Lexical Derivation Research Articles

Morpheme order in a lexeme/morpheme-based morphology

This paper argues that contemporary morphological theories are undermined by the concept of the linguistic sign, the morpheme or the word, which forms the basis of these theories. Instead of the sign, grammars operate on two distinct and definitionally incompatible basic units, the lexeme, which is a linguistic sign, and the (grammatical) morpheme, which is not. Grammars must contain autonomous lexical and morphological components in order to have sufficient power to explain the independence of the sets of conditions on lexical, syntactic and morphological rules. Such a model can be properly constrained to prevent these components from operating in disregard of each other by (a) discrete definitions of ‘lexeme’ and ‘morpheme’; (b) one specific principle constraining features added to underlying lexical bases by abstract (phonology-free) lexical derivations, and (c) an independently motivated markedness theory. This model also maps morphology onto abstract lexical and syntactic derivates in the proper order, accounting for what Baker has recently called the ‘Mirror Principle’ plus the exceptions to it.

Lexical Phonology: lexical and postlexical derivations

Paul Kiparsky's paper (1982) ‘From Cyclic to Lexical Phonology’ is the most interesting recent development in the line of research originated by Kiparsky (1973) and Mascaró (1976). The major task in this research is the investigation of the ways in which rules apply to phonological structures. Kiparsky (1973) makes the very pointed observation that some phonological rules apply exclusively in derived environments. An environment is derived if either (i) or (ii) is true:(i) the structure which is relevant to the application of the rule arises at morpheme boundaries: the environment is thus derived morphologically;(ii) the structure which is relevant to the application of the rule arises in the course of phonological derivation due to the application of an earlier phonological rule: the environment is thus derived phonologically.

Linguistic Creativity and Word Formation

Word formation and derivation, although receiving considerable attention on the part of theoretical and descriptive linguists (Aronoff 1975; Dardano 1978; Bauer 1983; Scalise 1984, etc.), have not yet been granted the same treatment in psycholinguistics from the point of view of both firstand second-language acquisition (but see Vasvari Fainberg 1983). This is rather surprising since derivation seems to be the perfect testing ground for a number of theoretical claims, whether they are concerned with linguistic structure, acquisitional processes, language transfer, language competence or firstand second-language pedagogy. This paper deals exclusively with lexical derivation as it is manifested in the oral and written production of Anglophone learners of Italian. There are four main assumptions underlying my analysis: 1. Lexical derivation belongs to that linguistic competence which is based on creativity. In other words, speakers have the ability not only to generate sentences never before heard, but also to create and understand derived words never before heard. 2. It follows from (1) above that no essential differences exist between native and non-native speakers regarding their ability to utilize this competence. Differences are apparent, however, at the level of production, and they will be discussed below. 3. Foreign language learners, contrary to the hypothesis expressed in Vizmuller (1983:78), do indeed engage in the spontaneous activity of deriving new words from those they already know by means of suffixation and prefixation. 4. Straight language transfer plays a relatively minor role in this particular linguistic process. Lexical (or morphological) derivation is basically a process which is used to form new words from those already existing in the language by means of prefixes, suffixes (and, less frequently, infixes). For a number of reasons, in a setting where foreign language acquisition takes place,

Reciprocal verbs in Chicheŵa: a case for lexical derivation

I.o. The phenomenon of reciprocity has, within the framework of generative grammar, been dealt with either as an aspect of sentence coordination as in the following:1(a) the boy saw the girl(b) the girl saw the boy(c) the boy and the girl saw each other

Lexical derivation

Lexical derivation

On the extent and nature of irregularity in the lexicon

Several hitherto unconnected lines of research on the nature of lexemic derivation are integrated and focused on the problem of lexical irregularities. A system of derivational typology is developed, which departs from Kurylowicz's distinction of syntactical and lexical derivations, but continues in distinguishing among the latter, those which display sound-meaning symmetry from those which are asymmetrical. Among these latter, two varieties of sematically predictable vs. unpredictable classes are distinguished: naming and descriptive derivations, then those with and those without verb nexus. Within this framework, the newly emerging theory of redundancy-rule lexicalism is examined and found to be particularly ineffectual in treating asymmetrical derivations. Asymmetric derivations are shown to have a higher rate of productivity when derivation is seen as a process separate from affixation. Thus a theory incorporating derivation rules in the lexicon and affixation rules in the morphological component will capture more information about lexical regularities than any thus far proposed, without resorting to zero morphemes. Moreover, derivation rules may be used to store the very kinds of unpredictable information for which redundancy rules were designed. Finally, arguments are presented against qualitative differences between sentential and lexemic rules: if lexical rules are properly formulated, the distinction between derivation and redundancy becomes moot.

Lexical derivation and the form class of word associations.

Certain words are claimed by linguists to be derived out of simple lexical items. Such words should therefore be likely to elicit free associates from the grammatical category of their stems. Simple words, on the other hand, should follow the usual rule of eliciting associates from their own grammatical category. Previous research suggests that this is the case, but provides no criterion for distinguishing between simple and derived words. The present study explicitly specifies which words are to be regarded as derived, and finds no effect of the grammatical category of the stem upon the category of the associate.

Abstract nouns: Imagery versus lexical complexity

Four types of nouns were used as stimuli in a paired-associate learning experiment: low-imagery nouns that correspond to simple lexical entries (e.g., soul) and low-imagery nouns that may be derived from more basic lexical entries (e.g., explanation); high-imagery nouns that correspond to simple lexical entries (e.g., comrade), and high-imagery nouns that are derived lexically (e.g., speaker). Both low imagery and lexical complexity significantly retarded paired-associate learning. The frequency with which words are used was shown to be important, in that some high-frequency words that may be derived lexically were nevertheless treated like simple lexical entries. It was argued that lexical derivations are interesting psychological processes which must not be confused with abstractness.

Liwāṭ : « agir comme le peuple de Loth… », Formation et interprétation lexicales en arabe classique

According to early Arab lexicographers, the Koranic personage of Lūṭ (the biblical Loth) is at the origin of a lexical family of Classical Arabic. The object of the present article is to reflect, as a linguist, on the formation and interpretation of each member of this rather large family, whose core is liwāṭ. Besides two nouns directly derived from Lūṭ, it includes several verbs formed thereon as well as a number of nominal forms associated with such verbs. The scope of this case study lies in calling into question the formal and semantic relations currently regarded as the best established in the field of lexical derivation in Classical Arabic.Key-words: Classical Arabic ; lexicology ; derivation from proper nouns ; word-formation ; lexical semantics