Defining and typologizing binominal lexemes

Abstract

This chapter starts by demonstrating the need for the comparative concept ‘binominal lexeme’ in order to cover both ‘noun-noun compounds’ and their ‘functional equivalents’ (§1). To complement this informal definition, four different, but compatible definitions of binominal lexeme are developed: functional, onomasiological, formal and typological (§2). Although couched in a variety of terms based on different theoretical frameworks, these have essentially identical extensions. In §3 a nine-way classification of binominal strategies is presented, together with the mnemonics used throughout this volume: jxt, cmp, der, cls; prp, gen, adj, con, and dbl. These nine types are represented on a two-dimensional grid that captures the number of markers, the locus of marking and the degree of fusion. The grid reveals two lacunae or “missing types”: prn and nml. Whereas the first of these probably exists somewhere in the world’s languages, the second seems to be a logical impossibility. §4 discusses types that are intermediate between the nine main types and the grammaticalization pathways that produce them. It then goes on to examine the relationship between binominal constructions and adnominal possessives, and introduces a new methodology, based on the Pwav scale, for comparing two non-binary constructions. This leads to the formulation of two Greenbergian universals concerning binominals and nominal modification.