Advertisement

Theoretical Background

  • Stela Manova
Chapter
Part of the Studies in Morphology book series (SUMO, volume 1)

Abstract

The theoretical background to this book merges principles and assumptions that have come to be known as ‘Natural Morphology’ (NM) (Section 2.1) and ‘Cognitive Linguistics’ (CL) (Section 2.2). Section 2.3 is devoted to the notion of prototype, which is seen as central to the understanding of the nature of morphological phenomena. Section 2.4 puts forward a set of morphological techniques corresponding to all possible cognitive operations that can be performed on a morphological form. If classified according to the mental effort required (or the degree of iconicity they exhibit), the morphological techniques constitute a cline that includes the following operations: (1) Addition X → X + Y, (2) Substitution X + Y → X + Z, (3) Modification X → X’, (4) Conversion X → X, and (5) Subtraction XY → X (or X → X – Y). In Section 2.5, the prototype model is discussed in regard to the classification of derivation and inflection.

Keywords

Language Type Prototype Theory Derivational Morphology Morphological Technique Cognitive Linguistic 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

References

  1. Adams, Valerie. 1973. An Introduction to Modern English Word-Formation. London: Longman.Google Scholar
  2. Anderson, Stephen R. 1988. Morphological Theory. In Linguistics: The Cambridge Survey, Vol. I: Linguistic Theory: Fondations, ed. Frederick J. Newmeyer, 146–191. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  3. Anderson, Stephen R. 1992. A-morphous Morphology. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  4. Andrejčin, Ljubomir. 1962. K morfologičeskoj xarakteristike vidovoj sistemy sovremennogo bolgarskogo jazyka. In Voprosy glagol’nogo vida, ed. Jurij Maslov, 231–237. Moskva: Izdatel’stvo inostrannoj literatury.Google Scholar
  5. Andrejčin, Ljubomir. 1978. Osnovna bălgarska gramatuka. Sofija: Nauka i izkustvo.Google Scholar
  6. Andrejčin, Ljubomir, Petja Asenova, Elena Georgieva, Kalina Ivanova, Ruselina Nicolova, Petăr Pašov, Xristo Părvev, Rusin Rusinov, Valentin Stankov, Stojan Stojanov, and Kristalina Čolakova. 1983. Gramatika na săvremennija bălgarski knižoven ezik. Tom II. Morfologija. Sofija: Izdatelstvo na BAN.Google Scholar
  7. Andrejčin, Ljubomir, L. Georgiev, St. Ilčev, N. Kostov, Iv. Lekov, St. Stojkov, and Cv. Todorov. 1999. Bălgarski tălkoven rečnik, IV izdanie, dopălneno i preraboteno ot D. Popov. Sofija: Nauka i izkustvo.Google Scholar
  8. Anić, Vladimir. 1991. Rječnik hrvatskoga jezika. Zagreb: Novi Liber.Google Scholar
  9. Anić, Vladimir, Dunja Brozović Rončević, Ivo Goldstein, Slavko Goldstein, Ljiljana Jojić, Ranko Matasovič, and Ivo Pranjković. 2002. Hrvatski enciklopedijski rječnik. Zagreb: Novi Liber.Google Scholar
  10. Aronoff, Mark. 1976. Word Formation in Generative Grammar. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  11. Aronoff, Mark. 1994. Morphology by Itself: Stems and Inflectional Classes. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  12. Aronoff, Mark and Nanna Fuhrhop 2002. Restricting suffix combinations in German and English: Closing suffixes and the monosuffix constraint. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 20, 451–490.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Bauer, Laurie. 1988. Introducing Linguistic Morphology. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.Google Scholar
  14. Assenova, Petja 2002. Balkansko ezikoznanie. V. Tǎrnovo: Faber.Google Scholar
  15. Babić, Stjepan. 1991 [1986]. Tvorba riječi u hrvatskom književnom jeziku: nacrt za gramatiku. 2 izd. Zagreb: Djela Hrvatske akademije znanosti i umjetnosti.Google Scholar
  16. Babić, Stjepan, Dalibor Brozović, Milan Moguš, Slavko Pavešić, Ivo Škarić, and Stjepko Težak. 1991. Povijesni pregled, glasovi i oblici hrvatskoga književnog jezika: nacrt za grammatiku. Zagreb: Djela Hrvatske akademije znanosti i umjetnosti.Google Scholar
  17. Barić, Eugenija, Mijo Lončarić, Dragica Malić, Slavko Pavešić, Mirko Peti, Vesna Zečević, and Marija Znika. 1997 [1995]. Hrvatska gramatika. II. promijeneno izdanje. Zagreb: Školska knjiga.Google Scholar
  18. Battistella, Edwin L. 1990. Markedness. The Evaluative Superstructure of Language. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.Google Scholar
  19. Battistella, Edwin L. 1996. The Logic of Markedness. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  20. Bauer, Laurie. 1983. English Word-formation. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  21. Bauer, Laurie. 1988. Introducing Linguistic Morphology. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.Google Scholar
  22. Bauer, Laurie. 2005. Conversion and the notion of lexical category. In Approaches to Conversion/Zero-Derivation, eds. Laurie Bauer and Salvador Valera, 19–30. Münster/New York: Waxmann.Google Scholar
  23. Baxturina, R.V. 1966a. Značenie i obrazovanie otimennyx glagolov s suffiksom -Ø- // -i-(t’). In Razvitie slovoobrazovanija sovremennogo russkogo jazyka, eds. Elena A. Zemskaja and D. N. Šmeleva, 74–112. Moskva: Nauka.Google Scholar
  24. Baxturina, R. V. 1966b. Morfonologičeskie uslovija obrazovanija otymennyx glagolov s suffiksom -Ø- // -i-(t’). In Razvitie slovoobrazovanija sovremennogo russkogo jazyka, eds. Elena A. Zemskaja and D. N. Šmeleva, 113–126. Moskva: Nauka.Google Scholar
  25. Beard, Robert. 1982. The plural as a lexical derivation. Glossa 16(2), 133–148.Google Scholar
  26. Beard, Robert. 1987. Morpheme order in a lexeme/morpheme-based morphology. Lingua 72, 1–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Becker, Thomas. 1990. Analogie und morphologische Theorie. München: Fink.Google Scholar
  28. Becker, Thomas. 1993. Back-formation, cross-formation, and ‘bracketing paradoxes’ in paradigmatic morphology. In Yearbook of Morphology 1993, eds. Geert Booij and Jaap van Marle, 1–25. Dordrecht: Kluwer.Google Scholar
  29. Bergenholtz, H. and J. Mugdan. 1979. Ist liebe primär? – Über Ableitung und Wortarten. In Deutsche Gegenwartssprache, ed. Peter Braun, 339–354. München: Fink.Google Scholar
  30. Berlin, Brent and Paul Kay. 1969. Basic Color Terms. Their Universality and Evolution. Berkeley, Los Angeles, CA: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  31. Blevins, J. P. 2005. Word-based declensions in Estonian. In Yearbook of Morphology 2005, eds. Geert Booij and Jaap van Marle, 1–25. Dordrecht: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Blevins, J. P. 2006. Word-based morphology. Journal of Linguistics 42, 531–573.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Booij, G. 2000. Inflection and derivation. In Morphology. An International Handbook on Inflection and Word-Formation. Vol. 1, eds. Geert Booij, Christian Lehmann, and Joachim Mugdan, 360–369. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.Google Scholar
  34. Bybee, Joan L. 1985. Morphology. A Study of the Relation between Meaning and Form. Amsterdam: Benjamins.Google Scholar
  35. Travaux linguistiques de Prague 2 (1966). Les problèmes du centre et de la périphérie du système de la langue. Prague: Académie Tchécoslovaque des sciences.Google Scholar
  36. Bybee, Joan L. and Carol L. Moder. 1983. Morphological classes as natural categories. Language 59, 251–270.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Comrie, Bernard. 2001. Different views of language universals. In Language Typology and Language Universals, Vol. 1, eds. Martin Haspelmath, Ekkehard König, Wulf Oesterreicher, and Wolfgang Raible, 25–39. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.Google Scholar
  38. Dressler, Wolfgang U. 1985a. Typological aspects of natural morphology. Wiener Linguistische Gazette 36, 3–26 [= Acta Linguistica Hungarica 35, 1987, 51–70].Google Scholar
  39. Dressler, Wolfgang U. 1987b. Word formation (WF) as part of natural morphology. In Leitmotifs in Natural Morphology, eds. Wolfgang U. Dressler, Willi Mayerthaler, Oswald Panagl, and Wolfgang U. Wurzel, 99–126. Amsterdam: Benjamins.Google Scholar
  40. Dressler, Wolfgang U. 1989. Prototypical differences between inflection and derivation. Zeitschrift für Phonetik, Sprachwissenschaft and Kommunikationsforschung 42, 3–10.Google Scholar
  41. Dressler, W. U. 1990a. Sketching submorphemes within natural morphology. In Naturalists at Krems, eds. J. Méndez Dosuna and C. Pensado, 33–41. Salamanca: Acta Salamanticensia (Estudios Filológicos 227).Google Scholar
  42. Dressler, Wolfgang U. 1990b. The cognitive perspective of “naturalist” linguistic models. Cognitive Linguistics 1–1, 75–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Dressler, Wolfgang U. 1997. On productivity and potentiality in inflectional morphology. CLASNET Working Papers 7, 2–22.Google Scholar
  44. Dressler, Wolfgang U. 1999. What is natural in natural morphology? Prague Linguistic Circle Papers, Vol. 3. Amsterdam: Benjamins, 135–144.Google Scholar
  45. Dressler, Wolfgang U. 2000a. Naturalness. In Morphology. An International Handbook on Inflection and Word-Formation, Vol. 1, eds. Geert Booij, Christian Lehmann, and Joachim Mugdan, 288–296. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.Google Scholar
  46. Dressler, Wolfgang U. and Ursula Doleschal. 1991. Gender agreement via derivational morphology. Acta Linguistica Hungarica 40(1–2), 115–137 (1990–1991).Google Scholar
  47. Dressler, Wolfgang U. and Maria Ladányi. 2000. Productivity in word formation (WF): A morphological approach. Acta Linguistica Hafniensia 47, 103–144.Google Scholar
  48. Givón, T. 1986. Prototypes: Between Plato and Wittgenstein. In Noun Classes and Categorization, ed. Colette Craig, 77–102. Amsterdam: Benjamins.Google Scholar
  49. Kay, Paul and C. K. McDaniel. 1978. The Linguistic Significance of the Meanings of the Basic Color Terms. Language 54/3, 610–647.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Langacker, Ronald W. 1991. Foundations of Cognitive Grammar. Vol. II. Descriptive Application. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
  51. Langacker, Ronald W. 1999. Grammar and Conceptualization. Berlin: de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Langacker, Roland W. 2002 [1991]. Concept, Image and Symbol. The Cognitive Basis of Grammar, 2nd edition. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
  53. Manova, S. 2005a. Derivation versus inflection in three inflecting languages. In Morphology and its Demarcations. Selected Papers from the 11th International Morphology Meeting, Vienna, February 2004, eds. Wolfgang U. Dressler, Dieter Kastovsky, Oskar Pfeiffer, and Franz Rainer, 233–252. Amsterdam: Benjamins.Google Scholar
  54. Manova, Stela. 2005c. Towards a theory of conversion in Slavic: Evidence from Bulgarian, Russian and Serbo-Croatian. Glossos 6. http://seelrc.org/glossos/issues/6/manova.pdf. Accessed 26.01.2010.
  55. Manova, Stela and Wolfgang U. Dressler. 2001. Gender and declensional class in Bulgarian. Wiener Linguistische Gazette 67–69, 45–81.Google Scholar
  56. Peirce, Charles S. 1965. Collected Papers. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  57. Plank, Frans. 1994. Inflection and derivation: In The Encyclopedia of Language and Linguistics, ed. Robert E. Asher, 1671–1678. Oxford: Pergamon Press.Google Scholar
  58. Rosch, Eleanor. 1975. Cognitive Representations of Semantic Categories. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General 104, 192–233.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Rosch, Eleanor. 1977. Human Categorization. In Studies in Cross-cultural Psychology, Vol. 1, ed. Neil Warren, 1–49. London: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  60. Rosch, Eleanor. 1978. Principles of categorization. In Cognition and Categorization, eds. Eleanor Rosch and Barbara B. Lloyd, 27–47. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  61. Stampe, D. 1973a. On chapter nine. In Issues in Phonological Theory, eds. Michael Kenstowicz and Charles Kisseberth, 44–52. The Hague: Mouton.Google Scholar
  62. Stampe, David. 1973b. A Dissertation on Natural Phonology. New York, NY: Garland.Google Scholar
  63. Stojanov, Stojan. 1993 [1964]. Gramatika na bălgarskija knižoven ezik. V izdanie. Sofija: Universitetsko izdatelstvo “Sv. Kl. Oxridski”.Google Scholar
  64. Stump, Gregory T. 2001. Inflectional Morphology. A Theory of Paradigm Structure. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Štekauer, Pavol and Rochelle Lieber. (eds.). 2005. Handbook of Word-Formation. Dordrecht: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Ungerer, Friedrich and Hans-Jörg Schmid. 1996. An Introduction to Cognitive Linguistics. London: Longman.Google Scholar
  67. Wurzel, Wolfgang U. 1984. Flexionsmorphologie und Natürlichkeit. Berlin: Akademie-Verlag. [English translation: 1989. Inflectional Morphology and Naturalness. Dordrecht: Kluwer]Google Scholar
  68. Wurzel, Wolfgang U. 1993. Morphology, natural. In The Encyclopedia of Language and Linguistics, ed. Robert E. Asher, 2590–2598. Oxford: Pergamon Press.Google Scholar
  69. Lappe, Sabine. 2007. Prosodic morphology. Dordrecht: Springer.Google Scholar
  70. Aronoff, Mark. 1994. Morphology by Itself: Stems and Inflectional Classes. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  71. Andrejčin, Ljubomir. 1962. K morfologičeskoj xarakteristike vidovoj sistemy sovremennogo bolgarskogo jazyka. In Voprosy glagol’nogo vida, ed. Jurij Maslov, 231–237. Moskva: Izdatel’stvo inostrannoj literatury.Google Scholar
  72. Wurzel, Wolfgang U. 1984. Flexionsmorphologie und Natürlichkeit. Berlin: Akademie-Verlag. [English translation: 1989. Inflectional Morphology and Naturalness. Dordrecht: Kluwer]Google Scholar
  73. Wittgenstein, Ludwig. 1953. Philosophical investigations. New York, NY: MacMillan.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Slavic StudiesUniversity of ViennaViennaAustria

Personalised recommendations