Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-t5pn6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-19T07:44:51.161Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

16 - Semantic Patterns in Noun-to-Verb Conversion in English

from Part III - Corpus-Based Case Studies

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  18 September 2020

Lívia Körtvélyessy
Affiliation:
P. J. Šafárik University, Košice, Slovakia
Pavol Štekauer
Affiliation:
P. J. Šafárik University, Košice, Slovakia
Get access

Summary

The paper researches all the occurrences of a stratified sample of lemmas tagged both as noun and as verb in the British National Corpus, plus a set of parallel samples of denominal verbs derived by affixation intended for comparison. This design records the distribution of semantic categories not according to the lemmas in the sample, but according to how much and where they are actualized in each occurrence of the lemma (i.e. it separates the various senses within the lemmas). The sample starts out from the lowest frequency of occurrence (1). In the case of conversion, the sample spans from frequency 1 to frequency 960. Semantic categories are recorded according to the analysis of the concordances available under each of the lemmas recorded in the sample, and based on the terms of the definitions available in the Oxford English Dictionary for each sense of each lemma. The results show that the patterns described for noun-to-verb conversion have a rather dissimilar relevance with respect to each other. The distribution of semantic categories according to their occurrences in the senses attested by each of the occurrences reported for the lemmas of the corpus sample in conversion and in affixation is quite uneven.

Type
Chapter
Information
Complex Words
Advances in Morphology
, pp. 311 - 334
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2020

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Ackema, P. (1999). Issues in Morphosyntax, Amsterdam: J. Benjamins.Google Scholar
Baeskow, H. (2019). Denominal verbs in morphology. In Lieber, R., ed., The Oxford Encyclopedia of Morphology, Oxford: Oxford University Press. https://oxfordre.com/linguistics/view/10.1093/acrefore/9780199384655.001.0001/acrefore-9780199384655-e-502.Google Scholar
Bauer, L. and Huddleston, R. (2002). Lexical word-formation. In Huddleston, R. and Pullum, G. K., eds., The Cambridge Grammar of the English Language, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 16211721.Google Scholar
Bauer, L., Lieber, R. and Plag, I. (2013). The Oxford Reference Guide to English Morphology, Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Bagasheva, A. (2017). Comparative semantic concepts in affixation. In Santana-Lario, J. and Valera, S., eds., Competing Patterns in English Affixation, Bern: P. Lang, pp. 3366.Google Scholar
Cetnarowska, B. (1993). The Syntax, Semantics and Derivation of Bare Nominalisations in English, Katowice: Uniwersytet Śląski.Google Scholar
Clark, E. V. and Clark, H. H. (1979). When nouns surface as verbs. Language, 55, 767811.Google Scholar
Davies, M. (2004–). British National Corpus (from Oxford University Press). Available online at www.english-corpora.org/bnc/.Google Scholar
Dirven, R. (1999). Conversion as a conceptual metonymy of event schemata. In Panther, K.-U. and Günter, R., eds., Metonymy in Language and Thought, Amsterdam: J. Benjamins, pp. 275287.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Don, J., Trommelen, M. and Zonneveld, W. (2000). Conversion and category indeterminacy. In Booij, G., Lehmann, C. and Mugdan, J., eds., Morphologie. Morphology. Ein internationales Handbuch zur Flexion und Wortbildung. An international handbook on inflection and word–formation. 1. Halband, Vol. 1, in collaboration with Kesselheim, W. and Skopeteas, S., Berlin: W. de Gruyter, pp. 943952.Google Scholar
Fernández-Alcaina, C. (2017). Availability and unavailability in English word-formation. In Santana-Lario, J. and Valera, S., eds., Competing Patterns in English Affixation, Bern: P. Lang, pp. 163206.Google Scholar
Fernández-Alcaina, C. (2020). Lemma Extractor, GitHub Repository. Available at https://github.com/cristinaalcaina/Lemma_extractor.Google Scholar
Gottfurcht, C. A. (2008). Denominal verb formation in English, PhD dissertation, Evanston, IL: Northwestern University.Google Scholar
Karius, I. (1985). Die Ableitung der denominalen Verben mit Nullsuffigierung im Englischen, Tübingen: M. Niemeyer.Google Scholar
Kastovsky, D., ed. (1974). Studies in Syntax and Word-Formation. Selected Articles by Hans Marchand, München: W. Fink.Google Scholar
Kastovsky, D. (1994). Verbal derivation in English: a historical survey or Much Ado About Nothing. In Britton, D., ed., English Historical Linguistics 1994. Papers from the 8th International Conference on English Historical Linguistics (8. ICEHL, Edinburgh, 19–23 September 1994), Amsterdam and Philadelphia: J. Benjamins, pp. 93117.Google Scholar
Kisselew, M., Rimell, L., Palmer, A. and Padó, S. (2016). Predicting the direction of derivation in English conversion. In Proceedings of the 14th Annual SIGMORPHON Workshop on Computational Research in Phonetics, Phonology and Morphology, 11 August 2016, Berlin: Germany, pp. 9398.Google Scholar
Kreidler, C. W. (1998). Introducing English Semantics, London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Lara-Clares, A. (2016). Scáthach: BNC Frequency List Tool. Available at: scathach.laraclares.com.Google Scholar
Lara-Clares, C. (2017). Competition in Present Day English nominalization by zero-affixation vs. -ation. In Santana-Lario, J. and Valera, S., eds., Competing Patterns in English Affixation, Bern: P. Lang, pp. 207244.Google Scholar
Lee, Y. (2009). Conversion as zero-affixation: evidence from affix interaction. Journal of English Language and Linguistics, 9(1), 135160.Google Scholar
Lieber, R. (2004). Morphology and Lexical Semantics, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Lieber, R. (2006). The category of roots and the roots of categories: what we learn from selection in derivation. Morphology, 16(2), 247272.Google Scholar
Marchand, H. (1963). On a question of contrary analysis with derivationally connected but morphologically uncharacterized words. English Studies, 44, 176187.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marchand, H. (1964). A set of criteria for the establishing of derivational relationships between words unmarked by derivational morphemes. Indogermanische Forschungen, 69, 1019.Google Scholar
Marchand, H. (1969). The Categories and Types of Present-Day English Word-Formation, 2nd ed., München: C. Beck.Google Scholar
Martsa, S. (2007). Construction of meaning during conversion. Presented at the HUSSE/8 Conference, Szeged, 25–28 January 2007.Google Scholar
Oxford English Dictionary Online. Oxford University Press, March 2020. Web. 20 May 2019.Google Scholar
Plag, I. (1999). Morphological Productivity, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Plag, I. (2018). Word-Formation in English, 2nd ed., Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Plank, F. (2010). Variable direction in zero-derivation and the unity of polysemous lexical items. Word Structure, 3(1), 8297.Google Scholar
Quirk, R., Greenbaum, S., Leech, G. N. and Svartvik, J. (1985). A Comprehensive Grammar of the English Language, London: Longman.Google Scholar
Sanders, G. (1988). Zero derivation and the Overt Analogue Criterion. In Hammond, M. and Noonan, M., eds., Theoretical Morphology: Approaches in Modern Linguistics, San Diego, CA: Academic Press, pp. 155175.Google Scholar
Štekauer, P. (1996). A Theory of Conversion in English, Frankfurt am Main: P. Lang.Google Scholar
Tournier, J. (2010). Introduction descriptive à la lexicogénétique de l’anglais contemporain, 2nd ed., Paris and Geneve: Champion–Slaktine.Google Scholar
Valera, S. (2017). Conversion and figurative extension of meaning. SKASE Journal of Theoretical Linguistics, 14(2), 217.Google Scholar
Valera, S. (forthcoming). Main morphological formal means 3: approaches to conversion. In Fábregas, A., Acedo-Matellán, V., Armstrong, G., Cuervo, M. C. and Pujol, I., eds., The Routledge Handbook of Spanish Morphology, London: Routledge.Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×