1887
Volume 36, Issue 1
  • ISSN 0176-4225
  • E-ISSN: 1569-9714
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

Abstract

Abstract

This study investigates the effects of borrowing on the semantics of a derivational suffix. It presents a case study that compares the borrowed Middle English suffix - to Middle French -, paying special attention to their respective semantic structures and analysing them with semantic maps. The semantic structure of the borrowed suffix - is very similar to that of its origin - and there is no evidence for semantic reduction as a result of the borrowing process. This stability is linked to sociolinguistic aspects of the contact situation. Substantial semantic changes do occur in the recipient language after the suffix has become an established word formation process, however. On the basis of empirical data, this paper makes a contribution to the study of derivational semantics and contact linguistics by proposing a methodology for the analysis of the semantic structure of (borrowed) derivational morphology.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/dia.17016.sch
2019-04-05
2019-10-15
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Arndt-Lappe, Sabine & Ingo Plag
    (eds.) 2015 Special issue: Semantics of derivational morphology. Morphology25(4). 349–496. 10.1007/s11525‑015‑9272‑1
    https://doi.org/10.1007/s11525-015-9272-1 [Google Scholar]
  2. Baayen, Harald & Rochelle Lieber
    1991 Productivity and English derivation: A corpus-based study. Linguistics29(5). 801–843. 10.1515/ling.1991.29.5.801
    https://doi.org/10.1515/ling.1991.29.5.801 [Google Scholar]
  3. Bauer, Laurie, Rochelle Lieber & Ingo Plag
    2013The Oxford reference guide to English morphology. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198747062.001.0001
    https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198747062.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  4. Beard, Robert
    1995Lexeme-morpheme base morphology. Albany: State University of New York Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Coetsem, Frans van
    1995 Outlining a model of the transmission phenomenon in language contact. Leuvense Bijdragen84. 63–85.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Dictionnaire du Moyen Français
    Dictionnaire du Moyen Français. www.atilf.fr/dmf/. (6April 2016.)
  7. Douglas, David
    (ed.) 1975English historical documents, vol3. London: Eyre and Spottiswoode.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Fisiak, Jacek
    1970 The semantics of English loanwords in Polish. Studia Anglica Posnaniensia2. 41–49.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Gardani, Francesco
    . Forthcoming. Morphology and contact-induced language change. InAnthony Grant ed. The Oxford handbook of language contact. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Gardani, Francesco, Peter Arkadiev & Nino Amiridze
    2015 Borrowed morphology: An overview. InFrancesco Gardani, Peter Arkadiev & Nino Amiridze (eds.), Borrowed morphology, 1–23. Berlin: de Gruyter.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Gramley, Stephan
    2012The history of English: An introduction. London: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Haselow, Alexander
    2011Typological changes in the lexicon. Analytic tendencies in English noun formation. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110238211
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110238211 [Google Scholar]
  13. Hay, Jennifer
    2003Causes and consequences of word structure. New York: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  14. Ingham, Richard
    2018 Medieval bilingualism in England: On the rarity of vernacular code-switching. InPäivi Pahta, Janna Skaffari & Laura Wright (eds.), Multilingual practices in language history, 319–337. Berlin: de Gruyter.
    [Google Scholar]
  15. Kawaletz, Lea & Ingo Plag
    2015 Predicting the semantics of English nominalizations: A frame-based analysis of -ment suffixation. InLaurie Bauer, Lívia Körtvélyessy & Pavol Štekauer (eds.), Semantics of complex words, 289–319. Dordrecht: Springer.
    [Google Scholar]
  16. Lehrer, Adrienne
    2003 Polysemy in derivational affixes. InBrigitte Nerlich, Zazie Todd, Vimala Herman & David D. Clarke (eds.), Polysemy: Flexible patterns of meaning in mind and language, 217–232. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110895698.217
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110895698.217 [Google Scholar]
  17. Lieber, Rochelle
    2004Morphology and lexical semantics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511486296
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511486296 [Google Scholar]
  18. 2012 Semantics of derivational morphology. InClaudia Maienborn, Klaus von Heusinger & Paul Portner (eds.), Semantics, 2098–2119. Berlin: de Gruyter.
    [Google Scholar]
  19. Matras, Yaron
    2007 The borrowability of structural categories. InYaron Matras & Jeanette Sakel (eds.), Grammatical borrowing in cross-linguistic perspective, 31–73. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110199192.31
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110199192.31 [Google Scholar]
  20. 2009Language contact. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511809873
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511809873 [Google Scholar]
  21. Matras, Yaron & Jeanette Sakel
    2007Grammatical borrowing in cross-linguistic perspective. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110199192
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110199192 [Google Scholar]
  22. Oxford English Dictionary
    Oxford English Dictionary. Oxford: Oxford University Press. www.oed.com. (12Dec 2013.)
  23. Plag, Ingo
    1999Morphological productivity. Structural constraints in English derivation. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110802863
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110802863 [Google Scholar]
  24. 2006 Productivity. InBas Aarts & April McMahon (eds.), The handbook of English linguistics, 537–556. Malden: Blackwell. 10.1002/9780470753002.ch23
    https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470753002.ch23 [Google Scholar]
  25. Sakel, Jeanette
    2007 Types of loan: matter and pattern. InYaron Matras & Jeanette Sakel (eds.), Grammatical borrowing in cross-linguistic perspective, 15–29. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
    [Google Scholar]
  26. Schröder, Anne
    2011On the productivity of verbal prefixation in English: Synchronic and diachronic perspectives. Tübingen: Narr.
    [Google Scholar]
  27. Schulte, Marion
    2015aThe semantics of derivational morphology: A synchronic and diachronic investigation of the suffixes -age and -ery in English. Tübingen: Narr.
    [Google Scholar]
  28. 2015b Polysemy and synonymy in derivational affixation – A case study of the English suffixes -age and -ery. Morphology25(4). 371–390. 10.1007/s11525‑015‑9271‑2
    https://doi.org/10.1007/s11525-015-9271-2 [Google Scholar]
  29. 2016 Language contact in the history of English. InMarcus Hartner & Marion Schulte (eds.), Migration in context: literature, culture and language, 21–36. Bielefeld: Aisthesis.
    [Google Scholar]
  30. 2017 Investigating semantic change in derivational morphology. InElise Louviot & Catherine Delesse (eds.), Studies in language variation and change 2: Shifts and turns in the history of English, 41–60. Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars.
    [Google Scholar]
  31. Seifart, Frank
    2013AfBo: A world-wide survey of affix borrowing. Leipzig: Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology. afbo.info. (11July 2018.)
    [Google Scholar]
  32. 2015 Direct and indirect affix borrowing. Language91(3). 511–532. 10.1353/lan.2015.0044
    https://doi.org/10.1353/lan.2015.0044 [Google Scholar]
  33. Siemund, Peter
    2008 Language contact. Constraints and common paths of contact-induced language change. InPeter Siemund & Noemi Kintana (eds.), Language contact and contact languages, 3–11. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/hsm.7.01sie
    https://doi.org/10.1075/hsm.7.01sie [Google Scholar]
  34. Thomason, Sarah G. & Terrence Kaufman
    1988Language contact, creolization, and genetic linguistics. Berkeley: University of California Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  35. Trips, Carola
    2009Lexical semantics and diachronic morphology. The development of -hood, dom, and -ship in the history of English. Tübingen: Niemeyer. 10.1515/9783484971318
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783484971318 [Google Scholar]
  36. Uth, Melanie
    2011Französische Ereignisnominalisierungen. Abstrakte Bedeutung und regelhafte Wortbildung. Berlin: de Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110259742
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110259742 [Google Scholar]
  37. Vanhove, Martine, Thomas Stolz, Aina Urdze & Hitomi Otsuka
    (eds.) 2012Morphologies in contact. Berlin: Akademie Verlag. 10.1524/9783050057699
    https://doi.org/10.1524/9783050057699 [Google Scholar]
  38. Winford, Donald
    2003An introduction to contact linguistics. Malden: Blackwell.
    [Google Scholar]
  39. Wohlgemuth, Jan
    2009A typology of verbal borrowings. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110219340
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110219340 [Google Scholar]
  40. Wright, Laura
    2018 A multilingual approach to the history of Standard English. InPäivi Pahta, Janna Skaffari & Laura Wright (eds.), Multilingual practices in language history, 339–358. Berlin: de Gruyter.
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1075/dia.17016.sch
Loading
/content/journals/10.1075/dia.17016.sch
Loading

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