When analysing a language, when do we analyse certain morphemes as one word as opposed to multiple, or is this arbitrary?
For instance, I could make the claim that (in certain cases) 'a/an' is a bound morpheme, and I could analyse it as a prefix on nouns. So, I would write 'anapple' instead of 'an apple'. We already see a considerable number of cases of this in English (eg: 'a lot' becoming 'alot')
(Since it's been pointed out that the 'a/an' example is in fact incorrect, a better example would be analysing 'of' as a head-marked posessive suffix.)
The converse is also possible. Why should I see Turkish 'evimiz' (house-our, "our house") as one word, and not 'ev imiz'? Turkish has bound words that display vowel harmony too, so why exactly must it be analysed as such?