Differences between English and German Endocentric V-N Compounds

Table of Contents

Abstract

1 Introduction

2 Review of Previous Research
2.1 Morphological Analysis of Compounds
2.2 Hawkins’ Parameter of Difference between English and German: loose-fit/ tight-fit

3 Research Question and Hypothesis

4 Study
4.1 Summary
4.2 Results
4.3 Discussion

5 Conclusion

6 References

Abstract

My term paper will be about the differences between English and German V-N compounds. I will focus on endocentric compounds since German lacks exocentric V-N compounds (Gast, 2008, p. 269). An example of an endocentric V-N compound that exists in both languages would be the English “driftwood” with its German counterpart “Treibholz” (Gast, 2008, p. 276). It is interesting to investigate whether the differences between English and German endocentric V-N compounds may be caused by a general contrast between the two languages. By that, I mean the tighter (German) and looser (English) fit between form and function which was suggested by Hawkins (1986) as a general parameter of difference (Hawkins, 1986, p. 6). I will start by explaining basic terminology of V-N compounding and Hawkins’ approach. After the basic elements are clarified, I will turn to my research question: “What are the major differences between English and German endocentric V-N compounds, and can they be linked to Hawkins’ general parameter of difference?”. To answer this question, I will use a paper by Volker Gast from 2008, which is called “Verb-noun compounds in English and German”.

1 Introduction

“Compounding is often thought of as the simplest kind of word-formation: it does not require special obligatory bound items but uses elements which are already part of the language” (Bauer, 2017, p. 1). Therefore, one could believe that compounding is the most understood of all word-formation processes. This assumption is wrong; compounding is still a very controversial area, especially since the classification of compounds leads to difficulties (Bauer, 2017, p. 1), which will also be dealt with during the paper.

My term paper deals with the differences between the formation of English and German verb-noun compounds. I will focus on endocentric compounds here because there are no exocentric V-N compounds in the German language (Gast, 2008, p. 269). The research question for this term paper is as follows: “What are the major differences between English and German endocentric V-N compounds, and can they be linked to Hawkins’ general parameter of difference?”.

Hawkins (1986) maintains that German has a tighter fit between form and meaning than English (Hawkins, 1986, p. 6). Since this assumption is very general, it is interesting to investigate whether the assumption applies to the field of endocentric V-N compounds in German and English.

V-N compounds are hard to identify because the left-hand member is often identified as a noun, for instance in “lovebird”. German does not contain exocentric V-N compounds while English does (Gast & König, 2012, p. 268), which is why their differences cannot be compared in this paper. Endocentric V-N compounds exist in both languages but are more restricted in English. English often uses N-N compounds where German uses V-N compounds instead; the English equivalent is often formed by -ing suffixation (Gast & König, 2012, p. 269).

To answer my research question, I will first explain the general makeup of compounds and describe the findings of previous literature. In this part, the terms binary, recursive, synthetic, attributive, coordinate, subordinate, headedness, endocentric, and exocentric will be explained. After that, I will depict Hawkins’ parameter of difference. In the next chapter, I will find out what the major differences between English and German endocentric V-N compounds are by referring to a study by Gast (2008). Afterward, I will examine whether these differences can be interpreted in Hawkins’ terms.

2 Review of Previous Research

2.1 Morphological Analysis of Compounds

Compounding is a word-formation process. It combines two or more lexemes (or free morphemes) into new lexical items. In the process of compounding, verbs, nouns, adjectives, prepositions, or particles can be combined. Therefore, there could technically be 16 different types of compounds (Gast & König, 2012, p. 262). But there are restrictions on compounding in English and German, especially concerning compounds including prepositions or particles. These are often unproductive and mostly lexicalized items. The other word categories can all be combined, even if they vary in productivity and distribution (Gast & König, 2012, p. 263).

It is also noteworthy that there are not only binary compounds (compounds consisting of two free morphemes) but also recursive compounds (compounds consisting of more than two free morphemes) (Gast & König, 2012, p. 263). Gast and König (2012) found that English compounds are mostly binary while German contains numerous recursive compounds, for example, “kirschkernweitspucken” which consists of four free morphemes (Gast & König, 2012, p. 263). Compounding itself is considered a recursive process. That means, that a compound with two lexemes can be combined with numerous other lexemes to form new compounds (Lieber, 2010, p. 44). Their internal structures can be shown visually as a word tree (Lieber, 2010, p. 44).

Synthetic compounds are combinations of two free morphemes where the head is derived from a verb and the other element functions as an argument of that verb. To demonstrate, Lieber (2010) mentions “dog walker” and “handwashing” as synthetic compounds. On the contrary, root compounds do not include an element that is derived from a verb, but only consist of two lexemes that could be nouns, adjectives, or verbs. Consequently, there is no argument-verb relationship between the two elements (Lieber, 2010, p. 46-47).

Additionally, compounds can be separated into attributive, coordinate, and subordinate compounds (Lieber, 2010, p. 47). Attributive compounds consist of two or more morphemes of at least two different word categories, and the first element expresses a relationship with the second element, like “machine-wash” (Lieber, 2010, p. 47). Coordinate compounds are combinations of two (or more) free morphemes of the word category, for example, “stir-fry” (Lieber, 2009, p. 361). In subordinate compounds, one element functions as the argument of the other element, most of the time as its object. Many of the subordinate compounds in the English language are synthetic compounds (Lieber, 2010, p. 47).

In addition, compounds can be divided into two categories concerning their headedness (Gast & König, 2012, p. 263). There are binary endocentric compounds where the head of the compound can be found either in the initial or in the final position of the compound. In German and English most of the endocentric compounds have their heads in the final position. That means that the left-hand members, also called modifiers, “denote special cases of the denotation of their right members” (Gast & König, 2012, p. 263). In this case, a “townhouse” is a type of house. Here, “town” is a hyponym or subtype of “house” (the head) and at the same time describes “house” further. The modifier cannot take inflectional morphemes while the head in the final position can (Schmid, 2011, p. 121), for example, ”*townshouse” is not possible, but “townhouses” is. For endocentric coordinative compounds like “stir-fry” or “blue-green”, it is still debated whether they have two heads or no head at all (Lieber, 2009, p. 366). Furthermore, there are exocentric compounds that have their semantic head outside of the compound (Bauer, 2017, p. 168). For instance, the exocentric V-N compound “pickpocket” is not a kind or subtype of “pick” nor of “pocket”, so neither of these two lexemes is the compound’s semantic head. English contains numerous exocentric V-N compounds (Gast & König, 2012, p. 263), and there are several subtypes of them (Bauer, 2017, p. 65). But since German generally contains very few exocentric compounds (Gast & König, 2012, p. 263) and completely lacks exocentric V-N compounds (Gast, 2008, p. 269), I will not investigate these subtypes further.

As already mentioned in the introduction, it is sometimes hard to identify the components of compounds, especially of V-N compounds. Bauer (1978) gives the example of the English endocentric compound “rattlesnake”. Is it “a snake which rattles or a snake who has a rattle?” (Bauer, 1978, p. 133). In this case, it is debatable whether the first free morpheme of “rattlesnake” is a noun or a verb. Bauer (1978) argues that the decision of categorizing the first element as a verb seems to be slightly better because of technical reasons and consistency, but there is no clear cut (Bauer, 1978, p. 134).

[...]