Cover not available

Article published In: Semantics and Psychology of Complex Words
Edited by Christina L. Gagné and Thomas L. Spalding
[The Mental Lexicon 15:1] 2020
► pp. 101–122

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

Absolutely PHAB

Towards a general model of associative relations

 | University of Oslo
 | Université Lumière Lyon 2
Published online: 30 October 2020
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/ml.00016.pep
Abstract
There have been many attempts at classifying the semantic modification relations (ℜ) of N + N compounds but this work has not led to the acceptance of a definitive scheme, so that devising a reusable classification is a worthwhile aim. The scope of this undertaking is extended to other binominal lexemes, i.e. units that contain two thing-morphemes without explicitly stating ℜ, like prepositional units, N + relational adjective units, etc. The 25-relation taxonomy of Bourque, Y. S. (2014). Toward a typology of semantic transparency: The case of French compounds [PhD dissertation]. University of Toronto.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar was tested against over 15,000 binominal lexemes from 106 languages and extended to a 29-relation scheme (“Bourque2”) through the introduction of two new reversible relations. Bourque2 is then mapped onto Hatcher, A. G. (1960). An introduction to the analysis of English noun compounds. Word, 16(3), 356–373. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar four-relation scheme (extended by the addition of a fifth relation, similarity, as “Hatcher2”). This results in a two-tier system usable at different degrees of granularities. On account of its semantic proximity to compounding, metonymy is then taken into account, following Janda, L. A. (2011). Metonymy in word-formation. Cognitive Linguistics, 22(2), 359–392. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar suggestion that it plays a role in word formation; Peirsman, Y., & Geeraerts, D. (2006). Metonymy as a prototypical category. Cognitive Linguistics, 17(3), 269–316. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar inventory of 23 metonymic patterns is mapped onto Bourque2, confirming the identity of metonymic and binominal modification relations. Finally, Blank, A. (2003). Words and concepts in time: Towards a diachronic cognitive onomasiology. In R. Eckardt, K. von Heusinger, & C. Schwarze (Eds.), Words in time: Diachronic semantics from different points of view (pp. 37–65). Mouton de Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar and (2001). Lexical typology from a cognitive and linguistic point of view. In M. Haspelmath, E. König, W. Oesterreicher, & W. Raible (Eds.), Language typology and language universals: An international handbook (pp. 1142–1178). de Gruyter.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar work on lexical semantics justifies the addition to the scheme of a third, superordinate level which comprises the three Aristotelean principles of similarity, contiguity and contrast.
Article outline
  • The nature of ℜ
  • Binominal lexemes
    • ‘Difficiliora’
  • Metonymy
  • Lexical semantics
  • Conclusion and further work
  • Notes
  • References
References (54)
References
Adams, V. (1973). An introduction to modern English word-formation. Longman.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Arnaud, P. J. L. (2003). Les composés timbre-poste. Presses Universitaires de Lyon.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2008). Semantic complexity in English [NN]ₙ compounds. Anglophonia. French Journal of English Linguistics, 12(24), 7–21.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Arnaud, Pierre J. L. (2016). Categorizing the modification relations in French relational subordinative [NN]N compounds. In Pius ten Hacken (ed.), The semantics of compounding, 71–93. Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bauer, L. (1979). On the need for pragmatics in the study of nominal compounding. Journal of Pragmatics, 3(1), 45–50. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2017). Compounds and compounding. Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bauer, L., & Tarasova, E. (2013). The meaning link in nominal compounds. SKASE Journal of Theoretical Linguistics, 10(3), 2–18.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Blank, A. (2003). Words and concepts in time: Towards a diachronic cognitive onomasiology. In R. Eckardt, K. von Heusinger, & C. Schwarze (Eds.), Words in time: Diachronic semantics from different points of view (pp. 37–65). Mouton de Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bonhomme, M. (1987). Linguistique de la métonymie. Peter Lang.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bourque, Y. S. (2014). Toward a typology of semantic transparency: The case of French compounds [PhD dissertation]. University of Toronto.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Brdar, M., & Brdar-Szabó, R. (2014). Where does metonymy begin? Some comments on Janda (2011). Cognitive Linguistics, 25(2), 313–340. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Brekle, H. E. (1970). Generative Satzsemantik und transformationelle Syntax im System der englischen Nominalkomposition. Fink.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Croft, W. (forthc.). Morphosyntax: Constructions of the world’s languages. Cambridge University Press.
Downing, P. (1977). On the creation and use of English compound nouns. Language, 810–842. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Fortis, J. -M. (2011). On localism in the history of linguistics. Handout 4eme Colloque International de l’Association Française de Linguistique Cognitive, Lyon.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gibbs, R. W. (1993). Process and products in making sense of tropes. In A. Ortony (Ed.), Metaphor and thought (pp. 252–276). Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Haspelmath, M., & Tadmor, U. (Eds.). (2009). World Loanword Database. Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology. [URL].
Hatcher, A. G. (1960). An introduction to the analysis of English noun compounds. Word, 16(3), 356–373. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Jackendoff, R. (2016). English noun-noun compounds in Conceptual Semantics. In P. ten Hacken (Ed.), The semantics of compounding (pp. 15–53). Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Janda, L. A. (2011). Metonymy in word-formation. Cognitive Linguistics, 22(2), 359–392. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Jespersen, O. (1942). A modern English grammar on historical principles. Part 6: Morphology. George Allen and Unwin.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Johnston, M., & Busa, F. (1999). Qualia structure and the compositional interpretation of compounds. In E. Viegas (Ed.), Breadth and depth of semantic lexicons (pp. 167–187). Springer. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Koch, P. (1999). Frame and contiguity. In K. -U. Panther & G. Radden (Eds.), Metonymy in language and thought (pp. 139–167). John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2001). Lexical typology from a cognitive and linguistic point of view. In M. Haspelmath, E. König, W. Oesterreicher, & W. Raible (Eds.), Language typology and language universals: An international handbook (pp. 1142–1178). de Gruyter.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Koziol, H. (1937). Handbuch der englischen Wortbildungslehre. Winter.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lees, R. B. (1960). The grammar of English nominalizations (Vol. 121). Indiana University.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(1970). Problems in the grammatical analysis of English nominal compounds. In M. Bierwisch & K. E. Heidolph (Eds.), Progress in Linguistics (pp. 174–186). Mouton.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Levi, J. N. (1978). The syntax and semantics of complex nominals. Academic Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Li, C. N. (1971). Semantics and the structure of compounds in Chinese [PhD dissertation]. University of California.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lieber, R. (2016). Compounding in the lexical semantic framework. In P. ten Hacken (Ed.), The semantics of compounding (pp. 38–53). Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Marchand, H. (1960). The categories and types of present-day English word-formation. Harrassowitz.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mätzner, E. (1860). Englische Grammatik: Vol. 1 Die Lehre vom Worte. Weidmannsche Buchhandlung.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Nakov, P. (2013). On the interpretation of noun compounds: Syntax, semantics, and entailment. Natural Language Engineering, 19(3), 291–330. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Noailly, M. (1990). Le substantif épithète. Presses Universitaires de France.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ó Séaghdha, D. (2007). Designing and evaluating a semantic annotation scheme for compound nouns. Proceedings of the 4th Corpus Linguistics Conference (CL-07). Cambridge University Computer Laboratory, 1–17.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Olsen, S. (2012). 80. Semantics of compounds. In C. Maienborn, K. von Heusinger, & P. Portner (Eds.), Semantics: An International Handbook of Natural Language Meaning. Volume 31 (pp. 2120–2150). De Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Peirsman, Y., & Geeraerts, D. (2006). Metonymy as a prototypical category. Cognitive Linguistics, 17(3), 269–316. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Pepper, S. (2002). The TAO of Topic Maps: Finding the way in the age of infoglut. Ontopia.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2009). The Italian Opera Topic Map (Version 2.1) [Computer software]. Ontopia. [URL]
(2020a). The typology and semantics of binominal lexemes: Noun-noun compounds and their functional equivalents [PhD dissertation]. University of Oslo.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2020b). The Bourquifier: An application for applying the Hatcher-Bourque classification (Version 3) [MS Excel]. [URL]
Radden, G., & Kövecses, Z. (1999). Towards a theory of metonymy. In K. -U. Panther & G. Radden (Eds.), Metonymy in language and thought (pp. 17–59). John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Rainer, F. (2013). Can relational adjectives really express any relation? An onomasiological perspective. SKASE Journal of Theoretical Linguistics, 10(1), 12–40.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Schifko, P. (1979). Die Metonymie als universales sprachliches Strukturprinzip. Grazer Linguistische Studien, 101, 240–264.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Søgaard, A. (2005). Compounding theories and linguistic diversity. In Z. Frajzyngier, A. Hodges, & D. S. Rood (Eds.), Linguistic diversity and language theories (pp. 319–337). John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Talmy, L. (2000). Toward a Cognitive Semantics: Vol. 1: Concept structuring systems. MIT Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
ten Hacken, P. (2013). Compounds in English, in French, in Polish, and in general. SKASE Journal of Theoretical Linguistics, 10(1), 97–113.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Tratz, S., & Hovy, E. (2010). A taxonomy, dataset, and classifier for automatic noun compound interpretation. 48th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics, 678–687.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ullmann, S. (1969). Précis de sémantique française (4th ed.). Francke.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Warren, B. (1978). Semantic patterns of noun-noun compounds. Acta Universitatis Gothoburgensis.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(1992). Sense developments: A contrastive study of the development of slang senses and novel standard senses in English. (Vol. 801). Almqvist & Wiksell.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(1999). Aspects of referential metonymy. In K. -U. Panther & G. Radden (Eds.), Metonymy in language and thought. John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cited by (3)

Cited by three other publications

Arnaud, Pierre J.L.
2022. Metaphor, metonymy and the nounness of proper names. Lexis :20 DOI logo
Héois, Aurélie
2022. What can Verbal Derivation Tell us about Proper Names?. Lexis :20 DOI logo
Körtvélyessy, Lívia, Pavol Štekauer & Pavol Kačmár
2022. Creativity in Word Formation and Word Interpretation, DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 27 november 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