Browsing by Author "Spruiell, William Craig"

Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Perspectives on nominalization
    (1990) Spruiell, William Craig; Davis, Philip W.
    Discussion of nominalization (NZN) is possible only within a general theory of grammatical categories and processes. For a cross-linguistic analysis, it is preferable to adopt a function-based definition of categories, in which nominals are considered arguments of predications and verbals as predications. In such a view, nouns are lexical items specialized for nominal usage. NZNs may be divided into four types: Act(ion), Participant, Adverbial, and Expression. Participant NZNs are a superset of Argument NZNs, while Expression NZNs are hypostases. Nominalization processes may be considered in terms of formation strategies and differentiation strategies. Formation of NZNs may be accomplished by a number of methods. An overt marker may be used (direct encoding strategy), or the mechanisms used for forming complex modifiers may be used with generic heads to form 'names for things' (modification strategy). Transfer nominalization may be considered an additional strategy, although transfer in the framework used represents occurrence of a dual-class form and is not strictly nominalization. Differentiation of NZNs may also be accomplished via direct encoding. However, a number of other differentiation strategies exist, including the use of voice and aspect markers and noun classifiers. Typically, Participant NZNs in a given language will represent conflations of participant roles kept separate in main clause morphosyntax; these conflations follow identifiable trends. In a study of 58 languages, it was found that Instrumental NZNs significantly correlate with Agentives, and Factives with Act (ion) NZNs. The Agentive/Instrumental and Act(ion)/Factive groupings remain separate from each other. Comparison of languages in the sample also shows that certain marking categories, such as voice, appear to be related to nominalization in general. That is, transitivity downshifters are associated with nominalization while upshifters are not. The factors underlying this association are related to those involved in the formation of object concepts in child language. The nominal concept develops from the object concept, and inherits a number of prototype characteristics from it without being, in adult language, directly isomorphic to it. This relationship accounts for a number of the observed characteristics of nominalizations.