Sympathy poem by Paul Laurence Dunbar

                                                                                  

                                                                                Sympathy

I know what the caged bird feels, alas!

When the sun is bright on the upland slopes;

When the wind stirs soft through the springing grass,

And the river flows like a stream of glass;

When the first bird sings and the first bud opes,

And the faint perfume from its chalice steals--

I know what the caged bird feels!

I know why the caged bird beats his wing

Till its blood is red on the cruel bars;

For he must fly back to his perch and cling

When he fain would be on the bough a-swing;

And a pain still throbs in the old, old scars

And they pulse again with a keener sting--

I know why he beats his wing!

I know why the caged bird sings, ah me,

When his wing is bruised and his bosom sore,--

When he beats his bars and he would be free;

It is not a carol of joy or glee,

But a prayer that he sends from his heart’s deep core,

But a plea, that upward to Heaven he flings--

I know why the caged bird sings!

by

Paul Laurence Dunbar

In the above poem, “Sympathy”, an African-American writer uses the image of a bird in a cage to communicate his thoughts on life and freedom.

How to Apply Marxist Theory to Literature

How to Apply Marxist Theory to Literature

What is Marxist Theory in Literature 

Marxist theory or Marxist criticism is one of the theories that can be used in literary criticism. This theory is based on the ideologies of Karl Marx, a German philosopher who criticized the inherent injustice in the European class/capitalist system of economics operating in the 19^thCentury.  Marx viewed history as a series of struggles between classes, in other words, the oppressed and the oppressors.

In Marxist literary criticism, literary works are viewed as a reflection of the social institutions from which they originate. In fact, the work itself is considered as a social institution that has a specific ideological function based on the ideology and the background of the writer.

According to Terry Eagleton, a leading British literary theorist, Marxist criticism is concerned with how novels get published and whether they mention the working class”. It also pays sensitive attention to form, style, and meanings.

The basic goal of this literary criticism is to assess the political tendency of a literary work and determine whether its social content or literary forms are progressive. Marxist criticism pays special attention to the division of class, class struggle, oppression, and political background of the story. In other words, this criticism focuses more on the social and political elements of a work than its aesthetic (artistic and visual) value.

Now, let’s see how to apply Marxist theory to literature.

How to Apply Marxist Theory to Literature

As explained above, class, oppression, power, economy and politics are some of the main elements that should be considered in a Marxist literary criticism. Asking the following questions and analyzing the information that is found from answering these questions will help you to apply the Marxist theory to literature.

·         What role does class play in the literary work?

·         How does the author analyze class relations?

·         What does the author say about oppression?

·         Are class conflicts ignored or blamed?

·         How do characters overcome oppression?

·         Does the work support the economic and social status quo, or does it advocate change?

·         Does the work serve as propaganda for the status quo? If so, in what way does it attempt to serve as propaganda?

·         Does the work propose some form of utopian vision as a solution to the problems encountered in the work?

·         How has the author’s ideologies and background affect the way he views the economy, politics or society?

·         How do the time period, social background and culture in which the work was written affect the portrayal of the political, economic, and social forces?

Summary

·         The Marxist theory is more concerned with social and political elements of a work than its aesthetic value.

·         Marxist theory can be applied to literature by analyzing the social, economic and political elements such as class division, class struggle, and oppression.

·         Asking questions is a good way to apply the Marxist perspective to a text. The questions and responses below are an example using the book Les Miserables.

·         Q: What economic or social issues appear in the course of the work, and what are the effects of these issues on the characters?

·          

Reference:

T Eagleton, Marxism and Literary Criticism, Berkeley, U of California P, 1976

Marxist literary theory by Sir Dr Suhail Ansari

What Is Marxist Criticism?

When you read a typical piece of literature, you're not just reading a story, but you're getting a glimpse into a different culture and society. So what is that society like? Is it like yours? Do the rich and powerful have all the control? Or is it more egalitarian? And what even inspired the author to create this society in the first place? There are all sorts of questions asked in Marxist criticism, which reviews a work of literature in terms of the society it presents.

Remember that Marxist thought gets its name from Karl Marx, the German philosopher who wrote The Communist Manifesto. In it, Marx and co-author Friedrich Engels argue that all of history is about the struggle between the haves and the have-nots. They predicted that one day, the proletariat, or the have-nots, will throw off the oppression of the bourgeoisie, or those with means and power.

Society in the Piece of Literature

Marxist criticism is interested in the society created by the author in the piece of literature concerned. Let's look at this in terms of a relatively new piece of literature, The Hunger Games, which is a trilogy by Suzanne Collins. In it, various districts are struggling economically and socially and eventually rise up against their government. The Marxist critique would go as far as to say that it was those conditions that caused the series to unfold the way it did. It was simply people rebelling against an unfair way of life.

Okay, now let's try looking at the society created in a classic piece of literature, The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn by Mark Twain. This book takes place in the American South in the 19th century and follows a white boy, Huck, as he helps a black slave, Jim, escape his situation. Here we've got quite a bit more detail. Instead of just two large classes, society is really divided into several smaller ones.

As a result, a Marxist critique would focus not only on those classes, but also what happens when they break down. After all, Huck and Jim form a tie that society would have forbidden. Because of this, it would be argued that Twain wanted society to get rid of race-based castes altogether, since they only kept humanity in bondage.

Society of the Author

Marxists might argue that literature doesn't just demonstrate class struggle, but are products of them. In a work, the society of the author often leaks through, and could be interpreted as a commentary of that society.

Let's go back to The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn. It could be argued that Twain was commenting on his own society. After all, there was still a distinct stratification between rich and poor, and white and black on the Mississippi in the late 19th century. Marxist literary critique would argue that this is Twain's way of highlighting differences in his own society.

The goal of Marxist literary theories is to represent class conflict as well as to reinforce class distinctions through literature. Marxist theorists frequently champion writers who are sympathetic to the working classes and those whose works challenge the economic equalities in capitalist societies. In maintaining the spirit of Marxism, literary theories developing from the Marxist paradigm have sought Modern ways of understanding the relationship between literature and economic production as well as cultural production. Literary theory has drawn a lot of influence from the Marxism analyzes society.

According to Marxists legal systems, religious beliefs, and cultural frameworks are determined by social and economic conditions. Therefore Art should represent these conditions truthfully and also seek to better them. The popularity of Marxist aesthetics has reduced in nowadays consumerist society; however it continues to pose responsible questions.

Despite Marxist critism theories having weaknesses it is a good thing that it allows intellectual freedom. Sometimes the authors writing may have been influenced in some way by the state. For instance, the communist world was totally different from what writers were allowed to show. This means that the literary work of time could not be analyzed by simply looking at the author's goal as it is proposed by new criticism. Reading the literary work very closely and particularly the language used by the author would help to analyze the work more critically. In this case Marxism is very crucial because what people read that is what they practice.

Some contemporary Marxists such Terry Eagleton have tried to rehabilitate or revise marx. She recognizes the fact that literary work like that of Shakespeare create value because by reading them we are made to think and get something out of them thus getting some values from them. This supplements new criticism theory that looks at the moral and sometimes the religious dimensions such as honesty.

Georg Lukacs contribution

In his contribution towards Marxism and literature, Georg Lukacs, maintained that the text contained in classic realist writings in describing events of ordinary occurrence and social conditions give a vivid picture of the entireness of a society and its evolution. He argues that the literature of naturalism shows the contradictions that exist in societies and within the individual in the context of a dialectical unit. He acknowledged the fact that realist novels present a partial image of a society. However, he also supported the idea that the value of a novel lies in its description of the nature of a society in a historic period. He also argued that any literary work does not reflect individual phenomena in isolation as modernist text depicts, but should be the whole process of life found in realism. Marxism theory interprets every literary work on the basis of how it responds to social inequalities. Social development is therefore an inherent part of the Marxism theory.  Marxism emphasizes the use of historical and biographical information in analyzing literary works. Marxism assumes that a literary work is a reflection of the society that produces it. This assumption is not always true. Some literary works may have had some external influenced thus depicting a society in a way that people wants to see it and thus may not be a true reflection of the society.

Marxism does not put emphasis on the use of Marx ideology of class conflict for academics but instead for social development. The Marxists hope that by analyzing literary works using class conflict ideology, the reader will be able to recognize the inequalities existing in the society and thus can find ways of overcoming them and bring about an equal society.

Karl Marx (1818-1883) was primarily a theorist and historian (less the evil pinko commie demon that McCarthyism fretted about). After examining social organization in a scientific way (thereby creating a methodology for social science: political science), he perceived human history to have consisted of a series of struggles between classes--between the oppressed and the oppressing. Whereas Freud saw "sexual energy" to be the motivating factor behind human endeavor.  Marx thought that "historical materialism" was the ultimate driving force, a notion involving the distribution of resources, gain, production, and such matters.

the labor force responsible for survival. Marx theorized that when profits are not reinvested in the workers but in creating more factories, the workers will grow poorer and poorer until no short-term patching is possible or successful. At a crisis point, revolt will lead to a restructuring of the system.

 (The Soviet Union was actually state-run capitalism.)

Marx is known also for saying that "Religion is the opiate of the people," so he was somewhat aware of the problem that Lenin later dwelt on. Lenin was convinced that workers remain largely unaware of their own oppression since they are convinced by the state to be selfless. One might point to many "opiates of the people" under most political systems--diversions that prevent real consideration of trying to change unjust economic conditions.

Marxist Criticism

According to Marxists, and to other scholars in fact, literature reflects those social institutions out of which it emerges and is itself a social institution with a particular ideological function. Literature reflects class struggle and materialism: think how often the quest for wealth traditionally defines characters. So Marxists generally view literature "not as works created in accordance with timeless artistic criteria, but as 'products' of the economic and ideological determinants specific to that era" (Abrams 149). Literature reflects an author's own class or analysis of class relations.

The Marxist critic simply is a careful reader or viewer who keeps in mind issues of power and money, and any of the following kinds of questions.

What is literary theory ?

Literary Theory

"Literary theory" is the body of ideas and methods we use in the practical reading of literature. By literary theory we refer not to the meaning of a work of literature but to the theories that reveal what literature can mean. Literary theory is a description of the underlying principles, one might say the tools, by which we attempt to understand literature. All literary interpretation draws on a basis in theory but can serve as a justification for very different kinds of critical activity. It is literary theory that formulates the relationship between author and work; literary theory develops the significance of race, class, and gender for literary study, both from the standpoint of the biography of the author and an analysis of their thematic presence within texts. Literary theory offers varying approaches for understanding the role of historical context in interpretation as well as the relevance of linguistic and unconscious elements of the text. Literary theorists trace the history and evolution of the different genres—narrative, dramatic, lyric—in addition to the more recent emergence of the novel and the short story, while also investigating the importance of formal elements of literary structure. Lastly, literary theory in recent years has sought to explain the degree to which the text is more the product of a culture than an individual author and in turn how those texts help to create the culture.

"Literary theory," sometimes designated "critical theory," or "theory," and now undergoing a transformation into "cultural theory" within the discipline of literary studies, can be understood as the set of concepts and intellectual assumptions on which rests the work of explaining or interpreting literary texts. Literary theory refers to any principles derived from internal analysis of literary texts or from knowledge external to the text that can be applied in multiple interpretive situations. All critical practice regarding literature depends on an underlying structure of ideas in at least two ways: theory provides a rationale for what constitutes the subject matter of criticism—"the literary"—and the specific aims of critical practice—the act of interpretation itself. For example, to speak of the "unity" of Oedipus the King explicitly invokes Aristotle's theoretical statements on poetics. To argue, as does Chinua Achebe, that Joseph Conrad’s The Heart of Darkness fails to grant full humanity to the Africans it depicts is a perspective informed by a postcolonial literary theory that presupposes a history of exploitation and racism. Critics that explain the climactic drowning of Edna Pontellier in The Awakening as a suicide generally call upon a supporting architecture of feminist and gender theory. The structure of ideas that enables criticism of a literary work may or may not be acknowledged by the critic, and the status of literary theory within the academic discipline of literary studies continues to evolve.

Literary theory and the formal practice of literary interpretation runs a parallel but less well known course with the history of philosophy and is evident in the historical record at least as far back as Plato. The Cratylus contains a Plato's meditation on the relationship of words and the things to which they refer. Plato’s skepticism about signification, i.e., that words bear no etymological relationship to their meanings but are arbitrarily "imposed," becomes a central concern in the twentieth century to both "Structuralism" and "Poststructuralism." However, a persistent belief in "reference," the notion that words and images refer to an objective reality, has provided epistemological (that is, having to do with theories of knowledge) support for theories of literary representation throughout most of Western history. Until the nineteenth century, Art, in Shakespeare’s phrase, held "a mirror up to nature" and faithfully recorded an objectively real world independent of the observer.

Modern literary theory gradually emerges in Europe during the nineteenth century. In one of the earliest developments of literary theory, German "higher criticism" subjected biblical texts to a radical historicizing that broke with traditional scriptural interpretation. "Higher," or "source criticism," analyzed biblical tales in light of comparable narratives from other cultures, an approach that anticipated some of the method and spirit of twentieth century theory, particularly "Structuralism" and "New Historicism." In France, the eminent literary critic Charles AugustinSaint Beuve maintained that a work of literature could be explained entirely in terms of biography, while novelist Marcel Proust devoted his life to refuting Saint Beuve in a massive narrative in which he contended that the details of the life of the artist are utterly transformed in the work of art. (This dispute was taken up anew by the French theorist Roland Barthes in his famous declaration of the "Death of the Author." See "Structuralism" and "Poststructuralism.") Perhaps the greatest nineteenth century influence on literary theory came from the deep epistemological suspicion of Friedrich Nietzsche: that facts are not facts until they have been interpreted. Nietzsche's critique of knowledge has had a profound impact on literary studies and helped usher in an era of intense literary theorizing that has yet to pass.

Attention to the etymology of the term "theory," from the Greek "theoria," alerts us to the partial nature of theoretical approaches to literature. "Theoria" indicates a view or perspective of the Greek stage. This is precisely what literary theory offers, though specific theories often claim to present a complete system for understanding literature. The current state of theory is such that there are many overlapping areas of influence, and older schools of theory, though no longer enjoying their previous eminence, continue to exert an influence on the whole. The once widely-held conviction (an implicit theory) that literature is a repository of all that is meaningful and ennobling in the human experience, a view championed by the Leavis School in Britain, may no longer be acknowledged by name but remains an essential justification for the current structure of American universities and liberal arts curricula. The moment of "Deconstruction" may have passed, but its emphasis on the indeterminacy of signs (that we are unable to establish exclusively what a word means when used in a given situation) and thus of texts, remains significant. Many critics may not embrace the label "feminist," but the premise that gender is a social construct, one of theoretical feminisms distinguishing insights, is now axiomatic in a number of theoretical perspectives.

While literary theory has always implied or directly expressed a conception of the world outside the text, in the twentieth century three movements—"Marxist theory" of the Frankfurt School, "Feminism," and "Postmodernism"—have opened the field of literary studies into a broader area of inquiry. Marxist approaches to literature require an understanding of the primary economic and social bases of culture since Marxist aesthetic theory sees the work of art as a product, directly or indirectly, of the base structure of society. Feminist thought and practice analyzes the production of literature and literary representation within the framework that includes all social and cultural formations as they pertain to the role of women in history. Postmodern thought consists of both aesthetic and epistemological strands. Postmodernism in art has included a move toward non-referential, non-linear, abstract forms; a heightened degree of self-referentiality; and the collapse of categories and conventions that had traditionally governed art. Postmodern thought has led to the serious questioning of the so-called metanarratives of history, science, philosophy, and economic and sexual reproduction. Under postmodernity, all knowledge comes to be seen as "constructed" within historical self-contained systems of understanding. Marxist, feminist, and postmodern thought have brought about the incorporation of all human discourses (that is, interlocking fields of language and knowledge) as a subject matter for analysis by the literary theorist. Using the various poststructuralist and postmodern theories that often draw on disciplines other than the literary—linguistic, anthropological, psychoanalytic, and philosophical—for their primary insights, literary theory has become an interdisciplinary body of cultural theory. Taking as its premise that human societies and knowledge consist of texts in one form or another, cultural theory (for better or worse) is now applied to the varieties of texts, ambitiously undertaking to become the preeminent model of inquiry into the human condition.

Literary theory is a site of theories: some theories, like "Queer Theory," are "in;" other literary theories, like "Deconstruction," are "out" but continue to exert an influence on the field. "Traditional literary criticism," "New Criticism," and "Structuralism" are alike in that they held to the view that the study of literature has an objective body of knowledge under its scrutiny. The other schools of literary theory, to varying degrees, embrace a postmodern view of language and reality that calls into serious question the objective referent of literary studies. The following categories are certainly not exhaustive, nor are they mutually exclusive, but they represent the major trends in literary theory of this century.

List of literary theories via we analyze any literary text by DR

List of literary theories via we analyze any literary text

1.     Traditional Literary Criticism

2.     Formalism and New Criticism

3.     Marxism and Critical Theory

4.     Structuralism and Poststructuralism

5.     New Historicism and Cultural Materialism

6.     Ethnic Studies and Postcolonial Criticism

7.     Gender Studies and Queer Theory

8.     Cultural Studies

Transformational Grammar by: Noam Chomsky 5

Transformational Grammar by: Noam Chomsky

1.     Transformational grammar • device for generating sentences in a language. • It generates only the well-formed or grammatically correct sentences of a language since it is meant to create the rules and principles which are in the mind or brain of a native speaker

2.     • Noam Chomsky believed that grammar has recursive rules allowing one to generate grammatically correct sentences over and over. • Our brain has a mechanism which can create language by following the language principles and grammar

3.      • Transformational Process of the Syntactic Structures according to Chomsky‟s Transformational Grammar can be best summarized by adding, deleting, moving, and substituting of words. These changes take place through specific rules, which are called Transformational Rules.

4.      Generally, any sentence structure contains a noun phrase (NP) and a verb phrase (VP).

5.     In the sentence: “Vicki laughed.” „Vicki‟ is a NP and „laughed‟ is a VP. The sentence could change to: “The woman laughed.” „The woman‟ is the NP and „laughed‟ is the VP. You can extend the sentence to: “Vicki who lives near me laughed.” “Vicki who lives near me” is the NP; “laughed” is the VP. Expanding the sentence, “Vicki who lives near me laughed loudly” The NP consists of “Vicki who lives near me” and the VP is “laughed loudly.”

6.     Deep and Surface structure • Deep structures are the input to the semantic component, which describes their meaning. • Surface structures are the input to the phonological component, which describes their sound. • In short, deep structure determines meaning, surface structure determines sound.

7.     The helical line connecting deep structure to surface structure represents the transformational cycle introduced in Chomsky ( 1965) .

8.     This model has three essential characteristics. • First , the meaning, or semantic interpretation , of a sentence is determined from its deep structure . • Second , the pronunciation , or phonetic interpretation , of a sentence is determined from its surface structure . • And third , the role of transformations is seen as converting the semantically relevant level of linguistic description into the phonetically relevant level

9.     Innate linguistic knowledge Empiricists Rationalists mind as a tabula rasa containing no knowledge prior to experience and placing no constraints on the forms of possible knowledge, except that they must be derived from experience by such mechanisms as the association of ideas or the habitual connection of stimulus and response (all knowledge comes from human beings have knowledge that is not derived from experience but is prior to all experience and determines the form of the knowledge that can be gained from experience (knowledge is implanted innately experience and prior to experience)

10. Chomsky‟s view • The information that the child is presented with—when other people address him or when he hears them talk to each other—is limited in amount, fragmentary, and imperfect. There seems to be no way the child could learn the language just by generalizing from his inadequate experiences, from the utterances he hears. Furthermore, the child acquires the language at a very early age, before his general intellectual faculties are developed.

11. Indeed, the ability to learn a language is only marginally dependent on intelligence and motivation—stupid children and intelligent children, motivated and unmotivated children, all learn to speak their native tongue. If a child does not acquire his first language by puberty, it is difficult, and perhaps impossible, for him to learn one after that time. Formal teaching of the first language is unnecessary: the child may have to go to school to learn to read and write but he does not have to go to school to learn how to talk.

12. The child has a universal grammar, so to speak, programmed into his brain as part of his genetic inheritance. In the most ambitious versions of this theory, Chomsky speaks of the child as being born "with a perfect knowledge of universal grammar, that is, with a fixed schematism that he uses,…in acquiring language." A child can learn any human language on the basis of very imperfect information. That being the case, he must have the forms that are common to all human languages as part of his innate mental equipment.

13. • One traditional argument against the existence of an innate language learning faculty is that human languages are so diverse. The differences between Chinese, Nootka, Hungarian, and English, for example, are so great as to destroy the possibility of any universal grammar, and hence languages could only be learned by a general intelligence, not by any innate language learning device. Chomsky has attempted to turn this argument on its head: In spite of surface differences, all human languages have very similar underlying structures; they all have phrase structure rules and transformational rules. They all contain sentences, and these sentences are composed of subject noun phrases and predicate verb phrases, etc.

14.  Grammatical theories • In the 1960s, Chomsky introduced two central ideas relevant to the construction and evaluation of grammatical theories.

15.  First: Distinction between COMPETENCE and PERFORMANCE

16.  Linguistic Performance • Chomsky noted the obvious fact that people, when speaking in the real world, often make linguistic errors (e.g., starting a sentence and then abandoning it midway through). He argued that these errors in linguistic performance were irrelevant to the study of linguistic competence

17. Linguistic Competence • the knowledge that allows people to construct and understand grammatical sentences

18.  Grammaticality • -correctness in terms of grammar . • It is possible for a sentence to be both grammatical and meaningless. Colorless green ideas sleep furiously.(Chomsky)…

19.  Grammaticality • Meaningful but ungrammatical (non)sentences • Man the bit sandwich the. • The meaning of which is fairly clear, but no native speaker would accept as well formed.

20.  Minimalism • "Minim

21.Minimalism • "Minimalist Program" aims at the further development of ideas involving economy of derivation and economy of representation

22.  Economy of derivation • a principle stating that movements (i.e., transformations) only occur in order to match interpretable features with uninterpretable features.

23 Economy of derivation • the plural inflection on regular English nouns, e.g.,dogs. The word dogs can only be used to refer to several dogs, not a single dog, and so this inflection contributes to meaning, making it interpretable. English verbs are inflected according to the number of their subject (e.g., "Dogs bite" vs "A dog bites"), but in most sentences this inflection just duplicates the information about number that the subject noun already has, and it is therefore uninterpretable.

24. Economy of representation • the principle that grammatical structures must exist for a purpose, i.e., the structure of a sentence should be no larger or more complex than required to satisfy constraints on grammaticality.

25..."I-Language" and "ELanguage" I-Language (Internal language) E-Language (External language) the linguistic knowledge that is in the mind of the speaker observable linguistic output (sentences, songs, texts etc.) Every fluent individual in a language community has an ILanguage. As such, every individual can produce a potentially infinite E-Language. E-Language is thus epiphenomenal; it is the result of I-Language.

26.             References http://noamchomsky2011 transform ational-grammar.html

ENGLISH MORPHOSYNTACTIC STRUCTURE 5

ENGLISH MORPHOSYNTACTIC STRUCTURE

            Linguistics as the scientific study of language has several branches such us phonetics, phonology, semantics morphology and syntax.  The two branches which are mentioned later namely morphology and syntax are now often combined into one unity called morphosyntax.

 The word morphosyntactic is the adjective of morphosyntax. Morphosyntax is derived from morphology which is the study of word formation and  syntax which is the study of how words are combined into larger unit such as phrase and sentence. Morphosyntax is the combination of morphology and syntax. They are combined because they have very close relationship.  According to Crystal (1980: 234)  morphosyntactic is a term in linguistics used to refer to grammatical categories or properties for whose definition criteria of morphology and syntax both apply, as in describing the characteristics of words. Crystal (1980: 234) gives illustration  that the distinctions under the heading of number in nouns constitute a morphosyntactic category: on the one hand, number contrasts affect syntax (e.g. singular subject requiring a singular verb); on the other hand, they require morphological definition (e.g. add –s for plural).

Based on the explanation above, we know that  word formation which is the concern of morphology has relationship with  the syntactic structure. The word cooks for example is formed from the morpheme cook and the morpheme –s. This discussion occurs in the science called morphology. However, The word cooks is influenced by another word which, together with the word cooks itself, forms a bigger structure which is called syntactic structure. In English, cooks occurs in the syntactic structure called sentence whose  subject is the third person singular and whose tense is simple present  such as the following sentences: My mother cooks every morning. ; She cooks every morning.; and He cooks every morning.

This article tries to discuss the relationship between  English word formations which are studied in morphology and the syntactic structure which is the domain of syntax  entitled English Morphosyntactic Structure.

2. Morphological structure

            The domain of morphology is words. How words are formed is the concern of this field so morphological structure is the structure which consists of the elements to form words. The most common word formation in language including English is affixation. Affixation is the process of word formation by adding the affixes or bound morphemes in bases or roots (free morphemes). In other words morphological structure is the structure or forms of words primarily through the use of morpheme construct (Crystal, 1980: 232).

            Morpheme is defined as the smallest meaningful unit of language (Lim Kiat Boey, 1975 : 37). Morphemes can be divided into two namely free morphemes and bound morphemes. Morphemes are the components which build words.  The word singers, for example, consists of three meaningful units or morphemes, sing, –er,  and –s. The morpheme sing which forms the word singers has the lexical meaning; the morpheme –er means the doer of singing; the morpheme –s has plural meaning. We can identify the meaning of the morpheme sing although it stands alone but we cannot identify the meaning of morphemes –er and –s in isolation. We can identify the meaning of the morpheme –er and –s after they combine to the morpheme sing. Sing which can meaningfully stand alone is called free morpheme while the morphemes such as –er and –s, which cannot meaningfully stand alone are called bound morphemes. Bound morphemes must be attached to free morphemes. Bound morphemes are also called affixes which can be classified into prefix, infix, and suffix. English only has two kinds of bound morphemes namely prefixes and suffixes. No infixes exist in English. Bound morphemes are classified into two types namely derivational and inflectional morphemes. Both inflectional and derivational morphemes play an important role in the larger structure namely syntactic structure.

3. Syntactic structure

            The word syntactic is the adjective form of the word  syntax. Syntax is the rules of grammar which are used for ordering and connecting words to form phrases or sentences (Longman Dictionary of Contemporary English, 1987: 1072).  Crystal (1980: 146) defines syntax as the study of the inter-relationships between elements of sentence structure, and of the rules governing the arrangement of sentences in sequences. Based on the definition above, syntactic structure is the structure which contains the words which are arranged to form phrases or sentences. The main syntactic structure is sentence. Phrases are the syntactic structures which are part of sentences. In arranging the elements of syntactic structure, the morphological aspect often plays an important role. It is difficult to separate morphological aspect in syntactic structure. In English, when we talk about inflection, actually, we will enter to the syntactic structure although we are unconscious. The words cooks as stated above, for example, consists of the free morpheme cook and the inflectional bound morpheme –s. The word cooks occur in an English sentence whose subject is singular noun or uncountable noun and the tense is simple present. The relation between the English morphological structure and the English syntactic structure called English morphosyntactic structure will be explained in this article.

4. Inflectional morphemes in syntactic

    Structure

4.1 Plural Morpheme

            In English, to form the plural noun from the singular one is by adding the plural marker to the noun.  The common plural marker or the plural morpheme is the suffix –s, although in reality this morpheme can be realized by the phonetic representations [s], [z], or [iz]. These phonetic representations or allomorphs are conditioned by the phones of the base to which the plural morpheme is added. Some countable nouns are not added with  the suffix –s to make them plural but the number of these types are not as many as those added with the suffix –s. Therefore, this plural morpheme is usually called the morpheme –s because this suffix frequently occurs in the plural noun formation.   The following are the examples of the words containing the plural morpheme or the morpheme {-s} which is pronounced /s/, /z/, or /iz/

Singular         {-s}      Plural      Phobetic representation

baby                -s         babies       [beibiz]

bag                  -s         bags          [bægz]

book                -s         books        [buks]

box                  -s         boxes        [boksiz]

cat                   -s         cats           [kæts]

dog                  -s         dogs         [dogz]

            As mentioned above, the plural morpheme or the morpheme {-s} is not always  realized by the suffix –s. The following are the examples:

Singular         {-s}      Plural

man                 -s         men

woman                        -s         women

child                -s         children

ox                    -s         oxen

tooth                -s         teeth

foot                 -s         feet

sheep               -s         sheep

deer                 -s         deer

            These morphological forms will determine the arrangement of syntactic structure. In sentence level, the subject must agree with the verb.  Look at the examples below:

(1) The book    is     on the table.

(2) The books   are  on the table.

(3) The student    is   in the class.

(4) The students  are in the class.

(5) The man    is  in my room.

(6) The men    are  in my room.

(7) The student   walks  to school.

(8) The students walk to school.

(9)   The woman goes to the market.

(10) The women go    to the market.

The examples above show that in present tense, to be which is suitable with the plural morphemes added to the noun is are like in sentence (2), (4), and (6).  In sentence (8) and (10), the plural morpheme {-s} need the verb form without inflectional morpheme. Inflectional morpheme {-s} to show present tense is needed in the sentence whose subject is singular or uncountable noun.

            In Phrase level some determiners must agree with the plural morpheme. Look at the following examples.

(11)  this student

        that student

        a  student      

      

(12)  these students

        those students

        several students

        many students   

        a lot of students

        a few students             

(13)  *this students

        *that students

        *these student

        *those student  

In example (11) the determiners this and that need singular noun. The morpheme {-s} is needed in the noun when it comes after the determiners these, those, several, many, a lot of, ad a few like in example (12). The phrases in (13) are not grammatically correct.

4.2 Present Tense Morpheme

            Inflectional morpheme plays an important role in English present tense. In English, inflectional morpheme is needed as present tense marker with particular subject. The singular noun, the third singular personal pronoun and uncountable noun as subject need the verbs with present tense morpheme. The form of present tense morpheme in this case is the suffix –s. Look at the examples below:

(14) My mother sweeps the floor.

       My father works in a bank.

       My teacher comes on time. 

       She/he speaks English fluently.

(15) My teachers never come late.

       My friends watch TV every night.

       The girls study in a university.

(16) *My mother sweep the floor.

       *My father work in a bank.

       *My teacher come on time. 

       *She/he speak English fluently.

       *My teachers never comes late.

       *My friends watches TV every night.

       *The girls studies in a university.

All the verbs in sentences (14) namely sweeps, works, comes and speaks contain inflectional morpheme –sadded in the final position (suffix) because the subjects are singular noun or the third person singular. Inflectional morpheme –s (the suffix –s) is not needed for the plural noun subjects. This is shown in examples (15). The sentences in example (16) are not  grammatically correct  because of the omission  of  inflectional morpheme –s and  the misplacement  of the inflectional morpheme –s.

  

4.3 Past Tense Morpheme

            In English, The most popular past tense  morpheme is indicated by the suffix –ed added to regular verbs. That is   why this past tense morpheme is often called morpheme –ed. In reality, this past tense morpheme has three phonetically conditioned variants or allomorphs [t], [d], and [id]. It means that the morpheme {-ed} can be pronounced [t], [d] or [id] depending on the final phone of the base attached by this morpheme. The following are the examples of the irregular verbs which contain the suffix –ed.

Verb     {-ed}       Inflection       Phone

                              Result                         

Cook        -ed        cooked             [ t ]

Stop         -ed         stopped           [ t ]

Wash        -ed        washed            [ d ]

Watch      -ed         watched          [ d ]

Wait         -ed         waited            [ id ]

Want        -ed         wanted           [ id ]

Divide      -ed         divided           [id ] 

            The past tense morpheme            ( morpheme –ed) also occurs irregularly. It means that this past tense morpheme (morpheme –ed) is not represented by the suffix –ed.  This morpheme occurs with the particular verbs called irregular verbs. These variants of past tense morpheme are said to be lexically conditioned. The examples of  irregular verbs which contain the past tense morpheme are as follows:

Verb               {-ed}                Inflection

                                                Result

am, is               -ed                   was

are                   -ed                   were

break               -ed                   broke

bring                -ed                   brought

buy                  -ed                   bought

catch                -ed                   caught

do                    -ed                   did

go                    -ed                   went

put                   -ed                  put

teach                -ed                   taught

In English sentence the past tense morpheme is used to show the past event or condition. Therefore the adverbs of time showing past time such as yesterday, last week, two years ago,  and in 1999 are related to the past tense morpheme. Look at the examples :

(17)  My mother cooked yesterday.

(18)  She came here two days ago.

(19)  She worked in Jakarta last year.

4.4 Progressive Morpheme

            Progressive morpheme in English is indicated by the suffix –ing added to the verbs. This progressive morpheme is used in the progressive tense sentences. The progressive tense gives the idea that an action is in progress during particular time. The tense says that an action begins before, is in progress during, and continues after another time or action (Azar,1993 : 3).

The  progressive  tense is also called the continuous tense. The progressive morpheme can be used in present and past tense. This morpheme is placed after be. The following examples are taken from Azar (1993: 3).

(20) He is sleeping right now.

(21) He was sleeping when I arrived.

(22) He will be sleeping when we arrive.

4.5 Past Participle Morpheme

            Past participle morpheme is used to show the perfect event and the passive sentence. Past participle morpheme can be in the form of prefix –ed added to the verbs or it can be in irregular forms of verbs. This morpheme is usually called the morpheme {-en} to differentiate it from the past tense morpheme whose symbol is {-ed}. The verbs containing past participle morphemes are usually called  verb three (V 3). This is because in the list, this verb is placed in column three (3). The use of the English verbs containing past participle in morphosyntactic structure are described as follows: 

4.5.1 Past Participle Morphemes in

         Perfect Tense Sentence

Past participle morphemes are used in perfect tense sentences.  Past participle morphemes (morpheme {–en}) are added to the verbs after the auxiliary verb has, have, or had.  Look at the examples below:

(23) She has cooked.

(24) I have lived here for three years.

(25) They have gone.

(26) Sally has given me money.

(27) John has been here for one our.

4.5.2 Past participle Morphemes in  

         passive Sentences

Past participle morpheme is also used in English passive sentences.

(28) I was invited to the meeting.

(29) She is waited by his grandmother.

(30) He was stopped by the police.

(30) This homework must be done here.

(31) This floor is swept everyday.

4.6 Comparative and Superlative

      Morpheme

4.7 Possessive Morpheme

5. Derivational Morpheme in Syntactic Structure

5.1 Morpheme -ness

REFERENCES

Azar, Betty Schrampfer. 1993.

    Understanding and Using English

    Grammar. Washington: Prantice-Hall,

    Inc.

Crystal, Davis. 1980. A First Dictionary

    of linguistics and Phonetics.  

    Colorado: Westview Press Boulder

           

Lim Kiat Boey. 1975.  An  Introduction 

    to  Linguistics  for  the  Language 

   Teacher. Singapore: Singapore

    University Press.