Understanding English Compound Words: Formation, Classification, and Criteria
Compounding
2.1. Definition and Main Features
What is a Compound?
- A compound is a word formed by combining at least two other words, lexemes, or bases.
- The combination should not follow typical phrasal structures. For example, “well done” and “in time” are phrases, not compounds.
- A compound functions grammatically and semantically as a single word.
- Compounds can be written as one word, two words, or hyphenated.
- In English, compounds typically consist of two bases.
- Compounding generally doesn’t alter the base words (e.g., tax-free).
2.2. Criteria for Identifying Compounds
Orthographic Criteria
- Solid Compounds: Written as one word (e.g., bedroom).
- Progression: Compounds may transition from open to solid as they become more established.
- Semantic Reflection: Orthography can reflect semantic structure (e.g., a black bird vs. a blackbird).
- Combining Forms: Typically written with hyphens (e.g., psycho-somatic).
Phonological Criteria
- Stress Pattern: Compounds usually have primary stress on the first element and secondary stress on the second (e.g., a ,dark `room vs. a ´dark ,room).
- Exceptions: Some compounds have different stress patterns due to thematic emphasis (e.g., ash-´blonde).
Semantic Criteria
- Single Idea: Compounds represent a single, unified concept.
- Non-Inferable Meaning: The meaning of a compound may not always be predictable from its components (e.g., blackboard).
Syntactic Criteria
- Inseparability: Compound elements cannot be easily separated (e.g., black ugly bird vs. ugly blackbird).
- Modification Restriction: The first element cannot be modified (e.g., a very black bird vs. *a very blackbird).
- Pro-Form Substitution: The second noun cannot be replaced with a pro-form (e.g., a black one vs. *a blackone).
Inflection and Linking Elements: Challenges
These criteria don’t always clearly distinguish between syntactic phrases (e.g., n+n phrases) and morphological compounds (e.g., n+n compounds).
Types of Compounds
Problems of Classification
- Debate and Dissatisfaction: Existing classification proposals are often debated and considered unsatisfactory.
- Lack of Homogeneity: Classifications often lack consistency across different languages.
- Language-Specific Terminology: Terminology can be tied to specific languages.
- Overlooked Compound Types: Some types of compounds are often disregarded in research.
- Inconsistent Criteria: Classifications may be based on inconsistent criteria.
Semantic Classification
This common classification relies on:
- Endocentricity/Exocentricity: Based on the presence or absence of a head constituent.
- Coordination: Based on the relationship between the compound’s constituents.
Endocentric Compounds (Modifier + Head)
- Head: The core element containing the primary meaning.
- Modifier: Restricts the head’s meaning (e.g., doghouse = a house for a dog).
- Typically share the same word class as their head and are hyponyms of one component.
Exocentric (Bahuvrihi) Compounds
- Non-Hyponym: Not a hyponym of the head element.
- Terminology Debate: Sometimes considered a subset of exocentric compounds.
- Separate Entity: Refers to a distinct entity (e.g., highbrow, heartthrob).
- Lexically Determined Word Class: Word class is determined lexically, not by constituents.
Dvandva or Coordinative/Copulative Compounds
- Varied Terminology: Includes terms like aggregative, coordinate, copulative, and co-compound.
- Dvandva (Couple): Refers to coordinate compounds as a whole.
- Equal Standing: Elements have equal semantic weight (e.g., mother-father = parents).
- Separate Identities: Coordinated entities retain their individual meanings.
- Joined by ‘And’: Elements can often be interpreted as joined by “and” (e.g., Austria-Hungary).
Lieber’s (2009) and Quirk et al.’s (1985) Functional Classifications
(Content related to these classifications was not provided in the original text.)