Definition

The following abbreviations will be used throughout this website:

Example

shows the canonical trilinear representation of an L1 text:

• T in the top line
• an interlinear morphological gloss
• a free translation in the bottom line.

Purpose

The primary aim of a morphological gloss is to help the reader ignorant of L1 to identify the morphs, understand their function and, thus, the grammatical structure of T by identifying aspects of the free translation with meaningful elements of the L1 text.

A secondary aim is to support an algorithm in the processing of the L1 text.

Properties

In the theory of linguistic methodology, morphological glossing is clearly distinct from morphological analysis: the morphological gloss presupposes a morphological analysis and description of T and, more generally, of L1. In practice, however, the two are intimately linked up because much morphological glossing is provided without any prior morphological analysis and simply represents an ad hoc analysis. Therefore, the present website cannot avoid discussing some problems of morphological analysis, too.

The morphological gloss reflects the units and obeys the rules formulated in the morphological description, but does not reproduce or incorporate them. Specifically:

• It does not reveal the conditions of allomorphy.
• It ignores syncretism, treating it like homonymy.
• It does not indicate word or morpheme class.

The following exposition concentrates on morphological glosses as they are used in print publications of L1 texts or with L1 examples in L2 linguistic treatments. If all the rules are observed, the representations are also processable by an algorithm whose task it is to map L1 units onto units of the gloss line. However, if the aim is to provide one or more layers of linguistic annotation for an L1 text which must be machine-processable, both the L1 text and its annotations are couched in some formal language, which as of 2017 would be some variant of XML. The particular requirements imposed in such a case are not treated here.

In principle, the degree of detail displayed in a morphological gloss depends on the purpose the example with its gloss is meant to serve. However, the author cannot foresee the purposes to which others will want to use his examples. A morphological detail that is not at stake in the current discussion may be essential for the argument another linguist may wish to base on the example. For this reason, the principle is to allow for as much precision and detail as seems tolerable (Rule 1). Rules 3 – 22 specify the properties of a complete morphological gloss. They do not exclude less detailed morphological glosses where they suffice. Cf. Rules 23 and 26 for possibilities of underspecifying morphological structure.

Rule 1. A morphological gloss should be as precise and detailed as tolerable. The limits of precision and detail are defined by practical considerations of complexity and intelligibility.

Quoting a glossed example

Chiefly in typological, but also in descriptive publications, glossed examples are often quoted from other sources. The first thing that deserves underscoring is that the quoter is free what to quote: just only the T, or the T with the gloss and/or the free translation. It is, thus, not the case that the gloss is an inseparable component of an example.

Moreover, the rules for quotation relevant here differ a bit from general rules of academic quotation, since it may be necessary to adjust the example to the context: the L1 orthography or the grammatical category labels used in the source may differ from those used in the quoting context. It is then licit to adjust the example. It does not, of course, by this cease to be quoted material. If the quoter does apply such changes to the example, he remains responsible for not distorting it. The reference to the source of the example makes it clear which part is quoted and which aspects have been adjusted.