Cover not available
Article published In:
The architecture of writing systems
Edited by Kristian Berg, Franziska Buchmann and Nanna Fuhrhop
[Written Language & Literacy 17:2] 2014
► pp. 282–307

Morphological spellings in English

| University of Oldenburg, Germany
| University of Oldenburg, Germany
| University of Oldenburg, Germany
| University of Oldenburg, Germany

Morphologically motivated spellings in English are usually thought to be restricted to cases like 〈electric – electrician – electricity〉, where the stem final letter 〈c〉 is kept constant in spelling although the corresponding phoneme varies in spoken language. However, there are many more – and fundamentally different – spellings that refer to morphological information. We will show this by systematically going through the three major parts of morphology: inflection, derivation, and compounding. In each area, we will identify spellings that can best be explained with reference to morphology. As a result, we will present an overview of formal and functional means of morphological spellings which goes far beyond the ubiquitous example cited above. Keywords: English; spelling; writing system; morphology; stem constancy

Published online: 22 September 2014
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/wll.17.2.05ber
References
Albrow, Kenneth H
(1972) The English writing system: Notes towards a description. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Baayen, R. Harald
(1993) On frequency, transparency and productivity. In Geert E. Booij & Jaap van Marle (eds.), Yearbook of morphology 1992, 181–208. Dordrecht: Kluwer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Baayen, R. Harald, Richard Piepenbrock & Leon Gulikers
(1995) The CELEX lexical database (release 2). Philadelphia: Linguistic Data Consortium.Google Scholar
Bauer, Laurie
(1998) When is a sequence of two nouns a compound in English? English Language and Linguistics 2.1: 65–86. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bauer, Laurie & Rodney Huddleston
(2002) Lexical word-formation. In Rodney Huddleston & Geoffrey K. Pullum (eds.), The Cambridge grammar of the English language, 1621–1722. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bauer, Laurie, Rochelle Lieber & Ingo Plag
(2013) The Oxford reference guide to English morphology. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Berg, Kristian
(2012) Identifying graphematic units: Vowel and consonant letters. Written Language and Literacy 15.1: 26–45. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2013) Graphemic alternations in English as a reflex of morphological structure. Morphology 23.4: 387–408. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ms.). The effect of morphology, prosody, and etymology on double consonants in English. Manuscript, University of Oldenburg.
Berg, Thomas
(2009) Structure in language: A dynamic perspective. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
(2012) The cohesiveness of English and German compounds. The Mental Lexicon 71: 1–33. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Carney, Edward
(1994) A survey of English spelling. London: Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cook, Vivian
(2004): The English writing system. London: Arnold.Google Scholar
Davies, Mark
(2008) The corpus of contemporary American English: 450 million words, 1990-present. Available online at [URL].
Eisenberg, Peter
(2013) Grundriss der deutschen Grammatik. Vol. 1: Das Wort. 4th edition. Stuttgart: Metzler.Google Scholar
Evertz, Martin & Beatrice Primus
(2013) The graphematic foot in English and German. Writing Systems Research 5.1: 1–23. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fuhrhop, Nanna
Ms.). Morphemkonstanz bei starken Verben im Deutschen und Englischen. Manuscript, University of Oldenburg.
Fuhrhop, Nanna & Rebecca Barghorn
(2012) Prinzipien der Wortschreibung im Deutschen und Englischen am Beispiel der Schreibdiphthonge und der Doppelkonsonanten. In Lutz Gunkel & Gisela Zifonun (eds.), Deutsch im Sprachvergleich. Grammatische Kontraste und Konvergenzen, 135–160. Berlin, New York: de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fuhrhop, Nanna, Franziska Buchmann & Kristian Berg
(2011) The length hierarchy and the graphematic syllable: evidence from German and English. Written Language and Literacy 14.2: 275–292. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hay, Jennifer
(2003) Causes and consequences of word structure. New York, London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Hay, Jennifer & R. Harald Baayen
(2002) Parsing and productivity. In Geert E.Booij & Jaap van Marle (eds.), Yearbook of morphology 2001, 203–235. Dordrecht: Kluwer. DOI logo_8Google Scholar
Huddleston, Rodney
(2002) The verb. In Rodney Huddleston & Geoffrey K. Pullum (eds.), The Cambridge grammar of the English language, 71–212. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Katz, Leonard & Ram Frost
(1992) The reading process is different for different orthographies: The orthographic depth hypothesis. In Ram Frost & Leonard Katz (eds.), Orthography, phonology, morphology, and meaning, 67–84. Amsterdam: Elsevier North Holland Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kösling, Kristina & Ingo Plag
(2009) Does branching direction determine prominence assignment? An empirical investigation of triconstituent compounds in English. Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic Theory 5.2: 201–239. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Langenscheidt/Collins
(2008) Großwörterbuch Englisch. Englisch – Deutsch, Deutsch – Englisch. Berlin etc.: Langenscheidt.Google Scholar
[
Longman] (2000) Longman dictionary of contemporary English. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Meisenburg, Trudel
(1998) Zur Typologie von Alphabetschriftsystemen anhand des Parameters der Tiefe. Linguistische Berichte 1731: 43–64.Google Scholar
Nunberg, Geoffrey, Ted Briscoe & Rodney Huddleston
(2002). Punctuation. In Rodney ­Huddleston & Geoffrey K. Pullum (eds.), The Cambridge grammar of the English language, 1723–1764. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Palmer, Frank, Rodney Huddleston & Geoffrey K. Pullum
(2002) Inflectional morphology and related matters. In Rodney Huddleston & Geoffrey K. Pullum (eds.), The Cambridge grammar of the English language, 1565–1620. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Primus, Beatrice
(2003) Zum Silbenbegriff in der Schrift-, Laut- und Gebärdensprache – Versuch einer mediumübergreifenden Fundierung. Zeitschrift für Sprachwissenschaft 23.1: 3–55.Google Scholar
(2010) Strukturelle Grundlagen des deutschen Schriftsystems. In Ursula ­Bredel, Astrid Müller & Gabriele Hinney (eds.), Schriftsystem und Schrifterwerb: ­linguistisch – didaktisch – empirisch, 9–45. Tübingen: Niemeyer.Google Scholar
Quirk, Randolph, Sidney Greenbaum, Geoffrey Leech & Jan Svartvik
(1985) A comprehensive grammar of the English language. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Rakic, Stanimir
(2009) Some observations on the structure, type frequencies and spelling of English compounds. SKASE Journal of Theoretical Linguistics 6.1: 59–83.Google Scholar
Rollings, Andrew G
(2004) The spelling patterns of English. München: Lincom.Google Scholar
Saussure, Ferdinand de
([1915] 1959) A course in general linguistics (translated by Wade Baskin). New York: Philosophical Library.Google Scholar
Schmid, Hans-Jörg
(2005) Englische Morphologie und Wortbildung. Eine Einführung. Berlin: Erich Schmidt Verlag.Google Scholar
Siegel, Dorothy
(1979) Topics in English morphology. New York: Garland.Google Scholar
Vachek, Josef
(1973) Written language. General problems and problems of English. The Hague, Paris: Mouton.Google Scholar
Venezky, Richard
(1999) The American way of spelling: The structure and origins of American English orthography. New York: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
Cited by

Cited by 16 other publications

Aronoff, Mark, Kristian Berg & Vera Heyer
2016. Some implications of English spelling for morphological processing. The Mental Lexicon 11:2 ► pp. 164 ff. DOI logo
Berg, Kristian
2013. Graphemic alternations in English as a reflex of morphological structure. Morphology 23:4 ► pp. 387 ff. DOI logo
Berg, Kristian
2016. Double consonants in English: graphemic, morphological, prosodic and etymological determinants. Reading and Writing 29:3 ► pp. 453 ff. DOI logo
Berg, Kristian
2016. Graphemic Analysis and the Spoken Language Bias. Frontiers in Psychology 7 DOI logo
Berg, Kristian & Mark Aronoff
2021. Is the English writing system phonographic or lexical/morphological? A new look at the spelling of stems. Morphology 31:3 ► pp. 315 ff. DOI logo
Beyersmann, Elisabeth, Petroula Mousikou, Ludivine Javourey-Drevet, Sascha Schroeder, Johannes C. Ziegler & Jonathan Grainger
2020. Morphological Processing across Modalities and Languages. Scientific Studies of Reading 24:6 ► pp. 500 ff. DOI logo
Hettwer, Caroline & Nanna Fuhrhop
2021. Chapter 6. Stem constancy under the microscope. In All Things Morphology [Current Issues in Linguistic Theory, 353], ► pp. 99 ff. DOI logo
Heyer, Vera
2021. Below the surface: The application of implicit morpho-graphic regularities to novel word spelling. Morphology 31:3 ► pp. 243 ff. DOI logo
Iwao, Haruka Sophia, Sally Andrews & Aaron Veldre
2024. Sensitivity to morphological spelling regularities in Chinese-English bilinguals and English monolinguals. Reading and Writing DOI logo
Ouellette, Lisa Larrimore
2013. The Google Shortcut to Trademark Law. SSRN Electronic Journal DOI logo
Rastle, Kathleen
2019. The place of morphology in learning to read in English. Cortex 116 ► pp. 45 ff. DOI logo
Rastle, Kathleen
2019. EPS mid-career prize lecture 2017: Writing systems, reading, and language. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology 72:4 ► pp. 677 ff. DOI logo
Symanczyk Joppe, Vilma
2018. Optimal spaces and hyphens. Written Language & Literacy 21:1 ► pp. 89 ff. DOI logo
Treiman, Rebecca, Sloane Wolter & Brett Kessler
2021. How sensitive are adults to the role of morphology in spelling?. Morphology 31:3 ► pp. 261 ff. DOI logo
Ulicheva, Anastasia, Hannah Harvey, Mark Aronoff & Kathleen Rastle
2020. Skilled readers’ sensitivity to meaningful regularities in English writing. Cognition 195 ► pp. 103810 ff. DOI logo
Yablonski, Maya, Kathleen Rastle, J.S.H. Taylor & Michal Ben-Shachar
2019. Structural properties of the ventral reading pathways are associated with morphological processing in adult English readers. Cortex 116 ► pp. 268 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 15 april 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.