Compound or phrase? Analogy in naming

In German (and other Germanic languages) both phrases and compounds are used as names for concepts (e.g. Rotwein ‘red wine’, grüner Daumen ‘green thumb/green fingers’). This study examines such kind-referring German A+N compounds and phrases. Whereas it is a widely accepted fact that compounds are inherently suitable for kind reference (or “naming”), due to their status as word formation entities, phrases used for kind reference are regarded as isolated, idiosyncratic cases. This paper presents the results of a production experiment which show that both A+N phrases and A+N compounds should be regarded as a productive means of coining names. The choice between the two constructions is largely dependent on the availability of similar constructions in the mental lexicon of the speakers. The larger the number of lexicalized compounds with the same adjective or noun, the higher the probability of the subjects choosing a compound. The larger the number of lexicalized phrases with the same adjective or noun, the higher the probability of the subjects choosing a phrase. Thus, the probability of using a compound to name a new concept positively correlates with the number of available other compounds (types) that feature one or both of the elements to be combined. This effect is stronger for adjectives than for nouns. These results cannot be accounted for in a rule-based approach to grammar and lexicon. Instead they support a constructionist approach in which differences in productivity directly relate to the (number of) existing instantiations of the respective constructions in the mental lexicon.