

Grammar


Tenses


Present

Present Simple

Present Continuous

Present Perfect

Present Perfect Continuous


Past

Past Simple

Past Continuous

Past Perfect

Past Perfect Continuous


Future

Future Simple

Future Continuous

Future Perfect

Future Perfect Continuous


Parts Of Speech


Nouns

Countable and uncountable nouns

Verbal nouns

Singular and Plural nouns

Proper nouns

Nouns gender

Nouns definition

Concrete nouns

Abstract nouns

Common nouns

Collective nouns

Definition Of Nouns

Animate and Inanimate nouns

Nouns


Verbs

Stative and dynamic verbs

Finite and nonfinite verbs

To be verbs

Transitive and intransitive verbs

Auxiliary verbs

Modal verbs

Regular and irregular verbs

Action verbs

Verbs


Adverbs

Relative adverbs

Interrogative adverbs

Adverbs of time

Adverbs of place

Adverbs of reason

Adverbs of quantity

Adverbs of manner

Adverbs of frequency

Adverbs of affirmation

Adverbs


Adjectives

Quantitative adjective

Proper adjective

Possessive adjective

Numeral adjective

Interrogative adjective

Distributive adjective

Descriptive adjective

Demonstrative adjective


Pronouns

Subject pronoun

Relative pronoun

Reflexive pronoun

Reciprocal pronoun

Possessive pronoun

Personal pronoun

Interrogative pronoun

Indefinite pronoun

Emphatic pronoun

Distributive pronoun

Demonstrative pronoun

Pronouns


Pre Position


Preposition by function

Time preposition

Reason preposition

Possession preposition

Place preposition

Phrases preposition

Origin preposition

Measure preposition

Direction preposition

Contrast preposition

Agent preposition


Preposition by construction

Simple preposition

Phrase preposition

Double preposition

Compound preposition

prepositions


Conjunctions

Subordinating conjunction

Correlative conjunction

Coordinating conjunction

Conjunctive adverbs

conjunctions


Interjections

Express calling interjection

Phrases

Sentences


Grammar Rules

Passive and Active

Preference

Requests and offers

wishes

Be used to

Some and any

Could have done

Describing people

Giving advices

Possession

Comparative and superlative

Giving Reason

Making Suggestions

Apologizing

Forming questions

Since and for

Directions

Obligation

Adverbials

invitation

Articles

Imaginary condition

Zero conditional

First conditional

Second conditional

Third conditional

Reported speech

Demonstratives

Determiners


Linguistics

Phonetics

Phonology

Linguistics fields

Syntax

Morphology

Semantics

pragmatics

History

Writing

Grammar

Phonetics and Phonology

Semiotics


Reading Comprehension

Elementary

Intermediate

Advanced


Teaching Methods

Teaching Strategies

Assessment
Trochees preferred
المؤلف:
Ingo Plag
المصدر:
Morphological Productivity
الجزء والصفحة:
P183-C6
2025-02-06
754
Trochees preferred
Let us now deal with the fact that -ize attaches overwhelmingly to prosodically left-headed words. There is a whole class of forms that in Raffelsiefen's account are treated as exceptional, namely those derivatives formed on the basis of words with ultimate primary stress, and monosyllables. What the iambic derivatives show is that IDENT-HEAD must be ranked higher than * CLASH-HEAD, because they never shift the main stress to a preceding syllable. Consider for example banálìze:

With monosyllabic bases, a violation of * CLASH-HEAD seems inevitable, because such derivatives cannot be improved by stem allomorphy (cf. Márxìze). The violation of these highly ranked constraints makes the at tested derivatives highly marked and therefore dispreferred -ize words. In our corpus of 284 20th century neologisms only the following forms are attested: banálìze, cyclize (trisyllabic pronunciation is preferred), Czechize, ecize, Maoize (again, trisyllabic pronunciation is preferred), Marxize, quantize, routìnìze.
In Raffelsiefen's model, derivatives involving primary stressed immediately before -ize are completely ruled out by the M-PARSE constraint, because this constraint is ranked lower than * CLASH. Hence, the optimal candidate is one in which the affix is not attached at all, which, according to Raffelsiefen, leads to a lexical gap. I propose a different reason for the near-absence of iambic or monosyllabic base words with -ize, namely the competition with -ify. The present model therefore dismisses M-PARSE as a necessary constraint for -ize derivatives.
There are only four derivatives in the neologism corpus that could possibly be classified as stress-shifted, i.e. as violators of IDENT-HEAD: bácterize (bactéria), lyóphilìze (lýophìle/lýophil), multímerìze (múltimer) and phagocýtìze (phágocỳte). However, bácterize could well be argued to be coined on the basis of the bound stem bacter-, which would naturally account for the existence and the prosodic structure of the attested cadidate. If bactéria (instead of bacter-) were the base, we would expect bactériìze as optimal.1 Forms such as bácteroid show that there is a bound stem allomorph bacter- available and forms such as bactèriólogy indicate the general possibility of schwa deletion (with the main stress of the base form surviving as a secondary stress). The form multímerìze is only considered as a minor variant in the OED, whereas the non-stress-shifted múltimerìze is presented as the standard pronunciation (also with the participles listed). This bears witness to the exceptionality of the stress-shifted form.
The remaining two forms (phagocýtìze and lyóphilìze) should be treated as exceptions. However, it is remarkable that both forms share their unusual stress patterns with other derived forms of their word families. Thus, in lyóphilìze the secondary stress of lyòphilizátion surfaces as main stress. This suggests that it might be a back-formation from the nomen actionis. The aberrant stress pattern of the -ize derivative makes the verb more similar to the nominalization than to the underived base word, and this may be exactly what the coiners and users aim at. Hence the nomen actionis is the output form with which stress correspondence is established. Evidence for this claim can be gleaned from the dates of the first citations of the forms as given in the OED. Thus lyóphilìze is first attested in the same text as the corresponding nomen actionis, respectively.
With the base word phágocỳte, we would predict the candidate phágoc[i]tìze to be optimal. Notably, this candidate is also cited in the OED in its participial form (phágocytìzed), with a primary stress on the first syllable. Thus there are in fact two competing forms attested, one of which is in accordance with the predictions of our model. Furthermore, a converted form to phágocỳte is attested with the same meaning, which might also be interpreted as indicative of the oddity of phagocýtìze. But again, the stress shift is reminiscent of other derived forms such as phagocýtai and phagocýtòse.
1 Perhaps for orthographic reasons (unusual clash of two <i> s) !bacteriize is avoided in written language.
الاكثر قراءة في Morphology
اخر الاخبار
اخبار العتبة العباسية المقدسة
الآخبار الصحية

قسم الشؤون الفكرية يصدر كتاباً يوثق تاريخ السدانة في العتبة العباسية المقدسة
"المهمة".. إصدار قصصي يوثّق القصص الفائزة في مسابقة فتوى الدفاع المقدسة للقصة القصيرة
(نوافذ).. إصدار أدبي يوثق القصص الفائزة في مسابقة الإمام العسكري (عليه السلام)