Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Back-formation, cross-formation, and ‘bracketing paradoxes’ in paradigmatic morphology

  • Chapter
Yearbook of Morphology 1993

Part of the book series: Yearbook of Morphology ((YOMO))

Abstract

On the whole, there are two ways to describe the standard types of word formation: syntagmatically and paradigmatically (cf. Van Marle 1985:9ff. et passim). Figures (1a) and (1b) show two syntagmatic or word-syntactic analyses of the actual English word undeceivable ‘incapable of being deceived’:

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 169.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 219.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 219.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  • Anttila, R. 1977. Analogy. The Hague: Mouton.

    Google Scholar 

  • Aronoff, M. 1976. Word Formation in Generative Grammar. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press. Barnhart, C.L./Steinmetz, S./Barnhart, R.K. 1973. A Dictionary of New English. London: Longman.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bauer, L. 1983. English Word Formation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Bauer, L. 1993. “Review of Becker 1990”. In G. E. Booij and J. van Marie (eds.), Yearbook of Morphology 1992. Dordrecht: Kluwer, 264–268.

    Google Scholar 

  • Becker, H. 1933. Das deutsche Neuwort. Eine Wortbildungslehre. Leipzig.

    Google Scholar 

  • Becker. T. 1990. Analogie und morphologische Theorie. München: Fink.

    Google Scholar 

  • Becker, T. 1992. “Compounding in German”. Rivista di Linguistica 4, 5–36.

    Google Scholar 

  • Becker, T. To appear. “Die Erklärung von Sprachwandel durch Sprachverwendung am Beispiel

    Google Scholar 

  • der deutschen Substantivflexion“. In K-M. Köpcke (ed.), Funktionale und typologische

    Google Scholar 

  • Untersuchungen zur deutschen Nominal-und Verbalmorphologie. Tübingen: Niemeyer. Becker, T. In preparation. “Morphologische Ersetzungsbildungen im Deutschen”.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bergenholtz, H./Mugdan, J. 1979. “Ist Liebe primär? Über Ableitung und Wortarten”. In P.

    Google Scholar 

  • Braun (ed.), Deutsche Gegenwartssprache. München: Fink, 339–354.

    Google Scholar 

  • Best, K.-H. 1973. Probleme der Analogieforschung. München: Hueber.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bloomfield, L. 1933. Language. New York. Revised British Edition. London 1935: Allen and Unwin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Booij, G.E. 1977. Dutch Morphology. A Study of Word Formation in Generative Grammar. Lisse: The Peter de Ridder Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brender, F. 1920. Die rückläufige Ableitung im Lateinischen. Diss. Basel. Lausanne: La Concorde.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brugmann, K. 1906. Vergleichende Laut- Stammbildungs-und Flexionslehre nebst Lehre vom Gebrauch der Wortformen der indogermanischen Sprachen. 2nd edition. Vol. 2: Lehre von den Wortformen und ihrem Gebrauch. Part I: Allgemeines, Zusammensetzung (Komposita). Nominalstämme. Strasbourg: Trübner.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bybee, J.L. 1985. Morphology. A Study of the Relation between Meaning and Form. Amsterdam: Benjamins.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bybee, J.L. 1988. “Morphology as lexical organization”. In Michael Hammond/Michael Noonan (eds.), Theoretical Morphology. Approaches in Modern Linguistics. San Diego: Academic Press, 119–140.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bybee, J.L./Slobin, D.I. 1982. “Rules and schemas in the development and use of the English past tense”. Language 58, 265–289.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chene, Brent de. 1975. “The treatment of analogy in a formal grammar”. In E. Grossmann et al. (eds.), Papers from the 11th Regional Meeting, Chicago Linguistic Society. Chicago, 152–164.

    Google Scholar 

  • Christman, H.H. 1979. “Zum Begriff der Analogie in der Sprachwissenschaft des 19. Jahrhunderts”. In Festschrift Kurt Baldinger, ed. by Manfred Höfler, Henri Vernay und Lothar Wolf. 2 vols. Tübingen: Niemeyer, 102–115.

    Google Scholar 

  • Christmann, H.H. 1980. “Zum Begriff der Analogie in der Sprachbetrachtung des 16.-19. Jh”. In G. Schmidt and M. Tietz (eds.). Stimmen der Romania. Festschrift für W. Theodor Elwert zum 70. Geburtstag. Wiesbaden: Heymann, 519–535.

    Google Scholar 

  • Erben, J. 1964. “Deutsche Wortbildung in synchronischer und diachronischer Sicht”. Wirkendes Wort 14, 83–93.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fleischer, W. 1969. Wortbildung der deutschen Gegenwartssprache. Leipzig. 4th edition 1975. Tübingen: Niemeyer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hale, K. 1965. “Some preliminary observations on Papago morphophonemics”. International Journal of American Linguistics 31, 295–305.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Halle, M. 1973. “Prolegomena to a theory of word formation”. Linguistic Inquiry 4, 3–16. Hock, H.H. 1986. Principles of Historical Linguistics. Berlin, New York: Mouton de Gruyter. Hoeksema, J. 1985. Categorical Morphology. New York: Garland.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hundsnurscher, F. 1968. Das System der Partikelverben mit aus in der Gegenwartssprache. Göppingen: Kümmerle. (= Göppinger Arbeiten zur Germanistik Nr. 2 ).

    Google Scholar 

  • Jackendoff, R. 1975. “Morphological and semantic regularities in the lexicon”. Language 51, 639671.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jelitte, H. 1977. “Sovetrussische Wortbildungstheorien zur Ableitung oder Motivation”. Wiener Slavistisches Jahrbuch 23, 157–179.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jespersen, O. 1905. Growth and Structure of the English Language. Oxford: Blackwell. 10th edition 1982. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jespersen, O. 1942. A Modern English Grammar on Historical Principles. Part VI: Morphology. Reprint London, 1954: Allen and Unwin.

    Google Scholar 

  • MacWhinney, B.J. 1978. The Acquisition of Morphophonology. (Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development 43.) Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marantz, A. 1982. “Re reduplication”. Linguistic Inquiry 13, 435–482.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marchand, H. 1963. “On content as a criterion of derivational relationship with backderived words”. Indogermanische Forschungen 68, 170–175.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reprinted in: Marchand, 1974. Studies in Syntax and Word-formation. Selected Articles by Hans Marchand. Ed. by D. Kastovsky. Munich. 218–223.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marchand, H. 1969. The Categories and Types of Present-day English Word-Formation. A Synchronic-diachronic Approach. Second, completely revised and enlarged edition. München: Beck.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marie, J. van. 1985. On the Paradigmatic Dimension of Morphological Creativity. Dordrecht: Foris.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marie, J. van. 1986. “The domain hypothesis: the study of rival morphological processes”. Linguistics 24, 601–627.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marie, J. van/Koefoed, G.A.T. 1981. “Over Humboldtiaanse taalveranderingen, morfologie en de creativiteit van taal”. Spektator 10, 111–147.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mayerthaler, W. 1981. Morphologische Natürlichkeit. Wiesbaden: Athenaion.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mel’Cuk, I.A. 1991. “Subtraction in natural language”. In D. Weiss and M. Grochowski (eds.), Words are Physicians for an Ailing Mind. Festschrift Andrzej Bogus-lawski. Munich: Sagner, 279–293.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moravcsik, E.A. 1978. “Reduplicative constructions”. In J.H. Greenberg (ed.), Universals of Human Language. Vol. 3: Word Structure. Stanford: Stanford University Press, 297–334.

    Google Scholar 

  • Motsch, W. 1977. “Ein Plädoyer für die Beschreibung von Wortbildungen auf der Grundlage des Lexikons”. In H.E. Brekle and D. Kastovsky (eds.), Perspektiven der Wortbildungsforschung. Bonn: Bouvier, 180–202.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nichtenhauser, D. 1920. Rückbildungen im Neuhochdeutschen. Diss. Freiburg.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nida, E.A. 1949. Morphology. The Descriptive Analysis of Words. 2nd edition. Ann Arbor: The University of Michigan Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • OED: The Oxford English Dictionary. 12 vols. with a supplement (= OED Suppl., SOED). Oxford: Oxford University Press. 1933.

    Google Scholar 

  • Paul, H. 1880. Prinzipien der Sprachgeschichte. 9th edition 1975. Tübingen: Niemeyer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Paul, H. 1989. Mittelhochdeutsche Grammatik. 23rd edition by Siegfried Grosse and Peter Wiehl. Tübingen: Niemeyer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Peters, A.M. 1983. The Units of Language Acquisition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Sassen, A. 1971. “Over het bestaan en ontstaan van Nederlandse woorden”. Ms. Groningen. First

    Google Scholar 

  • published in: G.E. Booij (ed.), Morfologie van het Nederlands. Amsterdam: Huis aan de drie grachten, 1979, 63–76.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sassen, A. 1981. “Morfologische produktiviteit in het licht van niet-additieve woordafleiding”. Forum der Letteren 22, 126–142.

    Google Scholar 

  • Saussure, F. de. 1916. Cours de linguistique générale. Ed. by C. Bally and A. Sechehaye with a contribution of Albert Riedlinger. Paris, Lausanne. Critical edition by Tullio de Mauro 1972. Paris: Payot.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scalise, S. 1984. Generative Morphology. Dordrecht: Foris.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schirmunski, V.M. 1962. Deutsche Mundartkunde. Vergleichende Laut-und Formenlehre der

    Google Scholar 

  • deutschen Mundarten. German edition by Wolfgang Fleischer. Berlin: Akademie-Verlag. Schultink, 1962. De morfologische valentie van het ongelede adjectief in modern Nederlands. Den Haag: Van Goor Zonen.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shimamura, R. 1983. “Backformation of English compound verbs”. In J.F. Richardson, M. Marks and A. Chukerman, (eds.), Papers from the Parasession on the Interplay of Phonology, Morphology and Syntax. Chicago: Chicago Linguistics Society, 271–282.

    Google Scholar 

  • Soed: A Supplement to the Oxford English Dictionary. Edited by R.W. Burchfield. 4 vols. Oxford: At The Clarendon Press. 1972–1986. (OED Suppl.)

    Google Scholar 

  • Spencer, A. 1988. “Bracketing paradoxes and the English lexicon”. Language 64, 663–682.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Spencer, A. 1991. Morphological Theory. An Introduction to Word Structure in Generative Grammar. Oxford: Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stepanowa, M.D. and Fleischer, W. 1985. Grundzüge der deutschen Wortbildung. Leipzig: VEB Bibliographisches Institut.

    Google Scholar 

  • Strauss, S.L. 1982. “On ‘relatedness paradoxes’ and related paradoxes’. Linguistic Inquiry 13, 694–700.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stump, G.T. 1991. “A paradigm-based theory of morphosemantic mismatches”. Language 67, 675–725.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Uhlenbeck, E.M. 1953. “The study of word classes in Javanese”. Lingua 3, 322–354.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vennemann, T. 1972. “Rule inversion”. Lingua 29, 209–242.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vögeding, J. 1981. Das Halbsuffix -frei. Zur Theorie der Wortbildung. Tübingen: Narr. Williams, E. 1981. “On the notions ‘lexically related’ and ’head of a word”’. Linguistic Inquiry 12, 245–274.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wissmann, W. 1938. Die ältesten Postverbalia im Germanischen. Habilitation thesis. Berlin.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Institut für Deutsche Philologie, Schellingstr. 3, 80799, München, Germany

    Thomas Becker

Authors
  1. Thomas Becker
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. General Linguistics, Institute of generative Linguistics, Free University, Amsterdam, Holland

    Geert Booij

  2. P. J. Meertens Institute of the Royal Academy of Sciences, The Netherlands

    Jaap Van Marle

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 1993 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Becker, T. (1993). Back-formation, cross-formation, and ‘bracketing paradoxes’ in paradigmatic morphology. In: Booij, G., Van Marle, J. (eds) Yearbook of Morphology 1993. Yearbook of Morphology. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-3712-8_1

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-3712-8_1

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht

  • Print ISBN: 978-90-481-4328-3

  • Online ISBN: 978-94-017-3712-8

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation