Normality and Normalcy: A Case of -ITY/-CY Doublets in the BNCC
Abstract
Corpus-based research into derivational morphology can explain how affixes function, answer questions about their productivity and its relation to their synonymy, and clarify the rivalry between certain affixes and their semantic distinction. The aim of this research is to establish the similarities and differences between the nouns normality and normalcy by contrasting the suffixes -ity and -cy they contain in the British National Corpus (BNC). The focus is on the collocates which precede the nouns and the sources in which they appear. The attempt is also to understand what characterises the suffixes and their distribution. By focusing on normality and normalcy, we examine how lexical items behave in an electronically-stored corpus and whether a strong connection between meaning and form manifests itself in different word patterns highlighting different aspects of meaning.
References
Adams, V. (2001). Complex Words in English. New York: Routledge.
Baeskow, H. (2012). -Ness and -ity: Phonological Exponents of n or Meaningful Nominalizers of Different Adjectival Domains? Journal of English Linguistics 40(1), 6–40.
Bauer, L. (1983). English Word-formation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Carter, R. & McCarthy, M. (2006). Cambridge grammar of English. A comprehensive guide. Spoken and written English. Grammar and usage. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Davies, M. (2004-). British National Corpus (from Oxford University Press). Available online at: https://www.english-corpora.org/bnc/
Hunston, S. & Francis, G. (1996). Pattern Grammar. A Corpus-Driven Approach to the Lexical Grammar of English. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Co.
Jevrić, T. (2017). “Medical Men” and “Mad Women” ‒ A Study into the Frequency of Words through Collocations. [sic] – časopis za književnost, kulturu i književno prevođenje 2 (9). Retrieved from https: //www.sic-journal.org/ArticleView.aspx?aid=466.
Jevrić, T. (2019a). A Corpus Study of Derivational Morphology ‒ Prefixes un- and non- in the BNC. Reči, 12, 26–38.
Jevrić, T. (2019b). An Analysis of Frequent Adjectival Collocates of Lemmas MOTHER and FATHER and Their Cultural Implications. In N. Bakić-Mirić, et al. (Eds.), Current Topics in Language and Literature: An International Perspective. 106–122.Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.
Lindquist, H. (2009). Corpus linguistics and the description of English. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.
Pearce, M. (2008). Investigating the Collocational Behaviour of MAN and WOMAN in the BNC Using Sketch Engine. Corpora, 3 (1), 1–29.
Plag, I. (1999). Morphological Productivity. Structural Constraints in English Derivation. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.
Plag, I. (2003). Word-formation in English. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Plag, I. (2006).Productivity. In K. Brown (Ed.), Encycopedia of Language and Linguistics (2nd ed., Vol. 10, pp. 121-128). Boston: Elsevier Science.
Rainer, F. (2016). Blocking. In M. Aronoff (Ed.), Oxford Research Encyclopedias: Linguistics. New York: Oxford University Press.
Riddle, E. (1985). A Historical Perspective on the Productivity of the Suffixes -ness and -ity. In J. Fisiak, (Ed.), Historical Semantics, Historical Word-Formation (pp. 435–461). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Romaine, S. (1985).Variability in Word Formation Patterns and Productivity in the History of English. In J. Fisiak (Ed.), Papers from the 6th International Conference on Historical Linguistics, (pp. 451–465). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Stefanowitsch, A. & Gries, S. T. (2009).Corpora and Grammar. In A. Lüdeling & M. Kytö (Eds.), Corpus Linguistics. An International Handbook (Vol. 2, pp. 933–952). Berlin: Walter de Gruyter GmbH & Co.
Zimmer, B. (2020). How Normalcy Went From Misnomer to Safe Word. The Atlantic. Retrieved from https://www.theatlantic.com/culture/archive/2020/04/how-normalcy-became-a-safe-word/609805/.
The details about the publication policy, including copyright and licensing, are available at: