Nominalization as a typological phenomenon: A comparison between Latin and Australian languages: Types and tokens

Abstract

Abstract This study deals both with action nouns as a semantic class of word formation and with nominalization as a derivational process via offering a lot of relevant data in a kind of typological confrontation. Oswald Panagl investigates Latin examples applying criteria such as productivity, regularity, semantic transparency and syntactic behavior. As a result, he denotes derivations in -tiōn as the most vivid and active type of action noun delivering almost countless tokens. As a special case he treats the nominalizations in -tu becoming productive when they establish the grammatical category of supine in -tum. This procedure of a switch from derivation to inflection represents a sort of grammaticalization. He offers a scale model of increasing concretization (action–result–instrument–location–agents) exemplified with items from a variety of languages. Fritz Schweiger’s research presents a series of data from the Australian languages (Alyawarra, Bunuba, Diyari, Djapu, Gumbaynggir, Guugu Yimidhirr, Kalkatungu, Uradhi, Wambaya, and Wardaman). The author defines and analyzes the morpholo gical principles of word formation in his linguistic material and classifies the data arte legis. Because of the specific situation and the complex interrelations within this linguistic group of tongues investigated in this paper, it seems nearly impossible to develop and apply criteria of the common sort for uncovering genealogical kinship.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 17 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.