{-ity} 앞에서 {-ous} 탈락에 관한 소고
Some notes on {-ous} deletion in {-ity} affixation
0
조회
0
다운로드
0
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
This paper deals with the different behavior of {-ous} before {-ity}. {-ous} is deleted in some examples as shown in continuous-continuity. But it remains undeleted in some other cases as in the curious-curiosity pair. The earliest attempt to deal with this deviant behavior is made by Aronoff (1976), who introduces the term “truncative morphology” to explain the truncation of {-ous} before {-ity}. His basic assumption is that {-ous} is truncated when followed by {-ity}. The presence of {-ous}, in his explanation, is due to some exceptional clauses attached to the truncation rule. This approach, however, fails to produce the general picture of {-ous} deletion. This paper goes to the actual data to examine the reality of {-ous} deletion. The search with WordNavagator produces 2,620 words that end in {-ous} and 2,183 words that end in {-ity}. The cross checking and review of the data shows that in 85 words, {-ous} is present before {-ity} and it is deleted in 109 words. A closer examination of these data reveals that there are constraints that allow the presence of {-ous} in certain environments. Aronoff is correct in that {-ous} is basically deleted before {-ity}, but it is also shown that {-ous} stays to satisfy higher constraints. With the proposed ranking, [Parse-σ ≫ PU(stress) ≫ NoEmbedded(-ous)], this paper presents a comprehensive analysis of the presence and the absence of {-ous}. The basic idea is that {-ous} is deleted before {-ity}. But when the deletion results in more unfooted syllables or in moving the stress away from its original position and the presence can resolve these problems, {-ous} stays to satisfy higher demand on parsing or on stress uniformity. It is also noticed that there are apparent exceptions to this analysis. Nevertheless, this paper takes them into account and presents the explanation to the apparent exceptions without abandoning the analysis.
Abstract
This paper deals with the different behavior of {-ous} before {-ity}. {-ous} is deleted in some examples as shown in continuous-continuity. But it remains undeleted in some other cases as in the curious-curiosity pair. The earliest attempt to deal with this deviant behavior is made by Aronoff (1976), who introduces the term “truncative morphology” to explain the truncation of {-ous} before {-ity}. His basic assumption is that {-ous} is truncated when followed by {-ity}. The presence of {-ous}, in his explanation, is due to some exceptional clauses attached to the truncation rule. This approach, however, fails to produce the general picture of {-ous} deletion. This paper goes to the actual data to examine the reality of {-ous} deletion. The search with WordNavagator produces 2,620 words that end in {-ous} and 2,183 words that end in {-ity}. The cross checking and review of the data shows that in 85 words, {-ous} is present before {-ity} and it is deleted in 109 words. A closer examination of these data reveals that there are constraints that allow the presence of {-ous} in certain environments. Aronoff is correct in that {-ous} is basically deleted before {-ity}, but it is also shown that {-ous} stays to satisfy higher constraints. With the proposed ranking, [Parse-σ ≫ PU(stress) ≫ NoEmbedded(-ous)], this paper presents a comprehensive analysis of the presence and the absence of {-ous}. The basic idea is that {-ous} is deleted before {-ity}. But when the deletion results in more unfooted syllables or in moving the stress away from its original position and the presence can resolve these problems, {-ous} stays to satisfy higher demand on parsing or on stress uniformity. It is also noticed that there are apparent exceptions to this analysis. Nevertheless, this paper takes them into account and presents the explanation to the apparent exceptions without abandoning the analysis.
참고문헌 (15)
- 이용성, "접사 운율하위범주화제약과 강세배정에 관한 연구", 언어과학, 10(2), pp.93~114 (2003), 한국언어과학회
- 이용성, "{-ity}와 {-ness}의 생산성 소고", 언어과학, 19(3), pp.87~107 (2012), 한국언어과학회[DOI]
- Aronoff, M, "Word Formation in Generative Grammar" (1976), MIT Press
- Aronoff, M., "What is Morphology" (2005), BlackwellPublishing
- Aronoff, M., "Restricting Suffix Combinations in German and English: Closing Suffixes and the Monosuffix Constraints", Natural Language and Linguistic Theory, 20, pp.451~490 (2002)
- Hay, J., "What Constrains Possible Suffix Combinations? On the Interaction of Grammatical and Processing Restrictions in Derivational Morphology", Natural Language and Linguistic Theory, 22, pp.565~596 (2004)
- Kurisu, K., "The Phonology of Morpheme Realization", 박사, pp.2001
- Extrametricality in English, In Optimal green ideas in Phonology, "Lee, Y.", Indiana University., 37~55, pp.Working Papers inLinguistics I (1999)
- Marchand, H., "The Categories and Types of Present-Day English Word-Formation: A Synchronic-Diachronic Approach" (1969), University of Alabama Press
- McCarthy, J., "A Thematic Guide to Optimality Theory" (2002), Cambridge University Press
- McCarthy, J., "Generalized Alignment, In Yearbook of Morphology", pp.79~153 (1993), Kluwer Academic Publishers
- Optimality Theory: Constraint Interaction in Generative Grammar, "Prince, A.", Rutgers University, ~, pp.Technical Report #2 of the Rutgers Cente (1993)
- Raffelsiefen, R, "Absolute Ill-formedness and Other Morphophonological Effects", Phonology, 21(1), pp.91~142 (2004)
- Raffelsiefen, R., "Paradigm Uniformity Effects versus Boundary Effect, In Paradigms in Phonological Theory", pp.211~262 (2005), Oxford University Press
- Siegel, D., "Topics in English Morphology", 박사, pp.1974