Allomorph??

The present perfect is considered by some a "past tense."

ShaNapWhich of these words contains an allomorph of the "past tense":

Is that exactly how the question appears in the book?

ShaNapWhich of these words contains an allomorph of the "past tense":are, have, must, sitting, waits?

must

must is historically a past-tense form, even though it isn't used that way in modern English.

Note that present-day German has:

er muss - 'he has to'
er musste - 'he had to'

(German and English

Yes: "The study of language" by George Yule p.75

It comes in relation to the concept that some words contain/built from allomorphs of the past although they have no "clear" suffix of that sort.
For example: walked has -ed as a past tense suffix (one morph of the "past morpheme"), but a word like went has no such suffix and still regarded as containing a "past morpheme".

If,

ShaNapYes: "The study of language" by George Yule p.75

Oh, OK. The wording, and the use of quotation marks, seems odd to me.

In fact, I can see now in Google Books that the original reads:

Which of these words contains an allomorph of the morpheme "past tense":

http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=EYIwL-Gr0XIC&pg=PA75&lpg=PA75&dq=%22Which+of+

GPYWhich of these words contains an allomorph of the morpheme "past tense":

I would have written ... of the past-tense morpheme "-ed". In any case, I'm pretty sure that's what the author meant.

CJ

CalifJimI would have written ... of the past-tense morpheme "-ed".

I agree.

You agree that I would have written it that way?

You know me better than I suspected.

CJ

so is the answer, "must"?