Zeitschrift für Wortbildung / Journal of Word Formation (ZWJW)
Not a member yet
113 research outputs found
Sort by
Tagungsankündigung / Conference Announcement: "Symposium: Historical English Word Formation" (in memory of Prof. Dr. Hans Sauer) (February 17–18, 2023; Munich, Germany)
Get PDFDieser Beitrag ist ursprünglich im Peter-Lang-Verlag erschienen (https://www.ingentaconnect.com/contentone/plg/jwf/2022/00000006/00000002/art00006
Tagungsankündigung / Conference Announcement: "Word-Formation Theories IV / Typology and Universals in Word-Formation V" (June 23–26, 2022; Košice, Slovakia)
Get PDFDieser Beitrag ist ursprünglich im Peter-Lang-Verlag erschienen (https://www.ingentaconnect.com/contentone/plg/jwf/2022/00000006/00000001/art00005
Tagungsankündigung / Conference Announcement: "The Czech Approach to Word Formation in the Context of Slavic Linguistics" (September 21–23, 2022; Prague, Czech Republic)
Get PDFDieser Beitrag ist ursprünglich im Peter-Lang-Verlag erschienen (https://www.ingentaconnect.com/contentone/plg/jwf/2022/00000006/00000001/art00008
Tagungsankündigung / Conference Announcement: "Die Movierung. Formen – Funktionen – Bewertungen" (October 13–14, 2022; Passau, Germany)
Get PDFDieser Beitrag ist ursprünglich im Peter-Lang-Verlag erschienen (https://www.ingentaconnect.com/contentone/plg/jwf/2022/00000006/00000001/art00009
How typology shapes the constructional network: Denominal verb constructions in English, Dutch and German
Get PDFThis study proposes a cross-linguistic, corpus-based, and constructionist analysis of denominal verbs (DNVs) in English, Dutch and German. DNV constructions include various morphological construction types, such as conversion (e.g. English bottle > to bottle), prefixation (e.g. Dutch arm \u27arm\u27 > omarmen \u27to embrace\u27) and suffixation (e.g. German Katapult \u27catapult\u27 > katapultieren \u27to catapult\u27). We investigate the correlation between the distribution of DNV constructions and the typological properties of the languages, focusing on boundary permeability, inflectional complexity, syntactic configurationality and word-class assignment. The study shows that, although the three languages have the same repertoire of DNV constructions at their disposal, a Germanic cline can be detected in their preferences for non-overt vs overt marking of the word-class change. As such, the study highlights the impact of typological factors on the shape of language-specific constructional networks.
Dieser Beitrag ist ursprünglich im Peter-Lang-Verlag erschienen (https://www.ingentaconnect.com/contentone/plg/jwf/2022/00000006/00000001/art00001)This study proposes a cross-linguistic, corpus-based, and constructionist analysis of denominal verbs (DNVs) in English, Dutch and German. DNV constructions include various morphological construction types, such as conversion (e.g. English bottle > to bottle), prefixation (e.g. Dutch arm \u27arm\u27 > omarmen \u27to embrace\u27) and suffixation (e.g. German Katapult \u27catapult\u27 > katapultieren \u27to catapult\u27). We investigate the correlation between the distribution of DNV constructions and the typological properties of the languages, focusing on boundary permeability, inflectional complexity, syntactic configurationality and word-class assignment. The study shows that, although the three languages have the same repertoire of DNV constructions at their disposal, a Germanic cline can be detected in their preferences for non-overt vs overt marking of the word-class change. As such, the study highlights the impact of typological factors on the shape of language-specific constructional networks.
This contribution was originally published by Peter Lang Publishing (https://www.ingentaconnect.com/contentone/plg/jwf/2022/00000006/00000001/art00001
Consequences of the "los"-suffixation in German: corpus frequency, emotional-affective effects and a Construction Grammar perspective
No full textAusgehend vom privativen Derivationssuffix -los überprüfen wir Aussagen, die in der Wortbildungsliteratur zur Wortbildung zu finden sind anhand einer – in diesem Bereich – neuartigen empirischen Basis: einer Liste von affektiv-emotionalen Einschätzungen zu Basissubstantiven und assoziierten los-Ableitungen. Neben einer Frequenzanalyse anhand des Deutschen Referenzkorpus zeigen wir, dass im Allgemeinen die emotionale Polarität (sogenannte Valenz, positive vs. negative Emotionen) durch die Suffigierung mit -los umgekehrt wird. Bei stärker polarisierten Basissubstantiven ist diese Veränderung stärker. Die eingeschätzte Intensität der Emotion (sogenanntes Arousal) ist im Allgemeinen für die los-Ableitungen geringer als für die Basissubstantive. Um die Ergebnisse grammatiktheoretisch zu modellieren, nehmen wir abschließend eine konstruktionsgrammatische Perspektive ein und schlagen unter Verweis auf die Construction Morphology eine prototypische los-Konstruktion vor.
Dieser Beitrag ist ursprünglich im Peter-Lang-Verlag erschienen (https://www.ingentaconnect.com/contentone/plg/jwf/2022/00000006/00000002/art00003)Based on the privative derivational suffix -los, we test statements found in the literature on word formation using a – at least in this field – novel empirical basis: a list of affective-emotional ratings of base nouns and associated -los derivations. In addition to a frequency analysis based on the German Reference Corpus, we show that, in general, emotional polarity (so-called valence, positive vs. negative emotions) is reversed by suffixation with -los. This change is stronger for more polarized base nouns. The perceived intensity of emotion (so-called arousal) is generally lower for -los derivations than for base nouns. Finally, to capture the results theoretically, we propose a prototypical -los construction in the framework of Construction Morphology.
This contribution was originally published by Peter Lang Publishing (https://www.ingentaconnect.com/contentone/plg/jwf/2022/00000006/00000002/art00003
Tagungsankündigung / Conference Announcement: "Die Movierung. Formen – Funktionen – Bewertungen" (October 13–14, 2022; Passau, Germany)
Get PDFDieser Beitrag ist ursprünglich im Peter-Lang-Verlag erschienen (https://www.ingentaconnect.com/contentone/plg/jwf/2022/00000006/00000002/art00005
Are gender-fair nouns with a glottal stop ungrammatical? An analysis of the suffix [ʔɪn] as a phonological word
No full textSo-called gender-neutral nouns like Freund*innen, Redakteur_in or AutorInnen are suspected to not fit into the linguistic system. This paper argues that if these forms are pronounced with a glottal stop (e.g. Freund[?]innen), only small changes in the grammar are needed to integrate them. It is shown that the suffix [?in] in these derivatives can be analysed as a phonological word and therefore could be a new suffix that is added to the grammar. The phonological structure of its derivatives is shown to be just like the phonological structure of many native German derived nouns as many suffixes form a phonological word of their own. Also, the insertion of [?] in these derived wordforms can be explained by the status of the suffix as a phonological word. Hence, it is argued that speakers do not ignore the regularities of the grammar when they use gender-neutral nouns with [?in], but rather work with these rules to create new words with new meanings.
Dieser Beitrag ist ursprünglich im Peter-Lang-Verlag erschienen (https://www.ingentaconnect.com/contentone/plg/jwf/2022/00000006/00000001/art00002)So-called gender-neutral nouns like Freund*innen, Redakteur_in or AutorInnen are suspected to not fit into the linguistic system. This paper argues that if these forms are pronounced with a glottal stop (e.g. Freund[?]innen), only small changes in the grammar are needed to integrate them. It is shown that the suffix [?in] in these derivatives can be analysed as a phonological word and therefore could be a new suffix that is added to the grammar. The phonological structure of its derivatives is shown to be just like the phonological structure of many native German derived nouns as many suffixes form a phonological word of their own. Also, the insertion of [?] in these derived wordforms can be explained by the status of the suffix as a phonological word. Hence, it is argued that speakers do not ignore the regularities of the grammar when they use gender-neutral nouns with [?in], but rather work with these rules to create new words with new meanings.
This contribution was originally published by Peter Lang Publishing (https://www.ingentaconnect.com/contentone/plg/jwf/2022/00000006/00000001/art00002
"Ausgangssperre light" and "digitales Semester" – multi-word lexemes between lexicon and syntax
No full textIn recent years, the relation between lexicon and syntax as distinct domains has been questioned repeatedly. For all languages under discussion word-like examples that do not fit the category word have been found, so that the boundary between lexical unit and syntactic unit becomes leaky. Furthermore, relative borderlines vary from language to language. One of the problematic domains are phrasemes (phraseological units). This article concentrates on German multi-word lexemes which are very similar to compounds in respect to structure, semantics, and cognitive aspects (rechter Winkel \u27right angle\u27). Though mostly neglected or treated peripherally, this group is not exactly small, and patterns are productive – in contrast to the rest of phrasemes. We argue in favor of a transition between words and phrases and gradient distinctions between categories and a position of the problematic examples close to compounds and rather not among phrasemes. Finally, we look at how theoretical approaches deal with the problem.
Dieser Beitrag ist ursprünglich im Peter-Lang-Verlag erschienen (https://www.ingentaconnect.com/contentone/plg/jwf/2022/00000006/00000002/art00002)In recent years, the relation between lexicon and syntax as distinct domains has been questioned repeatedly. For all languages under discussion word-like examples that do not fit the category word have been found, so that the boundary between lexical unit and syntactic unit becomes leaky. Furthermore, relative borderlines vary from language to language. One of the problematic domains are phrasemes (phraseological units). This article concentrates on German multi-word lexemes which are very similar to compounds in respect to structure, semantics, and cognitive aspects (rechter Winkel \u27right angle\u27). Though mostly neglected or treated peripherally, this group is not exactly small, and patterns are productive – in contrast to the rest of phrasemes. We argue in favor of a transition between words and phrases and gradient distinctions between categories and a position of the problematic examples close to compounds and rather not among phrasemes. Finally, we look at how theoretical approaches deal with the problem.
This contribution was originally published by Peter Lang Publishing (https://www.ingentaconnect.com/contentone/plg/jwf/2022/00000006/00000002/art00002
Tagungsbericht / Conference Report: "Word formation and discourse structure" May 5–6, 2022; Leipzig, Germany
Get PDFDieser Beitrag ist ursprünglich im Peter-Lang-Verlag erschienen (https://www.ingentaconnect.com/contentone/plg/jwf/2022/00000006/00000002/art00004)This contribution was originally published by Peter Lang Publishing (https://www.ingentaconnect.com/contentone/plg/jwf/2022/00000006/00000002/art00004