Compound stress assignment by analogy: the constituent family bias

Compound or phrase? Analogy in naming

“…Krott, 2009). A predominant influence of the modifier constituent has also been found for English for novel compound interpretation by Gagné and Shoben (1997) and Gagné (2001) and for assigning compound stress (Plag, 2010).…”

“…A similar influence of the constituent family has also been found for the choice of linking elements in Krott et al (2001Krott et al ( , 2002bKrott et al ( , 2007 and for assigning compound stress in English (cf. Plag, 2006;Plag et al, 2007;Plag, 2010;Arndt-Lappe, 2011) as well as for the interpretation of English N+N compounds (cf. Gagné and Shoben, 1997;Gagné , 2001).…”

“…Similarly, studies on the stress assignment in English noun-noun compounds by Plag (2006), Plag et al (2007), Plag (2010), and Arndt-Lappe (2011) show that analogy is a strong predictor that may overrule other factors such as argument structure or semantics. Constituent families have also been demonstrated to play an important role for compound interpretation (Gagné and Shoben, 1997;Gagné , 2001) in that the interpretation of lexicalized compounds (or, more precisely, the interpretation of the semantic relations associated with a particular constituent) heavily influences the interpretation of new compounds sharing that constituent.…”

Prominence in Triconstituent Compounds: Pitch Contours and Linguistic Theory

“…Previous studies have shown that there is a host of right-prominent NN constructions, and their frequency has been estimated to be roughly 30 percent of all NN constructions (cf. Bell & Plag, 2012;Kunter, 2011;Plag, 2010;Sproat, 1994). Kösling and Plag (2009) propose that the violations at the N-level arise due to this presence of embedded right-prominent NN compounds: for example, science fiction shocker has prominence on the second constituent because the complex left constituent consists of the right-prominent science fiction; the same assumption is also put forward by Giegerich (2009).…”

“…Kösling & Plag, 2009). Another such factor in compound prominence assignment is analogy (e.g., Arndt-Lappe, 2011;Liberman & Sproat, 1992;Plag, 2006Plag, , 2010Schmerling, 1971;Spencer, 2003). Compounds that share the same left or right constituent tend to have the same prominence pattern.…”