|
Evaluative Morphology deals with processes that express diminution or augmentation, endearment, familiarity or contempt. This can be achieved by truncation (or shortening) of a word form (1a), affixation (1b&c), or a combination of truncation and affixation (2).
(1) a. doc (< doctor), mike (microphone), exam (examination)
b. cutie, wierdo, froglet, piglet, laundrette, festival-ette
c. mini-bar, microbrewery, hyper-awake, maxicab, super-easy
(2) a. Patricia > Pat / Trish > Patty / Trishy
b. comfortable > comfy, nightdress > nightie, old favourite > oldie
In this seminar we will deal with structural, phonological and sociolinguistic aspects of such forms. Structurally, we will try to determine to what extent evaluative affixes form a class of their own, separate from derivational and inflectional affixes, by exploring what kind of bases they attach to (root, word or phrase) and how the derived forms interact with other morphological processes, such as derivation (3a), inflection (3b) and compounding (3c).
(3) a. food connoisseur > foodie > foodie-ism
b. sarcastic > sarkie > sarkier, sarkiest
c. left-hander > leftie > leftie friendly
The role of phonology in truncation is to restrict the size and shape of the derived word, i.e., the number and makeup of the syllables (4). The result is typically a minimal word of the language involved to which an appropriate affix can be added. What is usually preserved is a stressed syllable or the beginning of the base word, while consonant clusters are simplified.
(4) a. Edward > Ed, Eddie, but not *Edwie
b. Victoria > Torrie, Vicki, but not *Victi
Finally, we will also address sociolinguistic and crosslinguistic aspects, such as the frequency of occurrence of such forms in certain registers (e.g., baby talk) and dialects. The English data will also be compared to similar morphological processes in other languages (e.g., German and Romance).
|
Anmelden