LITERATURE & BIOGRAPHY

The most cause of work of art is its creator, the author, and hence an explanation in term of personality and the life of the writer has been one of the oldest and best established methods of literary study.
Biography can be judged in relation to the light it throws on the actual production of poetry, but we can, of course, defend it and justify it as a study of the man of genius, of his moral, intellectual and emotional development, which has its own intrinsic interest. Finally, we can think of biography as affording materials for a systems study of the phychology of the poet and of the poetic process.
Three point of view should be carefully distinguished
- the first that biography explains and illuminates the actual product of poetry, is directly relevant
- the second point of view, shifts the centre of attention to human personality
- the third, considers biography as material for a science of future science, the phycology of artistic creation.

Biography is an ancient literary genre. First of all :
Chronologically and logically, it is part of histography. Biography makes no methodological distinction between a statesman, a general, an architect, a lawyer, and a man who plays no public role.
Cartridges view, in the view, of a biographer the poet is simply another man whose moral and intellectual development, external career, and emotional life, can be reconstructed and can be evaluated by reference to standards, usually drawn from some ethical system or code of manners.
So viewed, the problems of a biographer are simply those of a historian, he has to interpret his documents, letters, account by eye witnesses, reminiscences, autobiographical statements, and to decide questions of genuineness, thrust worthiness of witnesses, and the like.
In our context two question of literary biography are crucial. How far is the biographer justified in using the evidence of the works themselves for his purposes? How far are they results of literary biography relevant and important for an understanding of the works themselves? An affirmative answer to both questions is usually given to the first question it is assumed by practically all biographers who are specifically attracted to poet, for poets appear to offer abundant evidence usable in the writing of a biography, evidence which will be absent, or almost absent, in the class of many far more influential historical personages.
The whole view that art it self expression pure and simple, the transcript of personal feeling and experiences, is demonstrably false. There is a close relationship between the work of art the life of an author, this must never be construed as meaning that the work of art is a mere copy of life.
The biographical approach forget that a work of art is not simply the embodiment of experience but always the latest work in a series of such work; it is drama, a novel, a poem, determined, so far as it is determined at all. By literary tradition and convention. We must conclude that the biographical interpretation and use of every work of art needs careful scrutiny and examination in each care, since the work of art is not a document for biography.
The biographical frame work will also help us in studying the most obvious of all strictly developmental problem in the history of literature, the growth, maturing and possible decline of an author’s art. Biographical also accumulates the material for other question of literary history such as the reading of the poet, his personal associations with literary men, his travels, the landscape and cities he saw and lived in no biographical evidence can changes or influence critical evaluation. The frequently adduced criterion of sincerity is thoroughly false if it judges literature in terms of biographical truthfulness, correspondence to the author’s experience of feelings as they are attested by outside evidence. There is no relation between sincerity and value as art. The value of agonizingly felt love poetry perpetrated by adolescents and the dreary (however fervently felt) religious verse which fills libraries, are sufficient proof of this.

Read More

NATURAL APPROACH

BACKGROUND

In 1977, Tracy Terrell, a teacher of Spanish in California and Stephen Krashen, an applied linguist at the University of Southern California identified the Natural Approach with what they call “traditional” approaches to language teaching as based on the use of language in communicative situations without recourse to the native language. It is believed to conform to the naturalistic principles found I successful second language acquisition.


APPROACH

A. Theory of language
The Natural Approach “is similar to other communicative approaches being developed today”. What Krashen and Terrell do describe about the nature of language emphasizes the primacy of meaning. Language is viewed as vehicle for communicating meanings and messages. They state that “acquisition can take place only when people understand messages in the target language”. Then with a view of language that consist of lexical items, structures and messages. Obviously, there is no particular novelty in this fea as such, except that message are considered of primary importance of The Natural Approach.
B. Theory of learning
Krashen and Terrell make continuing reference to the theoretical and research base claimed to underlie the natural approach.
1. The Acquisition/learning hypothesis
It claims that there are two distinctive ways of developing competence in a second or foreign language. Acquisition refers to unconscious process that involve the naturalistic development of language proficiency through understanding language and through using language for meaningful communication. Learning by contrast refers to a process in which conscious rules about a language are developed.
2. The monitor hypothesis
It claims that we may call upon learned knowledge to correct ourselves when we communicate, but conscious learning (i.e. the learned system) has only this function are Time, Focus on form, and knowledge of rules.
3. The Natural Order Hypothesis
It claims that the acquisition of grammatical structures proceeds in a predictable order.
4. The Input Hypothesis
It claims to explain the relationship between what the learner is exposed to of a language (the input) and language acquisition. It involves four main issues:
a. The hypothesis relates to acquisition, and not to learning
b. People acquire language best by understanding input that is slightly beyond their current level of competence
c. The ability to speak fluently cannot be taught directly, rather it “emerges” independently in time, after the acquirer has built up linguistic competence by understanding input
d. If there is sufficient quantity of comprehensible input, I + 1 will usually be provided automatically.
5. The Effective Filter Hypothesis
Three kinds of affective or attitudinal variables related to second language acquisition are Motivation, Self-confident, and Anxiety.
These five hypothesis have obvious implications for language teaching:
a. as much comprehensible input as possible must be presented
b. whatever helps comprehension is important
c. the focus in the classroom should be on listening and reading; speaking should be allowed to “emerge”
d. in oreder to lower the effective filter, student work should center on meaningful communication rather than on form
e. input should be interesting and so contribute to a relaxed classroom atmosphere

DESIGN

A. Objectives
The Natural Approach “is for beginners and is designed to help them become intermediate”
However, since it is offered as a general set of principles applicable to a wide variety of situations, as in Communicative Language Teaching, specific objectives depend on learner needs and the skills (reading, writing, listening, or speaking) and level being taught.
B. The Syllabus
Krashen and Terrell (1983) approach course organization from two point of view:
1. First, they list some typical goals for language courses and suggest which of these goals are the ones at which the Natural Approach aims. They list such goals under four areas:
- Basic personal communication skills: oral e.g. listening to announcement in public place)
- Basic personal communication skills: written (e.g. reading and writing personal letter)
- Academic learning skills: oral (e.g., listening to lecturer)
- Academic learning skills: written ( e.g., taking notes in clas)
2. Second pont of view holds that “the purpose of a language course will vary according to the needs of the students and their particular interest

Read More

CLT

BACKGROUND


A British linguist, D. A. Wilkins contribute an analysis of the communicative meanings that a language learning needs understands and express. Communicative Language Teaching can be called with notional functional approach. American and British proponent now see it as an approach (and not a method) that aims to:
a) make communicative competence the goal of language teaching
b) develop procedures for the teaching of the four language skills that acknowledge the interdependence of language and communication.
CLT using procedures where learner work in pairs or groups employing available language resources in problem-solving task.
Finocchiaro and Brumit (1983) contrast the major distinctive features of the Audio lingual Method and the Communicative Approach, according to their interpretation:
Audio lingual Communicative Language Teaching
1. Attend to structure and form more than meaning
2. Language learning is learning structures, sounds, or words
3. Reading and writing are deferred till speech is mastered
4. Linguistic competence is the desired goal
5. The teacher control the learners and prevents them from doing anything that conflict with the theory.
6. Student are expected to interact with the language system, embodied in machines or controlled materials
7. The teacher are expected to specify the language that student are to use. 1. Meaning is Paramount

2. Language learning is learning to communicate
3. Reading and writing can start from the first day, if desired
4. Communicative competence is the desire goal
5. Teacher help learners in any way that motivates them to work with the language

6. Student are expected to interact with other people, either in the flesh, through pair and group work, or in their writing
7. the teacher cannot know exactly what language the student will use.

I. APPROACH
A. Theory of Language
The community Approach in language start from a theory of language as communication. The goal of language teaching is to develop what Hymes (1972) referred to as “Communicative Competence”
Its theory was a definition of what a speaker needs to know in order to be communicatively competent in a speech community.
Another theorist frequently on the communicative nature of language is Hennry Widdowson. a more influential analysis of communicative competence is found in canal and swain (1980), in which four dimension of communicative competence are identified: Grammatical competence, sociolinguistic competence, discourse competence, and strategic competence.
At the level of the language theory, CLT has characteristics of this communicative view of language follow:
1. Language is a system or the expressing of meaning
2. The primary function of language is to allow interaction and communication
3. The structure of language reflects its functional and communicative uses
4. Thee primary units of language are not merely its grammatical and structural features, but categories of functional and communicative meaning as exemplified in discourse

B. Theory of Learning
Elements of an underlying learning theory can be discerned in some CLT practice by Johnson (1982). It might be described as the communication principle:
*First, its activities that involve real communication promote learning,
*Second, its activities in which language is used for carrying out meaningful task promote learning
*Third, language that meaningful to the learner supports the learning process.
Savignon (1983) survey second language acquisition research as a source for leaning theorist and considers the role of linguistic, social, cognitive, and individual variables in language acquision.

II. DESIGN
A. Objectives
Phiepho (1981) discuss the following levels of objectives in a communicative approach:
1. an integrative and content level (language as a means of expression)
2. a linguistic and instrumental level (language as a semiotic system and an object of learning)
3. an effective level of interpersonal relationship and conduct(language as a means of expressing values and judgements about oneself and other)
4. a level of individual learning needs (remedial learning based on error analysis)
5. a general educational level of extra-linguistic goal (language-learning within the school curriculum)

B. Syllabus
Example of such a model that has been implemented nationally is the Malaysian communicational syllabus. These objectives are organized into learning areas, for ech which are specified a number of out come goals and products. The products such as:
a. understanding the message
b. asking questions to clear any doubts
c. asking question to gather more information
d. taking notes
e. arranging the notes in a logical manner for presentation
f. orally presenting the message

C. Types of learning and teaching activities
Classroom activities are often designed to focus in completing task that are mediated through language or involve negotiation of information and information sharing.
Functional communication activities and social interaction activities as major activity types in CLT.

D. Learners Roles
Breen and Caldin describe the learner’s role within CLT in the following term:
The Learners as negotiator-between it self, the learning process and the object of learning emerges from and interacts with the role of joint negotiator within the group undertakes. The implication for the learner is that he should contribute as much as he gains and thereby learn in an interdependent way

E. Teachers Roles
1. Needs analyst
The CLT teacher assumes a responsibility for determining and respondingto learner language needs. Typically, such formal assessments contain items that attempt to determine an individual’s motivation for studying the language.
2. Counselor
The teacher-counselor is expected to exemplify an effective communicator seeking to maximize the meshing of speaker intention and hearer interpretation, through the use of paraphrase, confirmation, and feedback.
3. Group process manager
Guidelines for classroom practice ( e. g. Litllewood 1981; Finochiaro and Brumfit 1983) suggest that during an activity of the teacher monitors, encourages, and suppresses the inclination to supply gaps in lexis, grammar and strategy but notes such gaps for later commentary and communicative practice.
The teacher leads in the debriefing of the activity, pointing out alternatives and extension and assisting group in self-correction discussion>

F. The role of instructional materials
1. Text-based materials
Language teaching text by Morrow and Johnson’s Communicate (1979) for example has none of usual dialogues, drills, or sentence pattern and uses visual cues, taped cues, picture and sentence fragment to initiate conversation.
2. Task-based material
To support CLT classes, these typically are in the form of one of kind items; exercise hand books, cue card, activity card, activity card, pair-communication practice materials, and student-interaction practice booklets.
3. Realita
Many proponent of CLT such as sign, magazine, advertisements, and newspaper, or graphic and visual source around which communicative activities can be built, such as maps, pictures, symbols, graphs, and charts.

III. PROCEDURE
CLT procedures are evolutionary rather than revolutionary:
1. Presentation of a brief dialog or several mini-dialog
2. oral practice of each utterance of the dialog segment to be presented
3. question and answers based on the dialog topic
4. question and answers related the students’ personal experience but centered around the dialog theme
5. study one of the basis communicative expression in the dialog or one of the structures which exemplify the function.
6. Learner discovery of generalization or rules underlying the functional expression of structure.
7. oral recognition, interpretative activities
8. oral production activities-proceeding from guided to free communication activities
9. copying of the dialog or mini dialogs or modules if they are not in the class text
10. sampling of the written homework assignment
11. evaluation of learning (oral only)



CONCLUSION
CLT principles includes:
Learners learn a language through using it to communicate,
- Authentic and meaningful communication should be the goal of class room activities,
- Fluency is an important dimension of communication,
- Communication involves the integration of different language skills,
- Learning is a process of creative construction and involves trial and error.
Johnson and Johnson (1998) identify core characteristics that underlie current applications of communicative methodology:
1. Appropriateness
2. Message focus
3. Psycholinguistic processing
4. Risk taking
5. Free practice
Some focus centrally on the input to the learning process. Thus Content-Based Teaching stresses that the content or subject matter of teaching is of primary importance in teaching. Some teaching proposals focus more directly on instructional factor and Learning factor. Outcome is another dimension of the process of communication and is central in Competency-Based Language Teaching.

Read More

COMMUNITY LANGUAGE LEARNING

Background

Community Language Learning (CLL) is the name of method developed Charles A. Curran, a professor of psychology at Loyola University, Chicago. It represent the use of counseling-learning theory to teach language. The basic procedures of CLL can thus be seen as derived from the counselor-client relationship
Community Language Learning is linked is a set of practices used in certain kinds of bilingual education programs as “language alternation”, a message/lesson/class is presented first in the native language and then again in second language.






Approach: Theory of Language and Learning

La Forge, student of Curran, elaborate an alternative theory of language, which is referred to as “Language as social Process”
“…communication involves not just unidirectional transfer of information to the other, but the very constitution of the speaking subject in relation to its other…”(La Forge 1983;3)
“Language is people; language is persons in contact; language is person in response”, CLL interaction are two distinct and fundamental kinds: interaction between learners and interaction between learners and knower.
The CLL view of learning is a human learning both cognitive and affective. Its termed whole person learning, the development of the learner’s relationship with the teacher is central. The process of learning a new language, then, is like being reborn and developing a new persona, with all the trials and challenges that are associated with birth and maturation.
Curran discusses “consensual validation” or “convalidation” that is the key element of CLL classroom procedures. A group of ideas concerning the psychological requirements for successful learning are collected under the acronym SARD, as follow:
S stand for security
A stands for attention and aggression
R stand for retention and reflection
D denotes discrimination


Design: Objectives, Syllabus, learning activities, roles of learner, Teachers, and Materials

The progression is topic based, with learners nominating thing they wish to talk about and messages they wish to communicated to other learners.
The teacher’s responsibility is to provide a conveyance for these meanings in a way appropriate to the learners’ proficiency level, a syllabus emerges from the interaction between the learner’s expressed communicative intentions and the teacher’s reformulations of these into suitable target language utterances.
CLL combines innovative learning takes and activities with conventional once. They include:
1. translation
2. group work
3. recording
4. transcription
5. analysis
6. reflection and observation
7. listening
8. free conversation
Learners roles in CLL is be become members of a community – their fellow learners and the teacher – and learn through interacting with the community.
Learners are expected :
- to listen attentively to their knower,
- to freely provide meaning they wish to express
- to repeat target utterances without hesitation,
- to support fellow members of the community,
- to report deep inner feeling and frustrations as well as joy and pleasure,
- and to become counselors of other learners
The teachers role derives from the function of the counselor is to respond calmly and not judgmentally, in a supportive manner, and help the client try to understand his or her problems better by applying order and analyze to them.
More specific teacher’s roles are the teacher operates in a supportive role, providing target language translations and a model for imitation on requests of the client,
Teacher monitor learner utterance, providing assistance when requested,
The teacher may intervene directly to correct deviant utterances, supply idioms, and advise on usage and fine point of grammar when student capable of accepting criticism
Since a CLL course evolves out of the interactions of community, a textbook is not considered a necessary component.


Procedures

The learners are linked in some way to knower or a single knower as a teacher. The first class may begin with a period of silence. Later, may sit in silence while they decide what to talk about. The knower may use the volunteered comment as way of introducing discussing of classroom contact or as a stimulus for language interaction regarding hoe learner felt about the period of silence. The knower may encourage learners to address questions to one another or to the knower.
The class might be re-formed into small group in which a single topic, chosen by the class or the group, is discussed. The summary of the group discussion may be presented to another group, who in turn try to repeat or paraphrase the summary back to the original group.
In an intermediate or advanced class, a teacher may encourage groups to prepare a paper drama for presentation to the rest of the class. Finally, the teacher asks learners to reflect on the language class, as a class or in groups.

Conclusion

Community Language Learning must be familiar with and sympathetic to the role of counselor in psychological counseling. The teacher must also be relatively non directive and must be prepared to accept and even encourage the “adolescent” aggression of the learner as he or she striver for independence. The teacher must operate without conventional materials, depending on student topics to shape and motivate the class.
Critics of CLL question the appropriateness of counseling metaphor on which it is predicated, the lack of a syllabus makes objectives unclear and evaluation difficult to accomplish, and the focus on fluency rather than accuracy may lead to inadequate control of grammatical system of the target language.
Supporters of CLL is emphasize the positive benefits of a method that centers on the learner and stresses the humanistic side of language learning, and not merely its linguistic dimension.

Read More

morfology

PRODUCTIVITY
I. Prelimineries (Pendahuluan)
A. The existence of productivity
Concerns to which word- formation can be said to be productive in general. In English , -er can be added to any new verbal base to give a new lexeme which means ‘the person who carries out the action of the verb’ Also in English the suffix –ful can be added to the name of any container to provide a noun: canful, pocketful, skipful,ect.





B. Productivity and creativity
Following lyons (1977 ; 549) a distinetion will be drawn the here between productivity and creativity. Productivity is to be accounted for by the rules of a generative grammar. Creativity, on the other hand, is the native speaker’s bility to extend the languange system in a motivated, but unpredictable (non-rule-governed) way.
C. Synchronic and diachronic productivity
Confusing productivity from a diachcronic point of view wich productivity seen purely synchronically (see Gunter,1972: I). Productivity in word formation is frequently considered to mean no more than the invention of new lexemes which then become a part of the language system. Laze is actually derived from an earlier form lazy, possibly by analogy with such pairs as crazelecrazy. It has frequently been stated that back-formation of this kind is purely a diachronic phenomenon (pennanen, 1966: IO; Quirk et al., 1972:977 fn.b; tietze, 1974: 4.I.I). back-formation must be allwed for in a synchronic grammar if it is still a curent method of forming lexemes
II. Syntactic and Morphological Productivity
At least three statements about productivity are commonly found in transformational literature as applied to sentences:
1. speakers of a language have the ability o produce and understand new saentences of that language (Chomsky, 1966a: 3-3I):
2. there is no such thing as the longest sentence of a natural language (chomsky, 1957:23; Lyons,1968: 221):
3. the statistical probability that any given utterance has been heard/ produced previously by the speaker-listener approaches zero(Chomsky,1957: 16-17: 1966: I2 fn. 20)
A. Production of new forms
When word-formation is said to be productive, it frequently means no more than that native speakers can produce and understand new words (see, for example, pennanen, 1972: 292).
B. Existence of a longest form
In discussing whether there is such a thing as the longest word in a language, it will be useful to consider compounding and derivation separately.
a. Compaunding
The case with sentence formation, limitations on short-term memory may affect the length of compounds in actual use, but this does not affect the theoretical grammaticality of these formations.
b. Derivation
One of the main picces of evidence here is recursiveness. English is concerned, there are some cases where it is clearly recursive.it is quite easy to illustrate that the rules for the addition of suffixes must be formulated in such a way as to allow for recursiveness.
#. - ation (1) occurs before -al (2) inspir,ation.al,reval,ation,al
- al (2) “ “ -ize (3) industri, al, ize, palat, al, ize
- ize (3) “ “ -ation (I) idol, iz, ation, organ, iz, ation
#. - ic (I) “ “ -al (2) con,ic, al,poet, ic, al
-al (2) “ “ -ist (3) education, al, ist,herb, al,ist
-ist (3) “ “ -ic (I) atom, ist, ic, monarch,ist, ic
It is in fact extremely difficult to find examples of the recursive use of the same suffix listed in dictionaries.thus in finnish the number of possible sentences and the maximum length of sentences. There are pragmatic restrictions on the length of words, and while some derivational procedures are more severely limited than others (either pragmatically or in a theoretically motivated way).
C. Probability of accurrence
Sentence formation should be more productive than word-formation. Some idea of the vast difference in productivity can be gained by trying to put figures to the number of possible arrangements of phonemes and lexemes in a languag1e. As beard does,that the difference be attributed entirely to this difference in the number of possible arrangements of the elements.
On result of the difference in productivity between lexemes and sentences is that it allows what meys (1975) calls “ item-familiarity” with lexemes, but rerely with sentences. The speaker listener feels that he knows individual complex word is a way that he does not feels that he knows individual sentences.
D. Syntactic vs Morphological Productivity
In fact, if one accepts the conclusion that the difference between the productivity of sentence formation and word-formation is a quantitative but now a qualitative one, then the two are so similar that it becomes virtually obligatory for the analyst to attempt to deal with sentence formation and word-formation in yhe same component of the grammar. One that in often mentioned is the problem posed by semi productivity in derrivation.
III. Remarks on “remarks...
A. problem for studies of productivity
chomsky has three main arguments against a transformationalist approach to nominalization, firstly, nominalization is not “productivitive”. Secondly, derived nominals have the internal structure of noun phrases,not, of derived sentences ; and finally, devired nominals are idiosyncratically related in terms of both morphology and semantics to their corresponding verbs.
B. Productivity “in Chomsky (1970)
By “productivity “, chomsky does not mean that there is no derived nominal corresponding to some verbs, but that the derived nominal cannot always replace the verb (or adjective) to which it corresponds in a given sentence.
C. Internal Structure
Chomsky’s obyection that derived nominals (unlike gerunds, which have the structure of verbs in full sentences) have the structure of NPs cannot be taken as an argument againts a transformationalist position. Instead, different transformational sources may account for the two kinds of nominal; gerunds can be derived from sentences,as Chomsky suggests, while nominalizations can be derived from configurations like.
D. Idiosyncrasy
a. Morphologycal idiosyncrasy
To consider the morphologycal point first, it is clear that part of the difficulty is that Chomsky is dealing with the full range of English derivational sufffixes, and not just with the productive ones. Examples, laughter, which seems to be only word in English with a-ter nominalizing suffix (with the possible exception of slaughter), and belief, which fits into the lexicalized sheathl sheathe, adviceladvise series.
b. Semantic idiosyncrasy
Many – if not most – derived nominals listed in dictionaries are ambiguous, and possibly several ways ambiguous. The first is that only some of the meanings are productive and that a derived nominal is lexcalized in other meanings but productive in this limited number of meanings. The second possibility is that the semantic relationship of the derived nominal to its corresponding verb is not in fact fully specified. Instead only the grammatical relationship of verb- nominalizationis specified, and the semantic relationship is pragmatically determined.
E. Complements
Chomsky he says (1970: 190) :
That fact that refuse takes a noun phrase complement or a reduced sentential complement and destroy only noun phrase complement , either as a noun or as a verb, is expressed by the feature structure of the ‘neutral’ lexical entry.....
(Where “’Neutral’ lexical” means a lexical entry unspecified for whether a noun or a verb will be the surface realization of the morpheme: this is how Chomsky relates a nominalization to its verb in his grammar).

VI. Semi- productivity
Marchand notes that both –ness and –ity can be added to bases in -able to provide nominlizations. On the basis of the entries in the OED marchand gives the following instances of acceptable and unacceptable formations:
Serviceableness *servieablility
*certainness certainty
Suitableness suitablility
Thus it seems that the two suffixesare not freely to any base in –able, are therefore not completely productive, but only semi –productive. It should be noted that the discussion above has been in terms of garmmaticality rather than in terms of acceptability. This is a corollary of talking in terms of competence rather than performance.
IV. Some restrictions on productivity
A syntactic restriction can be provisionally defined as one affecting the rules, configuration and/or features which lead to the generation of a string made up of a base and an affix or (in the case of conversion) process marker, or which, in the case of compounding, lead to a string made up of two (or more) stems, and marked as forming a compound.
a. Pragmatics
Pragmatics can here be defined in a wide sense as the influence of knowledge and beliefs abaut the structure of the real world, in contrast to knowledge abaut the language –system. Some of the ways in which word –formation is influenced and limited by pragmatic factors are discussed below.
1. Requirement of existence
The lack of existece of a given form (or interpretation of a form) is often used as an argument against the productivity of word formation.
2. Nameability requirement
Nameability in complex words must also be subject to more general rules governing the permissibility of lexical items. Chomsky postulates that such restrictions are universal, and they must apply as filters on complex as well as simplex lexemes.
b. Blocking
Blocking is the name given by aronoff (1976:43) to the phonemenon of the non-occurrence of a complex form because of the existence of another form. Aronoff(1976) develops the nation of blocking further than this. He lists a number of nominals related to adjectival bases in –ous such as :
Various - variety
Curious - curiousity
Glorious glory *gloriousity
Furious fury *furiousity
Where the presence of a nominal like glory or fury can be said to block the generation of an –ity form, but then he points out that a –ness nominalization is possible in every case.there is an inverse relationship between productivity and institutionalization/lexicalization such that the most productive patterns are not lexicalized, and fully lexicalized processes are not productive.
c. limitations on the bases that may undergo prosesses
1. phonological
As well as segmental restrictions on the bases that can undergo particular processes, there may also be suprasegmental restrictions. These can be illustrated from English with reference to the infixation of –bloody-,-bloomin(g)-, -fuckin(g)- and other such forms into the middle of words, to give forms like absobloominlutely. In the vast majorty of cases,these infixes occur inmmediately before the syllable of the base that bears the lexical stress: thus while licketyfuckingsplit is acceptable, *lickfuckingetysplit is not. Not only are infixes like –fucking-limited by stress to where they can occur in the word, they are limited by syllable pattern.
2. Morphological
Having made the point that a feature such as [ _+ latinate] is needed, aronoff (1976:52) goes on to argue that since readability is attested, the latinate feature must also be attached to –able, and that it must be the feature marking of the last morpheme which is important, rather than the feature marking of the root. This is not a restriction on be conjoined, as in provis, ion,ment, but *environ, ment,ment is not possible. Aronoff (1976:53-4) also shows that the make-up of the base can play a role. He gives the example of adjectival forms in –al devired from nouns in –ment.
*orna ornament ornamental
Employ employment *employmental
Thus rules of word –formation have to be sensitive to the difference between a base which is a root, and a base which is more than a simple root.
3. Lexical
Certain word –formation processes are triggered or limited by the individual roots. Aronoff (1976: 40) gives the examples of the formation of –ity nominalizations from adjectival –ous bases. In some of these, the –ous becomes –os-, for example, currious, curiosity; in others it is deleted, as in vorasious, voracity. This is presumably to say that the less productive pattern (at least) is only found in lexicalized words.
4. Semantic
What is perhaps surprising, is that it would seem to be a semantic property of the head noun, rather than of the base of the adjective : that is, it seems intuitively speaking to be something to do with men that they inalienably possess eyes ,legs, etc. A slightly more abstract example is provided by zimmer (1964: 15), who points out that “negative prefixes are not used (in English) with adjectival stems that have ‘negative’ value on evaluative scales such as ‘good-bad’...”. thus someone can be said to be unwell, but not *unill; unhappy but not *unsad; uncheerful but not *unsorrowful; unoptimistic but not unpessimistic.
d. Retrictions on stem collocations in compounds
the claim is made in bauer (1978d: 3.4.4) that the determaining element in an endocentric nominal compound always denotes the primary defining characteristic of the subgroup denoted by the compound as a ehole. ‘thus in policedog the primary defining characteristic of the member of the group of dogs under discussion is its connection with the police. Given this, it is to be expected that there should not be any genus-species compounds like *human-man,*animalhorse,*placemoor where the determining element is implicit in the head element. Note however, that species –genus compounds, which migth appear to be equally redundant, are far more common; cod fish, beech tree, puppy dog, palm tree, buy child.
e. Semantic coherence
aronoff (1976:388f), following Zimmer (1964), claims that more productive a process is, the more easily can its semantic effect be specified. The meanings of the –ness nominalizations can be stated in terms of a choice between three operations on the verb; -ity nominalizations. As aronoff (1976:39) remarks,”commonsensically, the correlation is perfectly reasonable: the surerane is of what a word will mean, the more likely one is to use it.”
f. Analogy
By an analogical formation will be meant a new formation clearly modelled on one already existing lexeme, and not giving rise to a productive series. This is presumably what happened in the case of formation in –scape, based on landscape, then an analogical formation seascape giving eventually a productive series including not only cloudscape, skyscape and waterscape but also dreamscape, winterscape, and wirescape (Aldrich,1966)
g. Other restrictions
one further linguistic restriction on productivity would seem to be the existence of a form with a lexicalized meaning other than that which would be assigned to it productively. For example, there is no commonly used nominalization from ignore i English, although it would be useful to have one: ignorance, which would be suitable, is lexicalized with a different meaning, and is thus unavailable; ignoration, which is listed in the OED, strikes many people as being unsuitable.
h. Productivity as a cline
productivity is not so much an either/or phonemenon as a cline. This is linked crucially with lexicalixation, for several reasons. Semantic coherence correlates with productivity and lack of semantic coherence has to be listed in the lexicon. In fact, the inter-relation of productivity and lexicalization i very complex, and there is not necessarily influence in one direction only.
i. Restrictions acting in unison
Morphological process can be said to be more or less productive according to the number of vew words which it is used to form.

Read More