33 research outputs found

    La suffixation en ‚Äďasyon et en ‚Äď√© du cr√©ole guadeloup√©en¬†: deux cas de r√©analyse de sch√©mas morphologiques du fran√ßais

    Get PDF
    This paper is about the creation of two suffixations in Guadeloupean Creole, the ‚Äďasyon suffixation (konp√≤rtasyon ‚Äėnegative behavior‚Äô¬†‚Üź¬†konp√≤rt√© ‚Äėto behave‚Äô; pwofitasyon ‚Äėprofit‚Äô¬†‚Üź¬†pwofit√© ‚Äėto enjoy‚Äô) and the ‚Äď√© suffixation (bwann√© ‚Äėto move‚Äô¬†‚Üź¬†bwann ‚Äėmovement‚Äô; migann√© ‚Äėto mix‚Äô ¬†‚Üź¬†migan ‚Äėpur√©e‚Äô). Guadeloupean Creole has seldom been studied from the point of view of morphology. It is considered as a full-fledged language in which 90% of the vocabulary is inherited from its superstratum or lexifier language (French). The vocabulary is inherited with some morphological schemas which become productive in Creole to form new lexemes, either on French or non-French bases. Yet, morphological schemas are not fully inherited: at the very least, they are accompanied by phonological, semantic or syntactic changes with respect to the original schema. The two Creole morphological suffixations on which this paper focus are partially inherited from French. We argue that these suffixations follow from reanalysis mechanisms of morphological schemas already known from work on morphological change, rather than from a process of grammaticalization.a) ‚Äďasyon suffixation which phonologically extends the French ‚Äďion suffix by incorporating a root element; b) ‚Äď√© suffixation which consists of a ‚Äúdeinflectionalization‚ÄĚ of the infinitive verbal suffix that becomes a derivational suffix.Our study is based on a corpus collected by a native speaker, from dictionaries and field surveys of native speakers. It is composed of 7045 lexemes of Guadeloupe Creole from all the islands. The analysis was conducted within the theoretical framework of lexematic morphology. Finally, our study allows us to take a position in the debate on the morphology of Creole languages, (i) against the claim that derivation emerges only through gradual grammaticalization and (ii) against the hypothesis of a poorer and simpler morphology of Creoles

    The lexeme in descriptive and theoretical morphology

    Get PDF
    After being dominant during about a century since its invention by Baudouin de Courtenay at the end of the nineteenth century, morpheme is more and more replaced by lexeme in contemporary descriptive and theoretical morphology.  The notion of a lexeme is usually associated with the work of P. H. Matthews (1972, 1974), who characterizes it as a lexical entity abstracting over individual inflected words. Over the last three decades, the lexeme has become a cornerstone of much work in both inflectional morphology and word formation (or, as it is increasingly been called, lexeme formation). The papers in the present volume take stock of the descriptive and theoretical usefulness of the lexeme, but also adress many of the challenges met by classical lexeme-based theories of morphology

    The lexeme in descriptive and theoretical morphology

    Get PDF
    After being dominant during about a century since its invention by Baudouin de Courtenay at the end of the nineteenth century, morpheme is more and more replaced by lexeme in contemporary descriptive and theoretical morphology.  The notion of a lexeme is usually associated with the work of P. H. Matthews (1972, 1974), who characterizes it as a lexical entity abstracting over individual inflected words. Over the last three decades, the lexeme has become a cornerstone of much work in both inflectional morphology and word formation (or, as it is increasingly been called, lexeme formation). The papers in the present volume take stock of the descriptive and theoretical usefulness of the lexeme, but also adress many of the challenges met by classical lexeme-based theories of morphology

    The lexeme in descriptive and theoretical morphology

    Get PDF
    After being dominant during about a century since its invention by Baudouin de Courtenay at the end of the nineteenth century, morpheme is more and more replaced by lexeme in contemporary descriptive and theoretical morphology.  The notion of a lexeme is usually associated with the work of P. H. Matthews (1972, 1974), who characterizes it as a lexical entity abstracting over individual inflected words. Over the last three decades, the lexeme has become a cornerstone of much work in both inflectional morphology and word formation (or, as it is increasingly been called, lexeme formation). The papers in the present volume take stock of the descriptive and theoretical usefulness of the lexeme, but also adress many of the challenges met by classical lexeme-based theories of morphology

    The lexeme in descriptive and theoretical morphology

    Get PDF
    After being dominant during about a century since its invention by Baudouin de Courtenay at the end of the nineteenth century, morpheme is more and more replaced by lexeme in contemporary descriptive and theoretical morphology.  The notion of a lexeme is usually associated with the work of P. H. Matthews (1972, 1974), who characterizes it as a lexical entity abstracting over individual inflected words. Over the last three decades, the lexeme has become a cornerstone of much work in both inflectional morphology and word formation (or, as it is increasingly been called, lexeme formation). The papers in the present volume take stock of the descriptive and theoretical usefulness of the lexeme, but also adress many of the challenges met by classical lexeme-based theories of morphology

    The lexeme in descriptive and theoretical morphology

    Get PDF
    After being dominant during about a century since its invention by Baudouin de Courtenay at the end of the nineteenth century, morpheme is more and more replaced by lexeme in contemporary descriptive and theoretical morphology.  The notion of a lexeme is usually associated with the work of P. H. Matthews (1972, 1974), who characterizes it as a lexical entity abstracting over individual inflected words. Over the last three decades, the lexeme has become a cornerstone of much work in both inflectional morphology and word formation (or, as it is increasingly been called, lexeme formation). The papers in the present volume take stock of the descriptive and theoretical usefulness of the lexeme, but also adress many of the challenges met by classical lexeme-based theories of morphology

    The lexeme in descriptive and theoretical morphology

    Get PDF
    After being dominant during about a century since its invention by Baudouin de Courtenay at the end of the nineteenth century, morpheme is more and more replaced by lexeme in contemporary descriptive and theoretical morphology.  The notion of a lexeme is usually associated with the work of P. H. Matthews (1972, 1974), who characterizes it as a lexical entity abstracting over individual inflected words. Over the last three decades, the lexeme has become a cornerstone of much work in both inflectional morphology and word formation (or, as it is increasingly been called, lexeme formation). The papers in the present volume take stock of the descriptive and theoretical usefulness of the lexeme, but also adress many of the challenges met by classical lexeme-based theories of morphology

    The lexeme in descriptive and theoretical morphology

    Get PDF
    After being dominant during about a century since its invention by Baudouin de Courtenay at the end of the nineteenth century, morpheme is more and more replaced by lexeme in contemporary descriptive and theoretical morphology.  The notion of a lexeme is usually associated with the work of P. H. Matthews (1972, 1974), who characterizes it as a lexical entity abstracting over individual inflected words. Over the last three decades, the lexeme has become a cornerstone of much work in both inflectional morphology and word formation (or, as it is increasingly been called, lexeme formation). The papers in the present volume take stock of the descriptive and theoretical usefulness of the lexeme, but also adress many of the challenges met by classical lexeme-based theories of morphology

    The lexeme in descriptive and theoretical morphology

    Get PDF
    After being dominant during about a century since its invention by Baudouin de Courtenay at the end of the nineteenth century, morpheme is more and more replaced by lexeme in contemporary descriptive and theoretical morphology.  The notion of a lexeme is usually associated with the work of P. H. Matthews (1972, 1974), who characterizes it as a lexical entity abstracting over individual inflected words. Over the last three decades, the lexeme has become a cornerstone of much work in both inflectional morphology and word formation (or, as it is increasingly been called, lexeme formation). The papers in the present volume take stock of the descriptive and theoretical usefulness of the lexeme, but also adress many of the challenges met by classical lexeme-based theories of morphology

    The lexeme in descriptive and theoretical morphology

    Get PDF
    After being dominant during about a century since its invention by Baudouin de Courtenay at the end of the nineteenth century, morpheme is more and more replaced by lexeme in contemporary descriptive and theoretical morphology.  The notion of a lexeme is usually associated with the work of P. H. Matthews (1972, 1974), who characterizes it as a lexical entity abstracting over individual inflected words. Over the last three decades, the lexeme has become a cornerstone of much work in both inflectional morphology and word formation (or, as it is increasingly been called, lexeme formation). The papers in the present volume take stock of the descriptive and theoretical usefulness of the lexeme, but also adress many of the challenges met by classical lexeme-based theories of morphology
    corecore