CELTA Language Analysis: How to Analyse Form, Meaning, Use, and Phonology for Assignments 1 and 2

What Is the FMU+P Framework and Why Does CELTA Use It?

The FMU+P framework organises language analysis into four distinct analytical dimensions, each addressing a different aspect of how a language item works. Form addresses the grammatical construction — how the item is built, what word classes it contains, how it changes in negative and interrogative patterns. Meaning addresses what the item encodes semantically — what situation, relationship, time frame, or attitude it expresses. Use addresses when and how the item appears in real language — its register, frequency, collocational patterns, and the communicative functions it typically serves. Phonology addresses how the item sounds — its phonemic transcription, stress pattern, and how it changes in connected speech.

For used to + infinitive, the FMU+P analysis provides: Form — the structural formula for affirmative, negative, and interrogative; Meaning — past habit or state that no longer exists, with present contrast implied; Use — informal spoken, typically with time references, contrastable with simple past; Phonology — citation form /juːzd tuː/, natural connected speech /ˈjuːstə/, with elision of /d/ before /t/. Each of the four dimensions requires its own analytical method, and each generates specific information that a teacher needs before presenting the item. Treating language analysis as a single undifferentiated task — writing a paragraph about "what the structure means" — produces the under-differentiated analysis that receives satisfactory grades at best.

Form Analysis: How to Describe Grammar Structure and Lexical Form

Form analysis for a grammar item requires the structural formula in affirmative, negative, and interrogative patterns, using word-class notation. For used to + infinitive:

Affirmative: Subject + used to + bare infinitive → She used to live in Paris.
Negative: Subject + didn't use to + bare infinitive → She didn't use to live in Paris.
Interrogative: Did + subject + use to + bare infinitive? → Did she use to live in Paris?

The form detail that distinguishes accurate from inaccurate analysis is the spelling change in negative and interrogative: used to (affirmative, with -d) becomes use to (negative and interrogative, without -d) because the auxiliary did carries the past tense marking. A candidate who writes the negative as *didn't used to — retaining the -d — has produced an inaccurate form analysis. This is a common error in CELTA Assignment 2 submissions from candidates who rely on intuition rather than systematic analysis.

For lexical items, form analysis covers word class (noun, verb, adjective, adverb, preposition, particle), morphological features (base form, inflected forms, derivational patterns), and for phrasal verbs, separability. For give up: verb phrase (phrasal verb, verb + particle); intransitive use: She gave up.; transitive inseparable with gerund object: She gave up smoking. — not *She gave smoking up. with a gerund; but transitive separable with noun object: She gave it up or She gave up the habit. The separability pattern is the form detail most frequently omitted in phrasal verb analysis.

Meaning Analysis: Denotation, Connotation, and the Used To False Friend Trio

Meaning analysis addresses the semantic content of the target item — what it encodes about time, aspect, attitude, or relationship — and distinguishes it from formally similar items that encode different meanings. For used to + infinitive, the meaning components are: (1) the habit or state existed in the past; (2) it existed over a period of time (not a single event); (3) it no longer exists in the present; (4) there is an implied present contrast. These four components must all be present in a complete meaning analysis, because they are what the CCQ sequence must verify.

The most critical meaning distinction for used to + infinitive is the false friend trio — three formally similar constructions with distinct meanings:

used to + bare infinitive → past habit or state, no longer true: I used to smoke. (I smoked regularly in the past; I do not smoke now.)
be used to + gerund / noun → be accustomed to (state, any tense): I am used to working late. (I am accustomed to this; it is normal for me.)
get used to + gerund / noun → become accustomed to (process, any tense): I am getting used to the noise. (I am in the process of adjusting.)

The form distinction is structural: only the first construction uses used to followed by a bare infinitive. The second and third use used to as an adjectival phrase (be/get + used to) followed by a gerund or noun, where to is a preposition, not the infinitive marker. A learner who writes *I am used to wake up early has confused the first and second constructions. A meaning analysis that does not address this distinction is incomplete, because this false friend generates the most frequent learner error associated with this structure.

For lexical items, meaning analysis addresses denotation (the core dictionary meaning), connotation (evaluative associations), and semantic prosody (whether the item co-occurs primarily with positive or negative contexts). The verb cause carries negative semantic prosody — cause problems, cause damage, cause harm — and rarely appears with positive objects in authentic use, despite learners frequently producing *cause happiness or *cause success.

Use Analysis: Register, Frequency, Collocations, and Contrastive Analysis

Use analysis addresses the contextual conditions for the target item: when native speakers use it, what register it belongs to, what it typically collocates with, and how it contrasts with alternatives that encode similar but not identical meanings. For used to + infinitive, use analysis covers: register — informal spoken, personal narrative; frequency — common in personal history narration (childhood memories, past routines, accounts of change); typical co-texts — time reference phrases (when I was a child, in those days, back then), verbs of activity or habitual state (used to play, used to live, used to believe); and contrastive use — the contrast with simple past.

The key use distinction for used to + infinitive versus simple past is the emphasis on present change. He lived in London (simple past) is a neutral statement of past fact — it carries no implication about the present. He used to live in London foregrounds the contrast with now — it implies he does not live in London now and that this represents a change. When a native speaker chooses used to over simple past, they are choosing to emphasise the discontinuity between past and present. This is the use distinction that justifies selecting used to as a target item for teaching: learners who use simple past for past habits are not producing errors, but they are missing a communicative distinction that native speakers make.

For lexical items, use analysis must specify collocations. Presenting a lexical item without its typical collocations is an incomplete use analysis, because collocations are the primary determinant of whether learner production sounds natural. Make collocates with: decision, mistake, progress, effort, suggestion, appointment, phone call. It does not collocate with: *homework (do homework), *research (do/conduct research), *work (do work). These collocational boundaries are not predictable from meaning alone and must be explicitly taught.

Phonology Analysis: IPA Transcription, Stress, and Connected Speech for Used To

Phonology analysis requires full IPA transcription of the target item in citation form (careful, isolated pronunciation) and in natural connected speech (the form produced at normal conversational speed). For used to: citation form /juːzd tuː/ — each phoneme fully articulated; natural connected speech /ˈjuːstə/ — the /d/ of used is elided before the /t/ of to, and the /uː/ of to is reduced to the weak form schwa /ə/. The result is a form that many learners do not recognise as used to when they hear it in authentic speech, which is why the connected speech analysis is pedagogically essential.

Primary stress is marked with ˈ before the stressed syllable. In the phrase used to, primary stress falls on the first syllable of used: /ˈjuːstə/. In a full sentence, He used to play football, the stress pattern follows the natural English sentence stress pattern: content words receive stress, function words are reduced. The verb play and the noun football receive primary stress; used to is typically unstressed in connected speech unless the speaker is emphasising the past contrast: /hiː ˈjuːstə pleɪ ˈfʊtbɔːl/.

The four connected speech features relevant to CELTA phonology analysis are: elision — omission of a sound (used to: /d/ elided → /ˈjuːstə/); assimilation — a sound changes to match an adjacent sound (ten boys: /n/ → /m/ before bilabial /b/ → /tem bɔɪz/); linking — a consonant links to an adjacent vowel beginning (far away: /r/ links → /fɑːrəweɪ/); weak forms — function words reduce in unstressed positions (to → /tə/, have → /həv/ or /əv/, and → /ən/ or /n/). For any target item in Assignment 2, identify which of these features applies and transcribe both the citation and connected speech forms with stress marks. The phonology section is where the most marks are earned or lost in Assignment 2.