Re: Thoughts on Word building

Henrik wrote:

<<<
> A conlanger could make up "country+love" and "king+country" (or
> reversely "love+country" and "country king", depending how his
> conlang works.) ...
But thes is not derivation, then, do we agree? This as compounding.
(snip)
But these are again compounds. I thought you said we're talking about
derivation here (see the beginning of my paragraph). I'm confused.
Are you saying these are derivation? Or do we agree these are
compounding?
>>>
Are you serious? Where did I write that this is derivation? I thought I already
made this clear in my two previous posts. And actually, who cares if you call
this "compounding" or else when the examples we pick are self-explanatory, that
is, you pick two or more plain words and stick them together instead of using an
affix?

<<<
E.g. let's use 'person' - 'ren2', and compare this to some other
compounds:
ai4-ren2 - lover; spouse bi1-ren2 - threatening
verb + noun verb + noun
Same structure: verb + object, different effect: the first one is the
noun specifying the object, the second is a compound adjective. So
'ren2' does not strictly derive the meaning in a predefined way: it
has to be guessed and is ad-hoc. 'ren2' can be used alone, too, so it
is clearly compounding.
ai4-gou2 - patriotism
verb + noun
Compare this is 'ai4-ren2'. It is also verb + object, and we cannot
say that 'ai4' works in the same way, so 'ai4' is also compounding,
so we cannot classify 'ai4' as a derivational prefix either.
Both 'ren2' and 'gou2' can be used alone and compose ad-hoc meanings
instead of in a well defined way. Both 'ren2' and 'gou2' can also
attach to nouns, so they are not restricted to certain contexts.
nü3-ren2 - woman
wang2-gou2 - kingdom
>>>
I was talking of COMPOUNDS. You are talking of me not talking about compounds.
You make a point in showing that these are mostly ccompounds.

I have to repeat here what I specifically mentionned in my previous post:
The "ambiguity" that you referred to in "ai-koku" and "bei-koku" for instance is
due to the mix of V+O, V+S AND modifier+modified in Sino-Japanese compounds.

Now, if you would like to consider compounds in natlangs with V+O, S+V and
modified+modifier, like Khmer or Indonesian, you will see that these problems
are SOLVED for a great part:

man+fishing = a fisherman
man+love+music = a melomane
bird+black = a blackbird
machine+compute = a computer
compute+data = data computing

Though something warns me that you won't get that one either.

<<<
ad a)
Be aware these are not derivational endings, but form compounds.
So when seeking lists of derivational endings, keep this in mind
and possibly narrow down and clarify usage. And if you really
want bound morphemes, even think of a bound form for each Kanji
used in derivation in your conlang.
>>>
I am very aware that I am not interested in derivation, so I am not seeking a
list of derivational endings, I don't want bound morphemes and I manage my
conlang without derivation.

Oh! And my two posts were about COMPOUNDING. Just in case you would missed that
one again.

<<<
ad b)
I'd say a typical reason could be historical development where
the conlangers engelang demands a systematical grid of atoms or
something.
>>>
"Atomism" in conlanging started when naturalists started describing plants and
animals in treelike diagrams. It is the dream to make a vocabulary  resembling
nature. Personally, I feel that the vocabulary inside my head does not have
much to do with nature and I doubt the idea of hierarchising concepts that way.
I am more on the "white horse" side, so there.

<<<
snip...
Of course, it's a very good source of ideas. I use it myself all the
time when trying to make up vocab. I just say that in general, it is
compounding, not derivation.
>>>
Really? I thought it was about compounding, not derivation.

Reply