Id | Segment | Tagger | CU |
1 | Comparison of methods of derivation from prefixes and suffixes in Basque, Catalan and Spanish: lexicographic conclusions | A1 | |
2 |
The purpose of this paper is to set forth some of the results of research by working groups at the above universities over the last three years. | A1 | |
3 | This study is part of the project titled Configuración morfológica y estructura argumental: léxico y diccionario, subsidised by the Spanish Education Ministry and based on a three-viewpoint approach. | A1 | |
4 | Firstly, derivation processes based on prefixes and suffixes have been analysed in all three languages, with special emphasis on those cases in which the basis for derivation is a verb and those in which the derivative is a verb. | A1 | |
5 | Two substantial differences have been found: one is between prefixes and suffixes within Basque and the other is between Basque derivatives and those of romance origin. | A1 | |
6 | Secondly, a theoretical exposition of these two differences has been sought and found. | A1 | |
7 | Thirdly, we have attempted to consolidate the contribution of this theoretical exposition to the field of lexicography. | A1 | |
8 | This paper aims to bring together the theoretical exposition and our lexicographic conclusions. | A1 | |
9 |
The differences which must be dealt with in any theoretical exposition are: | A1 | |
10 | a) the scarcity of prefixes in Basque as compared to the abundance of suffixes; | A1 | |
11 | and b) the fact that this imbalance is not shared by the romance languages. | A1 | |
12 | Our hypothesis is that a syntactic characteristic of Basque and the romance languages is extrapolated to their morphology, | A1 | |
13 | so that in Basque derivations the core of the structure is on the right, | A1 | |
14 | while in the romance languages it is on the left. | A1 | |
15 | To make this easier to understand, remember that prefixes in romance languages may act in two ways: as modifiers of a core, located on the left (refer/rehacer, desfer/deshacer, predir/predecir) or as the core, coming first with a complement on their right (eslomar-se/deslomarse, desfullar/deshojar). | A1 | |
16 | In the former case the prefix provides specificity for the core | A1 | |
17 | (the derivative predecir is a more specific version of the core decir, but to say before is, after all, still to say). | A1 | |
18 | In the latter case, the core is made up of the prefix itself, | A1 | |
19 | and the core is the basis of the derivation, | A1 | |
20 | so that prehistoria is not a more specific version of the basic complement historia but something different altogether. | A1 | |
21 | It can be seen in two ways that Basque has only the first form. | A1 | |
22 | First of all, it has the prefix des-, which has both possibilities, as in the case of the romance languages. In the derivative desegin it acts as a modifier of the basic core egin (the antonym of do), | A1 | |
23 | but when we seek an example of the prefix/core complement type (deshojar), desostatu, | A1 | |
24 | we find that it is not properly formed. | A1 | |
25 | Observe that the prefixes ber-/bir ''re' and ez- 'in-/des-'also act in the same way. | A1 | |
26 |
As regards lexicographic conclusions, the first point which must be stressed in this paper is the difficulty found in forming words such as desostatu. | A1 | |
27 | Secondly, we must make it clear that the prefix-core/base-complement of the romance languages and English has a corresponding feature in Basque in base-complement/suffix-core. | A1 | |
28 | This is an important contribution to modern lexicography. | A1 | |
29 | Beyond formations of the des1 hoja2 r ??hosto2 gabe1 tu type we must bear in mind the option hostoak2 galdu/kendu1 but especially the forms pozoin-du (en-venenar), bigun-du (re-blancederse), lerro-ka-tu (a-linear), irin-ez-ta-tu (enharinar), lur-rera-tu (a-terrizar), which should be standardised as the common correspondents of the prefixes a-, des-, en-, es-, in- and re- | A1 | |
30 | so that more and better resources are made available. | A1 | |