Refine
Year of publication
Document Type
- Part of a Book (15)
- Article (7)
- Conference Proceeding (3)
Has Fulltext
- yes (25)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (25) (remove)
Keywords
- Deutsch (12)
- Phonologie (7)
- Prosodie (5)
- Englisch (4)
- Rezension (3)
- Wortbildung (3)
- Apokope (2)
- Bedeutungswandel (2)
- Diphthong (2)
- German (2)
Publicationstate
- Veröffentlichungsversion (12)
- Postprint (4)
- Zweitveröffentlichung (3)
Reviewstate
- (Verlags)-Lektorat (19)
- Peer-Revied (1)
Publisher
- de Gruyter (4)
- Benjamins (2)
- Linguistic Analysis (2)
- Linguistic Society of America (2)
- Mouton de Gruyter (2)
- Oxford University Press (2)
- Akademie Verlag (1)
- Buske (1)
- Cambridge Univ. Press (1)
- Heidelberg u.a. (1)
Identity effects in phonology are deviations from regular phonological form (i.e. canonical patterns) which are due to the relatedness between words. More specifically, identity effects are those deviations which have the function to enhance similarity in the surface phonological form of morphologically related words. In rule-based generative phonology the effects in question are described by means of the cycle. For example, the stress on the second syllable in cond[ɛ]nsation as opposed to the stresslessness of the second syllable in comp[ǝ]nsation is described by applying the stress rules initially to the sterns thereby yielding condénse and cómpensàte. Subsequently the stress rules are reapplied to the affixed words with the initial stress assignment (i.e. stress on the second syllable in condense, but not in compensate) leaving its mark in the output form (cf. Chomsky and Halle 1968). A second example are words like lie[p]los 'unloving' in German, which shows the effects of neutralization in coda position (i.e. only voiceless obstruents may occur in coda position) even though the obstruent should 'regularly' be syllabified in head position (i.e. bl is a wellformed syllable head in German). Here the stern is syllabified on an initial cycle, obstruent devoicing applies (i.e. lie[p]) and this structure is left intact when affixation applies (i.e. lie[p ]Ios ) (cf. Hall 1992). As a result the stern of lie[p]los is identical to the base lie[p].
Perhaps the biggest challenge in derivational morphology is to reconcile morphological idiosyncrasy with semantic regularity. How can it be explained that words with dead affixes and irregulär allomorphy can nonetheless exhibit straightforward and stable semantic relations to their etymological bases (cf. strength ‘property of being strong’, obedience ‘act of obeying’, ‘property of being obedient’)? Theories based on the idea of capturing regularity in terms of synthetic rules for building up complex words out of morphemes along with rules for interpreting such structures in a compositional fashion have not made - and arguably cannot make - sense of this phenomenon. Taking the perspective of the learner in acquisition, I propose an alternative approach to meaning assignment based, not on syntagmatic relations among their constituent morphemes, but on paradigmatic relations between whole words. This approach not only explains the conditions under which meaning relations between words are expected to be stable but also accounts for another notorious mystery in derivational morphology, the frequent occurrence of total synonymy among affixes, as opposed to words.