Nativization and German - ieren

Historically, languages seem to have two kinds of affixes: those that stay put as unproductive (English - ity , Hindi - at , and German - sal ) and those that go on to increase their lexical domain (English - hood and non -, Hindi be -, German - ung ). When a native affix attaches to non-native lexical items it could not previously attach to, we say that the lexical items in question have moved into the native classification (cf. Allen 1978; Aronoff 1976). English - hood , originally restricted to native bases, now attaches to latinate bases such as priest and state , implying that state and priest have been totally nativized. When a non-native affix increases its lexical domain, we say that the original restriction on it has been removed. Hindi be , originally restricted to [+Persian] words can now attach to almost any adjective (cf. Singh, forthcoming). Non-native affixes either stay put as unproductive (cf. English - ity ) or may generalize to cover the entire lexicon (cf. English non - and Hindi be -). When they do generalize so pervasively, they can be attached productively to newly borrowed words. Attachment to newly borrowed words, however, generally implies free attachability with native bases (cf. the Russian nominal suffix - izm discussed in Shanskii, 1968, particularly pp. 100 ff)

Adjective · Affix · German · Hindi · Lexical item · Lexicon · Linguistics · Noun · Suffix · Word formation · Linguistic Variation and Morphology · Philosophy · Swearing, Euphemism, Multilingualism · Syntax, Semantics, Linguistic Variation

• Multilingualism, sociolinguistics and theories of linguistic form

  Open Access•Rajendra Singh•Language Sciences•2010

  Añadir item

• Russian Word-Formation

  Alexander Vitek, Charles E Townsend•The Slavic and East European…•1969

  Añadir item

• Assimilation Rates of Borrowings and Phonological Productivity

  Kyril Holden, Kyril T Holden•Language•1976

  Añadir item