Nominal Compounding as a Productive Word-formation Process in ...

Defining Nominal Compounding
as a Productive Word-formation
Process in Chuxnabán Mixe
Carmen Jany
California State University, San Bernardino
cjany@csusb.edu
Fieldwork Forum, UC Berkeley March 13, 2013

Introduction: What is a compound?
• Proposed criteria for defining compound words
•Complex
•Spelled together
•Right-headed
•Inflected as a whole
•Conceptual units
•Formed w/o word-formation affixes
•Specific stress pattern
•Include linking elements
•Syntactically inseparable
•Syntactico-semantic islands
• Bauer (2006), Lieber & Štekauer (2009), Scalise &
Vogel (2010)

Introduction: What is a compound?
• Many not universally accepted criteria
• Lieber & Štekauer (2009) emphasize importance
of at least three criteria for compoundhood
• Stress and phonological patterns
• Behavior of compound with respect to inflection
• Syntactic impenetrability
• This work
• Maintains that criteria are best viewed languagespecifically

Introduction: Nominal compounds
• Aikhenvald (2007:24)
• Compounding refers to the combination of at least
two potentially free forms
• Nominal compounding results in the creation of
new nouns
• Some definition problems
• What is a lexeme/word (Bauer 2006)
• Roots vs. derivational affixes (Lieber & Štekauer 2009)

Introduction: Nominal compounds
• Some definition problems (con’t)
• Postulated criteria: Gradient rather than
categorial distinction (Lieber & Štekauer 2009)
• Construction vs. lexcial unit (Bauer 2006)
• Deictic compounds (Downing 1977)
• Common word-formation process in
Mixean and other Mesoamerican languages
(Campbell et al. 1986; Romero 2010; Ruiz De Bravo Ahuja
1980; Schoenhals 1982; Van Haitsma 1967)

Introduction: This presentation
• Common and productive word-formation
process in Chuxnabán Mixe
• Nominal compounds may share properties
with NPs and possessive constructions => not
easily identified in all instances
• Examining formal criteria that distinguish
nominal compounds from NPs and from
possessive constructions in Chuxnabán Mixe

Introduction: This presentation
• Chuxnabán Mixe language and data
• Noun phrases & Possessive constructions
• Nominal compounding
• Semantics of compounds and types
• Phonological criteria
• Morphosyntactic criteria
• Summary and Conclusions

Language and Data
• Chuxnabán Mixe
• Mixe-Zoquean language
• Spoken by 900 people in one village in Oaxaca
• Typologically
• Polysynthetic and head-marking
• Inverse alignment system and noun incorporation
• Data
• Personal field work
• Elicitation (words, phrases) & oral narratives

Language and Data
• Mixean-Zoquean language family
• From Wichmann 1995

Language and Data
San Juan Bosco Chuxnabán

Language and Data

Language and Data

Noun Phrases & Possession
• Noun phrases in Chuxnabán Mixe
• Lack any binding morphology
• Consist of personal or demonstrative pronoun,
noun, or noun + modifiers ( ADJ, NUM, DEM )
• Adjectives precede or follow noun with no
change in meaning
(1) tu’uk tsaajptëëjk mutsk / tu’uk mutsk tsaajptëëjk
one church small / one small church
‘one small church’

Noun Phrases & Possession
• Nominal Morphology and Possession
• Optional plural marker for humans -ëch, diminutive
suffix –u’unk, possessive prefixes, locative case suffix
• Possession marked as prefix on the possessed
• 3rd person possessive prefix y- triggers
palatalization of following segment
(2) tëëjk ‘house’
y-tëëjk -> chëëjk ‘his, her house’
u’k y-tëëjk -> u’k chëëjk ‘the dog’s house’

Compounding: Semantics
• Endocentric & often predictable meaning
• nëëj ‘water’ + yuujk ‘animal’ -> nëëjyuujk ‘fish’
• naax ‘earth’ + yuujk ‘animal’ -> naaxyuujk ‘worm’
• uujts ‘plant’ + atsëm ‘pig’
• tsuxk ‘green’ + kat ‘toucan’
->uujtsatsëm ‘ wild boar’
-> tsuxkat ‘type of
• wiin ‘eye’ + waay ‘hair’ -> wiinwaay ‘eyelash’
• yo’k ‘neck’ + paajk ‘bone’
• kaan ‘salt’+ nëëj ‘water’
• këk ‘deep’ + nëëj ‘water’
• They are always right-headed
-> yo’kpaajk ‘Adam’s apple’
-> kaanëëj ‘salt water’
-> këknëëj ‘lagoon’

Compounding: Semantics
• Exocentric & sometimes predictable meaning
• ’ipx ’20’ + teky ‘foot’ -> ’ipxteky ‘centipede’
• teky ‘foot’ + waj ‘horn’ -> tekywaj ‘ankle’
• kë’ë ‘hand’ + kaa ‘lion’ -> kë’ëkaa ‘thumb’
• të’ëny ‘excrement’ + tsik ‘coati’ -> të’ënychik ‘lizard’
• kay ‘food’ + tëëjk ‘house’ -> kaychëëjk ‘stomach’
• naax ‘earth’ + waay ‘hair’ -> naaxwaay ‘dust’
• Coordinate & often predictable meaning
• tun ‘mountain’+ kopk ‘mountain’ -> tunkopk ‘mountain’
• tsuxk ‘green’ + yëk ‘black’ -> tsuxkyëk ‘blue’

Compounding: Semantics
• New concepts as compounds
• iix ‘visible’ + jok ‘smoke’ -> iixjok ‘airplane’
• u’k ‘dog’ + tëëjk ‘house’ -> u’ktëëjk ‘doghouse’
• Compounds with loan words from Spanish
• cerë from Spanish cera ‘wax’
• + pa’ak ‘sweet’ -> cerëpa’ak ‘honey’
• + yuujk ‘animal -> cerëyuujk ‘bee’

Compounding: Phonology
Consontant inventory
Vowel inventory

Compounding: Phonology
• Compounds differ from phrases based on
• Obstruent voicing only within words (Jany 2010)
• nëëkopk ‘fountain’ (nëëj ‘water’ + kopk ‘mountain’)
• kë’ëxooky ‘fingernail’ (kë’ë ‘hand’ + xooky ‘nail’)
But: mëk uky ‘strong purple’ (mëk ‘strong’ + uky ‘purple’)
• Sonorant devoicing only at word boundary (Jany 2010)
• kaajpn ‘village’, But: kaajpnkopk ‘capital’
• Nasal place assimilation only within words (Jany 2010)
• wiimpo’k ‘forehead’ (wiin ‘eye’ + po’k ‘basket’)
But: wiin poop ‘sclera’ (wiin ‘eye’ + poop ‘white’)

Compounding: Phonology
• Compounds differ from phrases based on
• Suprasegmental palatalization only within words
• kachypaajk ‘rib’ (kachy ‘basket’ + paajk ‘bone’)
• kaychaajkn ‘kitchen’ (kay ‘food’ + taajkn ‘place’)
• tsooychëëjk ‘hospital’ (tsooy ‘medicine’ + tëëjk ‘house’)
But: mony joypyp ‘early morning’
(mony ‘early’ + joypyp ‘morning’)
• There is only one primary stress (on the right-most root)
• mëjnëëteech ‘sea’ (mëj ‘big’ + nëëj ‘water’ + teech ‘father’)
• mëja’aychëëjk ‘ancestor’ (mëj ‘big’ + ja’ay ‘person’ + tëëjk
‘house’)

Compounding: Phonology
• Compounds differ from phrases based on
• Occasional consonant elision & syllable reduction
when compared to free forms
• jëxk ‘back’ + paajk ‘bone’ -> jëpaajk ‘spine’
• kë’ë ‘hand’ + waj ‘horn’ -> kë’waj ‘wrist’
• teky ‘foot’ + kaa ‘lion’ -> tekyaa ‘big toe’
• maap ‘sleep’ + taajkn ‘place’ -> maataajkn ‘bedroom’
• Occasional linking vowel (also in Zoque, Herrera 1995)
• teky ‘foot’ + waj ‘horn’ -> tekyüwaj ‘ankle’
• teky ‘foot’ + wa’axy ‘divided’ -> tekyëwa’axy ‘toes’

Compounding: Morphosyntax
• Morphosyntactic clues for compounding
• Formally distinct from nominal possession
• Compounding
tsaajp ‘heaven’ + tëëjk ‘house -> tsaajptëëjk ‘church’
• Nominal possession
taajk ‘policeman’ + tëëjk ‘house ->taajk chëëjk
taajk y-tëëjk
policeman POSS-house
‘policeman’s house’
• Compare
• u’k chëëjk ‘dog’s house’ versus u’ktëëjk ‘doghouse’

Compounding: Morphosyntax
• Phoneme vs. morpheme-induced palatalization
• tsooy ‘medicine’ + tëëjk ‘house’ = tsooychëëjk ‘hospital’
=> if the last consonant of the preceding word is
palatalized, compounding and nominal possession
show the same pattern of palatalization
• Possession: compounds inflected as whole
• poopniij ‘white chilli’
• tsiinka’ax ‘parrot’
-> pyoopniij ‘his white chilli’
-> ntsiinka’ax ‘my parrot’

Compounding: Morphosyntax
• Word order
• Fixed order in compounds, but variable in noun
phrases (Adj + N or N + Adj)
• Compounds versus Noun phrases
• këknëëj ‘lagoon’ vs. nëëj këk ‘deep water’
(këk ‘deep’; nëëj ‘water’)
• tookxtsooy ‘pepper’ vs. tsooy tookx ‘food is medicine’
(tookx ‘food’; tsooy ‘medicine’)

Compounding: Morphosyntax
• Componds with different meaning
• uujtsatsëm ‘wild boar’ vs.
(uujts ‘plant’; atsëm ‘pig’)
• nëtoky ‘iguana’
(nëëj ‘water’; toky ‘rotten’)
• kaatsi’ixy ‘onion’
(kaa ‘lion’; tsi’ixy ‘fart’)
atsëmuujts ‘type of plant’
vs. tokynëëj ‘rotten water’
vs. tsi’ixykaa ‘lion’s fart’
• tëëjkopk ‘roof’ vs. kopktëëjk ‘house in the
(tëëjk ‘house’; kopk ‘mountain’) mountain’

Compounding: Morphosyntax
• Word order: Adjectives before or after compound
• po’owëën ‘leather belt’ (po’o ‘leather’; wëën ‘belt’)
yëk po’owëën or po’owëën yëk ‘black leather belt’,
But not: *po’o yëk wëën
• Sometimes one part can’t stand alone (“cranberry-type”)
• to’oxychëëjk ‘woman’ (to’oxy = female; can’t stand alone)
• ye’eychëëjk ‘man’ (ye’ey = male; can’t stand alone)
• Lexical categories in nominal compounds
• N + N; ADJ + N; NUM + N; N+ V, V + N

Compounding: Productivity
• Morphological productivity: gives rise to new
formations on a systematic basis (Plag 2006)
• Qualitatively: process is widely available and can be
used to produce new words
• Quantitatively: process is being extensively used
• This work: Productivity examined qualitatively
• Aikhenvald (2007): productivity correlates with
• Few (phon, morph, morpho-synt) restrictions
• Semantic predictability

Compounding: Productivity
• Aikhenvald (2007) (con’t)
• Formal regularity
• Synchronic use for new forms
• Recursiveness
• Chuxnaban Mixe
• No restrictions as long as there is semantic need
• Strong semantic predictability (endocentric)
• Regularity: right-headedness
• New concepts, also Spanish loans

Summary and Conclusions
• Compounds distinguished from phrases
• Mainly phonologically, as noun phrases are
morphologically simple
• Morphosyntax: Fixed order and treated as a
whole for inflection
• Further studies
• Mismatches between phonological and
grammatical word (i.e. phonology of separate
words, but fixed word order)

Summary and Conclusions
• Nominal compounding fairly productive
• Used synchronically for new forms
• Some regularity and semantic predictability
• Largest group: endocentric (right-headed)
• No restrictions due to phonological shape
• Some restrictions on modifying compounds
(mëjnëëjteech ‘sea’; mëj ‘large’, nëëj ‘water’, teech’ ‘father’;
can’t say ‘large sea’)

Bibliography
• Aikhenvald, Alexandra. 2007. Typological distinctions in wordformation.
In Timothy Shopen ed. Language typology and syntactic
description: Volume III: Grammatical categories and the lexicon.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 1-65.
• Bauer, Laurie. Compound. 2006. In: Keith Brown ed. Encyclopedia of
Language & Linguistics. Second Edition. Elsevier. 719-726.
• Campbell, Lyle, Terrence Kaufman, Thomas C. Smith-Stark. 1986.
Meso-America as Linguistic Area. Language 62:3. 530-570.
• Downing, Pamela. 1977. On the Creation and Use of English
Compound Nouns. Language 53:4. 810-842.

Bibliography
• Herrera, Z. Esther. 1995. Palabras estratos y
de fonologia léxica en Zoque. El Colegio de México
• Jany, Carmen. 2011. The phonetics and phonology of Chuxnabán
Mixe. Linguistic Discovery 9:1.
• Jany, Carmen. 2010. Assimilatory processes in Chuxnabán Mixe.
Proceedings from the Annual Workshop on Native American Languages.
University of California, Santa Barbara.
• Jany, Carmen. 2006. Vowel Length and Phonation Contrasts in
Chuxnabán Mixe. Proceedings from the Annual Workshop on Native
American Languages. University of California, Santa Barbara.
• Lieber, Rochelle and Pavol Štekauer (eds). 2009. The Oxford
Handbook of Compounding. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Bibliography
• Romero-Méndez, Rodrigo. 2008. A Reference Grammar of Ayutla Mixe
(Tukyo’m Ayuujk). Dissertation. University of Buffalo: New York.
• Ruiz de Bravo Ahuja, Gloria. 1980. Mixe Tlahuitoltepec, Oaxaca.
Archivo de Lenguas Indígenas de México. (Data by Don D. Lyon)
• Schoenhals, Alvin and Louise C. Schoenhals. 1982. Vocabulario Mixe
de Totontepec. Hidalgo, Mexico: Summer Institute of Linguistics.
• Sergio Scalise and Irene Vogel (eds.). 2010. Cross-disciplinary issues
in compounding. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
• Van Haitsma, Julia Dieterman and Willard Van Haitsma. 1976. A
Hierarchical Sketch of Mixe as spoken in San José El Paraíso. No. 44.
Mexico: Summer Institute of Linguistics.

Dios kujuuyëp!
Thank you!