The aim of this paper is to identify the effect of register variation in spoken British English on the occurrence of the four principal verb-forming suffixes: ‑ate, ‑en, ‑ify and ‑ize, by building on the work of Biber et al. (1999), Plag et al. (1999) and Schmid (2011). Register variation effects were compared between the less formal Demographically-Sampled and the more formal Context-Governed components of the original 1994 version of the British National Corpus. The pattern of ‑ize derivatives revealed the most marked register-based differences with respect to frequency counts and the creation of neologisms, whereas ‑en derivatives varied the least compared with the other three suffixes. Quantitative and qualitative analyses of these suffix profiles in the context of spoken language reveal markers of register formality that have not hitherto been explored; derivative usage patterns provide an additional dimension to previous research on register variation which has mainly focused on grammatical and lexical features of language.
(2001) Complex Words in English. Harlow: Pearson Education Limited.
Baayen, R. H.
(1992) Quantitative aspects of morphological productivity. In G. Booij & J. van Marle (Eds.), Yearbook of Morphology 1991 (pp. 109–149). Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Baayen, R. H.
(1993) On frequency, transparency and productivity. In G. Booij & J. van Marle (Eds.), Yearbook of Morphology 1992 (pp. 181–208). Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Baayen, R. H.
(1994) Productivity in language production. Language and Cognitive Processes, 9(3), 447–469.
Baayen, R. H.
(2008) Analyzing Linguistic Data: A Practical Introduction to Statistics Using R Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Baayen, R. H.
(2009) Corpus linguistics in morphology: Morphological productivity. In A. Lüdeling & M. Kytö (Eds.), Corpus Linguistics: An International Handbook (pp. 899–919). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Baayen, R. H., & Lieber, R.
(1991) Productivity and English derivation: A corpus-based study. Linguistics, 29(5), 801–843.
Baayen, R. H., Milin, P., & Ramscar, M.
(2016) Frequency in lexical processing. Aphasiology, 30(11), 1174–1220.
Bauer, L.
(1983) English Word-Formation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Bauer, L., Lieber, R., & Plag, I.
(2013) The Oxford Reference Guide to English Morphology. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Biber, D.
(1988) Variation across Speech and Writing. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Biber, D., Johansson, S., Leech, G., Conrad, S., & Finegan, E.
(1999) The Longman Grammar of Spoken and Written English. London: Longman.
Burnard, L.
(2007) Reference Guide for the British National Corpus. Oxford: Oxford University Computing Services. Retrieved from [URL] (last accessed November 2016).
Cowie, C.
(2006) Economical with the truth: Register categories and the functions of ‑wise viewpoint adverbs in the British National Corpus. ICAME Journal, 301, 5–36.
Dunning, T.
(1993) Accurate methods for the statistics of surprise and coincidence. Computational Linguistics, 191, 61–74.
Dixon, R. M. W.
(2014) Making New Words: Morphological Derivation in English. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Fernández-Domínguez, J.
(2013) Morphological productivity measurement: Exploring qualitative versus quantitative approaches. English Studies, 94(4), 422–447.
Friginal, E., Pearson, P., Di Ferrante, L., Pickering, L., & Bruce, C.
(2013) Linguistic characteristics of AAC discourse in the workplace. Discourse Studies, 15(3) 279–298.
Garside, R., & Smith, N.
(1997) A hybrid grammatical tagger: CLAWS4. In Garside, R., Leech, G., & McEnery, A. (Eds.) Corpus Annotation: Linguistic Information from Computer Text Corpora (pp. 102–121), London: Longman.
Guz, W.
(2009) English affixal nominalizations across language registers. Poznań Studies in Contemporary Linguistics, 45(4), 447–471.
Hay, J., & Baayen, R. H.
(2002) Parsing and productivity. In G. Booij & J. van Marle (Eds.), Yearbook of Morphology 2001, (pp. 203–235). Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Hay, J., & Baayen, R. H.
(2003) Phonotactics, parsing and productivity. Italian Journal of Linguistics, 15(1), 99–130.
Hoffmann, S., Evert, S., Smith, N., Lee, D., & Berglund Prytz, Y.
(2008) Corpus Linguistics with BNCweb – APractical Guide. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.
Laws, J., & Ryder, C.
In preparation). Verb-forming suffixation: Semantic category distributions as a function of register.
Lieber, R.
(2004) Morphology and Lexical Semantics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Love, R., Dembry, C., Hardie, A., Brezina, V., & McEnery, T.
(1969) The Categories and Types of Present-day English Word-formation: A Synchronic-diachronic Approach (2nd ed.). Munich: C. H. Beck’sche Verlagsbuchhandlung.
Mazgutova, D., & Kormos, J.
(2015) Syntactic and lexical development in an intensive English for Academic Purposes programme. Journal of Second Language Writing, 291, 3–15.
McEnery, T., & Hardie, A.
(2012) Corpus Linguistics: Method, Theory and Practice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Plag, I.
(1999) Morphological Productivity: Structural Constraints in English. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Plag, I.
(2004) Syntactic category information and the semantics of derivational morphological rules. Folia Linguistica, 38(3–4), 193–225.
Plag, I., Dalton-Puffer, C., & Baayen, R. H.
(1999) Morphological productivity across speech and writing. English Language and Linguistics, 3(2), 209–228.
Quinion, M.
(2002) Ologies and Isms: Word Beginnings and Endings. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Säily, T.
(2011) Variation in morphological productivity in the BNC: Sociolinguistic and methodological considerations. Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic Theory, 7(1), 119–141.
Säily, T., & Suomela, J.
(2017) Types2: Exploring word-frequency differences in corpora. In T. Hiltunen, J. McVeigh & T. Säily (Eds.) Big and Rich Data in English Corpus Linguistics: Methods and Explorations. Studies in Variation, Contacts and Change in English. Helsinki: VARIENG.
Schmid, H-J.
(2011) English Morphology and Word-formation: An Introduction. Berlin: Erich Schmidt Verlag.
Stein, G.
(2007) A Dictionary of English Affixes: Their Function and Meaning. Munich: Lincom Europa.
Wilson, A.
(2013) Embracing Bayes factors for key item analysis in corpus linguistics. In M. Bieswanger & A. Koll-Stobbe (Eds.) New Approaches to the Study of Linguistic Variability. Language Competence and Language Awareness in Europe (pp. 3–11). Frankfurt: Peter Lang.
Cited by
Cited by 4 other publications
Dressler, Wolfgang U., Veronika Mattes & Laila Kjærbæk
Kochetova, Larisa, Anastasya Plavina, S. Cindori, O. Larouk, E.Yu. Malushko, L.N. Rebrina & N.L. Shamne
2018. Corpus-Based Study of Discursive Representation of ‘Other’ in Diachronic Perspective. SHS Web of Conferences 50 ► pp. 01132 ff.
Laws, Jacqueline
2019. Profiling complex word usage in the speech of preschool children: Frequency patterns and transparency characteristics. First Language 39:6 ► pp. 593 ff.
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 31 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.