Honestly I don’t have enough knowledge to critic this book, I will try to add some suggestion based on my experience in learning and reading of morphology book since I’m learning of English and teaching my student in my place. In general whole of content of book wrote by Prof Nurachman Hanafi is simple to understand and easy to follow that guide us to understand more about morphology.
Before I critic chapter by chapter of the book I would like to critic and suggest in technical issue, first is the font of the book is too small and unclearly enough because of the printer or copies, second is the thigh of the glue is not strong and tightly. The third example is in the manuscript in every heading of chapter is not used of capital letter rather than sub heading (example in chapter I heading write used without capital letter while sub heading write used of capital letter). The last of my suggestion as prof command to us to critic and suggest of this book is there is not I can find of putting non-affixal process of morphology as of reduplication, alternation, and supletion because non-affixal process is part of the morphological process in morphemes, so for the next edition I hope non-affixal is in the book of prof because in my thesis later I would like take a research morphology and syntaxes of my own language process.
My critical and suggest for chapter one as I have been learn and analyze. First, in introduction is too short just one paragraph and unconsist of paragraph as in Indonesia ‘tidak ada garis barunya’. Second is very short of explanation of the example used in the book as in the page 5 about morphological interference. Third is each of sub heading is short of example.
Second chapter is about derivation clearly enough is easy to understand but there are some matter in there as I analyze is about morphological process need more explanation in category especially bound morpheme as core elements of derivational. In problem case of verbs of Latin origin: receive, deceive, conceive, perceive. Should these be considered to be composed of a single morpheme or prefix plus bound morpheme in derivational morpheme process.
Third chapter is about Inflectional process as the same in chapter two Inflectional is the part of affixation process in making of the words of morphologycal process. The weaknesses of talking about inflectional process in this book as I critizise the particular of adjective inflectional of comparative and superlative. Both of the them are not stated clarly in this book evetought has just stated in the intensifiers in page 21.
Fourth chapter is about Affixation. In this chapter is really detail talk about process of affixation it is easy to follow and simple to understand but my critic and suggestion are go to the unclearly stated of the process of affixation for example derivational and inflectional eventough has been stated in early chapter of this book but in this chapter the writer should be state clearly about affixation let see in the inflectional there are 8 process of affiation is not stated in this chapter namemly; third person singular-s, past tense-ed, progressive-ing, past participle-en, plural-s, possesive-‘s, comparative-er, and superlative-est.
Chapter five is about compound. In this chapter consists of solid, hyphernate, open compound, clippings, abreviations: blends and acronyms, and back formation. Whole content of this chapter are easy and simple to understand. It is claerly enough with details explanation plus simple examplification. If I critic and some addying in this chapter go trough to the characteristic of compound as in explanation of stress change and meaning change in pages of 43-44 in this book as in example of solid compound: air tight vs airtight, over draft vs overdraft, over night vs overnight. I can not find the clearly enough of explanation, so my suggestion it should be better the writer put more detail of explanation of this matter.
Chapter six of this book deals with phonological process of clitics. The phonological aspect of clitics has been discussed detail by the writer of this book but if I critic of this aspect of phonological process about clitics the is poor of explanation and axamplification in english the writer just focus on the other langauge. My suggestion it is important that the writer should be give more examplification in english senteces instead of altertion of the other langauge used.
Chapter seven discussed clearly about case markings. The writer focus on inflectional case, concordial case, and analitical case with detail examplification of many langauges used. If I suggest that in this this chapter the writer should add the example of Indonesia langauge or other vernacular langauge of Indonesian particularly the vernacular langauge around us like sasak, Bima, or Sunda langauge. Becouse in this chapter the writer put only turkey and Japan langauge in examplification about the case marking process.
In the chapter eight deals with phonological process of ‘Negations’, difine as negative sense in a clause. So in this chapter the writer focus on the clasification of parting of negation in general such as negative pronouns, negative adverbs, negative articles, negative affixes, indeclinable words, and negative doublings. In this chapter is complitely understand well by us but it should be better if the writer make clasification of positive and negated of english example as in :
- Play with the baby (positive)
- Do not play with the baby (negated)
In negative doublings the writer only used of Ute language there is no English example in there because there are many English example about negative doublings whereas some negative doubling may resolve to a positive; others resolve to intensify the negative clause within a sentence. For example: I didn't go nowhere today, I'm not hungry no more, You don't know nothing, There was never no more laziness at work than before. While some negative doubling become positives such as I didn't not go to the park today, We can't not go to sleep!, and I have no doubt this sentence is false.
Chapter nine is talking about voice systems and relevant to the bran of it. They are consists of active voice, passive, antipassive, middle, reflexive, causative, and reciprocal. Each of them really clear in giving exemplification, but if I critic in this chapter the writer need more explanation about voicing process not just in giving the example but also in more detail process.In the last chapter of this book the writer discussion about ‘aspects’. As mention in the chapter ten of this book ‘aspects’ is one of the grammatical category which talked about the internal temporal structure of a situation. The first weaknesses of this chapter is in introduction, before the writer discusses the branch of ‘aspects’ it should be better keep detail explanation each of them in general to make the reader understand well about of ‘aspects’ situation. Second is quite difficult to distinguish each of them as there is not I cannot find the general conclusion.