Problems and Solution for The Multifunctional Morphemes in Machine Translation (English- Kurdish- Arabic)
Pirsgirêk û çareseriyên morfemên pir peywerî di wergera makîneyîn de Lêkolîna sepandî di navbera Îngilîzî, Kurdî û Erebî de
Prepared by the researcher : Dr. Safia Zivingi – Democratic Arabic Center in Berlin
Democratic Arab Center
International Journal of Kurdish Studies : First issue – April 2023
A Periodical International Journal published by the “Democratic Arab Center” Germany – Berlin
:To download the pdf version of the research papers, please visit the following link
Multifunctionality refers to the linguistic capability of a linguistic form to manifest itself in different syntactic structures that result in different syntactic functions and semantically. The phenomenon of morphemes, which has several functions, is almost present in most languages. This method enriches the language, but on the other hand, it leads to problems, most notably ambiguity and confusion in meanings. The problems of homonymy appear at various linguistic levels (phonetic, morphological, semantic, and syntactic). In this paper, we will discuss the multifunctional morphemes at the morphological level only, by studying the affixes (prefixes, suffixes, and infixes) that are characterized by their multiple grammatical and semantic functions, and presenting the problems they face when transferring them between languages (English, Arabic, and Kurdish). Although verbal homonymies are similar in writing, there are small details found in them that may not appear in the written drawing, such as phonetic differences related to stress or small vowels, or grammatical differences related to the nature of their uses according to the context. There are also morphological problems related to the multiplicity of morphemes indicative of one function; their development is not regulated. Most of these problems were not adequately treated in machine translation. The dictionary of machine translation requires a precise definition of the behavior of the word phonetically, morphologically, grammatically, semantically, and stylistically. At the level of comparison between the three languages (English, Arabic, and Kurdish), we found that all these languages have the feature of morphemes with multiple functions. Still, Arabic may have formulas and morphemes that can functionally correspond to English morphemes. Still, it prefers to use equivalents of lexical elements, not morphological elements, given the richness of Arabic and its semantic diversity. Still, this phenomenon may cause chaos and irregularity in machine translation. We also noticed that Kurdish is not only characterized by the multiplicity of functions of one morpheme but by the diversity of morphemes that indicate one function.
Diyardeya morfêman ku pir peywerî ne, ku hema bêje ew di piraniya zimanan de hene, ku ev rêbaz ziman dewlemend dike, lê ji aliyê din ve pirsgirêkan derdixe holê, lê ya herî diyar ew e ku di wateyan de nezelalî û tevliheviyê çêdike. Pirsgirêkên navehevrengî “heman navder” di astên curbecur ên zimanî (dengsazî, peyvsazî, watesazî û hevoksaziyê) de xuya dibin. Di vê gotarê de, em ê tenê morfemên pir peywerî di asta morfolojîk de, bi lêkolîna paşgir, pêşgir û navgiran re, ku bi gelek peywerên wan ên rêzimanî û watesazî ve têne xuyang kirin û pirsgirêkên ku di dema wergerandina wan de, di navbera zimanan de rû bi rû dimînin, pêşkêş bikin(Îngilîzî, Erebî û Kurdî). Her çend navehevrengên devkî di nivîsandinê de dişibin hev jî, lê hûrguliyên piçûk di wan de têne dîtin ku dibe ew di xêzkirina nivîskî de xuya nebin, wek cûdahiyên dengnasî yên ku bi stresê an dengdêrên piçûk ve girêdayî ne, an cûdahiyên rêzimanî yên ku bi xwezaya karanîna wan ve li gorî çerçuvê, girêdayî ne. Pirsgirêkên morfolojîk ên girêdayî pirbûna morfemên yek peywer jî hene; pêşketina wan nayê rêkxistin kirin. Piraniya van pirsgirêkan di wergera makîneyîn de bi têra xwe nehatin çareser kirin. Di ferhenga wergerandina makîneyîn de pênasekirina rast a tevgera peyvê ji hêla dengsaî, peyvsazî, rêzimanî, watesazî û şêwazî ve pêwist dike. Di asta danberheva di navbera her sê zimanan de (îngilîzî, erebî û kurdî) me dît ku ev hemû ziman xwedî taybet-morfemên bi pir peywerî ne, lê dibe ku zimanê erebî form û formên ku ji aliyê peywerî ve bi morfemên îngilîzî re têkildar dibin, hene. Lê belê ji ber dewlemendiya erebî û cihêrengiya wê ya watesazî, ew tercîh dike ku hevrehên hêmanên ferhengî bikar bîne, ne hêmanên morfolojîk. Dîsa jî, ev diyarde dibe ku di wergera makîneyîn de, bibe sedema tevlîhevî(kaos) û bêserûberiyê. Her wiha me dît ku çawa di kurdî ne tenê bi pirbûna peywerîyên yek morfemê lê bi cihêrengiya morfemanên ku yek peywerî ê nîşan didin diyar dibe.”
At the semantic level, there are phenomena known as synonyms (i.e., several words expressing one meaning) and its opposite is the phenomenon of homonymy (one-word expressing several meanings). It is similar to the phenomenon of (polysemy), and it differs from homonymy, in that there may be no common denominator between the multiple meanings of the vocabulary, while homonymy combines them with similar or close meanings. Likewise, at the morphological level, it is noted that one morpheme may have several meanings or functions.
There is no consensus on how to understand polysemy. But a common hypothesis is that polysemous words have a single meaning that can be modulated to fix distinct denotations depending on the context, while homonymy has distinct lexical entries, polysemous are mapped to a single lexical entry with a single meaning that enables access to multiple distinct senses. Given the standard assumption that word meanings are represented by concepts, it follows that polysemy undermines the atomistic idea that each concept has a single denotation. Instead, concepts and word meanings shift their denotations. (Dunn: 2020: 164)
Psycholinguistic and neurolinguistic evidence suggests that polysemous words, unlike homonymy, are easier and quicker to retrieve and that ambiguity resolution for polysemes involves modulation of a common meaning rather than selection among competing concepts. Thus polysemy, unlike homonymy, involves a single concept with multiple available denotations. (Dunn: 2020:166)
One of the problems that lexicalists face with homonymy is the fact that some forms have a wide range of meanings so semantics have to decide whether the meanings showcase polysemy or homonymy. From a generative perspective, multifunctionality has been treated, not as cases of homonymy, but as feature matrices of elements. Put differently, a multifunctional element has a feature matrix and the syntactic behavior of the element is determined by its feature matrix that contains its morphosyntactic features and their specifications. Supporters of multifunctionality as a syntactically driven linguistic phenomenon argue that the grammar of language does not require two separate systems, but only one. The requirement of one component system is against the two systems of the lexicalist approach, i.e., the phrasal system and the word system. What matters in multifunctionality is the syntactic environment in which the functional elements occur, but never their content. (Zahrani : 2020, 68- 69).
2- THE MULTIFUNCTIONAL MORPHEMES in English
In English, there are several morphemes that have different meanings and functions. Some were lexical units, then became affixes. They added words to form new words and new meanings. We will present some examples to point out their most prominent meanings and functions.
in- (preposition): It to indicate inclusion, location, or position within limits, means, medium, or instrumentality, limitation, qualification, or circumstance, purpose, and the larger member of a ratio
in (adverb): To or toward the inside, especially of a house or other building, to or toward some destination or a particular place, at close quarters, so as to incorporate, to or at an appropriate place, within a particular place, especially, in the position of participant, insider, or officeholder, in vogue or season, and in certain situations.
in- (adjective): That is located inside or within, that is in position, operation, or power, that is directed or bound inward, keenly aware of and responsive to what is new and fashionable, and extremely fashionable.
in-(noun): One who is in office or power or on the inside, a matter of ins versus outs, and influence.
in, within, into, toward, on, or not.
in- (suffix): neutral chemical compound, and harm a pharmaceutical product.
ex- (preposition): out of, from, without
ex-(prefix): out, away, off, not
less(adjective): Constituting a more limited number or amount, of lower rank, degree, or importance, of reduced size, extent, or degree, and more limited in quantity.
less(adverb): To a lesser extent or degree, to a progressively smaller size or extent, by no means, not at all less…
less(noun): a smaller portion or quantity, and something of less importance
less (preposition): diminished by (MINUS)
-less(adjective suffix): Destitute of, not being witless, childless, and unable to be acted on or to act (in a specified way)dauntless and fadeless.
ly-(combining form): degrading: reduction (lyase), and dispersed state: dispersion(lyophilic)
-ly(adjective suffix): like in appearance, manner, or nature: having the characteristics of (queenly), and characterized by regular recurrence in (specified) units of time: every (weekly)
-ly(adverb suffix): in a (specified) manner(slowly), at a (specified) time interval(annually), from a (specified) point of view(eschatologically, with respect to (partly), to a (specified) degree(relatively, in a (specified) place in a series(secondly)
full (adjective): containing as much or as many as is possible or normal (a full hamper), complete especially in detail, number, or duration (a full report), lacking restraint, check, or qualification(full retreat), having all distinguishing characteristics: enjoying all authorized rights and privileges(full member, full professor), not lacking in any essential: PERFECT (in full control of your senses), being at the highest or greatest degree: MAXIMUM(full speed), being at the height of development(full bloom), rounded in outline(a full figure), possessing or containing a great number or amount, having an abundance of material, especially in the form of gathered, pleated, or flared parts(a full skirt), rich in experience(a full life), having volume or depth of sound(full tones), and completely occupied especially with a thought or plan(full of his own concerns).
full (adverb): very, extremely(knew full well they had lied to me), ENTIRELY(swung full around), straight, squarely(got hit full in the face)
full (noun): the highest or fullest state or degree(the full of the moon), the utmost extent(enjoy to the full
full (verb): fulled; fulling; fulls
(intransitive verb): of the moon: to become full
(transitive verb): to make full in sewing, to shrink and thicken (woolen cloth) by moistening, heating, and pressing
graph noun (1): a diagram (such as a series of one or more points, lines, line segments, curves, or areas) that represents the variation of a variable in comparison with that of one or more other variables, the collection of all points whose coordinates satisfy a given relation (such as a function), and a collection of vertices and edges that join pairs of vertices
graph (verb): graphed; graphing; graphs
graph (noun (2): a written or printed representation of a basic unit of speech (such as a phoneme or syllable), and a single occurrence of a letter of an alphabet in any of its various shapes
-graph(noun combining form): something written or drawn(monograph)
2[French -graphe, from Late Latin -graphus] : instrument for making or transmitting records or images(chronograph).
-ic(adjective suffix): having the character or form of being(panoramic): consisting of(runic), of or relating to(aldermanic), related to, derived from, or containing(alcoholic), in the manner of: like that of the characteristic of(Byronic), associated or dealing with(Vedic) utilizing (electronic), characterized by: exhibiting (nostalgic) affected with (allergic), caused by(amoebic), tending to produce (analgesic), having a valence relatively higher than in compounds or ions named with an adjective ending in –ous(ferric iron)
-ic(noun suffix): one having the character or nature of one belonging to or associated with: one exhibiting or affected by one that produces.
– noun suffix (1)
1: action or process (running, sleeping, meeting
2- a: product or the result of an action or process( an engraving), often in the plural (earnings)
b: something used in an action or process( a bed covering, the lining of a coat)
3: action or process connected with (a specified thing: boating)
4: something connected with, consisting of, or used in making (a specified thing: scaffolding, shirting)
5: something related to (a specified concept: offing)
6: one of a (specified) kind (sweating)
– verb suffix or adjective suffix (2)
used to form the present participle(sailing), and sometimes to form an adjective resembling a present participle but not derived from a verb( swashbuckling). (Meriem Webster:2022)
Popularized in the middle of the twentieth century.
3- THE MULTIFUNCTIONAL MORPHEMES in Kurdish:
The Kurdish language is classified as an Indo-European language, a language that suffers from bilingualism, due to the dispute between two main dialects (Kurmanji and Sorani), an ancient language dating back thousands of years. However, it was subjected to persecution and erasure of its cultural identity for centuries, and in the twentieth century, signs of its linguistic renaissance emerged in the development of this language, to keep pace with the language of the times in all fields.
Kurdish is a language that has not been unified yet. There are several main dialects, most notably the northern (Kurmanji) and southern (Sorani) dialects, and we will rely on both of them for the applied study. The Kurdish language is considered a rich language, especially at the morphological and lexical levels, and this has led to the problem of controlling and organizing this richness when generating new terms and vocabulary.
The Kurdish language’s multifunctional morphemes indicate the different functional morphological, syntactical, and semantic tasks of the morphemes. (Shahab:2022, 383)
The Kurdish language is characterized by great flexibility in generating new meanings in a variety of linguistic ways, including the use of different structures, from structures composed of two nouns, two verbs, verb-adverb, noun-adjective, or noun-adverb… This phenomenon may be common in most languages. Such as the morpheme (le), which plays the role of a prefix (ledestdan, lekardekhat = resign), suffix (gozele = ), and infix (yek le yek= one by one), it sticks to nouns, verbs, adverbs, adjectives, prepositions, and conjunctions. It also enters sentences to give different functions, from grammatical functions such as continuity, example, or different semantic meanings, to showing reason or specifying the time or the place… Thus, one morpheme may generate different meanings according to its location and its attachment, and such phenomena show the extent of the flexibility of the Kurdish language, that the morpheme plays this vital and flexible role in the multiplicity of its functions, and meanings, in its location and distribution as well as prefix, suffix, and infix… In the structure, linguistic conjunctions play an essential role in this functional, grammatical, numerical, and semantic diversity. (Shahab:2022)
We note that in the Kurdish language there are many examples of affixes that have several functions, such as (ek):
It is a morpheme appended to the adjective, making it a subject (vir-virrek = untruthful), a subjunctive affixed to the noun, making it singular (destek= bundle), it may be affixed to the noun indicating the name of the tools (guvaştek =squeezer).
It is indicated here that such a type of morpheme, which shares several morphological and semantic functions, is known in many languages. The morpheme denoting the subject in English (-er), and in Arabic, the form (fa’eil) is common with the nouns of tools and professions in both languages as well. (zivingi: 2021)
We will discuss another phenomenon of a morpheme that has several grammatical functions. Its grammatical roles are multiplied according to its position in the sentence or word. From that (ê):
It is added to the end of a feminine noun, a pronoun that is used in the accusative and feminine case, it also denotes the future (ez ê bêm= I will come)…
Like that suffix (-ȋ) which does different functions:
It creates new names from names (such as serȋ, derȋ, kerȋ), of the verbs, this morpheme creates new adjectives, i.e. the object: (such as ketȋ, şûştȋ, xistȋ, kelandȋ), it transforms adjectives and adverbs into nouns (serȋ, germȋ, kelȋ), and it indicates country, nationality, etc …
There is also a morpheme (e) which also has several grammatical functions, such as sentences (Ew li mal e = He is at home), It is like (verb to be) in English (is), and it is similar to this morpheme in Persian (ist), as well as in French (est), where this morpheme is written like this in French, but it is pronounced (e), as it is pronounced this morpheme in Kurdish. Also, the morpheme (e) is used with the third person singular as a noun or a pronoun:(Hejar nexweş e = Hajar is sick). (Mehmud: 2012, 44-45)
Articles and conjunctions ( ȇ , a , yȇ , ya , yȇn ) have many functions in Kurdish: The main use for masculine and feminine (gul ȇn zer = the yellow flower), (hesp ȇ ciwanȋ = jiwan’s horse), To indicate possession: comes before the pronouns (hesp ȇ min = my horse , gul a wȇ = her flower), If it falls between two nouns, it becomes like the relative pronoun (pirtûk ya xwendekaran e = book for student ), to identifier (yȇ spȋ = the white one, ya sor = the red one ), to connect (the phrases it becomes like a relative pronoun: Ew bû ya şȋr kirrȋ = She was the one who bought the milk), when connecting phrases, it adds (ȋ) to the singular, and (in) to the plural at the end of the verb. (Zaxoyȋ: 2009, 20).
4- THE MULTIFUNCTIONAL MORPHEMES in Arabic:
Arabic is from the Semitic language family, and it is a rich and diverse language, not only in the official language, but also in its dialects, all these linguistic categories are different and diverse in all their linguistic levels(phonetic, morphological, grammatical, and semantic).
Arabic, like other languages, has the phenomenon of multifunctionality, especially at the semantic level. On the morphological and grammatical levels, the elements with multifunctionality are few compared to the English and Kurdish languages.
In the Arabic language, there are also morphemes that have several functions, such as The two formulas (mef’el مَفعَل, mef’il مَفعِل) are common morphemes to denote the nouns of time and place.
Also,(how, when, who, what, where…) They can be interrogative morphemes as they are used as conditional morphemes.
When you study, you will pass (conditional), when will you go to work? ( interrogative ). The structure of the sentence determines the function of this morpheme, whether it is interrogative or conditional. Likewise, (who sows reaps (conditional), and who is absent from the meeting? (interrogative). Also, where do you go I’ll go with you (conditional). Where are you going this morning? (interrogative). How do you treat me I will treat you (conditional), how do you deal with your students? (interrogative).
It is noteworthy that there is a researcher who conducted a study on the morpheme (maa ما), which has several functions and meanings. He tried studying some methods that distinguish between homonymy in the Arabic language, by highlighting some semantic interpretations of the common morpheme according to the grammatical structure of the sentence.
The maa can function as a negative, interrogative, relative, nominalizing, durative, exclamatory, indefinite, conditional, and redundant particle. (Zahrani : 2020, 67).
The syntactic environment that surrounds the functional element is what makes the element function in a particular way and be interpreted appropriately. (Zahrani : 2020, 70).
The particle (maa) can also function interrogatively. In this function, it expresses negation and interrogation in yes/no constructions as in ( Maa ga:bal-t-ak ams? = Did I not meet you yesterday ?)
(Maa) function as an exclamative particle and expresses astonishment, surprise, or wonder. It can occur with verbal and nominal clauses. (maa ajmal al- wuru:d =How beautiful D-flowers), (maa aghba:-hum = How stupid they are!).
It indicates the noun of preference ‘ism tafdi:l’, to describe the superlative properties.
The particle maa can also be used to indicate the inclusion of the whole time and space referred to in a proposition. In this function, maa can be interpreted as ‘between that which spans….
For example: (ni-tga:bal maa-bain al’asr wa almaghrib = We meet (for the entire time) between Asr and Maghrib prayers). (khalli-na ni-hrwil ‘ la al rasi:f maa-bain bait-na wa bait-kum = Let’s jog on the sidewalk (spanning the whole area) between our house and your house). (Zahrani : 2020, 73- 74)
Among the paradoxes of the multiplicity of functions (maa) when automatic translation into English, we see that it is translated according to the most common meanings, and it may not fit the intended meaning, so wherever (maa) appears in the sentence, it is translated into English to (what), because the interrogative is its most famous meaning, knowing that it has Several functions as we have indicated.
In such studies, there are researchers who point to the need to conduct deeper studies to find out the structures imposed by the use of some morphemes, but this can be considered another way of imposing the normative approach, by placing morphemes within specific linguistical syntactic.
5-Problems of multifunctional morphemes between languages
(English- Kurdish- Arabic)
There are multifunctional morphemes that can perform various grammatical functions in a variety of synthetics, and may originally have been a lexical element and then evolved into different morphemes through different grammatical pathways. It can have multiple meanings and functions, resulting in ambiguity or confusion, in which case the context can clarify it. This is at the level of the same language, so how do cases become when placing an equivalent of the multifunctional morpheme between different languages?
The phenomenon of morphemes, which has several meanings and functions, emerges at various linguistic levels (phonetic, morphological, grammatical, and semantic).
On the phonetic level: This is demonstrated through identical vocabulary in writing, but differs in its pronunciation through stress, for example by stress on a letter to indicate the type of word, whether it is a noun or a verb or otherwise. As for machine translation, its meaning is clarified through its position in the sentence and the context.
It is indicated that there are letters in Arabic that do not exist in English, so we write them in capital letters according to the closest of these letters to them in pronunciation, they are characterized by amplifying their pronunciation, so we write them in capital letters:
In Arabic, phonemic problems arise in this field through the fact that this language has written only the consonants because the short vowels are additional symbols that are added to the consonants, and in contemporary writing, it is dispensed with these additional symbols that express the short vowels, i.e. Half of the sounds are not written, which may cause problems in clarifying some vocabulary due to their lack of clarity without writing the vowels, such as (FalaH) when stressing the letter(L)(FallaH) it becomes, meaning (a villager), but without stressing this letter it means (success), and given that the stressed (a villager) in its stressing the letter(L) is more used in the language, it is noted that in machine translation it is translated by (a villager), and it does not refer to the meaning of success because it is little used, and this is one of the manifestations of linguistic confusion of the homonymy as a result of phonemic inaccuracy.
Likewise, (şerTiyeh = conditional) and (şurTiyeh= police), hereby, contemporary Arabic writing dispenses with writing vowels and only writes consonants, so the two words are completely identical in Arabic writing, but not in pronunciation and meaning. In machine translation, it is mostly translated (the police), because it is more used, so this meaning does not fit in the context of the text used for linguistics and grammar.
The same is true of the words ” ni’em” (plural of “grace”), and ” ne’em ” (meaning “yes”). Because the vowels are not written, they are identical in writing by writing only the consonants, both are identical in writing by writing only consonants, but they differ in vowels (i.e. in pronunciation) as well as in the meaning of each, but when machine translation they are translated according to the most used meaning (yes).
Likewise (muhimmeh , mehemmeh), the first means important or necessary, and the second means mission or responsibility.
An example of this is “Cookie.” This word is a type of homonymy in English, it is used in the field of food, as well as in the field of computers, but the Arabic language, made a distinction between each of them, by translating this word into the field of food into (biscuits). ) while in the field of computers translated it into (link file). However, when machine translation, it is noticed that this word is automatically translated according to the most commonly used meaning, which is the meaning adopted in the field of computers. When watching cooking videos, the viewer is surprised by the machine translation that translates “cookie” into “link file” and repeats the phrases. We cook the “link file”, or grill the “link file”, or fry the “link file” ……
Likewise in the Arabic language, when the machine translation of the writing “al-Naqdi” (it is a homonymy, it has the meaning of financial, as well as the meaning of criticism), since the financial concept is more common, this word is most likely translated into (financial), while the context is about literature, not economics.
Such funny ambiguities necessitate the necessity of instructing the computer with sufficient linguistic information to distinguish between the verbal honomymies, not according to the grammatical structure only, but also according to the uses of the context used, by specifying that in the context of the computer comes this meaning, and in the context of food in another sense, when translating between languages.
At the semantic level, the problems of functional pluralism emerge through the phenomena of homonymy, polysemous, and synonymy.
At the syntactic level, through idioms, there are similar structures or contextual expressions between languages, but they may not be translated by their exact equivalents in other languages, which leads to strange and funny literal translations of these idioms.
The same is true at the morphological level. We have referred to some affixes that have various grammatical, morphological, and semantic functions, which sometimes leads to chaos in organizing machine translation between the two languages (source and target).
Most languages suffer from the phenomenon of morphemes that have different functions because when a machine translation between languages, it leads to ambiguity, confusion, and many problems.
We will present examples of English morphemes that are characterized by their multifunctionality, to see how they have translated automatically into Arabic and Kurdish.
from Greek -ismos, from verbs in -izein -ize
1: a distinctive doctrine, cause, or theory
2: an oppressive and especially discriminatory attitude or belief.
-ism noun suffix
1a: act : practice : process(criticism)
b: manner of action or behavior characteristic of a (specified) person or thing(animalism).
c: prejudice or discrimination on the basis of a (specified) attribute(racism)
2a: state : condition : property(barbarianism)
b: abnormal state or condition resulting from an excess of a (specified) thing (alcoholism) or marked by a resemblance to (such) a person or thing(giantism)
3a: doctrine : theory : religion(Buddhism)
b: adherence to a system or a class of principles(stoicism)
4: characteristic or peculiar feature or trait(colloquialism). (Meriem Webster : 2022)
Before we mention examples of machine translation of multifunctional morphemes between English, Arabic, and Kurdish languages, it should be noted that we distinguished between these languages, which we had to write all in Latin letters only, that Kurdish is written in italics, and Arabic was distinguished by underlining. Also, there are letters in Arabic that do not exist in English, so we write them in capital letters according to the closest of these letters to them in pronunciation, they are characterized by amplifying their pronunciation, so we write them in capital letters. In Kurdish, there is a letter (x) which is the same(kh) in English.
naturalism : xwezayîbûn . sruştgeray . Teby’iyeh طبيعيَّة
realism : rastîbawerî . rastîgerî . waqi’iyehواقعيَّة
egalitarianism: wekhevîparêzî . yeksanî xwazy . musawat مساواة
historicism: dîrokparêzî (dîrokperestî) . mêjûgeraiy . tariykhiyeh تاريخيَّة
humanism : mirovparêz . mirovdostî . insaniyeh إنسانيَّة
journalism : rojnamegerî . Sehafeh صحافة
structuralism : piştî avahparêzî . pêkhategeray . biniyewiyehبنيوية
primitivism : destpêkparêz . seretaygeray . bidaiyeh بدائيَّة
rationalism: sedemparêzî . awezmendî . hokargery . ‘eqlaniyeh عقلانيَّة
reductionism : kêmbûnparêzî . kemkrdnewegry . ikhtizaliyeh اختزاليَّة
relativism : têkildarî . rêjeyxwazî . nisbiyeh نسبيَّة
(-ism), its Arabic equivalent is the suffix(iyeh), which does not have independent meanings, noting that this Arabic suffix is placed as an analogue of several other English suffixes, such as: -y, al, so the Arabic suffix “iyeh” is considered a morpheme that has several functions.
In the field of terminology, it is noted that the suffix -ism, which is predominantly used in the nouns of sects, beliefs and cases, in Kurdish, has several lexical equivalents: (xwazi, gere, parêz), and sometimes it is sufficient to add (-î) at the end of the word, and these Kurdish suffixes have the meanings of desire, movement, maintenance, or protection are not expressive of states or beliefs.
1: with : together: joint: jointly (coexist, coheir)
2: in or to the same degree (coextensive)
3a: one that is associated in an action with another: fellow: partner(co-author, co-worker)
b: having a usually lesser share in duty or responsibility : alternate: deputy(co-pilot)
4: of, relating to, or constituting the complement of an angle(cosine). (Meriem Webster: 2022)
In short, this prefix indicates the meanings of participation, association, and attachment…
In front of the English affix (co), the Kurdish morpheme (hev) is predominantly used, sometimes used as an abstract prefix, for example:
Cooperativeness = hevkarî (hev+karî) = te’awiniyeh تعاونيَّة
Consistencies = hevgirtinên (hev+girtinên) = itisaq اتساق
Consanguineous = hevjînî (hev+jînî) = qeriyb قريب
Consolidation = hevgirtin (hev+girtin) = demj دمج
And sometimes, as infixes are sticked to prepositions:
Correspondence = lihevhatinî (li+hev+hatinî) = muraseleh مراسلة
Consentaneous = lihevhatî (li+hev+hatî) = bitteraDyبتراضٍ
Consecutively = li pey hev (li +pey +hev) = ‘ela ttwaly على التوالي
Coordinate = liberhevxistin(li+ber+hev+xistin) = tensiq تنسيق
At other times, it abandons all morphemes which denote the function of participation by using the various lexical elements, such as: Complain (gilîkirin), communicates(danûstandinê).
Constructivists = avaker = binaiyeh . بنائية
Comprehensive = giştane = shamileh شاملة
Communication = ragehandin = itiSalat اتصالات
Concentration = lisersekinî = terkiz تركيز
Corresponding = corresponding = teqabul تقبُّل
Despite the variety of morphemes (prefixes) denoting these functions in Kurdish, however, (hev) is predominantly used, and other than that, lexical elements are used, which leads to irregularities in morphemes denoting the same function at the level of the language itself, and at the level of contrastive between the sending and receiving languages.
It is mentioned that in the Kurdish language, there are three affixes as equivalents to the function: (tev, hev, pev). These prefixes denote association, inclusion, and plural. There are other affixes that have similar meanings that denote grouping, coherence, and participation (pêk, têk). Examples include:
Kurdish can exploit the diversity of the morphemes indicative of participation, by assigning each morpheme to a sub-field of these meanings, in order to organize and coordinate in the language, such as allocating (hev) to horizontal participations, such as accompanying a human being or any other forms of relationships, allocating (tev) For vertical accumulations indicating totality, grouping, and accumulation, and allocating (pev) to other types of participations, and connections, i.e. that is, by assigning each morpheme according to the nature of the semantics that each field requires.
These affixes with convergent meaning in Kurdish (hev, pev, tev, pêk, têk) are similar to the case of the negative affixes in English, as it is believed that the prefix (in-) is branched to three similar prefixes in their meanings (il-, im-, ir-), according to the historical method, the same is true in Kurdish. There are similar prefixes in functions, but they differ by one letter.
In Arabic, the English prefix (co-) corresponds to various lexical elements. There is no homogeneous and steady symmetry to them, neither on the derivational level through morphological forms, nor on the syntactic level through the addition of morphological affixes. This is demonstrated by the above-mentioned example.
It is noteworthy that in Arabic the form (fa’il) has the connotation of participation, that is, by adding the infix (a) to the root, and thus this form can correspond to the English prefix (co-) which indicates participation.
1a: one that performs a (specified) action cycling: one that makes or produces a (specified) thing novelist.
b: one that plays a (specified) musical instrument; harpist
c: one that operates a (specified) mechanical instrument or contrivance automobilist
2: one that specializes in a (specified) art or science or skill; geologist, ventriloquist
3: one that adheres to or advocates a (specified) doctrine or system or code of behavior. (Meriem Webster : 2022)
Its functions can be summarized as having indications of performing a work or skill, or it is a behavior and system in a work. In Kurdish, it is most likely to use several equivalents. In Kurmanji, it’s its equivalent to (kirî, kir), and it is also like that it is in the Soran, its equivalent (kiraw), and this lexical element indicates the meaning of work in the two dialects.
In Arabic, it is equivalent to a variety of lexical elements that are neither coordinated nor regular, and there are no morphemes derived from organized lexical elements corresponding to this English morpheme.
Examples of Arabic and Kurdish equivalents of a morpheme (-ed):
printed : çapkirî . çapkraw . meTbu’ مطبوع
revised : sererastkirî . bjarkiraw . pêdaçûnewekraw . muneqqeHeh منقّحة
industrialized: pîşesazkirî . pîşesazî . Sina’y صناعي
-al (adjective suffix): of, relating to, or characterized by (directional)
-al (noun suffix ): action : process (rehearsal). (Meriem Webster : 2022)
A suffix (al-) denotes a job, process, or characterized. In Kurdish, the morphological equivalent is the suffix (î), and in Arabic, it uses the suffix (y), which shares as an equivalent to several other English suffixes.
organizational : rêxistinî. rêkxrawey, tenZiymiyeh . تنظيمية
professional: pîşeyî (bikêrhatî) . pîşeger. pîşey. muHterif محترف .
relational: têkilî . pewendî . itiSaly اتصالي .
- Conclusions and Recommendations :
Although verbal homonomies are similar in writing, there are small details found in them that may not appear in the written drawing, such as phonetic differences related to stress or small vowels, or grammatical differences related to the nature of their uses according to the context. There are also morphological problems related to the multiplicity of morphemes indicative of one function; their development is not regulated. Most of these problems were not adequately addressed in machine translation, which depends on choosing the most commonly used equivalents that may not fit the intended meaning, which causes ambiguity and confusion.
On the other hand, at the level of comparison between the three languages (English, Arabic, and Kurdish), we found out that all these languages have the feature of morphemes with multiple functions, but the Arabic language may have formulas and morphemes that can functionally correspond to English morphemes, but it prefers to use equivalents of lexical elements, not morphological elements, given the richness of Arabic and its semantic diversity, but this phenomenon may cause chaos and irregularity in the process of machine translation. We also noticed that Kurdish is not only characterized by the multiplicity of functions of one morpheme but by the diversity of morphemes that indicate one function as well, as is clear in the participatory function (synonym): pev, tev, pêk, têk.
When there are many morphemes denoting one function in any language, when machine translation, this linguistic diversity must be organized and employed so that each morpheme can be assigned to a specific function, and vice versa by allocating each meaning or function to a specific morpheme. And the necessity of inculcating the computer with linguistic information sufficient to distinguish between honomymies, polysemy, and synonymy, not only according to the grammatical, semantic and morphological structure, but also according to the context used.
 Dunn, Jake Quilty. Polysemy and thought: Toward a generative theory of concepts, Wiley Online Library, Volume 36 Number 1 February, 2021
 Mehmud, Berzo. Kopyûle û Paşkok di Rista Kurdȋ û Hindo-Ewropȋ de , şam , 2012 , p: 44-45
 Shahab Tayib Taher , & Faisal Ghazi Muhammed, M. &. The Multifunctional Morphemes in Kurdish Language the Morpheme Leas an example . Journal of the College of Languages, baghdad, Iraq. No. (46) 2022.
 Zahrani, Mohammad Ali Al . The Multifunctionality of a Morpheme Proposes its Morphosyntactic Features and their Specifications: Feature Matrix 1 1, Taif University, Taif, Saudi Arabia, Vivid: Journal of Language and Literature – Vol. 9 No. 2 (2020)
 Zaxoyȋ , ȋbrahȋm Remezan . Rȇzman a kurdȋ , Dihok , ҫapa 2, 2009, p20
 Zivingi, Safia. Comparative Study of Drafting Tool names (in Kurdish , English, and Arabic). Journal of Afro-Asian Studies : Democratic Arab Centre, Germany – Berlin. Ninth Issue – May 2021
 (2022) Merriam-Webster Dictionary, Incorporated.
Dr. Safia Zivingi:
- She holds a Ph.D. from the Faculty of Arts and Humanities, Department of Arabic Language, Applied Linguistics, University of Aleppo, Syria.
- She was appointed as a member of the teaching staff at Damascus University, Branch 2 in As-Suwayda.
- She held several positions at the Arab Democratic Center in Berlin, Germany, including Deputy Editor-in-Chief of the International Journal of Kurdish Studies, Chair of the Scientific Council of the Journal of Cultural, Linguistic, and Artistic Studies, and a member of the advisory board at this center.
- She has published many linguistic books, as well as published research in many international scientific journals, and has also participated in several international scientific conferences.
- Most of her research and studies are on applied linguistics issues in terminological approaches, in the manufacture of dictionaries, in comparative and contrastive linguistic studies between Arabic, Kurdish, and English languages…
- She also publishes dictionaries of specialized scientific terms (trilingual: English-Arabic-Kurdish): Dictionaries of linguistic terms, a dictionary of literary and critical terms, and a dictionary of Islamic terms …..
– The participation of this research paper has been announced in (the 8th International Conference on Computer Science, Engineering, And Applications (CSEA 2022), Zurich, Switzerland) Because I did not sign the waiver of the research, the research was not published. At the request of several researchers to obtain this reference, We are publishing this research for the first time and exclusively in this journal.