Typological Changes in the Lexicon

Haselow, Alexander

doi:10.1515/9783110238211

Cited by 45 publications

(13 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…By contrast, it only occurs in two different adverb formations ( oferhlude ‘too loudly’; oferswiþe ‘very much, too much’), with four tokens in all. The prefix over - remains productive with adjectives into Modern English (Haselow 2011:10), but, according to the OED , the Old English forms did not survive into Middle English: “the great majority of existing over -combinations are of later formation, chiefly since c1550, although in some cases compounds that had already existed in Old English and become obsolete were re-formed” ( OED , s.v. over - prefix).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Verbal prefixes, the most widely studied ones, were replaced by adverbs and particles, probably because the latter provided more explicitness than the semantically ambiguous or empty prefixed forms. According to Haselow (2011:11), this replacement evidences “a shift of the encoding strategy of lexical information towards analyticity.” We could also apply this idea of lack of explicitness to degree prefixations of adjectives and adverbs vis-à-vis degree adverbs. In the case of intensification, the preference for analytic devices was already well established in the Old English period, much earlier than in other areas of grammar.…”

Section: Synthetic Intensification Devices In Englishmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Synthetic Intensification Devices in Old English

Méndez-Naya

2021

Journal of English Linguistics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Even though degree adverbs (e.g., swiþe) represent the most common intensification strategy in Old English, morphological devices are also very frequent, as expected in a predominantly synthetic language. This article studies synthetic intensification strategies in Old English with a focus on degree modification of adjectives and adverbs by means of spatial formatives (e.g., þurh- in þurhbitter ‘very bitter’ and for- in foreaþe ‘very easily’), paying attention both to the features of the intensifying formative and to the characteristics of the intensified base. Using the cognitive construct of the “Image Schema,” I show that the original spatial meaning of the formatives can help explain their combinatorial preferences in terms of boundedness. Of all the items studied, for- stands out as the most grammaticalized Old English spatial intensifying formative: it is semantically opaque, is very productive with both adjectives and adverbs, and has a very wide collocational profile.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Synthetic Intensification Devices In Englishmentioning

confidence: 99%

Synthetic Intensification Devices in Old English

Méndez-Naya

2021

Journal of English Linguistics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…While initial studies within this framework were mostly synchronic in nature (e.g., Goldberg 1995), Traugott and Trousdale (2013) recently introduced the constructionalization approach as a means to fruitfully account for diachronic language change within a constructional model of language. Importantly, this approach provides a unified—rather than a distinct—account of such diachronic processes as lexicalization (e.g., the development of -ræden , - hood and -dom ; Trips 2009; Haselow 2011) and grammaticalization (e.g., the development of binomial quantifiers such as a lot/bit/shred of ; Brems 2003, 2010, 2011; Traugott 2008) as well as of changes that arguably take up an in-between position on the lexical-grammatical gradient (e.g., composite predicates, the way -construction; Traugott & Trousdale 2013:34, 90-91).…”

Section: With-acs and The Constructionalization Frameworkmentioning

confidence: 99%

With or Without with

Pol

Hoffmann

2016

Journal of English Linguistics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper concerns the development of the augmentation system of the English absolute construction (AC). The AC is a schematic non-finite construction consisting of a (pro-) nominal head and a predicate and typically expressing adverbial meaning; the construction may be introduced by a preposition. It is argued on the basis of extensive corpus data that one of these introductory prepositions or augmentors, with, has grammaticalized from a preposition-like item indicating the specific relation of manner/accompanying circumstance to a semantically bleached “absolute marker.” In this context, the study of the with-AC in its entirety is argued to benefit from a grammatical constructionalization perspective (Trousdale 2012; Traugott & Trousdale 2013) in that the construction meets the three defining criteria of this process: increased generalization, increased syntactic productivity, and decreased compositionality. It is then shown how the shifts within the augmentation system affected the dynamics of the AC in its entirety as a set of augmentors indicating specific semantics was replaced by a single augmentor, with, whose presence or absence is related to ease of processing, as confirmed by a regression analysis. Finally, a possible route for further, future constructionalization is briefly touched upon.

show abstract

“…The work by Haselow (2011) follows in the same track, although he is more concerned with derivational morphology than Kastovsky, who focuses on inflectional phenomena such as ablaut in strong verbs or the simplification of inflection and explains their consequences to derivational morphology from the perspective of inflection. Haselow (2011) addresses the question of productivity in noun formation and finds some rising analytic tendencies that can be seen as a consequence of the change to invariable base morphology which, being unable to modify the root to produce a stem or a stem to produce a word, has to add affixes (thus analytic) to bases of derivation that enjoy the status of words. 2 Martín Arista (2008, 2011c, 2012b puts forward a framework of functional morphology that is inspired in the layering of functional grammars and, consequently, focuses on the points of contact between morphology and syntax.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Split and unified functions in the formation of old English nouns and adjectives

Escarza

2014

Rev. lingüíst. leng. apl.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This journal article draws a distinction between the split and unified functions obtaining in the formation of Old English nouns and adjectives. The starting point of the discussion is an enlarged inventory of lexical functions that draw on Meaning-Text Theory and structural-functional grammars and explain the change of meaning caused by prefixation and suffixation in Old English. The extended inventory of lexical functions consists of 33 functions and has been applied to ca. 7,500 affixed nouns and adjectives extracted from the lexical database Nerthus (www.nerthusproject.com). The distinction between split and unified functions, in such a way that the former can be realized by both prefixes and suffixes and the latter by either prefixation or suffixation, allows for some generalizations. Firstly, the analysis proves that there are more functions involved in prefixation than in suffixation. Secondly, prefixation is meaning oriented while suffixation is class oriented.

show abstract

Typological Changes in the Lexicon

Cited by 45 publications

References 0 publications

Synthetic Intensification Devices in Old English

Synthetic Intensification Devices in Old English

With or Without with

Split and unified functions in the formation of old English nouns and adjectives

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About