Blends deal with the action of abridging and then combining various lexemes to form a new word. However, the process of defining which words are true blends and which are not is more complicated. The difficulty comes in determine which parts of a new word are "recoverable" (its root can be distinguished).[1]
There are many types of blends, based on how they are formed. Algeo, a linguist, proposed dividing blends into three groups[1] :
However, classification of types of blends is not standard among all linguists.
Most blends are formed by one of the following methods:
Ø broccoli (3) + cauliflower (4) → broccoflower (4)
Ø breakfast (2) + lunch (1) → brunch (1)
Ø camera (3) + recorder (3) → camcorder (3)
Ø education (4) + entertainment (4) → edutainment (4)
Ø information (4) + commercial (3) → infomercial (4, exception)
Ø motor (2) + hotel (2) → motel (2)
Ø simultaneous (5) + broadcast (2) → simulcast (3, exception)
Ø smoke (1) + fog (1) → smog (1)
Ø spoon (1) + fork (1) → spork (1)
Ø stagnation (3) + inflation (3) → stagflation (3)
When two words are combined in their entirety, the result is considered a compound word rather than a blend. For example, bagpipe is a compound, not a blend, of bag and pipe.
Blending can also apply to roots rather than words, for instance in Israeli Hebrew. "Israeli דחפור dakhpór ‘bulldozer’ hybridizes (Mishnaic Hebrew>>)Israeli דחפ √dħp ‘push’ and (Biblical Hebrew>>)Israeli חפר √ħpr ‘dig’[...] Israeli שלטוט shiltút ‘zapping, surfing the channels, flipping through the channels’ derives from (i) (Hebrew>)Israeli שלט shalát ‘remote control’, an ellipsis – like English remote (but using the noun instead) – of the (widely known) compound שלט רחוק shalát rakhók – cf. the Academy of the Hebrew Language’s שלט רחק shalát rákhak; and (ii) (Hebrew>)Israeli שטוט shitút ‘wandering, vagrancy’. Israeli שלטוט shiltút was introduced by the Academy of the Hebrew Language in [...] 1996. Synchronically, it might appear to result from reduplication of the final consonant of shalát ‘remote control’. Another example of blending which has also been explained as mere reduplication is Israeli גחלילית gakhlilít ‘fire-fly, glow-fly, Lampyris’. This coinage by Hayyim Nahman Bialik blends (Hebrew>)Israeli גחלת gakhélet ‘burning coal’ with (Hebrew>)Israeli לילה láyla ‘night’. Compare this with the unblended חכלילית khakhlilít ‘(black) redstart, Phœnicurus’ (<<Biblical Hebrew חכליל ‘dull red, reddish’). Synchronically speaking though, most native Israeli-speakers feel that gakhlilít includes a reduplication of the third radical of גחל √għl. This is incidentally how Ernest Klein[2] explains gakhlilít. Since he is attempting to provide etymology, his description might be misleading if one agrees that Hayyim Nahman Bialik had blending in mind."[3]
"There are two possible etymological analyses for Israeli Hebrew כספר kaspár ‘bank clerk, teller’. The first is that it consists of (Hebrew>)Israeli כסף késef ‘money’ and the (International/Hebrew>)Israeli agentive suffix ר- -ár. The second is that it is a quasi-portmanteau word which blends כסף késef ‘money’ and (Hebrew>)Israeli ספר √spr ‘count’. Israeli Hebrew כספר kaspár started as a brand name but soon entered the common language. Even if the second analysis is the correct one, the final syllable ר- -ár apparently facilitated nativization since it was regarded as the Hebrew suffix ר- -år (probably of Persian pedigree), which usually refers to craftsmen and professionals, for instance as in Mendele Mocher Sforim’s coinage סמרטוטר smartutár ‘rag-dealer’."[4]
Blending may occur with an error in lexical selection, the process by which a speaker uses his semantic knowledge to choose words. Lewis Carroll's explanation, which gave rise to the use of 'portmanteau' for such combinations, was:
Humpty Dumpty's theory, of two meanings packed into one word like a portmanteau, seems to me the right explanation for all. For instance, take the two words "fuming" and "furious." Make up your mind that you will say both words ... you will say "frumious."[5]
The errors are based on similarity of meanings, rather than phonological similarities, and the morphemes or phonemes stay in the same position within the syllable[6].
Some languages, like Japanese, encourage the shortening and merging of borrowed foreign words (as in gairaigo), because they are long or difficult to pronounce in the target language. For example, karaoke, a combination of the Japanese word kara (meaning empty) and the clipped form oke of the English loanword "orchestra" (J. ōkesutora オーケストラ), is a Japanese blend that has entered the English language. (From the article gairaigo.)
Many corporate brand names, trademarks, and initiatives, as well as names of corporations and organizations themselves, are blends. For example, Wiktionary, one of Wikipedia's sister projects, is a blend of wiki and dictionary. Also, Nabisco is a blend of the initial syllables of National Biscuit Company.
In linguistics, clipping is the word formation process which consists in the reduction of a word to one of its parts (Marchand:1969). Clipping is also known as "truncation" or "shortening."
According to Marchand (1969), clippings are not coined as words belonging to the standard vocabulary of a language. They originate as terms of a special group like schools, army, police, the medical profession, etc., in the intimacy of a milieu where a hint is sufficient to indicate the whole. For example, exam(ination), math(ematic), and lab(oratory) originated in school slang; spec(ulation) and tick(et = credit) in stock-exchange slang; and vet(eran) and cap(tain) in army slang. While clipping terms of some influential groups can pass into common usage, becoming part of Standard English, clippings of a socially unimportant class or group will remain group slang.
Clipping mainly consists of the following types:
Back clipping or apocopation is the most common type, in which the beginning is retained. The unclipped original may be either a simple or a composite. Examples are: ad (advertisement), cable (cablegram), doc (doctor), exam (examination), fax (facsimile), gas (gasoline), gym (gymnastics, gymnasium), math (mathematics), memo (memorandum), mutt (muttonhead), pub (public house), pop (popular concert), trad (traditional jazz).
Fore-clipping or aphaeresis retains the final part. Examples: chute (parachute), coon (raccoon), gator (alligator), phone (telephone), pike (turnpike), varsity (university).
In middle clipping or syncope, the middle of the word is retained. Examples are: flu (influenza), jams or jammies (pajamas/pyjamas), polly (apollinaris), shrink (head-shrinker), tec (detective).
Clipped forms are also used in compounds. One part of the original compound most often remains intact. Examples are: cablegram (cable telegram), op art (optical art), org-man (organization man), linocut (linoleum cut). Sometimes both halves of a compound are clipped as in navicert (navigation certificate). In these cases it is difficult to know whether the resultant formation should be treated as a clipping or as a blend, for the border between the two types is not always clear. According to Bauer (1983), the easiest way to draw the distinction is to say that those forms which retain compound stress are clipped compounds, whereas those that take simple word stress are not. By this criterion bodbiz, Chicom, Comsymp, Intelsat, midcult, pro-am, sci-fi, and sitcom are all compounds made of clippings.
Subscribed to receive the latest news in your inbox
