Volume 9, Issue 2
  • ISSN 2213-8722
  • E-ISSN: 2213-8730
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes



The current paper offers an analysis of a set of 27 entrenched endocentric, exocentric, and copulative (water)-noun nominal compounds in Persian with both right- and left-headed compounds, based on the network model of conceptual blending theory. Given that an emergent meaning is involved in endocentric and copulative compounds, the same as in exocentric compounds, the paper argues that all types of compounds can be insightfully defined as conceptual blends. However, the conceptual blending network model fails to show the distinct role of head and modifier in the overall meaning of compounds, on the one hand, and the qualifying difference in the extent of emergent meaning among various types of compound words, on the other hand. Our study also lends support to a correspondence between the continuum of integration networks and the continuum of figurativity in compounds.


Article metrics loading...

Loading full text...

Full text loading...


  1. Adams, V.
    (1973) An introduction to modern English word formation. London: Longman.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Anvari, H.
    (2003) farhang-e bozorg-e Sokhan [Sokhan Comprehensive Dictionary]. Tehran: Sokhan.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Barcelona, A.
    (2008) The interaction of metonymy and metaphor in meaning and form of bahuvrihi compounds. Annual Review of Cognitive Linguistics, 6(1), 208–281. 10.1075/arcl.6.10bar
    https://doi.org/10.1075/arcl.6.10bar [Google Scholar]
  4. Benczes, R.
    (2005) Creative noun-noun compounds. Annual Review of Cognitive Linguistics, 3(1), 250–268. 10.1075/arcl.3.13ben
    https://doi.org/10.1075/arcl.3.13ben [Google Scholar]
  5. (2006) Creative compounding in English: The semantics of metaphorical and metonymical noun-noun combinations. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. 10.1075/hcp.19
    https://doi.org/10.1075/hcp.19 [Google Scholar]
  6. Bloomfield, L.
    (1933) Language. Chicago: Chicago University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Booij, G.
    (2005) The grammar of words. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. (2009) Compounding and construction morphology. InR. Lieber & P. Štekauer (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of compounding (pp. 201–216). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. (2010) Construction morphology. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Bundgaard, P. F., Ostergaard, S., & Stjernfelt, F.
    (2006) Waterproof fire stations? Conceptual schemata and cognitive operations involved in compound constructions. Semiotica, 1611, 363–393. 10.1515/SEM.2006.071
    https://doi.org/10.1515/SEM.2006.071 [Google Scholar]
  11. Coulson, S.
    (2001) Semantic leaps: frame-shifting and conceptual blending in meaning construction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511551352
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511551352 [Google Scholar]
  12. Coulson, S., & Oakley, T.
    (2000) Blending basics. Cognitive Linguistics, 11(3–4), 175–196. 10.1515/cogl.2001.014
    https://doi.org/10.1515/cogl.2001.014 [Google Scholar]
  13. Estaji, A., & Ghanun, M.
    (2010) barresi-e naqš-e este’areh dar sakhte-važe zaban-e Farsi [The role of metaphor in Persian word-formation]. Maǰmu’e Maghɑlɑte Panǰomin Hamɑyeš-e Zabɑn va Adabijɑt-e Fɑrsi. University of Sabzevar. 668–684.
    [Google Scholar]
  14. Evans, V., & Green, M.
    (2006) Cognitive linguistics: An introduction. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  15. Fauconnier, G.
    (1994) Mental spaces: aspects of meaning construction in natural language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511624582
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511624582 [Google Scholar]
  16. Fauconnier, G., & Turner, M.
    (2002) The way we think: Conceptual blending and the mind’s hidden complexities. New York: Basic Books.
    [Google Scholar]
  17. (2003) Conceptual blending: form and meaning. Recherches en Communication, 191, 57–86. 10.14428/rec.v19i19.48413
    https://doi.org/10.14428/rec.v19i19.48413 [Google Scholar]
  18. Geeraerts, D.
    (2002) The interaction of metaphor and metonymy in composite expressions. InR. Dirven & R. Pörings (Eds.), Metaphor and metonymy in comparison and contrast (pp. 435–465). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110219197.435
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110219197.435 [Google Scholar]
  19. Handl, S., & Schmid, H. J.
    (2011) Introduction. InS. Handl & H. J. Schmid (Eds.), Windows to the mind: metaphor, metonymy and conceptual blending (pp. 1–20). Berlin/NewYork: Mouton de Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110238198.1
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110238198.1 [Google Scholar]
  20. Hatcher, A. G.
    (1960) An introduction to the analysis of English noun compounds. Word, 16(3), 356–373. 10.1080/00437956.1960.11659738
    https://doi.org/10.1080/00437956.1960.11659738 [Google Scholar]
  21. Hopple, P. M.
    (2011) The structure of nominalization in Burmese. SIL International.
    [Google Scholar]
  22. Jespersen, O.
    (1954) A modern English grammar on historical principles. vol.VI1: Morphology. London: Bradford and Dickens.
    [Google Scholar]
  23. Kalbassi, I.
    (1997) sakht-e ešteqaqi-ye važe dar zaban-e Farsi emrooz [The derivational structure of word in modern Persian]. Tehran: Pažuhešgahe Olume Ensani va Motaleate Farhangi.
    [Google Scholar]
  24. Karimi-Doustan, Gh., & Vahid, A.
    (2013) tahlil-e ma’naei-ye kalamat-e morakkab dar zaban-e Farsi [A Semantic analysis of noun-noun compounds in Persian]. Paĵuhešhaye Zabanšenasi, 5(8), 65–82.
    [Google Scholar]
  25. Khabbaz, M.
    (2007) Ĵaygah-e haste dar kalamat-e morakkab-e qeyre-fe? li-e Farsi [The place of head in Persian non-verbal compounds]. Dastour, 31, 53–66.
    [Google Scholar]
  26. Langacker, R. W.
    (1987) Foundations of cognitive grammar I: Theoretical prerequisites. Stanford CA: Stanford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  27. (1999) Grammar and conceptualization. Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110800524
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110800524 [Google Scholar]
  28. (2008) Cognitive grammar: A basic introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195331967.001.0001
    https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195331967.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  29. Lees, R. B.
    (1968) The grammar of English nominalizations. Bloomington: Indiana University.
    [Google Scholar]
  30. Leong, W. X.
    (2015) The meaning construction of Chinese compounds: A cognitive semantic perspective. Master’s thesis, Malaysia: University of Malaya.
    [Google Scholar]
  31. Levi, J. N.
    (1978) The syntax and semantics of complex nominals. New York NY: Academic Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  32. Libben, G.
    (2006) Why study compound processing? An overview of the issues. InG. Libben & G. Jarema (Eds.), The representation and processing of compound words (pp. 1–22). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  33. Libben, G., Gibson, M., Bom Yoon, Y., & Sandra, D.
    (2003) Compound fracture: The role of semantic transparency and morphological headedness. Brain and Language, 84(1), 50–64. 10.1016/S0093‑934X(02)00520‑5
    https://doi.org/10.1016/S0093-934X(02)00520-5 [Google Scholar]
  34. Lieber, R.
    (1980) On the organization of the lexicon. Doctoral dissertation, Massachusetts: Institute of Technology.
  35. Marchand, H.
    (1960) The categories and types of present-day English word-formation: a synchronic diachronic approach. Wiesbaden: Otto Harrassowitz.
    [Google Scholar]
  36. Mierzwińska-Hajnos, A.
    (2015) More than blends and compounds: conceptual integration theory behind plant-related linguistic expressions in Polish and English. Lublin Studies in Modern Languages and Literature, 39(2), 65–89. 10.17951/lsmll.2015.39.2.65
    https://doi.org/10.17951/lsmll.2015.39.2.65 [Google Scholar]
  37. Nesset, T., & Sokolova, S.
    (2019) Compounds and culture: Conceptual blending in Norwegian and Russian. Review of Cognitive Linguistics, 17(1), 257–274. 10.1075/rcl.00034.nes
    https://doi.org/10.1075/rcl.00034.nes [Google Scholar]
  38. Okoye, A. N.
    (2016) Blending in Etulo compound words. Mgbakoigba, Journal of African Studies, 5(2), 32–47.
    [Google Scholar]
  39. Onysko, A.
    (2010) Casting the conceptual spotlight: hybrid compounding in German as an example of head-frame internal specifier selection. InA. Onysko & S. Michel (Eds.), Cognitive perspectives on word formation (pp. 243–300). Berlin/New York: de Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110223606.243
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110223606.243 [Google Scholar]
  40. (2014) Figurative processes in meaning interpretation: A case study of novel English compounds. Yearbook of the German Cognitive Linguistics Association, 2(1), 69–88. 10.1515/gcla‑2014‑0006
    https://doi.org/10.1515/gcla-2014-0006 [Google Scholar]
  41. (2016) Enhanced creativity in bilinguals? Evidence from meaning interpretations of novel compounds. International Journal of Bilingualism, 20(3), 315–334. 10.1177/1367006914566081
    https://doi.org/10.1177/1367006914566081 [Google Scholar]
  42. Paul, L.
    (2002) The constituent order of nominal compounds in Zazaki and other Iranian languages. Language Typology and Universals, 55(1), 64–79. 10.1524/stuf.2002.55.1.64
    https://doi.org/10.1524/stuf.2002.55.1.64 [Google Scholar]
  43. Ryder, M. E.
    (1994) Ordered chaos: The interpretation of English noun–noun compounds. Berkeley/Los Angeles: University of California Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  44. Sabzevari, M.
    (2013) Šaffɑfiat va tiregi-e ma’nɑi-e asɑmi-e morakkab-e zabɑn-e Fɑrsi az didgɑh-e šenɑxti [The semantic transparency and opacity in Persian noun compound nouns with a cognitive approach]. ǰostɑr-hɑ-je zabɑni, 4(3), 55–73.
    [Google Scholar]
  45. Samei, H.
    (2016) Važe-sazi dar zaban-e Farsi: yek engareh-ye nazari [Word-formation in Persian: A theoretical approach]. Tehran: Bahar.
    [Google Scholar]
  46. Schmid, H. J.
    (2011) Conceptual blending, relevance and novel N+N-compounds. InS. Handl & H. J. Schmid (Eds.), Windows to the mind: metaphor, metonymy and conceptual blending (pp. 219–246). Berlin/NewYork: Mouton de Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110238198.219
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110238198.219 [Google Scholar]
  47. Shaghaghi, V.
    (2007) Mabani-ye sarf [An introduction to morphology]. Tehran: Samt.
    [Google Scholar]
  48. Spencer-Oatey, H.
    (2007) Theories of identity and the analysis of face. Journal of pragmatics, 39(4), 639–656. 10.1016/j.pragma.2006.12.004
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2006.12.004 [Google Scholar]
  49. Tabatabaei, A.
    (2003) Esm va sefat-e morakkab dar zaban-e Farsi [Compound nouns and adjectives in Persian]. Tehran: Markaze Nashre Daneshgahi.
    [Google Scholar]
  50. (2014) Tarkib dar zaban-e Farsi [Compounding in Persian]. Tehran: Farhangestane Zaban va Adabe Farsi.
    [Google Scholar]
  51. Tarasova, E.
    (2013) Some new insights into the semantics of English N+N compounds. Doctoral dissertation, Wellington: Victoria University.
  52. Torabian, A.
    (2013) Barresi-e este’ɑre dar esm-hɑ-je morakkab-e esm-esm-e zabɑn-e Fɑrsi dar čɑrčub-e zabɑnšenɑsi-e šenɑxti [Metaphor in Persian noun-noun nominal compounds in cognitive linguistics]. Master’s thesis, Shiraz: University of Shiraz.
    [Google Scholar]
  53. Tuggy, D.
    (2005) Cognitive approach to word-formation. InP. Štekauer & R. Lieber (Eds.), Handbook of word formation (pp. 233–66). Netherlands: Springer. 10.1007/1‑4020‑3596‑9_10
    https://doi.org/10.1007/1-4020-3596-9_10 [Google Scholar]
  54. Turner, M., & Fauconnier, G.
    (1995) Conceptual integration and formal expression. Metaphor and Symbolic Activity, 10(3), 183–203. 10.1207/s15327868ms1003_3
    https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327868ms1003_3 [Google Scholar]
  55. Zibin, A., & Altakhaineh, A. R. M. S.
    (2018) An analysis of Arabic metaphorical and/or metonymical compounds: A cognitive linguistic approach. Metaphor and the Social World, 8(1), 100–133. 10.1075/msw.16023.zib
    https://doi.org/10.1075/msw.16023.zib [Google Scholar]

Data & Media loading...

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was successful
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error