“The ghosts of old morphology”
Lexicalization or (de)grammaticalization?
“Ghost” inflectional morphology that has lost its grammatical function but remains as phonetic material has been argued to have undergone lexicalization (since the inflection becomes an unanalyzable part of the lexical item and emerges as “more lexical”) and/or degrammaticalization (since the inflection loses grammatical function and is hence “less grammatical”); if seen as the natural consequence of an inflection having attained advanced grammatical status, it may also be understood as degrammaticalization. Focusing on comparative -er (near), superlative -est (next), adverbial genitive -s (e.g. once, towards, sideways), and adverbial dative -um (whilom), this paper distinguishes between changes affecting different parts of a construction (i.e. the host words and the inflectional endings) and argues that the inflections are subject to neither lexicalization nor (de)grammaticalization, but are instances of “petrification”.
Cited by (1)
Cited by one other publication
Van de Velde, Freek & Muriel Norde
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 16 july 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.