Semantic Fragmentation and Conventionalization in Persian Compound Nouns Ending in Verbal Stems: A Usage-based Perspective

نوع مقاله : مقاله تحقیق

نویسندگان
Adel Rafiei 1
Zoleikha Azimdokht 2
1 Associate Professor of Linguistics, Department of Linguistics, Faculty of Foreign Languages, University of Isfahan
2 Ph.D. in Linguistics, Department of Linguistics, Faculty of Foreign Languages, University of Isfahan
10.48311/LRR.14.5.27
چکیده
In the present study, we analyze the semantic fragmentation and conventionalization in Persian compound nouns ending in the verbal stems –andāz ‘throw’, -band ‘fasten/close,’ -foruš ‘sell’, -gir ‘catch’, -keš ‘pull’, -paz ‘cook’, -yāb ‘find’, and -zan ‘hit’ from the usage-based perspective. The analysis is based on a 800 data set extracted from diachronic and synchronic corpora. The words produced from the general compounding pattern [XV PRS]N can be categorized in a range of semantic categories, including agent, instrument, location, and object. In describing the semantic fragmentation of [XV PRS]N, we propose the human agent as the starting meaning, from which the instrument sub-pattern is derived by the mechanism of metaphorical extension. However, to justify the object and location meanings, we consider the metonymic extension mechanism to be involved. The sense extension mechanisms do not only apply to the individual words but can happen on the pattern level. It is also argued that these mechanisms are not mechanically applied to all the patterns ending in the verbal stems, instead, it is the usage and the communicative needs of the speakers that determine the semantic fragmentation of any patterns. To illustrate this point, as a case study, we focus on the development of instrument meaning in the pattern [X-paz PRS]N. We show that the instrument sub-pattern is a recent linguistic phenomenon that coincides with the introduction of modern cooking equipment with mostly English names to Iranian society. The increasing use of these types of equipment has led to a new communicative need for naming such instruments. This extra-linguistic factor has motivated the pattern [X-paz PRS]N to be extended through analogy with English compound instrument nouns. The findings of this study may contribute to the understanding of word-formation patterns in general and compounding patterns in particular.

کلیدواژه‌ها

موضوعات

AbolGhasemi, M. (1991). Grammatical and lexical notes. In P. Khanlari (Ed.), The leader of speech, 19-25. Alborz [In Persian]
Azimdokht, Z. (2019). A Study of Persian Compounds Ending in Present Verbal Stems: A Construction Morphology Approach. PhD thesis. University of Isfahan, Iran. [In Persian]
Azimdokht, Z. Rafiei, A. (2019). Persian Agentive Compound Words Ending in 'PAZ' Present Stem: Construction Morphology Approach. Comparative Linguistics, 9 (17), 20-45. [In Persian]
Beard, R. (1990). The nature and origins of derivational polysemy. Lingua, 81, 101- 140.
Beard, R. (1995). Lexeme- morpheme based morphology: A general theory of inflection and word formation. SUNY.
Booij, G. (1986). Form and meaning in morphology: The case of Dutch agent nouns. Linguistics, 24, 503- 517.
Booij, G. (2002). The morphology of Dutch. Oxford University Press.
Booij, G. (2005). The Grammar of words (1st edition). Oxford University Press.
Booij, G. (2010). Construction morphology. Oxford University Press.
Booij, G. Lieber, R. (2004). On the paradigmatic nature of affixal semantics in English. Linguistics, 42, 327-357.
Bybee, J. L. (1985). Morphology: A study of the relation between meaning and form. John Benjamins.
Bybee, J. L. (1995). Regular morphology and the lexicon. Language and Cognitive Process, 10, 425- 455.
Bybee, J. L. (2001). Phonology and language use. Cambridge University Press.
Bybee, J. L. (2010). Language, Usage, and Cognition. Cambridge University Press.
Evans, V. & Green, M. (2006). Cognitive linguistics: An introduction. Edinburg University Press.
Goldberg, A. (1995). Constructions: A Construction Grammar approach to argument structure. Chicago University Press.
Heyvaert, L. (2003). A cognitive-functional approach to nominalization in English. Mouton de Gruyter.
Ibbotson, P. (2013). The scope of usage-based theory. Frontiers in Psychology, 4. Article No. 255.
Jaberg, K. (1905). Review of Roediger 1904. Archiv für das stadium der neueren sprachen und literature ,114, 458- 462.
Keshani, Kh. (1993). Zansu reverse dictionary. University publication center. [In Persian]
Lüdtke, J. (2005). Romanische Wortbildung. Inhaltlich - diachronisch - synchronisch. Stauffenburg.
Luschützky, H. Ch. (2011). Agent-noun polysemy in Slavic: some examples. In H. Ch. Luschützky & F. Rainer (Eds.), Agent noun polysemy in Indo-European languages. Special issue of Sprachtypologie und Universalienforschung, 64(1), 75–97.
Luschützky, H. Ch. Rainer, F. (2011). Agent noun polysemy in cross- linguistic perspective. Language Typology and Universals, 64(4), 287-338.
Luschützky, H. Ch. Rainer, F. (2013). Instrument and place nouns: A typological and diachronic perspective. Linguistics, 51 (6). 1301- 1359.
Lyons, J. (1977). Semantics. Cambridge University Press.
Masini, F. Audring, J. (2019). Construction Morphology. In J. Audring & F. Masini (Eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Morphological Theory, 365-389. Oxford University Press.
Meibauer, J, Guttropf, A., and Scherer, C. (2004). Dynamic aspects of German –er nominal: a probe into the interrelation of language change and language acquisition. Linguistics, 42, 155-193.
Menéndez-Pidal. R. (1968). Manual de gramática histórica española (13th edition). Espasa-Calpe
Meyer-Lübke, W. (1890). Italienische Grammatik. O. R. Reisland.
Milroy, J. (1992). Linguistic variation and change. Blackwell.
Panagl, O. (1975). Kasustheorie und Nomina Agentis. In H. Rix (Ed.), Flexion und Wortbildung. Akten der V. Fachtagung der Indogermanischen Gesellschaft, Regensburg, 9 - 14 September 1973, 232 - 146. Reichert.
Panagl, O. (1978). Agens und Instrument in der Wortbildung. In W. U. Dressler & W. Meid (Eds.), Proceedings of the 12th International Congress of Linguists. Vienna,August, 28- Septembre 2, 1977, 453- 456. Innsbrucker Beitrage zur Sprachwissenschaft.
Panther, K. U. Thornburg, L. L. (2003). The role of metaphor and metonymy in English –er nominal. In R. Dirven & R. Pörings (Eds.), Metaphor and metonymy in comparison and contrasr, 279 – 319. Mouton de Gruyter.
Paul, H. (1920). Prinzipien der Sprachgeschichte (5th edition). Niemeyer.
Rafiei, A., Rezaei, H. (2019). Derived Nouns ending in -gar based on Construction Morphology. Journal of Language-Related Research, 10(3), 71-94. [In Persian]
Rainer, F. (2004 a). Del nombre de agente al nombre de instrument en español: ¿Cómo y cuándo? Iberoromania, 59, 97-122.
Rainer, F. (2004 b). L'origine dei nomi di strumento italiani in -tor. In Th. Krisch, Th. Lindner, & U. Müller (Eds.), Analecta homini universali dicata. Festschrift für Oswald Panagl zum 65. Geburtstag. Vol.1, 399-424. Heinz.
Rainer, F. (2005 a). Noms d'instruments/ de lieux en -tor dans la Galloromania. Vox Romanica, 64, 121- 140.
Rainer, F. (2005 b). Semantic change in word formation. Linguistics, 43(2), 415-441.
Rainer, F. (2011). The agent- instrument- place “polysemy” of the suffix -TOR in Romance. Language Typology and Universals Persian Academy letter (special issue), 1, 5-12.
Torabi, S. (2014). A study of Persian agentive suffixes in Construction Morphology framework. M.A. dissertation. University of Isfahan. [In Persian]
Traugott, E. C., Trousdale, G. (2013). Constructionalization and Constructional change. Oxford University Press.