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.
