A Study On Noun-Noun Compounds In English Neologisms

This thesis attempts to explore the cognitive motivation in the construction of Noun-Noun compounds in English neologisms from the perspective of conceptual integration theory.For those who learn English as a second language, compounds constitute a hurdle hard to clear. English compounds constitute one focus of contemporary linguistic research. The scholars both at home and abroad make researches into them from a wide variety of angles. The previous researches, in large part, are centered upon analysing the modes of formation of compounds and further, upon investigating the syntactic and semantic relations between their constituents. The efforts of past linguistic analysts have vividly laid out the unpredictability and apparently unlimited semantic flexibility of the English compound, without making much progress at revealing cognitive mechanisms for the modeling of that flexibility.Conceptual integration, as a sort of cognitive process, plays a fundamental role in structuring word meaning. Conceptual Integration theory is put forward by Fauconnier and Turner, originating from the accomplishments in contemporary cognitive science and developed on the basis of mental space theory. It focuses specially on conceptual projection as an instrument of on-line work. Its central process is conceptual blending. Despite the fact that blending is fairly easy to find out in some novel cases, it is in large part a routine cognitive process that people tend to take for granted. There exist four basic types of conceptual integration networks: simplex networks, mirror networks, single-scope networks and double-scope networks.The semantics of compound nouns present a clear case for the application of conceptual blending. The processes of meaning construction in compound nouns are well captured by the conceptual integration network. In this thesis the author concentrates on Noun-Noun compounds, the most significant subcategory of compound nouns in English neologisms. Fauconnier and Turner have suggested that Noun-Noun compounds in English can be best accounted for as involving conceptual integration. Each noun evokes a mental space structured by a certain appropriate frame and the blended space contains elements and relations selectively projected from both of the input domains. Accordingly, the meaning of the Noun-Noun compound is a successful blending of the two spaces involved.Bloomfield first puts forward the concepts of"endocentric compounds"and"exocentric compounds". The former can be further divided into subordinate compounds and coordinate compounds. This research reveals that these four types of conceptual integration networks combine to account for the construction of Noun-Noun compounds in English neologisms.In coordinate Noun-Noun compounds, there are two centers and they are of equal syntactic and semantic status. Mirror networks are solely involved in the construction of coordinate Noun-Noun compounds. In the coordinate Noun-Noun compound, the organizing frame of each input space lays emphasis on different aspects of the organizing frame inherent in the blended space.In subordinate Noun-Noun compounds, there is only one head, the head being dominant and the other constituent dependent on it. The construction of subordinate Noun-Noun compounds involves three types of conceptual integration networks, simplex networks, single-scope networks and double-scope networks.In the subordinate Noun-Noun compound constructed in simplex networks, an effective frame is contained in the input space evoked by the head, and some elements in the input space evoked by the constituent dependent on the head. The relevant part of the frame with its roles and the elements as values are projected from the two input spaces respectively. In the blended space, the frame and the elements are integrated in the simplest way. The subordinate Noun-Noun compound constructed in simplex networks does not appear intuitively to have undergone a process of conceptual integration in that the frame in one input is compatible with the elements in the other, no clashes arising between the inputs. As a result, it is the simplest type of subordinate Noun-Noun compound.In the subordinate Noun-Noun compound constructed in single-scope networks, the two constituents, the head and the constituent dependent on the head, construct two input spaces. The meaning of the compound results from the blending of the two input spaces. Two different organizing frames are intrinsic to the two input spaces respectively, only one projected to the blended space and extended there.Source-target metaphors are often involved in subordinate Noun-Noun compounds constructed in single-scope networks. The input space evoked by the head of the Noun-Noun compound is the focus input, or the"target". The input space evoked by the constituent dependent on the head is the framing input, or the"source", providing the organizing frame for the blend. The framing input gives us some insight about the focus input.In the subordinate Noun-Noun compound constructed in double-scope networks, the two input spaces contain their respective organizing frames. The blended space inherits parts of each of these frames, forming an emergent structure of its own. The sharp difference between the two frames leads to rich clashes which pose challenges to the imagination. The resultant blend can be highly creative, which accounts for the novelty of subordinate Noun-Noun compounds constructed in this way.The other type of compound, the exocentric compound, is in opposition to the endocentric compound. There is no apparent head in it. Single-scope networks are solely involved in the construction of exocentric Noun-Noun compounds. Exocentric Noun-Noun compounds bear much resemblance to subordinate Noun-Noun compounds constructed in single-scope networks. In the exocentric Noun-Noun compound, two different organizing frames are contained in the two input spaces respectively, only one projected to the blended space. Source-target metaphors are also involved in the exocentric Noun-Noun compound. The input space constructed by one constituent serves as the framing input or"source"which provides the organizing frame for the blend. The input space constructed by the other constituent serves as the focus input, or"target". What distinguishes the exocentric compound from the subordinate Noun-Noun compound constructed in single-scope networks is that metonymies also play a significant role in its construction apart from metaphors. While metaphors play an important part in the cross-space mapping between the focus space and the framing space, metonymies perform a function within the focus input or"target". Metaphors and metonymies combine to account for the complexity of exocentric Noun-Noun compounds.The combination of conceptual integration theory with Noun-Noun compounds offers us a novel angle both for the study of conceptual integration theory and for the study of compounds. The author hopes that his attempt may be of some value to future lexical study.