word (n.)

A unit of expression which has universal intuitive recognition by NATIVE-SPEAKERS, in both spoken and written language. However, there are several difficulties in arriving at a consistent use of the term in relation to other CATEGORIES of linguistic description, and in the comparison of languages of different structural types. These problems relate mainly to word identification and definition. They include, for example, decisions over word boundaries (e.g. is a unit such as washing machine two words, or is it one, to be written washing-machine?), as well as decisions over status (e.g. is the a word in the same sense as is chair?). Regular definitions of words as ‘units of meaning’, or ‘ideas’ are of no help, because of the vagueness of such notions as ‘idea’. As a result, several theoretical distinctions have been made.

Three main senses of ‘word’ are usually distinguished (though terminology varies):

(a) Words are the physically definable units which one encounters in a stretch of writing (bounded by spaces) or speech (where identification is more difficult, but where there may be PHONOLOGICAL clues to identify boundaries, such as a PAUSE, or JUNCTURE features). ‘Word’ in this sense is often referred to as the orthographic word (for writing) or the phonological word (for speech). A neutral term often used to subsume both is word form.

(b) There is a more abstract sense, referring to the common factor underlying the set of forms which are plainly VARIANTS of the same unit, such as walk, walks, walking, walked. The ‘underlying’ word unit is often referred to as a LEXEME. Lexemes are the units of VOCABULARY, and as such would be listed in a dictionary.

(c) This then leaves the need for a comparably abstract unit to be set up to show how words work in the GRAMMAR of a language, and ‘word’, without qualification, is usually reserved for this role (alternatively, one may spell out this implication, referring to ‘MORPHEMIC/MORPHOSYNTACTIC/GRAMMATICAL’ words, though the latter has an alternative sense). A word, then, is a grammatical unit, of the same theoretical kind as MORPHEME and SENTENCE. In a HIERARCHICAL model of analysis, sentences (clauses, etc.) consist of words, and words consist of morphemes (minimally, one free morpheme). Word-order refers to the sequential arrangement of words in a language. Languages are sometimes classified in terms of whether their word-order is relatively ‘free’ (as in Latin) or ‘fixed’ (as in English).

Several criteria have been suggested for the identification of words in speech (criteria which would apply to the written language as well, if they were needed). One is that words are the most stable of all linguistic units, in respect of their internal structure, i.e. the CONSTITUENT parts of a complex word have little potential for rearrangement, compared with the relative POSITIONAL MOBILITY of the constituents of sentences and other grammatical structures (cf. disestablishment, where the sequence of dis-establish-ment is fixed, and all boys like girls, where many alternative sequences are possible, e.g. boys all like girls). A second criterion refers to the relative ‘uninterruptibility’ or COHESIVENESS of words, i.e. new elements (including pauses) cannot usually be inserted within them in normal speech: pauses, by contrast, are always potentially present at word boundaries. A criterion which has influenced linguists’ views of the word since it was first suggested by Leonard Bloomfield is the definition of word as a ‘minimal free form’, i.e. the smallest unit which can constitute, by itself, a complete utterance (it contrasts here with sentence, seen as the maximal free form recognized by most grammars). On this basis, possibility is a word, as is possible (contexts could be constructed which would enable such units to occur as single-element sentences, e.g. Is that a probable outcome? Possible.), but -ity is not (nor would any affix be). Not all word-like units satisfy this criterion, however (e.g. a and the in English), and how to handle these has been the subject of considerable discussion.

Several general subclassifications of words have been proposed, such as the distinction between VARIABLE and invariable types, GRAMMATICAL (or FUNCTION) words v. LEXICAL words, CLOSED-CLASS v. OPEN-CLASS words, EMPTY v. FULL words. At a more specific level, word-classes can be established, by analyzing the various GRAMMATICAL, SEMANTIC and PHONOLOGICAL properties displayed by the words in a language, and grouping words into classes on the basis of formal similarities (e.g. their INFLECTIONS and DISTRIBUTION). The results are analogous to the traditional notion of ‘parts of speech’, but word-classes usually display a wider range of more precisely defined classes, e.g. PARTICLES, AUXILIARIES, etc., alongside NOUNS, VERBS, etc., and lack the vagueness of many of the traditional NOTIONAL definitions (e.g. a noun as the ‘name of a person, place or thing’). The study of the structure and composition of words is carried on by MORPHOLOGY. The study of the ARRANGEMENTS of words in sentences is the province of SYNTAX. The notion of ‘PROSODIC word’ is central to some theories of phonological structure, as is the notion of a ‘MINIMAL word’ (one which contains at least two MORAS/SYLLABLES).

مواضيع ذات صلة

Word sharing and dialects: Dialects generally borrow from dialects

Dialects—Where Do You Draw the Line?

The standard

Koinés

Externally motivated change

Chain shifts

Changes to make life easier

Systemic changes

Weakening of intervocalic unvoiced stops

Simplification of consonant clusters

Assimilation

Reduction/loss of unstressed vowels