Cover not available

Article published In: Linguistics in the Netherlands 2021
Edited by Mark Dingemanse, Eva van Lier and Jorrig Vogels
[Linguistics in the Netherlands 38] 2021
► pp. 128–143

Get fulltext from our e-platform
JBE logo with link
PDF logo with download linkDownload PDF

The productivity of Dutch diminutives

 | Utrecht University
 | Utrecht University
Open Access logo
Available under the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) 4.0 license.

For any use beyond this license, please contact the publisher at rights@benjamins.nl.

Open Access publication of this article was funded through a Transformative Agreement with Utrecht University.

Published online: 29 October 2021
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/avt.00053.tui
Abstract
This study reports on an investigation of the productivity of the Dutch diminutive paradigm, which gives rise to five suffixal allomorphs, against the background of Yang, Charles. 2016. The price of linguistic productivity. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar Tolerance Principle. It shows how, by studying the frequency of the allomorphs and the environments in which they occur, we can use the Tolerance Principle to determine if a productive rule system can be found for the Dutch diminutives. In doing so, we also describe how we collected the necessary data by setting up a corpus study on Dutch diminutives, including a specific one with data from child directed speech.
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Dutch diminutives
    • 2.1Empirical background
    • 2.2Theoretical accounts
    • 2.3Acquisition findings
  • 3.Quantifying the relevant diminutive data distribution
    • 3.1The tolerance principle
    • 3.2Corpus research: Determining allomorphs
    • 3.3Corpus research: Feature selection
  • 4.A Tolerance Principle based analysis of Dutch diminutives
    • 4.1Finding a productive rule system
    • 4.2Discussion
  • 5.Conclusion
  • Acknowledgements
  • Note
  • References
References (17)
References
Augustinus, Liesbeth, Ineke Schuurman, Vincent Vandeghinste & Frank Van Eynde. 2014. “GrETEL: Searching for breadcrumbs in texts.” Centre for Computational Linguistics KU Leuven. Accessed 2 July 2020, [URL]
Berko, Jean. 1958. “The child’s learning of English morphology.” Word 14 (2–3): 150–177. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Boersma, Tiffany. A. 2018. “Variability in the acquisition of allomorphs.” PhD diss., University of Amsterdam.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Booij, Geert. 1999. The phonology of Dutch. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Den Os, Els, & Rita Harder. 1987. “De verwerving van de regels voor meervouds- en verkleinwoordsvorming in het Nederlands.” De Nieuwe Taalgids 801: 240–250.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gillis, Steven. 1997. “The acquisition of diminutives in Dutch.” Studies in pre- and protomorphology, edited by W. Dressler. Vienna: Verlag der Österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Huber, Daniel. 2005. “Some notes about the Dutch diminutive suffix.” Government Phonology Workshop 2(4):23–19.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
van der Hulst, Harry. 2008. “The Dutch diminutive.” Lingua 118.9: 1288–1306. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kooij, Jan & Marc van Oostendorp. 2003. Fonologie: uitnodiging tot de klankleer van het Nederlands. Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Linke, Kathrin. 2020. “Diminutive allomorphy.” Taalportaal, 09 June 2021, [URL]
MacWhinney, Brian. 2000. The CHILDES project: Tools for analyzing talk. 3ʳᵈ edition. Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Odijk, Jan. 2015. “Linguistic research with PaQu.” Computational Linguistics in The Netherlands 51: 3–14.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Trommelen, Mieke. 1984. The syllable in Dutch. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
van Tuijl, Rosita. 2020. “The productivity of Dutch diminutives.” MA diss. Utrecht University.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
van de Weijer, Jeroen. 2002. “An Optimality Theoretical analysis of the Dutch diminutive.” Linguistics in the Netherlands 191: 199–209. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Yang, Charles. 2016. The price of linguistic productivity. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Yip, Kenneth, & Gerry Sussman. 1997. “Sparse representations for fast, one-shot learning.” Proceedings of the National Conference on Artificial Intelligence: 521–527.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cited by (3)

Cited by three other publications

Shi, Rushen & Emeryse Emond
2023. The threshold of rule productivity in infants. Frontiers in Psychology 14 DOI logo
Yang, Charles
2023. A User’s Defense of the Tolerance Principle: Reply to Enger (2022). Beiträge zur Geschichte der deutschen Sprache und Literatur 145:4 ► pp. 563 ff. DOI logo
Yang, Charles
2024. Phonological Regularity and Breakdown. An Account of Vowel Length Leveling in Middle English. In The Method Works, ► pp. 237 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 1 december 2025. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.

Mobile Menu Logo with link to supplementary files background Layer 1 prag Twitter_Logo_Blue