The role of schemas in Construction Morphology

Article / Letter to edito

CONSTRUCTION MORPHOLOGY: AN INTERVIEW WITH GEERT BOOIJ

Geert Booij (1947) is professor emeritus of linguistics at the University of Leiden where he worked from 2005-2012. From 1981-2005 he was professor of General Linguistics at the Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, and from 1971-1981 assistant / associate professor at the University of Amsterdam, where he also obtained his Ph.D. degree in linguistics in 1977. He studied Dutch and general linguistics at the University of Groningen (1965-1971) where he obtained his MA degree (cum laude). He was dean of the Faculty of Letters at the Vrije Universiteit (1988-1991, 1998-2002), conrector of the Vrije Universiteit (1999-2002), dean of the Faculty of Letters of the University of Leiden (September 2005- October 2007), and member (1997-2002) and chair (2002-2004) of the Dutch Research Council for the Humanities of NWO (the Dutch organization for scientific research). He served on a number of national and international committees for the assessment of linguistic research achievements, and on audit committees for the quality of language programs at various universities in the Netherlands.Geert Booij also taught at the University of Canterbury in Christchurch, New Zealand (Erskine Fellow) in 2002, the Linguistic Society of America Institute at the University of Berkeley in 2009, at Harvard University (Erasmus professor of Dutch language and culture) in 2010, and at the Freie Universität Berlin (Germanic Department, section Dutch) in 2011. In 2011 he received the Alexander von Humboldt Research Award for his overall achievements in linguistic research. He is an honorary member of the Linguistic Society of America.Geert Booij is one of the two founders and editors of the book series Yearbook of Morphology (1988-2005), which is, as of 2006, continued as the journal Morphology, of which he was one of the three editors until 2014. He is the author of a number of Dutch textbooks on grammar, morphology, and phonology, and of four English monographs: The Phonology of Dutch (1995), The Morphology of Dutch (2002, 20192), The Grammar of Words (2005, 2012), and Construction Morphology (2010), all published by Oxford University Press. He has published linguistic articles in a wide range of Dutch and international journals and volumes (see https://geert.booij.com for a list of, mostly downloadable, publications).Geert Booij (1947) é professor emérito de linguística na Universidade de Leiden, onde trabalhou de 2005 a 2012. De 1981 a 2005, foi professor de Linguística Geral da Universidade Livre de Amsterdam, e, de 1971 a 1981, professor assistente/associado da Universidade de Amsterdam, onde também obteve seu Ph.D. em linguística em 1977. Estudou holandês e linguística geral na Universidade de Groningen (1965-1971), onde obteve seu título de mestre (cum laude). Foi reitor da Faculdade de Letras da Universidade Livre (1988-1991, 1998-2002), vice-diretor da Universidade Livre (1999-2002), reitor da Faculdade de Letras da Universidade de Leiden (Setembro 2005- Outubro 2007) e membro (1997-2002) e presidente (2002-2004) do Conselho Holandês de Pesquisa para Humanidades da NWO (Organização holandesa para pesquisa científica). Atuou em uma série de comitês nacionais e internacionais para a avaliação das realizações de pesquisas linguísticas e em comitês de auditoria para a qualidade dos programas de línguas em várias universidades na Holanda. Geert Booij também lecionou na Universidade de Canterbury em Christchurch, Nova Zelândia (Erskine Fellow) em 2002, na Sociedade Linguística do America Institute da Universidade de Berkeley em 2009, na Universidade de Harvard (Erasmus professor de língua e cultura holandesas) em 2010, e na Universidade Livre de Berlin (Departamento de Germânicas, seção Holandês) em 2011. Em 2011, recebeu o Prêmio Alexander von Humboldt de Pesquisa por suas realizações gerais em pesquisa linguística. É membro honorário da Linguistic Society of America. Geert Booij é um dos dois fundadores e editores da série de livros Yearbook of Morphology (1988-2005), que, desde 2006, teve continuação como a revista Morphology, da qual foi um dos três editores até 2014. Ele é o autor de uma série de livros holandeses sobre gramática, morfologia e fonologia e de quatro monografias em inglês: The Phonology of Dutch (1995), The Morphology of Dutch (2002, 20192), The Grammar of Words (2005, 20123) e Construção Morphology (2010), todos publicados pela Oxford University Press. Ele publicou artigos linguísticos em uma ampla variedade de periódicos e volumes holandeses e internacionais (consulte https://geert.booij.com para obter uma lista de publicações, em sua maioria para download).

An investigation into tensile structure system: construction morphology and architectural interventions

Tensile structures represent a new chapter in the history of building structures. Tensile structure system are capable of spanning large distances while incurring very little weight on supporting structure, developments in the design of fabric structure can dramatically change the ways in which permanent building construction is conceptualized. This paper reviews the current methods and systems for design and construction of fabric structures. The paper begins with a brief historical evolution and explanation of the various types of fabric structure that have previously been built. Subsequent topics address the development of computational analysis methods, innovative construction techniques, fabric material types, properties and their characteristics.  In this paper, a qualitative descriptive evaluation research method has been used. The research methodology comprises of case studies, visual observation and data collection. Finally, five case studies around the world have been presented to validate and illustrate the various modern trends and the direct application of design and construction methods of tensile structure system

The Assignment of Grammatical and Inherent Gender to English Loan Words in Lithuanian Discourse

The aim of this study was to analyse the gender assignment patterns and processes to English loan nouns that were inserted into Lithuanian language during the process of natural speech. Construction Morphology and the Morpheme-based Model were fused for the purpose of the analysis creating the Integrated Construction Morphology Model which allowed the detailed analysis of phonological, morphological, syntactic and semantic procedures. The main focus of this research is the change that occurs in the word level while inserting an L2 item into L1 discourse. The findings revealed that masculine gender was assigned as a default gender regardless of stem vowel classification for inanimate nouns. Biological sex determined the gender of English nouns that are animate. Furthermore, a complex process of suffix merging from English and Lithuanian languages was observed, regarding the combined suffixes as one item. This research contributed to greater understanding of the morphological processes that occur when words are borrowed into the Lithuanian language

Metapragmatic neology in digital discourse: Solid groundwork for Morphopragmatics and Construction Morphology

This note addresses the topic of Judith Bridges’s focus article, namely -splain neologisms such as mansplain, thinsplain and covidsplain, from the perspective of morphological theory. I attempt to show that Morphopragmatics, a subfield of morphology, can account for the complex pragmatics of word formation processes like those in -splain neology. I propose that the analysis of -splain words as constructional idioms, under the framework of Construction Morphology, provides a suitable account of the pragmatic effects associated with the innovations in this lexical pattern

What's in a compound? Review article on Lieber and Štekauer (eds) 2009. 'The Oxford Handbook of Compounding'

The Oxford Handbook of Compounding surveys a variety of theoretical and descriptive issues, presenting overviews of compounding in a number of frameworks and sketches of compounding in a number of languages. Much of the book deals with Germanic noun–noun compounding. I take up some of the theoretical questions raised surrounding such constructions, in particular, the notion of attributive modification in noun-headed compounds. I focus on two issues. The first is the semantic relation between the head noun and its nominal modifier. Several authors repeat the argument that there is a small(-ish) fixed number of general semantic relations in noun–noun compounds (‘Lees's solution’), but I argue that the correct way to look at such compounds is what I call ‘Downing's solution’, in which we assume that the relation is specified pragmatically, and hence could be any relation at all. The second issue is the way that adjectives modify nouns inside compounds. Although there are languages in which compounded adjectives modify just as they do in phrases (Chukchee, Arleplog Swedish), in general the adjective has a classifier role and not that of a compositional attributive modifier. Thus, even if an English (or German) adjective–noun compound looks compositional, it isn't

Advances in morphological theory: construction morphology and relational morphology

Theoretical and Experimental Linguistic

Alternative theories of morphology in the Parallel Architecture : a reply to Benavides 2022

The Slot and Structure Model of morphology (SSM: Benavides 2022) presents itself as an extension of the Parallel Architecture (PA: Jackendoff 1997, 2002). The present article compares SSM to Relational Morphology (Jackendoff and Audring 2020) and Construction Morphology (Booij 2010), which also claim allegiance to the Parallel Architecture. It is shown that (a) SSM does not segregate semantic structure from syntactic structure, violating the fundamental premise of the PA; (b) SSM is concerned primarily with deriving productive morphology, while the PA is stated in terms of declarative schemas that license nonproductive as well as productive morphology; (c) SSM enforces a strict division between morphology and syntax, while the PA allows a degree of interpenetration. Finally, Benavides accuses RM of lacking a direct connection between semantics and syntax. It is shown that this is based on a misunderstanding of the RA formalism