Hostname: page-component-74656f9884-2dmjx Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-11T02:43:21.602Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

When Nouns Surface as Verbs

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 March 2026

Eve V. Clark  and
Herbert H. Clark
Eve V. Clark
Affiliation:
Stanford University
Herbert H. Clark
Affiliation:
Stanford University
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

People readily create and understand denominal verbs they have never heard before, as in to porch a newspaper and to Houdini one's way out of a closet. The meanings are best accounted for by a theory of interpretation that specifies what the verbs mean on particular occasions of their use. Our proposal is that their use is regulated by a convention: in using such a verb, the speaker means to denote the kind of state, event, or process that, he has good reason to believe, the listener can readily and uniquely compute on this occasion, on the basis of their mutual knowledge, in such a way that the parent noun (e.g. porch or Houdini) denotes one role in the state, event, or process, and the remaining surface arguments of the denominal verb denote others of its roles. This convention accounts for the meaning and acceptability of innovative verbs in various contexts; similar conventions may be needed to account for other innovative uses of language.

Information

Type
Research Article
Information
Language , Volume 55 , Issue 4 , December 1979 , pp. 767 - 811
Copyright
Copyright © 1979 by Linguistic Society of America

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Adams, Valerie. 1973. An introduction to Modern English word-formation. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Bar-Hillel, Yehoshua. 1954. Indexical expressions. Mind 63. 359–79.Google Scholar
Berlin, Brent, Breedlove, D. E.; and Raven, P. H. 1968. Covert categories and folk taxonomies. American Anthropologist 70. 290–99.Google Scholar
Berlin, Brent, Breedlove, D. E.; and Raven, P. H. 1973. General principles of classification and nomenclature in folk biology. American Anthropologist 75. 214–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bolinger, Dwight. 1975. Aspects of language (2nd ed.) New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.Google Scholar
Bolinger, Dwight. 1976. Meaning and memory. Forum Linguisticum 1. 1–14.Google Scholar
Bolinger, Dwight. 1977. Meaning and form. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Brown, Cecil H. 1976. General principles of human anatomical partonomy and speculations on the growth of partonomic nomenclature. American Ethnologist 3. 400–424.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brown, Cecil H., et al. 1976. Some general principles of biological and non-biological folk classification. American Ethnologist 3. 73–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chomsky, Noam. 1970. Remarks on nominalization. Readings in English transformational grammar, ed. by Jacobs, Roderick A. & Rosenbaum, Peter S., 184–221. Waltham, MA: Ginn.Google Scholar
Clark, Eve V. 1978. Discovering what words can do. Papers from the Parasession on the Lexicon, 34–57. Chicago: CLS.Google Scholar
Clark, Eve V. MS. The young word-maker: a case study of innovation in the child's lexicon. To appear in Conference Proceedings on Language Acquisition: The state of the art, ed. by Lila R. Gleitman and Eric Wanner.Google Scholar
Clark, Herbert H. 1978. Inferring what is meant. Studies in the perception of language, ed. by Levelt, Willem J. M. & Flores d'Arcais, G. B., 295–322. London: Wiley.Google Scholar
Clark, Herbert H., and Haviland, S. E. 1977. Comprehension and the given-new contract. Discourse production and comprehension, ed. by Freedle, Roy O., 1–40. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.Google Scholar
Clark, Herbert H., and Marshall, C. 1978. Reference diaries. Theoretical issues in natural language processing, II, ed. by Waltz, David L., 57–63. New York: Association for Computing Machinery.Google Scholar
Clark, Herbert H., and Marshall, C. MS. Definite reference and mutual knowledge. To appear in Linguistic structure and discourse Setting, ed. by Arvind K. Joshi & B. Webber. Cambridge: University Press.Google Scholar
Comrie, Bernard 1976. Aspect. Cambridge: University Press.Google Scholar
Cruse, David. A. 1977. The pragmatics of lexical specificity. Journal of Linguistics 13. 153–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Downing, Pamela. 1977. On the creation and use of English compound nouns. Lg. 53.810–42.Google Scholar
Fillmore, Charles J. 1968. The case for case. Universals of linguistic theory, ed. by Bach, Emmon and Harms, Robert T., 1–88. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.Google Scholar
Fillmore, Charles J. 1971. Some problems for case grammar. Linguistic developments of the sixties—Viewpoints for the seventies, ed. by O'Brien, Richard J. Monograph Series on Languages and Linguistics, Georgetown University, 24. 35–56.Google Scholar
Gleitman, Lila R., and Gleitman, Henry. 1970. Phrase and paraphrase: some innovative uses of language. New York: Norton.Google Scholar
Green, Georgia M. 1974. Semantics and syntactic regularity. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
Grice, H. P. 1975. Logic and conversation. Syntax and semantics, III: Speech acts, ed. by Cole, Peter & Morgan, J. L., 41–58. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Gruber, Jeffrey S. 1976. Lexical structures in syntax and semantics. (Lexical structures in syntax and semantics) Amsterdam: North-Holland.Google Scholar
Hampton, James A. 1976. An experimental study of concepts in language. University of London dissertation.Google Scholar
Hirtle, W. H. 1970. -ED adjectives like ‘verandahed’ and ‘blue-eyed’. Journal of Linguistics 6. 19–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hudson, Richard A. 1975. Problems in the analysis of -ed adjectives. Journal of Linguistics 11. 69–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jespersen, Otto. 1942. A modern English grammar on historical principles, VI: Morphology. Copenhagen: Munksgaard.Google Scholar
Katz, Jerrold J. 1972. Semantic theory. New York: Harper & Row.Google Scholar
Katz, Jerrold J. 1977. A proper theory of names. Philosophical Studies 31. 1–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Katz, Jerrold J., and Fodor, Jerry A. 1963. The structure of a semantic theory. Lg. 39.170–210.Google Scholar
Kripke, Saul. 1972. Naming and necessity. The semantics of natural language, ed. by Davidson, Donald & Harman, Gilbert, 253–355. Dordrecht: Reidel.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kripke, Saul. 1977. Speaker's reference and semantic reference. Studies in the philosophy of language (Midwest studies in philosophy, 2) ed. by French, P. A. et al., 255–76. Morris, MN: University of Minnesota, Morris.Google Scholar
Lehrer, Adrienne. 1969. Semantic cuisine. Journal of Linguistics 5. 39–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lewis, David K. 1969. Convention. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Ljung, Magnus. 1974. Some remarks on antonymy. Lg. 50.74–88.Google Scholar
Ljung, Magnus. 1977. Problems in the derivation of instrumental verbs. Perspektiven der Wortbildungsforschung, ed. by Brekle, Herbert E. & Kastovsky, D., 165–79. Bonn: Bouvier Verlag Herbert Grundmann.Google Scholar
Lyons, John. 1968. Introduction to theoretical linguistics. Cambridge: University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lyons, John. 1977. Semantics, vol. 1. Cambridge: University Press.Google Scholar
McCawley, James M. 1971. Prelexical syntax. Linguistic developments of the sixties-Viewpoints for the seventies, ed. by O'Brien, Richard J. Monograph Series on Languages and Linguistics, Georgetown University, 24. 19–33.Google Scholar
Marchand, Hans. 1969. The categories and types of present-day English word-formation (2nd ed.) München: Beck.Google Scholar
Mencken, H. L. 1929. The American language. New York: Knopf.Google Scholar
Mill, John Stuart. 1843. A system of logic. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Mühlhäusler, Peter. 1975. The functional possibilities of lexical bases in New Guinea Pidgin. Paper presented at the Conference on Pidgins and Creoles, University of Hawaii.Google Scholar
Partridge, Eric 1950. Name into word. New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Rips, Lance J.: E. J. Shoben; and Smith, E. E. 1973. Semantic distance and the verification of semantic relations. Journal of Verbal Learning & Verbal Behavior 12. 1–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rosch, Eleanor H. 1973. On the internal structure of perceptual and semantic categories. Cognitive development and the acquisition of language, ed. by Moore, Timothy E., 111–44. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Rosch, Eleanor H. 1977. Human categorization. Advances in cross-cultural psychology, vol. 1, ed. by Warren, N., 1–49. London: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Rosch, Eleanor H., and Mervis, C. 1975. Family resemblances: studies in the internal structure of categories. Cognitive Psychology 7. 573–605.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rosch, Eleanor H.; et al. 1976. Basic objects in natural categories. Cognitive Psychology 8. 382–439.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rose, James H. 1973. Principled limitations on productivity in denominal verbs. Foundations of Language 10. 509–26.Google Scholar
Schiffer, Stephen R. 1972. Meaning. Oxford: University Press.Google Scholar
Searle, John R. 1969. Speech acts. Cambridge: University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smith, Edward E. 1978. Theories of semantic memory. Handbook of learning and cognitive processes, V, ed. by Estes, William K., 1–56. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Smith, Edward E., Rips, L. J.; and Shoben, E. J. 1974. Semantic memory and psychological semantics. The psychology of learning and motivation, vol. 8, ed. by Bower, G. H., 1–45. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Smith, Edward E., Shoben, E. J.; and Rips, L. J. 1974. Structure and process in semantic memory: a featural model for semantic decisions. Psychological Review 81. 214–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Strawson, Peter F. 1950. On referring. Mind 59. 320–44.Google Scholar
Strawson, Peter F. 1959. Individuals: an essay in descriptive metaphysics. London: Methuen.Google Scholar
Strawson, Peter F. 1961. Singular terms and predication. Journal of Philosophy 58. 393–412.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tulving, Endel. 1972. Episodic and semantic memory. Organization of memory, ed. by Tulving, E. & Donaldson, W., 381–403. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Tversky, Amos. 1977. Features of similarity. Psychological Review 84. 327–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Watt, William C. 1973. Late lexicalizations. Approaches to natural language, ed. by Hintikka, K. J. J. et al., 457–89. Dordrecht: Reidel.Google Scholar
Weinreich, Uriel. 1966. Explorations in semantic theory. Current trends in linguistics, III: Theoretical foundations, ed. by Sebeok, Thomas A., 395–477. The Hague: Mouton.Google Scholar
Zimmer, Karl E. 1971. Some general observations about nominal compounds. Working Papers in Language Universals, Stanford University, 5.C1-C21.Google Scholar
Zimmer, Karl E. 1972. Appropriateness conditions for nominal compounds. Working Papers in Language Universals, Stanford University, 8. 3–20.Google Scholar