Skip to main content Accesibility Help
×
×
Home

Analogy in suffix rivalry: the case of English -ity and -ness

  • SABINE ARNDT-LAPPE (a1)
Abstract

Rivalry between the two English nominalising suffixes -ity and -ness has long been an issue in the literature on English word-formation (see esp. Marchand 1969; Aronoff 1976; Anshen & Aronoff 1981; Romaine 1983; Riddle 1985; Giegerich 1999; Plag 2003; Säily 2011; Baeskow 2012; Lindsay 2012; Bauer et al. 2013: ch. 12). Both regularly attach to adjectival bases, producing nouns with (mostly) synonymous meanings. Most standard accounts assume that stronger restrictiveness of -ity is an effect of -ity being less productive than -ness, and that the observed preferences are an effect of selectional restrictions imposed on bases and/or suffixes. The focus of the present study is on the productivity of the two suffixes in synchronic English and on the diachronic development of that productivity in the recent history of the language. The article presents a statistical analysis and a computational simulation with an analogical model (using the AM algorithm, Skousen & Stanford 2007) of the distribution of -ity and -ness in a corpus comprising some 2,700 neologisms from the Oxford English Dictionary from three different centuries (the eighteenth, nineteenth and twentieth). Statistical analysis of the OED data reveals that -ity preference for pertinent bases is far more widespread than hitherto thought. Furthermore, the earlier data show a consistent development of these preference patterns over time. Computational modelling shows that AM is highly successful in predicting the variation in synchronic English as well as in the diachronic data solely on the basis of the formal properties of the bases of nominalisation. On the basis of a detailed analysis of the AM model it is shown that, unlike many previous approaches, an analogical theory of word-formation provides a convincing account of the observed differences between the productivity profiles of the two nominalising suffixes and their emergence over time.

Copyright
References
Hide All
Albright, Adam. 2009. Modeling analogy as probabilistic grammar. In Blevins, James P. & Blevins, Juliette (eds.), Analogy in grammar, 185213. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Albright, Adam & Hayes, Bruce. 2003. Rules vs. analogy in English past tenses: A computational/experimental study. Cognition 90, 119–61.
Anshen, Frank & Aronoff, Mark. 1981. Morphological productivity and phonological transparency. Canadian Journal of Linguistics 26, 6372.
Anshen, Frank & Aronoff, Mark. 1988. Producing morphologically complex words. Linguistics 26, 641–55.
Anshen, Frank & Aronoff, Mark. 1999. Using dictionaries to study the mental lexicon. Brain and Language 68, 1626.
Anttila, Raimo. 2003. Analogy: The warp and woof of cognition. In Joseph, Brian D. & Janda, Richard D. (eds.), The handbook of historical linguistics, 425–40. Malden, MA: Blackwell.
Arndt-Lappe, Sabine. In press. Word-formation and analogy. In Müller, Peter O., Ohnheiser, Ingeborg, Olsen, Susan & Rainer, Franz (eds.), Word-formation: An international handbook of the languages of Europe. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.
Arndt-Lappe, Sabine & Bell, Melanie. 2014. Analogy and the nature of linguistic generalisation: Locality, generality, and variability in English compound stress. MS Heinrich-Heine-Universität Düsseldorf and Anglia Ruskin University. Available from www.phil-fak.uni-duesseldorf.de/anglistik3/arndt-lappe/publications_arndt_lappe/.
Aronoff, Mark. 1976. Word formation in generative grammar. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Austin, Peter C. & Steyerberg, Ewout W.. 2012. Interpreting the concordance statistic of a logistic regression model: Relation to the variance and odds ratio of a continuous explanatory variable. BMC Medical Research Methodology 12, 82.
Baayen, Harald R. 2008. Analyzing linguistic data. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Baayen, Harald R. & Neijt, Anneke. 1997. Productivity in context: A case study of a Dutch suffix. Linguistics 35 (3), 565–87.
Baayen, Harald R. & Renouf, Antoinette. 1996. Chronicling the times: Productive lexical innovations in an English newspaper. Language 72 (1), 6996.
Baeskow, Heike. 2012. -ness and -ity: Phonological exponents of n or meaningful nominalizers of different adjectival domains? Journal of English Linguistics 40 (1), 640.
Bauer, Laurie. 2001. Morphological productivity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Bauer, Laurie, Lieber, Rochelle & Plag, Ingo. 2013. English morphology: A reference guide to contemporary English word-formation and inflection. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Beal, Joan C. 2004. English in modern times: 1700–1945. London: Routledge.
Beal, Joan C. 2012. Periods: Late Modern English. In Bergs, Alexander & Brinton, Laurel J. (eds.), English historical linguistics, 6378. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.
Becker, Thomas. 1990. Analogie und morphologische Theorie (Studien zur theoretischen Linguistik). Munich: Fink.
Bermúdez-Otero, Ricardo. 2012. The architecture of grammar and the division of labour in exponence. In Trommer, Jochen (ed.), The phonology and morphology of exponence: The state of the art, 883. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Bermúdez-Otero, Ricardo & McMahon, April M.. 2006. English phonology and morphology. In Aarts, Bas & McMahon, April M. (eds.), The handbook of English linguistics, 382410. Oxford: Blackwell.
Booij, Geert. 2010. Construction morphology. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Bybee, Joan & Moder, Carol L.. 1983. Morphological classes as natural categories. Language 59, 251–70.
Chandler, Steve. 2010. The English past tense: Analogy redux. Cognitive Linguistics 21 (3). 371417.
Chapman, Don & Skousen, Royal. 2005. Analogical Modeling and morphological change: The case of the adjectival negative prefix in English. English Language and Linguistics 9 (2), 333–57.
Chomsky, Noam & Halle, Morris. 1968. The sound pattern of English. New York: Harper & Row.
Csardi, Gábor & Nepusz, Tamás. 2006. The igraph software package for complex network research. InterJournal, Complex Systems 1695. http://igraph.org
Daelemans, Walter & van denBosch, Antal. 2005. Memory-based language processing. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Daelemans, Walter, Zavrel, Jakub, van derSloot, Ko & van denBosch, Antal. 1999–. TiMBL: Tilburg Memory Based Learner. Available from http://ilk.uvt.nl/timbl/.
Derwing, Bruce I. & Skousen, Royal. 1989. Morphology in the mental lexicon: A new look at analogy. In Booij, Geert & van Marle, Jaap (eds.), Yearbook of morphology 1989, 5571. Dordrecht: Foris.
Derwing, Bruce I. & Skousen, Royal. 1994. Productivity and the English past tense: Testing Skousen's analogical model. In Lima, Susan D., Corrigan, Roberta & Iverson, Gregory K. (eds.), The reality of linguistic rules, 193218. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Dietz, Klaus. In press. 108. Historical word-formation in English. In Müller, Peter O., Ohnheiser, Ingeborg, Olsen, Susan & Rainer, Franz (eds.), Word-formation: An international handbook of the languages of Europe. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.
Dossena, Marina. 2012. 55 Late Modern English: Semantics and lexicon. In Bergs, Alexander & Brinton, Laurel J. (eds.), English historical linguistics, 887900. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.
Eddington, David. 2000. Analogy and the dual-route model of morphology. Lingua 110, 281–98.
Eddington, David. 2002. Spanish diminutive formation without rules or constraints. Linguistics 40 (2), 395419.
Eddington, David. 2006. Look Ma, no rules: Applying Skousen's analogical approach to Spanish nominals in -ión. In Wiebe, Grace, Libben, Gary, Priestly, Tom, Smyth, Ron & Wang, H. S. (eds.), Phonology, morphology, and the empirical imperative: Papers in honour of Bruce L. Derwing, 371407. Taipei: Crane.
Embick, David & Marantz, Alec. 2008. Architecture and blocking. Linguistic Inquiry 39 (1), 153.
Fabb, Nigel. 1988. English suffixation is constrained only by selectional restrictions. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 6 (4), 527–39.
Fruchterman, Thomas M. J. & Reingold, Edward M.. 1991. Graph drawing by force-directed placement. Journal of Software: Practice and Experience (21), 1129–64.
Gahl, Susanne & Yu, Alan C. L. (eds.) 2006. Exemplar-based models in linguistics, special issue of Linguistic Review 23(3).
Giegerich, Heinz. 1999. Lexical strata in English: Morphological causes, phonological effects. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Guz, Wojciech. 2009. English affixal nominalizations across language registers. Poznań Studies in Contemporary Linguistics 45 (4), 447–71.
Hay, Jennifer. 2001. Lexical frequency in morphology: Is everything relative? Linguistics: An Interdisciplinary Journal of the Language Sciences 39 (6), 1041–70.
Hay, Jennifer. 2003. Causes and consequences of word structure. London: Routledge.
Hayes, Bruce. 1982. Extrametricality and English stress. Linguistic Inquiry 13 (2), 227–76.
Kastovsky, Dieter. 1986. The problem of productivity in word formation. Linguistics 24 (3), 585600.
Keuleers, Emmanuel. 2008. Memory-based learning of inflectional morphology. PhD dissertation, University of Antwerp.
Keuleers, Emmanuel, Sandra, Dominiek, Daelemans, Walter, Gillis, Steven, Durieux, Gert & Marten, Evelyn. 2007. Dutch plural inflection: The exception that proves the analogy. Cognitive Psychology 54 (4), 283318.
Kiparsky, Paul. 1982a. From cyclic phonology to lexical phonology. In van der Hulst, Harry & Smith, Norval (eds.), The structure of phonological representations, 131–75. Dordrecht: Foris.
Kiparsky, Paul. 1982b. Lexical morphology and phonology. In Yang, In-Seok (ed.), Linguistics in the morning calm: Selected papers from SICOL, 391. Seoul: Hanshin.
Liberman, Mark Y. & Prince, Alan. 1977. On stress and linguistic rhythm. Linguistic Inquiry 8, 249336.
Lindsay, Mark. 2012. Rival suffixes: Synonymy, competition, and the emergence of productivity. In Angela Ralli, Geert Booij, Sergio Scalise & Athanasios Karasimos (eds.), Morphology and the architecture of grammar: Proceedings of the 8th International Morphology Meeting, 192–203. Patras: University of Patras. http://morbo.lingue.unibo.it/mmm.
Lindsay, Mark & Aronoff, Mark. Forthcoming. Natural selection in self-organizing morphological systems. In Fabio Montermini, Gilles Boyé & Jesse Tseng (eds.), Selected proceedings of the 7th Décembrettes. Munich: LINCOM Europa.
Marchand, Hans. 1969. Categories and types of present-day English word-formation. Munich: C. H. Beck.
Marcus, Gary F.Pinker, Stephen, Ullman, Michael, Hollander, Michelle, Rosen, T. J., Xu, Fei & Clahsen, Harald. 1992. Overregularization in language acquisition (Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
Matthews, Clive A. 2013. On the analogical modelling of the English past-tense: A critical assessment. Lingua 133, 360–73.
McClelland, James L. & Rumelhart, David E.. 1985. On learning the past tenses of English verbs. In McClelland, James L. & Rumelhart, David E. (eds.), Parallel distributed processing: Explorations in the microstructure of cognition, vol. 2: Psychological and Biological Models, 216–71. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Pinker, Stephen. 1991. Rules of language. Science 253, 530–35.
Pinker, Steven & Prince, Alan. 1994. Regular and irregular morphology and the status of psychological rules in grammar. In Lima, Susan D., Corrigan, Roberta & Iverson, Gregory K. (eds.), The reality of linguistic rules, 321–51. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Plag, Ingo. 1996. Selectional restrictions in English suffixation revisited: A reply to Fabb (1988). Linguistics 34 (4).
Plag, Ingo. 1999. Morphological productivity: Structural constraints in English derivation. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Plag, Ingo. 2003. Word-formation in English. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Plag, Ingo. 2006. Productivity. In Aarts, Bas & McMahon, April M. (eds.), The handbook of English linguistics, 537–56. Oxford: Blackwell.
Prasada, Sandeep & Pinker, Stephen. 1993. Generalization of regular and irregular morphological patterns. Language and Cognitive Processes 8, 156.
Raffelsiefen, Renate. 1999. Phonological constraints on English word formation. In Booij, Geert & van Marle, Jaap (eds.), Yearbook of morphology 1998, 225–87. Dordrecht: Kluwer.
Riddle, Elizabeth M. 1985. A historical perspective on the productivity of the suffixes -ness and -ity. In Fisiak, Jacek (ed.), Historical semantics: Historical word-formation (Trends in Linguistics. Studies and Monographs 29), 435–61. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Romaine, Suzan. 1983. On the productivity of word formation rules and limits of variability in the lexicon. Australian Journal of Linguistics 3 (2), 177200.
Säily, Tanja. 2011. Variation in morphological productivity in the BNC: Sociolinguistic and methodological considerations. Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic Theory 7 (1), 119–41.
Säily, Tanja & Suomela, Jukka. 2009. Comparing type counts: The case of women, men and -ity in early English letters. In Renouf, Antoinette & Kehoe, Andrew (eds.), Corpus linguistics: Refinements and reassessments, 87109. Amsterdam: Rodopi.
Skousen, Royal. 1989. Analogical modeling of language. Dordrecht: Kluwer.
Skousen, Royal. 1992. Analogy and structure. Dordrecht: Kluwer.
Skousen, Royal. 1995. Analogy: A non-rule alternative to neural networks. Rivista di Linguistica 7 (2). 213–31.
Skousen, Royal. 2002a. An overview of analogical modeling. In Skousen, Royal, Lonsdale, Deryle & Parkinson, Dilworth B. (eds.), Analogical modeling, 1126. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Skousen, Royal. 2002b. Issues in analogical modeling. In Skousen, Royal, Lonsdale, Deryle & Parkinson, Dilworth B. (eds.), Analogical modeling, 2748. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Skousen, Royal. 2005. Analogical modeling (49). In Köhler, Reinhard, Altmann, Gabriel & Piotrowski, Rajmund G. (eds.), Quantitative Linguistik: Ein internationales Handbuch = Quantitative linguistics (Handbücher zur Sprach- und Kommunikationswissenschaft = Handbooks of linguistics and communication science = Manuels de linguistique et des sciences de communication / mitbegr. von Gerold Ungeheuer. Hrsg. von Armin Burkhardt . . .; Bd. 27), 705–16. Berlin: De Gruyter.
Skousen, Royal. 2009. Expanding Analogical Modeling into a general theory of language prediction. In Blevins, James P. & Blevins, Juliette (eds.), Analogy in grammar, 164–84. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Skousen, Royal, Lonsdale, Deryle & Parkinson, Dilworth B. (eds.) 2002. Analogical modeling. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Skousen, Royal & Stanford, Thereon. 2007. AM: Parallel. Available from http://humanities.byu.edu/am/.
van den Bosch, Antal & Daelemans, Walter. 2013. Implicit schemata and categories in Memory-based Language Processing. Language and Speech 56 (3), 309–28.
van Tieken-Boon Ostade, Ingrid. 2009. An introduction to Late Modern English. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.
Wedel, Andrew B. 2006. Exemplar models, evolution and language change. The Linguistic Review 23, 247–74.
Zamma, Hideki. 2012. Patterns and categories in English suffixation and stress placement: A theoretical and quantitative study. PhD dissertation, University of Tsukuba.
Recommend this journal

Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this journal to your organisation's collection.

English Language & Linguistics
  • ISSN: 1360-6743
  • EISSN: 1469-4379
  • URL: /core/journals/english-language-and-linguistics
Please enter your name
Please enter a valid email address
Who would you like to send this to? *
×

Metrics

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 0
Total number of PDF views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between <date>. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

Usage data cannot currently be displayed