Information AboutBack-formation |
| CATEGORIES ABOUT BACK-FORMATION | |
| linguistic morphology | |
| word coinage | |
|
The simplest case is when a longer form of a word pair predates what would usually be the basic form. For example, the noun ''resurrection'' was borrowed from Latin, and the verb ''resurrect'' was then derived from it. We expect the suffix ''-ion'' to be added to a verb to create a noun; when as in this case the suffix is removed from the noun to create the verb, this is a back-formation. Back formation becomes a kind of Folk Etymology when it rests on an erroneous understanding of the morphology of the longer word. For example, the singular noun ''asset'' is a back-formation from the plural ''assets''. However, ''assets'' is originally not a plural; it is a loan-word from Anglo-Norman ''asetz''. The ''-s'' was erroneously taken to be a plural inflection. Many words came into English by this route: ''Pease'' was once a Mass Noun but was reinterpreted as a Plural , leading to the back-formation ''pea''; the noun ''statistic'' was likewise a back-formation from the field of study ''statistics''. In Britain the word ''burgle'' came into use in the 19th century as a back-formation from ''burglar'' (in America ''burglarize'' is used). Even though many English words are formed this way, new coinages may sound strange, and are often used for humorous effect. For example, ''gruntled'' or ''pervious'' (from ''disgruntled'' and ''impervious'') would be considered mistakes today, and used only in humorous contexts. The comedian George Gobel regularly used original back-formations in his humorous monologues. Bill Bryson mused that the English language would be richer if we could call a tidy-haired person ''shevelled'' - as an opposite to ''dishevelled''. Frequently back-formations begin in colloquial use and only gradually become accepted. For example, ''burger'' (and ''beefburger'', ''cheeseburger'', etc., from '' Hamburger '') is in common use today though it would have been considered awkward or colloquial as late as the 1940s; and ''enthuse'' (from ''enthusiasm'') is gaining popularity, though it is still considered substandard by some today. Back-formations of borrowed terms generally do not follow the rules of the original language. For example ''Homo sapiens'' is Latin for ''thinking man''. As with all Linnaean species names, this is singular in Latin (plural would be ''homines sapientes'') but it is generally treated as plural in English, with the corresponding singular back-formation ''Homo sapien''. Similarly ''antipodes'', borrowed from Greek via Latin, has the apparent form of a plural noun, and is treated as such, with ''antipode'' taken to mean "an antipodal point". The final ''podes'' is indeed plural, meaning ''feet'', and the corresponding singular would be transliterated as ''pous'' (foot). However ''antipodes'' itself is a compound of ''anti-'' (opposite) and ''podes'' (feet). As such, it is arguably not a plural noun at all, and the singular ''antipous'', if it existed at all, would mean "opposite the foot." Some regard such divergence as incorrect, or as a mark of ignorance. Others assert that a language is determined by its usage and that strictly applying such a principle of correctness would render English a highly irregular blend of Anglo-Saxon, Latin, French and every other language from which it had ever borrowed. MORE EXAMPLES OF BACK-FORMATION
SEE ALSO |
|
|