A CONTRASTING ANALYSIS OF ENGLISH. AND YORUBA MORPHOLOGY
A CONTRASTING ANALYSIS OF ENGLISH. AND YORUBA MORPHOLOGY
No Thumbnail Available
Date
1979
Authors
TINUOYE, MARY OLUFUNMILAYO
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Publisher
Abstract
This study demonstrates the fact that a language,
in this case Yoruba, that is not as widely spoken as
English, French, German etc. may contain morphological
processes comparable to the widely used languages of
the world. An attempt is made to contrast the
morphological processes of Yoruba with that of English
based on a descriptive, formal, but taxonomic approach.
It is found out that Yoruba has limited morphological
processes that is, where English makes use of
both inflectional and derivational morphology, Yoruba
makes use of derivational morphology. Also, in its
use of the derivation, Yoruba makes extensive use of
prefixation while English makes use of both prefixation
and suffixation. The other Morphological processes the
Yoruba language lends itself to are: reduplication
(which is the most productive process), compounding,
and calqueing. As for English there are the processes
of suppletion, replacives, compounding, very faint
trace of calqueing and reduplication. Suffixation
is the most productive morphological process in English.
Another finding is that there is no genetic
relationship between the two languages. In spite of
this, however, the morphological features can still
be compared as there are common processes as mentioned
In paragraph two above. Also the English language
serves as the base language whose morphological processes
are used to dig out some of the processes in the Yoruba
language.
Thus, in chapter one we look at the purpose of
this present study, the problems to be faced, the
scope of study and assumptions on which the study is
based. An attempt is also made to see why the TG
approach is not adopted in the study.
Chapter two looks at all the morphological
processes that are available in the two languages
pointing out those processes that are most productive
in each of the languages. Such processes for example
inflectional and derivational suffixes that are
absent in the Yoruba language but present in English
are also discussed.
Chapters three and four look at the relevance of
morphology to syntax and semantics respectively. It
is seen that the use of morphology in English is
mainly connected with syntax while the Yoruba language
puts the semantic aspect into more productive use.
Chapter five then gives a summary of the whole work
including a highlight of the important findings in the
mode of word-formation of the two languages.
The study have, thus, indicated that a
contrastive study of English and Yoruba (and any
other Nigerian language) in whichever field of linguistic
study (phonology, morphology, semantics, syntax)
is necessary as this will throw light on what features
of the languages are common and where the differences
occur. This is not only valuable as an academic
pursuit but of great benefit to learners of English
and textbook writers for students, in this case,
Yoruba students learning the English language.
Description
In Partial Fulfilment of the Requirenents for
the Decree of
MASTER OF ARTS IN LANGUAGE (M.A. LANGUAGE)
DEPARTMENT OF ENGLISH
AHMADU BELLO UNIVERSITY
ZARIA.