Languages & Linguistics
Conversion
Conversion in linguistics refers to the process of creating a new word by changing the grammatical category of an existing word without adding any affixes. This can involve changing a word from one part of speech to another, such as using a noun as a verb without adding any additional morphemes. Conversion is a common phenomenon in English and other languages.
Written by Perlego with AI-assistance
Related key terms
1 of 5
5 Key excerpts on "Conversion"
eBook - PDF- Dagmar Divjak, Stefan Th. Gries, Dagmar Divjak, Stefan Th. Gries(Authors)
- 2012(Publication Date)
- De Gruyter Mouton(Publisher)
Conversion and the lexicon: Comparing evidence from corpora and experimentation Laura Teddiman Abstract In the present study, we explore native speaker sensitivity to lexical cate- gories in English by targeting words that are ambiguous with respect to lexical category outside of a sentence context. In particular, we focus on those words that can be used either as a noun or as a verb, using corpora to determine word frequencies. Each time a word occurs in a corpus, it is used within a context that supports a particular interpretation, and this was reflected in the decisions each participant made. Participants com- pleted an online category decision task, in which they were asked to decide whether a given item was a noun or a verb. Results showed that ambiguous words were more likely to be categorized as nouns when they occurred more frequently as a noun in context. This e¤ect was not itself categorical, but instead was modulated by the relative frequencies of nominal and verbal occurrence. An o¿ine task where words were rated on how noun- like they were generated similar results. Here, corpora can be taken to represent a measure of summed linguistic experience over time. The corpus, or experience, presents the contexts by which the lexical category of an item can be determined, and results from this experiment suggest that speakers are sensitive to this general information in the absence of a given context. That this information is ably used in a time-constrained task speaks to the power of corpora as resources for linguistic investigation. 1. Introduction Lexical Conversion is a common and productive word-formation process in English that allows a single word to be associated with more than one lexical category without the use of overt morphological marking (Plag 1999: 219; Plag 2003: 107). For example, the word work can be used as both a noun, as in I have a lot of work N to do, and as a verb, as in I work V at the lab.
eBook - PDF- Bernd Heine, Tania Kuteva(Authors)
- 2005(Publication Date)
- Cambridge University Press(Publisher)
Translation does in fact play an important role in situations of intense language contact; but, as we will see below, it is constrained in a number of ways. In the present work we will highlight one factor constraining grammatical replication that has found only limited attention in previous studies of language contact. This factor is grammaticalization. Grammaticalization is a process leading from lexical to grammatical and from grammatical to more grammatical forms, and since the development of grammatical forms is shaped by constructions as well as larger context settings, the study of grammaticalization is also concerned with constructions and larger discourse units (Heine, Claudi & H¨ unnemeyer 1991; Hopper & Traugott 1993; Bybee, Perkins & Pagliuca 1994; Lehmann [1982] 1995; for a critical review of grammaticalization theory, see Newmeyer 1998; Campbell 2001; Campbell & Janda 2001). A large body of knowledge has been assembled on the evolution of gram- matical categories in the languages of the world (e.g. Heine & Kuteva 2002). All this work, however, has focused on language-internal grammatical change. Not only have grammaticalization processes usually been viewed as indepen- dent, language-internal changes, but it has even been claimed that the same grammatical category may re-emerge in a given language, and that this per- sistence or “diachronic stability” is a phenomenon entirely language-internally conditioned. In some cases, the stability over time may involve the very con- ceptual pattern on which the formal expression of the grammatical category is based. Contact-induced language change on the other hand is a regionally confined process resulting from specific historical events. What this suggests is that grammaticalization and language change induced by contact constitute quite divergent phenomena and, in fact, in the relevant literature the two tend to be described as mutually exclusive processes.
eBook - PDFItalian Clitics
An Empirical Study
- Cinzia Russi(Author)
- 2008(Publication Date)
- De Gruyter Mouton(Publisher)
In the litera-ture on grammaticalization and language change in general, the term lexi-calization has received various, even somewhat incompatible, interpreta-tions to the extent that it may denote quite different linguistic phenomena. 16 Therefore, I find it appropriate to offer a precise characterization of the in-terpretation that lexicalization receives in this study. The section then con-tinues with a discussion on the points of correspondence and divergence between grammaticalization and lexicalization, which underscores how closely the two phenomena are related (§ 2.3.2). In Section 2.4, I examine two issues that have been the subject of theo-retical debate: (a) the relevance (or lack thereof) of two well-known Chapter 2: Grammaticalization, lexicalization, and language change 22 mechanisms of language change, i.e., reanalysis and analogy, vis-à-vis grammaticalization (§ 4.4.1) and (b) whether grammaticalization can be re-garded as independently motivated or should be considered an epiphe-nomenal process (§ 4.4.2). 2.2. General features of grammaticalization 2.2.1. Basic theoretical assumptions within the traditional framework In essence, grammaticalization indicates a general diachronic process of morphosyntactic change by which a linguistic form undergoes a more or less substantial loss of syntactic independence accompanied by a concomi-tant increase of its grammatical function. Ideally, a grammaticalization process starts by affecting a full lexical item (most typically a noun or a verb), which, through a combination of linguistic changes taking place at different language levels, ends up becoming an affix. The evolution of the Latin noun MENS ‘mind, disposition’ into an adverbial affix in Romance sketched in (1) is extensively cited as a model instance of grammaticaliza-tion.
eBook - PDFMore than Words
A Festschrift for Dieter Wunderlich
- Ingrid Kaufmann, Barbara Stiebels, Ingrid Kaufmann, Barbara Stiebels(Authors)
- 2015(Publication Date)
- De Gruyter Akademie Forschung(Publisher)
The claim that there are three basic classes of con-version, postulated in (19), and exemplified at the outset of the paper in (2) to (4) can be substantiated with the generalizations discussed in the following section. In analogy to the structures used for compounds above, the word-syntactic rules for Conversion then must be as in (20), instantiating the schema put forward in (17). As always, the right-hand head (phonologically empty) determines the category of the whole. If adjectives are included as left-hand members, the categories Ν and V need to be generalized into appropriate features including the adjectives. (20) Rules for Conversion: a. root Conversion: [Ν 2 ] —> [V 2 ] [N 2 ] b. stem Conversion: [V 1 ] -» [Ν 1 ] [V 1 ] c. word Conversion: [N°] —» [V o ] [N°] The structures defined in this way are completely identical to those assumed for other complex words. The difference is exclusively one of phonological form, consisting in the emptiness of the right-hand head. To speak of rules for Conversion is misleading insofar as there are no special rules for this domain. 11. Kiparsky's discussion of Conversion concerns English, and does not include the third type of Conversion, word Conversion. 60 Richard Wiese 4.2 Three arguments for three classes First, root Conversion as exemplified in (2) is least productive (see also Olsen 1990:195-6, Fleischer & Barz 1995:209-11, Eisenberg 1998:284). There is no princi-pled way of saying which verbal root can undergo Conversion, and which cannot. Fur-thermore, the process seems to be fossilized. To the extent that converted roots seem to be coined recently at all, they may be regarded as loan formations. Second, the mean-ing of converted nouns is lexicalized, wide-ranging, and only idiosyncratically related to that of the verb. Third, as also shown in (2a), the deverbal nouns appear with all genders. Fourth, the plural allomorph is also not predictable.
- Philip Baldi, Pierluigi Cuzzolin, Philip Baldi, Pierluigi Cuzzolin(Authors)
- 2011(Publication Date)
- De Gruyter Mouton(Publisher)
Michèle Fruyt Grammaticalization in Latin 1. Basic concepts 1.1. Grammaticalization as a general process Grammaticalization ∗ is one of the processes that drives linguistic change, 1 and it is an important one. Grammaticalization is present in all languages at all times 2 and seems to be a pervasive diachronic process in natural languages. But this diachronic process is also one that can be analyzed synchronically. 3 Grammaticalization is a type of innovation and linguistic change where the speech community is unaware of the phenomenon and does not control it, as opposed to other innovations that are under the control of the speech community (or of individual members of the speech community). Grammaticalization, which is independent of the control, will, or con-sciousness of the speech community, is a gradual transition that happens over time. Forms of expression (morphemes, lexemes, word sequences, etc.) may be grammaticalized and become grammatical lexemes (or morphemes) even though they were not previously grammatical at first. Or they may become ∗ . The author wishes to thank the editors of this volume for their assistance, especially in finding appropriate English equivalents for terms and concepts which come out of the French linguistic tradition. 1. For other phenomena involved in linguistic change see n. 8. 2. As may be seen from the numerous works published in the last twenty–five years dealing with a great variety of languages. See Section 2.3. 3. Cf. Desclés and Guentchéva (1997:17); and the title of Robert (2003): Perspectives syn-chroniques sur la grammaticalisation . See also Section 2.6: the indicator of the progress of a given evolution is often a synchronic variation displaying the cooccurrence of vari-ous evolutionary stages. 662 Michèle Fruyt more and more grammatical, if they were already grammatical lexemes (or morphemes). 4 It is generally 5 thought that the more grammaticalized the linguistic el-ements are, the more they are constrained.
Index pages curate the most relevant extracts from our library of academic textbooks. They’ve been created using an in-house natural language model (NLM), each adding context and meaning to key research topics.
