Abstract
Chapter 10 explores formations consisting of one stem and one bound element. First, it is argued that the bound element is a deverbal noun stem; thus, the structures containing it are deverbal compounds. However, contrary to other stems, bound stems do not become free units (i.e. words) when they are combined with the appropriate inflectional affixes. Second, the properties that distinguish common compounds from those with bound stems are examined. It is claimed that they are governed by the basic structural principles of Modern Greek compounding, and substantial evidence is provided showing their right-headed endocentric character, [stem-stem] structure, internal theta-role saturation, compound marking and their peculiar stress properties. Third, the productivity rate of the particular formations is discussed. It is maintained that these words are part of the actual Greek morphological system and are productively created, as illustrated by the large number of neologisms.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsNotes
- 1.
-os (e.g. δásos) and -o (e.g. péfko) are inflectional suffixes of neuter nouns belonging to distinct inflection classes. They express the syncretic values of nominative, accusative and vocative singular. See Appendix 2 and Ralli (2000) for details about the inflection of neuter nouns and the variety of inflectional endings, depending on the inflection class they belong to.
- 2.
There are two basic allomorphic variations of the verb stem with the meaning of ‘eat’: tro- (the present stem) and faγ- (the aorist stem). The bound stem -faγ(os) derives from the aorist stem, in accordance with most Greek deverbal derivatives, which are based on the aorist (+past, +perfective) allomorph. See Ralli (2005) and Chap. 2 (Sect. 2.2) of this book, for additional details.
- 3.
As shown in Appendix 1, the major changes in the Greek language have occurred during the Koine period. The most striking phonological changes are the loss of quantity distinctions in the vowel system (reducing the Attic system of seven long and five short vowels to a system of five isochronous vowels/a e o i u/) and the change of voiced and aspirated stops to fricatives (/b d g/ → /v δ γ/ and /ph th kh/ → [f θ x]).
- 4.
Note that the particular word lipólysis appears as lipoδiálisi ‘fat dissolution’ in MG, where lísi ‘solution’ is preceded by the prefix δia-.
- 5.
According to Babiniotis (2002), some typical examples are the following:
(i)
Formation Const1 Const2 Verbal base
a.
kerδoskópos (1825) < kerδ- -skop- (< AG σκοπέω/skopéo:/)
‘speculator’ profit target, observe
b.
sizmolóγos (1897) < sizm- -loγ (< léγo)
‘seismologist’ earthquake talk
c.
sizmoγráfos (1877) <sizm- -γraf- (< γráfo)
‘seismographer’ earthquake write
- 6.
- 7.
Iacobini and Giuliani (2010: 292) also invoke the notion of cline by considering elements of neoclassical formations (combining forms in their terms) to be integrated in a scale ranging from less independent constituents to more independent ones. For details about the notion of continuum applied to morphology, the reader is referred to Bybee (1985), Bauer (1988) and Ralli (2005). See also Chapter 11 (Sect. 11.2.2) for the same notion regarding the interaction of compounding and derivation.
- 8.
However, it should be pointed out that there are linguists (e.g. Bauer 1998; Lüdeling et al. 2002) who do not exclude neoclassical compounds, at least English and German ones, from the native word-formation system. In particular, they claim that neoclassical compounds do not differ in principle from native ones, and that there is only a difference in ‘degree’ in each aspect of rules and elements that are involved in their formation. In Bauer’s (1998: 403) terms, there is a fuzzy boundary between the different word-formation categories, while for Lüdeling et al. (2002: 257), neoclassical and native categories form a continuum. A different view is expressed by Baeskow (2004), who claims that native speakers of English using neoclassical formations have an implicit knowledge of their etymology which distinguishes them from native constructions.
- 9.
See footnote 4.
- 10.
Following Ralli (1988, 2005), Greek verbs inflect according to two inflection classes on the basis of their stem allomorphy. Verb stems of class II display a systematic X(a) ~ Xi allomorphy pattern, where X(a) is the present stem and Xi the aorist (past, perfective) stem. These verbs inflect differently from class I verbs, like γráfo ‘write’, which do not display the particular stem allomorphy. Κiniγ(ó) ‘hunt, chase’ may be a typical example of a class II verb, deriving from the noun kiniγ(ós) ‘hunter’ through conversion. For a description of verbal inflection classes, see Appendix 2. For the issue of allomorphy, see Sect. 7.3.
- 11.
In AG, contract verbs were those who were submitted to a rule reducing two adjacent vowels into one (e.g. /e o:/ → /o:/). After undergone contraction, the verbal forms received stress on the ultimate syllable resulting from contraction. AG contract verbs were inflected according to the second conjugation class, which more or less corresponds to MG Class II, although the latter is defined on the basis of stem allomorphy, as noted in footnote 10, Chap. 7 (Sect. 7.3) and Appendix 2.
- 12.
- 13.
Some items with a form identical to that of bound stems may appear at the first position of compounds. However, they are not bound stems but the homonymous free words. Consider, for instance, lóγ(os) ‘speech’ in loγoθerapía ‘speech therapy’, and fór(os) in foroapalaγí ‘tax exemption’.
- 14.
There are few exceptions which should be treated as lexicalised cases, for example, xiróγrafo lit. hand-written ‘manuscript’.
- 15.
With some exceptions, for example, the adjectival derivative stem in -ik- in an example like kinon ik opolitikós ‘socio-political’ < kinonik(ós) ‘social’ + politik(ós) ‘political’.
- 16.
This linking element is usually analysed as part of the first constituent (see, among others, Baeskow 2004).
References
Anastassiadi-Symeonidi, Anna. 1986. I Neologia stin Koini Neoelliniki [Neology in Modern Greek Koine]. Thessaloniki: Epistimoniki Epetirida Filosofikis Scholis.
Babiniotis, George. 2002. Leksiko tis Neas Ellinikis glossas [Dictionary of the Modern Greek language]. Athens: Centre of Lexicography.
Baeskow, Heike. 2004. Lexical properties of selected non-native morphemes in English. Tübingen: Gunter Narr Verlag.
Baker, Mark. 2000. On category asymmetries in derivational morphology. In Morphology 2000: Selected papers from the 9th Vienna morphology meeting, ed. Sabrina Bendjaballah, Wolfgand Dressler, Oskar Pfeiffer, and Maria Voeikova, 17–36. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Bauer, Laurie. 1998. Is there a class of neoclassical compounds, and if so, is it productive? Linguistics 36(3): 403–422.
Bauer, Laurie. 2001. Morphological productivity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Bergmann, Ralph. 1998. Autonomie und Isonomie der beiden Wortbildunggssysteme im Deutschen. Sprachwissenschaft 23: 167–183.
Bloomfield, Leonard. 1933. Language. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
Bybee, Joan. 1985. Morphology. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Chantraine, Paul. 1933. La formation des noms en grec ancient. Paris: Klincksieck.
Dardano, Maurizio. 1978. La formazione delle parole nell’Italiano d’oggi. Roma: Bulzoni.
Domenig, Marc, and Pius ten Hacken. 1992. Word manager: A system for morphological dictionaries. Hildesheim: Olms.
Fradin, Bernard. 2000. Combining forms, blends and related phenomena. In Extragrammatical and marginal morphology, ed. Anna Thornton, 11–59. München: Lincolm Europa.
Giannoulopoulou, Giannoula. 2000. Α morpho-semantic comparison of affixes and confixes in Modern Greek and Italian [in Greek]. Ph.D. diss., Aristotle University of Thessaloniki.
Iacobini, Claudio. 2004. Composizione con elementi neoclassici. In La formazione delle parole in Italiano, ed. Maria Grossmann and Franz Rainer, 69–89. Tübingen: Max Niemeyer Verlag.
Iacobini, Claudio, and Alessandro Giuliani. 2010. A multidimensional approach to the classification of combining forms. Italian Journal of Linguistics 22(2): 287–316.
Kastofsky, Dieter. 2009. Astronaut, astrology, astrophysics: About combining forms, classical compounds and affixoids. In Selected proceedings of the 2008 symposium on new approaches in English historical lexis (HEL-LEX 2), ed. Rod McConchie, Alpo Honkapohja, and Jukka Tyrkko, 1–13. Somerville: Cascadilla.
Leksiko tis Koinis Neoellinikis [Dictionary of Modern Greek Koine]. 2000. Thessaloniki: Institute of Modern Greek Studies.
Liddel, Henry, and Robert Scott. 1996. A Greek-English lexicon. Revised and augmented throughout by Sir Henry Stuart Jones, Roderick McKenzie, Peter Glare, and Anne Thomson, 9th ed. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Lüdeling, Anke, Tanja Schmidt, and Sawwas Kiokpasoglou. 2002. Neoclassical word formation in German. In Yearbook of morphology 2001, ed. Geert Booij and Jaap van Marle, 253–283. Dordrecht: Kluwer.
Martinet, André. 1979. Grammaire fonctionelle du français. Paris: Didier.
Migliorini, Bruno. 1963. Saggi sulla lingua del novecento. Firenze: Sansoni.
Namer, Fiametta, and Françoise Villoing. 2005. Have cutthroats anything to do with tracheotomes? Distinctive properties of VN vs. NV compounds in French. In Proceedings of the 5th Mediterranean Morphology meeting (Fréjus, France), ed. Geert Booij, Bernard Fradin, Emiliano Guevara, Angela Ralli, and Sergio Scalise. URL: http://mmm.lingue.unibo.it
Namer, Fiametta, and Françoise Villoing. 2006. Assigning category to non-autonomous bases in neoclassical compounding. 12th morphology meeting. Budapest, May 26–28 2006.
Nespor, Marina, and Angela Ralli. 1996. Morphology-phonology interface: Phonological domains in Greek compounds. The Linguistic Review 13: 357–382.
Plag, Ingo. 1999. Morphological productivity. Structural constraints in English derivation.. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter.
Prćić, Tvrtko. 2008. Suffixes vs final combining forms in English. A lexicographic perspective. International Journal of Lexicography 21: 1–22.
Ralli, Angela. 1988. Eléments de la morphologie du grec moderne. La structure du verbe. Ph.D. diss., Université de Montréal.
Ralli, Angela. 1992. Compounding in modern Greek. Rivista di Linguistica 4(1): 143–174.
Ralli, Angela. 2000. A feature-based analysis of Greek nominal inflection. Glossologia 11–12: 201–228.
Ralli, Angela. 2005. Morfologia [Morphology]. Athens: Patakis.
Ralli, Angela. 2007. I sinthesi lekseon: diaglossiki morfologiki prosengisi [The composition of words: A morphological cross-linguistic approach]. Athens: Patakis.
Ralli, Angela. 2008. Composés déverbaux grecs à ‘radicaux liés’. In La composition dans une perspective typologique, ed. Dany Amiot, 189–210. Arras: Artois Presses Université.
Ralli, Angela. 2009. IE, Hellenic: Modern Greek. In The Oxford handbook of compounding, ed. Rochelle Lieber and Pavol Štekauer, 453–463. Oxford/New York: Oxford University Press.
Scalise, Sergio. 1983. Morfologia lessicale. Padova: CLESP.
Scalise, Sergio. 1984. Generative morphology. Dordrecht: Foris.
Selkirk, Elisabeth. 1982. The syntax of words. Cambridge: MIT Press.
Ten Hacken, Pius. 2000. Derivation and compounding. In Morphologie morphology, ed. Geert Booij, Christian Lehmann, and John Mugdan, 349–359. Berlin/New York: Walter De Gruyter.
Van Marle, Jaap. 1985. On the paradigmatic dimension of morphological creativity. Dordrecht: Foris.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2013 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Ralli, A. (2013). Deverbal Compounds with Bound Stems. In: Compounding in Modern Greek. Studies in Morphology, vol 2. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-4960-3_10
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-4960-3_10
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-94-007-4959-7
Online ISBN: 978-94-007-4960-3
eBook Packages: Humanities, Social Sciences and LawSocial Sciences (R0)