Most word-formation theories assume that derivatives in general tend towards canonicity, i.e. one-to-one correspondence between form and meaning and thus full morphosemantic transparency. However, form-meaning mismatches actually are widespread, both in terms of languages and word-formation rules. These mainly fall into two types: over-marking and under-marking. In this paper we propose a classification of these deviations, distinguishing between a derivational and a lexical level. We illustrate this classification with examples from French and other languages (English, Italian and Dutch). We sketch a unified analysis of these deviations within a word-based framework. We propose to analyse the relative importance of canonicity and discrepancies in word formation from the perspective of the interaction between the speaker and the hearer.
1981“The Development of Prefixal and Parasynthetic Verbs in Latin and Romance”. Romance Philology 35.79–88.
Beard, Robert
1995Lexeme-Morpheme Based Morphology: A General Theory of Inflection and Word Formation. Albany, NY: SUNY Press.
Becker, Thomas
1993“Back-Formation, Cross-Formation, and ‘Bracketing Paradoxes’ in Paradigmatic Morphology”. Yearbook of Morphology 1992 ed. by Geert Booij & Jaap van Marle, 1–27. Dordrecht: Kluwer.
Booij, Geert
2002The Morphology of Dutch. Oxford & New York: Oxford University Press.
Corbett, Greville
2010“Canonical Derivational Morphology”. Word Structure 3.141–155.
Corbin, Danièle
2001“Du nouveau sur beurre laitier. Note sur une fausse conversion”. Par monts et par vaux. Itinéraires linguistiques et grammaticaux ed. by Claude Buridant, Georges Kleiber & Jean-Christophe Pellat, 127–143. Louvain & Paris: Peeters.
Darmesteter, Arsène
1894 [1875] Traité de la formation des mots composés dans la langue française comparée aux autres langues romanes et au latin. 2nd edition. Paris: Bouillon.
Dressler, Wolfgang U
2000“Extragrammatical vs Marginal Morphology”. Marginal and Extragrammatical Morphology ed. by Ursula Doleschal & Anna M. Thornton, 1–10. München: Lincom Europa.
Fradin, Bernard
2000“Combining Forms, Blends and Related Phenomena”. Extragrammatical and Marginal Morphology, ed. by Ursula Doleschal & Anna M. Thornton, 11–59. München: Lincom Europa.
Hathout, Nabil
2011“Une analyse unifiée de la préfixation en anti-”. Roché, Boyé, Hathout, Lignon & Plénat, eds. 2011, 251–318.
Iacobini, Claudio
2004“Parasintesi”. La formazione delle parole in italiano ed. by Maria Grossmann & Franz Rainer, 165–188. Tübingen: Max Niemeyer.
Koehl, Aurore
2009“Are French ité Suffixed Nouns Property Nouns?”. Selected Proceedings of the 6th Décembrettes: Morphology in Bordeaux ed. by Fabio Montermini, Gilles Boyé & Jesse Tseng, 95–110. Somerville, Mass.: Cascadilla Proceedings Project.
Levinson, Steven C
2000Presumptive Meanings: The Theory of Generalized Conversational Implicature. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.
Lindsay, Mark & Mark Aronoff
2013“Natural Selection in Self-Organizing Morphological Systems”. Morphology in Toulouse ed. by Nabil Hathout, Fabio Montermini & Jesse Tseng, 133–153. München: Lincom Europa.
Nagano, Akiko
2007“Marchand’s Analysis of Back-Formation Revisited: Back-Formation as a Type of Conversion”. Acta Linguistica Hungarica 54.33–72.
Namer, Fiammetta
2013“Adjectival Bases of French aliser and ariser Verbs: Syncretism or Under-Specification?”. Morphology in Toulouse ed. by Nabil Hathout, Fabio Montermini & Jesse Tseng, 185–210. München: Lincom Europa.
Piantadosi, Steven, Harry Tily & Edward Gibson
2012“The Communicative Function of Ambiguity in Language”. Cognition 122:3.280–291.
Plénat, Marc
2009“Les contraintes de taille”. Aperçus de Morphologie du français ed. by Bernard Fradin, Françoise Kerleroux & Marc Plénat, 47–64. Paris: Presses Universitaires de Vincennes.
Plénat, Marc & Michel Roché
2004“Entre morphologie et phonologie: la suffixation décalée”. Lexique 16.159–198.
Prince, Alan & Paul Smolensky
1993Optimality Theory. Constraint Interaction in Generative Grammar. RuCCS Technical Report 2. Piscataway: Rutgers Center for Cognitive Sciences, Rutgers University, and Boulder : Department of Computer Science, University of Colorado.
Roché, Michel
2011a“Quel traitement unifié pour les dérivations en isme et en iste”. Roché, Boyé, Hathout, Lignon & Plénat, eds. 2011, 69–143.
2011Des unités morphologiques au lexique. Paris: Hermès.
Scalise, Sergio
1994Morfologia. Bologna: il Mulino.
Serrano Dolader, David
1995Las formaciones parasintéticas en español. Madrid: Arco Libros.
Shimamura, Reiko
1983“Backformation of English Compound Verbs”. Papers from the Parasession on the Interplay of Phonology, Morphology and Syntax ed. by John F. Richardson, Mitchell Marks & Amy Chukerman, 271–282. Chicago: Chicago Linguistic Society.
Szymanek, Bogdan
2005“The Latest Trends in English Word-Formation”. Handbook of Word-Formation ed. by Pavel Štekauer & Rochelle Lieber, 429–448. Dordrecht: Springer.
Thornton, Anna M
2012“Reduction and Maintenance of Overabundance. A Case Study on Italian Verb Paradigms”. Word Structure 5:2.183–207.
Warren, Beatrice
1990“The Importance of Combining Forms”. Contemporary Morphology ed. by Wolfgang U. Dressler, Hans Christian Luschützky, Oskar E. Pfeiffer & John R. Rennison, 111–132. Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter.
Zipf, George K
1949Human Behavior and the Principle of Least Effort. New York: Addison-Wesley.
Cited by
Cited by 8 other publications
Copot, Maria & Olivier Bonami
2024. Baseless derivation: the behavioural reality of derivational paradigms. Cognitive Linguistics 0:0
2015. Exploring the polysemy of the Modern Greek prefix iper-. Morphology 25:4 ► pp. 411 ff.
Hathout, Nabil & Fiammetta Namer
2022. ParaDis: a family and paradigm model. Morphology 32:2 ► pp. 153 ff.
Khazhieva, Zilya, Olga Novikova, Andrey Belyaev & Larisa Ivanova
2023. The Word-building Category Potential in the Analysis of the Names of Persons in the Russian and Bashkir Languages. <i>WORD</i> 69:2 ► pp. 160 ff.
Laks, Lior & Fiammetta Namer
2022. Hebrewnette – A New Derivational Resource for Non-concatenative Morphology: Principles, Design and Implementation . Prague Bulletin of Mathematical Linguistics 118:1 ► pp. 25 ff.
Namer, Fiammetta & Nabil Hathout
2020. ParaDis and Démonette – From Theory to Resources for Derivational Paradigms. Prague Bulletin of Mathematical Linguistics 114:1 ► pp. 5 ff.
Shalal, Fadhel Abbas
2018. Morpheme-based approach versus word-based approach: classifying derivative words with respect to their bases. Russian Linguistics 42:2 ► pp. 237 ff.
Stump, Gregory
2019. Some sources of apparent gaps in derivational paradigms. Morphology 29:2 ► pp. 271 ff.
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 19 march 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.