follows sentential stress because sentential stress is determined syntactically.

2-4 Theoretical base of the study
According to Francis Katamba (1993) in Modern Linguistics Morphology, general to lexical morphology is the principle that the morphological component of a grammar is organized in a series of hierarchical strata( cf. Allen, 1978; Siegel, 1974; Pesetsky, 1979; Kiparsky, 1982a, 1982b, 1983, 1985; Mohanan, 1982, 1986: Mohanan and Mohanan, 1984; Halle and Mohanan, 1985; Strauss, 1982a; and Pulleyblank, 1986).
English affixes (both prefixes and suffixes) can be grouped in two broad classes on the basis of their phonological behavior. One type is neutral and the other type is non-neutral. Neutral affixes have no phonological effect on the base to which they are attached, but non-neutral ones affect in some way the consonant or vowel segments, or the location of stress in the base to which they are attached.
As you can see below, the presence of the neutral suffixes -ness and -less makes no difference. The same syllable of the base receives stress regardless; and the base is left unchanged.
a. ‘abstract ‘abstract-ness b. ‘home ‘home-less
‘serious ‘serious-ness ‘power ‘power-less
ert a ‘lert-ness ‘paper ‘paper-less

Besides effecting stress, non-neutral suffixes also tend to trigger changes in the shape of the vowels or consonants of the base to which they are added. You can see this if you compare cone with conic. The presence of the non-neutral suffix -ic induces the replacement of the vowel [?u] of cone [‘k?un] with [?] with in conic [‘k?n?k].
Like below, your transcription should reveal the changes in the root vowel triggered by -th. These changes show that the suffix -th is non-neutral. In the examples in column b., the root vowel is either shortened or changed in quality or, it is a diphthong, it is turned into monophthong. By contrast, in column 2-3c, where the neutral -ly suffix is added, no change takes place in the location of stress or in the realization of the consonants and vowel in the base.
a. Adjective b. Noun c. Adverb
wide [wa?d] wid-th [w?d?] wide-ly [wa?dl?]
(*[wa?d?]) (*[w?dl?])
long [l??] leng-th [le??] ______
(*[l???])
broad [br?:d] bread-th [bred?] broad-ly [br?:dl?]
(*[br?:d?]) (*[bredl?])
In SPE (this is the standard way of referring to Chomsky and Halle’s 1968 book, The Sound Pattern of English) the difference between the behavior of neutral and non-neutral affixes was dealt with in terms of the strength of boundaries. Between the base and a neutral suffix like -ness or -ly, there was said to intervene a strong boundary (symbolized by ‘#’). In contrast, a weak boundary (symbolized by ‘+’) was assumed to separate the base from a non-neutral suffix like -ic, -ee, or -th. The distinction between non-neutral affixes (associated with ‘+boundary’ in SPE) and neutral affixes (associated with ‘#boundary’) corresponds roughly to the more traditional distinction between primary and secondary affixes (Whitney, 1889; Bloomfield, 1933).

Primary Secondary
+boundary #boundary
Non-neutral Neutral
Latinate Germanic
Weak Strong

The idea that phonological rules may be paired with morphological rules that introduce affixes is not new. About 2500 years ago, Panini, envisaged this kind of pairing of word-structure rules and phonological rules.
In addition to being non-neutral or neutral in their phonological effects, English primary and secondary affixes display contrasting phonotactics behaviour. Whereas secondary affixation can produce segment sequences that are disallowed within a single morpheme in lexical representations, primary affixation cannot give segment sequences that deviate from those allowed in single morphemes in the lexicon.

2-5Categories of Suffixes
On linguistic grounds, it is useful to distinguish two classes of English derivational suffixes; Neutraland Non-Neutral suffixes (Andrea Tyler 1987 conducted theacquisition of English derivational morphology,). Neutral suffixes, such as -ness, -er, -ize, and -ment, have several propertieswhich should make them relatively easy to learn. They attach to independent words; so, for example,when the suffix -er is removed from owner, the result is an independent word, own. Neutral suffixesdo not cause changes of stress or vowel quality in the word to which they are added. Usually,although not always, the meaning of a word formed from Neutral suffixes is transparently related tothat of the stem.Non-neutral suffixes, such as -ity, ify, -ian, -ous, -ic, or -ive, differ from Neutral suffixes in severalrespects. They often attach to bound morphemes (stems that are not words in their own right);hence, taking off the -ify in gratify or quantify fails to produce an independent word. Non-neutralsuffixes tend to cause changes of stress and vowel quality in the stem to which they attach, asexemplified by the difference in the pronunciation of the a in profane and profanity. Finally, themeaning of words originally formed with Non-neutral suffixes is often not transparently related, as inthe words formed from the bound morpheme cam ‘meat’ such as carnival, carnivore, carnation.The two types of suffixes also vary in their applicability. Neutral suffixes have a wide range ofapplicability. The primary restriction on these suffixes is their subcategorization for the part-of-speech of the morpheme to which they can attach. So, for instance, the Neutral suffix -er can attachto virtually any verb in order to form an agentive. Non-neutral suffixes, on the other hand, do nothave the same broad range of applicability. As Kiparsky (1982) points out, words formed fromparticular root morphemes take particular Non-neutral suffixes. For example, words containing theroot ceive take -tion, as in receive/reception, deceive/deception, perceive/perception. The root fer, onthe other hand, takes the suffix -ence as in prefer/preference, refer/reference. Moreover, within theseparadigms there are often idiosyncratic exceptions; compare the triplets arrive/arrival/*arrivation andderive/*derival/derivation. From the properties of Neutral and Non-neutral suffixes, one would predict that the former areacquired earlier, and more easily. The available data bear this out.
2-5-1 Non-neutral (Strong) suffixes
According to Kent Lee 2001, creating new words by adding certain suffixes can cause the main word stress to shift rightward. These suffixes are called strong suffixes (or non-neutral, or Class 1). The main word stress is marked with an acute accent [!], and when necessary, secondary stresses are marked with a grave accent [`]. The stress shifts will occur with the addition of the strong suffix if the word is long enough, and if the stress is far back enough on the base.
Suffix Base Derived word
-al (ADJ) p?litics political
-ic alcohol alcoh?lic
-ify ?cid ac?dify
-ity n?rmal norm?lity
-ous ?nalogue an?lagous
-ual c?ntext contéxtual
-y (noun) ?nalogue analogy
If the main stress is already close enough to the end of the word, then addition of a strong suffix will not cause the stress to shift any farther:
Polemic polémical
A few strong suffixes and prefixes may bear a secondary stress. The verbal suffix -ate bears a secondary stress (as opposed to the unstressed adjectival -ate suffix – see below). The prefix auto- bears main stress when it means “automatic”, and the Latin suffix -esce (‘to become’) bears main stress, downgrading the other stress to a secondary stress. Finally, many French suffixes bear main stress. Some Greek prefixes can take primary stress in hard-to-predict ways, especially in scientific terms.

-àte (verb) h?drogen h dr?genàte
auto- mobile automobile
-esce ph?sphor ph?sphorésce
French suffixes: -ade casc?de, faç?de
-e, ee fiancé, fiancée; sauté; employee
-ese Ch?nése
-esque burlésque
-ette dinétte 1
-eur entreprenéur
-ier cavalier

دسته بندی : No category

دیدگاهتان را بنویسید