Why *-ling-in? : The pertinacity of a wrong gender
| dc.contributor.author | Plank, Frans | |
| dc.date.accessioned | 2013-02-20T07:39:21Z | deu |
| dc.date.available | 2013-05-14T22:25:06Z | deu |
| dc.date.issued | 2011 | |
| dc.description.abstract | Co-occurrence restrictions among affixes are preferably accounted for through general structural constraints, to do with separations of word-internal domains, with hierarchical rankings of the affixes involved, with processing complexity, or with word-prosodic patterns. Disallowing particular designated affixes to combine with one another by (language-particular) stipulation is considered a theoretical option only to be taken as a last resort. Against this backdrop it is argued here that in the much-discussed German case of diminutive-pejorative-absolutive suffix -ling the preclusion of further derivational affixation, in particular suffixation with feminine motional -in, is not due to any such general constraint; rather, this must be recognised as an instance of an affix-specific selectional restriction of a morphosemantic kind. The chief theoretical interest of this particular case is diachronic. While inner suffix -ling, originally a semantically neutral nominalising suffix, was able to acquire a diminutive, pejorative, absolutive-aligned ("passive") semantics, its original gender remained masculine rather than changing to neuter, as would be semantically more suitable. Thus, with the outer, feminine-deriving suffix -in being sensitive to the gender of its nominal bases, nouns which are formally masculine, as required by -in suffixation, but on semantic grounds ought to be neuter are infelicitous. | eng |
| dc.description.version | published | |
| dc.identifier.citation | Morphology ; 22 (2012), 2. - S. 277-292 | deu |
| dc.identifier.doi | 10.1007/s11525-011-9188-3 | deu |
| dc.identifier.ppn | 378930346 | deu |
| dc.identifier.uri | http://kops.uni-konstanz.de/handle/123456789/21956 | |
| dc.language.iso | eng | deu |
| dc.legacy.dateIssued | 2013-02-20 | deu |
| dc.rights | terms-of-use | deu |
| dc.rights.uri | https://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/ | deu |
| dc.subject | Affix co-occurrence | deu |
| dc.subject | affix order | deu |
| dc.subject | animacy | deu |
| dc.subject | "closing" suffixes | deu |
| dc.subject | derivational morphology | deu |
| dc.subject | diachrony | deu |
| dc.subject | gender | deu |
| dc.subject | German | deu |
| dc.subject.ddc | 400 | deu |
| dc.title | Why *-ling-in? : The pertinacity of a wrong gender | eng |
| dc.type | JOURNAL_ARTICLE | deu |
| dspace.entity.type | Publication | |
| kops.citation.bibtex | @article{Plank2011lingi-21956,
year={2011},
doi={10.1007/s11525-011-9188-3},
title={Why *-ling-in? : The pertinacity of a wrong gender},
number={2},
volume={22},
issn={1871-5621},
journal={Morphology},
pages={277--292},
author={Plank, Frans}
} | |
| kops.citation.iso690 | PLANK, Frans, 2011. Why *-ling-in? : The pertinacity of a wrong gender. In: Morphology. 2011, 22(2), pp. 277-292. ISSN 1871-5621. eISSN 1871-5656. Available under: doi: 10.1007/s11525-011-9188-3 | deu |
| kops.citation.iso690 | PLANK, Frans, 2011. Why *-ling-in? : The pertinacity of a wrong gender. In: Morphology. 2011, 22(2), pp. 277-292. ISSN 1871-5621. eISSN 1871-5656. Available under: doi: 10.1007/s11525-011-9188-3 | eng |
| kops.citation.rdf | <rdf:RDF
xmlns:dcterms="http://purl.org/dc/terms/"
xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#"
xmlns:bibo="http://purl.org/ontology/bibo/"
xmlns:dspace="http://digital-repositories.org/ontologies/dspace/0.1.0#"
xmlns:foaf="http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/"
xmlns:void="http://rdfs.org/ns/void#"
xmlns:xsd="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#" >
<rdf:Description rdf:about="https://kops.uni-konstanz.de/server/rdf/resource/123456789/21956">
<dcterms:available rdf:datatype="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#dateTime">2013-05-14T22:25:06Z</dcterms:available>
<dcterms:isPartOf rdf:resource="https://kops.uni-konstanz.de/server/rdf/resource/123456789/45"/>
<dc:contributor>Plank, Frans</dc:contributor>
<dcterms:bibliographicCitation>Morphology ; 22 (2012), 2. - S. 277-292</dcterms:bibliographicCitation>
<dcterms:issued>2011</dcterms:issued>
<dc:rights>terms-of-use</dc:rights>
<dcterms:abstract xml:lang="eng">Co-occurrence restrictions among affixes are preferably accounted for through general structural constraints, to do with separations of word-internal domains, with hierarchical rankings of the affixes involved, with processing complexity, or with word-prosodic patterns. Disallowing particular designated affixes to combine with one another by (language-particular) stipulation is considered a theoretical option only to be taken as a last resort. Against this backdrop it is argued here that in the much-discussed German case of diminutive-pejorative-absolutive suffix -ling the preclusion of further derivational affixation, in particular suffixation with feminine motional -in, is not due to any such general constraint; rather, this must be recognised as an instance of an affix-specific selectional restriction of a morphosemantic kind. The chief theoretical interest of this particular case is diachronic. While inner suffix -ling, originally a semantically neutral nominalising suffix, was able to acquire a diminutive, pejorative, absolutive-aligned ("passive") semantics, its original gender remained masculine rather than changing to neuter, as would be semantically more suitable. Thus, with the outer, feminine-deriving suffix -in being sensitive to the gender of its nominal bases, nouns which are formally masculine, as required by -in suffixation, but on semantic grounds ought to be neuter are infelicitous.</dcterms:abstract>
<dcterms:hasPart rdf:resource="https://kops.uni-konstanz.de/bitstream/123456789/21956/1/plank_219564.pdf"/>
<void:sparqlEndpoint rdf:resource="http://localhost/fuseki/dspace/sparql"/>
<dspace:hasBitstream rdf:resource="https://kops.uni-konstanz.de/bitstream/123456789/21956/1/plank_219564.pdf"/>
<foaf:homepage rdf:resource="http://localhost:8080/"/>
<dc:date rdf:datatype="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#dateTime">2013-02-20T07:39:21Z</dc:date>
<dc:creator>Plank, Frans</dc:creator>
<dc:language>eng</dc:language>
<bibo:uri rdf:resource="http://kops.uni-konstanz.de/handle/123456789/21956"/>
<dspace:isPartOfCollection rdf:resource="https://kops.uni-konstanz.de/server/rdf/resource/123456789/45"/>
<dcterms:title>Why *-ling-in? : The pertinacity of a wrong gender</dcterms:title>
<dcterms:rights rdf:resource="https://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/"/>
</rdf:Description>
</rdf:RDF> | |
| kops.description.openAccess | openaccessgreen | |
| kops.flag.knbibliography | true | |
| kops.identifier.nbn | urn:nbn:de:bsz:352-219564 | deu |
| kops.sourcefield | Morphology. 2011, <b>22</b>(2), pp. 277-292. ISSN 1871-5621. eISSN 1871-5656. Available under: doi: 10.1007/s11525-011-9188-3 | deu |
| kops.sourcefield.plain | Morphology. 2011, 22(2), pp. 277-292. ISSN 1871-5621. eISSN 1871-5656. Available under: doi: 10.1007/s11525-011-9188-3 | deu |
| kops.sourcefield.plain | Morphology. 2011, 22(2), pp. 277-292. ISSN 1871-5621. eISSN 1871-5656. Available under: doi: 10.1007/s11525-011-9188-3 | eng |
| kops.submitter.email | oleg.kozlov@uni-konstanz.de | deu |
| relation.isAuthorOfPublication | 5bfeaf3c-12a3-42bc-9777-319ca83776fb | |
| relation.isAuthorOfPublication.latestForDiscovery | 5bfeaf3c-12a3-42bc-9777-319ca83776fb | |
| source.bibliographicInfo.fromPage | 277 | |
| source.bibliographicInfo.issue | 2 | |
| source.bibliographicInfo.toPage | 292 | |
| source.bibliographicInfo.volume | 22 | |
| source.identifier.eissn | 1871-5656 | deu |
| source.identifier.issn | 1871-5621 | |
| source.periodicalTitle | Morphology |
Dateien
Originalbündel
1 - 1 von 1
Vorschaubild nicht verfügbar
- Name:
- plank_219564.pdf
- Größe:
- 5.99 MB
- Format:
- Adobe Portable Document Format
Lizenzbündel
1 - 1 von 1
Vorschaubild nicht verfügbar
- Name:
- license.txt
- Größe:
- 1.92 KB
- Format:
- Plain Text
- Beschreibung:

