Search

This article presents research into derivational properties of onomatopoeias in English and in Slovak. Onomatopoeias are defined narrowly in our approach, being restricted to the direct imitation of sounds of extra-linguistic reality. Our sample of 40 onomatopoeic words consists of two sound types: the sounds of animals and the sounds resulting from various falls, strokes, and bursts. A derivational network was produced for each such word. The evaluation parameters comprise derivational capacity, maximum derivational network, saturation value, number of derivation orders, most productive semantic categories by order of derivation, typical combinations of semantic categories, and derivational processes. An evaluation of the networks enabled us to answer the question of whether onomatopoeias are productive word-formation bases, to compare the two Sound Types, and to compare onomatopoeia-based networks to those based on non-iconic vocabulary. These results contribute to a better understanding of the word-formation systems in the compared languages and of the status of onomatopoeias with regard to non-iconic vocabulary.

The paper is aimed at the evaluation of whether, and if, to what degree, the psychological factor of creativity affects the interpretation of complex words. The research covered 324 students (17–18 years old) who attended (at the time of the experiment) various secondary schools in Košice, Slovakia. For the sake of evaluation, the respondents were divided into two cohorts (H-cohort and L-cohort) for each of the creativity variables, based on their high vs. low scores achieved in the Torrance Test of Creative Thinking (TTCT). These variables include Elaboration, Fluency, Flexibility and Originality and two subscores, the Creative Strengths and the Composite Score. The interpretation test includes potential compound words and converted words, i.e., potential words that admit numerous potential readings. The evaluation process is primarily based on Štekauer’s theory of meaning predictability (2005), and covers four variables: the predictability rate, the objectified predictability rate, hapax legomena, and the average number of readings per informant. The results suggest that while the H-cohort is more ‘creative’ in interpreting potential words the influence of the individual variables/subscores varies substantially.

There are many ways in which we, as speakers, are creative in how we form and interpret new words. Working across the interfaces of psychology, linguistics, psycholinguistics, and sociolinguistics, this book presents cutting-edge interdisciplinary research, showing how we manipulate the range of linguistic tools at our disposal to create an infinite range of words and meanings. It provides both a theoretical account of creativity in word-formation and word-interpretation, and an experimental framework with the corresponding results obtained from more than seven hundred participants. Data drawn from this vast range of speakers shows how creativity varies across gender and age, and demonstrates the complexity of relationships between the examined variables. Pioneering in its scope, this volume will pave the way for a brand new area of research in the formation and interpretation of complex words.

The main goal of the paper is to analyze and evaluate the nature and the role of word-formation systems in a sample of 73 European languages. The basis for the comparison is 100 word-formation features representing 12 word-formation processes. The data is used to examine (a) the structural richness of word-formation systems at the level of individual languages, language genera, families and the linguistic area of Europe, and (b) the parameter of Maximum Feature Occurrence that identifies those word-formation features that are present in all languages under consideration, i.e., in all languages of a genus, a family or a linguistic area of Europe. In the latter case, it identifies the so-called Euroversals. From the diachronic perspective, the paper evaluates the degree of diversification of languages belonging to the same language genus and language family.

In this final chapter, these preceding chapters and the 1,200 derivational networks on which they are based serve as an important and rich source of data and observations for drawing relevant cross-linguistic conclusions on the similarities and differences among the languages, as well as those language genera and/or languages that are sufficiently represented in our sample. In particular, we examine and compare the maximum derivational networks, saturation values, consistency of derivations at the language level and at the genera level, correlations between saturation values and the paradigmatic capacity, maximum and average numbers of orders of derivation, numbers of derivatives, correlations between semantic categories and orders of derivation, semantic categories with blocking effects, typical combinations of semantic categories, multiple occurrences of semantic categories, reversibility of semantic categories and the reasons for structurally poor derivational networks. The data are evaluated in terms of word-classes and orders of derivation, with a special focus on the role of genera and/or families, morphological types and the nature of the word-formation systems of individual languages. It is hypothesized that each of these five factors has an impact on (the possibility of) the generalization of our data., This article has been supported by the Spanish State Research Agency (SRA, Ministry of Economy and Enterprise) and European Regional Development Fund (ERDF) (Ref. FFI2017-89665-P).

The paper discusses the widely accepted assumption concerning the postulated universal ordering of derivational and inflectional affixes, first proposed by Greenberg as Universal #28. Various theoretical and empirical predictions underlying this assumption are briefly outlined. A sample of 73 European languages and a sample of 58 ‘world’ languages are used to show the range of violations of Greenberg’s universal in order to propose a tentative typology of these violations, and to examine the relatedness of postfixation to the genetic type of a language and its areal characteristics.

Evaluative morphology is the field of word formation which deals with diminutives, augmentatives, pejoratives, and amelioratives. Even if this issue has been widely studied in the last decades, what is still missing is a definition of what can be included in the domain of evaluative morphology. This article aims at filling this gap, sketching a clear definition of evaluative construction. Moreover, the article (anche the whole book it is part of) has the ambitions of mapping the state of the art in the field of evaluative morphology, of avoiding a biased approach to evaluative morphology that presents it merely on the basis of a single theoretical framework, of looking specifically at evaluative morphology phenomena from a cross-linguistic perspective.

Cross-linguistic research in the field of word-formation (WF) is more or less an untilled area. The main goal of this paper is to compare WF systems in Slavic languages, to analyse and evaluate their nature by comparing WF processes and types in Slavic languages as a whole as well as in individual languages of the Slavic genus. The basis for the comparison is the parameter of saturation value which indicates the structural richness of WF systems in terms of synchronically productive processes. This parameter facilitates cross-linguistic comparison at different levels of generalization, in particular: (i) intra-language level – comparison of the relative contribution of individual WF processes within one language; (ii) inter-language level (a) – comparison of the role of selected WF processes in various languages; inter-language level (b) – comparison of WF systems of various languages; (iii) supra-language level – comparison of WF in various language genera; language families and/or areas (Sprachbunds). The most typical features of compounding, affixation and conversion in Slavic languages are highlighted and illustrated with examples. The method applied to the analysis of word-formation processes is the semasiological method. The results, summarized in tables, make it possible to identify prototypical features of word-formation in Slavic languages.

Universals Archive (Universal #1926) indicates a universal tendency for sound symbolism in reference to the expression of diminutives and augmentatives. The research ( Štekauer et al. 2009 ) carried out on European languages has not proved the tendency at all. Therefore, our research was extended to cover three language families – Indo-European, Niger-Congo and Austronesian. A three-step analysis examining different aspects of phonetic symbolism was carried out on a core vocabulary of 35 lexical items. A research sample was selected out of 60 languages. The evaluative markers were analyzed according to both phonetic classification of vowels and consonants and Ultan's and Niewenhuis' conclusions on the dominance of palatal and post-alveolar consonants in diminutive markers. Finally, the data obtained in our sample languages was evaluated by means of a three-dimensional model illustrating the place of articulation of the individual segments.

The paper discusses two significant tendencies in the formation of new complex words, the tendency towards semantic transparency and the tendency towards economy of expression. A new conception of the notion of semantic transparency is proposed within the framework of an onomasiological theory. It draws on the concept of the onomasiological type which is based on the Morpheme-to-Seme-Assignment Principle. Furthermore, the concept of semantic transparency is interrelated to that of meaning predictability. It is demonstrated that various word-formation strategies reflecting a language user’s preference for semantic transparency or formal economy significantly affect the process of complex word meaning predictability. A cross-linguistic experiment includes three sets of tasks and covers four languages, Slovak, Bulgarian, Hungarian and English. The aim is to examine, analyze and discuss preferred naming strategies in terms of three research questions pertaining to the central topic of this paper.

Introduction by Laurie Bauer, Livia Kortvelyessy and Pavol Stekauer.- Semantics, Concepts, and Meta-Cognition: Attributing Properties and Meanings to Complex Concepts by Christina L. Gagne and Thomas L. Spalding.- The Interface of Semantic Interpretation and Inflectional Realization by Gregory Stump.- The Role of Second Order Schemas in the Construction of Complex Words by Geert Booij and Francesca Masini.- Sense Inheritance in English Word-Formation by Laurie Bauer and Salvador Valera.- Word-Formation Strategies: Semantic Transparency vs. Formal Economy by Livia Kortvelyessy, Pavol Stekauer and Julius Zimmermann.- Lexeme Formation in a Conscious Approach to The Lexicon by Livio Gaeta.- Remarks on Tautology in Word-Formation by Bogdan Szymanek.- Form and Meaning of Bahuvrihi Compounds: Evidence from Modern Greek and its Dialects by Marios Andreou and Angela Ralli.- Transpositions and the Limits of Word Formation by Pius Ten Hacken.- Structural Sensitivity as an Argument for Underspecification by Antonio Fabregas.- Stacking as a Reflex and Indicator of (Proto-)Typical Selectional Restrictions by Heike Baeskow.- Thoughts on Morphology and Cultural Evolution by Mark Aronoff.- Predicting the Semantics of English Nominalizations: A Frame-Based Analysis of -ment Suffixation by Lea Kawaletz and Ingo Plag.

Morphology is the study of the systematic relationship between the form and meaning of complex words. Therefore, it is a central task of morphology to provide a proper account of how the meanings of complex words are computed. One straightforward approach would be to assume that the computation of complex words is ruled by Fregean compositionality. The latter, however, has been claimed to be too narrow, since both syntactic and morphological constructions may exhibit specific holistic semantic properties that cannot be derived from their constituents or from general patterns of combination (Booij, Construction morphology. Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2010; Goldberg, Constructions. A construction grammar approach to argument structure. The University of Chicago Press, Chicago, 1995; Goldberg, Constructions at work. The nature of generalization in language. Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2006; Jackendoff, Constructions in the parallel architecture. In: Hoffmann T, Trousdale G (eds) The Oxford handbook of construction grammar. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 70–92, 2013). In the article we address a related problem, i.e. the fact that the meaning of a complex word may derive from that of another linguistic construct (be it a word or a phrase) that is not a building block of that complex word. We illustrate this point by providing data from different languages and we claim that this type of violation of Fregean compositionality can be accounted for by means of “second order schemas”, i.e. sets of two or more paradigmatically related constructional schemas.