Word construction
Parya Razmdideh; Sara Kheyrmand
Volume 12, Issue 2 , December 2020, , Pages 59-98
Abstract
“nɑme”-last complex words have rarely been examined in Persian morphology. In this study, examining the function of “nɑme” in the word-formation of Complex words which is embedded as a shared constituent, the polysemous patterns have been analyzed in the framework of construction ...
Read More
“nɑme”-last complex words have rarely been examined in Persian morphology. In this study, examining the function of “nɑme” in the word-formation of Complex words which is embedded as a shared constituent, the polysemous patterns have been analyzed in the framework of construction morphology (Booij, 2010). To fulfill this purpose, 102 “nɑme”-last complex words have been gathered from 3 Persian dictionaries including Zansoo (1994), Sokhan (2003), and Dehkhoda (1999) which have been classified in 12 extensions of meaning, adopting generalized holistic constructional schema which govern less abstract subschemas as meaning extensions derived from conceptual mechanisms. Achievements depicted that image schemas, metonymy, and metaphor are the chief forces in getting “nɑme”, polysemous in the examined complex words. Additionally, the other possibilities such as bound meaning in terms of constructional idiom, hierarchical lexicon, and default inheritance contributed by construction morphology indicated that “nɑme”-last complex words are governed by the so-called constructional idiom as a kind of constructional schema in which a fixed lexical unit with bound meaning is embedded. This justifies how “nɑme” is positioned in the fuzzy boundary between compounding and derivation as a “affixoid” which is grammaticalizing.
