LINGUIST List 18.2168: New: Fundamentality of Word Classes?

LINGUIST List 18.2168
Tue Jul 17 2007 Disc: New: Fundamentality of Word Classes? Editor for this issue: Ann Sawyer <sawyerlinguistlist.org>
To post to LINGUIST, use our convenient web form at http://linguistlist.org/LL/posttolinguist.html.
Directory 1. Jess Tauber, Fundamentality of Word Classes? Message 1: Fundamentality of Word Classes?
Date: 16-Jul-2007 From: Jess Tauber <phonosemanticsearthlink.net> Subject: Fundamentality of Word Classes? E-mail this message to a friend Are word class distinctions fundamental in the lexicon, or the result of historical processes? Must roots belong to one class or another, or can underspecification be the norm when new roots are created, as for instance by lexicalization of ideophones. Morphosyntax seems to be the commonest means to disambiguate class - by affixation, compounding, or position. Yet today's 'roots' may be the result of fusion with old morphology. As such, are old derived distinctions percolating into the lexicon, only to be lost later as the echoes of the processes which created them are forgotten? If this is the case, might morphosyntactic typology be able to tell us more about it? Do 'nouny' or 'verby' have ambiguity in different places in the lexicon, or those rich in ideophones or grams? Jess Tauber phonosemanticsearthlink.net Linguistic Field(s): General Linguistics Historical Linguistics Lexicography Linguistic Theories Morphology Typology Read more issues\|LINGUIST home page\|Top of issue

Please report any bad links or misclassified data

While the LINGUIST List makes every effort to ensure the linguistic relevance of sites listed
on its pages, it cannot vouch for their contents.