Word-formation in English by. Ingo Plag. Universität Siegen in press. Cambridge University that occur when the word for windows files are converted into PDF. Cambridge Core - Morphology - Word-Formation in English - by Ingo Plag. Word -formation in English by Ingo Plag UniversitatSiegen in press Cambridge that occur when the word for windows files are converted into PDF. base word: (16) load down -> download noun/verb Chapter 6: Compounding come.
|Language:||English, French, Dutch|
|ePub File Size:||30.59 MB|
|PDF File Size:||10.15 MB|
|Distribution:||Free* [*Registration needed]|
downloading and storing pictures and music, there's a growing concern that what today we .. Ingo Plag. Word-formation in English. How to investigate affixes: .. form singmoundupanvie.tk~plgreine/singmoundupanvie.tk). various types of word formation processes and the combinatorics of Plag, Ingo. singmoundupanvie.tk~engspra/Papers/Morphology/singmoundupanvie.tk Word-formation in English / Ingo Plag. p. cm. – (Cambridge textbooks in linguistics). Includes bibliographical references (p.) and indexes. ISBN 0 8.
The Language Organ. Linguistics as Cognitive Physiology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar Aronoff, Mark. Aitchison and D. Lewis eds. London and New York, — Booij, Ch. Lehmann, and J. Mugdan eds. Berlin — New York: Walter de Gruyter, — Google Scholar Bauer, Laurie. English Word-Formation. Watching English Change. London and New York: Longman. Morphological Productivity. Cambridge Studies in Linguistics, The Competing Demands of Popularization vs.
London and New York: Routledge, — Google Scholar Cannon, Garland. Historical Change and English Word-Formation. Recent Vocabulary. New York: Peter Lang. An Introduction to English Morphology. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.
The use of Optimality Theory in Word-Formation
Coleman and C. Kay eds. Google Scholar Dalton-Puffer, Christiane. Google Scholar Dent, Susie. The Language Report.
Oxford: Oxford University Press. Google Scholar Faiss, Klaus. Google Scholar Fischer, Andreas. Dalton-Puffer and N. Ritt eds. A Festschrift for Dieter Kastovsky. Berlin — New York: Mouton de Gruyter, 75— Google Scholar Giegerich, Heinz J. Lexical Strata in English. Morphological Causes, Phonological Effects. The Cambridge Grammar of the English Language.
Google Scholar Jones, Daniel. Fudge ed.
Google Scholar Kastovsky, Dieter. Kastovsky and A. Szwedek eds.
Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, — Google Scholar Kiparsky, Paul. Alsina, J.
Bresnan, and P. Sells eds. Google Scholar Lieber, Rochelle.
Deconstructing Morphology. Word Formation in Syntactic Theory. Google Scholar Ljung, Magnus. Berlin — New York: Mouton de Gruyter, — Google Scholar Marchand, Hans.
Google Scholar McArthur, Tom ed. The Oxford Companion to the English Language. Morning All Day. After a historical and explanatory chapter on the theory itself two investigations by Ingo Plag "The phonology of -ize derivatives" and Renate Raffelsiefen "Phonological constraints on English word formation" will be viewed to understand how the theory is applied.
Finally the -ity suffixation will be observed on the basis of the results of the preceding two chapters.
To attain a textual flow for this thesis the individual constraints used by Plag and Raffelsiefen are summed up and explained in chapter six. Numbers in brackets refer to the page in their article where they have defined the constraint, whilst definitions in angle brackets represent a summary of how the author uses and understands it only in cases when they did not formulate a definition.
The reader may observe that a few constraints are listed under different names; this is dues to the fact that there does not seem to be a uniform naming scheme yet - therefore the constraints are named according to the authors use.
For the fourth chapter the Internet was a main reference to build up a corpus of -ity derived words. Negation from The choice to use this online dictionary search was made because the website searches through several types of dictionaries in the web, starting from the general ones to the more specialized ones i.
Optimality Theory As Diana Archangeli points out the linguistic advances of the s and s were hoped to be improved by simpler representation in the years to come. However, "this simplification did not happen" Archangeli A leading theory at the time was generative phonology. At this stage the development from an input to its respective output was analysed via moving from the underlying representation via the morpheme concatenation and rules to the surface representation.
Each of these steps checked the development of the new output via inviolable constraints. Although the general analytical strategy has been on the right track; at the same time, there had been growing dissatisfaction in two ways.
First, despite continued innovation in theories of rules and of representations, certain types of data remained unexplained. Second, the prevailing belief about constraints - that they are inviolable - resulted in a continuing frustration with their role in grammar, for it is exceedingly difficult to find a constraint that is never violated.
OT is a rather young concept in linguistic dating back to a course by Alan Prince and Paul Smolensky at the University of California in They published their first detailed exposition of this theory in Optimality Theory - Constraint Interaction in Generative Grammar , triggering a great interest among linguists observing different topics. The former use of the theory in phonology became increasingly apparent "to topics in morphology, syntax, sociolinguistics, psycholinguistics and semantics" McCarthy 1.
Most theories of language apply rules to each respective input in order to obtain an output.
OT tackles the problem from the opposite angle namely by valuing possible output-candidates for a certain input. To do this is uses a range of violable constraints which rules out those candidates not corresponding to the specific constraints-hierarchy of the language in question. As McCarthy points out, OT is based on the idea of UG Universal Grammar which states that all languages are based on a universal kind of database, giving each and everyone of them a choice of many elements i.
Yearbook of Morphology 2002
In phonology the different possible phonemes. Each language has developed an order of precedence for these in which some of them take a minor role such as allophones in example of phonology or seem to be eliminated altogether.
This order of precedence makes each language unique. In terms of OT the representative constraint-hierarchy provides this order by preferring certain forms or elements above others. The idea of a general database can thus also be applied to the choice of constraints; i.
McCarthy gives the following graphical explanation of "Basic OT architecture" ibid: The former "generates output candidates for some input, and submits these to" the latter being "the set of constraints, which evaluates output candidates as to their harmonic values, and selects the optimal candidate" Krager The generator provides all possible candidates for the chosen input, as no rules or constraints prohibit "any conceivable output candidate" ibid: Practical issues and pitfalls of empirical research are explicitly addressed, thereby guiding and encouraging students to carry out their own small-scale empirical projects on English word formation.
The volume is rounded off by an answer key to the exercises, a reference section, and subject, affix, and author indices. An Introductory Survey.
Blocking; 3. Google Scholar Stein, Gabriele. The item-and-arrangement approach fits very naturally with agglutinative languages.