Word-Formation Processes in English

A special issue of Languages (ISSN 2226-471X).

Deadline for manuscript submissions: closed (15 December 2023) | Viewed by 7848

Special Issue Editors


E-Mail Website
Guest Editor
Graduate School of International Relations, University of Shizuoka, Shizuoka 422-8002, Japan
Interests: English linguistics; morphology and word-formation; lexicon; contrastive and comparative morphosyntax

E-Mail Website
Guest Editor
Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences, University of Tsukuba, Ibaraki 305-8577, Japan
Interests: English linguistics; morphology; word-formation; lexicon

Special Issue Information

Dear Colleagues,

We are pleased to announce the launching of the Special issue in Languages under the title “Word-Formation Processes in English.”

Word-formation is a linguistic discipline that studies morphological phenomena whereby language users produce complex words from existing building blocks. Its two major components are derivational morphology and compounding. Word-formation processes refer to various processes employed in word-formation. Thus, from a formal perspective, word-formation may be carried out by affixation (prefixation, suffixation, infixation, circumfixation, etc.), two-word composition (compounding, blending), input–output form identity (conversion), input copying (reduplication), stem alternation, or subtractive morphology (back-formation, clipping) (see Spencer 2015). From a syntactico-semantic perspective, derivational morphology includes nominalization, verbalization, and adjectivalization, as well as non-category-changing processes contributing to negation, spatio-temporal modification, aspectual alternation, valency alternation, quantitative semantics, evaluative semantics, etc. (see Beard 1995; Bagasheva 2017). Compounding involves endocentric or exocentric morphological structures in which the two constituent items are in a subordinative, attributive, or coordinat grammatical relationship (see Scalise & Bisetto 2009).

The purpose of this issue is to provide a collection of cutting-edge research articles that can contribute to the progress and development of synchronic and diachronic studies on word-formation and morphological theory. To achieve this goal, a special emphasis is placed on the English language for two reasons.

First, English has been a key language for the development of the field of linguistic morphology. The collaborative efforts of morphologists have contributed to uncovering synchronic and diachronic facts about the grammar and lexicon of this language on the one hand (Marchand 1969; Kastovsky 1992, 2006; Bauer et al. 2013) and to laying foundation for the theoretical treatment of word-formation processes on the other. For the latter contribution, see Štekauer (2000), Štekauer & Lieber eds. (2005), Lieber & Štekauer eds. (2009, 2014), Olsen ed. (2010), Spencer (2013), Don (2014), Müller et al. eds. (2015: Ch. I), Santana & Valera eds. (2017), Aurding & Masini eds. (2019), Bauer (2019), ten Hacken (2019), and Nikolaeva & Spencer (2022), among others. We intend to follow and further develop these fruitful lines of research.

Second, English merits further exploration because this global language now plays the role of a major axis of linguistic comparison in contrastive studies (e.g., Alexiadou & Rathert eds. 2010; Renner et al. eds. 2012; Štekauer et al. 2015; Mukai 2018; Nishimaki 2018; Gaeta 2020) as well as the role of a dominant source language of the lexical and grammatical borrowing in language contact around the world (e.g., Bagasheva eds. 2018; Alexiadou & Lohndal eds., a special issue in Languages). Additionally, attention should be paid to the fact that English linguistics currently proceeds in tandem with the advent of quantitative research methods using computer-based big-scale corpora (e.g., Bauer et al. 2013; Hilpert 2013).

This Special issue is therefore deep and wide in its scope, welcoming contributions addressing:

(1) empirical questions about the synchrony and diachrony of English word-formation processes per se

(2) theoretically framed questions about word-formation using English as a primary data source, and/or

(3) comparative, variationist, or contact-based aspects of English word-formation

Tentative Completion Schedule

  • Abstract Submission Deadline: 15 June 2023
  • Notification of Abstract Acceptance: 15 July 2023
  • Full Manuscript Deadline: 15 December 2023

We request that, prior to submitting a manuscript, interested authors initially submit a proposed title and an abstract of 400–600 words summarizing their intended contribution. Please send it to the guest editors ([email protected]; [email protected]) or to the Languages editorial office ([email protected]). Abstracts will be reviewed by the guest editors for the purposes of ensuring proper fit within the scope of the special issue. Full manuscripts will undergo double-blind peer review.

References:

Alexiadou, Artemis and Monika Rathert (eds.) (2010) The Syntax of Nominalizations across Languages and Frameworks, De Gruyter, Berlin.

Alexiadou, Artemis and Terje Lohndal (eds.) Word-Formation and Language Contact: A Formal Perspective, special issue in Languages <https://www.mdpi.com/journal/languages/special_issues/word_formation>

Audring, Jenny and Francesca Masini (ed.) (2019) The Oxford Handbook of Morphological Theory, Oxford University Press, New York.

Bagasheva, Alexandra (2017) “Comparative semantic concepts in affixation,” Santana-Lario & Valera (eds.), 33-65.

Bagasheva, Alexandra, Jesús Fernández-Domínguez, and Vincent Renner (eds.) (2018) Structural Borrowing in Word-Formation, Special issue in SKASE Journal of Theoretical Linguistics 15 (2). <http://www.skase.sk/JTL37index.html>.

Bauer, Laurie (2019) Rethinking Morphology, Edinburgh University Press, Edinburgh.

Bauer, Laurie, Rochelle Lieber and Ingo Plag (2013) The Oxford Reference Guide to English Morphology, Oxford University Press, Oxford.

Beard, Robert (1995) Lexeme-Morpheme Base Morphology: A General Theory of Inflection and Word Formation, State University of New York Press, Albany, NY.

Don, Jan (2014) Morphological Theory and the Morphology of English, Edinburgh University Press, Edinburgh.

Gaeta, Livio (2020) “English as a bridge: An L3-approach to contrastive linguistics,” Contrastive Studies in Morphology and Syntax, ed. by Georgiafentis Michalis, Giannoula Giannoulopoulou, Maria Koliopoulou & Angeliki Tsokoglou, 26-44, Bloomsbury Academic, London.

ten Hacken, Pius (2019) Word Formation in Parallel Architecture: The Case for a Separate Component, Springer, Cham.

Hilpert, Martin (2013) Constructional Change in English: Developments in Allomorphy, Word Formation, and Syntax, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

Kastovsky, Dieter (1992) “Semantics and Vocabulary,” The Cambridge History of the English Language, Volume I: The Beginnings to 1066, ed. by Richard M. Hogg, 290-408, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

Kastovsky, Dieter (2006) “Vocabulary,” A History of the English Language, ed. by Richard M. Hogg and David Denison, 199-270, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

Lieber, Rochelle and Pavol Štekauer (eds.) (2009) The Oxford Handbook of Compounding, Oxford University Press, Oxford.

Lieber, Rochelle and Pavol Štekauer (eds.) (2014) The Oxford Handbook of Derivational Morphology, Oxford University Press, Oxford.

Marchand, Hans (1969) The Categories and Types of Present-day English Word-Formation: A Synchronic-Diachronic Approach, Second edition, C.H.Beck, Munich.

Mukai, Makiko (2018) A Comparative Study of Compound Words, Hituzi Syobo, Tokyo.

Müller, Peter O., Ingeborg Ohnheiser, Susan Olsen, and Franz Rainer (eds.) (2015) Word-Formation: An International Handbook of the Languages of Europe Volume 1, De Gruyter Mouton, Berlin.

Nishimaki, Kazuya (2018) A Study on Cross-Linguistic Variations in Realization Patterns: New Proposals Based on Competition Theory, Kaitakusha, Tokyo.

Nikolaeva, Irina and Andrew Spencer (2022) Mixed Categories: The Morphosyntax of Noun Modification, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

Olsen, Susan (ed.) (2010) New Impulses in Word-Formation, Buske, Hamburg.

Renner, Vincent, François Maniez, and Pierre J. L. Arnaud (eds.) (2012) Cross-Disciplinary Perspectives on Lexical Blending, De Gruyter Mouton, Berlin.

Santana-Lario, Juan and Salvador Valera (eds.) (2017) Competing Patterns in English Affixation, Peter Lang, Bern.

Scalise, Sergio and Antonietta Bisetto (2009) “The classification of compounds,” Lieber & Štekauer (eds.), 34-53.

Spencer, Andrew (2013) Lexical Relatedness: A Paradigm-based Model, Oxford University Press, Oxford.

Spencer, Andrew (2015) “Derivation,” Müller et al. (eds.), 301-321.

Štekauer, Pavol (2000) English Word Formation: A History of Research (1960-1995), Gunter Narr, Tübingen.

Štekauer, Pavol & Rochelle Lieber (2005) Handbook of Word-Formation, Springer, Dordrecht.

Štekauer, Pavol, Salvador Valera, and Lívia Körtvélyessy (2015) Word-Formation in the World’s Languages: A Typological Survey, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

Prof. Dr. Akiko Nagano
Dr. Ryohei Naya
Guest Editors

Manuscript Submission Information

Manuscripts should be submitted online at www.mdpi.com by registering and logging in to this website. Once you are registered, click here to go to the submission form. Manuscripts can be submitted until the deadline. All submissions that pass pre-check are peer-reviewed. Accepted papers will be published continuously in the journal (as soon as accepted) and will be listed together on the special issue website. Research articles, review articles as well as short communications are invited. For planned papers, a title and short abstract (about 100 words) can be sent to the Editorial Office for announcement on this website.

Submitted manuscripts should not have been published previously, nor be under consideration for publication elsewhere (except conference proceedings papers). All manuscripts are thoroughly refereed through a double-blind peer-review process. A guide for authors and other relevant information for submission of manuscripts is available on the Instructions for Authors page. Languages is an international peer-reviewed open access monthly journal published by MDPI.

Please visit the Instructions for Authors page before submitting a manuscript. The Article Processing Charge (APC) for publication in this open access journal is 1400 CHF (Swiss Francs). Submitted papers should be well formatted and use good English. Authors may use MDPI's English editing service prior to publication or during author revisions.

Keywords

  • English
  • morphology
  • word-formation
  • synchrony and diachrony
  • empirical and theoretical approaches
  • contrastive linguistics
  • corpus
  • language contact

Published Papers (6 papers)

Order results
Result details
Select all
Export citation of selected articles as:

Research

28 pages, 661 KiB  
Article
NN and VV Coordinate Compounds
by Akiko Nagano and Masaharu Shimada
Languages 2024, 9(4), 143; https://doi.org/10.3390/languages9040143 - 15 Apr 2024
Viewed by 524
Abstract
Broadly speaking, binominal and biverbal lexical constructions have been studied independently in different research traditions and frameworks. It is true that the two do not necessarily have overlapping areal distributions, but the fundamental question remains whether Indo-European NN compounds and Transeurasian VV compounds [...] Read more.
Broadly speaking, binominal and biverbal lexical constructions have been studied independently in different research traditions and frameworks. It is true that the two do not necessarily have overlapping areal distributions, but the fundamental question remains whether Indo-European NN compounds and Transeurasian VV compounds have nothing in common. Against this background, a cross-categorial comparison, not within but across languages, is made of coordinative binominal and biverbal constructions. NN and VV coordinate compounds from English and Japanese are examined in detail using the methodology of contrastive morphology and decompositional lexical semantics. It is shown that dvandva is possible not only in NN but also in VV coordinate compounds and, furthermore, that the dvandva–appositive distinction in NN coordinate compounds recurs in VV coordinate compounds. Cross-categorial formal analyses of the two types, i.e., dvandva and appositive, are presented in the Lexical Semantic Framework. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Word-Formation Processes in English)
Show Figures

Figure 1

15 pages, 1253 KiB  
Article
A Construction Morphology Approach to Neoclassical Compounds and the Function of the Linking Vowel
by Hiromi Hayashi
Languages 2024, 9(4), 129; https://doi.org/10.3390/languages9040129 - 01 Apr 2024
Viewed by 620
Abstract
The morphological status of combining-forms (CF) (bio-, -logy, etc.) used in neoclassical compounds (biology, bioscience, etc.) is a matter of debate in morphology. Some see them as having the same status as ordinary words, while others [...] Read more.
The morphological status of combining-forms (CF) (bio-, -logy, etc.) used in neoclassical compounds (biology, bioscience, etc.) is a matter of debate in morphology. Some see them as having the same status as ordinary words, while others see them as having a special status and forming an independent category. This paper focuses on neoclassical compounds having basic and extended patterns. The former, biology type, is composed solely of CFs, while the latter contains ordinary words, i.e., free morphemes (FM), and is further classified into two categories: bioscience type and hamburgerology type. This paper aims to explain the relationship among those subtypes of neoclassical compounds while capturing their extension processes within the framework of Construction Morphology (CxM). In particular, we outline a novel analysis of those subtypes of neoclassical compounds using “schemas” and “constructional idioms” following the literature regarding CxM. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Word-Formation Processes in English)
24 pages, 883 KiB  
Article
The History of -eer in English: Suffix Competition or Symbiosis?
by Zachary Dukic and Chris C. Palmer
Languages 2024, 9(3), 102; https://doi.org/10.3390/languages9030102 - 14 Mar 2024
Cited by 1 | Viewed by 1391
Abstract
Ecological models of competition have provided great explanatory power regarding synonymy in derivational morphology. Competition models of this type have certainly shown their utility, as they have demonstrated, among other things, the relevance of frequency measures, productivity, compositionality and analyzability when comparing the [...] Read more.
Ecological models of competition have provided great explanatory power regarding synonymy in derivational morphology. Competition models of this type have certainly shown their utility, as they have demonstrated, among other things, the relevance of frequency measures, productivity, compositionality and analyzability when comparing the development of morphological constructions. There has been less consideration of alternative models that could be used to describe the historical co-development of suffixes that produce words with sometimes similar forms or meanings but are not inevitably or solely in competition. The symbiotic model proposed in this article may help answer larger questions in linguistics, such as how best to analyze certain multilingual morphological phenomena, including the emergence of semantically similar forms within the same language. The present study demonstrates the importance of a diachronic approach in situations of near-synonymy, as an understanding of semantic similarity necessitates a review of the available historical record. In particular, our study focuses on the case of the suffix -eer (e.g., marketeer) in English, analyzing its origins, semantics, compositionality, and historical development, including its symbiotic relationship to the similar suffix -er (e.g., marketer). Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Word-Formation Processes in English)
Show Figures

Figure 1

22 pages, 770 KiB  
Article
An Upper Take on Doubler-Uppers
by Alexandra Bagasheva
Languages 2024, 9(3), 91; https://doi.org/10.3390/languages9030091 - 10 Mar 2024
Viewed by 803
Abstract
Against the background of comparatively insufficient, expressly dedicated studies on double particle verb person nominalisations, this paper offers a qualitative, cognitive-constructionist approach to the properties of doubler-upper nominalisations of particle verbs in English and a reappraisal of some of the available analyses thereof. [...] Read more.
Against the background of comparatively insufficient, expressly dedicated studies on double particle verb person nominalisations, this paper offers a qualitative, cognitive-constructionist approach to the properties of doubler-upper nominalisations of particle verbs in English and a reappraisal of some of the available analyses thereof. On the assumption of the validity of the flexicon stance on the organisation of words in the human mind, and on the basis of a preliminary semantic analysis of 300 types of doubler-upper nouns extracted from two corpora and Urban Dictionary, it is claimed that there are no identifiable constraints on the possibility of double-er marking and no particular properties of particle verbs as bases to preclude double -er marking. A hypothesis is formulated that, despite their deviance, doubler-uppers strike the optimal balance between complexity and unity and appear to be the most natural and morphophonologically best-fitting pattern for particle verb -er nominalisation (at least in spoken discourse and the media). Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Word-Formation Processes in English)
Show Figures

Figure 1

14 pages, 1291 KiB  
Article
Exploring Creativity and Extravagance: The Case of Double Suffixation in English
by Maria Koliopoulou and Jim Walker
Languages 2024, 9(3), 88; https://doi.org/10.3390/languages9030088 - 07 Mar 2024
Viewed by 946
Abstract
There has been a recent focus in studies of English morphology on the concept of extravagance as applied to word formation, and on the interplay between extravagance and creativity. This article examines this issue, taking as a test case the phenomenon of double [...] Read more.
There has been a recent focus in studies of English morphology on the concept of extravagance as applied to word formation, and on the interplay between extravagance and creativity. This article examines this issue, taking as a test case the phenomenon of double suffixation of phrasal verbs. While double-ER suffixation (fixer-upper, helper-outer) has attracted substantial interest in the literature, less has been said about other suffixes. This article provides data that demonstrate that double suffixation occurs with -ERY, -AGE, -EE and -ABLE suffixes. As such, double suffixation can be seen as a genuine word formation template, rather than a phenomenon restricted to a single suffix. Furthermore, examination of the data enables a reflection on the interactions between the concepts of productivity, creativity and extravagance. We propose to see these concepts not just as three overlapping notions, but rather as points on a creativity scale. To underscore the parallels between them, we propose to see them successively as F-creativity, E-creativity and X-creativity. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Word-Formation Processes in English)
Show Figures

Figure 1

11 pages, 2291 KiB  
Article
The Birth and Death of Affixes and Other Morphological Processes in English Derivation
by Laurie Bauer
Languages 2023, 8(4), 244; https://doi.org/10.3390/languages8040244 - 20 Oct 2023
Cited by 1 | Viewed by 1475
Abstract
Linguistic change in morphology is usually discussed mainly in relation to change in inflectional morphology. In this paper, the focus is shifted to derivational morphology, where the issues are not entirely the same. In particular, the origins (or birth) of affixes and the [...] Read more.
Linguistic change in morphology is usually discussed mainly in relation to change in inflectional morphology. In this paper, the focus is shifted to derivational morphology, where the issues are not entirely the same. In particular, the origins (or birth) of affixes and the loss (death) of affixes are central to the present discussion, with formal, semantic and pragmatic factors all having a role to play. The question is also raised as to whether it is, in principle, possible to tell that any affix is completely dead. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Word-Formation Processes in English)
Back to TopTop