Word meaning combination two words

Within
the domain of syntax two levels should be distinguished: that of
phrases and that of sentences.

The
phrase can generally be defined as a combination of two or more words
which is a grammatical unit but is not an analytical form of some
word. The constituent elements of a phrase may belong to any part of
speech. A word-combination can also be defined as a compound
nominative unit of speech which is semantically global and
articulated.

The
difference between a phrase and a sentence is a fundamental one. A
phrase is a means of naming some phenomena or processes, just as a
word is. Each component of a phrase can undergo grammatical changes
while a sentence is a unit with every word having its definite form.
A change in the form of one or more words would produce a new
sentence.

Grammar
has to study the
aspects of phrases which spring from the grammatical peculiarities of
the words making up the phrase, and of the syntactical functions
of the phrase as a whole, while lexicology has to deal with the
lexical meaning of the words and their semantic groupings. For
example from
the grammatical point of view the two phrases
read
letters and
invite
friends are
identical (the
same pattern verb +
noun
indicating the object of the
action).

Phrases
can be divided according
to their function in the sentence into:

(1)
those
which
perform the function of one or more parts of the sentence (predicate,
or predicate and object, or predicate and adverbial
modifier, etc.)

(2)
those
which do not perform any such function
but whose function is equivalent to that of a preposition, or
conjunction, and which are equivalents
of those parts of speech.

1.3. Syntagmatic Connections of Words.

Words
in an utterance form various syntagmatic connections with one
another:

1. syntagmatic
   groupings of notional words alone,

Such
groups (notional phrases) have self-dependent nominative destination,
they denote complex phenomena and their properties (semi-predicative
combinations): a
sudden trembling; a soul in pain; hurrying along the stream;
strangely familiar; so sure of their aims.

1. syntagmatic
   groupings of notional words with functional words,

Such
combinations (formative phrases) are equivalent to separate words by
their nominative function: with
difficulty; must finish; but a moment; and Jimmy; too cold; so
unexpectedly.
They are contextually dependent (synsemantism).

1. syntagmatic
   groupings of functional words alone.

They
are analogous to separate functional words and are used as connectors
and specifiers of notional elements:
from out of; up to; so that; such as; must be able; don’t let’s.

Combinations
of notional
words
fall into two mutually opposite types:

1)
combinations of words related to one another on an equal rank
(equipotent
combinations)

2)
combinations of words which are syntactically unequal (dominational
combinations)

Equipotent
connection
is realised with the help of conjunctions (syndetically), or without
the help of conjunctions (asyndetically):
prose and poetry; came and went; on the beach or in the water; quick
but not careless; —
no
sun, no moon; playing, chatting, laughing; silent, immovable, gloomy;
Mary’s, not John’s.

The
constituents of such combinations form coordinative consecutive
connections.

Alongside
of these, there exist equipotent connections of a non-consecutive
type. In such combinations a sequential element is unequal to the
foregoing element in its character of nomination connections is
classed as (cumulative connections): agreed,
but reluctantly; satisfied, or nearly so.

Dominational
connection
is effected in such a way that one of the constituents of the
combination is principal (dominating/headword) and the other is
subordinate (dominated/adjunct, adjunct-word, expansion).

Dominational
connection can be both consecutive
and cumulative:
a
careful observer; an observer, seemingly careful; definitely out of
the point;
out
of the point, definitely; will be helpful in any case will be
helpful;
at
least, in some cases.

The
two basic types of dominational connection are:

1. bilateral
   (reciprocal, two-way) domination (in predicative connection of
   words);

2. monolateral
   (one-way) domination (in completive connection of words).

The
predicative connection
of words, uniting the subject and the predicate, builds up the basis
of the sentence. The nature of this connections is reciprocal (the
subject dominates the predicate and vice versa).

Such
word combinations are divided into:

1. complete
   predicative combinations (the subject + the finite verb-predicate);

2. incomplete
   predicative/semi-predicative/potentially-predicative combinations (a
   non-finite verbal form + a substantive element): for
   the pupil to understand his mistake; the pupil’s understanding his
   mistake;
   the
   pupil understanding his mistake.

Monolateral
domination is considered as subordinative since the syntactic status
of the whole combination is determined by the head-word:
a nervous wreck. astonishingly beautiful.

The
completive connections fall into two main divisions:

1. objective
   connections

2. qualifying
   connections.

Objective
connections
reflect the relation of the object to the process. By their form
these connections are subdivided into:

1. non-prepositional;

2. prepositional.

From
the semantico-syntactic point of view they are classed as:

1. direct
   (the immediate transition of the action to the object);

2. indirect
   or oblique (the indirect relation of the object to the process).

Direct
objective connections are non-prepositional, the preposition serving
as an intermediary of combining words by its functional nature.
Indirect objective connections may be both prepositional and
non-prepositional.

Further
subdivision of objective connections is realised on the basis of
subcategorising the elements of objective combinations, and first of
all the verbs; thus, we recognise objects of immediate action, of
perception, of speaking, etc.

Qualifying
completive connections
are divided into

1. attributive
   (an
   enormous appetite; an emerald ring; a woman of strong character, the
   case for the prosecution);

They
unite a substance with its attribute expressed by an adjective or a
noun.

1. adverbial:

   1. primary
      (the verb + its adverbial modifiers):
      to talk glibly, to come nowhere; to receive (a letter) with
      surprise; to throw (one’s arms) round a person’s neck; etc

   2. secondary
      (the non-verbal headword expressing a quality + its adverbial
      modifiers):
      marvellously becoming; very much at ease; strikingly alike; no
      longer oppressive; unpleasantly querulous; etc.

Completive
noun combinations are directly related to whole sentences
(predicative combinations of words): The
arrival of the train → The train arrived. The baked potatoes →
The potatoes are baked. The gifted pupil → The pupil has a gift.

Completive
combinations of adjectives and adverbs (adjective-phrases and
adverb-phrases) are indirectly related to predicative constructions:
utterly
neglected — utter neglect — The neglect is utter; very carefully
— great carefulness — The carefulness is great; speechlessly
reproachful — speechless reproach
— The reproach is speechless.

Соседние файлы в предмете [НЕСОРТИРОВАННОЕ]

• #
• #
• #
• #
• #
• #
• #
• #
• #
• #
• #

Learn More With These Definitions and Examples

Updated on February 05, 2020

A word blend is formed by combining two separate words with different meanings to form a new one. These words are often created to describe a new invention or phenomenon that combines the definitions or traits of two existing things. 

Word Blends and Their Parts

Word blends are also known as portmanteau (pronunciation port-MAN-toe), a French word meaning «trunk» or «suitcase.» Author Lewis Carroll is credited with coining this term in «Through the Looking-Glass,» published in 1871. In that book, Humpty Dumpty tells Alice about making up new words from parts of existing ones:

«You see it’s like a portmanteau—there are two meanings packed up into one word.»

There are different ways of creating word blends. One way is to combine portions of two other words to make a new one. These word fragments are called morphemes, the smallest units of meaning in a language. The word «camcorder,» for example,» combines parts of «camera» and «recorder.» Word blends can also be created by joining a full word with a portion of another word (called a splinter). For example, the word «motorcade» combines «motor» plus a portion of «cavalcade.»

Word blends can also be formed by overlapping or combining phonemes, which are parts of two words that sound alike. One example of an overlapping word blend is «Spanglish,» which is an informal mix of spoken English and Spanish. Blends can also be formed through the omission of phonemes. Geographers sometimes refer to «Eurasia,» the landmass that combines Europe and Asia. This blend is formed by taking the first syllable of «Europe» and adding it to the word «Asia.»

The Blend Trend

English is a dynamic language that is constantly evolving. Many of the words in the English language are derived from ancient Latin and Greek or from other European languages such as German or French. But starting in the 20th century, blended words began to emerge to describe new technologies or cultural phenomena. For instance, as dining out became more popular, many restaurants began serving a new weekend meal in the late morning. It was too late for breakfast and too early for lunch, so someone decided to make a new word that described a meal that was a little bit of both. Thus, «brunch» was born.

As new inventions changed the way people lived and worked, the practice of combining parts of words to make new ones became popular. In the 1920s, as traveling by car became more common, a new kind of hotel that catered to drivers emerged. These «motor hotels» quickly proliferated and became known as «motels.» In 1994, when a rail tunnel beneath the English Channel opened, connecting France and Great Britain, it quickly became known as the «Chunnel,» a word blend of «Channel» and «tunnel.»

New word blends are being created all the time as cultural and technological trends emerge. In 2018, Merriam-Webster added the word «mansplaining» to their dictionary. This blended word, which combines «man» and «explaining,» was coined to describe the habit that some men have of explaining things in a condescending manner.  

Examples

Here are some examples of word blends and their roots:

Blended word	Root word 1	Root word 2
agitprop	agitation	propaganda
bash	bat	mash
biopic	biography	picture
Breathalyzer	breath	analyzer
clash	clap	crash
docudrama	documentary	drama
electrocute	electricity	execute
emoticon	emotion	icon
fanzine	fan	magazine
frenemy	friend	enemy
Globish	global	English
infotainment	information	entertainment
moped	motor	pedal
pulsar	pulse	quasar
sitcom	situation	comedy
sportscast	sports	broadcast
staycation	stay	vacation
telegenic	television	photogenic
workaholic	work	alcoholic

Tip: See my list of the Most Common Mistakes in English. It will teach you how to avoid mis­takes with com­mas, pre­pos­i­tions, ir­reg­u­lar verbs, and much more.

English speakers are very creative when it comes to making up new words by combining parts of words that already exist. For example, most people know that “brunch” is a combination of “breakfast” and “lunch”, but did you know that “smog” comes from “smoke” and “fog”?

There are lots and lots of such words in English, many more than in other European languages. One of the reasons for that is, of course, that English has many more speakers than other European languages (with the exception of Spanish), so there are more people who can potentially create a catchy new word.

Nevertheless, I believe that the main reason is much more pragmatic. English is a fairly analytic language, which in linguistic jargon refers to a language that, simply put, conveys the function of a word using word order and things like prepositions rather than endings and prefixes. Words in English are thought of as isolated units, whereas words in other European languages often carry additional information, and it is much easier to merge two isolated units than to merge two words carrying a lot of additional information, some of which would inevitably be lost during merging.

But enough of that theoretical nonsense. Let’s take a look at actual examples of such words in English.

English portmanteaus

A portmanteau is a type of blend word in which the beginning of one word is combined with the final part of another word. For example, it may surprise you that the word “bit” used in computing (as in “megabit”) is a portmanteau of ”binary” and “digit” (its development was probably influenced by the fact that “bit” already was an English word meaning a small amount of something). Sometimes the two parts may overlap, e.g. “smash”, which is composed of “smack” and “mash” with “ma” connecting the two parts.

Let’s take a look at some of the most common portmanteaus in English that are more or less accepted (note that the list excludes brand and product names, which are often based on a portmanteau):

alphanumeric = alphabetic + numeric
advertorial = advertisement +‎ editorial
bit = binary + digit (only in computing)
brainiac = brain + maniac
breathalyzer = breath + analyzer
Brexit = Britain + exit
brunch = breakfast + lunch
camcorder = camera + recorder
dumbfound = dumb (mute) + confound
electrocute = electro- + execute
email = electronic + mail
emoticon = emotion + icon
endorphin = endogenous + morphine
fanzine = fan + magazine
forex = foreign + exchange
guesstimate = guess + estimate
infomercial = information + commercial
keytar = keyboard + guitar
labradoodle = labrador + poodle
mechatronics = mechanics +‎ electronics
metrosexual = metropolitan +‎ heterosexual
moped = motor + pedals (borrowed from Swedish)
motel = motor + hotel
napalm = naphthenic + palmitic
Oxbridge = Oxford + Cambridge (used in the UK to refer collectively to the University of Oxford and the University of Cambridge)
newscast = news + broadcast
paratrooper = parachute + troop + -er
phablet = phone + tablet
pulsar = pulsating + star
sexting = sex + texting
sheeple = sheep + people
smash = smack +‎ mash
smog = smoke + fog
Spanglish = Spanish + English
televangelist = television + evangelist
transistor = transconductance or transfer + resistor
vlog = video + blog (itself a shortening of web + log)
vitamin = vital + amine (introduced by a Polish biochemist when it was thought that all vitamins contained an amino acid)
webinar = web + seminar
workaholic = work + -a- + alcoholic

There is also an archaic word “cameleopard”, composed of “camel” and “leopard”, which means “giraffe”. If you are interested in the history of that word (and of the word “giraffe”), you can read my article about them.

Blend words combining the beginnings of two words

Another type of blend words, which are less common than portmanteaus in English, is formed by taking the first part of one word, the first part of another word, and merging them into one word. Here are the most common such words:

Amerind = American + Indian (referring to native Americans)
botox = botulism + toxin
cyborg = cybernetic + organism
cosplay = costume + play
hazmat = hazardeous + mataterial
modem = modulator + demodulator
sitcom = situation + comedy

Use the image

You can use the image on another website, provided that you link to the source article. If you share it on Twitter or Facebook, I kindly ask you to tag my profile @JakubMarian.

If you share it on reddit, please, share a link to the whole article and give credit to my subreddit r/JakubMarian in the comments.

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is about word-formation. For a method of teaching how to read, see synthetic phonics.

In linguistics, a blend (sometimes called blend word, lexical blend, portmanteau, or portmanteau word) is a word formed from parts of two or more other words. At least one of these parts is not a morph (the realization of a morpheme) but instead a mere splinter, a fragment that is normally meaningless. In the words of Valerie Adams:

In words such as motel, boatel and Lorry-Tel, hotel is represented by various shorter substitutes – ‑otel, ‑tel, or ‑el – which I shall call splinters. Words containing splinters I shall call blends.^{[1][n 1]}

Classification[edit]

Blends of two or more words may be classified from each of three viewpoints: morphotactic, morphonological, and morphosemantic.^[2]

Morphotactic classification[edit]

Blends may be classified morphotactically into two kinds: total and partial.^[2]

Total blends[edit]

In a total blend, each of the words creating the blend is reduced to a mere splinter.^[2] Some linguists limit blends to these (perhaps with additional conditions): for example, Ingo Plag considers «proper blends» to be total blends that semantically are coordinate, the remainder being «shortened compounds».^[3]

Commonly for English blends, the beginning of one word is followed by the end of another:

• boom + hoist → boost ^{[n 2]}
• breakfast + lunch → brunch ^{[n 2]}

Much less commonly in English, the beginning of one word may be followed by the beginning of another:

• teleprinter + exchange → telex ^{[n 2]}
• American + Indian → Amerind ^{[n 2]}

Some linguists do not regard beginning+beginning concatenations as blends, instead calling them complex clippings,^[4] clipping compounds^[5] or clipped compounds.^[6]

Unusually in English, the end of one word may be followed by the end of another:

• Red Bull + margarita → bullgarita ^{[n 2]}
• Hello Kitty + delicious → kittylicious ^{[n 2]}

A splinter of one word may replace part of another, as in three coined by Lewis Carroll in «Jabberwocky»:

• chuckle + snort → chortle ^{[n 2]}
• flimsy + miserable → mimsy
• slimy + lithe → slithy ^{[n 2]}

They are sometimes termed intercalative blends; these words are among the original «portmanteaus» for which this meaning of the word was created. ^[7]

Partial blends[edit]

In a partial blend, one entire word is concatenated with a splinter from another.^[2] Some linguists do not recognize these as blends.^[8]

An entire word may be followed by a splinter:

• dumb + confound → dumbfound ^{[n 2]}
• fan + magazine → fanzine ^{[n 3]}

A splinter may be followed by an entire word:

• Brad + Angelina → Brangelina ^{[n 2]}
• American + Indian → Amerindian ^{[n 2]}

An entire word may replace part of another:

• adorable + dork → adorkable ^{[n 2]}
• disgusting + gross → disgrossting ^{[n 2]}

These have also been called sandwich words,^[9] and classed among intercalative blends.^[7]

(When two words are combined in their entirety, the result is considered a compound word rather than a blend. For example, bagpipe is a compound, not a blend, of bag and pipe.)

Morphonological classification[edit]

Morphonologically, blends fall into two kinds: overlapping and non-overlapping.^[2]

Overlapping blends[edit]

Overlapping blends are those for which the ingredients’ consonants, vowels or even syllables overlap to some extent. The overlap can be of different kinds.^[2] These are also called haplologic blends.^[10]

There may be an overlap that is both phonological and orthographic, but with no other shortening:

• anecdote + dotage → anecdotage ^{[n 2]}
• pal + alimony → palimony ^{[n 2]}

The overlap may be both phonological and orthographic, and with some additional shortening to at least one of the ingredients:

• California + fornication → Californication ^{[n 4]}
• picture + dictionary → pictionary ^{[n 2]}

Such an overlap may be discontinuous:

• politician + pollution → pollutician ^{[n 5]}
• beef + buffalo → beefalo ^{[n 2]}

These are also termed imperfect blends.^[11][12]

It can occur with three components:

• camisade + cannibalism + ballistics → camibalistics ^{[n 6]}
• meander + Neanderthal + tale → meandertale ^{[n 6]}

The phonological overlap need not also be orthographic:

• back + acronym → backronym ^{[n 2]}
• war + orgasm → wargasm ^{[n 2]}

If the phonological but non-orthographic overlap encompasses the whole of the shorter ingredient, as in

• sin + cinema → sinema ^{[n 2]}
• sham + champagne → shampagne ^{[n 2]}

then the effect depends on orthography alone. (They are also called orthographic blends.^[13])

An orthographic overlap need not also be phonological:

• smoke + fog → smog ^{[n 2]}
• binary + unit → bit ^{[n 2]}

For some linguists, an overlap is a condition for a blend.^[14]

Non-overlapping blends[edit]

Non-overlapping blends (also called substitution blends) have no overlap, whether phonological or orthographic:

• California + Mexico → Calexico ^{[n 2]}
• beautiful + delicious → beaulicious ^{[n 4]}

Morphosemantic classification[edit]

Morphosemantically, blends fall into two kinds: attributive and coordinate.^[2]

Attributive blends[edit]

Attributive blends (also called syntactic or telescope blends) are those in which one of the ingredients is the head and the other is attributive. A porta-light is a portable light, not a ‘light-emitting’ or light portability; light is the head. A snobject is a snobbery-satisfying object and not an objective or other kind of snob; object is the head.^[2]

As is also true for (conventional, non-blend) attributive compounds (among which bathroom, for example, is a kind of room, not a kind of bath), the attributive blends of English are mostly head-final and mostly endocentric. As an example of an exocentric attributive blend, Fruitopia may metaphorically take the buyer to a fruity utopia (and not a utopian fruit); however, it is not a utopia but a drink.

Coordinate blends[edit]

Coordinate blends (also called associative or portmanteau blends) combine two words having equal status, and have two heads. Thus brunch is neither a breakfasty lunch nor a lunchtime breakfast but instead some hybrid of breakfast and lunch; Oxbridge is equally Oxford and Cambridge universities. This too parallels (conventional, non-blend) compounds: an actor–director is equally an actor and a director.^[2]

Two kinds of coordinate blends are particularly conspicuous: those that combine (near‑) synonyms:

• gigantic + enormous → ginormous
• insinuation + innuendo → insinuendo

and those that combine (near‑) opposites:

• transmitter + receiver → transceiver
• friend + enemy → frenemy

Blending of two roots[edit]

Blending can also apply to roots rather than words, for instance in Israeli Hebrew:

• רמזור ramzor ‘traffic light’ combines רמז √rmz ‘hint’ and אור or ‘light’.
• מגדלור migdalor ‘lighthouse’ combines מגדל migdal ‘tower’ and אור or ‘light’.
• Israeli דחפור dakhpór ‘bulldozer’ hybridizes (Mishnaic Hebrew>) Israeli דחפ √dħp ‘push’ and (Biblical Hebrew>) Israeli חפר √ħpr ‘dig'[…]
• Israeli שלטוט shiltút ‘zapping, surfing the channels, flipping through the channels’ derives from
  • (i) (Hebrew>) Israeli שלט shalát ‘remote control’, an ellipsis – like English remote (but using the noun instead) – of the (widely known) compound שלט רחוק shalát rakhók – cf. the Academy of the Hebrew Language’s שלט רחק shalát rákhak; and
  • (ii) (Hebrew>) Israeli שטוט shitút ‘wandering, vagrancy’. Israeli שלטוט shiltút was introduced by the Academy of the Hebrew Language in […] 1996. Synchronically, it might appear to result from reduplication of the final consonant of shalát ‘remote control’.
• Another example of blending which has also been explained as mere reduplication is Israeli גחלילית gakhlilít ‘fire-fly, glow-fly, Lampyris‘. This coinage by Hayyim Nahman Bialik blends (Hebrew>) Israeli גחלת gakhélet ‘burning coal’ with (Hebrew>) Israeli לילה láyla ‘night’. Compare this with the unblended חכלילית khakhlilít ‘(black) redstart, Phœnicurus’ (<Biblical Hebrew חכליל ‘dull red, reddish’). Synchronically speaking though, most native Israeli-speakers feel that gakhlilít includes a reduplication of the third radical of גחל √għl. This is incidentally how Ernest Klein^[15] explains gakhlilít. Since he is attempting to provide etymology, his description might be misleading if one agrees that Hayyim Nahman Bialik had blending in mind.»^[16]

«There are two possible etymological analyses for Israeli Hebrew כספר kaspár ‘bank clerk, teller’. The first is that it consists of (Hebrew>) Israeli כסף késef ‘money’ and the (International/Hebrew>) Israeli agentive suffix ר- -ár. The second is that it is a quasi-portmanteau word which blends כסף késef ‘money’ and (Hebrew>) Israeli ספר √spr ‘count’. Israeli Hebrew כספר kaspár started as a brand name but soon entered the common language. Even if the second analysis is the correct one, the final syllable ר- -ár apparently facilitated nativization since it was regarded as the Hebrew suffix ר- -år (probably of Persian pedigree), which usually refers to craftsmen and professionals, for instance as in Mendele Mocher Sforim’s coinage סמרטוטר smartutár ‘rag-dealer’.»^[17]

Lexical selection[edit]

Blending may occur with an error in lexical selection, the process by which a speaker uses his semantic knowledge to choose words. Lewis Carroll’s explanation, which gave rise to the use of ‘portmanteau’ for such combinations, was:

Humpty Dumpty’s theory, of two meanings packed into one word like a portmanteau, seems to me the right explanation for all. For instance, take the two words «fuming» and «furious.» Make up your mind that you will say both words … you will say «frumious.»^[18]

The errors are based on similarity of meanings, rather than phonological similarities, and the morphemes or phonemes stay in the same position within the syllable.^[19]

Use[edit]

Some languages, like Japanese, encourage the shortening and merging of borrowed foreign words (as in gairaigo), because they are long or difficult to pronounce in the target language. For example, karaoke, a combination of the Japanese word kara (meaning empty) and the clipped form oke of the English loanword «orchestra» (J. ōkesutora オーケストラ), is a Japanese blend that has entered the English language. The Vietnamese language also encourages blend words formed from Sino-Vietnamese vocabulary. For example, the term Việt Cộng is derived from the first syllables of «Việt Nam» (Vietnam) and «Cộng sản» (communist).

Many corporate brand names, trademarks, and initiatives, as well as names of corporations and organizations themselves, are blends. For example, Wiktionary, one of Wikipedia’s sister projects, is a blend of wiki and dictionary.

See also[edit]

• Acronym and initialism
• Amalgamation (names)
• Clipping (morphology)
• Conceptual blending
• Hybrid word
• List of blend words
• Phonestheme
• Phono-semantic matching
• Syllabic abbreviation
• Wiktionary category:English blends

Notes[edit]

References[edit]

External links[edit]