I. Aronoff, Selkirk and Lieber on the structure of the English lexicon and the nature and use of word-formation rules.
In the wake of Chomsky's "Remarks on Nominalization" (1970), in which Chomsky makes a strict distinction between syntax and derivational morphology, Aronoff (1976) proposes a word based theory of the lexicon. This lexicon is a separate component of the grammar in which derivational word formation processes are dealt with. This hypothesis is called strong lexicalist hypothesis. Aronoff suggests that inflection and compounding are not taking place in the lexicon but in the syntax (Spencer 1991: 82). As to the nature of the listed lexical items Aronoff does not go along with Halle who in 1973 assumed that the lexicon is made up of three lists: a list of morphemes, a list of actual words, and a list of words that are regularly formed but are non-existent (McCarthy 1992: 25). In his theory Aronoff reduces the three lists to one single list, stating that it could only be words that are listed in the lexicon, not morphemes. A reason for this assumption is that morphemes, other than words, are not persistent in meaning and sometimes they do not seem to have any meaning at all. A good example for meaningless morphemes are the so-called cranberry morphemes.
[...]
Inhaltsverzeichnis (Table of Contents)
- Aronoff's Word-Based Theory
- Selkirk's Lexicalist Theory
Zielsetzung und Themenschwerpunkte (Objectives and Key Themes)
This text aims to compare and contrast two prominent lexicalist theories of English word formation: Aronoff's word-based theory and Selkirk's theory of word structure. It explores their differing approaches to the lexicon, word formation rules, and the representation of morphological structure.
- The nature of the lexicon in English word formation
- The role and function of word-formation rules
- The representation of morphological structure
- The productivity of word formation rules
- The treatment of idiosyncrasy and irregularity in word formation
Zusammenfassung der Kapitel (Chapter Summaries)
Aronoff's Word-Based Theory: This section details Aronoff's word-based theory, which posits a lexicon containing only words, not morphemes. The theory emphasizes the importance of minimal meaningful signs and word formation rules (WFRs). The concept of arbitrariness in meaning is central to determining which words receive lexical entries. The text explores Aronoff's criteria for lexical listing, focusing on the predictability of meaning and the avoidance of overgeneration. It delves into the productivity of WFRs, highlighting the impact of phonological idiosyncrasies and semantic incoherence on rule productivity. The blocking phenomenon, arising from the lexicon's low tolerance for synonymy, is also discussed, illustrating how the existence of a non-derivational word can block the creation of a synonymous derived word. Examples such as 'transmission' and 'emission', and the 'ness' and 'ity' suffixes applied to adjectives ending in '-ous', are used to illustrate the principles of this theory. Aronoff's treatment of exceptions, such as back-formation, is explored, demonstrating how he addresses cases where affixes are attached to non-word roots through allomorphy and truncation rules.
Selkirk's Lexicalist Theory: This section presents Selkirk's lexicalist theory, which contrasts with Aronoff's in its approach to word structure and the role of rules. Selkirk views word structure as analogous to syntactic structure, generated by a rule system adhering to X-bar theory. The theory incorporates both freely occurring lexical items and bound morphemes. Selkirk’s approach differs significantly by including affixes in the lexicon, which contrasts with Aronoff's exclusion of affixes due to their dependence on word-formation rules. The text explores Selkirk’s use of word syntactic rules (WSRs) to assign labeled trees to words, representing their internal constituent structure, reflecting a hierarchical organization similar to that of sentences. This framework allows for a straightforward explanation of derivations like "aggressive," as the affix "-ive" is attached to the listed bound form "#agress#". The text also clarifies that Selkirk's system explicitly lists the idiosyncratic properties of affixes, which determine aspects such as category, meaning, and phonological representation—properties that Aronoff's system derives from the WFRs themselves. The discussion further emphasizes Selkirk's extension of Chomsky's X-bar theory to encompass the internal structure of words, showing how words are represented as X⁰, with roots represented as X¹. The text contrasts Selkirk's treatment of morphological processes as word syntactic processes, including inflection and derivation, with Aronoff's more strict separation of lexicon and syntax.
Schlüsselwörter (Keywords)
English word formation, lexicon, word-formation rules, morphology, syntax, lexicalism, Aronoff, Selkirk, productivity, idiosyncrasy, arbitrariness, minimal sign, X-bar theory, blocking, derivation, inflection, compounding, allomorphy, truncation, back-formation.
A Comparison of Aronoff's and Selkirk's Lexicalist Theories of English Word Formation: FAQ
What is the main focus of this text?
This text compares and contrasts two prominent lexicalist theories of English word formation: Aronoff's word-based theory and Selkirk's theory of word structure. It examines their different approaches to the lexicon, word-formation rules, and the representation of morphological structure.
What are the key themes explored in the text?
The text explores several key themes, including the nature of the lexicon in English word formation; the role and function of word-formation rules; the representation of morphological structure; the productivity of word-formation rules; and the treatment of idiosyncrasy and irregularity in word formation.
What is Aronoff's Word-Based Theory?
Aronoff's theory posits a lexicon containing only words, not morphemes. It emphasizes minimal meaningful signs and word-formation rules (WFRs). Meaning arbitrariness is central, determining lexical entries. The text details Aronoff's criteria for lexical listing, focusing on meaning predictability and overgeneration avoidance. It also discusses WFR productivity, the impact of phonological idiosyncrasies and semantic incoherence, and the blocking phenomenon (where a non-derivational word blocks a synonymous derived word).
How does Aronoff's theory handle exceptions like back-formation?
Aronoff addresses exceptions like back-formation through allomorphy and truncation rules, showing how affixes can be attached to non-word roots.
What is Selkirk's Lexicalist Theory?
Selkirk's theory views word structure as analogous to syntactic structure, generated by a rule system following X-bar theory. It includes both freely occurring lexical items and bound morphemes. Unlike Aronoff's theory, Selkirk includes affixes in the lexicon. The theory uses word syntactic rules (WSRs) to assign labeled trees to words, representing their internal constituent structure hierarchically.
How does Selkirk's theory differ from Aronoff's?
Selkirk's theory differs significantly by including affixes in the lexicon, contrasting with Aronoff's exclusion of affixes. Selkirk's system explicitly lists the idiosyncratic properties of affixes (category, meaning, phonological representation), while Aronoff's system derives these from the WFRs. Selkirk extends Chomsky's X-bar theory to word structure, representing words as X⁰ and roots as X¹, contrasting with Aronoff's stricter separation of lexicon and syntax.
What are the key terms and concepts discussed?
Key terms include: English word formation, lexicon, word-formation rules, morphology, syntax, lexicalism, Aronoff, Selkirk, productivity, idiosyncrasy, arbitrariness, minimal sign, X-bar theory, blocking, derivation, inflection, compounding, allomorphy, truncation, and back-formation.
What are the chapter summaries provided in the text?
The text provides detailed summaries of both Aronoff's and Selkirk's theories, highlighting their core principles, mechanisms, and contrasting approaches to key aspects of word formation.
What is the overall objective of the text?
The text aims to provide a comprehensive comparison of Aronoff's and Selkirk's lexicalist theories, enabling readers to understand their similarities and differences in explaining English word formation.
- Quote paper
- Johannes Klaas (Author), 1998, English Word Formation, Munich, GRIN Verlag, https://www.grin.com/document/722
