Leksički sloj imeničkih složenica tipa imenica + imenica u savremenom engleskom jeziku
The lexical level of nominal compounds of the noun + noun type in contemporary English
Author
Rakić, Stanimir V.Mentor
Čubrović, BiljanaCommittee members
Vujić, JelenaPaunović, Tatjana
Metadata
Show full item recordAbstract
U teoriji leksičke fonologije i morfologije, fonološka i morfološka pravila se
dodeljuju odvojenim slojevima leksikona za koje se pretpostavlja da definišu njihov domen
i način primene. Tako Kiparsky (1982) predlaže razlikovanje sledeća tri leksička sloja u
engleskom jeziku:
(1) 1. sloj : afiksi 1. reda i neregularna fleksija
2. sloj: afiksi 2. reda i slaganje
3. sloj: pravilna fleksija
U ovoj disertaciji se razmatraju neki opšti problemi teorije o uređenju leksičkih
slojeva i posebno problemi vezani za mesto složenica tipa imenica + imenica u hijerarhiji
leksičkih slojeva. Tako npr. bilo je rano primećeno da u nekim primerima kao što su
ungrammaticality, analyzability, standardization afiksi 1. reda mogu da slede afikse 2. reda
(Selkirk 1982, Straus 1982). Primeri toga tipa su nazvani ‘paradoksi zagrađivanja’ i bili su
dugo predmet diskusije i sporenja. Neki drugi problemi se odnose na mesto koje pripada
slaganju u hijerarhiji (1). Takođe je rano primećeno da pravilna fleksija može u ...nekim
slučajevima da učestvuje u gradnji složenica u engleskom jeziku, a to protivureči leksičkom
uređenju (1) prema kojem pravilna fleksija pripada 3. leksičkom sloju, a slaganje 2.
leksičkom sloju. Dalje su uočeni primeri da se u nekim složenicama u prvoj komponenti
mogu javljati fraze - sintagme, što predstavlja ‘prodor’ sintakse u tvorbu reči. Na osnovu
ovakvih pojava, neki lingvisti su čak tvrdili da se tvorba reči može shvatiti kao produženje
sintakse, tj. da u tvorbi reči važe isti bazični principi kao u sintaksi (Lieber 1992). Svi ovi
primeri narušavaju hijerarhiju leksičkih slojeva (1).
Javljanje množinskih oblika reči na -s u prvoj komponenti složenica je upravo
podstaklo neke lingviste da predlože postojanje samo 2 leksička sloja, tj. da spoje 2.
leksički sloj, kojem pripadaju složenice, s 3. leksičkim slojem u kojem je pravilna
fleksija. Tako Katamba i Stoneham (2006) smatraju da je dovoljno pretpostaviti
postojanje samo dva leksička sloja. Prema Katambi i Stonehamu prvom leksičkom ...
In the theory of lexical phonology and morphology, phonological and
morphological rules are assigned to separate levels of the lexicon which are supposed to
define their domain and manner of application. Thus Kiparsky (1982) has proposed
the following three lexical levels in English:
(1) Level 1: the first order affixes and irregular inflection
Level 2: the second order affixes and compounding
Level 3: regular inflection
In this dissertation I discuss some general problems with the theory of level
ordering, particularly the problems associated with the location of compounding in the
hierarchy (1). It has long been noted that in examples like ungrammaticality and
standardization the first order affixes can follow the second order affixes (Selkirk 1982,
Straus 1982). Examples of this type have been named ‘bracketing paradoxes’ and have
been the object of discussion and controversy for many years. Some other problems are
connected with the location of compounding in the hierarchy (1). It ...has been noticed that,
in some cases, regular inflection can take part in the formation of compounds which
violates hierarchy (1), where it has been assumed that regular inflection is located on the
third lexical level, and compounding on the second lexical level. Further, it has also been
noticed that the examples of compounds with phrasal first components present an
‘intrusion’ of syntax into word-formation. On the bases of such examples some linguists
have claimed that word-formation is just an extension of syntax, i.e. that the same basic
principles equally hold in word-formation as in syntax (Lieber 1992). All these
counterexamples violate the level ordering in (1).
The occurence of plural forms in -s in the first components of nominal
compounds has prompted some linguists to propose the existence of only two lexical
levels, i. e. to combine the second lexical level to the third lexical level. Thus, for
example, Katamba and Stoneham (2006) claim that it is sufficient to assume the
existence of only two lexical levels. According to their interpretation, irregular ...