Talk:Incorporation (linguistics)

[Untitled]

I'm putting this up here because I saw a link to this page and there was nothing here. My understanding of polysynthesis is very basic, though, so hopefully somebody will fix this up a bit. Ozy 01:07, 2004 Aug 10 (UTC)

I'd be interested in keeping this page but then creating a new page specifically for noun incorporation. NI is much better documented than other types of incorporation and there seems to be confusion on other pages as to what constitutes canonical NI. Any opinions on this? Straughn 17:50, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

I think that until there's enough material to warrant two separate articles, it makes sense to keep it all together. Noun incorporation redirects here already, so it can be discussed here until the article gets too big. Angr (talk) 15:05, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

I removed a link to a paper of mine (that I didn't put here) because it's outdated and I don't really believe it anymore. Here's a link to a current paper of mine:

http://www.chass.utoronto.ca/~mbarrie/Barrie2006Dissertation.pdf

although this is far from a definitive source on the subject. There are more general references that I believe should be used instead.

I just re-read the article, and the paper in question is cited as a source for the data used in the article. Of course, then, it needs to remain.

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Incorporation (linguistics). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140620224327/http://www.linguistics.ucsb.edu/faculty/mithun/pdfs/2009%20Polysynthesis%20in%20the%20Arctic.PDF to http://www.linguistics.ucsb.edu/faculty/mithun/pdfs/2009%20Polysynthesis%20in%20the%20Arctic.PDF

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:00, 12 November 2017 (UTC)

Proposed Changes: Expansion of "the syntax of noun incorporation"

Hello,

I want to thank everyone who has worked on this page before and let you all know of a couple of changes that we will be making to this page in the coming weeks. My group members and myself are enrolled in a 300 level syntax course and are doing a final project on noun incorporation. We plan to add to the “syntax of noun incorporation” section of this page by adding further explanations, examples, and syntax trees. We will also be adding further subsections to the “syntax of noun incorporation” section on the languages “English,” “Mohawk,” “Yucatec Mayan”, and “Frisian.” This may involve incorporating some information from the original individual language wikipedia pages into these subsections.

We are open to any suggestions you may have and Thank you again for your work thus far! — Preceding unsigned comment added by NEbbutt (talk • contribs) 20:10, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

Is there as source for this statement "If a language participates in productive compounding it does not allow for incorporation. An example of a compounding language is German. Respectively, if a language participates in incorporation it does not allow for productive compounding." 2600:1700:E450:3A30:3F40:F1:5F5F:64C2 (talk) 19:04, 25 February 2023 (UTC)

I also found this statement dubious, many Native American, such as in Central America (most Mayan languages and Nahuatl dialects) allow both extensive incorporation and compounding. 94.109.35.225 (talk) 12:36, 2 May 2023 (UTC)

Questions and suggestion

The current text contains:

”If a language participates in productive compounding it does not allow for incorporation. An example of a compounding language is German.”

What exactly is meant here: verb compounding, or alternatively any compounding?; productive incorporation, or alternatively any incorporation at all?

NL (Dutch) has noun compounding in such everyday words as:

• ziektekostenverzekeringsmaatschappij = ziekte (illness) + kosten (costs) + verzekering (insurance) + s (“connector”) + maatschappij (company) = health insurance company;

• handschoenen = hand (hand) + schoenen (shoes) = gloves;

• wetenschapsjournalist = wetenschap (science) + journalist (journalist) = science reporter.

And there are also verbs with incorporated nouns:

• NL “stofzuigen” = “stof” (dust) + “zuigen” (to suck) = to vacuum [Ik stofzuig de kamer. = I vacuum the room.; note that the transitivity of the verb “zuigen” carries over to the similarly transitive verb “stofzuigen”.]

• NL “raadplegen” = “raad” (council) + “plegen” (commit, carry out) = to consult

DE (German) similarly has:

• DE “staubsaugen” = “staub” (dust) + “saugen” (to suck) = to vacuum

Whether noun incorporation in NL (and/or DE) is productive, I do not know.Redav (talk) 13:56, 5 October 2023 (UTC)