Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-77c89778f8-rkxrd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-20T05:52:20.610Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Chapter 11 - Principles of Word Formation

from Part II - Morphology and Agreement Systems

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  31 March 2020

By
Geert Booij
Edited by
Michael T. Putnam  and
B. Richard Page
Michael T. Putnam
Affiliation:
Pennsylvania State University
B. Richard Page
Affiliation:
Pennsylvania State University
Get access

Summary

Word formation in Germanic languages mainly takes place by means of compounding and affixation. Compounds are usually right-headed, and there is often a linking element in N+N-compounds that derives historically from a case ending. In addition to endocentric compounds there are also copulative compounds. Compounding also takes place with roots of Greek and Latin origin that do not occur as words by themselves. Some compound constituents have developed into affixoids. Affixation is used to derive words of major categories: nouns, verbs, adjectives, and adverbs. Some of these affixes behave phonologically similar to compound constituents. Many nonnative affixes, identified on the basis of sets of borrowed nonnative complex words, are being used in word formation as well. Other mechanisms of word formation are affix substitution, conversion, reduplication, prosodic morphology, abbreviation, and blending. For the construction of numerals above 20, syntactic coordination may be used. The word formation patterns of Germanic languages have been strongly influenced by contact with Greek, Latin, and French. In addition, they have been influenced by contact with English. Individual languages have borrowed some of their morphology and complex words from another Germanic language, and Yiddish has been strongly influenced by various non-Germanic languages.

Keywords

affixationaffixoidsabbreviationblendingborrowingcompoundingconversionnumeralsprosodic morpholog,y quasi-incorporationreduplication
Type
Chapter
Information
The Cambridge Handbook of Germanic Linguistics , pp. 238 - 258
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2020

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Askedal, J. O. 2016. “Norwegian.” In Müller, P. O., Ohnheiser, I., Olsen, S., and Rainer, F. (eds.), Word Formation. An International Handbook of the Languages of Europe, Vol. 4. Berlin and New York: Mouton De Gruyter: 2525–2554.Google Scholar
Audring, J. and Booij, G. 2016. “Cooperation and coercion,” Linguistics 54: 617–637.Google Scholar
Bandle, O., Braunmüller, K., Jahr, E. H., Karker, A., Naumann, H. P., and Teleman, U. (eds.), 2002/2005. The Nordic Languages: An International Handbook of the History of the North Germanic Languages. Berlin: Mouton De Gruyter, Vol. 1 (2002), Vol. 2 (2005).Google Scholar
Bauer, L., Lieber, R., and Plag, I. 2013. The Oxford Reference Guide to English Morphology. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Booij, G. 1993. “Against split morphology.” In Booij, G. and van Marle, J. (eds.), Yearbook of Morphology 1993. Dordrecht: Kluwer: 27–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Booij, G. 2010. Construction Morphology. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Booij, G. 2015. “The nominalization of Dutch particle verbs: Schema unification and second order schemas,” Nederlandse Taalkunde 20: 285–314.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Booij, G. 2019. The Morphology of Dutch. 2nd edition. Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Booij, G. and Masini, F. 2015. “The role of second order schemas in word formation.” In Bauer, L., Körtvélyessy, L., and Štekauer, P. (eds.), Semantics of Complex Words. Dordrecht: Springer: 47–66.Google Scholar
Carstens, W. and Bosman, N. (eds.) 2014. Kontemporêre Afrikaanse taalkunde. Pretoria: Van Schaik.Google Scholar
Duden, 2009. Die Grammatik. Mannheim, Wien and Zürich: Dudenverlag.Google Scholar
Gaeta, L. and Schlücker, B. (eds.) 2012. Das Deutsche als kompositionsfreudige Sprache. Strukturelle Eigenschaften und systembezogene Aspekte. Berlin and New York: Mouton de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ghomeshi, J., Jackendoff, R., Rosen, N., and Russell, K. 2004. “Contrastive focus reduplication in English (the salad-salad paper),” Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 22: 307–357.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Götzsche, H. 2016. “Danish.” In Müller, P.O., Ohnheiser, I., Olse, S.n, and Rainer, F. (eds.), Word Formation: An International Handbook of the Languages of Europe, Vol. 4. Berlin and New York: Mouton de Gruyter: 2505–2524.Google Scholar
Harbert, W. 2007. The Germanic Languages. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Hentschel, E. (ed.) 2016. Wortbildung im Deutschen. Tübingen: Narr Francke Attempto Verlag.Google Scholar
Hoeksema, J. 2012. “Elative compounds in Dutch: Properties and developments.” In Oebel, G. (ed.), Intensivierungskonzepte bei Adjektiven und Adverben im Sprachenvergleich / Crosslinguistic comparison of intensified adjectives and adverbs. Hamburg: Verlag dr. Kovač: 97–142.Google Scholar
Hoekstra, J. 1998. Fryske wurdfoarming. Ljouwert: Fryske Akademy.Google Scholar
Hopper, P. and Traugott, E. 1993. Grammaticalization. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Hüning, M. and Booij, G. 2014. “From compounding to derivation. The emergence of derivational affixes through ‘constructionalization’,” Folia Linguistica 48: 579–604.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jacobs, N. G. 2005. Yiddish. A Linguistic Introduction. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Josefsson, G. 1997. On the Principles of Word Formation in Swedish. Lund: Lund University Press.Google Scholar
Lappe, S. 2007. English Prosodic Morphology. Dordrecht: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Los, B., Blom, C., Booij, G., Elenbaas, M., and van Kemenade, A. 2012. Morphosyntactic Change: A Comparative Study of Particles and Prefixes. Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Müller, P.O., Ohnheiser, I., Olsen, S., and Rainer, F. (eds.) 2016, Word Formation. An International Handbook of the Languages of Europe. Berlin and New York: Mouton De Gruyter.Google Scholar
Thráinsson, H., Petersen, H. P., Jacobsen, J., and Hansen, Z. S. 2004. Faroese. An Overview and Reference Grammar. Tórshavn: Føroya Fróðskaparfelag.Google Scholar
Williams, E. 1981. “On the notions ‘lexically related’ and ‘head of a word’,” Linguistic Inquiry 12: 245–275.Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected] is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×