This paper is concerned with the classification and analysis of different types of German synthetic compounds headed by deverbal agent nouns in -er, such as Romanleser ‘novel-reader’ or Gedankenleser ‘mind-reader’, where the non-head is seen to saturate an argument of the head lexeme while adhering to the semantic interpretation found in corresponding VPs (e.g. the distinct senses of read in the previous examples). In contrast to several previous approaches, which attempt to explain the relationship between VPs and compounds using a unified mechanism of incorporation or derivation, we argue that different compounding patterns require different analyses and that the respective constructions are to some extent independent of each other. While some compounds are modelled after frequent, familiar VPs and take account of the usage profile of syntactic phrases, other productive sets of compounds extend independently lexicalized schemas with fixed compound heads. To support our analysis we undertake the largest empirical survey of these formations to date, using a broad coverage Web corpus. We suggest several categories of verb-object lexeme pairs to account for our data and formulate an analysis of the facts within the framework of Construction Morphology.
Aikhenvald, A. Y. (2007). Typological distinctions in word-formation. In T. Shopen (Ed.), Language typology and syntactic description. 2nd edition. Vol. 31 (pp. 1–65). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Alexiadou, A., & Schäfer, F. (2010). On the syntax of episodic vs. dispositional -er nominals. In A. Alexiadou & M. Rathert (Eds.), The syntax of nominalizations across languages and frameworks (Interface Explorations 23) (pp. 9–38). Berlin & New York: De Gruyter Mouton.
Baayen, R. H. (1993). On frequency, transparency and productivity. In G. E. Booij & J. van Marle (Eds.), Yearbook of morphology 1992 (pp. 181–208). Dordrecht: Kluwer.
Baayen, R. H. (2001). Word frequency distributions. (Text, Speech and Language Technologies 18). Dordrecht, Boston & London: Kluwer.
Baayen, R. H. (2009). Corpus linguistics in morphology: Morphological productivity. In A. Lüdeling & M. Kytö (Eds.), Corpus linguistics. An international handbook, Vol. 21 (pp. 899–919). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Baayen, R. H., Kuperman, V., & Bertram, R. (2010). Frequency effects in compound processing. In S. Scalise & I. Vogel (Eds.), Cross-disciplinary issues in compounding (Current Issues in Linguistic Theory 311) (pp. 257–270). Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Baker, M. (1988). Incorporation: A theory of grammatical function changing. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Baroni, M., Bernardini, S., Ferraresi, A., & Zanchetta, E. (2009). The WaCky Wide Web: A collection of very large linguistically processed web-crawled corpora. Language Resources and Evaluation, 43(3), 209–226.
Barz, I. (1995). Komposita im Großwörterbuch Deutsch als Fremdsprache. In I. Pohl & H. Ehrhardt (Eds.), Wort und Wortschatz. Beiträge zur Lexikographie (pp. 13–24). Tübingen: Niemeyer.
Bauer, L. (2001). Morphological productivity (Cambridge Studies in Linguistics 95). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Booij, G. E. (1988). The relation between inheritance and argument structure: Deverbal -er-nouns in Dutch. In M. Everaert, A. Evers, R. Huybregts, & M. Trommelen (Eds.), Morphology and modularity. In honour of Henk Schultink (pp. 57–74). Dordrecht: Foris Publications.
Booij, G. E. (2010). Construction Morphology. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Booij, G. E. (2015). The nominalization of Dutch particle verbs: Schema unification and second order schemas. Nederlandse Taalkunde, 201, 285–314.
Botha, R. P. (1984). Morphological mechanisms: Lexicalist analyses of synthetic compounding. Oxford: Pergamon Press.
Bybee, J. L. (2010). Language, usage and cognition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Bybee, J. L. (2013). Usage-based theory and exemplar representations of constructions. In Thomas Hoffmann & Graeme Trousdale (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of Construction Grammar (pp. 49–69). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Christ, O. (1994). A modular and flexible architecture for an integrated corpus query system. Proceedings of Complex, 941, 23–32. Budapest.
de Jong, N. H., Feldmand, L. B., Schreuder, R., Pastizzo, M., & Baayen, R. H. (2002). The processing and representation of Dutch and English compounds: Peripheral morphological and central orthographic effects. Brain and Language, 81(1–3), 555–567.
Downing, P. A. (1977). On the creation and use of English compound nouns. Language, 53(4), 810–842.
Erk, K. (2012). Vector space models of word meaning and phrase meaning: A survey. Language and Linguistics Compass, 6(10), 635–653.
Evert, S., & Lüdeling, A. (2001). Measuring morphological productivity: Is automatic preprocessing sufficient? In P. Rayson, A. Wilson, T. McEnery, A. Hardie, & S. Khoja (Eds.), Proceedings of Corpus Linguistics 2001 (pp. 167–175). Lancaster.
Gaeta, L. (2015). Restrictions in word formation. In P. O. Müller, I. Ohnheiser, S. Olsen, & F. Rainer (Eds.), Word-formation. An international handbook of the languages of Europe, Vol. 21 (pp. 858–874). Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter.
Gaeta, L., & Ricca, D. (2006). Productivity in Italian word formation: A variable-corpus approach. Linguistics, 44(1), 57–89.
Gaeta, L., & Ricca, D. (2009). Composita solvantur: Compounds as lexical units or morphological objects?Italian Journal of Linguistics / Rivista di Linguistica, 21(1), 35–70.
Gaeta, L., & Ricca, D. (2015). Productivity. In P. O. Müller, I. Ohnheiser, S. Olsen, & F. Rainer (Eds.), Word-formation. An international handbook of the languages of Europe, Vol. 21 (pp. 841–858). Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter.
Goldberg, A. E. (2006). Constructions at work: The nature of generalization in language. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Goldberg, A. E. (2013). Constructionist approaches to language. In Th. Hoffmann & Gr. Trousdale (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of Construction Grammar (pp. 15–31). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Heringer, H. J. (1984). Wortbildung: Sinn aus dem Chaos. Deutsche Sprache, 121, 1–13.
Kawahara, D., & Kurohashi, S. (2005). PP-attachment disambiguation boosted by a gigantic volume of unambiguous examples. In R. Dale, K. -F. Wong, J. Su, & O. Y. Kwong (Eds.), Proceedings of the 2nd International Joint Conference on Natural Language Processing (IJCNLP-05) (pp. 188–198). Berlin & Heidelberg: Springer.
Kohvakka, H., & Lenk, H. (2007). ‘Streiter für Gerechtigkeit’ und ‘Teilnehmer am Meinungsstreit’? Zur Valenz von Nomina agentis im Deutschen und Finnischen. In H. Lenk, & M. Walter (Eds.), Wahlverwandtschaften. Valenzen – Verben – Varietäten. Festschrift für Klaus Welke zum 70. Geburtstag (pp. 195–218). Hildesheim, Zurich & New York: Georg Olms.
Kürschner, W. (1974). Zur syntaktischen Beschreibung deutscher Nominalkomposita. Auf der Grundlage generativer Transformationsgrammatiken. (Linguistische Arbeiten 18). Tübingen: Niemeyer.
Lees, R. B. (1960). The grammar of English nominalizations. The Hague: Mouton de Gruyter.
Leser, M. (1990). Das Problem der ‘Zusammenbildungen’: eine Lexikalistische Studie. Trier: WVT Wissenschaftlicher Verlag.
Lieber, R. (1981). On the organization of the lexicon. PhD Thesis, University of New Hamsphire.
Lüdeling, A., Evert, S., & Baroni, M. (2007). Using web data for linguistic purposes. In M. Hundt, N. Nesselhauf, & C. Biewer (Eds.), Corpus linguistics and the web. (Language and Computers-Studies in Practical Linguistics 59) (pp. 7–24). Amsterdam & New York: Rodopi.
Masini, F. (2009). Phrasal lexemes, compounds and phrases: A constructionist perspective. Word Structure, 2(2), 254–271.
Mayerthaler, W. (1981). Morphologische Natürlichkeit. Wiesbaden: Athenaion.
Nübling, D., & Szczepaniak, R. (2011). Merkmal(s?)analyse, Seminar(s?)arbeit und Essen(s?)ausgabe: Zweifelsfälle der Verfugung als Indikatoren für Sprachwandel. Zeitschrift für Sprachwissenschaft, 30(1), 45–73.
Nübling, D., & Szczepaniak, R. (2013). Linking elements in German origin, change, functionalization. Morphology, 231, 67–89.
Plag, I. (1999). Morphological productivity. Structural constraints in English derivation (Topics in English Linguistics 28). Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter.
Rainer, F. (2003). Studying restrictions on patterns of word-formation by means of the Internet. Italian Journal of Linguistics / Rivista di Linguistica, 15(1), 131–139.
Roeper, T. (2005). Chomsky’s remarks and the transformationalist hypothesis. In P. Štekauer & R. Lieber (Eds.), The handbook of word-formation (pp. 125–146). Dordrecht: Springer.
Säily, T. (2011). Variation in morphological productivity in the BNC: Sociolinguistic and methodological considerations. Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic Theory, 7(1), 119–141.
Schiller, A., Teufel, S., Stöckert, C., & Thielen, C. (1999). Guidelines für das Tagging deutscher Textcorpora mit STTS. Technical report, Universität Stuttgart, Institut für maschinelle Sprachverarbeitung & Universität Tübingen, Seminar für Sprachwissenschaft.
Schlücker, B. (2012). Die deutsche Kompositionsfreudigkeit. Übersicht und Einführung. In L. Gaeta & B. Schlücker (Eds.), Das Deutsche als kompositionsfreudige Sprache. Strukturelle Eigenschaften und systembezogene Aspekte (Linguistik – Impulse & Tendenzen 46) (pp. 1–25). Berlin: Mouton De Gruyter.
Schmid, H. (1994). Probabilistic part-of-speech tagging using decision trees. In Proceedings of the Conference on New Methods in Language Processing (pp. 44–49). Manchester, UK.
Sharoff, S. (2010). In the garden and in the jungle. Comparing genres in the BNC and Internet. In Genres on the web. Computational models and empirical studies (pp. 149–166). Springer.
Siebert, S. (1999). Wortbildung und Grammatik. Syntaktische Restriktionen in der Struktur komplexer Wörter (Linguitische Arbeiten 408). Tübingen: Niemeyer.
ten Hacken, P. (2009). Early generative approaches. In R. Lieber & P. Štekauer (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of compounding (Oxford Handbooks in Linguistics) (pp. 54–77). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Wulff, S. (2008). Rethinking idiomaticity: A usage-based approach. London/New York: Continuum.
Wurzel, W. U. (1998). On the development of incorporating structures in German. In R. M. Hogg & L. van Bergen (Eds.), Historical linguistics 1995, Vol. 21: Germanic linguistics (pp. 331–344). Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Zeldes, A. (2012). Productivity in argument selection. From morphology to syntax (Trends in Linguistics: Studies and Monographs 260). Berlin & Boston: Mouton De Gruyter.
2024. Between syntax and morphology: German noun+verb units. Glossa: a journal of general linguistics 9:1
Hübener, Carlotta J.
2023. The morphologization of German noun-participle combinations. A diachronic case study. Morphology 33:3 ► pp. 189 ff.
Audring, Jenny
2022. Advances in Morphological Theory: Construction Morphology and Relational Morphology. Annual Review of Linguistics 8:1 ► pp. 39 ff.
Mattiello, Elisa & Wolfgang U. Dressler
2022. Dualism and superposition in the analysis of English synthetic compounds ending in-er. Linguistics 60:2 ► pp. 395 ff.
Gaeta, Livio & Marco Angster
2019. Stripping paradigmatic relations out of the syntax. Morphology 29:2 ► pp. 249 ff.
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 10 november 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers.
Any errors therein should be reported to them.