SEQUENCE OF CONSTITUENTS IN HENDIADIC PAIR-WORD CONSTRUCTIONS
DOI: 10.23951/1609-624X-2022-1-7-14
The purpose of the article is the analysis and systematization of ordering constraints used for identifying the sequence of constituents in hendiadic (binomial) constructions. The object of the study is six groups of constraints that are tested on 562 binomials. The materials of the study are hendiadic units collected from the sources of various genres and dictionaries. The use of this material allows us to explore the concept of that many factors can play a role under the right conditions, including the semantic relationship between the items, metrical and other phonological properties of the possible orderings, and relative item frequency. Results and discussion. The ordering constraints that determine the sequence of constituents in binomials were previously studied haphazardly and only recently became the subject of quantitative analysis. The most comprehensive scientific researches in this regard are the works of Ya. Malkiel, W. Cooper and J. Ross, S. B Benor and R. Levy, as well as S. Mollin and H. Sauer and B. Schwan. As a result of the study, several groups of ordering constraints and their subgroups were classified and systematized. These groups of factors include semantic constraints, i.e. structuring elements according to the perception, logic, chronology, hierarchy, etc., phonological constraints, i.e. the properties of vowels and consonants. In addition, among these factors are also metric constraints, implying the peculiarities of the syllables in the studied constituents. The other ones are such constraints as translational, item frequency and synchronic variation of the order. Thus, basically, it can be concluded that the ordering constraints are not only subject to classification and systematization, but also have a clear hierarchy.
Keywords: hendiadys, binomials, sequence of constituents, ordering constraints, English
References:
1. Abraham R. D. Fixed order of coordinates: A study in comparative lexicography. Modern Language Journal, 1950, vol. 34, pp. 276–287.
2. Malkiel Y. Studies in Irreversible Binomials. Lingua, 1959, vol. 8, pp. 113–160.
3. Bolinger D. L. Binomials and pitch accent. Lingua, 1962, vol. 11, pp. 34–44.
4. Koskenniemi I. Repetitive word pairs in Old and Early Middle English prose. Turku: Turun Yliopisto, 1968. 170 p.
5. Benor S., Levy R. The Chicken or the Egg? A Probabilistic Analysis of English Binomials. Language, 2006, no. 82, pp. 233–278.
6. Cooper W. E., Ross J. R. World order. In: Papers from the parasession on functionalism. Eds. R. E. Grossman, L. J. San, T. J. Vance. Chicago: Chicago Linguistic Society, 1975. P. 63–111.
7. Mollin S. Revisiting binomial order in English: Ordering constraints and reversibility, English Language and Linguistics, 2012, vol. 16/1, pp. 81–103.
8. Kohonen V. Observations on syntactic characteristics of binomials in Late Old English and Early Middle English prose. Neuphilologische Mitteilungen, 1979, vol. 80 (2), pp. 143–163.
9. Fenk-Oczlon G. Word frequency and word order in freezes. Linguistics, 1989, vol. 27, 517–56.
10. Morgan E., Levy R. Abstract knowledge versus direct experience in processing of binomial expressions. Cognition, 2016, vol. 157, pp. 384–402.
11. Sauer H., Schwan B. Heaven and Earth, Good and Bad, Answered and Said: a Survey of English Binomials and Multinomials (Part 2). Studia Linguistica Universitatis Iagellonicae Cracoviensis, 2017, 134, pp. 185–204.
12. British National Corpus (BNC). URL: https://www.english-corpora.org/bnc/ (accessed 14 October 2021).
13. Corpus of Contemporary American English (COCA). URL: https://www.english-corpora.org/coca/ (accessed 14 October 2021).
14. Mayerthaler W. Morphological naturalness. Trans. by Janice Seidler. Ann Arbor: Karoma, 1988 [1981]. 150 p.
15. Battistella E. Markedness: The evaluative superstructure of language. Albany, SUNY Press Publ., 1990. 265 p.
( 809.32 kB ) 
( 796.15 kB )
Issue: 1, 2022
Series of issue: Issue 1
Rubric: GERMAN LANGUAGES
Pages: 7 — 14
Downloads: 558