The root of a word is defined as

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

A root (or root word) is the core of a word that is irreducible into more meaningful elements.^[1] In morphology, a root is a morphologically simple unit which can be left bare or to which a prefix or a suffix can attach.^[2][3] The root word is the primary lexical unit of a word, and of a word family (this root is then called the base word), which carries aspects of semantic content and cannot be reduced into smaller constituents.
Content words in nearly all languages contain, and may consist only of, root morphemes. However, sometimes the term «root» is also used to describe the word without its inflectional endings, but with its lexical endings in place. For example, chatters has the inflectional root or lemma chatter, but the lexical root chat. Inflectional roots are often called stems, and a root in the stricter sense, a root morpheme, may be thought of as a monomorphemic stem.

The traditional definition allows roots to be either free morphemes or bound morphemes. Root morphemes are the building blocks for affixation and compounds. However, in polysynthetic languages with very high levels of inflectional morphology, the term «root» is generally synonymous with «free morpheme». Many such languages have a very restricted number of morphemes that can stand alone as a word: Yup’ik, for instance, has no more than two thousand.

The root is conventionally indicated using the mathematical symbol √; for instance, the Sanskrit root «√bhū-» means the root «bhū-«.

Examples[edit]

The root of a word is a unit of meaning (morpheme) and, as such, it is an abstraction, though it can usually be represented alphabetically as a word. For example, it can be said that the root of the English verb form running is run, or the root of the Spanish superlative adjective amplísimo is ampli-, since those words are derived from the root forms by simple suffixes that do not alter the roots in any way. In particular, English has very little inflection and a tendency to have words that are identical to their roots. But more complicated inflection, as well as other processes, can obscure the root; for example, the root of mice is mouse (still a valid word), and the root of interrupt is, arguably, rupt, which is not a word in English and only appears in derivational forms (such as disrupt, corrupt, rupture, etc.). The root rupt can be written as if it were a word, but it is not.

This distinction between the word as a unit of speech and the root as a unit of meaning is even more important in the case of languages where roots have many different forms when used in actual words, as is the case in Semitic languages. In these, roots (semitic roots) are formed by consonants alone, and speakers elaborate different words (belonging potentially to different parts of speech) from the root by inserting different vowels. For example, in Hebrew, the root ג-ד-ל g-d-l represents the idea of largeness, and from it we have gadol and gdola (masculine and feminine forms of the adjective «big»), gadal «he grew», higdil «he magnified» and magdelet «magnifier», along with many other words such as godel «size» and migdal «tower».

Roots and reconstructed roots can become the tools of etymology.^[4]

Secondary roots[edit]

Secondary roots are roots with changes in them, producing a new word with a slightly different meaning. In English, a rough equivalent would be to see conductor as a secondary root formed from the root to conduct. In abjad languages, the most familiar of which are Arabic and Hebrew, in which families of secondary roots are fundamental to the language, secondary roots are created by changes in the roots’ vowels, by adding or removing the long vowels a, i, u, e and o. (Notice that Arabic does not have the vowels e and o.) In addition, secondary roots can be created by prefixing (m−, t−), infixing (−t−), or suffixing (−i, and several others). There is no rule in these languages on how many secondary roots can be derived from a single root; some roots have few, but other roots have many, not all of which are necessarily in current use.

Consider the Arabic language:

• مركز [mrkz] or [markaza] meaning ‘centralized (masculine, singular)’, from [markaz] ‘centre’, from [rakaza] ‘plant into the earth, stick up (a lance)’ ( ر-ك-ز | r-k-z). This in turn has derived words مركزي [markaziy], meaning ‘central’, مركزية [markaziy:ah], meaning ‘centralism’ or ‘centralization’, and لامركزية, [la:markaziy:ah] ‘decentralization’^[5]
• أرجح [rjh] or [ta’arjaħa] meaning ‘oscillated (masculine, singular)’, from [‘urju:ħa] ‘swing (n)’, from [rajaħa] ‘weighed down, preponderated (masculine, singular)’ ( ر-ج-ح | r-j-ħ).
• محور [mhwr] or [tamaħwara] meaning ‘centred, focused (masculine, singular)’, from [mihwar] meaning ‘axis’, from [ħa:ra] ‘turned (masculine, singular)’ (ح-و-ر | h-w-r).
• مسخر [msxr], تمسخر [tamasxara] meaning ‘mocked, made fun (masculine, singular)’, from مسخرة [masxara] meaning ‘mockery’, from سخر [saxira] ‘mocked (masculine, singular)’ (derived from س-خ-ر[s-x-r]).»^[6] Similar cases may be found in other Semitic languages such as Hebrew, Syriac, Aramaic, Maltese language and to a lesser extent Amharic.

Similar cases occur in Hebrew, for example Israeli Hebrew מ-ק-מ‎ √m-q-m ‘locate’, which derives from Biblical Hebrew מקום‎ måqom ‘place’, whose root is ק-ו-מ‎ √q-w-m ‘stand’. A recent example introduced by the Academy of the Hebrew Language is מדרוג‎ midrúg ‘rating’, from מדרג‎ midrág, whose root is ד-ר-ג‎ √d-r-g ‘grade’.»^[6]

According to Ghil’ad Zuckermann, «this process is morphologically similar to the production of frequentative (iterative) verbs in Latin, for example:

• iactito ‘to toss about’ derives from iacto ‘to boast of, keep bringing up, harass, disturb, throw, cast, fling away’, which in turn derives from iacio ‘to throw, cast’ (from its past participle iactum).^[6]

Consider also Rabbinic Hebrew ת-ר-מ‎ √t-r-m ‘donate, contribute’ (Mishnah: T’rumoth 1:2: ‘separate priestly dues’), which derives from Biblical Hebrew תרומה‎ t’rūmå ‘contribution’, whose root is ר-ו-מ‎ √r-w-m ‘raise’; cf. Rabbinic Hebrew ת-ר-ע‎ √t-r-‘ ‘sound the trumpet, blow the horn’, from Biblical Hebrew תרועה‎ t’rū`å ‘shout, cry, loud sound, trumpet-call’, in turn from ר-ו-ע‎ √r-w-`.»^[6]
and it describes the suffix.

Category-neutral roots[edit]

Decompositional generative frameworks suggest that roots hold little grammatical information and can be considered «category-neutral».^[7] Category-neutral roots are roots without any inherent lexical category but with some conceptual content that becomes evident depending on the syntactic environment.^[7] The ways in which these roots gain lexical category are discussed in Distributed Morphology and the Exoskeletal Model.

Theories adopting a category-neutral approach have not, as of 2020, reached a consensus about whether these roots contain a semantic type but no argument structure,^[8] neither semantic type nor argument structure,^[9] or both semantic type and argument structure.^[10]

In support of the category-neutral approach, data from English indicates that the same underlying root appears as a noun and a verb — with or without overt morphology.^[7]

In Hebrew, the majority of roots consist of segmental consonants √CCC. Arad (2003) describes that the consonantal root is turned into a word due to pattern morphology. Thereby, the root is turned into a verb when put into a verbal environment where the head bears the «v» feature (the pattern).^[11]

Consider the root √š-m-n (ש-מ-נ).

Root √š-m-n (ש-מ-נ) in Hebrew^[11]

Pattern	Pronounced word	Gloss
CeCeC (n)	šemen	oil, grease
CaCCeCet (n)	šamenet	cream
CuCaC (n)	šuman	fat
CaCeC (adj)	šamen	fat
hiCCiC (v)	hišmin	grow fat/fatten
CiCCeC (n)	šimen	grease

Although all words vary semantically, the general meaning of a greasy, fatty material can be attributed to the root.

Furthermore, Arad states that there are two types of languages in terms of root interpretation. In languages like English, the root is assigned one interpretation whereas in languages like Hebrew, the root can form multiple interpretations depending on its environment. This occurrence suggests a difference in language acquisition between these two languages. English speakers would need to learn two roots in order to understand two different words whereas Hebrew speakers would learn one root for two or more words.^[11]

Root comparison between English and Hebrew (adapted from Syntactic Categorization of Roots^[7])

English Root	English Word	Hebrew Root	Hebrew Word	Gloss
√CREAM	cream	√š-m-n ש-מ-נ	šamenet	‘cream’
√FAT	fat	√š-m-n ש-מ-נ	šuman	‘fat’

Alexiadou and Lohndal (2017) advance the claim that languages have a typological scale when it comes to roots and their meanings and state that Greek lies in between Hebrew and English.^[12]

See also[edit]

• Lemma (morphology)
• Lexeme
• Morphological typology
• Morphology (linguistics)
• Phono-semantic matching
• Principal parts
• Proto-Indo-European root
• Radical (Chinese character) (this is more based upon a writing system than a spoken language)
• Semitic root
• Word family
• Word stem

References[edit]

External links[edit]

• Virtual Salt Root words and prefixes
• Espindle — Greek and Latin Root Words

Glossary of Grammatical and Rhetorical Terms

In English grammar and morphology, a root is a word or word element (in other words, a morpheme) from which other words grow, usually through the addition of prefixes and suffixes. Also called a root word.

In Greek and Latin Roots (2008), T. Rasinski et al. define root as «a semantic unit. This simply means that a root is a word part that means something. It is a group of letters with meaning.»

Etymology

From the Old English, «root»
Examples and Observations

• «Latin is the most common source of English root words; Greek and Old English are the two other major sources.
  «Some root words are whole words and others are word parts. Some root words have become free morphemes and can be used as separate words, but others cannot. For instance, cent comes from the Latin root word centum, meaning hundred. English treats the word as a root word that can be used independently and in combination with affixes, as in century, bicentennial and centipede. The words cosmopolitan, cosmic and microcosm come from the Greek root word kosmos, meaning universe; cosmos is also an independent root word in English.» (Gail Tompkins, Rod Campbell, David Green, and Carol Smith, Literacy for the 21st Century: A Balanced Approach. Pearson Australia, 2015)

Free Morphs and Bound Morphs

• «Because a root tells us more about the meaning of a word than anything else, the first thing we ask about a complex word is often: What is its root? Often a complex word has more than one root, as in blackbird. . . .
  «In our native and nativized vocabulary, roots can usually appear as independent words, for which reason they are called free morphs. This makes it particularly easy to find the roots of words like black-bird, re-fresh, and book-ish-ness. In Latin and Greek, roots most often do not occur as separate words: they are bound morphs, meaning they can only appear when tied to other components. For example, the root of concurrent is curr ‘run.’ which is not an independent word in English or even in Latin.»
  (Keith Denning, Brett Kessler, and William R. Leben. English Vocabulary Elements, 2nd ed. Oxford University Press, 2007)

Roots and Lexical Categories

• «Complex words typically consist of a root morpheme and one or more affixes. The root constitutes the core of the word and carries the major component of its meaning. Roots typically belong to a lexical category, such as noun, verb, adjective, or preposition. . . . Unlike roots, affixes do not belong to a lexical category and are always bound morphemes. For example, the affix -er is a bound morpheme that combines with a verb such as teach, giving a noun with the meaning ‘one who teaches.'»
  (William O’Grady, et al., Contemporary Linguistics: An Introduction, 4th ed. Bedford/St. Martin’s, 2001)

Simple and Complex Words

• «[M]orphologically simple words, which contain only a single root morpheme, may be compared to morphologically complex words which contain at least one free morpheme and any number of bound morphemes. Thus, a word like ‘desire’ may be defined as a root morpheme constituting a single word. ‘Desirable,’ by contrast, is complex, combining a root morpheme with the bound morpheme ‘-able.’ More complex again is ‘undesirability’ which comprises one root and three bound morphemes: un+desire+able+ity. Notice also how, in complex words of this sort, the spelling of the root may be altered to conform to the bound morphemes around it. Thus, ‘desire’ becomes ‘desir-‘ while ‘beauty’ will be transformed into ‘beauti-‘ in the formation of ‘beautiful’ and of the increasingly complex ‘beautician.'» (Paul Simpson, Language Through Literature: An Introduction. Routledge, 1997)

Pronunciation:

ROOT

Also Known As:

base, stem

Teachers frequently debate this question: What’s the difference between a root, base word, and stem? The reason teachers are forced to debate this question is that their textbooks present a model that quickly falls apart in the real world.

If teachers are confused, their students will also be confused. By the end of this page, you won’t be confused. To end this confusion, we will look at two systems:

1. The Traditional Root and Base-Word System for Kids
2. A Modern System of Morphemes, Roots, Bases, and Stems from Linguistics

Are you an elementary or middle school teacher? Have you taken a look at Pattern Based Writing: Quick & Easy Essay on the homepage?

Modern Linguistics

I looked at a few current student textbooks from major publishers, and most of them don’t mention the terms base or base word. They only use the term root in their basic word studies. I suspect that this is because modern linguistics has created a new meaning for the term base.

In case you are not aware, modern linguistics and modern grammar fix many of the broken models from centuries past—i.e., models and definitions that quickly fall apart when you question them. These days, most books on linguistics and morphology present a somewhat standardized model. In English Word-Formation (1983), Laurie Bauer explains this model succinctly and definitively. Let’s take a look.

This model holds up across the curriculum. This model is the foundation of what I teach my students.

My Perfect Model: Roots, Stems, and Bases

I always like to have a complete model in mind that holds up across the curriculum. This lets me find teaching moments and ensures that I can answer my students’ questions clearly and consistently. Although I may not teach my students the entire model, at least the concepts are straight in my mind.

For this reason, I created this “Perfect Model of Roots, Stems, and Bases.” To be clear, this model is an interpretation and fuller explanation of what you might find in a linguistics book. Let me explain it to you. It all begins with morphemes.

Keep in mind that teachers don’t need to teach their students this entire model. In fact, most teachers will want to keep their morphology lessons simple and focus on roots, prefixes, and suffixes. But all teachers will want to understand this entire model.

Do you teach beginning writers or struggling writers? If you do, be sure to check out Pattern Based Writing: Quick & Easy Essay on the homepage! It is the fastest, most effective way to teach students organized multi-paragraph writing… Guaranteed!

Morphemes

The term morpheme unifies the concepts of roots, prefixes, and suffixes, and therefore, it is an extremely valuable word. In short, words are composed of parts called morphemes, and each morpheme contributes meaning to the word. Morphemes are the smallest unit of language that contains meaning. Roots, prefixes, and suffixes all have one thing in common—they are all single morphemes. In contrast, stems and bases can be composed of one or many morphemes.

Root / Root Morpheme

When I use the term root, I always mean the root morpheme. The root is always the main morpheme that carries the main meaning of a word. Since a morpheme is the smallest unit of language that contains meaning, we can’t divide or analyze the root morpheme any further. Although a root can be a stand-alone word, to avoid confusion, I never use the term “root word.” I use the term root, and I use the term root morpheme to reinforce what a root is.

We have two types of root morphemes:

1. Dependent (bound) Roots: These roots cannot stand alone as words. These roots are usually Greek and Latin roots. Here are a few examples:

• • liberty          root: liber (free)
  • interrupt         root: rupt (break)
  • similar         root: sim (like)

2. Independent (free) Roots: These roots are stand-alone words. Practically speaking, these roots are almost always single-syllable words. You know the ones. It seems to me that most multi-syllable words can be further divided and further analyzed. With a little research, one finds that an ancient prefix or suffix has merged with a root. In short, most multi-syllable words are not root morphemes.

Here is what they thought 150 years ago. Although modern linguistics does not agree with these statements, it’s still food for thought. My point is that most of the independent roots that we deal with inside of the classroom are single-syllable words.

Q “All languages are formed from roots of one syllable.” – New Englander Magazine (1862)

Q “All words of all languages can be reduced to one-syllable roots.” – New Jerusalem Magazine (1853)

Here are a few examples:

• • replaced          root: place
  • mindfulness         root: mind
  • carefully         root: care

The Terms: Dependent Root and Independent Root

Modern linguistics use the term bound (for dependent) and free (for independent) to classify morphemes. Since teachers spend so much time teaching students about dependent clauses and independent clauses, I transfer this knowledge and terminology over to morphemes. Put simply: independent morphemes CAN stand alone; dependent morphemes CAN’T stand alone.

Q PREFIXES and SUFFIXES are almost always dependent morphemes—i.e., they can’t stand alone as words.

Q ROOTS are either dependent or independent morphemes.

Now, we will examine words that contain one root and words that contain two roots. As you examine these words, pay special attention to the dependent root and independent root aspect.

Pattern Based Writing: Quick & Easy Essay! Put simply, it works.

Stem

I use the term stem just as Bauer does. To find the stem, simply remove the inflectional suffixes. It’s that simple.

When to Use the Term Stem: The term stem is quite unnecessary in many classrooms, as all stems are bases. For this reason, teachers can always use the term base instead of stem. However, the concept of stems is helpful in teaching students about inflectional suffixes. Inflectional suffixes are different from derivational affixes (derivational prefixes and derivational suffixes).

Q Word: reddest    Stem: red

Q Word: girls’    Stem: girl

Q Word: boats    Stem: boat

Q Word: preapproved    Stem: preapprove

Q Word: justifying    Stem: justify

Q Word: responded   Stem: respond

Q Word: unjustifiable    Stem: no stem

Q Word: kindness    Stem: no stem

Base / Base Word

Bauer says, “A base is any form to which affixes of any kind can be added. This means that any root or any stem can be termed a base.”

In the table below, I use two labels to show how base and root relate to each other. Sometimes a base is a root (marked   Q Base/Root), and sometimes it is not a root (marked   Q Base).

To be clear, we can add a prefix or suffix to every base even if it already has a prefix or suffix. Furthermore, if we can add a prefix or suffix to something, we can call it a base.

Word: reread    Q Base/Root: read

Word: unhelpful    Q Base: helpful    Q Base/Root: help

Word: justifying    Q Base: justify    Q Base/Root: jus

Word: unreliable    Q Base: reliable    Q Base/Root: rely

Word: preponderance    Q Base: ponderance (uncommon)    Q Base/Root: ponder

Word: responded    Q Base: respond    Q Base/Root: spond

Word: preapproved    Q Base: preapprove    Q Base: approve    Q Base: approved    Q Base: proved    Q Base/Root: prove

Base vs. Base Word: To keep things simple, teachers should probably strike the term “base word” from their vocabulary. However, if the base is a complete word that can stand alone, teachers may choose to (or through force of habit) refer to it as a base word. If the base can’t stand alone, be sure not to call it a base word.

When to Use the Term Base: The term base is somewhat of a generic term for when we are not interested in or concerned with the root morpheme. As an example, we may choose to use the term base when we are ADDING prefixes and suffixes. When we are adding prefixes and suffixes, we often are unconcerned with finding or discussing the root morpheme. (Remember, we often add prefixes and suffixes to words that already contain prefixes and suffixes.) We may also choose to use the term base when removing a single, specific prefix or suffix, as the word may still contain other prefixes or suffixes.

Putting It All Together

Here is a table to help get you started in your word analysis studies related to root, stem, and base.

Example Word	Stem	Root: Dependent	Root: Independent	Base
1. undeniable			deny **	deny; deniable
2. reinvented	reinvent	ven/vent		ven/vent; invent; reinvent
3. deforestation			forest ***	forest; forestation
4. interacted	interact		act *	act; interact
5. demographics	demographic	demo	graph *	demo; graph; demographic
6. responding	respond	spond		spond; respond
7. preserving	preserve	serv		serv; preserve
8. hopefully			hope	hope; hopeful

I thought to quote from two websites that aided me, but to facilitate reading, I edit slightly and eschew blockquotes (>). The first quote is written with plainer and simpler diction and so ought to be read before the second with more formal diction.

---

1 of 2 quotes

Bases, stems, and roots are the main components of words, just like cells, atoms, and protons are the main components of matter.

In linguistics, the words «roots» is the core of the word. It is the morpheme that comprises the most important part of the word. It is also the primary unit of the family of the same word. Keep in mind that the root is mono-morphemic, or made of just one «chunk», or morpheme. Without the root, the word would not have any meaning. If you take the root away, all that you have left is affixes either before or after it. Such affixes do not have a lexical meaning on their own.

An example of a root is the word «act».

Now let’s look at what is a stem and a base and apply them to the root «act» so that you can see how they differ and interconnect to transform a lexical word altogether.

The stem occurs after affixes have been added to the root, for example:

Re-act ↝ Re-act-ion

Hence a stem is a form to which affixes (prefixes or suffixes) have been added. It is important to differentiate it from a root, because the root alone cannot be applied in discourse, whereas the stem exists precisely to be applied to discourse.

A base is the same as a root except that the root has no lexical meaning while the base does: «to act» is the infinitive of «act» and is structured with the base «act». In many words in our language, a word can be all three: a root, base, and stem (eg: «deer»). They differ in how they are applied during discourse (stem, base) and whether, on their own, they have any lexical meaning (stem, base) or no lexical meaning whatsoever (root).

An example of root, base and stem joined together is the word «refrigerator»:

The Latin root is frīg, which has no meaning in English on its own, and which requires a change in spelling for suffixes.

⟹ refrigerāre = Latin prefix + root + suffix, with no meaning in English of its own yet.

⟹ re- + friger + -ate + -tor = prefix + root + 2 suffixes.
The 2 suffices now produce lexical meaning = stem; spelling changes are required for suffixes.

_{[The links included with the answer contain the Glossary of Linguistic Terminology for further information.]}

_{Sources: http://www-01.sil.org/linguistics/GlossaryOfLinguisticTerms/WhatIsABoundRoot.htm
http://www-01.sil.org/linguistics/GlossaryOfLinguisticTerms/WhatIsAStem.htm}

---

2 of 2 quotes

Root, stem, base
Taken from: […] English [W]ord-[F]ormation […] by Laurie Bauer, 1983 (published by Cambridge University Press).

‘Root’, ‘stem’ and ‘base’ are all terms used in the literature to designate that part of a word that remains when all affixes have been removed.

A root is a form which is not further analysable, either in terms of derivational or inflectional morphology. It is that part of word-form that remains when all inflectional and derivational affixes have been removed. A root is the basic part always present in a lexeme. In the form ‘untouchables’ the root is ‘touch’, to which first the suffix ‘-able’, then the prefix ‘un-‘ and finally the suffix ‘-s’ have been added. In a compound word like ‘wheelchair’ there are two roots, ‘wheel’ and ‘chair’.

A stem is of concern only when dealing with inflectional morphology.
In the form ‘untouchables’ the stem is ‘untouchable’, although in the form ‘touched’ the stem is ‘touch’; in the form ‘wheelchairs’ the stem is ‘wheelchair’, even though the stem contains two roots.

A base is any form to which affixes of any kind can be added. This means that any root or any stem can be termed a base, but the set of bases is not exhausted by the union of the set of roots and the set of stems: a derivationally analysable form to which derivational affixes are added can only be referred to as a base. That is, ‘touchable’ can act as a base for prefixation to give ‘untouchable’, but in this process ‘touchable’ could not be referred to as a root because it is analysable in terms of derivational morphology, nor as a stem since it is not the adding of inflectional affixes which is in question.