a-:
~:
af
-
stootoff push
"repulsivell af"
-
sakdown sink
11 sediment n
-
::'IK~-ly
-
SEL,-ment
'buite ~'kerk - LIK, outside church -ly
"extra-clerical"
in voeg'- SEL, in add -rr.ent
"insertion"
buite ~ eg(te) ~'LIK
out of wedlock -ly
"illegitimate"
a a n - pak - SEL on lay -ment
"layer (of dirt)"
A - militere - opleiding, ~ - verpligte - sport, a- ~llitary training a- compulsary sport A - sosiale - versekering
a..- social insurance
GE
-
rooi-
das, GE - wit-
hemE, GE-
s,.rart - manel -ed red tie -ed white shirt -ed black frock-coat"wearing a red
"
Wearltlg a white ' "wearing a blacktie" shirt" frock-coat"
1'his list does not pretend to be eXhaustive: Kempen's (1969:§143) dis- cussion of Afrikaans synthetic compounds exemplifies the conventional, i.e. nongenerative, approach to the analysis of such morphologically complex forms as those listed above.
2. For this conventional view of synthetic cOIIOpounds cf., e.g." Henzen 1957: 23,7 and l1archand 1969: l5ff .
3. This view was documented in note 7 to chapter 1.
4. A synthetic compound may be said to consist of an affixal constituent and a 'phrasal constituent. For example; diklippig consists of the affixal constituent -ig and the phrasal constituent [dik lip] NP . The phrasal constituent, in turn, consists of a 'head constituent and a peripheral constituent. In the case of [dik lip] N? the head con- stituent is [lip] N and the peripheral constituent is [dikJ Adj • In traditionil.l tenns, the peripheral constituent is said to be "incor- porated" in the synthetic compound.
5. In essence the argunents which, for. example, Koster (1975) and Neijt (1976; 1979:7ff.) provide for considering Dutch a language which is underlyingly SOY apply to Afrikaans as well.
-o-.--}'or anaccount-of"-h-ow'-tnis tranS-for-mation fUnctions in the syntax of Dutch cf. Koster 1975.
7. Cf. §2.4.1.1 above for SOIne of the problems generated by assump- tion (13)(b).
B. Cf. §2.4.5 above for this point.
9. Cf. §3.5.3.2 above for this point.
10. "'01" these levels of ling'Jistic structure or representation c:f., e.g.,
Chomsky and Lasnik 1977 and Chomsky 1978.
11. Allen (1978:161-162) cites English forms which illustrate the same point.
12. The affix -e ~arks the attributive form of (certain) adjectives.
13. For the notion "word-based morphology" cf. Aronoff 1976: 21.
14. For the theoretical framework into which this constraint fits cf.
chapter 1 of this study.
15. For example, Roeper and Siegel 1978: 213-214.
16. Even the evidence from English provided by Aronoff (1976123ff.) for this constraint is less than convincing. This evidence involves con- troversial assumptions about thc phonological cycle in English and the status of back-formation in a theory of synchronic morpho~ogy.
17. Cf. Botha to appear: §§lo.4.2.2.2 for the way in which this crite- rion is used in the validation of linguistic hypotheses and theories.
18. Neither Roeper and Siegel (1978) nor Allen (1978) consider this pro- blen in connection with English. Fre.ser (1976:129-132) offers a few informal observations about the problem in the context of a discus- sion of verb-particle constructions. For some discussion of this pro- blem as it is manifested in Afrikaans cf. Le Roux to appear.
19. Schultink (1976) studied the stress patterns of Dutch synthetic com-
pounds in depth. Claassens (1979:chap: 6) attempted to replicate Schultink's study for Afrikaans. Claassens, however, fails to solve any significant problem in his work.
20. For this point cf. §2.4.3 above.
21. Aronoff cites Zimmer (1964) as an example of "a. modern author who does stress the fact that morphological form affects productivity".
If "modern" can also be taken to mean "structuralist" in this context, Aronoff could have referred to the early work of Schultink (1962:
42-43) and that of certain linguists (e.g., Uhlenbeck) cited by Schultink for this "fact".
22. Cf. Aronoff 1976:36 for more details.
23. Cf. Zimmer 1964:35-36.
24. For the notions "string adjacent" and "structure adjacent" cf., e.g., Chomsky and Lasnik 1977:482-483 and De Haan 1979:43.
2S. Roeper and Siegel's (1978) analysis of the latter compounds was illustrated in §2.3 above.
26. Notice that the deep structure phrase (SO) incorporates the preposi- tion ~ which may optionally appear in the surface form of the compound: deur-wind-gedroogde is an acceptable variant of windge- droogde. In §4.4.2.6 below we turn briefly to the ~uestion of the occurrence of prepositions in Afrikaans synthetic compounds.
27. For this analysis cf.Thereza Botha to appear.
28. For a number of subregularities cf. the reference in note 27.
29. Of the thematic fUnctions listed in (61) only that of accompaniment needs some elucidation. Gruber (1976:71) illustrates this thematic function as follows: "another nonMottonal sense of prepositions with Motional verbs is the expression of Accompaniment. In the sentence John flew the kite ahead of him the sense ma¥ be that John waS moving, maintaining the kite ahead of him".
-~FOrTne "-leJ(T8ir-su.bcategoi'i-es--or-whi"ch "besoek and" rook are members cr. Thereza Botha to appear.
31. cr. 82.2 above for Roeper and Siegel's First Sister Principle and
§2.4.4 for the role of the rules of Subcategorization Adjustment and Variable Deletion.
32. At this stage of the inquiry, it is not clear whether the forms (ii)-(iv) and (vi)-(viii) below should be analyzed as synthetic com- pounds incorporating a syntactically complex head constituent (under- scored) or whether they should be analyzed as primary compounds con- sisting of a noncomplex first constituent and a second constituent which is a synthetic compound:
(i)
(ii )
( iii)
(iv)
leeu -"~- Ell. (v)
lion bite -er
leeu- dood
-
b:t:t -ER (vi) lion dead bite -erklere - stukkend -byt - Ell. (vii) clothes to pieces bite -er
kop - af - b:t:t - ER head off bite -er
(viii)
pap - maak -ER porridge make -er pap
-
00]2 -'- maak - ER porridge open inake -er pap -warm - maak - ER porridge warm make -er pap - aan - maak - ER porridge up make -cr33. For the requirement that the non-linguistic principles in question should be independently motivated cf., e.g., Bever 1975.
34. A third alternative approach to the apparent counterexamples (69) to the Complexity Constraint would be to look for reasons for denying them the status of synthetic compounds. If such reasons could be found they would cease to be relevant to the evaluation of this con- straint. Ror the general nature of the reasons for not assigning expressions the status of synthetic compounds cf. §4.5.6 below.
35. Cf. §4.3.3.3 above for this nonprediction of the Deep Structllre Hypothesis.
36. Notice incidentally that Roeper and Siegel (1978:241-242), contrary to what is expected on the basis of the No Phrase Constraint, find
themselves compelled to account for -ed compounds which "involve a vcry restrictcd range of prepositional phrases". Their examples in- clude the following:
3l:.
at, in, "to withstars truck homemade bullet-ridden
wol ~~-reared pan-fried doo.'ll-laden
rebel-held land-based feather-filled
37. The meflning oc~ the prepositions tussen and onder (in combination witt.
that of the verbs kies, verdeel and (tweedrag) saai) is such that the compounds which incorporate the relevant NP in the singular for~ are
s~antically anomalous; e.g.:
*tusscn- ('n) - leier - kies - ERY between/ a
aT'long
leader choose ing
38. Cf., e.g., Halle 1973:10, Aronoff 1976:62-63, Allen 1978:chaD. 2.
39. For a modification of this view cf. Aronoff 1976:70ff.
40. Notc that this conclusion is based on an analysis of N + N nominal compounds; an analysis which has not been extended to V + N nominal compounds, of which Afrikaans has various subtypes (cf., e.g., Kempen 1969:§§56-57) .
41. Thc fact that it is possible to conceive of various primary compound interpretations for *leeuslaner is irrelevant to the argument.
42. It may be the case that this observation does not generalize to com- pound nouns of the form V + N. Cf. note 40 above.
43. E.g., Aronoff 1976, Allen 1978, Roeper and Siegel 1978.
44. For an analysis of this type of morphologically complex words cf.
Thereza Both8 in preparation.
45. For this notion cf. Bolinger 1971:3. Such forms have traditionally been known as "scheidbaar samengesteldc verba" in Dutch (cf., e.g.,
-])~rres-l97-5-:-lj3-)-and--as--"trennbare---.zusammensetzungen" in German (cf., e.g., Glinz 1962:389).
46. The Base Rule Theory, in fact, makes more predictions about the nature of synthetic compounds e.g. that such compounds will be distinct from transforms. The predictions considered above, how- ever, provide sufficient illustration of this aspect of the empirical content of the theory.
47.
cr.
Oosthuizen to appear for an analysis of the status of complex'~forms.
NOTES TO CHAnER 5
1. Some of the phrasal compounds in (1)-(5) have been taken from Kempen 1969:§70. Others are listed in a term paper by Thereza Botha.
2. It is possible that, within the framework of "lexical grammar" (cf.
Hoekstra, Van der HUlst and Moortgat 1979), vari ous al ternati ves to the Base Rule Theory may be formulated, such that these overcome the limitations of Roeper and Siegel's and Allen's theories without reouiring a modification of the No Phrase Constraint. The merit of these alternatives will be determined, among other things, by the measure of success which they achieve in "lexicalizing" the relevant
syntactic parameters. An inquiry into the nature and merit of these alternative theories, however, is a task for further research. At the time of writing the present study, I unfortunately did not have access to the contributions to the volume on "lexical grammar" edited by Hoekstra, Van der Hulst and Moortgat.
160
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Allen, Margaret Reece 1978
Aronoff, Mark 1976
Bach, Emmon 1974
Morphological investigations. Ph.D. Dissertation', Univer- sity of Connecticut.
'Word formation in generative grammar (='Linguistic 'Inquiry Monograph One). Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT
Press.
Syntactic theorL' New York, etc.: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, Inc.
Bever, Thomas A.
1974
1975
"The ascent of the specious or there' s a lot we don I t know about mirrors", in Cohen (ed.) 1974: 173-200.
"Functional explanations require independently motivated functional theories", Papers from the Parasession on Func- tionalism, Chicago Linguistic Society, 580-609.
Bloomfield, Leonard
1933 Language. London: George Allen ~ Unwin Ltd.
Bolinger, Dwight 1971
Booij, G.E.
1977
The phrasal verb in English. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard UniVersity Press.
Dutch morphology. A study of word formation in 'generative grammar. Lisse: The Peter de Ridder Press.
Botha, Rudolf P.
1968 The function of the lexicon 'in transformational gcnerative 'grammar (= ~ua LingUar~; 'Series Maior, No. 38).
The Haguc and Paris: Mouton.
1979
1980a
1980b
to appear
:Botha, Thereza to appear
in prepa- ration
Bresnan, Joan
'On the logic ofliliguistic research (= Utrecht Working Papers in Linguistics, No.2). Utrecht: Instituut voor Algernene Taalwetenschap, R.U.U.
Buitelyne van 'n teorie Oor srunestellende afleiding,.
Mimeographed.
"Roeper and Siegel's theory of verbal compounding: a cri- tical appraisal", StellEmbosch Papers in Linguistics, Nr. 4:
1-45.
"Allen's theory of synthetic compounding: a critical ap- praisal", in Van AL1{emade et al. (eds.) 1980:157-180.
The conduct of linguistic inquiry. A systematic introduc- tion to the methodology of ge~erat~ve gr~~ar. The Hague, Paris, New York: Mouton.
Generalizations about synthetic compounding in Afrikaans.
To appear in a 1981 number of ' Stell en bosch' Papers in Lin-
&uist~.
Primary compounds as bases of affixation rules: an apprai- sal of the Extended Ordering Hypotheses.
University of Stellenbosch.
M.A. Dissertation,
"A realistic transformational grammar", in Halle, Bresnan and Miller (eds.) 1978:1-59.
Carrier, Jill L.
1979
Chapin, Paul G.
1967
Chomsky, Noam 1970
The interaction of morphOlogical and phonological rules in Tagalog: a study in the relationship between rule compo- nents in grruT~ar. Ph.D. Dissertation, MIT, Cambridge, Mass.
On the syntax of word-derivation in English.
tation, HIT, Crunbridge, Mass.
Ph.D. Disser-
"Remarks on nominalization", in Jacobs and Rosenbaum (eds.) 1970.
1972
1978 "
Studies O?seri!anticsingenerativegraIiuitar (= "Janua Lin- guarum, Series;<!inor, No. 107). The Hague and Paris:
Mouton.
On binding. Mimeographed' [?ublished in'Linguistic Inquiry, Vol. 11, 1980:1-46J.
Chomsky, Noam, and Howard Lasnik 1977
1978
"Filters and control""Linguistic Inquiry, Vol. 8:425-504.
"A remark on contraction",' 'Linguistic 'InqUiry, Vol. 9:
268-274.
Claassens, S.J.H.
1979 K1emree1s van suffigaal afgeleide adjektiewe in Afrikaans.
D.Phil. Proefskrif, Universiteit van Stellenbosch.
Cohen, David (ed.)
1974 EXplaining linguistic phenomena. Washington, D.C.:
Hemisphere Publishing Corporation.
Culicover, P., T. Wasow, and A. Akmajian (eds.) 1977
De Haan, G.J.
1979
Formal syntax. New York: Academic Press.
Conditions on rules. The proper balance between syntax and semantics. Dordrecht: Foris Publications.
De Villiers, Reinette 19"{9
De Vries, J .W.
1975
Fraser, Bruce 1976
"Phrasal categories in word formation rules" , 'Stellenbosch Papers in Linguistics, Nr. 2:39-69.
Lexicale morfologie'van het werkwoord in Modern Nederlands.
Leiden: Universitaire Pers.
~he verb-particle'combinati6n in'English. New York and London: Academic Press.
1916
Glinz, Hans
1962
Halle, Morris
1973
·Lexical·sttucturesin syntax andse~anti~. Amsterdam, etc:·: North-Holland Publishing Company.
Die innere 1"orrn des Deutschen. Bine neue Deutsche Grammatik.
Dritte Auflage.Bern und I·lunchen: Francke Verlag.
"Prolegomena to a theory of ~.,rord formationlf ,_ Linguistic Inauiry, Vol. h:3-16.
Halle, Morris, Joan Bresnan, and George A. reiller (eds.)
1978
Henzen, Walter
1957
Linguistic theory and Dsvchological reality. Crunbridge, Hass.: The r-1IT Press.
Deutsche Wortbildung. 7,weite, verbesserte Auflage.
Tiibingen: Max Niemeyer Verlag.
Hoekstra, T., H. van der Hulst, M. Moortgat
1979 IntrodUction, Glot (Number devoted to "Lexical Grammar"), Jaargang 2: 1-48.
Jackendoff, Ray·S.
1972
1975
Semantic interpretation in generative grammar. Cambridge, 14ass. : ~nT Press.
"Morpholoe;ical and semantic regularities in the lexicon", Language, Vol. 51:639-671.
Jacobs, Roderick A., and Peter S. liosenballIl1 (eds.)
1970
Joseph, B:cian
1980
Readings in >o:nglish transformational grammar. Waltham, Kass.: Ginn and Co.
IlLex ical productivity versus syntactic generativityl!, Linguistic Incuiry, Vol. 11:420-426.
Kempen, W.
1969 cSamestelling, ca fleiding cenwoordsoorte1ike meerrUnksionali- C cteit incAfrikaans. Kaapstad, ens.: Nasou.
Koerner, E.F.K. (ed.) 1975
Koster, J.
1975
Le Roux, Cecile to appear
Levi, J.
1978
Lipka, L.
1975
Marchand, Hans 1969
CThe transformational~genera~ive paradigm and modern linguis- tic theory (:OcCurrent Trends in Linguistic ':'heory, VoL 1).
Amsterdam: North-Holland Publishing Co~pany.
"Dutch as an SOV language", Linguistic Analysis, Vol. 1:
111-136.
"Possible constraints on affixation in Afrikaans synthetic compounding", cStellenbosch Papers in Linguistics. Nr. 6, 1981.
Syntax and semantics of COmplex nominals. New York: Academic Press.
"Prolegorlena to 'Prolegomena to a theory of word.-forrlation' a reply ta Harris Halle", in Koerner (ed.) 1975:
115-184.
The categories and typescof present-day EnglishCword-forma- tion. Second Edition. Munchen: Beck.
Matthews, Peter H.
1972 Inflectional morphology: A theoretical study based oncas- neCts of Latin verb conjugation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
'~orphology. Cambridge: Cambridge Und.versity Press.
McCawley. James D.
1973 Revie,,, of Cho:nsky 1912, reproduced by the Inditma University Linguistics Club.
Meys, J.
1975
Moody, M.D.
1978
165
Comnound adjectives in·English . arid the ideal ·speaker.
Amsterdam: North-Holland Publishing Company.
"Some preliminaries to a!·theory of morphology", . Glosse. 12:
16-38.
Motsch, \Jolfgang
N eijt, A.H.
1978
1979
"Zur Stellung der 'Wortbildung' in einem formalen Sprach- modell", ·Studia ·Grwmnatica, Vol. I: 31-50.
''Marked coordination in conjunction with the SOV-SVO pro- blem", in Zonneveld (ed.) 1978:188-195.
GaDDing: A contribution to sentence grarr~ar. Dordrecht:
Foris Publications.
Nida, Eugene A.
1946 Horphology: the descriptive analysis of words. Ann Arbor, Michigan: University of Michigan Press.
Oosthuizen, Alta E.
to ap:pear
Peters, P.S. , 1973
Postal, Paul 1978
"On the status of complex ~ forms in Afrikaans" , Stellenbosch Papers in Linguistics.
and R.W. Ritchie
"On the generative power of transformational grammar~rr , Informat ion Sci ences, Vol. 6:49-83.
M., and Geoffrey Pullum
"Traces and the description of English complementizer con- traction", Linguistic Inquiry, Vol. 9:1-29.
Roeper, Thomas, and Muffy Siegel 1976
1978
A lexical transformation for verbal compounds. Preliminary version. University of Massachusetts, Amherst.
"A lexical transformation for verbal cclD.pounds"; Linf(uistic Inguiry, Vol. 9;199-260.