A Morphological Typology-Based Comparative Study of Word Formation in Vietnamese and Japanese

This study investigates the contrasting word formation strategies in Vietnamese and Japanese through the lens of morphological typology. Vietnamese, an analytic language, relies heavily on compounding, reduplication, and syntactic particles to convey grammatical meaning, while Japanese, an agglutinative language, employs rich inflectional morphology and affixation to encode grammatical relationships within words. Using a corpus of 100 lexical items from each language across semantic domains such as kinship, verbs, and technology, the research applies morpheme segmentation and typological mapping to identify structural patterns and functional roles of morphemes. The findings reveal that Vietnamese favors semantic transparency and syntactic flexibility, whereas Japanese demonstrates morphological density and hierarchical encoding. These typological differences have significant implications for second-language acquisition, translation strategies, and linguistic pedagogy, particularly in addressing learner challenges and optimizing cross-linguistic instruction. The study contributes to a deeper understanding of how morphological structures reflect broader linguistic and cultural systems.

Morphological typology, Word formation, Vietnamese language, Japanese language, Analytic and agglutinative.

1. Comrie, B. (1981). Language universals and linguistic typology. University of Chicago Press. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

2. Cruse, D. A. (1986). Lexical semantics. Cambridge University Press. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

3. Greenberg, J. H. (1960). Universals of language. MIT Press. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

4. Martin, S. E. (1975). A reference grammar of Japanese. Yale University Press. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

5. Murphy, M. L. (2010). Lexical meaning. Cambridge University Press. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

6. Nguyen, T. H., & Yamamoto, K. (2021). Kinship terms in Vietnamese and Japanese: A role schema approach. Journal of East Asian Linguistics, 30(2), 145-168. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10831-021-09203-2 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

7. Nguyễn Tài Cẩn. (1995). Ngữ pháp tiếng Việt. Hà Nội: Nhà xuất bản Giáo dục. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

8. Shibatani, M. (1990). The languages of Japan. Cambridge University Press. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

9. Slobin, D. I. (1996). From “thought and language” to “thinking for speaking”. In J. J. Gumperz & S. C. Levinson (Eds.), Rethinking linguistic relativity (pp. 70-96). Cambridge University Press. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

10. Thompson, L. C. (1965). A Vietnamese grammar. University of Washington Press. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

• Doctoral Life in Metaphor: A Corpus-Assisted Analysis of Social Media Narratives
• Constructing the Rupiah Depreciation: A Comparative Transitivity Analysis of News Coverage in the Jakarta Post and Antara News
• The Influence of Writing Strategies on Different Types of Writing Anxiety
• Effect of Cognitive Load Theory Based Instruction on Arabic-English Translation Performance among Hausa Speaking Undergraduates in North-West Nigeria
• First Year University Students and What They Believe About Learning a Second Language