Word formation processes in English and German – a survey

Table of contents

1.  Introduction p  3

2.  Contrasts in the lexicon p  3

3.  The components of words p  5

4.  Compounding p  6

5.  Derivational suffixation p  9

6.  Conversion p  10

7.  Denglisch word formation in German p  11

8.  Conclusion p  12

9.  Bibliography p  13

2  NA  

1) Introduction

When German native speakers converse with English native speakers, they are often astonished how easily and spontaneously new words can be created in English. At the same time, English speakers are astonished by the number of lengthy compounds the German use in written language. But still, most word formation processes are very similar in both languages - both English and German even share some affixes, for example be- in be-friend or be-zahlen or –er in sing-er or Säng-er. I want to investigate the differences and similarities concerning the major word formation processes in English and German (compounding, derivational suffixation and conversion). Firstly, I will provide an appropriate background by looking at contrasts in the lexicon and will also touch on some diachronic explanations. Then I will explain the different units of words.

Ultimately, I want to get an insight into a very recent phenomenon, namely the adding of German affixes to English words in German word formation - the so-called ‘Denglisch’.

2) Contrasts in the lexicon

Before I explore the similarities and differences in word formation processes between the two languages, I want to provide some background information by giving a general overview of the contrasts in the lexicon and the connection between word formation and the lexicon.

First, we must be aware of the fact, that words play an active role in the shaping of items in our imagination. This means, that if a word does not exist in a language, it is hard to grasp the meaning of it.

(1) Dunst, Nebel (2) haze, mist, fog We can translate haze with ‘Dunst’ and fog with ‘Nebel’, but it is hard to find an appropriate translation for mist (Mair 1995: 25). It is important to know that there are limits to the transfer of meaning from one language into another.

3

Another problem is false friends, which are words that look alike - often because they are rooted in the same language – but have developed a different meaning: loslassen ‘stop to hold’ vs. let loose ‘free from restraint’ (Mair 1995: 26)

This shows that the relation between English and German does not necessarily lead to a better understanding, but can lead to misinterpretations (“Can I become a steak, please?”).

Especially interesting concerning word formation are two tendencies in the lexicon which can be explained through history:

Dissociation

The German language tends to use compounds in cases where the English uses synonymous word pairs of different etymologic origin:

(1) table/desk vs. Tisch/Schreibtisch (2) calf/veal vs. Kalb/Kalbfleisch (Mair 1995: 29) The reason for this is the long periods of close language contact and bilingualism in Britain, especially after the Norman Conquest in 1066. The people who had to slaughter the animals used the English words while the French upper class used their words for the cooked meat. A large part of the Middle English vocabulary had its origin in French, in fact many thousand words (Jucker 2000: 36-38).

Zero-derivation

In Old English and Early Modern English, inflectional endings were lost. This is closely connected to the settlement of the Vikings in Britain. The Danes and Norwegians would have spoken different dialects, but both languages were rather similar to that of the Anglo-Saxons (Jucker 2000: 24). It is assumed that in order to understand each other, the endings were simply ignored. Due to this development, almost every verb, in English, can be used as a noun or the other way round (conversion), which is often a more precise way of saying something than in German:

to carpet a building vs. ein Gebäude mit Teppichen ausstatten The only constraints are word-class specific suffixes (Mair 1995: 29-30).

4