Nominalization By Mahmoud Abu Qarmoul
-
Upload
mahmoud-qarmoul -
Category
Education
-
view
254 -
download
0
description
Transcript of Nominalization By Mahmoud Abu Qarmoul
![Page 1: Nominalization By Mahmoud Abu Qarmoul](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062300/55889262d8b42a902d8b45ab/html5/thumbnails/1.jpg)
Nominalizations
![Page 2: Nominalization By Mahmoud Abu Qarmoul](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062300/55889262d8b42a902d8b45ab/html5/thumbnails/2.jpg)
In linguistic research the term n o m i n a l i z a t i o n is used for:
1 .the transformational process 2 .the concrete result of this process
![Page 3: Nominalization By Mahmoud Abu Qarmoul](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062300/55889262d8b42a902d8b45ab/html5/thumbnails/3.jpg)
The term may also be used for complex noun phrases which function as subject or object, as:
H i s c o n t i n u a l d r u m m i n g o n t h e t a b l e with h i s knife and f o r k (irritated me).
Alternatively, the term can be used in the narrow sense only for those noun phrases which have the structure of a noun itself. Examples are:
w a t c h m a k e r, b i r d - w a t c h e r,
b e e r - d r i n k e r , c a v e - d w e l l e r, w r i t i n g - d e s k,
w a s h i n g m a c h i n e, housekeeping,
c l o s i n g - t i m e .
![Page 4: Nominalization By Mahmoud Abu Qarmoul](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062300/55889262d8b42a902d8b45ab/html5/thumbnails/4.jpg)
From the point of view of morphology, nominalizations may be either
compounds or suffixal derivatives.
suffixal derivatives: include zero-derivatives,
like chimney sweep, which parallel overt derivatives, like
deer huntER many of the complex lexemes just mentioned are clearly related to full sentences and can therefore be considered nominalized sentences, like
b u l l f i g h t e r, t h e a t r e g o e r,
g r a v e - d i g g e r.
![Page 5: Nominalization By Mahmoud Abu Qarmoul](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062300/55889262d8b42a902d8b45ab/html5/thumbnails/5.jpg)
Marchand postulates that the determinatum in suchnominalizations corresponds to a particular constituent of an underlying sentence.
He distinguishes the following types of reference:
S(ubject)-type: apple-eatlER, crylBABY
0(bject-)type: eatinglAPPLE, drawlBRIDGE
Pr(edication)-type: apple-eatling, arrivlAL
Ad(verbial Complement)-type :
oil refinlERY, carvinglKNiFE
![Page 6: Nominalization By Mahmoud Abu Qarmoul](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062300/55889262d8b42a902d8b45ab/html5/thumbnails/6.jpg)
Marchand labels these types according to the syntactic function of the element which corresponds to the determinatum in the complex lexeme. This classification is thus based on syntactic criteria.
O P S
Bull fight -ER
'someone fights bulls ‘
S P O
![Page 7: Nominalization By Mahmoud Abu Qarmoul](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062300/55889262d8b42a902d8b45ab/html5/thumbnails/7.jpg)
The determinatum in Subject-types is not necessarily the
suffix -er, as can be seen from chimney sweep
The Subject-type can also be represented by a compound, like c r y b a by 'person, esp. a child, who cries too often'. This can be derived from an underlying sentence like 'the baby cries' or 'some baby cries' with additional lexicalization
![Page 8: Nominalization By Mahmoud Abu Qarmoul](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062300/55889262d8b42a902d8b45ab/html5/thumbnails/8.jpg)
Complex lexemes without a verbal element are more difficult to correlate with an underlying sentence .
In this case one can either introduce a specific, concrete verb in the underlying sentence, or postulate an abstract semantic element.
![Page 9: Nominalization By Mahmoud Abu Qarmoul](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062300/55889262d8b42a902d8b45ab/html5/thumbnails/9.jpg)
Another illustration of the derivation of types of reference can be given for the
suffixal derivative n o v e l i s t . We can either start from an underlying sentence such as someone writes novels' or introduce a generalized verb like make, p r o d u c e , which gives the sentence 'someone produces novels'. In either case, however, the suffix -ist corresponds to the subject in an underlying sentence and we consequently get a Subject-type here too
![Page 10: Nominalization By Mahmoud Abu Qarmoul](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062300/55889262d8b42a902d8b45ab/html5/thumbnails/10.jpg)
The adverbial complement of a sentence can also become the determinatum in a nominalization .
O i l refinery will be used in our last example to illustrateMarchand's types of reference.
O P AdP
oil refine - ery
someone refines oil at some place
S P O O
![Page 11: Nominalization By Mahmoud Abu Qarmoul](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062300/55889262d8b42a902d8b45ab/html5/thumbnails/11.jpg)
For action nouns and other types of nominalization denoting a fact, process,event, or state, a more recent theoretical proposal is the so-called:
"head-noun analysis“
![Page 12: Nominalization By Mahmoud Abu Qarmoul](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062300/55889262d8b42a902d8b45ab/html5/thumbnails/12.jpg)
in that abstract antecedent "head nouns", like ACTION, FACT, PROCESS, EVENT, STATE etc., are postulated in the underlying structure from which such nominalizations are derived. Thus, on a deeper level, e.g.c o c k f i g h t i n g , bloodsheds, boatride,
d a n c i n g , a r r i v a l etc. contain ACTION, while the head noun for
d e p a r t u r e may be either ACTION or FACT .
The interpretation depends on the context (e.g. John's d e p a r t u r e was odd) and on the nature of the verb serving as base for the nominalization.
![Page 13: Nominalization By Mahmoud Abu Qarmoul](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062300/55889262d8b42a902d8b45ab/html5/thumbnails/13.jpg)
This fourfold classification of nominalizations in (namely the 'types of reference') has considerable explanatory power for disambiguating identical or similar surface structures. Thus, dishwashER can either be a S-type or an Ad-type of Instrument.
The complex lexeme payment, like its German equivalent Z a h l u n g , can either be used for the process or the sum paid. This ambiguity can be resolved by distinguishing the P-type from the O-type
![Page 14: Nominalization By Mahmoud Abu Qarmoul](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062300/55889262d8b42a902d8b45ab/html5/thumbnails/14.jpg)
Marchand's 'types of reference', however, cannot only be used for the disambiguation and classification of nominalizations.
In addition to this, they have a more far-reaching explanatory function
![Page 15: Nominalization By Mahmoud Abu Qarmoul](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062300/55889262d8b42a902d8b45ab/html5/thumbnails/15.jpg)
The question now arises:
why such different reduced syntagmas are derived from the same complete syntagma
(the sentence?)
![Page 16: Nominalization By Mahmoud Abu Qarmoul](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062300/55889262d8b42a902d8b45ab/html5/thumbnails/16.jpg)
Marchand's explanation is based on the observation that the distinction between old and new information plays an important role here .
According to his theory, the determinatum of the complex lexeme always corresponds to that constituent of the sentence which is presupposed as known information
![Page 17: Nominalization By Mahmoud Abu Qarmoul](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062300/55889262d8b42a902d8b45ab/html5/thumbnails/17.jpg)
Marchand characterizes this process in the following way:
One grammatical part of the sentence is taken to be known: the Subject, the Object, the Predicate, the Predicate Complement, or the Adverbial Complement, and it is this part of the sentence that becomes the determinatum of the composite
![Page 18: Nominalization By Mahmoud Abu Qarmoul](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062300/55889262d8b42a902d8b45ab/html5/thumbnails/18.jpg)
t o p i c a l i z a t i o n
This process is often referred to as t o p i c a l i z a t i o n in linguistics. Marchand consequently also denotes his 'types of reference' as "selectional patterns
of information ."He points out that the distinction between old and new information was captured in the Prague school of linguistics by the terms theme (Thema) and r h e m e (Rhema).
![Page 19: Nominalization By Mahmoud Abu Qarmoul](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062300/55889262d8b42a902d8b45ab/html5/thumbnails/19.jpg)
The author would like to take up again the distinction between denotation and reference
If we apply this to Marchand's 'types of reference', we have to modify some of his statements. It is not a grammatical part of the sentence which is known or given, but the relationship between this constituent and an extralinguistic referent or denotatum. This relationship corresponds to the one between the determinatum of the complexlexeme and the identical referent or denotatum.
![Page 20: Nominalization By Mahmoud Abu Qarmoul](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062300/55889262d8b42a902d8b45ab/html5/thumbnails/20.jpg)
For example the subject in the underlying sentence Someone eats s o m e apple denotes the same extralinguistic referent as the suffix -er in the agent nominalization. This referent, the agent,as well as its existence are presumed to be known or given
![Page 21: Nominalization By Mahmoud Abu Qarmoul](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062300/55889262d8b42a902d8b45ab/html5/thumbnails/21.jpg)
The given information does not only contain the relation of reference andthe existence of the referent; it also includes the denotation of the linguistic sign used for referring.
It is known that a c r y b a b y is a kind of baby, a d r a w b r i d g e is a bridge, and a carving-knife a knife.
![Page 22: Nominalization By Mahmoud Abu Qarmoul](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062300/55889262d8b42a902d8b45ab/html5/thumbnails/22.jpg)
This fact is also expressed by the stress pattern of complex lexemes .
As a rule, the determinatum only bears secondary stress or no stress at all. The determinant, which is more important from the point of view of given versus new information, normally bears the main stress. This pattern is found e.g. in crybaby, drawbridge, carving-knife, steamboat, blackbird, novelist. The determinant syntagmatically modifies the given determinatum and makes the category denoted by the syntagma more specific .
Complex lexemes therefore have a higher degree of semantic specificity compared to the simple words that constitute their determinatum.
![Page 23: Nominalization By Mahmoud Abu Qarmoul](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062300/55889262d8b42a902d8b45ab/html5/thumbnails/23.jpg)
Marchand's basis for the classification isobviously a purely syntactic one. However, the distinction for example between the S-type and the Ad-type in the nominalization dishwashER also touches semantic questions. In one case we have an agent, in the other an instrument expressed by an adverbial complement. Yet the relation between the verb w a s h and an agent or an instrument is clearly of a different nature. This difference is therefore not only a matter of syntax, but also of semantics.
![Page 24: Nominalization By Mahmoud Abu Qarmoul](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062300/55889262d8b42a902d8b45ab/html5/thumbnails/24.jpg)
There is a linguistic theory which understands the relationship between the verb and other elements of the sentence as syntactic-semantic relations, namelyCharles Fillmore's Case Grammar. In the framework of this linguistic theory, the relations just mentioned are labelled d e e p cases or c a s e r o l e s . These cases must not be confused with the surface cases of traditional grammar .
In the latest model relevant here, Fillmore gives the following list of deep cases: Agent, Experiencer, Instrument, Object, Source, Goal, Location, Time. The grammatical subject and object, as syntactic functions, are understood as purely surface relations in the classical version of Fillmore's Case Grammar
![Page 25: Nominalization By Mahmoud Abu Qarmoul](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062300/55889262d8b42a902d8b45ab/html5/thumbnails/25.jpg)
Some further remarks on the analysis of nominalizations, as a subgroup of complex lexemes, based on Case Grammar, may be appropriate. Thus, b u l l f i g h t e r is no longer a S-type, but an Agent-Type. The referent of the American word draftee is the goal of the action denoted by the verb. In Case Grammar this category is labelled G o a l . Consequently draftee is, like mostsuffixal derivatives in -ee, a Goal-Type. The superficially similar escapee, however, is an Agent-Type. D r a w e r may be either an Agent-Type or an Object-Type depending on whether we refer to a person or a box-like container in a chest.
![Page 26: Nominalization By Mahmoud Abu Qarmoul](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062300/55889262d8b42a902d8b45ab/html5/thumbnails/26.jpg)
The traditional classification of adverbial complements on the basis of content is also captured by Case Grammar and leads to a more appropriate description of the Ad-types. Therefore h u n t i n g season is described as a TimeType, o i l r e f i n e r y as a LocationType, and
p r i n t i n g - i n k as a Instrument-Type.
![Page 27: Nominalization By Mahmoud Abu Qarmoul](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062300/55889262d8b42a902d8b45ab/html5/thumbnails/27.jpg)
We can now maintain that the application of Fillmore's deep cases to Marchand's 'types of reference* throws a new light upon the structure of complex lexemes and leads to a better understanding of the functioning of word-formation. With this theory we can capture fundamental differencesbetween superficially and morphologically parallel words and explain them better .
![Page 28: Nominalization By Mahmoud Abu Qarmoul](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062300/55889262d8b42a902d8b45ab/html5/thumbnails/28.jpg)
the lexemes listed in (11a) are all derivatives in -er, but representdifferent 'types of reference'. Conversely, morphologically distinct complex lexemes as for example those in (11b) can be explained and described as realizations of the same underlying type
![Page 29: Nominalization By Mahmoud Abu Qarmoul](https://reader036.fdocuments.in/reader036/viewer/2022062300/55889262d8b42a902d8b45ab/html5/thumbnails/29.jpg)
(11a )–ER )11b( AGENT-TYPE:
payer (Agent-) grave-digglercooker (Instrument-) c u t - t h r o a t d i n e r (Location-) novel/istm o u r n e r (Experiences) cook/0c o n t a i n e r (Object-Type)
(diner may also be an Agent-Type)
.