Construct · 1 fields · 2 citations

clitic: a standalone construct

One name. One construct. A landmark on the map.

● anchor · one construct, one field Nearest construct by meaning·not indexed
clitic1 CONSTRUCTCliticBOUND · UNSTRESSED

A single standalone construct; nearby constructs are located against it in the Collider. Tap a field for its definition, unit, and measures.

Linguistics

A word-like form that leans on a host

In linguistics, a clitic is an element that is syntactically a separate word but phonologically cannot stand alone, so it leans on an adjacent host (the English contracted 's, 'll, or n't, or the pronouns that attach to verbs in Romance languages). Zwicky and Pullum's 1983 analysis of English n't sharpened the tests distinguishing clitics from both independent words and true inflectional affixes, and Klavans's 1985 work set out the parameters of how clitics attach. The referent is a bound-but-word-like unit sitting between full words and affixes, identified by its mismatch between syntactic independence and phonological dependence.[1][2]

Unit
A syntactically word-level element that is phonologically bound to a host
Recovery means
Not applicable
Measured by
Diagnosed by the Zwicky–Pullum criteria (host selectivity, ordering, gaps, and morphophonological idiosyncrasy), separating clitics from affixes and words

Next

Run it through the Collider, or take the citations with you.

See how clitic sits against neighbouring constructs in the Collider, or export every reference on this page in one click.

Open in ColliderExport BibTeXReport this entry

Nearby constructs

contraction4 fields · 4 citationsjingle · one word, four constructsdependence4 fields · 5 citationsjingle · one word, four constructselement3 fields · 5 citationsjingle · one word, three constructs

References

  1. Zwicky, A. M., & Pullum, G. K. (1983). Cliticization vs. inflection: English n't. Language, 59(3), 502–513. https://doi.org/10.2307/413900
  2. Klavans, J. L. (1985). The independence of syntax and phonology in cliticization. Language, 61(1), 95–120. https://doi.org/10.2307/413422

Cited on this page?

Confirm your construct, or correct us.

If your work is cited behind one of these entries, you know better than we do whether we captured the meaning right. Confirm it, suggest an edit, or dispute it, and your name goes on the entry as an author who has checked it, linked to your ORCID.

Claim your construct