Universal #2014
Legacy number: 2015
| Number | 2009 |
| Original | Suggested hierarchy of base types for diminutivisation and augmentativisation: Noun > Adjective, Verb > Adverb, Numeral, Pronoun, Interjection > Determiner |
| Standardized | IF augmentatives/diminutives can be formed from Determiners, THEN they can also be formed from Adverbs, Numerals, Pronouns, or Interjections;IF from Adverbs, Numerals, Pronouns, or Interjections, THEN also from Adjectives or Verbs;IF from Adjectives or Verbs, THEN from Nouns. |
| Keywords | augmentative, diminutive, word class, noun, adjective, verb, adverb, numeral, pronoun, interjection, determiner |
| Domain | word formation |
| Type | implicational hierarchy |
| Status | achronic |
| Quality | statistical |
| Basis | core sample of 30 lgs, inner sample of 50 lgs (all identified in paper), broad sample of 120+ lgs |
| Source | Bauer 1997: 540 |
Discussion
Counterexamples
Khmer: diminutives from verbs, but not from nouns. <Author>Tigre: dim from nouns, adj/vb, and demonstratives, but not from adv/.../interj. <Author>
Notes
1, This is meant to supersede previous claims (e.g. by Ettinger 1974 and Nieuwenhuis 1985), revised in light of Bauer's superior crosslinguistic evidence.2. Modified claim (author):The further down the hierarchy, the less PRODUCTIVE is evaluative derivation.3. And author en passant suggests that diminutive is more productive than augmentative evaluative morphology – restated implicationally (and I'm sure such a claim has somewhere been made explicitly):IF augmentative derivational morphology, THEN also diminutive derivational morphology.4. The present claim does not seem intended as a claim about diminutive/augmentative as an AGREEMENT category, specifying preferred agreement triggers and targets. Where diminutive/augmentative is used for purposes of agreement, as in Tungusic or Bantu, nouns are the triggers and adjectives and also verbs the targets. Less systematically than in agreement, diminutive/augmentative marking can be distributed over several major (lexical or also focused grammatical) words in a sentence as a kind of affective perseveration. See Plank 1981: 255-256, with references.
Log in to join the discussion.
2. Modified claim (author): The further down the hierarchy, the less PRODUCTIVE is evaluative derivation.
3. And author en passant suggests that diminutive is more productive than augmentative evaluative morphology – restated implicationally (and I'm sure such a claim has somewhere been made explicitly): IF augmentative derivational morphology, THEN also diminutive derivational morphology.
4. The present claim does not seem intended as a claim about diminutive/augmentative as an AGREEMENT category, specifying preferred agreement triggers and targets. Where diminutive/augmentative is used for purposes of agreement, as in Tungusic or Bantu, nouns are the triggers and adjectives and also verbs the targets. Less systematically than in agreement, diminutive/augmentative marking can be distributed over several major (lexical or also focused grammatical) words in a sentence as a kind of affective perseveration. See Plank 1981: 255-256, with references.