I have been taught that there are 12 word formation processes: 1) Coining 2) Adoption of Brand Names 3) Onomatopoeia 4) Borrowing 5) Affixation 6) Clipping 7) Blending 8) Reduplication 9) Acronyms 10) Backformation 11) Conversion 12) Compounding
6:40 Hello, I was searching about this kind of words for the chart and I can find them Can you help me with more examples for each one or maybe one way for find them on internet? Please it's for a work...
I'm no linguist, but I would argue that things like "silk tie" and "aluminum foil" do not break the compound stress rule because they are not compounds at all. I would say that "silk tie" are two words where each performs a specific function. "Tie" is a noun which informs us of what we are talking about (a tie) and "silk" acts as an adjective here. It informs us of what type of tie we are referring to specifically. This may, however, just be a disagreement over the definition of what a word is. I would say that "Boston Marathon," though functioning as one unit to refer to a specific event, is actually made up of two words, where "marathon" tells us what we are talking about and "Boston" specifies which marathon we are referring to in particular. Anyway, nice videos. Keep up the great work.
So undesirability can be split up into: {un-} + {desire} + {-able} + {-ty}, right? Therefore: 1. {desire} + {-able} = denominal Adjectivecompound using Suffixation. 2. {desirable} + {-ty} = deadjectivial Nouncompund using Suffixation. 3. {un-} + {desirability} = Negation using Prefixiation. In sum, this compound is a negated nominal compound. Is that correct? Are there better ways to describe the individual processes of compounding?
+Immortal Songs Thanks for watching! While 'thank you' is such a frequent string that you might be tempted to analyze it as a word, there are several pieces of evidence against the idea that it might be a compound: 1. It does not have a head ('armchair' is a kind of 'chair', 'thank you' is not a kind of 'you'). 2. It is not clear to me what word class 'thank you' would instantiate. Yes, you might be able to pluralize it and speak of 'thank yous', but it mostly behaves like a sentence, not like a word. 3. The combination of verb and pronoun is not a particularly coherent schema (there are 'f*** you', 'let's', 'tell me', 'hit it', etc., but what do they have in common?). So I'd say it is a construction in its own right (ua-cam.com/video/9DllnszLuM0/v-deo.html).
I think that jumping been is some kind of bean with a worm in it which makes it look like it's jumping when the worm is moving inside. At least that's what it was originally ;)
An observation: I understand that this is INTRODUCTION to linguistics, so therefore you do not go into greater detail when discussing these. However I still need to ask - are you familiar with the Cognitive Onomasiological Theory (Štekauer, 1996, 1998, 2001) ? It is a part of Word Formation realm and greatly explains not only Conversion (which is my main point here, as it is not simply "changing the word class of a word") but most (all) other Word Formation processes and makes it possible to group them together, without the need for the division between Compounding, Affixation, Blending etc.. The starting point is a semantic analysis of extralinguistic reality, rather than analysis of an actual word as seen in the Semasiological approach. Please bear in mind I am not an advanced student, rather a beginner, but already I can see the wide possible implications of this theory, where the main focus lies on the act of naming - and most importantly - the speaker/coiner himself. A word is not formed by itself, and human input plays a huge role - this concept is ignored by vast majority of mainstream linguists, which is a shame. Needless to say, all the other morphological, lexical and phonological processes and rules are still valid and applicable (and necessary of course). Still, thank you for all the videos on your channel - especially concerning morphology and word formation. Very helpful for all the beginners out there :)
A comment I'd like to make is that in "linguist" there are two syllables not three.../liŋg-wist/. (Please, correct me if I'm wrong, or if I've misunderstood your point somewhere). I do like your videos, warm greetings!
Hi Seda! The two are different words, with different etymologies. So although they are written the same, we don't have conversion here. Best wishes, --Martin
grating is confusing...seems as if it was derived from another class-word. like 'caring' is derived from the word 'care', by adding the DERIVATIONAL suffix 'ing' to the root 'care' What is the difference between them? why the 'grating 'has a INFLECTIONAL suffix and and 'caring' has a DERIVATIONAL suffix? (
2021. Still valuable. Thank you professor!
@ 31:37
You can't have 'goap' as a blend but there're no rules which says you can't have 'shoat'. So, you can either call it 'geep' or 'shoat' : )
I have been taught that there are 12 word formation processes:
1) Coining
2) Adoption of Brand Names
3) Onomatopoeia
4) Borrowing
5) Affixation
6) Clipping
7) Blending
8) Reduplication
9) Acronyms
10) Backformation
11) Conversion
12) Compounding
Can be extended.
You helped me understand this topic very easily during quarantine! Great job and thank you!
Thank you! Stay safe!
6:40
Hello, I was searching about this kind of words for the chart and I can find them
Can you help me with more examples for each one or maybe one way for find them on internet? Please it's for a work...
Thanks very much it was helpful and interesting.
I'm no linguist, but I would argue that things like "silk tie" and "aluminum foil" do not break the compound stress rule because they are not compounds at all. I would say that "silk tie" are two words where each performs a specific function. "Tie" is a noun which informs us of what we are talking about (a tie) and "silk" acts as an adjective here. It informs us of what type of tie we are referring to specifically.
This may, however, just be a disagreement over the definition of what a word is. I would say that "Boston Marathon," though functioning as one unit to refer to a specific event, is actually made up of two words, where "marathon" tells us what we are talking about and "Boston" specifies which marathon we are referring to in particular.
Anyway, nice videos. Keep up the great work.
+Martin Hilpert If one of the words you are blending begins with a vowel sound, how would the technique that you showed here change?
So undesirability can be split up into: {un-} + {desire} + {-able} + {-ty}, right?
Therefore:
1. {desire} + {-able} = denominal Adjectivecompound using Suffixation.
2. {desirable} + {-ty} = deadjectivial Nouncompund using Suffixation.
3. {un-} + {desirability} = Negation using Prefixiation.
In sum, this compound is a negated nominal compound.
Is that correct? Are there better ways to describe the individual processes of compounding?
how about the word "UA-camr" can you make a short analyze about which term could describe?
Compounding and then Affixation
backformation
Very useful. Thanks a lot
it was very easy and informative lecture.
your videos are always useful for me thank you!
+Zahide Duvan Thanks for watching!
Thank you, I now understand this :) Apart from that, do you think the word 'thank you' is a compounding ?
+Immortal Songs Thanks for watching! While 'thank you' is such a frequent string that you might be tempted to analyze it as a word, there are several pieces of evidence against the idea that it might be a compound: 1. It does not have a head ('armchair' is a kind of 'chair', 'thank you' is not a kind of 'you'). 2. It is not clear to me what word class 'thank you' would instantiate. Yes, you might be able to pluralize it and speak of 'thank yous', but it mostly behaves like a sentence, not like a word. 3. The combination of verb and pronoun is not a particularly coherent schema (there are 'f*** you', 'let's', 'tell me', 'hit it', etc., but what do they have in common?). So I'd say it is a construction in its own right (ua-cam.com/video/9DllnszLuM0/v-deo.html).
Nice explanation. Could you please help me. the explanation of the historical changes of productivity. Thank you.
Thank you so much for these highly structured video.I want to ask about how many types of conversion we have?
I think that jumping been is some kind of bean with a worm in it which makes it look like it's jumping when the worm is moving inside. At least that's what it was originally ;)
Veronika Surovcová yuck!
An observation: I understand that this is INTRODUCTION to linguistics, so therefore you do not go into greater detail when discussing these. However I still need to ask - are you familiar with the Cognitive Onomasiological Theory (Štekauer, 1996, 1998, 2001) ?
It is a part of Word Formation realm and greatly explains not only Conversion (which is my main point here, as it is not simply "changing the word class of a word") but most (all) other Word Formation processes and makes it possible to group them together, without the need for the division between Compounding, Affixation, Blending etc.. The starting point is a semantic analysis of extralinguistic reality, rather than analysis of an actual word as seen in the Semasiological approach. Please bear in mind I am not an advanced student, rather a beginner, but already I can see the wide possible implications of this theory, where the main focus lies on the act of naming - and most importantly - the speaker/coiner himself. A word is not formed by itself, and human input plays a huge role - this concept is ignored by vast majority of mainstream linguists, which is a shame. Needless to say, all the other morphological, lexical and phonological processes and rules are still valid and applicable (and necessary of course).
Still, thank you for all the videos on your channel - especially concerning morphology and word formation. Very helpful for all the beginners out there :)
In your lessons about morphological productive I didn't understand the meaning of words when you add suffixes on it .
Thank you for the beautiful lecture .❤️
A comment I'd like to make is that in "linguist" there are two syllables not three.../liŋg-wist/. (Please, correct me if I'm wrong, or if I've misunderstood your point somewhere). I do like your videos, warm greetings!
Many words allow variation between two and three syllables: family, every, liberal, etc. Bisyllabic is indeed more common with "linguist"!
this video was recorded 11 years ago WOW
Well done sir
negative iN- also changes before 'r' (irregular') and 'l' (illegible).
The wind blew and wind the clock. The two different wind here are conversion?
Hi Seda! The two are different words, with different etymologies. So although they are written the same, we don't have conversion here. Best wishes, --Martin
@@MartinHilpert Thank you so much Martin. But then what is here? Are they homonyms?
@@sedamouette1125 Yes, exactly. See for example here: ahdictionary.com/word/search.html?q=wind
This was so useful thank you! I wrote chickagator
Very useful thanx a lot 😊
My centauric choice is "cockodile".
thanks a lot ,it is useful
+Jaza ahmed Thanks for watching!
Hi
I have question
Biology
is it infixtion
if it is
can you tell me how
Nope
grating is confusing...seems as if it was derived from another class-word. like 'caring' is derived from the word 'care', by adding the DERIVATIONAL suffix 'ing' to the root 'care'
What is the difference between them? why the 'grating 'has a INFLECTIONAL suffix and and 'caring' has a DERIVATIONAL suffix? (
Thank you mister
it is useful ,,, God bless you
Good luck
thank you so much, it helped a lot)
.....”alcoholics or rapists or what not” the way you casually throw that out as if that was the average born again Christian is hilarious 😂
29:02 chiguana
Yes ,it is useful for us
Cool
thx so much from Morocco
Thank you so much ❤❤
Thank you sir
i am from iraq
in my book mophology is so hart can you halp me pleas ☺
Thank you;)