Inflection and derivation as traditional comparative concepts

Bibliographic Data

ID4758737
AuthorsMartin Haspelmath (0000-0003-2100-8493, Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology , Leipzig , Germany, corresponding author)
Year2024
Volume62
Issue1
Pages43-77
Publication date2024-01-29
Peer ReviewedYes
Open AccessYes
TypeARTICLE
VenueLinguistics (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 0024-3949 • E-ISSN: 1613-396X
PublisherWalter de Gruyter GmbH (PUBLISHER • DE)
DOI10.1515/ling-2022-0086
OpenAlexW4390166905
LanguageEN
Citations received8
References cited73

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