Jana Chamonikolaso á, Ma in Adam, I ena Headlando á Kalischo á…
On conca ena i e and nonconca ena i e
lexeme- o ma ion pa e ns in English
Aleš Klég (P ague)
ABSTRACT
The pape bo ows he concep o (non)conca ena ion om mo phology and applies i o wo d-
o ma ion pa e ns bo h wi hin and ou side he scope o de i a ional mo phology, a guing a he same
ime o a b oade , lexicological app oach o lexeme- o ma ion (as a model o ocabula y expansion)
han ha iden i ying wo d- o ma ion wi h de i a ional mo phology. I a i es a he conclusion ha
he bina y di ision o lexeme- o ma ion in o ei he conca ena i e o nonconca ena i e pa e ns
does no e lec he cha ac e o many pa e ns accu a ely enough.
KEYWORDS
wo d- o ma ion, de i a ional mo phology, lexeme- o ma ion pa e n, conca ena i e, nonconca ena i e
Men e e had, and e e will ha e lea e,
To coin new wo ds well sui ed o he age,
Wo ds a e like lea es, some wi he e e y yea ,
And e e y yea a younge ace succeeds.
Ho ace, poe and sa i is (65–8 BCE), A s Poe ica,
ansl. by Wen wo h Dillon, 4 h Ea l o Roscommon (1680)
1. INTRODUCTION
When i comes o he desc ip ion o lexicon inno a ion, i is usual o speak o
wo d- o ma ion, al hough i has been epea edly poin ed ou ha lexeme- o ma ion
is a mo e app op ia e e m (in o de o exclude in lec ional mo phology; c Baue ,
2004; Kas o sky, 2009; Haspelma h, Sims, 2010, and o he s). O e ing a much b oade
pe spec i e, Ma hesius (1929, 1975) in oduces he concep o unc ional onoma ol-
ogy, a s udy o linguis ic denomina ion ( he seman ic ac i i y o gi ing names o con-
cep s which p ecedes he syn ac ic ac i i y o b inging he names in o mu ual ela-
ions). F om his poin o iew, o ma ion o wo ds is subsumed unde a wide no ion
o name o ma ion (a naming uni exp essing a concep may consis o mo e han one
wo d; c . Vachek, 2003, 163).
The ac ha a new lexeme may no be a single wo d, bu a mul iple-wo d ex-
p ession, ha i may no be a mo phologically complex wo d, bu a simplex coinage,
ha i may no be o med by a mo phological ule a all, indica es ha jus eplacing
he e m wo d- o ma ion wi h lexeme- o ma ion does no esol e he p oblem o
he limi ed each o wo d- o ma ion concei ed as (pa o ) mo phology. This na ow
OPEN ACCESS
90 LINGUISTICA PRAGENSIA 2/2015
iew o wo d- o ma ion unde mo phology is echoed in Liebe and Š ekaue (2014, 3):
“The e m ‘wo d o ma ion’ e e s o he c ea ion o new lexemes in a language and is
gene ally said o be composed o compounding and de i a ion.” Bo h compounding
and de i a ion ( o which con e sion is usually added) a e nowadays occasionally de-
sc ibed in e ms o (non)conca ena ion. The ollowing is an a emp o ollow h ough
he applica ion o he mo phological concep o (non)conca ena ion o lexeme- o -
ma ion in he b oade , lexicological sense, which includes p ocesses ha go beyond
he o ma ion o me e wo ds and beyond mo phology, inasmuch as “ he mechanisms
o c ea ing lexical i ems include much mo e han jus he egula mo phological
mechanisms o de i a ion and composi ion; hey also comp ise, o ins ance, bo -
owing and onoma opoeia” (Gee ae s, 1994, 2190), o which o he s, such as seman ic
shi ing, can be added.
2. (NON)CONCATENATION IN MORPHOLOGY
Ma hews (1991, 130–144), among o he s, ecognizes wo main ypes o mo phologi-
cal p ocesses: he addi ion o an independen o ma i e, and an in e nal change o
a modi ica ion (ei he o al o pa ial) o he base. Acco ding o him, he i s ype
includes p e ixa ion, su ixa ion and in ixa ion, and appa en ly also eduplica ion;
p ocesses o he second ype which he men ions include owel change, supple ion,
accen o onal pa e ns, and sub ac ion. (In con as o he p e ailing iew, he ea s
compounding as dis inc om wo d- o ma ion, in ha compounding is a lexical p o-
cess which de i es lexemes om lexemes, no om o ms, al hough he inds pa al-
lels wi h wo d- o ma ion.)
Subsequen ly he wo ypes ha e come o be e med conca ena i e and noncon-
ca ena i e p ocesses. Thus, o ins ance, Haspelma h and Sims (2010, 34–40) speak o
wo basic ypes o mo phological pa e ns: conca ena i e, “which is when wo mo -
phemes a e o de ed one a e he o he ”, and nonconca ena i e, “which is e e y hing
else”. They iden i y conca ena i e pa e ns wi h a ixa ion and compounding. As a
as nonconca ena i e pa e ns a e conce ned, hey dis inguish “[o]ne impo an class
o non-conca ena i e pa e ns”, base modi ica ion (o s em modi ica ion/al e na-
ion), a “collec i e e m o mo phological pa e ns in which he shape o he base
is changed wi hou adding segmen able ma e ial”. I subsumes changes o place o
a icula ion (pala aliza ion, on ing), changes o manne o a icula ion (weakening
o consonan s, ica i iza ion), changes o quan i y (leng hening, e.g., gemina ion,
o he sho ening o s em owels), and also onal change and s ess shi . In addi ion,
Haspelma h and Sims place h ee mo e p ocesses o in lec ional mo phology unde
base modi ica ion: sub ac ion ( unca ion o dele ion o segmen s om he base),
me a hesis ( ea angemen o segmen s wi hin he base) and eduplica ion (pa o
he base o he comple e base is copied and a ached o he base), al hough he las
one wi h ce ain ese a ions. They also poin ou ha jus as desc ip ion o a ixa ion
in ol es speci ica ions as o which mo phemes may combine, i.e. he combina o y
po en ial o he a ix, so a e nonconca ena i e pa e ns subjec o es ic ions equi -
alen o he combina o y po en ial in conca ena i e pa e ns.
ALEŠ KLÉGR 91
While conca ena ion is gene ally no a moo poin , his is no ue o noncon-
ca ena i e mo phology (a e m used by McCa hy, 1981; see also Ca s ai s-McCa hy
1992, 80). The cu en de elopmen s in (au osegmen al, p osodic) mo phology and
phonology in combina ion wi h he Op imali y Theo y app oach ake a dim iew o
nonconca ena ion as a mo phological p ocess. Da is and Tsujimu a (in Liebe , Š eka-
ue , 2014, 190–192) poin ou ha he de ini ion o nonconca ena i e mo phology is
“no uncon o e sial” and explain why. Bye and S enonius (2012, 429–430) in oduce
he “conca ena i e ideal” in which mo phemes a e linea ly o de ed (i.e. wi h no o e -
lapping), con iguous (i.e. no discon inui y), addi i e (i.e. no sub ac ion), p ese ed
when addi ional mo phemes a e added, segmen ally au onomous (con ex - ee) and
disjoin om each o he (i.e. no haplology). Nonconca ena i e pa e ns a e hen usu-
ally de ined nega i ely as phenomena ha all sho o his ideal, pa e ns in which
he phonological ins an ia ion o a mo pheme canno be dema ca ed in an ou pu
ep esen a ion (c . Ku isu, 2001, 2). Bye and S enonius, o one, conclude ha he e
is no nonconca ena i e mo phology, only nonconca ena i e e ec s; ha all mo phol-
ogy is conca ena i e, and nonconca ena i e mo phology is only an epiphenomenon.
Simila ly T omme (2012, 2) ejec s Ma hews’ posi ion ha nonconca ena i e mo -
phology is he esul o genuinely mo phological p ocesses in a ou o he iew ha
i is basically a phonological phenomenon (c . also Liebe , 1992).
The di e ences in de ining nonconca ena i e mo phology a e e lec ed in disa-
g eemen on he inclusion o some p ocesses among nonconca ena i e p ocesses.
Thus, while Da ies and Tsujimu a (in Liebe and Š ekaue 2014, 190-192) ega d in ix-
a ion as conca ena i e (in ixes ha e “consis en phonemic con en ” and “can usually
be clea ly dema ca ed”), o he au ho s see i as a nonconca ena i e pa e n (Ku isu,
2001, Ca s ai s-McCa hy, 1992, and o he s). Simila ly in lec ional eduplica ion (pa
o he base o he comple e base is copied and a ached o he base) is ega ded as
conca ena i e, o ins ance, by Ma an z (1982), bu as nonconca ena i e by Inkelas
(in Liebe , Š ekaue , 2014) and o he s. Haspelma h and Sims, oo, belie e i has mo e
in common wi h nonconca ena i e gemina ion o owel leng hening han a ixal con-
ca ena ion. The nonconca ena i e na u e o o he p ocesses, such as au osegmen al
a ixa ion (ma king a mo phological ca ego y by a dis inc i e ea u e o one added
o he base), sub ac ion o empla ic ope a ions, is gene ally accep ed.
3. WORD-FORMATION IN MORPHOLOGY
Subsuming wo d- o ma ion unde mo phology in e ec de e mines which lex-
eme- o ma ion p ocesses will be legi ima e mo phological pa e ns, and which pa -
e ns will be excluded as ha ing ques ionable mo phological s a us, al hough hey
also c ea e new lexemes in language. Thus Haspelma h and Sims (2010: 34–40) il-
lus a e mo phological nonconca ena ion only by examples om in lec ional mo -
phology because wo d- o ma ion p ocesses o he han conca ena i e a ixa ion and
compounding a e seen by hem ei he as he limi ing case o a mo phological pa e n
(con e sion) o as being ou side he scope o mo phology p ope ( o ma ion o ac-
onyms, alphabe isms, clippings and blends). Con e sion does no exac ly i hei
92 LINGUISTICA PRAGENSIA 2/2015
concep ion o a mo phological pa e n (de ined as pa ial esemblance in o m and
meaning among g oups o wo ds) ei he because o he iden i y o o m be ween
base and de i a i e. Blends, clippings, ac onyms and alphabe isms a e excluded om
mo phology by hem “because he esul ing new wo ds do no ha e di e en mean-
ings o he longe wo ds om which hey a e o med”.
The ejec ion o clipping, ac onymiza ion, abb e ia ion and blending on seman ic,
a he han mo phological, g ounds is somewha su p ising (e en i blends which by
de ini ion ha e di e en meanings om hei cons i uen wo ds a e le aside). The e
a e ac onyms (lase , scuba) whose co esponding “longe wo ds” ha e p obably ne e
appea ed in speech and a e p ac ically unknown o na i e speake s, and so exis only
in hei “sho e ” o m. As ega ds clipping, Baue (2006, 498) obse es ha “[C]lip-
ping does no c ea e lexemes wi h new meanings, bu lexemes wi h a new s ylis ic
alue”. Acco ding o Plag (2003, 117) his aises he ques ion “o wha exac ly we mean
when we say ha a wo d- o ma ion p ocess should add ‘new meaning’ o a base,
he eby c ea ing a new lexeme. Do we conside he exp ession o a i ude a ‘new
meaning’? O only as a mino modula ion in usage?” He answe s he ques ion by ac-
cep ing “a no ion o wo d- o ma ion wide enough” o accommoda e e en clippings
as p oduc s o wo d- o ma ion. (In a way a decision o ea wo bases as di e en
lexical i ems on accoun o hei di e en e alua i e meaning, o any o he ype o
conno a i e meaning, is eminiscen o a dis inc ion made be ween nea synonyms.)
The la es ea men o de i a ion (de i a ional mo phology) appea s in a hand-
book edi ed by Liebe and Š ekaue (2014). The con ibu ing au ho s add ess bo h
conca ena i e de i a ion, i.e. a ixa ion (Baue ), and nonconca ena i e de i a ion,
eduplica ion (Inkelas), and o he non eduplica i e p ocesses (Da is, Tsujimu a),
al hough mos o he examples in ol e in lec ional mo phology (declension, conju-
ga ion) and e y li le o de i a ion p ope ( o ma ion o hypoco is ics). The chap e
on con e sion (Vale a) includes only a passing e e ence o i s (non)conca ena i e
cha ac e (Olsen, 1990), and he la es book on compounding (Liebe , Š ekaue , 2009)
does no in oke he concep o conca ena ion a all.
The p oblem o mo phological s a us o wo d- o ma ion p ocesses is handled di -
e en ly by au ho s. While Baue (2004, 113) speaks o “p ocesses which a e less ob-
iously mo phological, such as blending, clipping, he c ea ion o ac onyms, and he
like”, and uses he label lexical o hem, some au ho s s ess he di e en cha ac e
o hese p ocesses by in oducing special e ms. López Rúa (2006) uses he e m non-
mo phological wo d o ma ion by which he means sho ening o wo ypes, splin-
e -based clippings (lab, phone), and le e -based ini ialisms, i.e. alphabe isms (NBC)
and ac onyms (lase ), and wo d manu ac u e. Ma iello (2008) speaks o ex a-g am-
ma ical mo phological ope a ions, e c.
Wo d- o ma ion p ocesses as (de i a ional) mo phology a e no e y o en subjec
o explici classi ica ion when e e ing o English (o o languages in gene al) and a e
usually simply lis ed. One example o such gene al classi ica ion is Fleische ’s (2000),
which ope a es wi h i e basic ca ego ies: Kombina ion on S ämmen, A igie ung,
Subs i u ion, Sub ak ion, and Kon e sion. A mo e ecen example o a c oss-linguis-
ic app oach o wo d- o ma ion ypology is Š ekaue e al. (2012). Using ques ionnai e-
and g amma -based da a on 55 languages in hei e o o de elop a ypology o lan-
ALEŠ KLÉGR 93
guages in e ms o hei wo d- o ma ion cha ac e is ics, he au ho s dis inguish ou
basic ca ego ies: wo d- o ma ion p ocesses combining ee mo phemes (compound-
ing, including compounding wi h wo d- o ma ion base modi ica ion, eduplica ion,
blending), wo d- o ma ion p ocesses combining ee and bound mo phemes (a ixa-
ion), wo d- o ma ion wi hou addi ion o de i a ional ma e ial (con e sion, wo d- o -
ma ion by in e nal modi ica ion) and sub ac i e wo d- o ma ion (back- o ma ion).
4. WORD-FORMATION TYPOLOGIES IN LEXICOLOGY
By con as , bo h mo phological and lexical wo d- o ma ion p ocesses a e equally
ep esen ed when wo d- o ma ion is app oached as an independen a ea o s udy
cons i u ing, oge he wi h se e al o he s, he domain o lexicology in he Eu opean
adi ion. Hence wo d- o ma ion ypologies cons uc ed om he lexicological pe -
spec i e end o be mo e a ied and s uc u ed. A selec ion o English wo d- o ma-
ion ypologies is e iewed by S ein (2000), who no es ha while he e is b oad ag ee-
men abou which ypes o wo d- o ma ion a e cha ac e is ic o English, he au ho s
di e in he se s o ypes pos ula ed and o en hei c i e ia a e no clea . She also
inds ha he ypological classi ica ions depend on speci ic linguis ic heo ies and in-
c easingly ake in o accoun he s uc u e o he whole ocabula y.
She s a s wi h Hans Ma chand, a seminal igu e in English wo d- o ma ion.
Ma chand (1969, 1–2) explici ly ecognizes he di e en mo phological s a us o
wo d- o ma ion pa e ns by se ing up wo majo g oups o wo ds (each ealized by
i e ypes o p ocesses): “wo ds o med as g amma ical syn agmas”, i.e. combina ions
o ull linguis ic signs (compounding, p e ixa ion, su ixa ion, de i a ion by a ze o
mo pheme and back- o ma ion) and “wo ds which a e no g amma ical syn agmas”
(i.e. no made up o ull linguis ic signs: exp essi e symbolism, blending, clipping,
ime and ablau gemina ion and wo d manu ac u e). Common o bo h g oups is ha
he new wo d is based on a “synch onic ela ionship be ween mo phemes”. The p ob-
lem wi h he e m syn agma is ha i we wan o use he adjec i e syn agma ic, i s
logical opposi e in he Saussu ean sense is pa adigma ic a he han nonsyn agma ic.
Also he nex classi ica ion discussed by S ein ema ks on he di e ence be ween
he mo phological and lexicological pe spec i es. I appea s in Qui k e al. (1985;
Appendix I Wo d- o ma ion) and s a s by de ining wo d- o ma ion as an “a ea in
which g amma and lexicology sha e a common g ound”, con aining bo h gene ali-
ies and idiosync acies. Acco dingly, he au ho s dis inguish be ween he ou main
ypes, p e ixa ion, su ixa ion, con e sion and compounding, whose aspec s “mos
esemble he egula i ies o g amma and a e mos closely in e ela ed wi h hem”
(p. 1530), and he emaining p ocesses, i.e. back- o ma ion, eduplica i es, abb e i-
a ions (clippings, ac onyms), blends, and amilia i y ma ke s, which a e deal wi h
a he end unde Miscellaneous modes (Ma chand’s exp essi e symbolism and wo d
manu ac u e a e omi ed).
The hi d classi ica ion S ein examines is Algeo’s (1991) sys em which he used o
desc ibe neologisms appea ing be ween 1941 and 1991. Algeo iden i ies six basic e -
ymological sou ces (wi h a numbe o sub ypes): c ea ing (wo d manu ac u e and

94 LINGUISTICA PRAGENSIA 2/2015
sound wo ds, imi a i e, echoic and onoma opoe ic), bo owing (simple, adap ed,
calques), combining (p e ixa ion, su ixa ion and compounding), sho ening (clip-
ping, alphabe ism, ac onymy, back- o ma ion, phone ic elision, i.e. unin en ional
aphesis, apocope, syncope), blending (wi h clipped i s o second elemen , wi h
bo h elemen s clipped, wi h o e lapping sounds), shi ing (o g amma , i.e. con e -
sion: a gues > o gues ; o meaning: specializa ion, gene aliza ion, me apho , me on-
ymy; o o m: oy boy > boy oy, G ay > ya g, Jesus > jeepe s; o ci cums ances: s ylis ic
ans e combined wi h shi o o m, e.g. dialec al s omp becoming an al e na i e o
s anda d s amp), and, inally, sou ce unknown. S ein ocuses on Algeo’s ca ego ies
ha coincide wi h s anda d p ocesses, combining, sho ening, blending and wo o
he shi ing sub ypes, o meaning and g amma , bu dismisses shi ing o o m (i.e.,
a bi a y changes o he phone ic s uc u e o he wo d) as an “unsa is ac o y sub-
g oup” and shi ing o ci cums ances. He objec ions o Algeo’s classi ica ion conce n
i s diach onic bias, he lack o ocus on he pa e n aspec and he lack o dis inc ion
be ween p ocesses a di e en le els.
In his espec she p e e s Tou nie ’s (1988) ou line o ma ices lexicogéniques p e-
sen ed in Table 1. She app ecia es his dis inc ion be ween in e nal and ex e nal
sou ces o lexical expansion and his hie a chical model o in e nal sou ces wi h se -
e al le els o desc ip ion and gene aliza ion. Using wha migh be called a semio ic
ca ego iza ion, Tou nie dis inguishes h ee ypes o neology, mo pho-seman ic, se-
man ic and mo phological, acco ding o which aspec o he linguis ic sign ( o m and
meaning) changes, and o each ype assigns he p ocess(es) e ec ing he change. S ein
iden i ies he ollowing weaknesses in his model: he o mal aspec some imes o e -
ides he seman ic e ec s o he ope a ions (e.g. in jux aposi ion and amalgama ion);
bo h unc ional change (con e sion) and meaning change (me apho isa ion, me on-
ymy) also in ol e a change in g amma ical beha iou ; a educ ion in o m may a ec
only pa o he mo pheme and so, she claims, ins ead o mo phological neology he
e m ‘ o m neology’ should be used. The e a e o he objec ions we could make, such as
ha he model omi s manu ac u e, o ha i lumps oge he cons uc ion and sound
imi a ion al hough hei mo pho-seman ic neology is due o as ly di e en p o-
cesses, ha ansposing cons uc ion in ol es a change in g amma ical beha iou , e c.
S ein’s own ypology (Table 2) uses Tou nie ’s model as he p ima y s a ing poin bu
adds se e al imp o emen s: she e ines and inco po a es bo h his in e nal-ex e nal dis-
inc ion ( o ma ion-impo a ion; he la e ex ended by he appella i iza ion o p ope
names) and he semio ic c i e ion, di e en ia ing be ween h ee ace s, o m, meaning
and g amma . In he model o ocabula y expansion p ocesses she ci cumsc ibes he
“ eal domain o wo d- o ma ion […] whe e he e is he s onges co ela ion in o m,
g amma and meaning: cons uc ing and shi ing” (p. 100). The ac ha nonconca ena-
i e shi ing is de ini ely no seen as he eal domain in wo d- o ma ion as mo phol-
ogy unde lines he di e ence be ween he mo phological and he lexical app oach.
Lack o gene al consensus on he s a us o de ini ion o pa icula wo d- o ma-
ion p ocesses and he ela ions be ween hem is no limi ed only o English. The
same si ua ion ob ains in he desc ip ions o o he languages oo, as he esul s o
Ho migo’s (2011) analysis o Spanish sugges . Di e ences in heo e ical s a ing
poin s, e minology and i s usage a e ce ainly a p oblem, and so ypological claims
ALEŠ KLÉGR 95
able 1: Tou nie ’s ma ices lexicogéniques
able 2: S ein’s model o ocabula y expansion
abou wo d- o ma ion in indi idual languages and e en mo e so ypological compa i-
sons o di e en languages ha e o be aken wi h cau ion.
5. THE USE OF (NON)CONCATENATIVE CATEGORIES IN WORD-FORMATION
Al hough he idea o nonconca ena i e mo phological p ocesses is ques ioned by cu -
en ends in mo phology, i has begun o c op up in ecen desc ip ions o wo d- o -
ma ion as mo phology and as pa o lexicology alike. Š ekaue (2005), o ins ance,
96 LINGUISTICA PRAGENSIA 2/2015
con as s his onomasiological app oach o wo d- o ma ion wi h “ he adi ional clas-
si ica ion o wo d o ma ion p ocesses […] exclusi ely based on o mal c i e ia, such
as ex ending s. educing he s em (wo d o ma ion base), i.e., conca ena i e s. non-
conca ena i e p ocesses; combina ion o wo s ems s. s em + bound mo pheme s.
in e nal s em modi ica ion; e c.”
Simila ly, Fus e and Sánchez (2008) base hei desc ip ion o English wo d- o -
ma ion (which hey see as pa o mo phology “mos di ec ly ela ed o lexicology”)
explici ly on (non)conca ena ion. They ind wo basic wo d building ope a ions a
a o mal le el: conca ena i e wo d- o ma ion p ocesses ( he combina ion o mo -
phemes in s ings), exempli ied by de i a ion and compounding, and nonconca -
ena i e wo d- o ma ion p ocesses (phonological al e a ions such as educ ion o
he base, o no change o he base a all, making mo phemic segmen a ion di icul ).
They iden i y h ee impo an nonconca ena i e p ocesses in Mode n English: con-
e sion, back- o ma ion and sho ening (e.g. ele ision > TV, elly). They also obse e
ha wo d- o ma ion is no he only way ocabula y is augmen ed and men ion bo -
owing, seman ic change and oo c ea ion.
Re e ence o (non)conca ena ion can also be ound in desc ip ions o wo d- o ma-
ion in non-Indo-Eu opean languages. Kageyama (2014) applies he concep o Japa-
nese and speaks o “a weal h o conca ena i e and nonconca ena i e wo d o ma ion
p ocesses ha p oduce complex wo ds by compounding, a ixa ion, con e sion, in-
lec ion, blending, clipping, and o he mechanisms, which a e o en condi ioned by
di e ences o lexical s a a.”
6. CATEGORIZATION OF LEXEME-FORMATION PATTERNS
IN TERMS OF (NON)CONCATENATION
F om he lexicological pe spec i e and gi en ha lexeme o ma ion only pa ially
o e laps wi h mo phology, he issue o whe he nonconca ena i e ope a ions ha e
a place in mo phology o whe he hey a e a phonological phenomenon is no o
much ele ance. On he o he hand, he o mal ca ego iza ion o lexeme- o ma ion
p ocesses acco ding o (non)conca ena ion is an a ac i e idea o se e al easons.
I has g ea each and may p obably co e all o lexeme- o ma ion ( ocabula y ex-
pansion) and help clus e lexeme- o ma ion pa e ns in a meaning ul way. The ac
ha (non)conca ena ion is a pu ely o mal c i e ion has i s ad an ages (compa ed o
he semio ic c i e ion which combines o m, meaning and unc ion a once). I may
accommoda e ope a ions ha ha e no been sys ema ically included in lexeme o -
ma ion ye (e.g. a ious ypes o c ea ion; c . S ein’s ejec ion o a bi a y shi ing o
o m men ioned by Algeo) and easily allows o c ossca ego iza ion, i.e. iden i ica-
ion o p ocesses in ol ing wo di e en p inciples o o ma ion. Conca ena ion also
appea s o na u ally sepa a e p o o ypical mo phological ule-go e ned o ma ion
om less ule-go e ned o down igh a bi a y nonconca ena i e lexical pa e ns.
We ha e seen ha conca ena ion is ypically desc ibed as he addi ion o an inde-
penden o ma i e, “when wo mo phemes a e o de ed one a e he o he ” (Haspel-
ma h, Sims abo e), e c., o in a mo e sophis ica ed way in e ms o he “conca ena-
ALEŠ KLÉGR 97
i e ideal” (see Bye and S enonius abo e). Nonconca ena ion is cha ac e ized as an
in e nal change o a modi i ca ion o he base ( iz Ma hews), s em al e a ion, absence
o clea dema ca ion o a mo pheme, no change o he base a all, e c., o simply nega-
i ely as “e e y hing else” (Haspelma h, Sims abo e) which is no conca ena ion. I
is possible o pa aph ase he wo ca ego ies as addi i e p ocesses and non-addi i e
p ocesses. Th is concep ion is su i cien ly gene al o allow ca ego iza ion o lexeme-
o ma ion no only wi hin mo phology, bu o encompass he whole o ocabula y ex-
pansion (c . Ma hesius’ idea o name o ma ion), bo h ule-go e ned and a bi a ily
c ea i e, no es ic ed o single-wo d le el o in e nal sou ces. Th e ollowing dia-
g am is my own a emp a a en a i e ou line o lexeme- o ma ion ca ego ized om
he (non)conca ena ion pe spec i e:
igu e 1: Lexeme- o ma ion ca ego ized om he (non)conca ena ion pe spec i e
Th e se en basic ypes subsume se e al sub ypes: 1. base-affi x addi ion (lexical de -
i a ion: p e i xa ion, su i xa ion; ‘base’ s ands o ‘wo d’ o ‘s em’); 2. base-base ad-
di ion: compounding (wo d-wo d: windmill; s em-wo d: as ophysics; s em-s em: as-
onau ); eduplica ion (go-go, no-no, bling-bling, hubba-hubba), epea ing he whole
unchanged base; 3. (syn ac ic) wo d-wo d addi ion: mul iwo d uni s o ph asemes,
bo h idioma ic and non-idioma ic (p i a e soldie ); 4. base al e a ion: sho en-
ing — clipping (lab, emp), ini ialisms (TV); back slang (yob, ed aw [wa de ]); a bi-
a y sound al e a ions c ea ed o euphemizing, jocula , slang pu poses, e c. (Jesus
> jeepe s, lo d > lawks, lud, pes y >pesky, yep, gans a), me a hesis (gi dle < g iddle), e c.
Many such al e a ions a e ound unde he lexicog aphic agbag e m ‘co up ion’
(c . Baue , 1994, Klég , 1999, 2010); 5. base shi� ing (g amma ical: con e sion; se-
man ic: meaning ex ension, specializa ion, gene aliza ion); 6. o m/sense impo a-
ion (bo owing, in e lingual, in e dialec al; an onomasia: i an, ampe e, guinea); 7.
wo d c ea ion (unmo i a ed, ex nihilo; mo i a ed, onoma opoeic). Howe e , he as-
signmen o pa e ns o he conca ena i e o he nonconca ena i e ca ego y is no