Derivational morphology in flux: a case study of word-formation change in German

References

CorporaSearch in Google Scholar

DECOW14AX=Corpora from the Web. http://www.corporafromtheweb.org/Search in Google Scholar

DTA=Deutsches Textarchiv (German Text Archive), deutschestextarchiv.deSearch in Google Scholar

DeReKo=Deutsches Referenzkorpus (German Reference Corpus), https://cosmas2.ids-mannheim.de/cosmas2-web/Search in Google Scholar

DWDS=Digitales Wörterbuch der deutschen Sprache – Kernkorpus 20. Jahrhunderts. http://www.dwds.de/Search in Google Scholar

FnhdC=Bonner Frühneuhochdeutschkorpus (Bonn Early New High German Corpus). https://korpora.zim.uni-due.de/Fnhd/Search in Google Scholar

SoftwareSearch in Google Scholar

R Core Team. 2015. R. A software and environment for statictical computing. Vienna: R Foundation.Search in Google Scholar

Scripts and packages:Search in Google Scholar

Baroni, Marco & Stefan Evert. 2007. zipfR. Lexical statistics in R. http://zipfr.r-forge.r-project.org/(accessed 26 January 2015).Search in Google Scholar

Flach, Susanne. 2016. Collostructions. An R implementation for the family of collostructional methods. www.bit.ly/sflachSearch in Google Scholar

Gries, Stefan Th. 2007. Collostructional analysis: Computing the degree of association between words and words/constructions.Search in Google Scholar

Research literatureSearch in Google Scholar

Harald. 1992. Quantitative Aspects of Morphological Productivity. In Geert E. Booij & Jaap Van Marle (eds.), Yearbook of morphology 1991, 109–149. Dordrecht: Kluwer.10.1007/978-94-011-2516-1_8Search in Google Scholar

Baayen, R. Harald. 1993. On Frequency, Transparency, and Productivity. In Geert E. Booij & Jaap Van Marle (eds.), Yearbook of morphology 1992, 181–208. Dordrecht: Kluwer.10.1007/978-94-017-3710-4_7Search in Google Scholar

Baayen, R. Harald. 2001. Word Frequency Distributions. (Text, Speech and Language Technology, 18). Dordrecht: Kluwer.10.1007/978-94-010-0844-0Search in Google Scholar

Baayen, R. Harald. 2009. Corpus Linguistics in Morphology: Morphological Productivity. In Anke Lüdeling & Merja Kytö (eds.), Corpus linguistics (HSK 29.2), 899–919. Berlin, New York: De Gruyter.10.1515/9783110213881.2.899Search in Google Scholar

Baroni, Marco & Stefan Evert. 2005. Testing the extrapolation quality of word frequency models. Proceedings of Corpus Linguistics 2005. http://www.birmingham.ac.uk/Documents/college-artslaw/corpus/conference-archives/2005-journal/Lexiconodf/EvertBaroni2005.pdf. (accessed 15 October 2016).Search in Google Scholar

Baroni, Marco & Stefan Evert. 2014. The zipfR package for lexical statistics: A tutorial introduction. http://zipfr.r-forge.r-project.org/materials/zipfr-tutorial.pdf.Search in Google Scholar

Barz, Irmhild. 1998. Zur Lexikalisierungspotenz nominalisierter Infinitive. In Irmhild Barz & Günther Öhlschläger (eds.), Zwischen Grammatik und Lexikon, 57–68. Tübingen: Niemeyer.10.1515/9783110912494.57Search in Google Scholar

Bauer, Laurie. 2001. Morphological productivity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511486210Search in Google Scholar

Booij, Geert E. 2010. Construction Morphology. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1111/j.1749-818X.2010.00213.xSearch in Google Scholar

Booij, Geert E. 2012. The grammar of words: An introduction to linguistic morphology. 3rd edn. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Bybee, Joan. 1995. Regular morphology and the lexicon. Language and Cognitive Processes 10(5). 425–455.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195301571.003.0008Search in Google Scholar

Bybee, Joan L. 2010. Language, usage and cognition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511750526Search in Google Scholar

Croft, William. 1991. Syntactic categories and grammatical relations. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Search in Google Scholar

Croft, William. 2001. Radical construction grammar: Syntactic theory in typological perspective. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198299554.001.0001Search in Google Scholar

Dąbrowska, Ewa. 2009. Words as constructions. In Vyvyan Evans & Stéphanie Pourcel (eds.), New directions in cognitive linguistics (Human Cognitive Processing 24), 201–223. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins.10.1075/hcp.24.16dabSearch in Google Scholar

Dammel, Antje. 2011. Wie kommt es zu rumstudierenden Hinterbänklern und anderen Sonderlingen? Pfade zu pejorativen Wortbildungsbedeutungen im Deutschen. In Jörg Riecke (ed.), Historische Semantik. (Jahrbuch für germanistische Sprachgeschichte 2). Berlin, New York: De Gruyter.10.1515/9783110236620.326Search in Google Scholar

Demske, Ulrike. 2000. Zur Geschichte der ung-Nominalisierung im Deutschen: Ein Wandel morphologischer Produktivität. Beiträge zur Geschichte der deutschen Sprache und Literatur 122. 365–411. doi: 10.1515/bgsl.2000.122.3.365.Search in Google Scholar

Demske, Ulrike. 2001. Zur Distribution von Infinitivkomplementen im Althochdeutschen.Linguistische Berichte 9. 61–86.Search in Google Scholar

Demske, Ulrike. 2002. Nominalization and argument structure in early new high German. In Ewald Lang & Ilse Zimmermann (eds.), Nominalisations (ZAS Papers in Linguistics), 67–90. Berlin ZAS.10.21248/zaspil.27.2002.150Search in Google Scholar

Diessel, Holger. 2015. Usage-based construction grammar. In Ewa Dąbrowska & Dagmar Divjak (eds.), Handbook of cognitive linguistics, 296–322. Berlin, New York: De Gruyter.10.1515/9783110292022-015Search in Google Scholar

Dunning, Ted. 1993. Accurate methods for the statistics of surprise and coincidence. Computational Linguistics 19(1). 69–74.Search in Google Scholar

Durrell, Martin, Astrid Ensslin & Paul Bennett. 2007. The GerManC project. Sprache und Datenverarbeitung 31. 71–80.Search in Google Scholar

Ebensgaard-Jensen, Kim. 2013. Semantic coherence in English accusative-with-bare-infinitive constructions. Rask 38. 161–176.Search in Google Scholar

Ehrich, Veronika & Irene Rapp. 2000. Sortale Bedeutung und Argumentstruktur: -ung-Nominalisierungen im Deutschen. Zeitschrift für Sprachwissenschaft 19. 245–303.10.1515/zfsw.2000.19.2.245Search in Google Scholar

Evert, Stefan. 2004. A simple LNRE model for random character sequences. In Gérald Purnelle, Cédrick Fairon, Anne Dister (eds.), Proceedings of JADT 2004. 411–422. Louvain: Presses universitaires de Louvain.Search in Google Scholar

Evert, Stefan & Marco Baroni. 2007. zipfR: Word frequency distributions in R. Proceedings of the 45th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics, Posters and Demonstrations Sessions, Prague, 29–32.Search in Google Scholar

Flach, Susanne. 2015. Let’s go look at usage. (Ed.) Thomas Herbst & Peter Uhrig. Yearbook of the German Cognitive Linguistics Association 3(1). 231–251. doi:10.1515/gcla-2015-0013.Search in Google Scholar

Fonteyn, Lauren & Stefan Hartmann. 2016. Usage-based perspectives on diachronic morphology: A mixed-methods approach towards English ing-nominals. Linguistics Vanguard 2(1). doi:10.1515/lingvan-2016-0057.Search in Google Scholar

Gaeta, Livio & Davide Ricca. 2006. Productivity in Italian word-formation. Linguistics 44(1). 57–89.10.1515/LING.2006.003Search in Google Scholar

Goldberg, Adele E. 1995. Constructions: A construction grammar approach to argument structure. Chicago and London: The University of Chicago Press.Search in Google Scholar

Goldberg, Adele E. 2001. Corpus evidence of the viability of statistical preemption. Cognitive Linguistics 22(1). 131–153.10.1515/9783110335255.57Search in Google Scholar

Goldberg, Adele E. 2006. Constructions at work: The nature of generalization in language. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199268511.001.0001Search in Google Scholar

Hartmann, Stefan. 2014a. The Diachronic Change of German Nominalization Patterns: An Increase in Prototypicality. In Gabriella Rundblad, Aga Tytus, Olivia Knapton & Chris Tang (eds.), Selected Papers from the 4th UK Cognitive Linguistics Conference, 152–171. London: UK Cognitive Linguistics Association.Search in Google Scholar

Hartmann, Stefan. 2014b. “Nominalization” Taken Literally: A Diachronic Corpus Study of German Word-Formation Patterns. Italian Journal of Linguistics 26(2). 123–155.10.1075/cilt.334.09harSearch in Google Scholar

Hartmann, Stefan. 2014c. Constructing a Schema: Word-Class Changing Morphology in a Usage-Based Perspective. In Martin Hilpert & Susanne Flach (eds.), Yearbook of the German Cognitive Linguistics Association, Vol. 2, 235–252. Berlin, New York: De Gruyter.10.1515/gcla-2014-0014Search in Google Scholar

Hartmann, Stefan. 2016. Wortbildungswandel. Eine diachrone Studie zu deutschen Nominalisierungsmustern. Berlin, Boston: De Gruyter.10.1515/9783110471809Search in Google Scholar

Hartmann, Stefan. 2018. Deutsche Sprachgeschichte. Grundz̈ge und Methoden. Tübingen: Francke.10.36198/9783838548234Search in Google Scholar

Hilpert, Martin. 2006. Distinctive collexeme analysis and diachrony. Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic Theory 2(2). 243–256.10.1515/CLLT.2006.012Search in Google Scholar

Hilpert, Martin. 2013. Constructional change in English: Developments in allomorphy, word formation, and syntax. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9781139004206Search in Google Scholar

Hilpert, Martin. 2014. Construction grammar and its application to English. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Hilpert, Martin. forthc. Three open questions in diachronic construction grammar. In Evie Coussé, Peter Andersson & Joel Olofsson (eds.), Grammaticalization meets construction grammar. Amsterdam, Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Search in Google Scholar

Hilpert, Martin & Stefan Th Gries. 2009. Assessing frequency changes in multistage diachronic corpora: Applications for historical corpus linguistics and the study of language acquisition. Literary and Linguistic Computing 24(4). 385–401.10.1093/llc/fqn012Search in Google Scholar

Kempf, Luise. 2016. Adjektivsuffixe in Konkurrenz. Wortbildungswandel vom Frühneuhochdeutschen zum Neuhochdeutschen. Berlin, Boston: de Gruyter.10.1515/9783110429787Search in Google Scholar

Kempf, Luise & Stefan Hartmann. forthc. Schema unification and morphological productivity: A diachronic perspective. To appear in Geert E. Booij (ed.): The construction of words. Advances in construction morphology. Berlin: Springer.10.1007/978-3-319-74394-3_16Search in Google Scholar

Knobloch, Clemens. 2002. Zwischen Satz-Nominalisierung und Nennderivation: -ung-Nomina im Deutschen. Sprachwissenschaft 27. 333–362.Search in Google Scholar

Krott, Andrea, Robert Schreuder & R. Harald Baayen. 1999. Complex words in complex words. Linguistics 37(5). 905–926.10.1515/ling.37.5.905Search in Google Scholar

Langacker, Ronald W. 1987. Foundations of cognitive grammar. Vol. 1: Theoretical prerequisites. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Langacker, Ronald W. 1991. Foundations of cognitive grammar. Vol. 2: Descriptive application. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Langacker, Ronald W. 2004. Remarks on Nominal Grounding. Functions of Language 11(1). 77–113.10.1075/fol.11.1.05lanSearch in Google Scholar

Langacker, Ronald W. 2008. Cognitive grammar: A basic introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195331967.001.0001Search in Google Scholar

Levshina, Natalia. 2015. How to do linguistics with R. Data exploration and statistical analysis. Amsterdam, Philadelphia: John Benjamins.10.1075/z.195Search in Google Scholar

Li, Wentian. 1992. Random texts exhibit Zipf’s-law-like word frequency distribution. IEEE Transactions on Information Theory 38(6). 1842–1845.10.1109/18.165464Search in Google Scholar

Mandelbrot, Benoît. 1962. On the theory of word frequencies and on related Markovian models of discourse. In Roman Jakobson (ed.), Structure of language and its mathematical aspects, 190–219. Providence: American Mathematical Society.10.1090/psapm/012/9970Search in Google Scholar

Marchand, Hans. 1969. The categories and types of present-day English word formation: A synchronic-diachronic approach. München: Beck.Search in Google Scholar

Michel, Jean-Baptiste, Yuan Kui Shen, Aviva Presser Aiden, Adrian Veres, Matthew K. Gray, Joseph P. Pickett, Dale Hoiberg, Dan Clancy, Peter Norvig, Jon Orwant, Steven Pinker, Martin A. Nowak & Erez Lieberman Aiden. 2011. Quantitative analysis of culture using millions of digitized books. Science 331(6014). 176–182.10.1126/science.1199644Search in Google Scholar

Nübling, Damaris, Antje Dammel, Janet Duke & Renata Szczepaniak. 2013. Historische Sprachwissenschaft des Deutschen: Eine Einführung in die Prinzipien des Sprachwandels. 4th edn. Tübingen: Narr.Search in Google Scholar

Panther, Klaus-Uwe & Linda Thornburg. 2001. A conceptual analysis of English -er nominals. In Martin Pütz, Susanne Niemeier & René Dirven (eds.), Applied cognitive linguistics (Cognitive Linguistics Research 19.2), 149–200. Berlin, New York: De Gruyter.Search in Google Scholar

Perek, Florent. 2016. Using distributional semantics to study syntactic productivity in diachrony. A case study. Linguistics 54(1). 149–188.10.1515/ling-2015-0043Search in Google Scholar

Panther, Klaus-Uwe & Linda Thornburg. 2002. The roles of metaphor and metonymy in English -er Nominals. In René Dirven & Ralf Pörings (eds.), Metaphor and metonymy in comparison and contrast, 279–319. Berlin, New York: De Gruyter.10.1515/9783110219197.2.279Search in Google Scholar

Plag, Ingo. 1999. Morphological productivity: Structural constraints in English derivation. (Topics in English Linguistics, 28). Berlin, New York: De Gruyter.Search in Google Scholar

Römer, Christine. 1987. Transformationalistische und lexikalistische Erklärung von Wortbildungen - dargestellt am Beispiel deverbaler -ung-Substantive. Deutsch als Fremdsprache 24. 217–221.Search in Google Scholar

Roßdeutscher, Antje & Hans Kamp. 2010. Syntactic and Semantic Constraints on the Formation and Interpretation of -ung-Nouns. In Monika Rathert & Artemis Alexiadou (eds.), The semantics of nominalizations across languages and frameworks (Interface Explorations 22), 169–214. Berlin, New York: De Gruyter.10.1515/9783110226546.169Search in Google Scholar

Schäfer, Roland. 2015. Processing and querying large corpora with the COW14 architecture. Challenges in the Management of Large Corpora (CMLC-3). http://corpora.ids-mannheim.de/cmlc.html.Search in Google Scholar

Schäfer, Roland & Felix Bildhauer. 2012. Building large corpora from the web using a new efficient tool chain. In Cicoletta Calzolari, Khalid Choukri, Terry Declerck, Mehmet Uğur Doğan, Bente Maegaard, Joseph Mariani, Asuncion Moreno, Jan Odijk & Stelios Piperidis (eds.), Proceedings of LREC 2012, 486–493. Istanbul: European Language Resources Association.Search in Google Scholar

Scherer, Carmen. 2006. Was ist Wortbildungswandel? Linguistische Berichte 205. 3–28.10.1515/9783110914887.5Search in Google Scholar

Scherer, Carmen. 2007. The Role of Productivity in Word-Formation Change. In Joseph C. Salmons & Shannon Dubenion-Smith (eds.), Historical linguistics 2005 (Current Issues in Linguistic Theory, 284), 257–271. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins.10.1075/cilt.284.19schSearch in Google Scholar

Schneider-Wiejowski, Karina. 2011. Produktivität in der deutschen Derivationsmorphologie. University of Bielefeld PhD thesis.Search in Google Scholar

Schmid, Hans-Jörg. 2017. A framework for understanding entrenchment and its psychological foundations. In Hans-Jörg Schmid (ed.), Entrenchment and the psychology of language learning. How we reorganize and adapt linguistic knowledge, 9–39. Berlin, Boston: De Gruyter.10.1037/15969-002Search in Google Scholar

Schmidt, Wilhelm. 2007. Geschichte der deutschen Sprache: Ein Lehrbuch für das germanistische Studium. 10th ed. Stuttgart: Hirzel.Search in Google Scholar

Shin, Soo-Song. 2001. On the event structure of -ung-nominals in German. Linguistics 39. 297–319.10.1515/ling.2001.012Search in Google Scholar

Smirnova, Elena & Tanja Mortelmans. 2010. Funktionale Grammatik: Konzepte und Theorien. Berlin, New York: De Gruyter.10.1515/9783110223873Search in Google Scholar

Spencer, Andrew. 2001. Morphology. In Mark Aronoff & Janie Rees-Miller (eds.), The handbook of linguistics, 213–237. Oxford: Blackwell.10.1111/b.9781405102520.2002.00011.xSearch in Google Scholar

Spencer, Andrew & Arnold M. Zwicky. 1998. Introduction. In Andrew Spencer & Arnold M. Zwicky (eds.), The handbook of morphology, 1–10. Oxford: Blackwell.10.1002/9781405166348.ch0Search in Google Scholar

Stefanowitsch, Anatol. 2009. Bedeutung und Gebrauch in der Konstruktionsgrammatik: Wie kompositional sind modale Infinitive im Deutschen? Zeitschrift für Germanistische Linguistik 37. 562–592.10.1515/ZGL.2009.036Search in Google Scholar

Stefanowitsch, Anatol. 2013. Collostructional analysis. In Thomas Hoffmann & Graeme Trousdale (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of construction grammar, 290–306. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/oxfordhb/9780195396683.013.0016Search in Google Scholar

Stefanowitsch, Anatol & Stefan Th. Gries. 2003. Collostructions: Investigating the interaction of words and constructions. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics 8(2). 209–243.10.1075/ijcl.8.2.03steSearch in Google Scholar

Taylor, John R. 2002. Cognitive grammar. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Taylor, John R. 2012. The mental corpus: How language is represented in the mind. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199290802.001.0001Search in Google Scholar

Thielmann, Winfried. 2007. Substantiv. In Ludger Hoffmann (ed.), Handbuch der deutschen Wortarten, 791–822. Berlin, New York: De Gruyter.Search in Google Scholar

Traugott, Elizabeth Closs & Graeme Trousdale. 2013. Constructionalization and constructional changes. (Oxford Studies in Diachronic and Historical Linguistics 6). Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199679898.003.0004Search in Google Scholar

Vogel, Petra M. 1996. Wortarten und Wortartenwechsel: Zur Konversion und verwandten Erscheinungen im Deutschen und in anderen Sprachen. Vol. 39. (Studia Linguistica Germanica). Berlin, New York: De Gruyter.10.1515/9783110905106Search in Google Scholar

Vogel, Petra M. 2000. Grammaticalization and part-of-speech systems. In Petra Maria Vogel & Bernard Comrie (eds.), Approaches to the typology of word classes (Empirical Approaches to Language Typology 23), 259–284. Berlin, New York: De Gruyter.10.1515/9783110806120.259Search in Google Scholar

Werner, Martina. 2012. Genus, Derivation und Quantifikation: Zur Funktion der Suffigierung und verwandter Phänomene im Deutschen. (Studia Linguistica Germanica, 114). Berlin, New York: De Gruyter.10.1515/9783110291902Search in Google Scholar

Wiechmann, Daniel. 2008. On the computation of collostruction strength: Testing measures of association as expressions of lexical bias. Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic Theory 4(2). 253–290.10.1515/CLLT.2008.011Search in Google Scholar

Wulff, Stefanie. 2006. Go-V vs. go-and-V in English: A case of constructional synonymy? In Stefan Th. Gries & Anatol Stefanowitsch (eds.), Corpora in cognitive linguistics. Corpus-based approaches to syntax and lexis, 101–126. Berlin, New York: Mouton de Gruyter.10.1515/9783110197709.101Search in Google Scholar