The Morphome

Abstract

The term morphome (to be distinguished from morpheme), and the notion that there exist autonomous morphological phenomena synchronically independent of phonological or functional conditioning, has occupied a central place in morphological theory. This article reviews some characteristics of morphomic (i.e., autonomously morphological) structures that are assumed in recent studies. Taking a diachronic perspective, it asks whether these properties (typological uniqueness, phonological heterogeneity, syncretism, systematicity, predictiveness) are inherent or only contingent. It concludes that typological uniqueness is not inherent and that the belief that it is so is a misunderstanding. Phonological heterogeneity, a repeatedly observed concomitant of some of the best-known types of morphome, proves merely contingent since alternations firmly anchored in a particular phonological form can be morphomic. Syncretism may be a precondition for, but is not necessarily characteristic of, the historical emergence of morphomes. Contrary to widely held assumptions, systematicity and predictiveness are acquired (not inherent) characteristics of morphomes.

The Cambridge Handbook of Romance Linguistics

“…13 See, among others, Burkhardt (2005), Späth (2007), Grohmann (2009), Ramchand and Reiss (2012, Rothman and Slabakova (2011). Studies of the interfaces in relation to Romance data include Rizzi and Savoia (1993), Zubizarreta (1998), Elordieta et al (2003), D'Imperio et al (2005), Rao (2008), Silvestri (2009, Folli and Ulbrich (2010), Scheer (2011), Cruschina (2012), D'Alessandro and Scheer (2015, Fischer and Gabriel (2016), Manzini and Savoia (2016), Ledgeway (2018b;2021a), Cruschina, Ledgeway, and Remberger (2019).…”