● Lexical morphology deals with the formation and the structure of a word rather than

the morpheme. This idea is contrasted with the American structuralism, they believe
that the morpheme is the central key of morphology. Lexical morphology discuss
three important aspects which are the word-based models of tradition,
pre-structuralism approaches and the order word-and-paradigm morphology. The
centrality of a word has a condition that must be respected, the production of each
layer derivation must be a possible word in a language. The output of a layer
derivation cannot fracture well-formed restrictions on words. For example in BANTU
language, all words must end in a vowel, but there is a problem which is all verbs root
and verbal suffixes end in consonants. So, because of the necessarity that words
must end in a vowel a solution arises which is the basic verbal suffix. The following
example explains the idea above, we have the word ‘ba-lab-a ‘, the basic verbal suffix
‘–a’ connects to the verbal word to show that it respects the well-formdness
restriction of a word. There is another reason that consider the word as a central
unite of morphology: the morphological process that have fully formed words as their
input. Like, compounding, affixation and conversion.
The lexicon only accept the words that are phonologically permitted. In addition, the morphs
represent morphemes in words that is accepted by English grammar. For example, the
putative words ‘grestifer’ and ‘dispregnetation’ are potential words, but there is a problem
which is all the affixes morphemes exist in the English mental lexicon but the root ‘-gest’,
‘-preg’ are not. According to putative words, meaningless words exist in a language and they
have a fixed order of morphemes. As an example, the root morphemes are priv, popul, pert
and the affixes morphemes are –de, -ate, -ion. As a result, the words forms are deprivation,
populate, population, depopulate, depopulation, port, portion, deport and deportation. We
notice that the affix-ion must follow the suffix –ate. Lexical morphology declares that, all
affixes at stratum 1 are connected before any stratum 2 affixes which mean that when both
occur in the same word the stratum 1 affixes are the closest to the root. For instance, we
have the word athlete attaches to the non-neutral, pre-accenting suffix “ic” to become
ath’letic then attaches to the neutral suffix –ism to become ath’let-ic-ism. We assume that
the stratum 1 and stratum 2 occur in the same word. As a results, stratum 1 precede stratum
2. This the distinction between the stratum 1 and 2 but we might expect that the affixes of
the same stratum co- occur on the same term. How can we predicting the order. To answer
this question we must study this example, home(n) –less(a)- ness(n), the suffix –ness
connects to adjective base while –less connects to nouns to form adjectives. Therefore, -less
must be added first to a noun to become an adjective before –ness can be suffixed. Lastly,
the derivational and inflectional morphemes may co-occur in the same Stratum. As a
solution, the derivational suffix are always closer to the root rather than the inflectional. For
example, we don’t say” work-s-er”, we say “wor-er-s “.
The ordering of strata in the lexicon usually represents the ordering of process of
word-formation. Stratum 1 includes the more idiosyncratic word-formation process. To
explain more, the affixes are less co-herent. They are vague and unpredictable most of the
time while stratum 2 is more general word-formation process, they have predictable
meaning. Example of co-herency of stratum 1 and stratum 2. To start with stratum 1, X-ous
means abounding in, full of, the nature of. Secondly, the stratum 2, X-less means without.
Moreover, the nouns with the shape X-ous-ness which are made up by adding –ness to
adjectives ending in –ous are regular predictable in meaning. However, the nouns with the
shape _ous, -ity are not regular.
Conversion is a derivational process that changes the word from one form to another but
there is a directionality problem which means that we don't know if nouns are derived from
verb or vice versa. The conversion process adds an additional dimension of meaning. as an
example, the verb head is derived from the noun head then becomes to head (function as
the head of) . Although, it still a problematic in the context of conversion. lexical phonology
shows the distinction between nouns and verbs in terms of word stress. The lexicon put the
main stress on the final syllable of a V but nouns stressed on the first syllable. The
conversion of verbs into nouns is placed at stratum 1 and the conversion of nouns into verbs
is placed at stratum 2 . To explain more, nouns-from-verbs are called deverbal nouns. In
addition, verbs-from- nouns are called demoninal verbs. We conclude that the deverbal
nouns are less productive than the demoninal verbs.
the demoninal verbs have another support which is the strong verbs. For instance, -ins and
-ink are strong verbs, they form their past tense by ablaut then they become -ang, -ank.
The strict cycle condition means that, in the mental lexicon, rules are blocked off. Rules are
only have the ability to affect items that belong to the stratum 1. The strict cycle condition is
illustrated by the example of velar softening. For example, the sound / K/ becomes / S/
before a front vowel. Another principle, which limits what rules can do and support strict
cyclist is the Bracket Erasure Convention. It means that at the end of each layer of derivation
brackets arise and they cannot affected by any phonological or any other properties.
Now we are going to talk about Elsewhere Condition. When two rules arise in the same type
of inputs. As a result, they can't both apply. This where the Elsewhere Condition shows up.
The Elsewhere Condition give the advantage of this restricted rule over the most general
one. As an example, the irregular stratum 1 plural formation in English.
Morphological phenomena arise which is blocking. It limits the productivity of a word
formation rules. For example, the plural English is adding s or es to the end of a word but
some words doesn't accept this rule. Like, child since it is blocked by the presence of the
word children.