Inflection and derivation as traditional comparative concepts

Datos Bibliográficos

ID4758737
AutoresMartin Haspelmath (0000-0003-2100-8493, Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology , Leipzig , Germany, autor de correspondencia)
Año2024
Volumen62
Número1
Páginas43-77
Fecha de publicación2024-01-29
Peer ReviewedSí
Open AccessSí
TipoARTICLE
RevistaLinguistics (JOURNAL)
Identificadores de la revistaISSN: 0024-3949 • E-ISSN: 1613-396X
EditorialWalter de Gruyter GmbH (PUBLISHER • DE)
DOI10.1515/ling-2022-0086
OpenAlexW4390166905
IdiomaEN
Citas recibidas8
Referencias citadas73

This article revisits the distinction between inflectional and derivational patterns in general grammar and discusses the possibility that this well-known distinction is not rooted in the reality of languages, but in the Western tradition of describing languages, through dictionaries (for words, including derived lexemes) and through grammar books (where we often find tables of exemplary paradigms). This tradition has led to rather different terminological treatments of the two kinds of patterns, but from the perspective of a constructional view of morphology, there is no need to incorporate such differences into formal grammatical descriptions. For practical purposes, we need clear and simple definitions of entrenched terms of general linguistics, so the article proposes semantically based (retro-) definitions of inflection, derivation and lexeme that cover the bulk of the existing usage. Finally, I briefly explain why we need sharp definitions of comparative concepts, and why prototype-based and fuzzy definitions of traditional terms are not helpful

Comparative linguistics · Epistemology · Grammar · Inflection · Lexeme · Linguistics · Perspective (graphical) · Simple (philosophy) · Sociology · Theoretical linguistics · Artificial Intelligence · Computer Science · Historical Linguistics and Language Studies · Linguistics and language evolution · Philosophy · Syntax, Semantics, Linguistic Variation