ISSN 1392-1517. KALBOTYRA. 2000. 49(3)
SUFFIXING DOMINANCE IN THE ACQUISITION OF ENG­
LISH DERIVATIONAL MORPHOLOGY
Irma Mirbakaite
One of the linguistic assumptions claims the
is, the less its root changes in its construction.
existence of a general tendency for languages
If there is a possibility of zero derivation learn­
to prefer suffixes to prefixes (Cutler & Hawk­
ers will initially rely on it. Affixation comes
ins, 1985). The original insight into the phe­
next. In the case of affixation suffixes are easi­
nomenon comes from Greenberg (1966) who
est to acquire, prefixes are harder acquired than
was the first to indicate that suffixation is usu­
suffixes and infixes are the hardest. Clark
ally more frequent than prefixation, and that
(1993, pg. 256), Hawkins and Cutler (1988),
both are more frequent than infixation. In many
Kuczaj (1979), define the principle of simplic­
languages, the functions of suffixes are more
ity as a reflection of psycholinguistic process­
important than prefixes because they convey
ing strategy according to which the word is
the syntactic class while prefixes do not deter­
identified from the segments that precede the
mine the lexical category, have a more static
affix carrying some syntactic function.
role and tend to be treated as part of the word,
On the other hand, the principle of simplic­
with a semantic rather than a syntactic role
ity in language acquisition is relative to the ty­
(Schreuder et al., 1990).
pology of the target language and learners'
Language acquisition research, as a field of
language proficiency level. Its effect is mostly
linguistics that analyses the learnability issue -
evident at the initial stages of acquisition when
one of the criteria for evaluating particular lin­
the language experience of the learner is very
guistic models
&
limited (Clark, 1993, pg. 122). The data from
Schachter, 1989, pg. 1-2) - investigated suf­
studies of Hebrew acquisition show that at the
and assumptions
(Gass
fixing dominance in languages under the title
initial stages of first language acquisition, chil­
"Simplicity Principle" and considered it be one
dren do not make use of the typically Semitic
of the general cognitive-functional principles
process of vowel-alternation, but show prefer­
that holds in the process of language acquisi­
ence for suffix and prefix patterns in their lexi­
tion irrespective of the age and previous lan­
cal innovations (Berman, 1985). Adult Lithua­
guage acquisition experience of learners.
nian learners of English at the pre-intermediate
According to the "Simplicity Principle",
level of language proficiency also prefer suf­
language learners find it easier to interpret and
fixing to prefixing (Mirbakaite,
coin a new word the simpler it is in form - that
learners acquire more forms, they develop the
1999). As
89
ability to attend to the beginning of a word as
between their knowledge of suffixes and pre­
well as the end, and find it easier to produce
fixes. At a more advanced level of language
new
proficiency this difference might be relatively
coinages
that
involve
root
changes
(Kuczaj, 1979; Karpf, 1991). If paying atten­
smaller or remain unchanged. On the other
tion to suffixes during the initial processing of
hand, because of suffixing, as the prevailing
the target language does not pay off, at the later
derivation type in English, the difference be­
stages of language acquisition the learners may
tween the knowledge of suffixes and prefixes
start attending more to prefixing or infixing.
of more advanced English learners might in­
The study by Olshtain (1985) demonstrated
crease even further.
that adult advanced learners of Hebrew as a
Therefore, assuming the universality of the
second language make use of blending and root
simplicity principle in language acquisition and
changing more often than learners of interme­
a clear dominance of suffixing in English, the
diate language proficiency level.
primary purpose of the present study was to
Although the existence of the simplicity
trace the linguistic and psycholinguistic suf­
principle in the acquisition of the first language
fixing dominance in the developmental process
is widely acknowledged, there are only a few
of English morphology knowledge of Lithua­
of studies that have investigated its applicabil­
nian adult learners. It was hoped that the ob­
ity to the acquisition of the derivational mor­
tained results would shed some light on the
phology of the second language. Moreover,
process of English derivational morphology
there are no studies which would analyse how
acquisition by second language learners and
the simplicity principle manifests itself in the
provide some empirical basis for the meth­
acquisition of the morphological system of the
odological investigations on English deriva­
second language where suffixing is the domi­
tional morphology teaching.
nant type of word derivation viz. in English.
The data for the analysis was obtained
In theory, two assumptions concerning the
during the experiment which tested the knowl­
dynamics of the development of English deri­
edge of English suffixes and prefixes of par­
vational morphology are possible. First, as the
ticipants that had different proficiency levels of
effect of the simplicity principle is mostly evi­
English.
dent at the initial stages of language acquisi­
The following sections of the article present
tion, learners of low language proficiency lev­
the method of the experiment and discuss the
els should demonstrate the greatest difference
results obtained.
METHOD
The experiment consisted of two parts - writ­
English lemmas. The participants of the ex­
ten and oral tests. 64 items of the written test
periment were asked to express the meaning of
and 34 items of the oral test provided Lithua­
the concepts in English by supplying the miss­
nian concepts-prompts and partial forms of the
ing parts of the given lemmas' forms. As the
90
given prompts were complex words, it was ex­
pressure, thus their creative use of derivational
pected that the responses of the participants
morphology knowledge approximated the natu­
would contain different English affixes.
ral conditions of spontaneous language pro­
Two different modes of the experiment -
duction. During the written test, however, the
written and oral - allowed us to observe the
participants were allocated sufficient time for
use of derivational morphology knowledge un­
thinking and thus could demonstrate their
der different conditions and thus increased the
knowledge of derivational morphology in a
validity of the obtained results: during the oral
more detailed way.
test the participants were under certain time
Subjects
The subjects of this study were 80 (18- and 19-
- the median of the subjects' scores, the stan­
year-old) adult Lithuanian-speaking students
dard deviation (S.D.), the maximum
(70 females and 10 males) of Vilnius Peda­
(Max.), the minimum score (Min.) - are pre­
gogical University and Vilnius
sented in Table 3.
University.
score
They were drawn from the sample of 167 stu­
80 participants took part in the written test
dents who completed Grammar (Part 1) and
and 40 of them also participated in the oral part
Listening tests of Oxford Language Profi­
of the experiment. The different English lan­
ciency Placement Test a week before the ex­
guage proficiency level of each group of the
periment. Only students who scored between
subjects allowed us to investigate the develop­
93-70 and 118-135 were included in the ex­
ment of the derivational morphology knowl­
periment. They were ascribed to two language
edge and the choice preferences of morphemes
proficiency groups : pre- and post-interme­
by language learners of different language pro­
diate. Summary statistics of the placement test
ficiency levels.
Methods of data analysis
To compare parallel batches of data on suffixes
boxes in the plots) and the minimum and the
and prefixes, the Box-and-Whisker Plot which
maximum values of the variable (the "whiskers"
describes a distribution of data values was
in the plots).
used. Box plots describe the central tendency
The samples of correct responses for suf­
of the variable in terms of the median of the
fixes and prefixes were also evaluated using a
values (represented by the smallest boxes in the
so-called t-test, which compares the means of
plots). The spread (variability) in the variable
two variables. This allowed us to obtain statis­
values is represented in these plots by the
tically valid data on the difference of the par­
quartiles (the 25th and 75th percentiles, larger
ticipants' suffix and prefix knowledge.
91
RESULTS
Only the participants' correct responses were
strated significantly better knowledge of suf­
analysed to investigate the problem of suffixing
fixes than of prefixes, irrespective of the task
dominance in the acquisition pattern of English
mode (the frequency numbers of affix occur­
derivational morphology.
rence with different partial words were turned
Responses were scored as correct if the
to percentages as the number of stimulus words
participants completed the partial stimuli words
requiring the use of suffixes and prefixes was
with the affixes which adequately expressed
different; see Table 1).
the required meaning and part of speech (e.g.
The difference between suffix and prefix
used -er to form an agent-noun, -y to form a
use was also tested statistically. The t-test val­
noun and express a diminutive meaning).
ues obtained comparing the occurrence num­
Naturally, the overall knowledge of affixes
bers of suffixes and prefixes showed that dif­
of the pre-intermediate group was found to be
ferences between the samples were statistically
lower than affix knowledge of the post-inter­
significant.
mediate group. However, both groups demonT a b l e 1. Affix use (%) in the correct responses of pre and post-intermediate groups.
Written test
Croup
Pre-intermediate. gr.
Post-intermediate, gr.
Oral test
Suffixes
Prefixes
Suffixes
Prefixes
45
71
23
58
23
58
11
46
T a b l e 2. T-test values for the written and oral affix samples of the pre and post-intermediate groups.
Group
Pre-intermediate
Post-intermediate
Written test
Oral test
t=3.504, p=0.05, D.F.=39
t=7.107, p=0.05, D.F.=39
t=4.83, p=0.05, D.F.=19
t=6.3, p=0.05, D.F.=19
T a b l e 3. Summary statistics of the placement test.
Group
Pre-intermediate
Post-intermediate
Max. possible test score
Max.
Min.
S.D.
Median
150
150
93
135
70
118
5.65
4.8
86
122
Box-and Whiskers plots (see Figures 1, 2, 3,
in the plots). In all cases the median values for
and 4) for the samples of prefixes and suffixes
prefixes are lower than for suffixes. It should be
that were found in the correct responses of the
also noted that the prefix knowledge of the
participants also confirmed the suffixing knowl­
pre-intermediate group and their ability to use
edge dominance for both groups. This is evi­
it during the oral test was extremely low - the
dently demonstrated by the distribution of the
median value of the responses equals to zero
median values (represented by the smaller boxes
(see Figure 4).
92
Sox Pio! ( I R O R A L S T A 1ūv'20e)
B o i ł Wh.tktrPlol
ZU
О
ГП
О
Non-Ou!li.r M i l
Non-Outli.r Mm
75%
2SV7S*
Mf dii n v i l u *
F i g u r e 1. Box-and-Whisker Plot of suffix and prefix sam­
ples for the post-intermediate group (written test).
F i g u r e 4. Box-and-Whisker Plot of suffix and prefix sam­
ples for the pre-intermediate group (oral test).
Box L W h i s k K Plot
In addition, the spread (variability) in the
variable values (represented by the 7 5
25
th
th
and
percentiles) reveals uneven development
of suffix and prefix knowledge. The difference
between the suffix and prefix knowledge of the
pre-intermediate group is relatively less than
" T T Min-Mi«
•
2S%-7S%
O Mtdun.łlu
F i g u r e 2 Box-and-Whisker Plot of suffix and prefix sam­
ples for the pre-intermediate group (written test).
the difference between the knowledge of suf­
fixes and prefixes of the post-intermediate
group - the gaps between the lower quartiles of
suffix samples and upper quartiles of prefix
samples for the
Воя Plot ( 1 R O R A L . S T A 10v*20cJ
pre-intermediate
group are
less than the gaps between the lower and upper
quartiles
1
of
affix
samples
for
the
post-
intermediate group. Therefore, this finding is in
•
keeping with the assumption that because of
the significant dominance of suffixing in Eng­
j
ZU
N o n - O u l l i . r Max
N o n - O u l l i t r Mm
lish, more advanced learners start giving even
more preference to suffixing thus leaving the
a
Mtdun
acquisition of prefixes behind
F i g u r e 3. Box-and-Whisker Plot of suffix and prefix sam­
ples for the post-intermediate group (oral test).
CONCLUSIONS
The present empirical research tested the va­
vestigated language proficiency level of the
lidity of the simplicity principle in the acquisi­
Lithuanian adult learners of English, they know
tion of English derivational morphology by
suffixes much better than prefixes. Therefore,
Lithuanian learners of English. The obtained
the results of the study confirmed that some cog­
results demonstrated that irrespective of the in­
nitive-functional principles of language acquisi93
tion might hold irrespective of learners' age,
eral level of the English language knowledge the
their previous language learning experience or
relative disproportion between the knowledge of
the characteristics of the target language.
suffixes and prefixes tended to increase.
Second, the dynamics of the development of
The present research was oriented towards
suffix and prefix knowledge of the Lithuanian
the descriptive analysis of the acquisition proc­
learners of English was investigated. The results
ess of derivational morphology thus its findings
of the study suggested that the significant domi­
might be relevant for the theory of general ac­
nance of suffixing in English is reflected in the
quisition principles. On the other hand, it is
acquisitional pattern of derivational morphology
obvious that deeper understanding
- the difference between the knowledge of pre­
principles has some didactic significance too
fixes and suffixes was found to be larger for the
but only further methodological research could
post-intermediate
group
than
for
the
pre-
intermediate group, i.e. with the increase of gen-
of these
suggest practical recommendations on English
derivational morphology teaching.
REFERENCES
1. Berman, Ruth A. Acquisition of Hebrew // The Cross
Linguistic Study of Language Acquisition. Vol. 1 I Ed. I.
Slobin. Hillsade, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. 1985.
255-371.
2. Clark, E. The Lexicon in Acquisition.
versity Press, 1993.
Cambridge Uni­
3. Cutler, A., Hawkins, J. A., Gilligan, G. The Suffixing
preference: a Processing Explanation // Linguistics. 1985.
23. 723-758.
4. Gass, M. S., Schachter, J. Introduction. // Linguistic Per­
spectives on Second Language Acquisition. I Eds. S. M.
Gass, J. Schachter. Cambridge University Press. 1989.
5. Greenberg, J. H. Some Universale of Grammar with
Particular Reference to the Order of Meaningful Elements
// Universals of Language. T ed.1 Ed. J. H. Greenberg.
Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press. 1966.
d
6. Hawkins, J. A., Cutler, A. Psycholinguistic Factors in
Morphological Asymmetry // Explaining Language Uni-
versah I Ed. Hawkins J. A. Oxford: Blackwell. 1988.
280-317.
7. Karpf, A. Universal Grammar Needs Organization //
Folia Linguistica. 1991. X X V / 3 - 4 . 3 4 1 - 3 6 0 .
8. Kuczaj, S. A. Evidence for a Language Learning Strat­
egy: on the Relative Ease of Acquisition of Prefixes and
Suffixes // Child Development. 1979. 50. 1-13.
9. Mirbakaite, I. The Influence of Some Cognitive Strate­
gies on The Acquisition of Derivational Morphology //
Kalbotyra. 1999. 48(3). 4 1 - 4 8 .
10. Olshtain, E. The Acquisition of N e w Word Formation
Processes in Second Language Acquisition // Studies In
Second language Acquisition. 1987. 9. 2 2 1 - 2 3 2 .
11. Schreuder, R., Grendel, M., Poulisse, M., Roelofs, N.,
van de Voort, M. Lexical Processing, Morphological Com­
plexity and Reading // Comprehension Processes in Reading
I Eds. D. A. Balota, G. В. Flores d'Arcais, K. Rayncr.
Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. 1990.
PRIESAGŲ DOMINAVIMAS ĮSISAVINANT A N G L Ų K A L B O S DERIVACINĘ M O R F O L O G I J Ą
Irma Mirbakaite
Santrauka
Straipsnyje nagrinėjama, ar lingvistinis ir psicholingvistinis priesagų dominavimas turi įtakos užsienio kalbą besi­
mokančiųjų derivacinės morfologijos įsisavinimo eigai.
Gauti rezultatai leidžia teigti, kad dėl priesagų dominavi­
mo anglų kalbos morfologinėje sistemoje, ją besimokantys
įsisavina priesagas geriau nei priešdėlius ir Sis skirtumas
yra linkęs didėti kylant bendram kalbos mokėjimo lygiui.
Vilniaus pedagoginis universitetas
[teikta
Anglų kalbos katedra
1999 m. gruodžio men.
94