I have this idea in my head that when it comes to morphemes, there are two divisions at the top: "semantical morphemes" and "functional morphemes". Semantical morphemes are those that just carry a meaning, like auto, super, tract, etc. Functional morphemes are affixes that don't have a meaning, but rather a function: they modify the word. For example, the adjective stupid can be made into a noun by using a functional morpheme, of which there are to options for the word stupid; -ity and -ness. Other examples of functional morphemes include -uous/ous, -ism, -ion and many more.
They don't carry any semantical meaning (at least in my understanding), they just take the root and transport it into another word class.
Is this conceptual approach to the subject linguistically sound? Are these perhaps terms actually used?