16.01.2014 Views

The morphological productivity of selected ... - Helda - Helsinki.fi

The morphological productivity of selected ... - Helda - Helsinki.fi

The morphological productivity of selected ... - Helda - Helsinki.fi

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.

with <strong>fi</strong>nal stress, and it is fully productive. However, its domain is diminished by -<br />

ität (with learned bases) and, more rarely, -ie (with adjectives ending in -phil).<br />

Férnandez-Domínguez de<strong>fi</strong>nes both type blocking and token blocking as<br />

examples <strong>of</strong> synonymy blocking, as opposed to homonymy blocking, which<br />

prevents the coining <strong>of</strong> a new word because <strong>of</strong> structural overlapping with an<br />

existing word (2007: 71–73). For example, the word liver ‘inner organ’ prevents<br />

the coining <strong>of</strong> *liver ‘someone who lives’ (Plag 1999: 50; cited in Férnandez-<br />

Domínguez 2007: 73).<br />

To conclude, it can be said that new words are always formed for a<br />

speci<strong>fi</strong>c need, and thus constraints may not tell us everything about the<br />

pr<strong>of</strong>itability <strong>of</strong> word-formation processes (Bauer 2001: 143). Férnandez-<br />

Domínguez goes as far as to state that the naming need on the part <strong>of</strong> the language<br />

community is so strong that it may even “knock out” the restrictions caused by<br />

various constraints (2007: 84). In any case, the application <strong>of</strong> different wordformation<br />

processes is seldom straightforward, and there are several exceptions to<br />

the rules.<br />

3. Material and methods<br />

3.1. A closer look at the <strong>selected</strong> combining forms<br />

As was stated earlier, combining forms can be divided into initial and <strong>fi</strong>nal<br />

combining forms. In this study, I will compare the two and try to <strong>fi</strong>nd out whether<br />

they differ in <strong>productivity</strong>. To do so, I will compare the values <strong>of</strong> Baayen’s<br />

potential <strong>productivity</strong> P <strong>of</strong> three initial combining forms (hyper-, ultra-, and<br />

pseudo) as well as three <strong>fi</strong>nal combining forms (-logy, -graphy, and -nomy), in<br />

order to determine whether there are any major differences in the <strong>productivity</strong><br />

rates between these two subtypes. <strong>The</strong>se six combining forms were chosen<br />

because they are among the most frequent ones in the BNC. Sample size is<br />

important in performing statistical analyses on the combining forms, since many<br />

<strong>of</strong> the measures used in this study do not work properly if the sample is too small<br />

(see section 2.3.3. for discussion).<br />

39

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

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!