Cover not available
Part of
Competition in Word-Formation
Edited by Alexandra Bagasheva, Akiko Nagano and Vincent Renner
[Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today 284] 2024
► pp. 1–31

Chapter 1
Towards a competition-based word-formation theory

Core research questions and major hypotheses

ORCID logo | University of Shizuoka
ORCID logo | Sofia University “St. Kliment Ohridski”
ORCID logo | Université Lumière Lyon 2
This chapter provides an overview of the study of competition in word-formation theories, drawing on the findings of the ten chapters collected in this volume and other recent contributions. It explores recurrent issues regarding (i) the triggers and outcomes of competition, (ii) the variety of competing forms, and (iii) the synonymy condition for competition. With respect to the first set of research questions, a binary typology of form-based and meaning-based resolutions is identified, with each pole providing multiple ways to resolve competition. Next, for the form-related research questions, the distinction between macro‑ and micro-level competition is significant. Finally, the synonymy condition is reassessed through a careful comparison between morphologically simplex and complex lexemes, leading to a definition of competing rivals in word-formation as a set of formally suppletive morphological processes that produce propositional, near, or sense synonyms.
Keywords: morphology, word-formation, competition, rivalry, affixation
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Fundamental questions
    • 2.1Onomasiological and semasiological perspectives
    • 2.2Triggers and outcomes of competition
  • 3.Questions about form
    • 3.1Competition between instantiations: Doublets and clusters
    • 3.2Competition between morphological processes
    • 3.3Form-based resolutions
      • 3.3.1The marginalization or total loss of a rivaling form
      • 3.3.2Blocking
      • 3.3.3Base selection
  • 4.Questions about meaning
    • 4.1Lexical and word-formational semantics
    • 4.2The synonymy condition in competition
    • 4.3Meaning-based resolutions
      • 4.3.1Distinguishing features or contexts of propositional synonymy
      • 4.3.2Distinguishing features or contexts of near synonymy and sense synonymy
        • 4.3.2.1Lexical semantic features
        • 4.3.2.2Syntagmatic contexts
  • 5.Macro-level competition
    • 5.1Macro-level competition in transcategorial change
    • 5.2Macro-level competition in other lexical functions of word-formation
    • 5.3Macro-level competition beyond the boundaries of word-formation
  • 6.Concluding remarks
  • Notes
  • References
Published online: 8 May 2024
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/la.284.01nag
References (105)
References
Acquaviva, Paolo, Lenci, Alessandro, Paradis, Carita & Raffaelli, Ida. 2020. Models of lexical meaning. In Word Knowledge and Word Usage: A Cross-Disciplinary Guide to the Mental Lexicon, Vito Pirrelli, Ingo Plag & Wolfgang U. Dressler (eds), 353–404. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Akita, Kimi & Murasugi, Keiko. 2022. Binomial adjectival doublets in Japanese: A Relational Morphology account. Morphology 32: 281–297. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Andreou, Marios & Lieber, Rochelle. 2019. Aspectual and quantificational properties of deverbal conversion and ‑ing nominalizations: The power of context. English Language & Linguistics 24(2): 333–363. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Arndt-Lappe, Sabine. 2023. Different lexicons make different rivals. Word Structure 16(1): 24–48. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Aronoff, Mark. 1976. Word Formation in Generative Grammar. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
. 2019. Competitors and alternants in linguistic morphology. In Competition in Inflection and Word-Formation, Franz Rainer, Francesco Gardani, Wolfgang U. Dressler & Hans Christian Luschützky (eds), 39–66. Cham: Springer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2020. -less and -free. In Complex Words: Advances in Morphology, Lívia Körtvélyessy & Pavol Štekauer (eds), 55–64. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2023. Three ways of looking at morphological rivalry. Word Structure 16(1): 49–62. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Aronoff, Mark & Lindsay, Mark. 2014. Productivity, blocking, and lexicalization. In The Oxford Handbook of Derivational Morphology, Rochelle Lieber & Pavol Štekauer (eds), 67–83. Oxford: OUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Baeskow, Heike. 2015. Stacking as a reflex and indicator of (proto-)typical selectional restrictions. In Semantics of Complex Words, Laurie Bauer, Lívia Körtvélyessy & Pavol Štekauer (eds), 241–276. Cham: Springer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bagasheva, Alexandra. 2017. Comparative semantic concepts in affixation. In Competing Patterns in English Affixation, Juan Santana-Lario & Salvador Valera (eds), 119–161. Bern: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
Bauer, Laurie. 1983. English Word-Formation. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2001a. Morphological Productivity. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2001b. Introducing Linguistic Morphology, 2nd edition. Edinburgh: EUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2006. Competition in English word-formation. In The Handbook of the History of English, Ans van Kemenade & Bettelou Los (eds), 177–198. Malden, MA: Blackwell. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2019. Notions of paradigm and their value in word-formation. Word Structure 12(2): 153–175. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2023. The birth and death of affixes and other morphological processes in English derivation. Languages 8: 244. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bauer, Laurie, Valera, Salvador & Díaz-Negrillo, Ana. 2010. Affixation vs. conversion: The resolution of conflicting patterns. In Variation and Change in Morphology, Franz Rainer, Wolfgang U. Dressler, Dieter Kastovsky & Hans Christian Luschützky (eds), 15–32. Amsterdam: Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bauer, Laurie, Lieber, Rochelle & Plag, Ingo. 2013. The Oxford Reference Guide to English Morphology. Oxford: OUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bauer, Laurie, Körtvélyessy, Lívia & Štekauer, Pavol (eds). 2015. Semantics of Complex Words. Cham: Springer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Berg, Thomas. 2014. Competition as a unifying concept for the study of language. The Mental Lexicon 9 (2): 338–370. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bobkova, Natalia & Montermini, Fabio. 2023. A quantitative approach to doublets in Russian denominal adjective construction. Word Structure 16(1): 63–86. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Booij, Geert. 2010. Construction Morphology. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
Cetnarowska, Bożena. 1993. The Syntax, Semantics and Derivation of Bare Nominalisations in English. Katowice: Uniwersytet Śląski.Google Scholar
Chomsky, Noam. 2005. Three factors in language design. Linguistic Inquiry 36(1): 1–22. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cruse, D. Alan. 2011. Meaning in Language: An Introduction to Semantics and Pragmatics (3rd ed.). Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
De Smet, Hendrik, D’hoedt, Frauke, Fonteyn, Lauren & Van Goethem, Kristel. 2018. The changing functions of competing forms: Attraction and differentiation. Cognitive Linguistics 29(2): 197–234. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Denistia, Karlina, Shafaei-Bajestan, Elnaz & Baayen, R. Harald. 2022. Exploring semantic differences between the Indonesian prefixes PE‑ and PEN‑ using a vector space model. Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic Theory 18(3): 573–598. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dixon, R. M. W. 2014. Making New Words: Morphological Derivation in English. Oxford: OUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Díaz-Negrillo, Ana. 2017. On the identification of competition in English derivational morphemes: The case of ‑dom, -hood and ‑ship. In Competing Patterns in English Affixation, Juan Santana-Lario & Salvador Valera (eds), 119–161. Bern: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
Fábregas, Antonio. 2010. A syntactic account of affix rivalry in Spanish nominalizations. In The Syntax of Nominalizations across Languages and Frameworks, Artemis Alexiadou & Monika Rathert (eds), 67–92. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2015. Structural sensitivity as an argument for semantic underspecification. In Semantics of Complex Words, Laurie Bauer, Lívia Körtvélyessy & Pavol Štekauer (eds), 217–240. Cham: Springer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2016. Deconstructing the non-episodic readings of Spanish deverbal adjectives. Word Structure 9(1): 1–41. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fellbaum, Christiane. 2015. Lexical relations. In The Oxford Handbook of the Word, John R. Taylor (ed), 350–363. Oxford: OUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fernández-Alcaina, Cristina. 2017. Availability and unavailability in English word-formation. In Competing Patterns in English Affixation, Juan Santana-Lario & Salvador Valera (eds), 163–205. Bern: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
Fernández-Domínguez, Jésus. 2017. Methodological and procedural issues in the quantification of morphological competition. In Competing Patterns in English Affixation, Juan Santana-Lario & Salvador Valera (eds), 67–117. Bern: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
Fradin, Bernard. 2019. Competition in derivation: What can we learn from French doublets in ‑age and ‑ment? In Competition in Inflection and Word-Formation, Franz Rainer, Francesco Gardani, Wolfgang U. Dressler & Hans Christian Luschützky (eds), 67–93. Cham: Springer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gardani, Francesco, Rainer, Franz & Luschützky, Hans Christian. 2019. Competition in morphology: A historical outline. In Competition in Inflection and Word-Formation, Franz Rainer, Francesco Gardani, Wolfgang U. Dressler & Hans Christian Luschützky (eds), 3–38. Cham: Springer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gause, Georgyi Frantsevich. 1934. The Struggle for Existence. Baltimore, MD: Williams and Wilkins.Google Scholar
Goldberg, Adele E. 2019. Explain Me This: Creativity, Competition, and the Partial Productivity of Constructions. Princeton: PUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gries, Stefan Th. 2004. Isn’t that fantabulous? How similarity motivates intentional morphological blends in English. In Language, Culture, and Mind, Michel Achard & Suzanne Kemmer (eds), 415–428. Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications.Google Scholar
. 2012. Quantitative corpus data on blend formation: Psycho‑ and cognitive-linguistic perspectives. In Cross-Disciplinary Perspectives on Lexical Blending, Vincent Renner, François Maniez & Pierre J. L. Arnaud (eds), 145–167. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gunkel, Lutz & Zifonun, Gisela. 2008. Constraints on relational-adjective noun constructions: A comparative view on English, German and French. Zeitschrift für Anglistik und Amerikanistik 56: 283–302. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Guzmán Naranjo, Matías & Bonami, Olivier. 2023. A distributional assessment of rivalry in word formation. Word Structure 16(1): 87–114. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hamawand, Zeki. 2007. Suffixal Rivalry in Adjectival Formation: A Cognitive-Corpus Analysis. London: Equinox.Google Scholar
Hegedűs, Irén. 2014. Affix doublets and affix rivalry in the history of English. Argumentum 10: 312–324.Google Scholar
Huyghe, Richard & Wauquier, Marine. 2021. Distributional semantics insights on agentive suffix rivalry in French. Word Structure 14(3): 354–391. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Huyghe, Richard & Varvara, Rossella. 2023a. Affixal rivalry: Theoretical and methodological challenges. Word Structure 16(1): 1–23. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(eds) 2023b. Quantitative Approaches to Affix Rivalry, Thematic issue of Word Structure 16(1).Google Scholar
Hüning, Matthias & Schlücker, Barbara. 2015. Multi-word expressions. In Word-formation: An International Handbook of the Languages of Europe, Vol. 1, Peter Müller, Ingeborg Ohnheiser, Susan Olsen & Franz Rainer (eds), 450–467. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ishida, Takashi & Naya, Ryohei. 2022. Presidential company vs. president company: Very subtle but crucial semantic differences between RA-N and N-N. Tsukuba English Studies 41: 19–32.Google Scholar
Kaunisto, Mark. 2007. Variation and Change in the Lexicon: A Corpus-based Analysis of Adjectives in English Ending in -ic and -ical. Amsterdam: Rodopi. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kawaletz, Lea & Plag, Ingo. 2015. Predicting the semantics of English nominalizations: A frame-based analysis of ‑ment suffixation. In The Semantics of Complex Words, Laurie Bauer, Lívia Körtvélyessy & Pavol Štekauer (eds), 289–319. Cham: Springer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kikuchi, Yuki. 2020. An analysis of N-free X and N‑less X based on Construction Morphology. JELS 37: 59–65.Google Scholar
Kiparsky, Paul. 2010. Dvandvas, blocking, and the associative: The bumpy ride from phrase to word. Language 86(2): 302–331. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Koehl, Aurore & Lignon, Stéphanie. 2014. Property nouns with ‑ité and ‑itude: Formal alternation and morphopragmatics or the sad-itude of the AitéN. Morphology 24: 351–376. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lara-Clares, Cristina. 2017. Competition in Present-day English nominalization by zero-affixation and ‑ation. In Competing Patterns in English Affixation, Juan Santana-Lario & Salvador Valera (eds), 207–244. Bern: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
Lenci, Alessandro. 2018. Distributional models of word meaning. Annual Review of Linguistics 4: 151–171. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Levin, Beth & Rappaport Hovav, Malka. 2013. Lexicalized meaning and manner/result complementarity. In Studies in the Composition and Decomposition of Event Predicates, Boban Arsenijevič, Berit Gehrke & Rafael Marín (eds), 49–70. Dordrecht: Springer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Li, Ping & MacWhinney, Brian. 2012. Competition model. In The Encyclopedia of Applied Linguistics, Carol A. Chapelle (ed), 1–5. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley Online Library. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lieber, Rochelle. 2004. Morphology and Lexical Semantics. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2016. English Nouns: The Ecology of Nominalization. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2023. Ghost aspect and double plurality: On the aspectual semantics of eventive conversion and ‑ing nominalizations in English. In The Semantics of Derivational Morphology: Theory, Methods, Evidence, Sven Kotowski & Ingo Plag (eds), 15–36. Berlin: De Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2024. Derivation and semantic theory: Foundations, frameworks, and outcomes. To appear in English Linguistics 40.Google Scholar
Lieber, Rochelle & Plag, Ingo. 2022. The semantics of conversion nouns and ‑ing nominalizations: A quantitative and theoretical perspective. Journal of Linguistics 58(2): 307–343. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lindsay, Mark & Aronoff, Mark. 2013. Natural selection in self-organizing morphological systems. In Morphology in Toulouse: Selected proceedings of Décembrettes 7, Fabio Montermini, Gilles Boyé & Jesse Tseng (eds), 133–153. Munich: Lincom Europa.Google Scholar
McCulloch, Gretchen. 2019. Because Internet: Understanding the New Rules of Language. New York, NY: Riverhead Books.Google Scholar
Missud, Alice & Villoing, Florence. 2020. The morphology of rival ‑ion, -age and ‑ment selected verbal bases. Lexique 26: 29–52. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Moravcsik, Edith. 2014. Introduction. In Competing Motivations in Grammar and Usage, Brian MacWhinney, Andrej Malchukov & Edith Moravcsik (eds), 1–16. Oxford: OUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Murphy, Lynne M. 2010. Lexical Meaning. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Naccarato, Chiara. 2019. Agentive (para)synthetic compounds in Russian: A quantitative study of rival constructions. Morphology 29(1): 1–30. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Nagano, Akiko. 2008. Conversion and Back-Formation in English. Kaitakusha: Tokyo.Google Scholar
. 2023. Affixal rivalry and its purely semantic resolution among English derived adjectives. Journal of Linguistics 59(3): 499–530. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Nagano, Akiko & Shimada, Masaharu. 2014. Morphological theory and orthography: Kanji as a representation of lexemes. Journal of Linguistics 50(2): 323–364. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Naya, Ryohei. 2017. Competition in word-formation: Deverbal nominalization by ‑ment vs. conversion. JELS 34: 271–277.Google Scholar
Nishiyama, Kunio & Nagano, Akiko. 2020. Keitairon to Rekisikon (Morphology and the Lexicon). Kaitakusha: Tokyo.Google Scholar
OED = Oxford English Dictionary, online edition. [URL]
Plag, Ingo. 1999. Morphological Productivity: Structural Constraints in English Derivation. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Plag, Ingo & Balling, Laura Winther. 2020. Derivational morphology: An integrated perspective on some fundamental questions. In Word Knowledge and Word Usage: A Cross-disciplinary Guide to the Mental Lexicon, Vito Pirrelli, Ingo Plag & Wolfgang U. Dressler (eds), 295–335. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Prince, Alan & Smolensky, Paul. 2002. Optimality Theory: Constraint Interaction in Generative Grammar. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Radimský, Jan & Štichauer, Pavel. 2021. Nomina actionis in the diachrony of Italian: A paradigm-based model of competition. Lingue e Linguaggio 20(1): 33–55. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Raffelsiefen, Renate. 2010. Idiosyncrasy, regularity, and synonymy in derivational morphology: Evidence for default word interpretation strategies. In New Impulses in Word Formation, Susan Olsen (ed), 173–232. Hamburg: Helmut Buske Verlag.Google Scholar
Rainer, Franz. 2013. Can relational adjectives really express any relation? An onomasiological perspective. SKASE Journal of Theoretical Linguistics 10(1): 12–40.Google Scholar
Rainer, Franz, Gardani, Francesco, Dressler, Wolfgang U. & Luschützky, Hans Christian (eds). 2019. Competition in Inflection and Word-Formation. Dordrecht: Springer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Renner, Vincent. 2020. An ecosystem view of English word-formation. The Mental Lexicon 15(1): 4–20. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rodrigues, Alexandra Soares. 2015. Semantic rivalry between affixes: the case of Portuguese nominalisers. In Mediterranean Morphology Meetings 9: 134–137. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Santana-Lario, Juan & Valera, Salvador (eds). 2017. Competing Patterns in English Affixation. Bern: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
Schirakowski, Barbara. 2020. (No) competition between deverbal nouns and nominalized infinitives in Spanish. Borealis: An International Journal of Hispanic Linguistics 9(2): 257–283. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Schmid, Hans-Jörg. 2016. English Morphology and Word-Formation: An Introduction, 3rd ed. Berlin: Erich Schmidt.Google Scholar
Schulte, Marion. 2015a. The Semantics of Derivational Morphology: A Synchronic and Diachronic Investigation of the Suffixes -age and -ery in English. Tübingen: Narr Verlag.Google Scholar
. 2015b. Polysemy and synonymy in derivational affixation: A case study of the English suffixes ‑age and ‑ery. Morphology 25: 371–390. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Shimamura, Reiko. 1990. Eigo no Gokeisei to Sono Seisansei (Word-Formation in English and its Productivity). Tokyo: Liber Press.Google Scholar
Štekauer, Pavol. 1998. An Onomasiological Theory of English Word-Formation. Amsterdam: Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2005. Onomasiological approach to word-formation. In Handbook of Word-Formation, Pavol Štekauer & Rochelle Lieber (eds), 207–232. Dordrecht: Springer.Google Scholar
. 2017. Competition in natural languages. In Competing Patterns in English Affixation, Juan Santana-Lario & Salvador Valera (eds), 15–32. Bern: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
Sugioka, Yoko. 2005. Multiple mechanisms underlying morphological productivity. In Polymorphous Linguistics: Jim McCawley’s Legacy, Salikoko S. Mufwene, Elaine J. Francis & Rebecca S. Wheeler, 203–224. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Tribout, Delphine & Villoing, Florence. 2014. La composition VN et la conversion V>N en français: un nouveau cas de concurrence morphologique? In Foisonnements Morphologiques: Études en Hommage à Françoise Kerleroux, Florence Villoing, Sophie David & Sarah Leroy (eds), 75–108. Nanterre: Presses universitaires de Paris Ouest.Google Scholar
Trips, Carola. 2009. Lexical Semantics and Diachronic Morphology: The Development of -hood, -dom and -ship in the History of English. Tübingen: Niemeyer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ueno, Yoshio. 2015. An Automodular View of Ellipsis. Tokyo: Waseda University Press.Google Scholar
Varvara, Rossella. 2020. Constraints on nominalizations: Investigating the productivity domain of Italian ‑mento and ‑zione. Zeitschrift für Wortbildung/Journal of Word Formation 4(2): 78–99. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Varvara, Rossella, Lapesa, Gabriella & Padó, Sebastian. 2021. Grounding semantic transparency in context: A distributional semantic study of German event nominalizations. Morphology 31(4): 409–446. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Varvara, Rossella & Zamparelli, Roberto. 2019. Competition between event-denoting deverbal nouns and nominal infinitives in Italian. In Competition in Inflection and Word-Formation, Franz Rainer, Francesco Gardani, Wolfgang U. Dressler & Hans Christian Luschützky (eds), 169–193. Cham: Springer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Villalva, Alina. 2022. Complex verbs: The interplay of suffixation, conversion, and parasynthesis in Portuguese and English. In Paradigms in Word Formation: Theory and Applications, Alba E. Ruz, Cristina Fernández-Alcaina & Cristina Lara-Clares (eds), 249–282. Amsterdam: Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Yang, Charles. 2006. The Price of Linguistic Productivity: How Children Learn to Break the Rules of Language. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Zehentner, Eva. 2022. Competing constructions construct complementary niches. Language Dynamics and Change 13(1): 34–73. DOI logoGoogle Scholar