25.12.2013 Views

0 INTRODUCTION

0 INTRODUCTION

0 INTRODUCTION

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

6. FINDINGS<br />

6.2.1. Romance nominalizations in relation to borrowing and other word-formation<br />

processes<br />

This section analyzes how exactly Romance nominalizations were acquired by the English<br />

language. As already mentioned, the methods available for vocabulary expansion are<br />

borrowing, affixation and the revival of obsolete native words, but in the case under<br />

discussion here only the first two apply.<br />

As Nevalainen (1999: 397) points out, it is sometimes difficult to decide whether<br />

Romance nominalizations have been borrowed or rather created in English following<br />

Romance word-formation patterns. In this dissertation, Romance nominalizations which<br />

are attested in English at an earlier date than the corresponding verbs are considered<br />

borrowings, e.g. concoction (1531 vs. concoct 1607), convulsion (1599 vs. convulse 1643).<br />

Romance nominalizations having no corresponding verb in English are also considered<br />

borrowings, e.g. friction, deligation. By contrast, it can be safely assumed that Romance<br />

nominalizations having a Romance suffix but a native base can be regarded as English<br />

coinages on Latin patterns, e.g. tillage, ailment. Finally, those Romance nominalizations<br />

attested later than their corresponding verbs or attested in the same year could be either<br />

borrowings or English coinages, so they have been classified as indeterminate, e.g.<br />

advisement (1393 vs. advise 1325), suspension (1425 vs. suspend 1425).<br />

Table 18. Romance nominalizations: borrowing vs. affixation<br />

Borrowings English Indeterminate TOTAL<br />

coinages<br />

Romance nom. 189 4 154 347<br />

204

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!