Borderline cases in morphology: A study in language change

The aim of this study is to show how languages may change. To this end, three processes of non-morphemic word formation are analyzed: suffix reinterpretation, clipping and blending. An example of suffix reinterpretation is the development from Dutch -loog as in bioloog into -oloog as in deskundoloog. Clippings that are analyzed are, for instance, Dutch aso from asociaal or alto from alternatief. Krommunicatie, a mixture from krom and communicatie is a blend. These processes are considered exceptional and irregular. This is contested in this study. The underlying assumption of this research has steadfastly been that word-formation processes are systematic, not random or haphazard, based on the rationale that, if language changes were haphazard, interlocutors would see their chances of properly understanding each other heavily diminished. In addition, it is a priori highly unlikely that word formation consists of two completely different parts: a morphemic one which is systematic and a non-morphemic one which is not. The results presented in this volume show, as would be expected, that non-morphemic processes of word formation are not all chaotic. The theory of diacrisis, developed by the Polish linguist Ludwik Zabrocki (1907-1977), appeared to be very helpful in the analysis of the word-formation processes studied. Naïve native speakers of a language recognize the ‘confusivum’ of words, which is the common part of heterophonous words. This confusivum then systematically forms the basis for new formations and thus for language change. The data analyzed in this study mainly come from Dutch and English, however, examples are also presented from French, Spanish, Italian, German, Swedish, Frisian, Afrikaans and Polish