Ekman transport: Difference between revisions
en>ShelfSkewed m fix isbn, rm notice |
en>Sbmehta m ° symbol |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
The | In [[Morphology (linguistics)|linguistic morphology]], the term '''bracketing paradox''' refers to morphologically complex [[word]]s which apparently have more than one incompatible analysis, or ''[[Bracketing (linguistics)|bracketing]]'', simultaneously. | ||
One type of a bracketing paradox found in [[English language|English]] is exemplified by words like ''unhappier'' or ''uneasier''.<ref>Pesetsky, D. 1985. "Morphology and logical form." ''Linguistic Inquiry'' 16:193-246.</ref> The synthetic [[comparative]] [[suffix]] ''-er'' generally occurs with monosyllabic [[adjective]]s and a small class of disyllabic adjectives with the primary (and only) [[Stress (phonology)|stress]] on the first syllable. Other adjectives take the analytic comparative ''more''. Thus, we have ''older'' and ''grumpier'', but ''more correct'' and ''more restrictive''. This suggests that a word like ''uneasier'' must be formed by combining the suffix ''er'' with the adjective ''easy'', since ''uneasy'' is a three syllable word: | |||
:<math>\Big[\mbox{un-}\Big] \Big[ \big[\mbox{easi}\big] \big[\mbox{-er}\big] \Big]</math> | |||
However, ''uneasier'' means "more uneasy", not "more difficult". Thus, from a [[Meaning (linguistics)|semantic]] perspective, ''uneasier'' must be a combination of ''er'' with the adjective ''uneasy'': | |||
:<math>\Big [ \big[\mbox{un-}\big] \big[\mbox{easi}\big] \Big ] \Big[\mbox{-er}\Big] </math> | |||
however violates the morphophonological rules for the suffix ''-er''. Phenomena such as this have been argued to represent a mismatch between different levels of grammatical structure.<ref>Sproat, R. 1988. "Bracketing paradoxes, cliticization, and other topics: The mapping between syntactic and phonological structure." In Everaert et al. (eds), ''Morphology and Modularity.'' Amsterdam: North-Holland.</ref> | |||
Another type of [[English language|English]] bracketing paradox is found in [[compound word]]s that are a name for a professional of a particular discipline, preceded by a modifier that narrows that discipline: ''nuclear physicist'', ''historical linguist'', ''political scientist'', etc.<ref>Williams, E. 1981. "On the notions 'lexically related' and 'head of a word.'" ''Linguistic Inquiry'' 12:245-274.</ref><ref>Spencer, A. 1988. "Bracketing paradoxes and the English lexicon." ''Language'' 64:663-682.</ref> Taking ''nuclear physicist'' as an example, we see that there are at least two reasonable ways that the compound word can be bracketed (ignoring the fact that ''nuclear'' itself is morphologically complex): | |||
#<math> \Big [ \mbox{nuclear} \Big ] \Big [ \big [ \mbox{physic(s)} \big ] \big [\mbox{-ist} \big ] \Big ] </math> - one who studies physics, and who happens also to be nuclear | |||
#<math> \Big[ \big [\mbox{nuclear} \big] \big [\mbox{physic(s)} \big] \Big] \Big [\mbox{-ist} \Big] </math> - one who studies nuclear physics, a subfield of physics that deals with nuclear [[Phenomenon|phenomena]] | |||
What is interesting to many morphologists about this type of bracketing paradox in English is that the correct bracketing 2 (correct in the sense that this is the way that a native speaker would understand it) does not follow the usual bracketing pattern 1 typical for most compound words in English. | |||
== See also == | |||
* [[List of paradoxes]] | |||
== References == | |||
{{reflist}} | |||
[[Category:Paradoxes]] | |||
[[Category:Linguistic morphology]] | |||
Revision as of 18:26, 4 August 2013
In linguistic morphology, the term bracketing paradox refers to morphologically complex words which apparently have more than one incompatible analysis, or bracketing, simultaneously.
One type of a bracketing paradox found in English is exemplified by words like unhappier or uneasier.[1] The synthetic comparative suffix -er generally occurs with monosyllabic adjectives and a small class of disyllabic adjectives with the primary (and only) stress on the first syllable. Other adjectives take the analytic comparative more. Thus, we have older and grumpier, but more correct and more restrictive. This suggests that a word like uneasier must be formed by combining the suffix er with the adjective easy, since uneasy is a three syllable word:
![{\displaystyle {\Big [}{\mbox{un-}}{\Big ]}{\Big [}{\big [}{\mbox{easi}}{\big ]}{\big [}{\mbox{-er}}{\big ]}{\Big ]}}](https://wikimedia.org/api/rest_v1/media/math/render/svg/b299e032fc4cfb9acd46bb710f671c98234fb8ce)
However, uneasier means "more uneasy", not "more difficult". Thus, from a semantic perspective, uneasier must be a combination of er with the adjective uneasy:
![{\displaystyle {\Big [}{\big [}{\mbox{un-}}{\big ]}{\big [}{\mbox{easi}}{\big ]}{\Big ]}{\Big [}{\mbox{-er}}{\Big ]}}](https://wikimedia.org/api/rest_v1/media/math/render/svg/c2389c13a13cefdce7a88730c012ccd88d06a23e)
however violates the morphophonological rules for the suffix -er. Phenomena such as this have been argued to represent a mismatch between different levels of grammatical structure.[2]
Another type of English bracketing paradox is found in compound words that are a name for a professional of a particular discipline, preceded by a modifier that narrows that discipline: nuclear physicist, historical linguist, political scientist, etc.[3][4] Taking nuclear physicist as an example, we see that there are at least two reasonable ways that the compound word can be bracketed (ignoring the fact that nuclear itself is morphologically complex):
- - one who studies physics, and who happens also to be nuclear
- - one who studies nuclear physics, a subfield of physics that deals with nuclear phenomena
![{\displaystyle {\Big [}{\mbox{nuclear}}{\Big ]}{\Big [}{\big [}{\mbox{physic(s)}}{\big ]}{\big [}{\mbox{-ist}}{\big ]}{\Big ]}}](https://wikimedia.org/api/rest_v1/media/math/render/svg/64aea576f41883f550065f3a1ccb11f4cd075a52)
![{\displaystyle {\Big [}{\big [}{\mbox{nuclear}}{\big ]}{\big [}{\mbox{physic(s)}}{\big ]}{\Big ]}{\Big [}{\mbox{-ist}}{\Big ]}}](https://wikimedia.org/api/rest_v1/media/math/render/svg/21a5ac7e2e7925c4bace54fc3d4f5e40f8a7664e)
What is interesting to many morphologists about this type of bracketing paradox in English is that the correct bracketing 2 (correct in the sense that this is the way that a native speaker would understand it) does not follow the usual bracketing pattern 1 typical for most compound words in English.
See also
References
43 year old Petroleum Engineer Harry from Deep River, usually spends time with hobbies and interests like renting movies, property developers in singapore new condominium and vehicle racing. Constantly enjoys going to destinations like Camino Real de Tierra Adentro.
- ↑ Pesetsky, D. 1985. "Morphology and logical form." Linguistic Inquiry 16:193-246.
- ↑ Sproat, R. 1988. "Bracketing paradoxes, cliticization, and other topics: The mapping between syntactic and phonological structure." In Everaert et al. (eds), Morphology and Modularity. Amsterdam: North-Holland.
- ↑ Williams, E. 1981. "On the notions 'lexically related' and 'head of a word.'" Linguistic Inquiry 12:245-274.
- ↑ Spencer, A. 1988. "Bracketing paradoxes and the English lexicon." Language 64:663-682.