The fine line between compounds and portmanteau words in English: A prototypical analysis
Abstract
The current paper investigates two productive morphological processes, namely compounds and portmanteau words (or blends). While compounds, a productive, regular and predicable morphological process, have received much attention in the literature, little attention was paid to portmanteau words, a creative, irregular and unpredictable word formation process. The present paper aims to find the commonalities and differences between these morphological devices, using Rosch et al.’s (1975; 1976) theory of prototypes and basic-level categories to achieve this goal. This theory will also be employed to discuss the literature on the word formation mechanisms under investigation and propose a new categorization approach to these neologisms. The analysis suggests that compounds and blends compare and contrast and that the distinctions between them are blurry. The analysis confirms that a prototypical approach is well suited to compounds and blends in English. This has implications for future research into English word-formation processes in general and compounds and blends precisely.
Keywords
Full Text:
PDFReferences
Adams, V. (1973). An introduction to modern English word-formation. London: Longman.
Aitchison, J. (2012). Words in the mind: An introduction to the mental lexicon (4th ed.). John Wiley & Sons.
Algeo, J. (1978). The taxonomy of word making. Word, 29(2), 122-131.
Arnaud, P. J. (2013). Word-formation and word-creation: A data-driven exploration of inventiveness in neologisms. Quaderns de Filologia. Estudis lingüístics, 18, 97-113.
Arndt-Lappe, S., & Plag, I. (2013). The role of prosodic structure in the formation of English blends. English Language and Linguistics, 17(3), 537.
Aronoff, M. (1976). Word formation in generative grammar. Massachusetts: The MIT Press.
Aronoff, M, & Anshen, F. (1998). Morphology and the lexicon: lexicalization and productivity. In A. Spencer & A. Zwicky (Eds.), The Handbook of Morphology. Oxford: Blackwell.
Barlow, M. (2000). Usage, blends and grammar. In M. Barlow & S. Kemmer (Eds.), Usage-based models of language. California: CSLI.
Bauer, L. (1983). English word-formation. London: Cambridge.
Bauer, L. (1998). Is there a class of neoclassical compounds, and if so is it productive? Linguistics, 36(3).
Bauer, L. (2001). Morphological Productivity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Bauer, L. (2003). Introducing linguistic morphology (2nd ed.). Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.
Bauer, L. (2006). Compounds and minor word-formation types. In B. Aarts & A. McMahon (Eds.), The handbook of English linguistics (pp. 483–506). Oxford: Blackwell.
Bauer, L. (2012). Blends. Core and Periphery. In V. Renner, F. Maniez & P. Arnaud (Eds.), Cross-Disciplinary Perspectives on Lexical Blending (pp. 11-22). Berlin: De Gruyter.
Beard, R. (1998). Derivation. In A. Spencer & M. Z. Arnold (Eds.), The Handbook of Morphology. Oxford: Blackwell.
Beliaeva, N. (2014). Unpacking contemporary English blends: Morphological structure, meaning, processing.
Beliaeva, N. (2019). Blending creativity and productivity: on the issue of delimiting the boundaries of blends as a type of word formation. Lexis. Journal in English Lexicology, (14).
Berlin, B., Breedlove, D.E, Raven, P.H. (2013). Principles of Tzeltal Plant Classification. An Introduction to the Botanical Ethnography of a Mayan-Speaking People of Highland Chiapas. New York and London: Academic Press. (Original work published 1974)
Brdar-Szabó, R., & Brdar, M. (2008). On the marginality of lexical blending. Jezikoslovlje, 9.
Brdar, M. (2017). Metonymy and word-formation: Their interactions and Complementation. Cambridge: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.
Cannon, G. (1986). Blends in English word formation. Linguistics, 24 (4), 725-753.
Collins Cobuild English dictionary. (1987). London: Harper Collins.
Downing, P. (1977). On the creation and use of English compound nouns. Language, 53, 810-842.
Dressler, W. U. (2000). Extra grammatical vs. marginal morphology. Extra grammatical and marginal morphology, 1(11).
Evans, V., & Green, M. (2006). Cognitive Linguistics: An Introduction. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press Ltd.
Fandrych, I. (2008). Submorphemic elements in the formation of acronyms, blends and clippings. Lexis. Journal in English Lexicology, (2), 103-121.
Geeraerts, D. (2013). Diachronic Prototype Semantics. A Digest. In A. Blank & P. Koch (Eds.), Historical Semantics and Cognition. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. (Original work published 1999)
Ginzburg R. S., Khidekel, S. S., Knyazeva, G. Y., & Sankin, A. A. (1979). A Course in Modern English Lexicology (2nd Ed.). Moscow: Visshaya Shkola.
Gries, S. T. (2004). Isn’t that fantabulous? How similarity motivates intentional morphological blends in English. Language, culture, and mind, 415-428.
Gries, S. T. (2012). Quantitative corpus data on blend formation: Psycho-and cognitive-linguistic perspectives. In V. Renner, F. Maniez & P. Arnaud (Eds.), Cross-Disciplinary Perspectives on Lexical Blending (pp. 145-167). Berlin: De Gruyter.
Hamans, C. (2010). The productivity of blending: Linguistic or cognitive? Or how to deal with administrivia and ostalgia. Lingua Terra Cognita II. A Festschrift for professor Roman Kalisz. Gdańsk: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Gdańskiego, 467-490.
Hamawand, Z. (2011). Morphology in English: Word formation in cognitive grammar. London: Continuum.
Haspelmath, M., & A. Sims. (2010). Understanding Morphology (2nd ed). London: Hodder.
Johnson, Mark. (1987). The body in the mind: the bodily basis of imagination, reason and meaning. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
Kemmer, S. (2003). Schemas and lexical blends. In H. Cuyckens, T. Berg, R. Dirven & K.-U. Panther (Eds.), Motivation in language: From case grammar to cognitive linguistics. A Festschrift for Gunter Radden (pp. 69–97). Amsterdam & Philadelphia: Benjamins.
Lahlou, H., & Ho-Abdullah, I. (2012). A Cognitive Approach to Compounds and Blends: Revising the linguistic approach to blends. Germany: LAP LAMBERT Academic Publishing.
Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. (2003). Metaphors we Live by. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press (Original work published 1980).
Lakoff, G. (2008). Women, Fire, and Dangerous Things: What Categories Reveal about the Mind. Chicago and London: The University of Chicago Press. (Original work published 1987)
Lehrer, A. (1996). Identifying and interpreting blends: an experimental approach. Cognitive Linguistics, 7(4), 359-390.
Lehrer, A. (2007). Blendalicious. In J. Munat (Ed.), Lexical Creativity, Texts and Contexts (pp. 115-133). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
Mattiello, E. (2013). Extra-Grammatical Morphology in English. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.
Plag, I. (2003). Word-formation in English. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Quinion, M. (1996). Through the blender. World Wide Words. Retrieved from http://www.worldwidewords.org/articles/blend.htm
Renner, V., Maniez, F., & Arnaud, P. J. (2012). Introduction: A bird’s-eye view of lexical blending. In V. Renner, F. Maniez & P. Arnaud (Eds.), Cross-Disciplinary Perspectives on Lexical Blending (pp. 1-9). Berlin: De Gruyter.
Ronneberger-Sibold, E. (2010, February). Word Creation Definition—Function—Typology. In Variation and Change in Morphology: Selected Papers from the 13th International Morphology Meeting, Vienna, February 2008 (Vol. 310, p. 201). John Benjamins Publishing.
Rosch, E. (1975). Cognitive Representations of Semantic Categories. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 104(3), 192.
Rosch, E., Mervis, C. B., Gray, W. D., Johnson, D. M., & Boyes-Braem, P. (1976). Basic Objects in Natural Categories. Cognitive psychology, 8(3), 382-439.
Rúa, P. L. (2004). The categorial continuum of English blends. English studies, 85(1), 63-76.
Stekauer, P. (2001). Fundamental principles of an onomasiological theory of English word-formation. Onomasiology Online, 2, 1-42.
Trask, R. L. (1994). Language Change. London: Routledge.
Trommer, J. & Zimmermann, E. (2012). Portmanteaus as generalized templates. In V. Renner, F. Maniez & P. Arnaud (Eds.), Cross-Disciplinary Perspectives on Lexical Blending (pp. 233-258). Berlin: De Gruyter.
Turner, M., & Fauconnier, G. (1995). Conceptual integration and formal expression. Metaphor & Symbolic Activity, 10(3), 183-204.
Refbacks
- There are currently no refbacks.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
ISSN 1305-578X (Online)
Copyright © 2005-2022 by Journal of Language and Linguistic Studies