Demarcation of compounding and prefixation in Old English
2
조회
0
다운로드
1
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
This article investigates the morphological character of the eleven Old English morphemes (æfter- “after,” æt- “at,” fram- “from,” in- “in,” of- “of,” ofer- “over,” þurh- “through,” under- “under,” up- “up,” ut- “out,” and wiþ- “to, against”) that were used both as free words (adverbs or prepositions) and as the first elements of complex words. The morphemes as parts of complex words can differ in meaning from their independent counterparts even though they are identical in form (e.g., under “under” + standan “to stand” = understandan “to understand,” not “to stand under”). It is not an easy task to determine whether the morphemes used as parts of complex words are words or prefixes. To identify such affix-like elements, the previous literature introduced intermediate categories like “affixoid” and “semi-affix” (Fleisher 1969, Marchand 1969), and the concept of a “morphological cline” (Bauer 1983). In accordance with the three factors that have been proposed in the previous literature as the criteria for distinguishing compounds and affixes—type frequency, semantic change, and productivity—I attempted to evaluate and rank the Old English borderline morphemes in terms of the degree of grammaticalization. This paper shows that the Old English morphemes vary in terms of the degree of transition from a free word to a prefix. I argue that the concept of a morphological cline is more useful and adequate than the introduction of intermediate categories for the synchronic characterization of the Old English borderline morphemes.
Abstract
This article investigates the morphological character of the eleven Old English morphemes (æfter- “after,” æt- “at,” fram- “from,” in- “in,” of- “of,” ofer- “over,” þurh- “through,” under- “under,” up- “up,” ut- “out,” and wiþ- “to, against”) that were used both as free words (adverbs or prepositions) and as the first elements of complex words. The morphemes as parts of complex words can differ in meaning from their independent counterparts even though they are identical in form (e.g., under “under” + standan “to stand” = understandan “to understand,” not “to stand under”). It is not an easy task to determine whether the morphemes used as parts of complex words are words or prefixes. To identify such affix-like elements, the previous literature introduced intermediate categories like “affixoid” and “semi-affix” (Fleisher 1969, Marchand 1969), and the concept of a “morphological cline” (Bauer 1983). In accordance with the three factors that have been proposed in the previous literature as the criteria for distinguishing compounds and affixes—type frequency, semantic change, and productivity—I attempted to evaluate and rank the Old English borderline morphemes in terms of the degree of grammaticalization. This paper shows that the Old English morphemes vary in terms of the degree of transition from a free word to a prefix. I argue that the concept of a morphological cline is more useful and adequate than the introduction of intermediate categories for the synchronic characterization of the Old English borderline morphemes.
참고문헌 (31)
- Anderson, Steven, "A-morphous morphology" (1992), Cambridge University Press
- Baayen, Harald, "Corpus linguistics: An international handbook", pp.900~919 (2009), Mouton De Gruyter
- Bauer, Laurie, "English word formation" (1983), Cambridge University Press
- Bauer, Laurie, "Morphological productivity" (2001), Cambridge University Press
- Bauer, Laurie, "Morphology and its demarcation", pp.97~108 (2005), Benjamins
- Booij, Geert, "Yearbook of morphology 1993", pp.29~49 (1993), Kluwer
- Booij, Geert, "Morphology", pp.360~369 (2000), de Gruyter
- Booij, Geert, "Morphology and its demarcation", pp.109~131 (2005), Benjamins
- Booij, Geert, "Construction morphology" (2010), Oxford University Press
- Bybee, Joan, "Explaining language universals", pp.350~379 (1988), Blackwell
- On prefix like adverbs in Modern Greek, "Dimela, Eleonora", 72~94, pp.Patras Working Papers in Linguistics (2009)
- Fleischer, Wolfgang, "Wortbildung der deutschen Gegenwartssprache" (1969), Bibliographisches Institut
- Hay, Jennifer, "Causes and consequences of word structure" (2003), Routledge
- Heine, Bernd, "Approaches to grammaticalization volume 1", pp.149~187 (1991), John Benjamins
- Henzen, Walter, "Deutsche wortbildung" (1965), Niemeyer
- Hogg, Richard, "An introduction to Old English" (2002), Oxford University Press
- Kastovsky, Dieter, "The cambridge history of the English language volume 1: The beginnings to 1066", pp.290~409 (1992), Cambridge University Press
- 김유강, "Old English Prefixes: Some Observations on their Base-type, Frequency and Semantic Function", 영어학연구, 18(3), pp.87~123 (2012), 한국영어학학회
- Marchand, Hans, "Expansion, transposition and derivation", La Linguistique, 1, pp.13~26 (1967)
- "The categories and types of present-day English word-formation. München:Beck. Nerthus: Lexical database of Old English" (1969)[URL]
- Olsen, Susan, "Morphology", pp.897~915 (2000), de Gruyter
- Paul, Hermann, "Deutsche grammatik. Vol. V. Wortbildungslehre" (1920), Niemeyer
- Ralli, Angela, "The Benjamins handbook of compounding", pp.434~456 (2010), John Benjamins
- Scalise, Sergio, "Generative Morphology" (1984), Foris
- Schmidt, Günter Dieterich, "Deusche lehnwortbildung", pp.53~101 (1987), Narr
- Ten Hacken, Pius, "Morphology", pp.349~359 (2000), de Gruyter
- Traugott, Elizabeth Closs, "Perspectives on historical linguistics", pp.245~271 (1982), John Benjamins
- Traugott, Elizabeth Closs, "The handbook of historical linguistics", pp.624~647 (2003), Blackwell Publishing
- Trips, Carola, "Lexical semantics and diachronic morphology: The development of –hood, -dom and –ship in the History of English" (2009), Niemeyer
- Wilmanns, Wilhelm, "Deutsche grammatick. Abt.2" (1896)