Home Linguistics & Semiotics Compounds and other nominal modifier constructions in Pama-Nyungan languages
Chapter
Licensed
Unlicensed Requires Authentication

Compounds and other nominal modifier constructions in Pama-Nyungan languages

  • Jakob Lesage
Become an author with De Gruyter Brill

Abstract

Binominal compounds and binominal phrases are often assumed to be independent categories. In descriptions of lesser-known languages, their distinctions are sometimes taken for granted and their commonalities glossed over. These distinctions and commonalities are not always straightforward, however. In this chapter, I define and compare four types of nominal modifier constructions in Pama-Nyungan languages: binominal compounds, descriptive phrases, generic-specific constructions, and inalienable possession constructions. I argue against using (non-)compositionality and figurativity as a criterion to distinguish between compounds and phrases. I illustrate the different ways in which languages may distinguish these four constructions. Not all categories are easily differentiated in individual languages, based on the available data from grammars. There is morphosyntactic overlap between these constructions in many languages, and some languages appear to make more distinctions than others. Cross-linguistic similarities between these categories hint at potential constructional links between compounds and other syntactic structures.

Abstract

Binominal compounds and binominal phrases are often assumed to be independent categories. In descriptions of lesser-known languages, their distinctions are sometimes taken for granted and their commonalities glossed over. These distinctions and commonalities are not always straightforward, however. In this chapter, I define and compare four types of nominal modifier constructions in Pama-Nyungan languages: binominal compounds, descriptive phrases, generic-specific constructions, and inalienable possession constructions. I argue against using (non-)compositionality and figurativity as a criterion to distinguish between compounds and phrases. I illustrate the different ways in which languages may distinguish these four constructions. Not all categories are easily differentiated in individual languages, based on the available data from grammars. There is morphosyntactic overlap between these constructions in many languages, and some languages appear to make more distinctions than others. Cross-linguistic similarities between these categories hint at potential constructional links between compounds and other syntactic structures.

Downloaded on 1.12.2025 from https://www.degruyterbrill.com/document/doi/10.1515/9783110673494-004/html
Scroll to top button