Synthetic language

The morphemes being synthesized in the following examples either belong to a particular grammatical class – such as adjectives, nouns, or prepositions – or are affixes that usually have a single form and meaning:

• English derivational synthesis example

• German derivational synthesis

• Greek derivational synthesis

• Polish derivational synthesis

• Russian derivational synthesis

• Malayalam derivational synthesis
  • അങ്ങനെയല്ലാതായിരിക്കുമ്പോളൊക്കെത്തന്നെ (aṅṅaneyallātāyirikkumpōḷokkettanne)
    • "such/so + not + has + been + when + occasions + all + exclusively"
    • "on all such occasions when it has been not so"
• Persian derivational synthesis

• Ukrainian derivational synthesis

• international classical compounds based on Greek and Latin derivational synthesis

• alternately, cholesterol can be read as chole- + στερεός(stereós) + -ol, as in "bile + solid + [alcohol suffix]", or "the solid alcohol present in bile".

In relational synthesis, root words are joined to bound morphemes to show grammatical function. In other words, it involves the combination of more abstract units of meaning than derivational synthesis.[2] In the following examples note that many of the morphemes are related to voice (e.g. passive voice), whether a word is in the subject or object of the sentence, possession, plurality, or other abstract distinctions in a language:

• Italian

• Spanish

• Nahuatl

• Latin

• Albanian
  • jepmani
    • "give + to me + it[singular] + you[plural] + [imperative mood]"
    • 'You, give it to me'
• Japanese

• Finnish

• Hungarian

• Turkish

• Georgian

• • The word describes the whole sentence that incorporates tense, subject, object, relation between them, direction of the action, conditional and causative markers etc.

Agglutinating languages have a high rate of agglutination in their words and sentences, meaning that the morphological construction of words consists of distinct morphemes that usually carry a single unique meaning.[4] These morphemes tend to look the same no matter what word they are in, so it is easy to separate a word into its individual morphemes.[1] Note that morphemes may be bound (that is, they must be attached to a word to have meaning, like affixes) or free (they can stand alone and still have meaning).

• Swahili is an agglutinating language.[1] For example, distinct morphemes are used in the conjugation of verbs:
  • Ni-na-soma: I-present-read or I am reading
  • U-na-soma: you-present-read or you are reading
  • A-na-soma: s/he-present-read or s/he is reading

In fusional languages, short morphemes (for example, inflectional affixes) tend to denote several different syntactic roles assigned to a root word they are attached to. Also, they tend to be fused together so that it is difficult to separate individual morphemes from one another.[1][5]

Polysynthetic languages are considered the most synthetic of the three types because they combine multiple stems as well as other morphemes into a single continuous word. These languages often turn nouns into verbs.[1] Many Native Alaskan and other Native American languages are polysynthetic.

• Mohawk: Washakotya'tawitsherahetkvhta'se means "He ruined her dress" (strictly, 'He made the-thing-that-one-puts-on-one's body ugly for her'). This one inflected verb in a polysynthetic language expresses an idea that can only be conveyed using multiple words in a more analytic language such as English.

Oligosynthetic languages are a theoretical notion created by Benjamin Whorf. Such languages would be functionally synthetic, but make use of a very limited array of morphemes (perhaps just a few hundred). The concept of an oligosynthetic language type was proposed by Whorf to describe the Native American language Nahuatl, although he did not further pursue this idea.[6] Though no natural language uses this process, it has found its use in the world of constructed languages, in auxlangs such as aUI.

• Mandarin lacks inflectional morphology almost entirely, and most words consist of either one- or two-syllable morphemes, with compound words words being very numerous.

However, with rare exceptions, in Mandarin each syllable (corresponding to a single written character) represents a morpheme with an identifiable meaning, even if many of such morphemes are bound. This gives rise to the common misconception that Chinese consists exclusively of "words of one syllable". Although this may be true both in the case of southern dialects and classical texts, in modern Mandarin two related words (such as péngyou, literally "friend-friend") may be merged into a disyllabic word, in order to resolve the phonetic ambiguity. Another example of a synthetic compound word in Mandarin is míngtiān 'tomorrow' (míng "next" + tīan "day").

A similar process is observed in the Southern dialects of American English, where it is not unusual for the short vowel sounds [ɪ] and [ɛ] to be indistinguishable before nasal consonants: thus the words "pen" and "pin" are homophones (see pin-pen merger). In these dialects, the ambiguity is often resolved by using the compounds "ink-pen" and "stick-pin", in order to clarify which "p*n" is being discussed.

• English:
  • "He travelled by hovercraft on the sea" is largely isolating, but travelled (although it is possible to say "did travel" instead) and hovercraft each have two morphemes per word, the former being an example of relational synthesis (inflection), and the latter of compounding synthesis (a special case of derivation with another free morpheme instead of a bound one).

• Japanese:
  • 私たちにとって、この泣く子供の写真は見せられがたいものです。 Watashitachi ni totte, kono naku kodomo no shashin wa miseraregatai mono desu means strictly literally: "To us, these photos of a child crying are things that are difficult to be shown", meaning 'We cannot bear to be shown these photos of a child crying' in more idiomatic English. In the example, most words have more than one morpheme and some have up to five.
• Hebrew:
  • אתמול סיפרתי לחברים שלי על הרעיון, שעליו חשבתי‎ Etmol siparti l'khaverim sheli al hara'ayon, she'alav khashavti "Yesterday I told my friends about the idea I was thinking about". From this example we can see that Hebrew verbs are conjugated by tense, mood, and person (including gender and number). In addition, there are prepositions that are conjugated, but by person, like של‎ shel and על‎ al. More at Modern Hebrew grammar.

• Finnish:
  • Käyttäytyessään tottelemattomasti oppilas saa jälki-istuntoa
  • "Should they behave in an insubordinate manner, the student will get detention."
  • Structurally: behaviour (present/future tense) (of their) obey (without) (in the manner/style) studying (they who (should be)) gets detention (some). Practically every word is derived and/or inflected. However, this is quite formal language, and (especially in speech) would have various words replaced by more analytic structures: Kun oppilas käyttäytyy tottelemattomasti, hän saa jälki-istuntoa 'When the student behaves in an insubordinate manner, they will get detention'.
• Georgian:
  • გადმოგვახტუნებინებდნენო gadmogvakht'unebinebdneno (gad-mo-gv-a-kht'un-eb-in-eb-d-nen-o)
  • 'They said that they would be forced by them (the others) to make someone to jump over in this direction'.
  • The word describes the whole sentence that incorporates tense, subject, direct and indirect objects, their plurality, relation between them, direction of the action, conditional and causative markers, etc.
• Classical Arabic:
  • أوأعطيناكموه عبثًا؟ ’awa’aʼṭaynākumūhu ʻabathan (wa-aʻṭay-nā-ku-mū-hu ʻabath-an)
  • "And did we give it (masc.) to you futilely?" in Arabic, each word consists of one root that has a basic meaning (aʻṭā  'give' and ʻabath  'futile'). Prefixes and suffixes are added to make the word incorporate subject, direct and indirect objects, number, gender, definiteness, etc.