Cover not available

In:Historical Linguistics 2023: Selected papers from the 26th International Conference on Historical Linguistics,Heidelberg, 4-8 September 2023
Edited by Jadranka Gvozdanović
[Current Issues in Linguistic Theory 371] 2026
► pp. 55–81

A revolution in the history of affix formation

 | Adam Mickiewicz UniversityPoznań
This content is being prepared for publication; it may be subject to changes.
Abstract
This chapter studies the origin of affix formation in English. Two main processes appear to oppose each other: a syntagmatic process and a pa­ra­dig­matic one. The syntagmatic process, which is the process that is traditionally the only one which is referred to, breaks down into a gram­mat­ical­iz­ation process in which compounds form an important intermediate step, and a recognition process, followed by reinterpretation into compounds. The paradigmatic process, which recently has become popular, also breaks down into two subprocesses: libfixing, in which opaque forms are consciously broken open by the speaker, and blending, where the second part of the blend can detach itself from the new form based on frequency or productivity and can develop into an affix in a way similar to the libfix.
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Data collection
  • 3.Grammaticalization as the basis for affix formation
  • 4.Assumed compounds
    • 4.1Recognition
    • 4.2Secretion supported by meaning
    • 4.3Existing process
    • 4.4The third way
    • 4.5Provisional conclusion
  • 5.Libfixing
    • 5.1Consciously liberated parts
    • 5.2Libfixes as occasionalisms
    • 5.3Libfixes and regularity
  • 6.Libfixing and blending
    • 6.1Blending
    • 6.2Headedness
    • 6.3Similar process
    • 6.4Alternative approaches
    • 6.5Provisional conclusion
  • 7.Analogy
  • 8.Conclusion: Differences between syntagmatic and paradigmatic affix formation
  • Author queries
  • Acknowledgements
  • Notes
  • References
References (42)
References
Andersen, Henning. 1973. Abductive and deductive change. Language 49. 567–595. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Anderson, Stephen R. 2015. Morphological change. In Claire Bowern & Bethwyn Evans (eds.), The Routledge Handbook of Historical Linguistics, 264–285. London: Routledge.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ayto, John. 2003. Newspapers and neologisms. In Jean Aitchinson & Diana M. Lewis (eds.), New Media Language, 182–186. London & New York: Routledge.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bat-El, Outi. 2006. Blends. In Keith Brown (ed.), Encyclopedia of language and Linguistics. Oxford: Elsevier. Second edition. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bauer, Laurie. 1994. Watching English Change. An Introduction to the Study of Linguistic Change in Standard Englishes in the Twentieth Century. London & New York: Longman.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2001. Morphological productivity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bauer, Laurie, Rochelle Lieber & Ingo Plag. 2013. The Oxford reference guide to English morphology. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Callies, Marcus. 2016. Of soundscapes, talkathons and shopaholics: On the status of a new type of formative in English (and beyond). STUF — Language Typology and Universals 69. 495–516. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cannon, Garland. 1986. Blends in English word formation. Linguistics 24. 725–753. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1989. Abbreviations and acronyms in English word formation. American Speech 64.2. 99–127. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Collins. 2023. Collins online unabridged English dictionary. Glasgow: HarperCollins [URL]
Fischer, Olga. 2010. An iconic, analogical approach to grammaticalization. In C. Jac Conradie, Roné Johl, Marthinus Beukes, Olga Fischer & Christina Ljungberg (eds.), Signergy, 279–298. Amsterdam: Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Frandrych, Ingrid. 2008. Submorphemic elements in the formation of acronyms, blends and clippings. Lexis 2. 103–121.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
GloWbE. Corpus of Global Web-Based English. [URL]
Hacken, Pius ten. 2019. Review of Elisa Mattiello, Analogy in word-formation. Folia Linguistica 53.1. 287–292. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hamans, Camiel. 2021a. Borderline Cases in Morphology. A study in language change. Diss. Universiteit van Amsterdam. Lewedorp: Van Kemenade.
. 2021b. Blends: an intermediate category at the crossroads of morphology and phonology. Yearbook of the Poznań Linguistic Meeting 7. 99–128. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hopper, Paul J. & Elisabeth Traugott. 2003. Grammaticalisation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Jespersen, Otto. 1922. Language: Its nature, development, and origin. London & New York: Allen and Unwin and Holt.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kastovsky, Dieter. 2006. Historical morphology from a typological point of view: Examples from English. In Terttu Nevalainen, Juhani Klemola & Mikko Laitined (eds.), Types of Variation, Diachronic, dialectal and typological interfaces, 53–80. Amsterdam: Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2009a. Diachronic perspectives. In Rochelle Lieber & Pavol Štekhauer (eds.), Oxford Handbook of Compounding, 323–340. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2009b. Astronaut, astrology, astrophysics: About combining forms, classical compounds and affixoids. In Roderick W. McConchie, Alpo Honkapohja & Jukka Tyrkkö (eds.), Selected Proceedings of the 2008 Symposium on New Approaches in English Historical Lexis (HEL-LEX2), 1–13. Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Proceedings Project.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lalić-Krstin, Gordana. 2014. Forms and meaning of the source word Armageddon in English lexical blends. In Tvrtko Prćić a.o. (eds.). Engleski jezik I anglofone književnosti u teoriji praksi. Zbornik u čast Draginji Pervaz, 257–273. Novi Sad: Filozofski Fakultet.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lalić-Krstin, Gordana & Nadežda Silaški. 2024. Linguistic ludicity as an attention-seeking device: the case of names of apocalyptic scenarios in news media headlines. Jezici i kulture u vremenu i prostoru XI/3: Tematski zbornik, 121–132.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lehrer, Adrienne. 1996. Identifying and interpreting blends: An experimental approach. Cognitive Linguistics 7.4. 359–390. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Marchand, Hans. 1969. The categories and types of present-day English word-formation, 2nd edn. München: Beck.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Marle, Jaap van. 1985. On the paradigmatic dimension of morphological creativity. Dordrecht: Foris Publications.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mattiello, Elisa. 2013. Extra-grammatical morphology in English: abbreviations, blends, reduplicatives, and related phenomena. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2017. Analogy in word-formation: A study in English neologisms and occasionalisms. Berlin: Mouton De Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2023. Transitional morphology. Combining forms in modern English. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
NOW. NOW Corpus (News on the Web). [URL]
OED. 2024. Oxford English Dictionary. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Online version June 2012. URL [URL]
Plag, Ingo. 2003. Word-formation in English. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Schmid, Hans Ulrich. 1998. -lîh-Bildungen: Vergleichende Untersuchungen zu Herkunft, Entwicklung und Funktion eines althochdeutschen Suffixes. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Szymanek, Bogdan. 2005. The latest trends in English word-formation. In Pavol Štekauer & Rochelle Lieber (eds.), Handbook of Word-Formation, 429–448. Dordrecht: Springer. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Trips, Carola. 2006. Syntactic sources of word-formation processes: Evidence from Old English and Old High German. In Jutta Hatmann & László Molnárfi (eds.), Comparative Studies in Germanic Syntax: From Afrikaans to Zurich German, 299–328. Amsterdam: Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2009. Lexical semantics and diachronic morphology: The development of the derivational suffixes -hood, -dom and -ship in the history of English. Tübingen: Niemeyer. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2014. Derivation and historical change. In Rochelle Lieber & Pavol Štekauer (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Derivational Morphology, 384–406. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2017. Morphological Change. In Marc Aronoff (ed.), Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Linguistics, 1–22. New York: Oxford University Press [URL].
Waren, Beatrice. 1990. The importance of combining forms. In Wolfgang U. Dressler, Hans C. Luschützky, Oskar E. Pfeiffer & John R. Rennison (eds.), Contemporary Morphology, 111–132. Berlin/New York: Mouton De Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Zwicky, Arnold. 2010. Libfixes. URL [URL]
Mobile Menu Logo with link to supplementary files background Layer 1 prag Twitter_Logo_Blue