The grammatical category presents a unity of form and meaning. A set of grammatical forms expressing a categorial function constitutes a paradigm. The paradigmatic correlation of grammatical forms in a category is exposed by the so-called grammatical opposition. See the example of aspect.

But sometimes a weak member of the opposition may turn onto a marked one. Example: He knocked, and knocked, and knocked. This is the stylistically marked member, as the idea of continuity is rendered, but by non-continuous forms.

The opposition may be defined as a generalized correlation of language forms, by means of which a certain function is expressed. The member of the opposition must possess two types of features: common features, and differentiating features. Because of common features they are included into one opposition. Example: in the category of aspect the common feature of the opposition of the continuous and non-continuous forms is to express the character of an action. One of the members of the opposition shows the action in progress; the other presents it as a fact – these are the differential features. They constitute the function of the whole opposition (as that of being able to distinguish between the character of an action).

The oppositional theory was originally formulated as a phonological theory by representatives of the Prague School. The method of oppositions has been successfully extended to grammar and semantics. Three main qualitative types of oppositions were established: privative (отрицательная); gradual (постепенная); equipollent (равная по силе).

By the number of contrasted oppositions they were divided into 1) binary, 2) more than binary. The most important for analysis is the binary privative type of opposition. The binary privitive opposition is formed by a contrastive pair of members in which one member is characterized by the presence of a certain differential feature (mark), while the other is characterized by the absence of this feature. The member in which the feature is present is called the marked, or the strong, positive member; the member in which the feature is absent, is called the unmarked, weak, negative member. Example 1: I study (weak member – non-past) – I studied (strong member – past). Example 2: a bird (weak member- non-plurality) – birds (strong member – plurality).