Advertisement

Morphology

, Volume 28, Issue 2, pp 219–227 | Cite as

Lexical deconstruction—review of Giegerich, H., Lexical structures: Compounding and the modules of grammar, Edinburgh Studies in Theoretical Linguistics, vol. 1

Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 2015
  • Melanie J. BellEmail author
Review Article
  • 164 Downloads

Overview

In this slim volume, Professor Giegerich sets out to test the theory of lexicalism (Chomsky 1970) with reference to English constructions consisting of a head noun preceded by an attributive modifier, e.g. beautiful picture, heavy smoker, dental decay, toy factory, Edinburgh student, party leader. Conventionally, some of these constructions are classed as noun phrases, while others are regarded as compound nouns. According to lexicalism, the two classes are generated by separate modules of the grammar: one module, ‘the lexicon’, is responsible for generating complex words, while another module, ‘the syntax’, is responsible for generating phrases. If the theory is correct, we might therefore expect that compound words, products of the lexicon, would be clearly distinguishable from phrases, products of the syntax. Giegerich asks to what extent this distinction is really discernible within the domain of English nominals. His conclusion, spelt out in the book’s preamble, is that...

References

  1. Alexiadou, A., Haegeman, L., & Stavrou, M. (2007). Noun phrase in the generative perspective. Studies in Generative Grammar (Vol. 71). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. Google Scholar
  2. Arndt-Lappe, S. (2011). Towards an exemplar-based model of stress in English noun-noun compounds. Journal of Linguistics, 47(3), 549–585. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Arndt-Lappe, S., & Bell, M. J. (2014). Analogy and the nature of linguistic generalisation: locality, generality, and variability in English compound stress. Manuscript, Heinrich-Heine-Universität. Google Scholar
  4. Bell, M. J. (2012). The English noun-noun construct: a morphological and syntactic object. In A. Ralli, G. Booij, S. Scalise, & A. Karasimos (Eds.), On-line proceedings of the eighth Mediterranean Morphology Meeting, MMM8, Cagliari, 14–17 September 2011 (pp. 59–91). Google Scholar
  5. Bell, M. J. (2013). The English noun noun construct: its prosody and structure. PhD thesis, University of Cambridge. Google Scholar
  6. Bell, M. J. (2015a). Inter-speaker variation in English compound prominence. Lingue E Linguaggio, 14(1), 61–78. Google Scholar
  7. Bell, M. J. (2015b). Basic relations and stereotype relations in the semantics of compound nouns. Journal of Cognitive Science, 16(3), 224–260. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bell, M. J., & Plag, I. (2012). Informativeness is a determinant of compound stress in English. Journal of Linguistics, 48(3), 485–520.  https://doi.org/10.1017/S0022226712000199. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Bell, M. J., & Plag, I. (2013). Informativity and analogy in English compound stress. Word Structure, 6(2), 129–155. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Bolinger, D. L. (1961). Contrastive accent and contrastive stress. Language, 37(1), 83–96. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Bolinger, D. L. (1972). Accent is predictable (if you’re a mind-reader). Language, 48(3), 633–644. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Chomsky, N. (1970). Remarks on nominalization. In R. A. Jacobs & P. S. Rosenbaum (Eds.), Readings in English transformational grammar (pp. 232–286). Waltham: Ginn and Company. Reprinted in: Studies on semantics in generative grammar (pp. 1–61). The Hague: Mouton. Google Scholar
  13. Fanselow, G. (1981). Zur Syntax und Semantik der Nominalkomposition. Linguistische Arbeiten (Vol. 107). Tübingen: Niemeyer. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Giegerich, H. J. (1999). Lexical strata in English: Morphological Causes, Phonological Effects. Cambridge Studies in Linguistics (Vol. 89). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Giegerich, H. J. (2009b). The English compound stress myth. Word Structure, 2(1), 1–17. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Payne, J., Pullum, G. K., Scholz, B. C., & Berlage, E. (2013). Anaphoric one and its implications. Language, 89(4), 794–829. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Plag, I., Kunter, G., & Lappe, S. (2007). Testing hypotheses about compound stress assignment in English: A corpus-based investigation. Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic Theory, 3(2), 199–232. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Trips, C. & Kornfilt, J. (Eds.) (2017). Further investigations into the nature of phrasal compounding. Morphological Investigations (Vol. 1). Berlin: Language Science Press. Google Scholar
  19. Wisniewski, E. J. (1994). Interpretations of novel noun-noun combinations (Technical report), Northwestern University, Department of Psychology. Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V., part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Anglia Ruskin UniversityCambridgeUK

Personalised recommendations