Questions And Answers Flashcards
Marchands scope of Word Formation:
Wf is the study of patterns associated with the formation of lexical words/ Central notion Syntagma. Bilateral signs Form and meaning Needs to be analysable determinant washing bird launch determinatum machine bath pad
Marchands scopeof Word Formation:
Wf is the study of patterns assocated with the formation of lexical words/ Central notion Syntagma.
What is Syntagma?
Sequential linguistic forms
Explain Expansion, transposition and derivation
1 Expan: adding a prefix but not changing word category- ex: un+happy
Still adjective
2.Trans:Changing word form by adding a suffix
Teach(v) + Er = Teacher(n)
3. Deri:Changing word class through conv, affixation or ing
Difference between word or morpheme
A word is made up of morphemes and a moropme is the smallest meaninful part or a word. “An ultimate contituent”
2 classes of the Word formation process
- Major= compounding, affixation (pre +suff)zero derivation, back formation,
- Minor=blending acronyms, clipping, reduplication : rhyme and ablaut
Zero conversion?
A process that assigns a n existing word to different word class. Also called conversion.
Sheep(sing)/sheep(plur)
Judge(v)/ judge(n)
Cheat(v)/cheat (n)
Backformation
The process if making a new word by remiving the suffix of a existing word.
BABYSITTER =
Baby sit
Backformation
BABYSITTER =
Baby sit
Compound
Launch + pad =
Launchpad
BLENDING
Breakfast + lunch=
Brunch
acronymization
FbI
clipping
laboratory = lab
blocking
the absence of a word because another word exists that has the same meaning.
3 conditions:
A. 2 words same stem
B. 2 words with the same meaning
C.neither words can be derived by productive wfr
Lee’s Compound theory
1.Kernal sentence > the course is a snap 2.Relative clause > course which is a snap 3.Expression + post nominal mod > course a snap 4.Word swap (with 2 two left over constituents) snap course
Lees theory criticized
Marchand heavily criticized the ambiguity of it. He then then ironically joined the field.
Lees does not explain: 1.Why Kernal sentences make entirely different compounds
- why semantically identical types have formal differences
- why the same sentence structure corresponds to different compound structures
- why identical sentences can yield different compounds
Kastovsky’s transformational approach
topical lization
1.Kernal sentence>
Someone eats apples
2.Underlying sentence level> topical lization transform…
apples are eaten
3.Word formation syntagma >word formation transform…
eating apples
Aranoff’s word based theory
word + the basic unit of word formation
not morphemes
No phrase constraint, word formation process is word based. no new words can be from phrases only existing words
Aranoff’s productivity theory
relativized approach: examines the productivity of an affix with reguard to a base
Actual/potential
Aranoff’s semantic coherence
the predictability of the meaning of words according to the wf rule: add ness to nouns make them more coherent because have basis in fact/extent/quality
The more coherent a word the more it will be used increasing production
Halle
List of Morphemes > free and bound Word formation rules > all rules Filter > semantically -al phonological - shortening of dipthong structural- accidental gap discont. or too new List of irregularities Dictionary > back to word formation Syntax > sentence usage Phonology > sounds in sentence pot. changes output finished ready for use
Reduplication
Subcategories
Ablaut: drink/drank
Rhyme: willy nilly
Exact: A man’s man
Reduplication
Man’s man
Robert lees
the Grammar of English Nominalizations
An American linguist and syntactician who argued that nominalizations which made use of transformations to generate compounds from kernel sentences.
Post nominial modification
Marker is after the head
