Morphological Analysis of English Verbs and Compounds, Appunti di Linguistica Inglese

Scarica Morphological Analysis of English Verbs and Compounds e più Appunti in PDF di Linguistica Inglese solo su Docsity! Conversion or Zero-affixation Most morphologists claim that zero-forms obtain only in those cases where there is also a non- zero form that expresses the same meaning or function; Such a constraint has been defined as overt analogue criterion; Question: is there such a criterion in the case of conversion? The answer to this question lies in the possibility of finding at least one affix that expresses the same range of meanings as conversion; If such a possibility is found, then we can speak of zero- affixation, otherwise such a hypothesis has to be rejected; To support the existence of zero-affixation many morphologists claim that all derivational processes (affixation, conversion, truncation and so on) are in truth affixational If, one the one hand, such a claim is very productive, because it places affixation at the centre of any morphological process, on the other hand it needs theory-internal proof to explain all those phenomena that do not show any overt affix; The risk, obviously, is that if we do not find convincing explanations, then all the theoretical apparatus fails; Let’s analyse conversion from Nouns intoVerbs to see whether the overt analogue criterion holds; The task is to see if there is a verb-deriving affix which has the same meaning as the hypothesised zero-affix; Consider suffixes like –ize, and –ify; Plag (1999) holds that they have a more restricted range of meanings than conversion. See below: • To jail locative meaning • To staff ornative meaning • Yellow causative meaning • Bundle resultative meaning • Cool inchoative meaning • Counterattack performative • Hammer instrumental meaning • Bark privative meaning Apart from those above there is a wealth of idiosyncratic meanings: e.g to crew= act as a member of a crew; ‘to eel’ = ‘move like a eel’ Now consider the verb-suffixes below: -ate: it attaches to words that end in one or two stressed syllables. If the base ends in an unstressed syllable, the last syllable is truncated (e.g. mercury-mercurate). Semantically, it has an ornative/ resultative meaning (e.g. methanate; fluorinate). Yet, lots of verbs ending in –ate do not follow this pattern. As a consequence, such a suffix seems to have only the property of b.CcVV=Steve c.VvCc=Abe Relationship between the base and the derived word: 1.in some forms the material which fills in the template consists of the first syllable (sometimes with exceptions consisting of other segments): e.g. Alonzo = Al; 2.some forms consist of what is left of the base in terms of secondarily stressed syllable: e.g. Adolphus = Dolph 3.other forms consist of secondarily stressed syllables: e.g. Abigail = Gail; Apart from the generalization above, in truncation processes a few segmental changes may also take place: e.g. /r/ is replaced by /l/ if it is the single coda consonant as in Harry = Hal; Yet, /r/ survives truncation if it occurs in the onset of the truncation (e.g. Ron) and if it is the first member of a coda cluster (e.g. Barb, Bert) DIMINUTIVES Albert = Bertie Andrew = Andy Australian = Aussie Barbara = Barbie Aunt = auntie Comfortable = comfy There are two ortographic variants in diminutives: e.g. –ie and –y; Yet, the pronunciation is the same; Bases are mainly proper/common nouns; sometimes adjectives; All diminutives are disyllabic with stresses on the first syllable; The onset of the second syllable is never complete. This despite the fact that the base may have a complex onset in the second syllable: e.g. Andrew = Andy not *Andry: This implies that diminutives are trochaic disyllables with the second consonant formed by a single consonant and the suffix; The first syllable remains, regardless of whether it is stressed or not; Clipping is often seen as the same process as truncation in the sense that it is a form abbreviated from longer words; a characteristic feature of clipped words is that they express familiarity with the objects they refer to; Ad = Advertisement Lab = Laboratory Photo = Photography Prof = Professor Most clippings are monosyllabic or disyllabic; they are usually based on the first part of the base word; Blending is different from the morphological processes analyzed so far in that it involves two (or rarely three) words; It is instead similar to other morphological processes in that it undergoes deletion of much phonological material of either one or the other word or even both of the words that are joined together; Set 1 Breath+analyzer= breathalyzer Motor +camp = mocamp Motor+Hotel = motel Science+fiction= Sci-fi Set 2 Boat+Hotel = Boatel Boom+hoist = boost Breakfast +lunch = brunch Spanish+English= Spanglish; Set 1 are blends formed by existing compounds. In such compounds the first element modifies the second: e.g. a motel is ‘a kind of hotel’; Set 2, instead, are blends in which the bases forming the compound are not attested as compounds in their full forms (e.g. *smog-fog). In this kind of blends the properties denoted by the compound word refer to both constituents: e.g. Spanglish is both Spanish and English. From a semantic point of view such blends are similar to copulative compounds (e.g. actor-director; writer-journalist); In blends belonging to set 2 it is always the first part of the first element that is joined to the second part of the second element, thus forming a pattern like AB+CD: e.g. breakfast+lunch=brunch; However, there are a few exceptions like modem, in which the first part of the first member is joined to the first part of the second member (e.g.modulator-demotulator); There are two restrictions: The syllable structure of the words: in truncation processes, the structure of the syllable is left intact, in that only syllabic components as a whole can be deleted (e.g. Amelia=Mel). Contra truncation, in monosyllabic blending either the onset of the first element and the rime of the second (e.g. goat+sheep=geep) or the onset and nucleus of the first element and the coda of the second are blended (e.g. boom+hoist= boost); Polysyllabic blends: the same restrictions as monosyllabic blends only that they may have more combinations: See the scheme below: First word: A= first part B=second part; Second word: C=first part D=second part; Boatel Chunnel Spanglish Stagflation 2.its right-hand member is a phrase (and not its left-hand member); Expressions like the ones above are considered lexicalized phrases; While phrases tend to be stressed on the last word (nuclear stress rule), compounds are usually stressed on the left member (compound stress rule): Notice the different stresses in the following examples: Phrases: the green cárpet; good jób; Compounds: páyment problems; spáce requirement; Differences in stress between compounds and noun phrases: Noun phrases: black bóard (a board which is black); Green hóuse (a house which is green); Compounds: Bláckboard (a board to write on); Gréenhouse (glass building to grow plants); But there are exceptions: scholar-áctivist; geologist-astrónomer (the stress on the right-hand member takes place quite regularly in copulative compounds); In three-word compounds, stresses reveal their internal structure and their semantics; → [[máil delivery] service] vs [mail [delívery service]]; Endocentric Compounds: compounds in which the head is easy to identify: ◦ Blackbird; ◦ Rawmeat; ◦ Headmaster; ◦ Armchair In all the compounds above the compound forms a hyponym of the head, that is to say a specific case of the head: ◦ A Blackbird is a particular type of ‘bird’; ◦ Rawmeat is ‘meat’ cooked in a particular way; ◦ A Headmaster is a particular kind of ‘master’; ◦ Armchair is a particular type of ‘chair’. Exocentric Compounds: (also called called bahuvrihi) compounds in which the head is not easy to identify because the meaning of the compound is the hyponym of some ‘unexpressed’ semantic head: e.g. highbrow; redskin. In these two cases the unexpressed semantic head is ‘person’; Dvandva compounds (also copulative compounds): compounds in which there is a simple conjunction of two words, without dependency between them. The compound is a hyponym of neither element but a combination of the two: Bosnia-Herzegovina; Alsace-Lorraine; Appositional /Coordinative Compounds: both are cases of Dvandas. The former because the compound is the hyponym of both the units forming it (e.g. maidservant is both a ‘maid’ and a ‘servant’). The latter because the bases establish a relation with a following noun (e.g. the theory- practice gap is a gap between T. and P.) REVISION OF MORPHOLOGICAL PHENOMENA: Conversion: changing one word from one category to another without adding affixes (zero derivation): stop (N) to stop (V); Clipping: when a longer form is abbreviated to produce a new form: fan (fanatic); Blending: joining parts of different words: smog (smoke + fog), brunch (breakfast + lunch); Backformation: the formation of a simple word from another understood as derived: burgle from burglar; edit from editor; Calque: a word which has been formed by translating a corresponding word into another language: grattacielo from skyscraper; Eponym: an individual name from which a common noun is derived: Lord Sandwich from Sandwich; Toponym: a word derived from a place; Acronyms: a word formed by joining the initial letters of other words: Ash from ‘Action on Smoking and Health; Tesol from‘Teachers of English to Speakers of Other Languages’; Onomatopoeia: words formed when the meaning is perceived as imitating the sound: buzz, hiss, crack; Coinage: the creation of a new word: Teflon, spandex; Cognates: words that have developed from a common ancestor; beam (English) is cognate with baum (German); Clitics: a word in which a grammatical element is treated as an independent item in syntax but forms the same phonological unit with the word that precedes or follows it: they’re; they’ve; isn’t. Nonce formation, Institutionalization, Lexicalization Nonce formation: a new complex word coined by a speaker/writer on the spur of the moment to cover immediate needs; A form ceases to be a nonce-formation as soon as it is used a second time. Nonce-formation may be ambiguous: World-sky: the word ‘world’ may mean ‘the earth’, the universe’, ‘human affairs’, ‘persons or institutions’ and others, while the word ‘sky’ may mean ‘where the sun is’ or also ‘climate’. This means that a nonce-formation can draw on any of these meanings and mix them up in the complex word; When the nonce-formation starts to be accepted by other speakers as a lexical item, the potential