Volume 25, Issue 1
  • ISSN 0929-0907
  • E-ISSN: 1569-9943
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes



The complex characteristics of lexical blending have long troubled mainstream word formation research to the extent that it has typically been considered a peripheral issue in linguistics. In recent years this has begun to change, and there is currently a growing body of evidence uncovering the intriguing nature of this word formation process. In the present study, underlying principles and usage-based aspects of lexical blends were examined. Analyses of derivatives of three matrix words, , and , revealed the impact of three cognitive constraints on the use of lexical blends: schema transfer effects, neighborhood effects, and effects of the influence from morphological lexicalization. The first constraint fueled blend formation, while the other two displayed a hampering effect on the use of lexical blending. Furthermore, a study of the word class distribution in the datasets showed that there were significant differences in the grammar of lexical blending and compounding, respectively.


Article metrics loading...

Loading full text...

Full text loading...


  1. Algeo, John
    1977 Blends, a structural and systemic view. American Speech52(1). 47–64. 10.2307/454719
    https://doi.org/10.2307/454719 [Google Scholar]
  2. Alm-Arvius, Christina
    2012 Comprehensive semantics: Lexicon, grammar, text cognition & the world. Stockholm University: Unpublished manuscript.
  3. Barber, Charles , Joan C. Beal & Philip A. Shaw
    2009The English language: A historical introduction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511817601
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511817601 [Google Scholar]
  4. Bauer, Laurie
    1983English word-formation. Cambridge & New York: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9781139165846
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139165846 [Google Scholar]
  5. 2006 Compounds and minor word-formation types. In Bas Aarts & April M. S. MacMahon (eds.), The handbook of English Linguistics, 483–506. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing Ltd.. 10.1002/9780470753002.ch21
    https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470753002.ch21 [Google Scholar]
  6. Beliaeva, Natalia
    2014 A study of English blends: From structure to meaning and back again. Word Structure7(1). 29–54. 10.3366/word.2014.0055
    https://doi.org/10.3366/word.2014.0055 [Google Scholar]
  7. Bergström, Gustaf Adolf
    1906On blendings of synonymous or cognate expressions in English: A contribution to the study of contamination. Lund University (Press) / Lund: H. Ohlsson.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Cannon, Garland
    1986 Blends in English word formation. Linguistics24(4). 723–753. 10.1515/ling.1986.24.4.725
    https://doi.org/10.1515/ling.1986.24.4.725 [Google Scholar]
  9. Cook, Paul
    2012 Using social media to find English lexical blends. In Ruth Vatvedt Fjeld & Julie Matilde Torjusen (eds.), Proceedings of the 15th EURALEX International Congress, 846–854. Oslo: Department of Linguistics and Scandinavian Studies, University of Oslo.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Cook, Paul & Suzanne Stevenson
    2010 Automatically identifying the source words of lexical blends in English. Computational Linguistics36(1). 129–149. 10.1162/coli.2010.36.1.36104
    https://doi.org/10.1162/coli.2010.36.1.36104 [Google Scholar]
  11. Crystal, David
    2001Language and the internet. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9781139164771
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139164771 [Google Scholar]
  12. 2011Internet linguistics: A student guide. New York: Routledge. 10.4324/9780203830901
    https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203830901 [Google Scholar]
  13. Dressler, Wolfgang U.
    2000 Extragrammatical vs. marginal morphology. In Ursula Doleschal & Anna M. Thornton (eds.), Extragrammatical and marginal morphology, 1–10. Munich: Lincom Europa.
    [Google Scholar]
  14. Fandrych, Ingrid
    2008 Pagad, Chillax and Jozi: A multi-level approach to acronyms, blends, and clippings. Nawa: Journal of Language & Communication2(2). 71–88.
    [Google Scholar]
  15. Fauconnier, Gilles & Mark Turner
    2002The way we think: Conceptual blending and the mind’s hidden complexities. New York: Basic Books.
    [Google Scholar]
  16. Fradin, Bernard
    2015 Blending. In Peter O. Müller , Ingeborg Ohnheiser , Susan Olsen & Franz Rainer (eds.), Word-formation: An international handbook of the languages of Europe, 386–413. Berlin/Boston: de Gruyter Mouton.
    [Google Scholar]
  17. Gries, Stefan Th
    2004a Isn’t that fantabulous? How similarity motivates intentional morphological blends in English. In Michael Achard & Suzanne Kemmer (eds.), Language, culture, and mind, 415–428. Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications.
    [Google Scholar]
  18. 2004b Shouldn’t it be breakfunch? A quantitative analysis of blend structure in English. Linguistics42(3). 639–667. 10.1515/ling.2004.021
    https://doi.org/10.1515/ling.2004.021 [Google Scholar]
  19. 2006 Cognitive determinants of subtractive word formation: A corpus-based perspective. Cognitive Linguistics17(4). 535–558. 10.1515/COG.2006.017
    https://doi.org/10.1515/COG.2006.017 [Google Scholar]
  20. 2012 Quantitative corpus data on blend formation: Psycho- and cognitive-linguistic perspectives. In Vincent Renner , Pierre Arnaud , Volker Gast & François Maniez (eds.), Cross-disciplinary perspectives on lexical blending, 145–167. Berlin: de Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110289572.145
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110289572.145 [Google Scholar]
  21. Harley, Trevor A.
    2008The psychology of language: From data to theory. New York: Psychology Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  22. Hay, Jennifer
    2001 Lexical frequency in morphology: Is everything relative?Linguistics39. 1041–1070. 10.1515/ling.2001.041
    https://doi.org/10.1515/ling.2001.041 [Google Scholar]
  23. Johnson, Mark
    1987The body in the mind: The bodily basis of meaning, imagination, and reason. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. 10.7208/chicago/9780226177847.001.0001
    https://doi.org/10.7208/chicago/9780226177847.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  24. Juhasz, Barbara J. , Rebecca L. Johnson & Jennifer Brewer
    2016 An investigation into the processing of lexicalized English blend words: Evidence from lexical decisions and eye movements during reading. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research46(2): 1–14.
    [Google Scholar]
  25. Kelly, Michael
    1998 To “brunch” or to “brench”: Some aspects of blend structure. Linguistics36(3). 579–590. 10.1515/ling.1998.36.3.579
    https://doi.org/10.1515/ling.1998.36.3.579 [Google Scholar]
  26. Kemmer, Suzanne
    2003 Schemas and lexical blends. In Hubert Cuyckens , Thomas Berg & René Dirven (eds.), Amsterdam studies in the theory and history of linguistic science: Motivation in language. Studies in honor of Günter Radden, 69–97. Amsterdam, NL: John Benjamins.
    [Google Scholar]
  27. Langacker, Ronald W.
    2008Cognitive 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]
  28. Lehrer, Adrienne
    1996 Identifying and interpreting blends: An experimental approach. Cognitive Linguistics7(4). 359–390. 10.1515/cogl.1996.7.4.359
    https://doi.org/10.1515/cogl.1996.7.4.359 [Google Scholar]
  29. 1998 Scapes, holics, and thons: The semantics of English combining forms. American Speech73(1). 3–28. 10.2307/455924
    https://doi.org/10.2307/455924 [Google Scholar]
  30. 2007 Blendalicious. In Judith Munat (ed.), Lexical creativity, texts and contexts, 115–133. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/sfsl.58.16leh
    https://doi.org/10.1075/sfsl.58.16leh [Google Scholar]
  31. Libben, Gary , Martha Gibson , Yeo Bom Yoon & Dominiek Sandra
    2003 Compound fracture: The role of semantic transparency and morphological headedness. Brain and Language84(1). 50–64. 10.1016/S0093‑934X(02)00520‑5
    https://doi.org/10.1016/S0093-934X(02)00520-5 [Google Scholar]
  32. López Rúa, Paula
    2004 The categorial continuum of English blends. English Studies85. 63–76. 10.1076/enst.
    https://doi.org/10.1076/enst. [Google Scholar]
  33. Plag, Ingo
    2003Word-formation in English. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511841323
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511841323 [Google Scholar]
  34. Pound, Louise
    1914Blends: Their relation to English word formation. Heidelberg: Carl Winter’s Universitätsbuchhandlung.
    [Google Scholar]
  35. Quirk, Randolph , Jan Svartvik , Geoffrey Leech & Sidney Greenbaum
    1985A comprehensive grammar of the English language. London & New York: Longman.
    [Google Scholar]
  36. Renner, Vincent , François Maniez & Pierre Arnaud
    (eds.) 2012Cross-disciplinary perspectives on lexical blending. Berlin: de Gruyter Mouton. 10.1515/9783110289572
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110289572 [Google Scholar]
  37. Ronneberger-Sibold, Elke
    2006 Lexical blends: Functionally tuning the transparency of complex words. Folia Linguistica40(1–2). 155–181. 10.1515/flin.40.1part2.155
    https://doi.org/10.1515/flin.40.1part2.155 [Google Scholar]
  38. Sandra, Dominiek
    1990 On the representation and processing of compound words: Automatic access to constituent morphemes does not occur. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology A42(3). 529–567. 10.1080/14640749008401236
    https://doi.org/10.1080/14640749008401236 [Google Scholar]
  39. Saussure, Ferdinand de
    1966Course in general linguistics. New York: McGraw-Hill.
    [Google Scholar]
  40. Sereno, Joan A. & Allard Jongman
    1997 Processing of English inflectional morphology. Memory & Cognition25(4). 425–437. 10.3758/BF03201119
    https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03201119 [Google Scholar]
  41. Soudek, Lev
    1968 Further members of the “burger” family. American Speech43. 74–76. 10.2307/455381
    https://doi.org/10.2307/455381 [Google Scholar]
  42. 1971 The development and use of the morpheme burger in American English. Linguistics9. 61–89. 10.1515/ling.1971.9.68.61
    https://doi.org/10.1515/ling.1971.9.68.61 [Google Scholar]
  43. Spencer, Andrew
    1996Phonology. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing Ltd.
    [Google Scholar]
  44. Taylor, John R.
    2002Cognitive Grammar. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  45. Tomasello, Michael
    2003Constructing a language: A usage-based theory of language acquisition. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  46. Warren, Beatrice
    1990 The importance of combining forms. In Wolfgang Dressler , Hans C. Luschutzky , Oskar E. Pfeiffer & John R. Rennison (eds.), Contemporary morphology, 111–132. Berlin/Boston: de Gruyter Mouton. 10.1515/9783110874082.111
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110874082.111 [Google Scholar]
  47. Wentworth, Harold
    1933 Twenty-nine synonyms for ‘portmanteau word’. American Speech8(4). 78–79.
    [Google Scholar]
  48. Withington, Robert
    1932 More “portmanteau” coinages. American Speech7(3). 200–203. 10.2307/451651
    https://doi.org/10.2307/451651 [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