Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
This contribution investigates English and German affixoids and their Italian equivalents from a morphotactic, morphosemantic, and morphopragmatic perspective, particularly in the context of verbal aggression. The suffixoid in the pattern bomb+proof , and the German prefixoid in intensifying expressive adjective compounds of the type blut+arm (with two main accents) ‘intensely poor, lit. blood+poor’ or sau+dumm ‘intensely dumb, lit. sow+dumb’, are examined. Affixoids (both suffixoids, such as + proof , and prefixoids, such as G. blut +) are transitional between compound constituents and derivational affixes (prefixes or suffixes), and thus part of transitional morphology, i.e. they are intermediate between different sub-components of word-formation. The issues investigated include the productivity and profitability of the units studied (cf. Bauer, 2001 ), their relative degree of morphosemantic transparency/opacity, their positive or negative connotations, the degrees of morphological richness of the different patterns, and whether the affixoid constructions refer to humans, animates, or inanimates. A combination of quantitative and qualitative analyses of data drawn from the literature and from large electronic corpora will demonstrate the pragmatic effects of these morphological processes and their preferred co-texts. A contrastive analysis with Italian morphosemantic equivalents will reveal how the three languages differ due to typological factors.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Mattiello et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: