Morpheme used in a sentence

Morpheme in a sentence as a noun

I mainly had in mind terms like morpheme, phoneme, scope, etc.

Portmanteaus can be composed of morphemes as well as words.

Here the model is taking the morpheme "trans" and using it as if it is "transaction".

To use English as an example, the word "cats" contains two morphemes, the stem "cat" and the plural suffix "s".

What they mean is that all languages have a similar sounding, very short morpheme to signal repair.

Uhm, basic linguistics teaches you about phonemes and morphemes.

The same morpheme tends to be spelled the same everywhere it's used, which promotes reuse and actually tends to make writing in bulk easier.

A surnameMost of these senses come from words that include the morpheme 文, not from uses it permits alone, but "language" is still not even listed.

However, the sequences of bound morphemes in those forms, which may look complex to you, form a finite-state language that admits just a few sequences.

"Err, yeah I guess you can guess from the morpheme of a Chinese character that a particular character is a type of tree or has something to do with trees, but that's about it.

Multiple hanja end up mapping to the same hangul block because they're homophones, so there's some information loss, but spelling is morphemic enough that you can recognize the same morpheme in different arrangements.

This is reflected in the orthography, where in case of multiple options for how to distribute letters over characters, the option that keeps the same morpheme spelled consistently through use in different words is preferred.

The funky part being that the blocks aren't just syllables, the boundaries between blocks often correspond to the boundaries between morphemes, because of how the phonotactics of the language have evolved and Hangul was designed to fit them.

But one could, in principle, use any of those characters to write any syllable /fang/ that appears anywhere in the Chinese language, and the reader reading aloud would still know from context which morpheme pronounced /fang/ was intended by the writer.

Basically, you sometimes have multiple options for how to distribute letters over blocks when writing down a word, and the ortography then fairly consistently prefers the variants that keep the same morpheme spelled consistently across different words.

His rant on Hangul, for example - for human users, the morpho-syllabic grouping of letters into blocks in Korean writing tends to be beneficial, because they make the orthography of morphemes in different contexts more regular and morpheme reuse smoother.

In Korean+Hangul, this sort of combination tends to split neatly into blocks, and when there are multiple options for how the letters can be distributed over them, the orthography usually prefers the variant that keeps the morpheme spelled consistently everywhere.

However, the orthography isn't purely phonemic but rather morpho-phonemic and the morpheme boundaries happen to line up with block boundaries a lot - but in some sense most applications of the Latin alphabet aren't any less abstract; English orthography is anything but consistently phonemic after all.