09 dets. What Is the Definition of Blending Words
Mixtures of two or more words can be classified from three angles: morphotactic, morphonological, and morphosemantic. [2] In some languages, the morphological mixing model has been increased as a result of language contact. In particular, the influence of English loanwords is documented in the literature (see for example Konieczna, 2012 on English influence in Slavic languages). Voice interference also leads to the manifestation of transliterated (19a) and interlinguistic (19b–c) mixtures. 3. Overlap, meaning that 2 words are combined by a common sequence of sounds A mixture of words is formed by combining two distinct words with different meanings to form a new one. These words are often created to describe a new invention or a phenomenon that combines the definitions or characteristics of two existing things. The choice of source words among mixtures is also subject to restrictions on the semantic relationship between them. Algeo (1977) divides mixtures into two broad categories: syntagmatic and associative (see Figure 1).
According to Algeo, syntagmatic or telescopic mixtures result “from a combination of two forms appearing successively in the chain of speech” (1977, p. 56), while the source words of associative mixtures or suitcases “are connected in the mind of the wordmaker and from there in his language” (1977, p. 57). The latter category is subdivided into: (1) synonymous mixtures, (2) mixtures combining words of the same paradigmatic class – paradigmatic mixtures or dvandva – and (3) mixtures whose source words are “related to each other, but not by paradigmatic equivalence” (1977, p. 58). An example of an alternative but largely compatible classification system is Renner (2006), where the category of tautogenous mixtures indicates synonymous relationships between source words. Renner`s taxonomy also includes different types of semantic relationships of words belonging to the same paradigm, especially additional relationships, as in smog (smoke and fog) and hybrid relationships, as in Zorse (a hybrid between zebra and horse). Constraints on syllable count, main stress and placement of switching points can be extrapolated to mixtures of seemingly exotic types.
Therefore, in most solid mixtures such as those of (7), the source words are merged where they are at most similar to each other. If there is no overlapping segment, the shorter source word replaces a segment of the longer source word so that the mixture inherits the prosodic outline of the latter. As a result, one source word retains its beginning, end, and prosodic outline, which are crucial for recognizability, and the other is completely preserved. In the rare cases where the inserted word is not completely preserved (for example, 7f-g), its prosodic outline is preserved. The number of syllables in the mixture does not differ significantly from the length of the longest of its source words. That is, if the two source words have an equal number of syllables, the tendency is that the mixture has the same number of syllables as in 11a-c or one more syllable than in 11d-g. The position of the accent in the mixture usually corresponds to that of at least one of the source words (in flexible accent languages: see Bat-El & Cohen, 2012 and Gries, 2004a for English; Piñeros, 2004 for Spanish; Tomaszewicz, 2012 for English and Polish). Mixtures tend to distort the prosodic outline (i.e., total number of syllables and principal stress position) of the longest source word (Cannon, 1986) or second source word (Bat-El, 1996; Gries, 2004a; Bauer, 2012). Given the considerations set out in Section 3.1, the two cases often coincide. For example, in 13a, the stressed syllables of the two source words are preserved in the mixture, but the prosodic outline corresponds only to that of the second word. The stress pattern of the mixture may repeat that of the second source word if it has more syllables than the first (13a-c) or the same number of syllables (13d).
In 13th, however, the first source word is longer and thus provides the stress model for mixing. Intercalative mixtures such as 13f (see also 7a–c, 7e) preserve the prosodic outline of the longer source word. In mixtures longer than any of their source words, the stressed syllable of at least one of the source words in the mixture remains stressed; For example, the second source word provides the accent in 13g. Humpty Dumpty`s theory of two meanings packaged in one word like a portmanteau word seems to me to be the right explanation for everyone. Take, for example, the two words “smoking” and “angry.” Decide you`re going to say both words. They will say “frumious”. [18] An obvious regularity postulated in the literature as a defining characteristic of mixtures is that most mixtures combine the first part of one word with the last part of another. Other structures discussed in Section 3.2 are much rarer in comparison, as shown by several empirical studies such as Kubozono (1990) and Gries (2006, 2012) for English mixtures and Ronneberger-Sibold (2012) for German, Farsi and Chinese mixtures. Moreover, the structure of mixtures is “constrained by semantic, syntactic, and prosodic constraints,” as Plag (2003, p. 125) summarizes. The semantic properties of mixtures and the most commonly attested grammatical structures were discussed in Section 2.1.
In terms of prosodic structure, mixtures tend to meet the phonotactic requirements of the respective language, as has been observed in studies of typologically different languages, for example in Cannon (1986), Kubozono (1990) and Plag (2003) for English, in Bat-El (1996) for Hebrew, in Piñeros (2004) for Spanish. Phonotactic limitations of mixture formation concern (1) the length of the syllable of the mixture in relation to the length of its source words, (2) the stress pattern, and (3) the location of the switching point in relation to the components of the syllable. The presence of the abbreviation KPN in the KoPuNa mixture is clearer in written form (capitalization is retained in the mixture, which improves recognizability). In some mixtures, one of the source words can only be recognized in graphic form, which is why they are called graphic mixtures (Konieczna, 2012). Each of the mixtures of (8) is pronounced as one of its source words, and the presence of the other becomes perceptible due to orthographic conventions (8a) or must be made perceptible by graphic means such as parentheses in 8b or capital letters in 8c-d. Mixing as a means of word formation is fascinating because mixtures are incredibly diverse (as in Dressler, 2000; López Rúa, 2004; Mattiello, 2013; and other studies) and at the same time surprisingly predictable (as Bat-El, 1996; Plag, 2003; Gries, 2012; and other researchers). Particular trends were observed with regard to the choice of words to be mixed as well as the formal structure and semantics of the mixtures. The formal and semantic properties of words that become mixed components are discussed in detail in section 2. The mixing process and the structure of the mixtures are explained in Section 3.
The areas of use are described in Section 4, and Section 5 provides an overview of the combination in different languages. Section 6 refers to mixtures as a morphological phenomenon. More than two separators in hybrid names like (18) reflect the nature of hybrids. For example, 18c refers to the fused holiday, including Halloween, Thanksgiving, and Christmas (Urban Dictionary, n.d.). In addition, the structure of the mixture may reflect the actual relationships between the denotata. For example, the proportions of source words used in the names of apricot-plum hybrids reflect the genetic profile of the hybrids: plumcot refers to a half-apricot and half-plum hybrid, apricot a hybrid rich in apricots and pluot a hybrid rich in plum (Renner, 2015a, p. 124). Similarly, the order of the splinters in an animal hybrid name indicates the type of brood: liger refers to a cross between a male lion and a female tiger, and tigon refers to a cross between a male tiger and a female lion. To find out how many new mixed words are formed each year (just a rough estimate), we looked at the new word lists in the dictionary and counted the mixtures they contain: About 20-25% of all new words in Cambridge`s list are mixed words.
In words like motel, boatel and Lorry-Tel, hotel is represented by various shorter substitutes – -otel, -tel or -el – which I will call splinters. Words that contain splinters are what I call mixtures. [1] [n 1] The regularities of formation of the mixture discussed in section 3.3 refer to the recognizability of the source words. On the one hand, source words are mixed “to maximize overlap in the middle of the merge section and to maximize phonemic/graphemic similarity as much as possible elsewhere” (Gries, 2012, p.