1,Introduction

Thetopicofthepresentdissertationistheinvestigationofcompoundingin
English.Theaimistogiveadescriptiveoverviewofthisvastandmuchneglected
aspectoftheEnglishlanguage.
Theapproachchosenforthispurposeistwofold,namelymorphologicaland
functional. The morphological perspective focuses on the identification of the
combinatorypatternsofcompounding,aswellasonthemorphologicalproperties
oftheconstituents.
This study can be divided into three main parts. The first part concerns
compoundingingeneral,asthefundamentalbasisforanyfurtheranalysis.The
secondpartconsistsofageneralreviewofwhatisgenerallydefinedasthestateof
theartoncompounding.
Thefirstpartintroducesthebasicnotionofcompounding,startingfromthe
definitionsgivenbyvariousscholars,andlooksatitscollocationwithingeneral
morphology. The second part proceeds to present the main properties of
compounding.
InthisthesisIwillfocusonthevasttopicofcompoundingandonthemost
relevantnotionsandissuesrelatedtoit.Ibeginbydefiningcompoundingin
generaltermsandIwilllaterinvestigateitsinherentnatureandhowitcollocates
withingeneralmorphology,accordingtovarioustheoreticalapproaches.AfterI
amgoingtointroducethecrucialnotionofhead,whichisfunctionaltothe
classificationofcompounds.

2.Compounding

Compoundingisoneofthebranchesofmorphology,whichdealswithword
formation. It is a powerful process of compacting information and enriching
vocabularywithinalanguage,exploitingpreviouslyexistinglexicalitems.The
1

followingschemevisualizesitsplaceinmorphology .

MORPHOLOGY

inflection

wordformation

derivation

composition

(compounding)

(Bauer,1983:34)

Theprocessofcompounding,withcompoundsasaresultofit,hasbeen
variouslydefinedbylinguistsovertimeand,althoughdefinitionsobviouslyshare
acommonconceptualcore,differencescanbeidentified.Letuslookmoreclosely
atsomedefinitionsandcommentonthem.

What is common to all these definitions is clearly the concept of using pre
existing lexical material to give rise to new complex formations within the
lexicon.Here,Ihavewillinglychosentheblanketwordmaterialforits

agueness,asthereiscertainvariabilityinthedefinitionofwhatisactuallycombinedin
acompound.Somescholarsseemtobemorerestrictiveintheirdefinitions,whileothers
potentiallyallowbroadercombinatorypatterns.Ifonlyfreeformsorwordshavingan
independentexistence(Adams1973)arecombinedintocompounds,thencombinations
containing atleast oneelement with noindependent status (alsocalled combining
2

forminCastairsMcCarthy2002)asinaudiobook,oreventwo,asinspectroscopy ,
wouldberuledoutfromthesedefinitions.Bothcasescontainboundmorphemesthat
cannot beconsidered asaffixes butratheras roots,sincetheybearanautonomous
lexical meaning. This means that using the term word properly meant is too
restrictive, asitdoesnotcontemplate cases like theaboveformations. Bycontrast,
3

definingacompoundasalexememadeupofatleasttwostems thereforeofatleast
tworoots(Bauer,1983)seemstofitawiderrangeofcompoundtypes.Indeed,the
termrootintendedasthepartofthewordwhichisleftwhenalltheaffixesare
taken away (McCarthy, 1991) enables us to include the formations seen above.
ProbablythemostcomprehensivedefinitionisgivenbyPlag(2003),whoaccountsfor
furthertypesofcompoundincludingthosecontainingphrasessuchas doityourself
(equipment)andgoodfornothingalthoughthisapproachisnotsharedbyallscholars,
amongwhomDressler(2005),whoconsiderstheseformationsasbelongingtoextra
grammaticalmorphologybecausetheyarenotrulegoverned.
Otherinterestingelementsemergefromtheabovedefinitionswithregardtothe
natureofcompounding.Adams(1973)pointsoutthatcompounds,thougharticulated,
behaveasaunit;hencetheprincipleofnonseparability,whichholdsforsinglewords,
worksforcompoundsaswell.Asregardssinglewords,theprincipleclaimsthatno
lexicalitemcanbelegallyinsertedwithinawordandsimilarlyforcompoundsthatthe

constituentscannotbekeptapartthroughtheinterpolationofotherlexicalelements .
Forthisreason,wecannotmodify blackboard into*blackhardboard,asopposedto
syntactic constructions like long road, whose lexical items can be easily set apart
withoutalteringtheoverallmeaning,asinlong(dusty)road.
Beside the crucial concept of uninterruptability, two further criteria define word
hood,namelypositionalmobilityandinternalstability,whichholdforcompoundstoo.
Theformerclaimsthatawordcanonlybemovedwithinasyntacticconstructionasa
unitandconsequently,whenappliedtocompounds,acomplexwordcanonlybemoved
inallitsconstituents,asinexample(a)below,inwhichthewholecompoundisfronted,
butnoneofitsconstituentscanbeseparatelyfocused,asexamples(b)and(c)show.

(a) Amorphologylecture,shewouldnevergive

(b)

*Morphology,shewouldnevergivea__lecture.

(c)*Alecture,shewouldnevergiveamorphology__.

(Spencer,2005:78)

Thelattercriterionmaintainsthattheelementswithinaword,aswellasinacompound,
presentafixedorderthatcannotbealtered,unlessthemeaningisradicallymodified,as
forinstanceinwallpaperthatissemanticallyverydifferentfromapotential(though
unlikely)paperwall,orhardlyconceivable,asfor*chairarmfromarmchair.Given
thatthesecriteriaeffectivelyapplytocompounds,singlewordsandcompoundsshare
thepropertyofbeingunits.

2.1

Endocentricandexocentriccompounds

Endocentriccompounds,astheirnameshows,areheaded,inthattheyhavetheir
centre,sotosay,insidethecompounditself.Therelationshipbetweentheconstituents
followsamodifierheadpattern,inwhichthecompoundfunctionsasahyponymofthe
8

grammaticalhead(Bauer,1983).Inotherwords,theentity,qualityoraction denoted
bythecompoundrepresentsasubsetofwhatisdenotedbythehead;hence,forinstance
drawbridgeisaparticularkindofbridge,seagreenisashadeofgreenanddripdryisa
specialwayofdrying.Endocentric compoundsrepresentthemostcommontypeand
tendtoberightheaded,whichcorrespondstoauniversalpreferenceaccordingtothe
NaturalMorphologyapproach(Dresser,2005).However,leftheadedcompoundsare
9

alsoattested,asinthecaseofRomancelanguages .
Asregardsexocentricorheadlesscompounds,theyarecharacterisedbyhavingno
headconstituentand,sincenoformalheadcanbeidentified,thelexicalcategoryofthe
compound is not determined by any of the constituents. However, given the
qualification of these compounds as exo centric, this means that th head is not
actuallynonexisting,butitshouldbesomehowrecoveredoutsidethecompound.This
process of inferring a plausible head not formally expressed may sometimes be a
difficult task. If retrieving the head for exocentric compounds like loudmouth and
10

pickpocketseemsratherstraightforward ,itislesssoforcompoundslikejailbirdand
buttercup.Asaconsequence,afurthersubgroupcanbeidentifiedwithinthegroupof
11

exocentric compounds, namely the socalled possessive or bahuvrihi compounds.

Fromasemanticpointofview,thesecompoundsspecifyapropertyoracharacteristic
possessedbyanunexpressedheadnounthatismostlyaperson,asforinstanceindare
devil(person)andspoilsport(person).
Moregenerally,naturallanguagesshowapredominanceofendocentricover
exocentriccompounds.AccordingtoNaturalmorphologists,thiscanbeexplained
throughamarkednesstheory,whichmaintainsauniversalpreferenceforunmarked
overmarkedchoicesinlanguage.Exocentriccompoundsrepresentamoremarked,thus
dispreferred,optionincomparisontoendocentricones,accordingtothesemiotic
parametersofdiagrammaticity(asaformoficonicity)andindexicality.Infact,
endocentriccompounds,asforinstancephotoframe,showoptimaldiagrammaticityin
thattherighthandconstituentisboththemorphotacticandthemorphosemantichead

12,

sincephotoframeisaparticularkindofframeandtakesthesemanticandsyntactic
featuresofthehead.Differently,themorphosemanticheadisexternaltothecompound
andthelefthandelementgoverningtherighthandoneisnotthemorphotacticheadin
exocentricnonproductivecompoundslikekilljoy.Inaddition,alongtheparameterof
indexicality,theaccesstothefocalelementofthecompound,i.e.head,isless
immediateinexocentricthaninendocentriccompounds.Infact,thereferentmustbe
inferredintheformer,whileitisevidentinthelattertype(Dressler,2005a).
2.2Subordinativeandcoordinativecompounds
Althoughdistinctintermsofpresenceofahead,yetthecompoundssofar
consideredsharethecommonpropertyofbeingsubordinativecompounds,inthatthe
constituentsarehierarchicallyordered.Inotherwords,inendocentricandexocentric
compounds,oneelementissemanticallyandstructurallydependentontheother.This
hierarchicalorderisevidentforendocentriccompoundsinrelationtothe
aforementionednotionofhead,butthisalsoholdstrueforexocentriccompounds,as

exemplifiedbythebahuvrihicompoundkilljoy,wherejoyissyntactically
subordinatedtokill.
However,subordinationisnottheonlypossiblerelationshipholdinginacompound.
Infact,therearealsocompoundsshowinganequalhierarchicalstatusofthe
constituents,asforinstanceinsofabedandusersystem(interface).Thesecompounds
arecalledcoordinative.However,toadeeperanalysis,wecanremarkasubstantial
differencebetweenthem.Actually,asofabeddenotesanobjectthatisatthesametime
asofaandabed,thusthecompoundisinsomewayahyponymofbothconstituents
(Bauer,1983)anditisgenerallydefinedascopulative.Inawiderperspective,wecan
considerthiskindofcompoundsasprovidedwithtwoheads.Ontheotherhand,a
compoundlikeusersystem(interface)doesnotdenoteanyentityonitsown,butrather
itestablishesadoublegroundofapplicationofthenounthatthecompoundrefersto.
Therefore,despitebeinghierarchicallyequal,noneoftheconstituentsisacandidatefor
headedness.Asaconsequence,withintheclassofcoordinativecompounds,wecan
drawafurtherdistinctionbetweenendocentricandexocentriccompounds.Asobserved
13

byBisetto&Scalise(2005),itisrelevanttonoticethatthesubordinationcoordination
axisintersectstheendocentricityexocentricityaxis,determiningfurther
subclassifications.Thefollowingschemessummarizethecategorizationsofaroutlined.
Dependingonthecriterionadoptedfirst,twooptional;basicallyequivalent
classifications(a.andb.)areavailable.

a.

Compounds
endocentric
subordinativecoordinative

exocentric
subordinativecoordinative

b.

Compounds
subordinative

coordinative

endocentricexocentric

endocentricexocentric

2.3Briefreviewofcompoundpatterns
Wehavesofarmadereferencetonominalcompoundsmainly.Thishappensbecause
this is the largest and most productive class in all languages, which logically
correspondstotheneedfordefiningandlabellingnewobjects,entitiesandconcepts.
However,itisnecessarytomentionminorgroupsbelongingtootherlexicalclasses.
HereIbrieflyreviewthecompoundpatternsofEnglish,takingintoconsiderationthe
threemainlexicalclasses(nouns,verbsandadjectives)andaddingtothemtheclosed
16

classofparticles .

RIGHTHANDconstituent

Constituent

LEFTHAND

N
V

Adj

P.cle

cornbread

stonewash

girlcrazy

sitin?

drawbridge,

dripdry

(failsafe)

seethrough,?

standalone?

breakthrough?

cutthroat

Adj

blackboard

blindfold

purplishred

P.cle

invitro?

overeat

ingrown?

into,within?

The table shows some problematic patterns (signalled with a question mark) that will

17

be examined in the following paragraphs .

2.3Phonologicalcriteria
Asregardsphonology,itshouldbepointedthatstressassignmentincompoundshas
been under debate for quite a long time. It is generally assumed that English
compounds, especially nominal compounds, are characterised by leftward stress, as
claimedbyChomsky&Halle(1969)whointroducedtheCompoundStressRuleandthe
NuclearStressRuletodistinguishbetweenphrasesandcompounds.TheNuclearStress
Ruleappliestophrasesandassignsprimarystresstotherightmostsonoritypeak,while
the Compound Rule assigns it to the leftmost in the string. According to
Chomsky&Halle,astheformerholdsnotonlyfornounphrases,butalsoforverband
adjectivephrases,thelatterappliestolexicalcategoriesingeneral,thustocompound
nouns,adjectivesandverbsinEnglish.However,thestresspatternofcompoundsdoes
notseemtobesuchastraightforwardissue,andacertainrangeofvariabilityinstress
assignmentisattested.Here,werecognizeagradabilityofphenomena.Inthecaseof
major rules,exceptions arefew and,therefore, they dononotdenythe rule itself.
Structures commonly recognised as compounds can be stressed on the righthand
constituent as in apple pe, silk te and geologistastrnomer . Stress variability
increases if we consider compounds belonging to other lexical categories, such as
compound adjectives, as noted by Lieber (1992) and Yamada (1981, 1984). As a
consequence, stress cannot be adopted as a valid criterion of distinction between
compoundsandphrases,oratleastitisnotsoforalllanguages.And,inanycase,
phonologicalcriteriaonlyholdforlanguagesthatpresentaprosodicdistinctionbetween
compoundsandphrases,likeEnglishandTurkish(Dressler,2005).

Althoughwehavemadeitclearthatstresspatterncannotdeterminecompound,the
questionarisingregardsthesourceofstressvariabilityinNNformationsespecially.
Assumingthatitcannotbecasual,arationaleshouldbeidentified.Theliteratureonthis
subjectessentiallypresentsthreeexplanations.Thefirstfindsitsreasoninstructural
factors.Inparticular,thesyntacticrelationbetweentheconstituentsshoulddetermine
thestresspatternofthecompound.Anexampleofsuchapproachisrepresentedby
Giegerich(2004),whoexplainsthedifferentstressinformationslikewtchmakerand
steelbrdge byrecurringtothesyntacticroleoftheconstituents.Inbothcases,the
righthandelementconstitutestheheadnounbutthemodifierplaysdifferentroles.In
watchmaker it works as a complement of the head, which has a deverbal origin.
According to the scholar, the relationship between the constituents of secondary
compounds(asinthecaseofwatchmaker)isgeneratedlexically,whichwouldexplain
theforestress,typicalofcompounds.Differently,themodifiersimplyplaystheroleof
anattributeinsteelbridge,wherethesemanticrelationshiplinkingtheconstituentsis
thatofXmadeofY.Thecompoundisheregeneratedsyntacticallyandtherefore
presentsaphrasalendstress.
Another explanation to stress variability in NN compounds is represented by
semanticapproaches,asLadds(1984).Thescholarproposesadestressinghypothesis
basedonthesemanticfunctionofthemodifier.Inotherwords,heclaimsthatphrasal
stressoccurswhenthemodifierdoesnotcontributetothecategorisationofthehead,
butonlytoitsdescription.Thedistinctionconveyedthroughthestresspatterniswell
exemplifiedbytheminimalpair grenhouseand greenhuse .Inthelattercase,the
modifieronlyprovidesadescriptivedetailofthehead,whileintheformeritisusefulto
the subcategorisation of the head itself, which is deaccented to signal its partial
contributiontotheidentificationofthecategoryexpressedbythewholecompound.

Athirdapproachtostressvariabilityisbasedontheideaofanalogy,wherebystress
assignmentisinfluencedbytheexistingNNcompounds.TheinvestigationsbyPlaget
al.(2006)gointothisdirection.Theybasetheirclaimonalargeamountofspoken
27

data that have been acoustically measured and tested on the three approaches
mentioned.Theirstudyhasprovedthatthestructuralexplanationisonlyrarelytenable
andmainlyforcompoundswhoseheadendsintheersuffix,butitisnotsuccessfulfor
othercompounds.Thesameholdsforthesemantichypothesisthatresultedinmuch
lower stress predictability than reported in the literature. The analogical hypothesis
relies on the influence the righthand constituent can have on other compounds
belongingtothesamefamily,thatissharingthesamerighthandconstituent.Starting
fromtheobservationthatformationscontaining avenue,street,lane etcasrighthand
constituentsallbehavethesamewaywithintheirrespectivefamilies,thehypothesis
claimsthatcompoundswithdifferentrighthandconstituentsgenerallypresentdifferent
stresspatterns;conversely,thosesharingacommonrighthandconstituentanalogically
sharethesamepattern(Plag,2006).Inconclusion,thedatashowasignificantlevelof
stresspredictability byadoptingtheanalogicalapproachthatappearstobethebest
predictorincomparisontotheothermodels.

2.4Semanticcriteria
Semantic criteria todistinguish compoundsfromsyntactic phrasesinaclearcut
manner are not always easy to identify. It is generally assumed that a criterion of
identificationisrepresentedbythenoncompositionalityofmeaning.Inotherwords,
thesumofthedifferentmeaningsoftheconstituentsisnotequaltothemeaningofthe
compound.Noncompositionalityispartlyduetothefactthat,inoppositiontosyntactic
phrases,therelationshipbetweentheconstituentsisnotexplicitandhastobeinferred,
andpartlybecauseofthemetaphoricalmeaningofcertaincompounds.However,we
can easily notice that semantic opacity and metaphor can be distinctive of some
syntactic constructions too, as for idiomatic expressions that are semantically more
similartocompounds,sincetheyachieveanestablishedconventionalmeaninginthe
lexicon (Dressler,2005).Let usconsideranexpressionlike kickthebucket,whose
meaningisclearlyidiosyncraticandcannotbeachievedthroughthesumofthesingle
semanticvaluesoftheconstituents.Asaconsequence,noncompositionalityturnsout
nottobeanexclusivecharacteristicsofcompoundingand,furthermore,italsoappears
not to be an essential requisite of compounds tout court. Compositionality should

actuallyberegardedasagradualnotionratherthandiscrete,rangingfrommoretoless
compositional.Compoundscanexhibitalowlevelofcompositionalityasinloonybin
orahighoneasinmanyparticipialcompoundadjectiveslikelifesaving(equipment),
whosemeaningiseasilyachievablethroughthesemanticvalueofeachconstituent.
Semantictransparencyontheonehandandlexicalisationontheothercontributeto
establishthedegreeofcompositionalityinthecompound.
Twogeneralsemanticcriteriaforcompoundhoodcanbedefinedasfollows.
(a) compoundsdenoteaunitaryconcept(Bisetto,2004)
(b) compoundshaveanamingfunction(Downing,1977)
Adjectivalcompoundsalsoappeartocomplywithcriteria(a)and(b),inthatthe
unitaryconcepttheydenotedescribesandnamesapropertyoftheheadnoun,asin
lightemittingdiodeordarkbluematerial.Differently,problematiccompoundsinterms
of criterion (a) are copulative cases like AngloIrish and tragicomic (see more of
copulativecompoundsinchapter3).
In contrast with the above criteria, syntactic phrases convey a concatenation of
concepts and essentially describe or assert rather than name. However, there are
compounds that may have a more descriptive function, as in the case compound
adjectivelikedarkblue.
Inconsiderationofwhatwehaveobservedsofar,wecanclaimthatsemanticcriteria
arenotsoeasytohandleandthatthedistinctionbetweencompoundsandphrasescan
sometimesbefuzzy.ThefollowingdiagramproposedbySteinvall(2002:109)
effectivelysummarisestherelationshipbetweencompoundingandsyntacticphrases.

26

Theaxesofcompositionality(vertical)andentrenchment orconventionalisation
(horizontal)arediagonallycutbyaline,whoseextremesarerepresentedbysyntactic
phrases(generallycharacterisedbyhighcompositionalityandlowconventionalisation)
and compounds (generally characterised by high conventionalisation and low
compositionality). Within these extremes a wide range of variation occurs, thus
establishing whatcanbedefined acontinuumalongwhichcompoundsandphrases
move.
Though absent from Steinvalls diagram, Multiword lexical units (MWLUs,
henceforth)representagoodexampleofthiscontinuum,astheycollocateatsomepoint
alongit.MWLUsareactuallygroupsofwords,likeUnitedStates,

EuropeanCommunity,HumanRights,whosemainpropertyisthatofoccurringtogether
moreoftenthanexpectedbychance,andconsequentlythereexistsahighlevelof

cohesivenessbetweeneachwordoftheunitcharacterisedbysomekindofattraction
betweenitscomponents(Dias&Guillor,).ThestatusofMWLUsisthatofphrases,but
itsharessomecharacteristicswithcompounds,asforinstancethatofdenotingasingle
concept.

3. Main types of compounds

The classification of compounds is done in many different ways using various

criteria. As Bauer points out (1983/2010) the usual way of classifying compounds is by
the function they play in the sentence (p. 201). This syntactic division is made
according to the word class of the compound as a whole and the word classes of the
individual constituents of the compound (Bauer, 1983/2010, p. 31). Using the syntactic
criterion, compound nouns, adjectives, verbs, etc. can be distinguished (Bauer, 1983/
2010, p. 201). Using semantic criteria, compounds can be subdivided into several
groups based on the relationship between their constituents. They may be subordinative,
appositional, coordinative, endocentric and exocentric.

3.1 Subordinative, appositional and coordinative compounds

Most compounds in English are headed which means that one of the constituents of
the compound is dominant (head) and the other constituent is its modifier (Kavka &
tekauer, 2006, p. 65). If this is the case, we speak of subordinative (or determinative)
compounds (Kavka & tekaue, 2006, p. 65). Examples of subordinative compounds
include blackbird, cry-baby, compact-disc, etc. (Kavka & tekauer, 2006, p. 65).
Semantically, the compound is a hyponym of its head (Kavka & tekauer, 2006, p. 65).
If the elements of the compound are in apposition to each other, it is termed
appositional compound, e.g. maid-servant, woman doctor, bitter-sweet, etc. (Kavka &
tekauer, 2006, p. 65-66). According to Bauer, (as cited in Kavka & tekauer, 2006)
each of the elements of the compound "independently refers to some aspect of the
enitity denoted by the compound as a whole" (p. 65). Finally, there are coordinative
(copulative, dvandva) compounds whose elements are in a coordinate relationship
(Kavka & tekauer, 2006, p. 66). Coordinative compound is not a hyponym of either of
its elements. Instead the elements of coordinative compound "name separate entities
which combine to form the entity denoted by the compound" (Bauer, 1983/2010, p. 31).
Examples of coordinative compounds include Alsace-Lorraine, Schleswig-Holsten, etc.
Kavka and tekauer (2006) claim, that the basic difference between the two latter types
lies in the fact, that unlike appositional compounds, coordinative compounds constitute
of "two clearly separable parts" (p. 66).

3.2 Endocentric and exocentric compounds

The binarity of compounds is highly relevant to this categorisation. According to
this division, compounds are treated as two-constituent structures in which one of the
constituents is the determinant and the other determinatum. The determinatum (or head)
is a superordinate constituent which determines the lexical class and the grammatical
properties (number, gender) of the compound (Kavka & tekauer, 2006, p. 62; Bauer,
2010, p. 30). The determinant functions as a modifying element of the head (Kavka &
tekauer, 2006, p. 62). Compound whose head is formally expressed is endocentric
(Kavka & tekauer, 2006, p. 62). For example, the compounds beehive and armchair
are both endocentric because beehive is a type of hive and armchair is a type of chair
(Bauer, 1983/2010, p. 30).
If the determinatum of the compound is only implicit, it is termed an exocentric
compound (Kavka & tekauer, 2006, p. 62). None of the constituents of exocentric
compound "refers to the referent directly" (Mair, 2008, p. 46). An example of
exocentric compound is a pickpocket because it is not a type of pocket but "a person
who picks other people's pockets" (Mair, 2008, p. 46).
Scalise et al. (2009) distinguish between semantically and formally endocentric
compounds. According to the semantic point of view, an endocentric compound denotes

24

a hyponym of its head. According to the functional point of view, the head must be
identified on formal grounds (p. 49).

3.3 Neoclassical compounds

Neoclassical compounds are complex words which include classical elements,
such as tele-, micro-, scope-, that are usually Greek or Latin in origin. These elements
are termed combining forms (Bauer, 1983/2010, p. 213; Adams, 1973, p. 31). Like
affixes, these forms can be combined with stems, or two combining forms may be
joined together to form a new word without using any lexical stem (Kavka & tekauer
2006, p. 66).

3.4

Compoundnouns

Nouncompoundsrepresentthelargestaswellasthemostwidelyinvestigated
classofcompounds.Thesemanticrelationshipsholdingbetweentheconstituentsare
manifoldandcannotbeeasilyenumerated.NNcompoundsaremainlyendocentric,
whileonlyalimitedgroupisrepresentedbyexocentriccompoundslike skinhead and
bluecollar,inwhichthereferentofthecompounddoesnotcorrespondtothatdenoted
bythehead.But,itisworthunderliningthattheirsemanticmotivation,i.e.ametonymic
one,isgroundedontheirrespectiveheads.WithinthecategoryofNNcompoundswe
canalsoincludeproductiveformationslikedrivinglicenseandansweringmachinethat
are called activity nouns. Another subgroup with a NN pattern is represented by
coordinativecompoundslikepoetpainterandastronomerphysician.
Incomparisontothepreviousone,theAdjNpattern,asingreenhouseanddarkroom,
mayraisedoubtsontherealnatureofsuchcollocations.Especiallyin thecaseofless
idiosyncraticformations,onecanargueifitisapropercompoundorratheranounphrase
(Booij, 2003). Discrimination is not always straightforward and various criteria are
proposedtodistinguishbetweenthem,althoughtheymaynotalwaysbefunctionalor
congruent.However,adistinctionshouldbemadebetweenprocessesoflexicalisation
andcompounding,andbetweencompoundsandsetphrases.Inallcases,thecriterionof
nonseparabilityisapplicable(moreat6.1).
TheVNpatternislittleproductive.Theverb,initsbaseform,islinkedtothenoun
byapredicatedirectobjectrelationshipwhenthecompoundbelongstotheexocentric
type.Examplesofthissubgrouparepickpocketandkilljoy.

Thereversepattern,alsorare,isNV,asinsunshine,forwhichweshouldprobably
assumeaconversionofthelexicalclassofshine.
Movingtotheminorclassofprepositions,someformationscombiningprepositions
withothermajorlexicalclassesareattested,butthequestionarisinghereiswhetherwe
shouldreckonthemamongpropercompoundsornot.LetusexamineaVP.clepatternas
insitin,pushup,workouttounderstanditsfunctionandorigin.Theexamplesabove
playtheroleofnounsandcanberegularlypluralizedinsitins,pushupsandworkouts,
bytheuncommonprocedureofattachinganinflectionalstoapreposition.When
qualifiedascompounds,theseformationsareclearlyoftheexocentrictype,sincenoneof
theconstituentsmirrorthegrammaticalandsemanticpropertiesofthecompound.
However,ifwelookattheoriginofthesestructures,weeasilynoticethattheyare
directlydrawnfromphrasalverbsthroughaprocessofconversion,namelyoneof
nominalization.Ifconversion,asadiachronicprocess,isinvolvedhere,thustheir
compoundstatusisindoubt.However,ifwelookattheseformationsfromasynchronic
pointofview,thequestioniswhethertheP.cleNpatternisactuallyanimmediately
productiveprocess.Inthiscase,IsharetheopinionofscholarslikePlag(2003)that
claimsthatsuchformationscanhardlybeaccountedforascompounds.Asregardsthe
P.cleNpattern,asinunderpassandafterbirth,itrepresentsamuchrestrictedtypeof
combination,sinceparticlesshowaverylimitedcapacitytomodifynouns(Spencer,
2003).

3.5Compoundverbs
ThisclassofcompoundsisrelativelyuncommoninEnglish.Manycasesofcompound
verbsarenotgenuinecompounds,butwhatMarchand(1969)callspseudocompound
verbs,astheyresultfromeitherbackformationorconversion.Compoundverbsliketo
handcuff,toshortcircuitandtowhitewashoriginatefromthecorrespondingNNorAdj
Nnouncompounds,throughaprocessofconversion,whiletochainsmoke,toair
conditionandtobrainwasharederivedthroughbackformationfromnominalcompounds
chainsmoker,airconditioningandbrainwashingrespectively.However,theoriginof
thecompoundisnotalwayseasytoestablishwithcertainty,asobservedbyAdams
(2001),whoquotesthecaseoftotalentspotambiguouslyderivingfromtalentspotteror
talentspotting.Thesamecanbestatedfortoglobetrotandtosleepwalk,whosestarting
pointcanbeeitheranounendingineroranominalizationining.Inothercases,
backformationsderivefromadjectivecompounds,asfortospoonfeedthat,mostlikely,
originatesfromtheadjectivespoonfed.Arestrictedgroupofverbcompoundspresentsa
VVpattern,asforinstancetodripdryandtodrycleanassubordinativesandtofreeze
dryascoordinative.Suchcasescanbeproperlydefinedascompoundsbecausetheyare
notprecededbypriormorphologicalprocesses.Besidesthemainlexicalclassessofar
examined,verbscanalsobecombinedwithprepositionsinP.cleVpatterns,givingrise

toformationsliketodownloadandtoovercomethatcanbevariouslyinterpretedas
propercompounds(seeBauer,1983)or,morelikely,asinversionsofverbsfollowedby
prepositions,asmaintainedbyPlag(2003).Inthelattercase,theirstatusofcompoundis
moredubious.

3.6Compoundadjectives
Thisclassofcompoundshasoftenbeenneglectedbyscholarsincomparisontothe
muchdebatedgroupofnominalcompounds.Itrepresentsaminoritygroupwithrespect
tonominalcompounds,havingaratioof1to12,asreportedbyHart(1994),butitshows
avarietyofcombinatorypatterns.
Iwillnotfurtherexpandonthisgroupofcompoundsbecauseitwillbetheobjectof
thefollowingchapters.

3.7Compoundadverbs
Asforthepreviousclass,littleattentionhasbeendevotedtoadverbialcompoundsby
handbooksandgrammars.Thisclassofcompoundsresultsfromthecombinationofa
particleandanoun,asinonline.Manycompoundsofthisclassaresomehowambiguous
withrespecttotheotherclassesofcompounds,inthattheycanpotentiallyhaveadouble
function,i.e.adverbialandadjectival.Theirfunctionclearlydependsonthesyntactic
contextinwhichtheseformationsarefound.P.cleNformations assumeanadverbial
functionwithinaprepositionalphrase,asinthefollowingsentence,
Seabirdsoftencomeinlandtofindfood.
whiletheyplatanadjectivalfunctioninfrontofanoun,thereforeinattributiveposition,

asinTheBlackseaisalargeinlandsea.
Othercompoundswiththisdoublefunctionareinvitro,overnight,uphill,andupstairs
justtomentionsomeofthem.TheseformationsshouldbedistinguishedfromotherP.cle
Nformationsthatareusedonlyattributivelywithanadjectivalfunctionasininstore
(caf),offpeak(phonecalls)andindepth(analysis).

3.8Othernonprototypicalcompounds
Nonprototypical compounding has already been introduced in the previous
paragraphs when dealing with copulative and exocentric compounds. Here, I present
furtherformations,whicharecharacterisedbyconstituents(eitheroneorboth)thatare
notautonomouswords.Inotherwords,theyarecharacterisedbyoneortwoboundroots
thatarenormallyfoundincombinationwithotherlexemes.Tworelevanttypesofnon
prototypicalcompoundsareneoclassicalcompoundsandcranberrycompounds.
Assuggestedbythename,neoclassicalcompoundsarecharacterisedbyoneormore
constituentsofclassicalorigin,namelyGreekorLatin,buttheircombinationismodern
andfindsnocorrespondenceinclassicallanguages.Thistypeofwordformationisa
widespreadprocessandhardlydefinableasalanguagespecificphenomenon,sinceitis
common to many languages. It is particularly productive in scientific and technical
language, where it often has a naming function for new processes, inventions and
18

discoveries.Theconstituentsofneoclassicalcompounds,alsocalledcombiningforms ,
areapparentlysimilartoprefixesandsuffixes,buttheybearafulllexicalmeaningand

theycancombinewithothercombiningforms,asintheocracyandbronchitis,whichis
notthecasewithaffixes.Thereforetheirstatusisthatofstandardlexemes.Combining
forms in neoclassical compounds are generally assigned a fixed position that
distinguishesthemintotwomainsubgroups,namelyinitialandfinalcombiningforms
(Plag,2003),withfewexceptionsthatcantakebothpositions.Listingalltheitemswithin
each group is beyond my scope here, but I will mention few cases to present such
distinction. Combining forms like, logy and graphy, as stems, canonly occupythe
righthandpositionasinphraseologyanddiscography,but,asroots,theycanoccuron
theleft,asinlogotherapyandgraphology.Bycontrast,otherboundrootslikegeoand
19

telecanonlyappearaslefthandconstituentsasingeopoliticsandtelemarketing .As
illustratedintheseexamples,combiningformscanalsocombinewithfreelexemesboth
intherighthandandinthelefthandposition.
Cranberrycompoundsrepresentaninterestinggroup,thoughverylimitedinnumber.
Theyalldenotevariouskindsofberriesandtheirfirstconstituentsarehapaxlegmen
(Aronoff,1976:10)becausetheyonlyoccurinoneEnglishword.Thisisthecaseof
cranberry,boysenberry,huckleberry,whoseleftconstituentsoccurneitherinisolation
norincombinationwithotherEnglishwords.Theyplayadiscriminatingfunction,thatis
theydistinguishbetweendifferentberrycompounds,buttheirindividualmeaningisnot
determined,asitisstrictlyconnectedtothoseofthewordsinwhichtheyoccur.