Morphologie
Unibe HS 2016
Unibe HS 2016
-
- 1 / 158
-
Lernkarten
Restrictions on word-formation rules
- phonological restrictions: pronunciation, perception difficulties
- semantic restrictions: Bäum-in (base-affix combinations)
-pragmatic restrictions: usefulness (Käferin)
- Morphological restrictions: requirement of special morphological properties in the base
moderate word form lexicon
memory strength of an affix affected when affix occurs often, lexical entry for an affix frequently accessed
parsing ratio
proportion of words with two given affixes that are estimated to be stored in the lexicon according to their component parts
e.g. parsing ratio of 0.17 --> 17 % of unique complex words containing the affix examined are decomposed, 83% of the words containing it are stored in the lexicon
higher parsing ratio --> affix activated in lexicon relatively more often --> more productive affix
Synonmy blocking
otherwhise productive derivational rule does not apply because it is pre-empted by an existing word that has the meaning of the potential neologism
e.g. to broom doesn't exist because there's already the well established word to sweep
frequency effect on blocking strength
frequent words have greater memory strength, therefore retrived faster from memory than rare words
analogical change
occurs when speakers form a new word on the model of / by analogy with another word
proportional equations: sting: stung = fling: x --> x= flung
measures of productivity
- degree of generalization, profitability, type frequency
- ratio of actual words to possible words = degree of exhaustion
- number of neologisms attested in a certain period of time = diachronic productivity
- ratio of hapax legomena with a given pattern to total token frequency of words with that pattern = category-conditioned degree of productivity
- ratio of hapax legomena with a given pattern to all hapax-legomena = hapax conditioned degree of productivity
hapax legomena
word that occurs only once in a corpus
degree of generalization, profitability, type frequency
= number of actual words formed according to a certain pattern
but: e.g. -ment has a high type frequency but is NOT PRODUCTIVE!
Productivity reminder
extent to which given morphological pattern to the total growth rate of the vocabulary
NOT same as frequency!!
Compound
complex lexeme that can be thought of as consisting of two or more base lexemes (e.g. lipstick)
noun incorporation
languages that do allow compounds in which the notional object and the verb form a compound
Interfix
semantically empty suffix (e.g. Volk-S-wagen)
semantic head
second, more important member of a compound (e.g. drawBRIDGE)
dependent
modifying element
endocentric compound
semantic head INSIDE the compound, meaning of the entire word is subset of the meaning of the lexeme that serves as a head
exocentric
semantic head outside the compound
kako-bios (having a bad life)
coordinative compounds
both members on equal footing
brothersister = brother and sister
appositional compounds
both compound members have same referent
e.g. poeta-pintor = poet who is also a painter
morphosyntactic locus
determination of the formal head (tree diagrams)
e.g. particle physics conference --> conference = head
head determines the way the plural of the compound is formed
semantic scope
not modification of root but rather entire base
word class of the resulting lexeme is that of the derivational affix
e.g. read-able is adjective because -able belongs to the word-class of adjectives
Similarities Syntax- Morphology
- dependent member narrows meaning of the head
e.g. doghouse is a type of house vs. house for the dog.
syntagmatic relations
follow each other in speech --> items ordered one after the other
e.g. In / the / beginning / God...
paradigmatic relations
relations between units that occur in the same slot
items in contrast with one another
e.g. God, Allah, he
Inflection classes
set of paradigms that exhibit the same inflectional pattern
Inflection class assignment
animacy: German: only animate nouns belong to the masculine n-declension
mass-count
transitivity
relationship to gender
class shift
diachronic change by which lexeme changes its inflection class
e.g. only highly productive classes are able to accomodate loanwords and attract lexemes from other, unstable classes
inheritance hierarchy
taxonomic hierarchy of declension classes is competently similar to hierarchies of this kind
Priscianic formation
member of an inflectional paradigm is formed from another member of the paradigm to which it need not be closely related semantically
e.g. priscianic analysis of Latin: form of the future active participle is dependent upon the form of the past-passive participle
Syncretism
two word-forms in a paradigm can be phonologically identical
--> inflectional harmony is systematic
syncretic = homonymous forms of a paradigm
systematic vs. accidental inflectional homonymy
test 1: the extent to which a pattern of homonymy is found in different inflection classes
e.g. spielt (3SG) und spielt (2PL): accidental
spielen (1PL) und spielen (2 PL): systematic --> syncretism
natural syncretism
two syncretic cells
3 SG and 3 PL --> natural class
only wordforms expressing 3rd person
Underspecification
tool for describing syncretism, not restricted to word based model
rule of referral
rule that says that several forms in the paradigm are identical
Defective lexemes
lexemes with missing wordforms
e.g. incombere: lacks past participle --> cannot be used in the compound past tense
disturbs functionality of the language
speakers can learn negative fact that a lexeme lacks certain forms - default pattern
helps explain why lexemes sometimes shift from one inflection class to another
Deponency
formal marker of an inflectional value is used in the wrong function, to express in a different value
Periphrasis
comparatives like more beautiful, well established convention for expressing the value
lexical periphrasis
certain lexemes lack word-forms for certain values
paradigmatic periphrasis
entire word-classes lack word-forms for certain combinations of inflectional values
categorical periphrasis
given grammatical function always expressed with a multiword expression
can only be identified in context with other paradigmatic forms
