Derivative Words of The Modern Ukrainian Lexicon in The ‎Context of Morphonology

  • Authors

    • Mariia Fedurko Drohobych Ivan Franko State Pedagogical University, Drohobych, Ukraine
    • Iryna Babii Ternopil Volodymyr Hnatiuk National Pedagogical University, Ternopil
    • Vira Kotovych Drohobych Ivan Franko State Pedagogical University, Drohobych, Ukraine
    • Anzhela Kuza Lviv National Environmental University, Lviv region, Ukraine
    • Liliia Lushpynska Ternopil Volodymyr Hnatiuk National Pedagogical University, Ternopil
    • Petro Matskiv Drohobych Ivan Franko State Pedagogical University, Drohobych, Ukraine
    https://doi.org/10.14419/nd3vx172

    Received date: June 9, 2025

    Accepted date: July 4, 2025

    Published date: July 15, 2025

  • Language; Morphophonology; Morphophonemic Changes; Morphophonemic Science

  • Abstract

    The article presents the views of various linguists on approaches to modifying the phonemic structure of morphemes, identifies patterns of ‎morphophonemic alternations of modern words of the Ukrainian language, analyzes morphophonemic positions in modern words, reveals ‎regular and irregular morphophonemic positions in modern words by the norms of the modern Ukrainian language, ‎identifies features of word formation of commonly used modern words (occasionalisms), and establishes features of their functioning in the ‎modern Ukrainian language. A theoretical generalization is made regarding the most important issues of morphophonemic science its ‎subject and tasks, concepts, paradigms, approaches to the study of morphophonemic facts, units, and their relationship to the semantic plan ‎of the language; the focus of attention is also directed to the relevance of considering morphophonemic phenomena as a whole‎.

  • References

    1. Albright, A., & Hayes, B. (2003). Rules vs. analogy in English past tenses: A computational/experimental study. Cognition, 90(2), 119–161. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0010-0277(03)00146-X.
    2. Ampa, A., Basri, M., & Ramdayani, S. (2019). A Morphophonemic Analysis on Affixation in The Indonesian Language. International Journal of Scientific & Technology Research, 8(7), 267-273.
    3. Basbøll, H. (2015). Morphophonology. In: International Encyclopedia of Social and Behavioral Sciences (2. ed., pp. 826-833). Elsevier. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-08-097086-8.53036-0.
    4. Belth, C., Payne, S., Beser, D., Kodner, J., Yang, Ch. (2021). The greedy and recursive search for morphological productivity. arXiv preprint arXiv:2105.05790.
    5. Bybee, J. (1995). Regular morphology and the lexicon. Language and Cognitive Processes, 10, 425–455. https://doi.org/10.1080/01690969508407111.
    6. Bybee, J. (2001). Phonology and language use. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511612886.
    7. Dwivedi, P. (2017). Morphophonemics. In: T. Mukherjee (ed.), An Introduction to Linguistics and Phonetics (pp.1-12). UGC MHRD ePG Pathshala.
    8. Fedurko, M. (2005). Morphonology of adjective word formation in modern Ukrainian language. [PhD dissertation]. Kyiv: O.O. Potebnia Institute of Linguistics.
    9. Fehringer, C. (2004). How Stable are Morphological Doublets? A Case Study of /[schwa]/ [similar] Ø Variants in Dutch and German. Journal of Germanic Linguistics, 16(04), 285-329. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1470542704040425.
    10. Fromkin, V. et.al. (1990). An Introduction to Language. Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.
    11. Greshchuk, V.V. (1995). Ukrainian adjectival word formation. − Ivano-Frankivsk: Play.
    12. Haber, L. R. (1976). Leaped and Leapt: A Theoretical Account of Linguistic Variation. Foundations of Language, 14(2), 211–238.
    13. Jensen, M. J. T. (1990). Word Structure in Generative Grammar. Amsterdam John Benjamins.
    14. Josiah, U., & Udoudom, J. (2012). Morphophonemic analysis of inflectional morphemes in English and Ibibio nouns: Implications for linguistic studies. Journal of Education and Learning, 1(2), 72-81. https://doi.org/10.5539/jel.v1n2p72.
    15. Karpilovska, E.A. (1990). Construction of complex word-forming units. Kyiv: Naukova Dumka.
    16. Kirov, Ch., & Cotterell, R. (2018). Recurrent neural networks in linguistic theory: Revisiting pinker and prince (1988) and the past tense debate. Transactions of the Association for Computational Linguistics, 6, 651–665. https://doi.org/10.1162/tacl_a_00247.
    17. Klymenko, N.F. (1998). Fundamentals of morphemics of the modern Ukrainian language. Kyiv: IZMN.
    18. Korzhyk, L.I. (1999). Structural and semantic typology of adjective word-formation chains in the modern Ukrainian literary language. [PhD disser-tation brief]. Precarpathian State University, Ivano-Frankivsk.
    19. Kowalik, K. (1998). Morfonologia. Gramatyka współczesnego języka polskiego. Morfologia. Warszawa: PWN.
    20. Lesiuk, M.P. (1991). Word-forming nest as an object of word-formation research. Word-forming and semantic structure of the Ukrainian lexicon. Lviv,
    21. Mahero, E. (2012). Regional morphophonemics: English Luhya loan words. LAP LAMBERT Academic Publishing.
    22. Mirbostani, S., Mirroshandel, S., & Rambow, O. (2023). Deep Active Learning for Morphophonological Processing. Proceedings of the 61st Annu-al Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics Volume 2: Short Papers, pp. 793-803. https://doi.org/10.18653/v1/2023.acl-short.69.
    23. Narasimhan, K., Barzilay, R., & Jaakkola, T. (2015). An unsupervised method for uncovering morphological chains. Transactions of the Association for Computational Linguistics, 3, 157–167. https://doi.org/10.1162/tacl_a_00130.
    24. Nurhayati, D.A.W. (2011). Morphonological and morphophonemic process (nature, types, and rules). Lingua Scientia, 5(2), 175-186.
    25. O’Grady, W., Dobrovolski, M., & Aronnoff, M. (1993). Contemporary linguistics: An introduction. St Martins Press.
    26. Parera, J.D. (1982). Studi Linguistik Umum dan Historikal Bandingan. Jakarta: Erlangga.
    27. Pierrehumbert, J. (2001a). Stochastic phonology. GLOT, 5(6), 1–13.
    28. Pierrehumbert, J. (2001b). Why phonological constraints are so coarse-grained. Language and Cognitive Processes, 16(5–6), 691–698. https://doi.org/10.1080/01690960143000218.
    29. Ramlan, M. (2001). Morphology: Suatu Tinjauan Deskriptif. Yogyakarta: CV. Karyono.
    30. Round, E. (2023). Morphophonology: lenition and assimilation. In: C. Bowern (ed) Oxford Guide to Australian Languages, OUP. https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198824978.003.0012.
    31. Säily, T. (2011). Variation in morphological productivity in the BNC: Sociolinguistic and methodological considerations. Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic Theory, 7(1). https://doi.org/10.1515/cllt.2011.006.
    32. Thornton, A. M. (2012). Overabundance in Italian verb morphology and its interactions with other non-canonical phenomena. In H. Otsuka, A. Ur-dze, J. van der Auwera, & T. Stolz (Eds.), Irregularity in Morphology (and beyond). https://doi.org/10.1524/9783050059587.251.
    33. Volyanska, E. (2014). Morphonological positions in new words of the modern Ukrainian language. Scientific Journal, 2, 32-41.

  • Downloads

  • How to Cite

    Fedurko, M., Babii , I. ., Kotovych, V. . ., Kuza , A. ., Lushpynska , L. ., & Matskiv, P. . . (2025). Derivative Words of The Modern Ukrainian Lexicon in The ‎Context of Morphonology. International Journal of Basic and Applied Sciences, 14(3), 48-53. https://doi.org/10.14419/nd3vx172