Ok, so <i>con</i> and <i>ceive</i> are not morphemes because they don't mean anything by their own, but <i>in</i> is a morpheme even if it does not have the same meaning by its own?<br><br>That seems rather illogical to me!,(reply>)," Yakamoz Gümüşservi<br>Yes", of course, but as Tom said in the video "in English, [conceive] is a morpheme". My question is why is <i>in</i> a morpheme even if it does not mean anything by itself. Sure it can have a different meaning, but <i>in</i> never means <i>not</i> by itself as in <i>inconceivable.</i><br>Therefore, I think Tom made a mistake.,(reply>), Nicholas R.M. They are Latin roots and they have meanings actually. Con means together, ceive means to take.