Understanding Splinter Words in English Grammar

In  the branch of linguistics known as morphology, a splinter is defined as a fragment of a word used in the formation of new words. Examples of splinters include  -tarian  and -terian (from vegetarian, as in the coinages eggitarian,  fisheterian, and meatatarian)  and -holic (shopaholic, chocoholic, textaholic, foodaholic). The splinter is formally identical to a clipping, but whereas clippings function as full words, splinters do not (Concise Encyclopedia of Semantics, 2009). The morphological term splinter was  coined by linguist J.M. Berman in Contribution on Blending in  Zeitschrift fà ¼r Anglistik und Amerikanistik, 1961. Examples and Observations English has lots of splinters, among them tastic, as in funktastic or fishtastic, which is used to form mostly ironic words meaning excellent or great in reference to X, originally from fantastic, or licious, as in bagelicious or bootielicious, which is used to form words meaning appealing in reference to X, originally from the word delicious. The difference between a splinter and a true suffix is that speakers understand splinters  in relation to the original word from which the ending splits off. If these bits survive and continue to give rise to new forms, though, they might someday be real suffixes!(Rochelle Lieber,  Introducing Morphology, 2nd ed. Cambridge University Press, 2016)Blends, unlike regular compounds, are . . . based on analogy rather than on rules. For instance, the occurrence of the splinter -licious (from delicious) in beaulicious and bootylicious has attracted some new coinages: e.g. Girlicious (a musical lady trio), Kittylicious (referring to Hello Kitty mov ies), and Lehrers (2007) jocular blendalicious.(Elisa Mattiello, Extra-Grammatical Morphology in English: Abbreviations, Blends, Reduplicatives, and Related  Phenomena. Walter de Gruyter, 2013)What Happens to SplintersSplinters arise through the process of blending . . .. Thus, -nomics in Thatchernomics is a splinter, recurring in Reaganomics, Rogernomics, Nixonomics, etc.Splinters may have any one of three possible fates. They may disappear. I suspect that this is what has happened to -teria (a splinter from cafeteria which had a brief flourishing in words like washeteria but now seem to have become unavailable). They may become productive affixes. This appears to be what has happened with -nomics, cited above, although it is of very low productivity. They may become independent words. This is what has happened to burger, originally a reanalysis from hamburger which shows up in beefburger and cheeseburger.Since splinters may turn into affixes or words, we appear to have a situati on where it is not clear whether new forms using the splinter will be derivatives or compounds. The -scape which emerged from landscape might be a case in point, though the Oxford English Dictionary lists so many instances of its being used independently that there can be little doubt as to its status as a word now. On the other hand, if we believe the Oxford English Dictionary, -cade (from cavalcade into motorcade) has become an affix.(Laurie Bauer, The Borderline Between Derivation and Compounding, in Morphology and Its Demarcations, ed. by Wolfgang U. Dressler. John Benjamins, 2005)Splinters in Blends[Blends] may be composed of two elements called splinters (ballute from balloon and parachute), or only one element is a splinter and the other element is a full word (escalift from escalator and lift, needcessity from need and necessity). . . . A special punning effect is achieved when one constituent echoes in some way the word or word-fragment it replaces, for example, foolosopher echoing philosopher, or fakesimile, echoing facsimile.(Pavol Ã…  tekauer, English Word-Formation: A History of Research, 1960-1995. Narr, 2000)

Essay How to Give American Students a Billingual Education

Imagine what Christopher Columbus first said when stepping on American soil. Perhaps he said: â€Å"This land holds great promise.† Whatever he said the more fascinating question to ponder centers around what language did he speak, for Christopher Columbus, a multi-linguist, knew Italian, Spanish, and Portuguese. So what happened to the diversity of languages in this land of promise? Many foreigners contribute to the melting pot of America, bringing their culture and language, yet American schools continue to teach just one language in today’s society. The heated debate among parents, educators, and politicians over a multilingual education in the United States began in the late nineteenth century. Over the next sixty years many crucial†¦show more content†¦Government geared support for bilingual education in the 1970s, almost ruling bilingual education as a requirement by President Carter; nevertheless, President Reagan turned the country against bilingual ed ucation by undoing President Carter’s proposal, cutting bilingual education funds, and enacting English-Only Laws in more states over the course of the 1980s (Jost 1039) . Despite the lingering criticism from the 1980s, President Clinton reenacts the bilingual education law in 1994; however, President George W. Bush’s No Child Left Behind Act, which requires all students to meet standards otherwise schools will receive penalties, negates the bilingual education law (Jost 1039). Since 1998, many states have passed loopholes bypassing the teaching of another language similar to California’s Proposition 227 stating the specific teaching method of English immersion, when students only receive instruction in English, for English language learners. Yet, other states like Utah and Minnesota have discovered the advantages and benefits of two-way bilingual immersion. Over these decades, the federal financial plays as the major culprit to the fluctuating support for bilin gual education. Although the Total Spending Government Spending graphs, which includes Federal, State, and Local spending, from 1960 to 1990 demonstrate the increasing amount spent on education, the percentage of total money spent on education wavers from

Etymology of Auspicious free essay sample

And fortune play upon thy prosperous helm As thy auspicious mistress. (ODE 792) Auspicious is a word that means ominous, favorable, and favored by fortune. The word auspicious originated in the fourteenth century and its original definition was the observation of birds for the purpose of obtaining omens. At first auspicious was previously Just defined as omens, and omens used to be regarded as negative.Eventually the word transformed to mean favorable omens, and then the word was just defined as favorable. (DEEDED) The word usually has, for the most part a positive connotation. Many people use this word to wish others well and success on endeavors. Many writers use auspicious in different ways, by implying different meanings. In 1879, Rosettes used the definition ominous when she used auspicious in Seek and Find, saying The aspect of Jubilant auspicious angels. This implies that he angels are of good omen and that the angels are probably bringing good fate to someone. We will write a custom essay sample on Etymology of Auspicious or any similar topic specifically for you Do Not WasteYour Time HIRE WRITER Only 13.90 / page This is in line with the general idea, with angels bringing good news, hope, and other positive ideas associated with these heavenly beings. In 1804, Sourwood used the definition prosperous in The Dispatches of the Duke of Wellington, saying We have reposed for five auspicious years under the shadow of your protection. This implies that the people have prospered under the protection of the Duke ofWellington, which suggests the greatness of the Duke In his peoples eyes, and the effectiveness of his rule. (ODE 792) The Intriguing word auspicious has been adapted by many poets to fit their needs but one of the most Interesting ways It has been used Is by Tentacle In their poem The Night Is Auspicious. The night Is auspicious. No trace of the usual specters/ The shadows dance VICIOUS; Rising from rich black nectars Ive murdered so many/ But only by night can my sins be undone.

Sociology Functionalism and Symbolic Interaction free essay sample

The key features, similarities and differences of Functionalism and Symbolic Interaction. Sociologists analyse social phenomena at different levels and from different perspectives. From concrete interpretations to sweeping generalizations of society and social behaviour, sociologists study everything from specific events, the micro level of analysis of small social patterns, to the big picture, the macro level of analysis of large social patterns. Sociologists today employ three primary theoretical perspectives: the symbolic interactions perspective, the functionalist perspective, and the conflict perspective. These perspectives offer sociologists theoretical paradigms for explaining how society influences people, and vice versa. Each perspective uniquely conceptualizes society, social forces, and human behaviour. This essay will focus on two of the three perspectives: on the functionalism and the symbolic interaction perspective. Functionalism is a macro structural theory that studies sociology as a whole. It sees society as a system with inter-related structures working together to meet the needs of society. We will write a custom essay sample on Sociology Functionalism and Symbolic Interaction or any similar topic specifically for you Do Not WasteYour Time HIRE WRITER Only 13.90 / page Functionalism focuses on an individual’s role within society and, more specifically, on the institutions which make up that society. The father of functionalism is Emile Durkheim who focused on social facts, social structures, cultural norms, and values, all of which he argued are external to the individual. Social facts as a key feature are referring to concept; expectations that come not from individual responses and preferences but from society which socializes each of its members. The purpose of social fact is that it coerces an individual to think, act and behave in a manner that is not what they would naturally for example they develop knowledge through institutions such as the political system, education system , family, religion, economy and the legal system. Furthermore individual behaviour is constrained by language: while we know language internally we are constrained still by it, so there is a different way to communicate according to gender, age, profession, social class or region. Another social fact is suicide. According to Durkheim’ people have a certain level of attachment to their groups, which he calls social integration. Abnormally high or low levels of social integration may result in increased suicide rates; low levels have  this effect because low social integration results in disorganized society, causing people to turn to suicide as a last resort, while high levels cause people to kill themselves to avoid becoming burdens on society’ (Durkheim, Suicide, 1897 in Sociology Guide) Durkheim explores the differing suicide rates among Protestants and Catholics, explaining that stronger social control among Catholics results in lower suicide rates. Functionalises argue that there is a value consensus within social systems and believe that without a collective consensuses of shared values and beliefs, achieving social order is impossible and social order is crucial for the well-being of society. According to functionalise, value consensus forms the basic integrating principle in society. As a result if members of society have shared values they consequently have similar identities which helps them to cooperate and avoid conflict. Children learn roles from their family. By this the son is expected to take the role/job of his father as the daughter is expected to cook and clean same as her mother. The role taking of the family is created to socialise the new members and teaches them the norms and values essential to the social life and to functioning together to make society work as a whole. The churchs role according to the functionalist plays a major role in holding society together by giving the members agreed values and beliefs with blessedness and through rituals. Value consensus also suggests that people have shared goals, roles and norms. Norms can be described as specific guidelines of appropriate behaviour, for example queuing when buying things. ‘Social rules or norms reflect Durkheim’s social facts in that govern individual behaviour’ (Nisbet, 1976). Although these regulations are often coercive and include various forms of social controls like punishment, sanctions, social approval or social disapproval, they are also generally agreed by society. According to this theory this is because individuals realise that this is for their benefit and for the benefits of the whole society. Another example would be how in the UK society most people agree that clothes should be worn in public. Functionalism demonstrates how social structures direct human behaviour and how the major institutions, such as religion, economy and education work together to make a society stable and functioning. Symbolic interaction it is a micro perspective action theory. It focuses attention on the way people interact through symbols like words, gestures, rules and roles. According to this theory an understanding of human conduct requires study of covert behaviour as human being are active in shaping their behaviour; they are humanized by interaction with other people and their interactions are carried on through the symbols and their meanings. One of the key features in the symbolic interaction is symbols and labels, which simply means that we can make one thing represent another. Symbolic interaction proposes that people have an idea about a subject even without seeing it. For example, when individual are asked to draw a table they immediately have a similar picture of a table in their mind. This symbolic system must be shared to work, in fact it is essential for everybody in the society to agree on what the word for ‘table’ should be. Different countries and cultures have a different symbolic language to name the same things. The ability to symbolise things around us open up huge possibilities for social behaviour and interaction. Everybody is unique and individual so to communicate with each other people use symbols in language. Humans are born with the ability to learn language and once they absorb it they can interact with the society, it enables them to have a discussion, share their thoughts and opinions. Self-concept is another key feature of symbolic interaction which proposes that when people interact they interpret the meanings and intentions of other people. For example if a person observes another smiling, crying, waving, or shaking a first they will put themselves in that person’s position in order to interpret the intention and meaning. On the basis of this interpretation they will decide their appropriate response. ‘Mead understood that human communication involves seeing yourself from other people’s point of view. How, for example, do you interpret your mother’s smile? Does it mean â€Å"I love you†, I find you humorous†, or something else entirely?. According to Mead, you can find the answer by using your imagination to take your mother’s point of view for a moment and see yourself as see you. In other words, you must see yourself objectively as a â€Å"me† to understand your mother’s communication act’ ( Brym, Lie, 2009) Mead goes on to argue that without this ability to be aware of the ‘self’ people could not direct action or respond to the action of others. According to this view thought is an inner conversation with the self. By becoming ‘self-conscious’ people can direct their own actions thoughts and deliberations. This sense of self allows individuals to be able to cooperate with each other by being aware of what is expected of them. In this way individuals initiate and direct their own action while at the same time being influenced by the actions and expectations of others. These are two of the three major perspectives on sociology. Each of them understands society and social phenomena in a very different way. Functionalism looks at the large structures in the society at a macro level, while symbolic interactions is a micro-level analysis which looks at the way in which individuals act within society. According to the functionalist perspective, everything in a society has a role that is necessary for the functioning of the society. This means that even poverty and economic inequality, for example, play an important role in keeping our society stable. Symbolic interactions do not ask about such ‘big picture’ questions such as why poverty persists, instead it looks at how individuals act. It proposes that people attach meanings to various things that they see as symbols in our society. They then act in ways that accord with the meaning that they attribute to those symbols. For example, ‘why would young people smoke cigarettes even when all objective medical evidence points to the dangers of doing so? The answer is in the definition of the situation that people create. Studies find that teenagers are well informed about the risks of tobacco, but they also think that smoking is cool, that they themselves will be safe from harm, and that smoking projects a positive image to their peers.