El papel de las operaciones cognitivas metonímicas en la interpretación de las formas truncadas en lengua inglesa

  1. María Sandra Peña Cervel 1
  1. 1 Universidad de La Rioja
    info

    Universidad de La Rioja

    Logroño, España

    ROR https://ror.org/0553yr311

Journal:
Cultura, lenguaje y representación = Culture, language and representation: revista de estudios culturales de la Universitat Jaume I = cultural studies journal of Universitat Jaume I

ISSN: 1697-7750

Year of publication: 2022

Issue: 27

Pages: 117-135

Type: Article

beta Ver similares en nube de resultados
DOI: 10.6035/CLR.6369 DIALNET GOOGLE SCHOLAR lock_openOpen access editor

More publications in: Cultura, lenguaje y representación = Culture, language and representation: revista de estudios culturales de la Universitat Jaume I = cultural studies journal of Universitat Jaume I

Institutional repository: lock_openOpen access Editor

Sustainable development goals

Abstract

The last few years have witnessed an upsurge of research on lexical blending (Renner, Maniez y Arnaud, 2012; Renner, 2015; Correia Saavedra, 2016; Balteiro y Bauer, 2019; Wulff y Gries, 2019). This corpus-based study provides a qualitative treatment of splinters non-morphemic word parts that result from the truncation of lexical items that are used recurrently to create new blended words as if they were affixes – from the point of view of Cognitive Linguistics. More specifically, we offer a fine-grained a nalysis of a corpus of 200 splinters (the SplinterCorpus ) gathered from previous works (Warren, 1990; Lehrer, 1998, 2007; Renner, 2007; Correia Saavedra, 2016) and from the Online Cambridge Dictionary by making use of some of the latest developments in cognitive modeling, especially the notion of ‘cognitive operation’ (Ruiz de Mendoza, 2020; Ruiz de Mendoza y Galera, 2014). While some splinters preserve the meaning of the source word from which they are derived, others reinterpret it (Bauer, Beliaeva y Tarasova, 2019; Mattiello, 2019). We focus on the second group and provide a principled account of the motivation underlying the semantic change undergone by the meaning of such splinters in terms of the cognitive operations of expansion and reduction. The evaluative character of metonymy of some of these splinters is also explored.

Bibliographic References

  • Citas Adams, Valerie. 1973. An introduction to modern English word-formation. Londres: Longman.
  • Algeo, J. 1977. «Blends, a structural and systemic view». American Speech, 52(1/2): 47-64.
  • Algeo, John. 1993. Fifty years among the new words. A dictionary of neologisms, 1941-1991. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  • Anderson, John R. 2010. Cognitive psychology and its implications. Nueva York: Worth Publishers
  • Arndt-Lappe, Sabine e Ingo Plag, 2013. «The role of prosodic structure in the formation of English blends». English Language and Linguistics, 17(3): 357–563.
  • Aronoff, Mark. 1976. Word formation in generative grammar. Cambridge MA: MIT Press.
  • Baayen, R. Harald. 1992. «Quantitative aspects of morphological productivity». En Yearbook of morphology 1991, eds. Geert Booij y Jaap van Marle. Dordrecht: Springer.
  • Baayen, R. Harald y Rochelle Lieber. 1991. «Productivity and English derivation: A corpus based study». Linguistics, 29(5): 801-843.
  • Balteiro, Isabel y Laurie Bauer (Eds.). (2019). Blending in English. Lexis. Journal in English Lexicology, 14. https://doi.org/10.4000/lexis.1249
  • Barrena Jurado, Alejandro. 2019. «A study on the ‘wordgasm’: the nature of blends’ splinters». Lexis. Journal in English Lexicology, 14. https://journals.openedition.org/lexis/3916
  • Bauer, Laurie.1983. English word-formation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  • Bauer, Laurie. 2003. Introducing linguistic morphology. 2.ª edición. Edimburgo: Edinburg University Press.
  • Bauer, Laurie. 2004. A glossary of morphology. Edimburgo: Edinburg University Press.
  • Bauer, Laurie. 2006. «Compounds and minor word-formation types». En The handbook of English linguistics, ed. Bas Aarts y April McMahon. Oxford: Blackwell.
  • Bauer, Laurie, Beliaeva, Natalia y Elizaveta Tarasova. 2019. «Recalibrating productivity: Factors involved». Zeitschrift für Wortbildung/Journal of Word Formation, 3(1): 44-80.
  • Bauer, Laurie, Lieber, Rochelle e Ingo Plag. 2013. The Oxford reference guide to English morphology. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  • Correia Saavedra, David. 2016. «Automatically identifying blend splinters that are morpheme candidates». Digital Scholarship in the Humanities, 31(1): 55–71.
  • Fauconnier, Gilles y Mark Turner. 2002. The way we think: Conceptual blending and the mind’s hidden complexities. Nueva York: Basic Books.
  • Fernando, Chitra. 1996. Idioms and idiomaticity. Oxford: Oxford University Press
  • Fischer, Roswitha. 1998. Lexical change in present-day English: A corpus-based study of the motivation, institutionalization, and productivity of creative neologisms. Tübingen: Narr.
  • Fradin, 2000. «Combining forms, blends and related phenomena». En Extragrammatical and marginal morphology, eds. Ursula Doleschal y Anna M. Thornton. Munich: Lincom Europa.
  • Hansen, Barbara, Hansen, Klaus, Neubert, Albrecht y Manfred Schentke. 1985. Englische Lexikologie. Leipzig: Enzyklopädie.
  • Hay, Jennifer. 2003. Causes and consequences of word structure. Londres: Routledge.
  • Hay, Jennifer e Ingo Plag. 2004. «What constrains possible suffix combinations? On the interaction of grammatical and processing restrictions in derivational morphology». Natural Language and Linguistic Theory, 22(3): 565-596.
  • Jespersen, Otto. 1950. Language. Its nature, development and origin. Londres: Allen & Unwin.
  • Katamba, Francis. 2005. English words: Structure, history, usage. 2.ª edición. Londres: Routledge.
  • Kemmer, Suzanne. 2003. «Schemas and lexical blends». En Motivation in language. Studies in honour of Günter Radden, eds. Hubert Cuyckens, Thomas Berg, René Dirven y Klaus-Uwe Panther. Ámsterdam & Filadelfia: John Benjamins.
  • Kolin, Philip C. 1979. «The pseudo-suffix -oholic». American Speech, 54(1): 74-76.
  • Kolin, Philip C. 1985. «The pseudo-suffix -(er)cise». American Speech, 60(1): 91-93.
  • Lehrer, Adrienne. 1998. «Scapes, Holics, and Thons: The semantics of English combining forms». American Speech, 73(1): 3–28.
  • Lehrer, Adrienne. 2007. «Blendalicious». En Lexical creativity, texts, and contexts, ed. Judith Munat. Ámsterdam & Filadelfia: John Benjamins.
  • López-Rodríguez, Irene. 2007. «The representation of women in teenage and women’s magazines: recurring metaphors in English». Estudios Ingleses de la Universidad Complutense, 15: 15-42.
  • Low, Graham D. 1988. «On teaching metaphor». Applied Linguistics, 9(2): 125-147.
  • Mattiello, Elisa. 2018. «Paradigmatic morphology: Splinters, combining forms, and secreted affixes». SKASE Journal of Theoretical Linguistics, 15(1): 2-22.
  • Mattiello, Elisa. 2019. «A corpus-based study of new English blends». Lexis. Journal in English Lexicology, 14. https://doi.org/10.4000/lexis.3660
  • Meyer, Paul Georg, Frühwirth, Andreas, Haupt, Birgit, Kerz, Elma, Kohn, Andreas, Lothmann, Timo, Marsden, Peter, y Tanja Oelkers. 2005. Synchronic English linguistics. An introduction. 3.ª edición. Tübingen: Narr.
  • Moon, Rosamund. 1998. Fixed expressions and idioms in English: A corpus-based approach. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
  • Nunberg, Geoffrey, Ivan A. Sag y Thomas Wasow (1994). «Idioms». Language, 20(3): 491-537
  • Paillard, Michel. 2000. Lexicologie contrastive anglais-français. Formation des mots et construction du sens. Gap: Ophrys.
  • Peña, M. Sandra. 2016. «Motivating film title translation: A cognitive analysis». Círculo de Lingüística Aplicada a la Comunicación, 66: 301-339.
  • Plag, Ingo. 1999. Morphological productivity: Structural constraints in English derivation. Berlín y Nueva York: Mouton de Gruyter.
  • Plag, Ingo. 2003. Word-formation in English. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  • Quirk, Randolph, Greenbaum, Sidney, Leech, Geoffrey y Jan Svartvik. 1985. A comprehensive grammar of the English language. Londres y Nueva York: Longman.
  • Renner, Vincent. 2007. «Quelques remarques sur les quasi-lexèmes de type e- et -holic». Lexicographie et terminologie: histoire de mots. Colloque en l’honneur d’Henri Béjoint, Sep 2007, Lyon, France. pp.147-156. ffhalshs-00512303. https://halshs.archives-ouvertes.fr/halshs-00512303/document
  • Renner, Vincent. 2015. «Lexical blending as wordplay». En Wordplay and metalinguistic/metadiscursive reflection: Authors, contexts, techniques, and meta-reflection, eds. Angelika Zirker y Esme Winter-Froemel. Berlín: Mouton de Gruyter.
  • Renner, Vincent, Maniez, François y Pierre J.L. Arnaud. 2012. Cross-disciplinary perspectives on lexical blending. Berlín: Walter de Gruyter.
  • Renouf, Antoinette. 2007. «Tracing lexical productivity and creativity in the British media: The Chavs and the Chavs-Nots». En Lexical creativity, texts, and contexts, ed. Judith Munat. Ámsterdam & Filadelfia: John Benjamins.
  • Ruiz de Mendoza, Francisco J. 2011. «Metonymy and cognitive operations». En Defining metonymy in cognitive linguistics. Towards a consensus view, eds. R. Benczes, Antonio Barcelona y Francisco J. Ruiz de Mendoza. Ámsterdam & Filadelfia: John Benjamins.
  • Ruiz de Mendoza, Francisco J. 2020. «Understanding figures of speech: Dependency relations and organizational patterns». Language & Communication, 71: 16–38.
  • Ruiz de Mendoza, Francisco y Alicia Galera. 2014. Cognitive modeling. A linguistic perspective. Ámsterdam & Filadelfia: John Benjamins.
  • Ruiz de Mendoza, Francisco y M. Sandra Peña. 2005. «Conceptual interaction, cognitive operations, and projection spaces». En Cognitive Linguistics: Internal dynamics and interdisciplinary interaction, eds. Francisco J. Ruiz de Mendoza y M. Sandra Peña. Berlín: Mouton de Gruyter.
  • Soudek, Lev. 1971. «The development and use of the morpheme burger in American English». Linguistics, 68: 61–89.
  • Stockwell, Robert y Donka Minkova. 2001. English words. History and structure. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  • Štekauer, Pavol. 2000. English word-formation: A history of research (1960-1995). Tübingen: Narr.
  • Warren, Beatrice. 1990. «The importance of combining forms». En Contemporary morphology, eds. Wolfgang U. Dressler, Hans C. Luschützky, Oskar E. Pfeiffer y John R. Rennison. Berlin: Mouton De Gruyter.
  • Wulff, Stefanie y Stephan Th. Gries, 2019. «Improving on observational blends research: Regression modeling in the study of experimentally-elicited blends». Lexis. Journal in English Lexicology, 14. https://doi.org/10.4000/lexis.3625
Data source: Dialnet