Further Investigations Into the Nature of Phrasal Compounding
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Further investigations into the nature of phrasal compounding Edited by Carola Trips Jaklin Kornfilt language Morphological Investigations 1 science press Morphological Investigations Editors: Jim Blevins, Petar Milin, Michael Ramscar In this series: 1. Trips, Carola & Jaklin Kornfilt (eds.). Further investigations into the nature of phrasal compounding 2. Schäfer, Martin. The semantic transparency of English compound nouns. Further investigations into the nature of phrasal compounding Edited by Carola Trips Jaklin Kornfilt language science press Carola Trips & Jaklin Kornfilt (eds.). 2017. Further investigations into the nature of phrasal compounding (Morphological Investigations 1). Berlin: Language Science Press. This title can be downloaded at: http://langsci-press.org/catalog/book/156 © 2017, the authors Published under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 Licence (CC BY 4.0): http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ ISBN: 978-3-96110-012-5 (Digital) 978-3-96110-013-2 (Hardcover) DOI:10.5281/zenodo.885113 Source code available from www.github.com/langsci/156 Collaborative reading: paperhive.org/documents/remote?type=langsci&id=156 Cover and concept of design: Ulrike Harbort Typesetting: Felix Kopecky, Sebastian Nordhoff, Iana Stefanova Proofreading: Ahmet Bilal Özdemir, Andreas Hölzl, Andreea Calude, Eitan Grossman, Gerald Delahunty, Jean Nitzke, Jeroen van der Weijer, Ka Yau Lai, Ken Manson, Luigi Talamo, Martin Haspelmath, Parviz Parsafar, Steven Kaye, Steve Pepper, Valeria Quochi Fonts: Linux Libertine, Arimo, DejaVu Sans Mono Typesetting software:Ǝ X LATEX Language Science Press Unter den Linden 6 10099 Berlin, Germany langsci-press.org Storage and cataloguing done by FU Berlin Language Science Press has no responsibility for the persistence or accuracy of URLs for external or third-party Internet websites referred to in this publication, and does not guarantee that any content on such websites is, or will remain, accurate or appropriate. Contents 1 Further insights into phrasal compounding Carola Trips & Jaklin Kornfilt 1 2 Phrasal compounds in Modern Icelandic with reference to Icelandic word formation in general Kristín Bjarnadóttir 13 3 Compounding in Polish and the absence of phrasal compounding Bogdan Szymanek 49 4 On a subclass of nominal compounds in Bulgarian: The nature of phrasal compounds Alexandra Bagasheva 81 5 Modeling the properties of German phrasal compounds within a usage-based constructional approach Katrin Hein 119 6 Phrasal compounds in Japanese Kunio Nishiyama 149 7 Copying compound structures: The case of Pharasiot Greek Metin Bağrıaçık, Aslı Göksel & Angela Ralli 185 8 Phrasal compounds and the morphology-syntax relation Jürgen Pafel 233 Index 261 Chapter 1 Further insights into phrasal compounding Carola Trips Universität Mannheim Jaklin Kornfilt Syracuse University 1 Further insights into phrasal compounding from a typological and theoretical perspective This collection of papers on phrasal compounds is part of a bigger project whose aims are twofold: First, it seeks to broaden the typological perspective by pro- viding data for as many different languages as possible to gain a better under- standing of the phenomenon itself. Second, based on these data, which clearly show interaction between syntax and morphology, it aims to discuss theoretical models which deal with this kind of interaction in different ways. For example, models like Generative Grammar assume components of grammar and a clear- cut distinction between the lexicon (often including morphology) and grammar which mostly stands for the computational system (syntax). Other models, like construction grammar do not assume such components and are rather based on a lexicon including constructs. A comparison of these models makes it then pos- sible to assess their explanatory power. The field of morphology and syntax started to acknowledge the existence of phrasal compounds predominantly in the context of Lexicalist theories because a number of authors realised that they are not easy to handle in models of linguistic theory which demarcate the lexicon (morphology) from syntax. Commenting on Carola Trips & Jaklin Kornfilt. Further insights into phrasal compound- ing. In Carola Trips & Jaklin Kornfilt (eds.), Further investigations into the nature of phrasal compounding, 1–11. Berlin: Language Science Press. DOI:10.5281/zenodo.885107 Carola Trips & Jaklin Kornfilt the difference between base and derived forms Chomsky said in his “Remarks on Nominalization”: “However, when the lexicon is separated from the categorial component of the base and its entries are analyzed in terms of contextual features, this difficulty disappears.” (Chomsky (1970: 190)) This assumption was dubbed The Lexicalist Hypothesis and in the courseof time a number of different versions surfaced. For example, Lapointe (1980: 8) put forward the Generalized Lexicalist Hypothesis which stated that “No syntactic rule can refer to elements of morphological structure.” Botha (1981: 18) took the perspective from morphology and established The No Phrase Constraint which postulated that “Syntactic phrases cannot occur inside of root compounds.” In 1987, Di Sciullo & Williams summarised these hypotheses and constraints in their Atomicity Thesis: “Words are “atomic” at the level of phrasal syntax and phrasal semantics. The words have “features” or properties, but these features have no struc- ture, and the relation of these features to the internal composition of the word cannot be relevant in syntax – this is the thesis of the atomicity of words, or the lexical integrity hypothesis, or the strong lexicalist hypothe- sis (as in Lapointe 1980), or a version of the lexicalist hypothesis of Chomsky (1970), Williams (1978; 1978a), and numerous others.” (Di Sciullo & Williams 1987:49) Some of these authors commented on instances of phrasal compounding like Botha (2015) (who coined the term “phrasal compounds”) and Savini (1984) and came to the conclusion that they constitute negative evidence for these con- straints because they clearly showed interaction between syntax and morphol- ogy (see the following examples from Dutch): (1) a. uit-die-bottel-drink alkoholis from-the-bottle-drink alcoholic ‘alcoholic who drinks straight from the bottle’ (Botha 1980:143) b. laat-in-die-aand drankie late-in-the-evening drink ‘drink taken late in the evening’ (Savini 1984: 39) 2 1 Further insights into phrasal compounding In the same vein, Lieber (1988; 1992) put forward examples for English and came to the conclusion that they violate these constraints, or in more general terms, the Lexical Integrity Hypothesis: (2) a. slept all day look b. a who’s the boss wink (Lieber 1992:11) But despite these rather sporadic discussions of the phenomenon no compre- hensive study of phrasal compounds in individual languages or cross-linguisti- cally existed. Fortunately, with a growing interest in compounding as an interface pheno- menon the situation has changed in the last five years. This can be seen by the publication of a number of volumes dedicating themselves explicitly to this type of word formation by providing detailed accounts of types of compounds across languages (see e.g. Scalise & Vogel (2010); Štekauer & Lieber (2009)), and this development brings phrasal compounds now to the fore as well. To gain a better understanding of phrasal compounds, in 2013 a workshop with the topic “Phrasal compounds from a typological and theoretical perspec- tive” brought together scholars who had been working on (phrasal) compound- ing in different languages and from different theoretical perspectives. Theout- come of this fruitful workshop was a collection on the topic which was published in 2015 as a special edition of STUF (Trips & Kornfilt 2015). The languages un- der investigation were German, English, Italian, Turkish, some additional Tur- kic languages and Greek. Concerning the approaches chosen for an analysis of the phenomenon, some authors (Pafel, Göksel) analysed the phrasal non-head of phrasal compounds in terms of quotes, quotations, citations whereas authors like Meibauer and Trips favoured a semantic analysis which attributes an impor- tant role to pragmatics (Trips to some degree in the form of coercion, Meibauer even more so in terms of pragmatic enrichment). Some of the authors (Bisetto, Baǧrıaçık & Angela Ralli) made a distinction between phrasal compounds that are lexical/morphological and syntactic (either within one and the same language or comparing languages) and some authors (Trips & Kornfilt) found similar se- mantic restrictions in diverse languages (Germanic, Turkish) but also clear struc- tural differences. Despite this valuable contribution to a phenomenon underrepresented in cur- rent research, it became evident quickly that to come closer to fulfilling the aims defined above it would be necessary to add further languages, on the onehand, and to deepen the theoretical discussion, on the other hand. 3 Carola Trips & Jaklin Kornfilt Concerning the typological aspect of (phrasal) compounding we wanted to include further languages which had not been investigated so far; especially in- teresting are, for example, Slavic languages, because they seem to exhibit com- pounds, but they occur less frequently than for example in the Germanic lan- guages. Another aspect worth investigating is whether all Germanic languages behave in the same way. One very interesting example is Icelandic which has much more inflectional morphology than the other contemporary Germanic lan- guages. Can we