Affiliation:
1. Department of Linguistics , Stanford University , Stanford , CA , USA , 94305-2150
2. School of Modern Languages , Georgia Institute of Technology , 613 Cherry Street NW , Atlanta GA 30313 , USA
Abstract
Abstract
The nature of the relationship between the head and modifier in English noun compounds has long posed a challenge to semantic theories. We argue that the type of head-modifier relation in an English endocentric noun-headed compound depends on how its referent is categorized: specifically, on whether the referent is conceptualized as an artifact, made by humans for a purpose; or as a natural kind, existing independently of humans. We propose the Events vs. Essences Hypothesis: the modifier in an artifact-headed compound typically refers to an event of use or creation associated with that artifact, while the modifier in a natural kind-headed compound typically makes reference to inherent properties reflective of an abstract essence associated with the kind, such as its perceptual properties or native habitat. We present three studies substantiating this hypothesis. First, in a corpus of almost 1,700 attested compounds in two conceptual domains (food/cooking and precious minerals/jewelry), we find that as predicted, compound names referring to artifacts tend to evoke events, whereas compound names referring to natural kinds tend to evoke essential properties. Next, in a production experiment involving compound creation and a comprehension experiment involving compound interpretation, we find that the same tendencies also extend to novel compounds.
Subject
Linguistics and Language,Language and Linguistics
Reference55 articles.
1. Baayen, R. Harald, Richard Piepenbrock & Leon Gulikers. 1995. The CELEX lexical database (Release 2). Linguistic Data Consortium, University of Pennsylvania [Distributor], Philadelphia, PA.
2. Barr, Dale J., Roger Levy, Christoph Scheepers & Harry J. Tily. 2013. Random effects structure for confirmatory hypothesis testing: Keep it maximal. Journal of Memory and Language 68(3). 255–278.
3. Bates, Douglas, Reinhold Kliegl, Shravan Vasishth & Harald Baayen. 2015. Parsimonious mixed models. University of Wisconsin-Madison, University of Potsdam and University of Tübingen, ms.
4. Bates, Douglas & Deepayan Sarkar. 2007. The lme4 package. R package.
5. Bauer, Laurie, Rochelle Lieber & Ingo Plag. 2013. The Oxford reference guide to English morphology. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Cited by
6 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献