Workshop Convenors

Lívia Körtvélyessy, P. J. Šafárik University in Košice, Slovakia

Pavol Štekauer, P. J. Šafárik University in Košice, Slovakia

Salvador Valera, University of Granada, Spain      

Workshop Idea

Atypicality in word-formation refers to processes that deviate from productive or widely accepted processes. Traditional classifications, such as Marchand (1960/1969), distinguish between grammatical syntagmas (e.g., compounding, affixation, back-formation) and other processes like blending or clipping. Later, Lieber (2004) proposed a productivity-based distinction between major and minor processes, though the rising frequency of blends and clippings challenges this framework.

Natural Morphology (Mayerthaler 1981; Dressler 2005) takes a cognitive approach, defining natural processes as simple, iconic, and universally accessible. From this perspective, concatenative morphology (affixation, compounding) is natural and typical, while non-concatenative morphology (e.g., internal modification, back-formation) is atypical. Scholars, however, differ on which processes fall under the non-concatenative label: Szymanek (1988) mentions, among others, reduplication and internal modification, while The Oxford Handbook of Derivation adds templatic, subtractive, augmentative, and autosegmental processes.

Štekauer, Valera & Körtvélyessy (2012) question some classifications, noting that reduplication aligns with the principle of constructional iconicity, while blending is more akin to compounding than to non-concatenative processes. Such debates highlight theoretical inconsistencies in defining atypical morphology.

The proposed workshop will address these challenges by exploring the typology, productivity, and theoretical treatment of non-concatenative processes, as well as their roles in psycholinguistic and sociolinguistic contexts. Documentation across languages and regions remains fragmented, and unlike concatenative morphology, no comprehensive handbook exists for non-concatenative word-formation.

The workshop aims to spark broader discussion and research into this underexplored area of morphology, acknowledging that while it cannot resolve all gaps, it can serve as an important catalyst for future work.