Article published in:Grammaticalization and Language Change: New reflections
Edited by Kristin Davidse, Tine Breban, Lieselotte Brems and Tanja Mortelmans
[Studies in Language Companion Series 130] 2012
► pp. 135–166
“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”.
Published online: 30 October 2012
Cited by 1 other publications
Van de Velde, Freek & Muriel Norde
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 21 february 2021. 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.