Blends: an intermediate category at the crossroads of morphology and phonology

Main Article Content

Camiel Hamans

Abstract

Blends are traditionally seen as irregular and unsystematic. In this paper it is shown that one must make a distinction between stub compounds or clipped compounds (sitcom, misper) and real blends (brunch, advertorial). In much of the literature on blends, however, stub compounds are classified as blends.


Stub compounds appear to be compounds and follow the Compound Stress Rule, whereas blends turn out to form a category of its own. Blends exhibit a right-hand head and insofar they can be compared to compounds. However, their prosodic structure is a copy of the second source word, the word where the final part of the word comes from. The analysis presented here demonstrates that blends consist of one prosodic word, whereas compounds consist of two. This proves that blends are an intermediate category of their own at the intersection of phonology and morphology. The examples discussed mainly come from English. Data from Dutch and German is also presented.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Article Details

How to Cite
Hamans, C. (2021). Blends: an intermediate category at the crossroads of morphology and phonology. Yearbook of the Poznań Linguistic Meeting, 7(1), 99-128. Retrieved from https://pressto.amu.edu.pl/index.php/yplm/article/view/29439
Section
Articles

References

    Arndt-Lappe, Sabine and Ingo Plag. 2012a. Phonological variability in English blends. Paper presented at The 20th Manchester Phonology Meeting, 24–26 May, 2012.
    Arndt-Lappe, Sabine and Ingo Plag. 2012b. Phonological variability in English blends. Paper presented at the Conference ‘Data-Rich Approaches to English Morphology: From corpo-ra and experiments to theory and back’. Wellington New Zealand, 4–6 July 2012.
    Arndt-Lappe, Sabine and Igno Plag. 2013. The role of prosodic structure in the formation of English blends. English Language and Linguistics 17. 537–563.
    Ayto, John. 2003. Newspapers and neologisms. Jean Aitchinson and Diana M. Lew-is (eds.). New Media Language. London/New York: Routledge: 182–186.
    Balteiro, Isabel and Laurie Bauer. 2019. Introduction. Lexis 14.
    Bat-El, Outi. 2006. Blend. In Keith Brown (ed.), Encyclopedia of language and linguistics (2nd edn, vol. 2), 66–70. Oxford: Elsevier.
    Bat-El, Outi and Evan-Gary Cohen. 2012. Stress in English blends: A constraint based analysis. In Vincent Renner, François Maniez and Pierre Arnaud (eds.), 193–211. Crossdisciplinary perspectives on lexical blending. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.
    Bauer, Laurie. 1983. English word-formation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    Bauer, Laurie. 1994. Watching English change. An introduction to the study of lin-guistic change in standard Englishes in the twentieth century. London & New York: Longman.
    Bauer. Laurie. 2006. Compounds and minor word-formation types. In Bas Aarts and April McMahon (eds.), The handbook of English linguistics, 483–506. Malden, MA: Blackwell.
    Bauer, Laurie. 2012. Blends: Core and periphery. In Vincent Renner, François Ma-niez and Pierre Arnaud (eds.), Crossdisciplinary perspectives on lexical blen-ding, 11–22. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton:
    Bauer, Laurie. 2019. Rethinking morphology. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.
    Bauer, Laurie, Rochelle Liber and Ingo Plag. 2013. English morphology. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    Beard, Robert. 1998. Derivation. In Andrew Spencer and Arnold M. Zwicky (eds.), The handbook of morphology, 44–65. Oxford: Blackwell.
    Beliaeva, Natalia. 2014a. A study of English blends: From structure to meaning and back again. Word Structure 7: 29–54.
    Beliaeva, Natalia (2014b). Unpacking contemporary English blends: Morphological Structure, meaning, processing. Wellington: University of Victoria. PhD Thesis. Available at .
    Beliaeva, Natalia. 2015. Blends at the interface between compounding and clipping: Evidence from readers’ evaluations. Neologica 9. 205–219.
    Beliaeva, Natalia. 2016. Blends at the intersection of addition and subtraction: Evi-dence from processing. SKASE, Journal of Theoretical Linguistics [online] A 13(2). 23–45.
    Beliaeva, Natalia. 2019a. Blending in morphology. In Mark Aronoff (ed.), Oxford Research encyclopedia of linguistics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    Beliaeva, Natalia. 2019b. Blending creativity and productivity: On the issue of de-limiting the boundaries of blends as a type of word formation. Lexis 14.
    Berg, Thomas. 2011. The clipping of common and proper nouns. Word Structure 4. 1–19.
    Booij, Geert. 1985. The interaction of phonology and morphology. In Edmund Gussmann (ed.), Phono-morphology. Studies in the interaction of phonology and morphology, 23–34. Lublin: Redakcja Widawnictw Katolickiego Uniwersytetu Lubelskiego.
    Booij, Geert. 1995. The phonology of Dutch. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
    Booij, Geert. 1999. The role of the prosodic word in phonotactic generalizations. In T. Alan Hall and Ursula Kleinhenz (eds.), Studies on the phonological word. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
    Brdar-Szabo, Rita and Mario Brdar. 2008. On the marginality of lexical blending. Jezikoslovlje 9, 171–194.
    Bryant, Margaret. 1974. Blends are increasing. American Speech 49. 163–184.
    Cannon, Garland. 1986. Blends in English word formation. Linguistics 24. 725–753.
    Cannon, Garland. 2000. Blending. In Geert Booij et al (eds.), Morpholo-gie/Morphology: Ein Internationales Handbuch Zur Flexion und Wortbildung, 952–956. Berlin: De Gruyter.
    Chomsky, Noam and Morris Halle. 1968. The Sound Pattern of English. New York: Harper & Row.
    Conolly, Patrick. 2013. The innovation and adoption of English lexical blends. Jour-nal IPP 2. 1–14.
    DiGirolamo, Cara M. 2012. The fandom pairing name. Blends and the phonology–orthography interface. Names: A Journal of Onomastics 60. 213–243.
    Dixon, Robert M.W. 2014. Making new words. Morphological derivation in English. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    Giegerich, Heinz J. 1985. Metrical phonology and phonological structure – German and English. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    Gries, Stefan Th. 2004a. Shouldn’t it be breakfunch? A quantitative analysis of blend structure in English. Linguistics 42. 639–667.
    Gries, Stefan Th. 2004b. Isn’t that fantabulous? How similarity motivates intentional morphological blends in English. In Michael Achard and Suzanne Kemmer (eds.), Language, culture and mind, 415–428. Stanford: CSLI Publications.
    Gries, Stefan Th. 2006. Cognitive determinants of subtractive word formation pro-cesses: A corpus-based perspective. Linguistics 17. 535–558.
    Gries, Stefan Th. 2012. Quantitative corpus data on blend formation: Psycho- and cognitive linguistic perspectives. In Vincent Renner, François Maniez and Pierre Arnaud (eds.), 145–167. Cross-disciplinary perspectives on lexical blending. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.
    Hamans, Camiel. 2010. The productivity of blending: linguistic or cognitive? Or how to deal with administrivia and ostalgia. In Danuta Stanulewicz, Tadeusz Z. Wolański and Joanna Redzimska (eds.), Lingua terra cognita II. A Festschrift for professor Roman Kalisz, 467–490. Gdańsk: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Gdań-skiego:
    Hamans, Camiel. 2012. From prof to provo: Some observations on Dutch clippings. In Bert Botma and Roland Noske (eds.), Phonological explorations: Empirical, theoretical and diachronic issues, 25–40. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
    Hamans, Camiel. 2017. Language change and morphological processes. Yearbook of the Poznań Linguistic Meeting 3. 1–23.
    Hamans, Camiel. 2018a. Between stub compounds and blends. In Virginija Ma-siulionyté and Skaisté Volungevičiené (eds.), Fremde und Eigene Sprachen. Linguistische Perspektive. Foreign and own languages. Linguistic perspectives. Akten des 51 Linguistischen Kolloquiums in Vilnius, Linguistic Colloquium in Vilnius 2016. Berlin. 353–371 .
    Hamans, Camiel. 2018b. Between Abi and Propjes: Some remarks about clipping in English, German, Dutch and Swedish. SKASE, Journal of Theoretical Linguis-tics [online] 15(2). 24–59.
    Hildebrandt, Kristine A. 2015. The prosodic word. In John R. Taylor (ed.), The Oxford handbook on the word, 221–245. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    Hong, Sung-Hoon. 2004. Properties of English word-blends: Structural description and statistical distribution. English Language and Linguistics 18. 117–140.
    Kelly, Michael H. 1998. To “brunch” or to “brench”: Some aspects of blend struc-ture. Linguistics 36. 579–590.
    Kubozono, Haruo. 1990. Phonological constraints on blending in English as a case for phonology-morphology interface. In Geert Booij and Jaap van Marle (eds.), Yearbook of Morphology 1990, 1–20. Dordrecht: Kluwer.
    Lappe, Sabie. 2007. English prosodic morphology. Dordrecht: Springer.
    Lehrer, Adrienne. 2006. Neologisms. In Keith Allan (ed.), Concise encyclopedia of semantics, 628–631. Amsterdam, Boston etc.: Elsevier.
    Mattiello, Elisa. 2013. Extra-grammatical morphology in English. Berlin/Boston: De Gruyter Mouton.
    Mattiello, Elisa. 2019. A corpus-based analysis of new English blends. Lexis 14.
    Marchand, Hans. 1969. The categories and types of present-day English word-formation. München: Beck.
    Moreton, Elliott, Jennifer L. Smith, Katya Pertsova, Rachel Broad and Brandon Prickett. 2017. Emergent positional privilege in novel English blends. Language 93(2). 347–380.
    Nespor, Marina and Irene Vogel. 1986=2007². Prosodic phonology. With a new introduction. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter.
    Pajerová, Kristina. 2018. Blends in het Nederlands [Blends in the Dutch language]. Olomouc: Palacký University. Master thesis.
    Peperkamp, Sharon. 1997. Prosodic words. The Hague: Holland Academic Graphics.
    Peperkamp, Sharon. 1999. Prosodic words. Glot International 4(4). 15–16.
    Piñeros, Carlos E. 2000. Word-blending as a case of non-concatenative morphology in Spanish. ROA (Rutgers Optimality Archive) 343–0999.
    Piñeros, Carlos E. 2002. The creation of portmanteaus in the extragrammatical mor-phology of Spanish. ROA (Rutgers Optimality Archive) 562–0602. [Also 2004. Probus 16. 203–240.]
    Plag, Ingo. 2003. Word-formation in English. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    Rakić, Stanimir. 2014. The prosody and quantity of English compounds. Journal of Foreign Language Teaching and Applied Linguistics 1(2). 277–287.
    Raffelsiefen, Renate. 1999. Phonological constraints on English word formation. In Geert Booij and Jaap van Marle (eds.), Yearbook of Morphology 1988, 225–287.
    Renner, Vincent. 2015. Lexical Blending as Wordplay. In Angelika Zirker and Esme Winter-Froemel (eds.), Wordplay and metalinguistic/metadiscursive reflection, 119–133. Berlin: De Gruyter.
    Renner, Vincent. 2018. Structural borrowing in word-formation: An explanatory overview. SKASE, Journal of Theoretical Linguistics [online] 15(2). 2–12.
    Renner, Vincent. 2019. French and English lexical blends in contrast. Languages in Contact 19. 27–47.
    Renner, Vincent, François Maniez and Pierre J.L. Arnaud. 2012. Introduction: A bird’s eye view of lexical blending. In Renner, Vincent, François Maniez and Pierre J.L. Arnaud (eds.), Cross-disciplinary perspectives on lexical blending, 1–9. Berlin/Boston: De Gruyter Mouton.
    Schoenfeld, Aviv, Evan Gary Cohen and Outi Bat-El. 2019. Variable base-word positioning in English blends. Lexis 14.
    Shaw, Katherine E.. 2013. Head faithfulness in lexical blends: A positional approach to blend formation. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina. Master thesis. Available at: .
    Shaw, Katherine E., Andrew M. White, Elliott Moreton and Fabian Monrose. 2014. Emergent faithfulness to morphological and semantic heads in lexical blends. John Kingston, Claire Moore-Cantwell, Joe Pater and Robert Staubs (eds.), Proceedings of Phonology 2013. Available at .
    Spencer, Andrew. 1998. Morphophonological operations. In Andrew Spencer and Arnold M. Zwicky (eds.). The handbook of morphology. Oxford: Blackwell: 123–143.
    Trommer, Jochen and Eva Zimmermann. 2012. Portmanteaus as generalized tem-plates. In Vincent Renner, François Maniez & Pierre Arnaud (eds.), 233–258. Crossdisciplinary perspectives on lexical blending. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.
    Tomaszewicz, Ewa. 2012. Output-to-output faithfulness in the phonological struc-ture of English blends. In Vincent Renner, François Maniez & Pierre Arnaud (eds.), Crossdisciplinary perspectives on lexical blending, 213–232. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton:
    Wurzel, Wolfgang U. 1980. Der deutsche Wortakzent: Fakten-Regeln-Prinzipien. Zeitschrift für Germanistik 3. 299–318.
    Williams, Edwin. 1981. On the notions ‘lexically related’ and ‘head of a word’. Linguistic Inquiry 12. 245–274.
    Wulff, Stefanie and Stefan Th. Gries. 2019. Improving on observational blends research: Regression modelling in the study of experimentally-elicited blends. Lexis 14.
    Zabrocki, Ludwik. 1962. Phon, Phonem und distinktives Morphem. Biuletyn Fono-graficzny 5. 59–87.
    Zabrocki, Ludwik. 1969. Phonologie und distinktive Morphologie. In Al Graur et al. (eds.), Actes du Xe Congrès International des Linguistes, 367–375. Bucharest: Editions de l’Académie de la République socialiste de Roumanie. Vol. 1:
    Zwicky, Arnold. 2010. Libfixes.