The tastes and distastes of verbivores – some observations on X-phemisation in Bulgarian and English

X-phemisation constitutes a powerful appraisal resource which weaves the ethnopragmatic texture of a culture. X-phemisms constitute a special type of non-literal language which capitalizes on all other possible types of non-literal language and the creative exploitation of phonetic-based word play. The main aim in the present paper is to elaborate on a hypothesis of X-phemisation via lexical extension (recruitment) as involving the mechanism of nominal metaphor at the conceptual level. This mechanism involves reframing of the vehicle (target) denotatum with an accompanying rearrangement in salience rating in the arising ad hoc concept resulting from blending the frames of the topic and vehicle denotata. This stereotype-violating mechanism reveals the power of human ingenuity at the deepest level of linguistic creativity. The ad hoc X-phemistic concept blends in an axiologically motivated manner the contextually relevant features of both denotata in a salience-constrained perceptually and evaluatively ordered set of features, triggered by the initial anchoring via the topic denotatum evoked by the actual lexical expression (the vehicle lexical concept). X‑phemisms (from fully lexicalized ones to highly innovative/artful ones) and X‑phemisation as an epiphenomenal occurrence in online linguistic interaction are seen as constituting a special subsystem in the appraisal resources of a language. This subsystem has special status with its high creativity and figurativity. Figurativity captures simultaneously the emergent, dynamic nature of X-phemisms and their grounding in stable conceptual metaphoric structures (in terms of strategies for their production/comprehension). Despite the diversity of X-phemism types (both in terms of their overall pragmatic effect) and the nature of their origin (resulting from substitution, lexical creativity, metaphoric transfers, phonetic innovation, word play, etc.), X‑phemisms constitute a complex uniform catgory whose complexity can only be adequately studied in the framework of interactional cognitive studies, where the emotional brain is also subsumed under ‘cognitive’

The ludic aspect of lexical inventiveness

In this paper we argue that coining new words is inherently ludic. Wehypothesize that naming (the onomasiological part of the creation of words)functions as a modern form of aporia (the riddle). We propose to interpret nonceformations as the initial stage of any new word both as a temporal and as aspatial notion. Once used in communicative interaction, a word is launched onits paths of socialization, instantiated by institutionalization and lexicalization.As there are no grounds for a sharp distinction between ‘ludic’ and ‘ordinary’words, we postulate ludicity as a third dimension of socialization for whicheach word is characterize

Introduction

This monograph is aimed at the examination of derivational networks across European languages. The concept of a derivational network is not new. The first ideas of network regularities and the network organization of derivational morphology can be traced back to the 1960s in relation to the Dokulilean tradition in word-formation. Unfortunately, apart from an outline of general principles, very little has been done in the field since. In recent years, however, we have been witnessing a growing interest in derivational paradigms and larger derivational systems based on them.This article has been supported by the Spanish State Research Agency (SRA, Ministry of Economy and Enterprise) and European Regional Development Fund (ERDF) (Ref. FFI2017-89665-P)

Semantic packaging in verb-based compounds in English and Bulgarian

Semantic packaging in verb­ based compounds in English and BulgarianThe article contrasts the word­ formation types of (para)synthetic compound nouns and compound verbs in two genetically distantly related but typologically distinct languages Bulgarian and English. While the nature of synthetic compound nouns in both languages is comparable, compound verbs show greater contrasts in terms of types, restrictions and preferences for intra­ compound relations and semantic diversity. An explanation is sought in terms of the influence of word­ relevant syntactic properties on word­ formation phenomena in the two languages. An additional powerful factor is the ubiquity of conversion or syntactic promiscuity in English. A hypothesis is formulated that in Bulgarian the iconicity of word­ formation processes and products associated with the biuniqueness of the sign as understood by Natural Morphology accounts for restrictions on the absolute reign of word­ formation paradigms in Bulgarian, where the distinction between inflectional morphology and word­ formation is more sharply delineated. The typological character of the two languages is ultimately taken into account as a factor which determines the preferences for compounds in English and the prevalence of affixal derivation in Bulgarian. Kompresja semantyczna w złożeniach czasownikowych w językach bułgarskim i angielskimAutorzy artykułu dokonali porównania mechanizmów słowotwórczych wykorzystywanych przy derywacji (para)syntetycznych złożeń rzeczownikowych oraz czasownikowych w językach bułgarskim i angielskim. Badane języki wykazują dalekie pokrewieństwo genetyczne, lecz z typologicznego punktu widzenia są one od siebie różne. W odróżnieniu od mechanizmów tworzenia syntetycznych złożeń rzeczownikowych, które w obu językach są podobne, złożenia czasownikowe różnią się, jeżeli chodzi o ich typy, ograniczenia użycia oraz preferencje odnośnie relacji zawartych w określonych złożeniach, jak również różnorodność semantyczną. Omawiane zjawiska są prawdopodobnie warunkowane tym, jak cechy składniowe danego języka wpływają na jego mechanizmy słowotwórcze. Kolejnym istotnym czynnikiem, kształtującym naturę tych mechanizmów w języku angielskim, jest konwersja semantyczna. W języku bułgarskim podział na morfemy słowotwórcze i fleksyjne jest dużo bardziej wyrazisty niż w języku angielskim. Autorzy stawiają hipotezę, że przyczyny tego zjawiska należy upatrywać w dwóch czynnikach: ikoniczności bułgarskich procesów słowotwórczych oraz bijekcji znaku (w rozumieniu morfologii naturalnej). W ostatecznym rozrachunku wydaje się, że to cechy typologiczne wpływają na to, że język angielski wykazuje wyraźną skłonność do tworzenia złożeń wyrazowych, zaś w języku bułgarskim dominuje zjawisko afiksacji derywacyjnej

Foreword: New territories in word-formation

Word-formation is a domain of linguistics which has steadily evolved in the last decades under the influence of the wide availability of electronic corpora and of a renewed interest in contrastive approaches to morphological analysis. From the 1990s onwards, morphological studies have increasingly relied on corpus data. An initial point of interest was the domain of productivity measurement (see Baayen & Lieber 1991, Baayen & Renouf 1996), but resorting to corpora soon became a widespread practice, notably to document rare phenomena, which cannot be thoroughly discussed in the absence of a wealth of data (see Plénat et al. 2002)

Further investigations into the nature of phrasal compounding

This collection of papers on phrasal compounding is part of a bigger project whose aims are twofold: First, it seeks to broaden the typological perspective by providing data for as many different languages as possible to gain a better understanding of the phenomenon itself. Second, based on these data which clearly show interaction between syntax and morphology it aims to discuss theoretical models which deal with this kind of interaction in different ways. Models like Generative Grammar assume components of grammar and a clear-cut distinction between the lexicon (often including morphology) and grammar. Other models, like construction grammar, do not assume such components and are rather based on a lexicon including constructs. A comparison of these models on the basis of this phenomenon on the morphology-syntax interface makes it possible to assess their descriptive and explanatory power

Further investigations into the nature of phrasal compounding

This collection of papers on phrasal compounding is part of a bigger project whose aims are twofold: First, it seeks to broaden the typological perspective by providing data for as many different languages as possible to gain a better understanding of the phenomenon itself. Second, based on these data which clearly show interaction between syntax and morphology it aims to discuss theoretical models which deal with this kind of interaction in different ways. Models like Generative Grammar assume components of grammar and a clear-cut distinction between the lexicon (often including morphology) and grammar. Other models, like construction grammar, do not assume such components and are rather based on a lexicon including constructs. A comparison of these models on the basis of this phenomenon on the morphology-syntax interface makes it possible to assess their descriptive and explanatory power

Further investigations into the nature of phrasal compounding

This collection of papers on phrasal compounding is part of a bigger project whose aims are twofold: First, it seeks to broaden the typological perspective by providing data for as many different languages as possible to gain a better understanding of the phenomenon itself. Second, based on these data which clearly show interaction between syntax and morphology it aims to discuss theoretical models which deal with this kind of interaction in different ways. Models like Generative Grammar assume components of grammar and a clear-cut distinction between the lexicon (often including morphology) and grammar. Other models, like construction grammar, do not assume such components and are rather based on a lexicon including constructs. A comparison of these models on the basis of this phenomenon on the morphology-syntax interface makes it possible to assess their descriptive and explanatory power

Further investigations into the nature of phrasal compounding

This collection of papers on phrasal compounding is part of a bigger project whose aims are twofold: First, it seeks to broaden the typological perspective by providing data for as many different languages as possible to gain a better understanding of the phenomenon itself. Second, based on these data which clearly show interaction between syntax and morphology it aims to discuss theoretical models which deal with this kind of interaction in different ways. Models like Generative Grammar assume components of grammar and a clear-cut distinction between the lexicon (often including morphology) and grammar. Other models, like construction grammar, do not assume such components and are rather based on a lexicon including constructs. A comparison of these models on the basis of this phenomenon on the morphology-syntax interface makes it possible to assess their descriptive and explanatory power

Further investigations into the nature of phrasal compounding

This collection of papers on phrasal compounding is part of a bigger project whose aims are twofold: First, it seeks to broaden the typological perspective by providing data for as many different languages as possible to gain a better understanding of the phenomenon itself. Second, based on these data which clearly show interaction between syntax and morphology it aims to discuss theoretical models which deal with this kind of interaction in different ways. Models like Generative Grammar assume components of grammar and a clear-cut distinction between the lexicon (often including morphology) and grammar. Other models, like construction grammar, do not assume such components and are rather based on a lexicon including constructs. A comparison of these models on the basis of this phenomenon on the morphology-syntax interface makes it possible to assess their descriptive and explanatory power