Noncontiguous Blends Phonological Characteristics of the Elements Retained in English Blends

for infixes. For that reason, the syllable of infixes must be heavy in order to maintain the stress placement of the base. It is due to the fact that stressed syllable is always heavy, so a heavy syllable is needed for infixes as the substitute. Otherwise, the stress placement will be different from those in base, meaning that it is needed to assign stress from the beginning. Now that all data in Table 5.5 have the same syllable size and syllable weight, the stress placement will remain the same as the base. As shown in Table 4.10, , ambi’sextrous is the combination of , ambi’dextrous and „sex. The SW1 ,ambi’dextrous is the base, while sex is the infix which must be put in the middle of base. The stressed syllable dex is deleted and substituted for the infix sex. The stressed syllable dex deks is heavy and monosyllabic, thus the substitute must be heavy and monosyllabic in order to maintain the stress placement of the base. The infix sex seks is both heavy and monosyllabic so that it is suitable as the substitute of dex. Finally, the resulting blend becomes ,ambi’sextrous. D.Meaning Identification of English Blends The meaning patterns of blends are identified according to the relation between two source words. In terms of the meaning construction, blends are similar to compounds due to the fact that for some extents blends may be understood as shortened compounds. Therefore, this study will apply four types of meaning used by compounds such as endocentric, exocentric, copulative, and appositional to identify the meaning of blends. From now on, the meaning of blends in general is classified into two types, namely endocentric and exocentric meaning. Endocentric meaning in blends denotes the meaning construction in which the meaning is derived from the element of blends. Thus the meaning is inside the blends. On the contrary, exocentric meaning is a meaning construction in which the meaning is outside the blends Szymanek, 1989: 48-50. Nevertheless, the classification of meaning into two general types is not sufficient to describe all meaning. In addition to these two general types, there are two other types of meaning, namely copulative and appositional meaning. Hereafter, there are four types of English blends in terms of the semantic features, namely endocentric, copulative, appositional, and exocentric blends. Figure 4.11 illustrates the distribution of blends based on the semantic types. According to the figure, the significant number of blends is found within three types of blends: endocentric, copulative, and appositional blends. Exocentric blends, the fourth type, are very limited in number. They are very rare, only making 1 . The most popular type of blends is endocentric blends which make 76 . These blends are the most numerous, meanwhile copulative and appositional blends follow with the smaller number. The percentage of copulative blends 12 is slightly larger than the percentage of appositional blends 11 . Figure 4.11 The distribution of Blends based on the Semantic Types The first type is endocentric blends. Endocentric blends are blends that consist of a head, which is the categorical part containing the basic meaning of the whole blends, and modifiers, which restrict the meaning. In other words, they signify the relationship between a modifier and a head. Thus, there is only one semantic head which is preceded or followed by additional information about the head modifiers. In endocentric blends, the semantic heads are inside the blends. For example: the blend vactor, where actor is the head and virtual is the modifier, is understood as an virtual actor. Another example is the blend abandonware abandoned x software which is a kind of software which is ignored by its owner and manufacturer. The blend flexitarian is also the example of endocentric blend. In flexitarian, flexible acts as a modifier which modifies the head vegetarian which meaning is a vegetarian who is flexible to combine meat to hisher meal. The blend agritourism, where tourism is the head and agricultural is the modifier, is understood as a kind of tourism in which customer do agricultural work. The blend ecommerce electronic x commerce, ezine electronic x magazine, 76 12 11 1 Endocentric blends Copulative Appositional Exocentric cheapuccino cheap x cappuccino, awkfest awkward x festival, flog fake x blog is a kind of commerce, magazine, and cappuccino, festival, and blog, respectively. The second type is copulative blends. Different from endocentric blends which only have one semantic head, copulative blends have two semantic heads. It means that there is no source word that is subordinated to another source word. The relation between the heads is typically equal. Having two semantic heads, the source words of copulative blends refer to different referent. For example, the blend Chimerica refers to China and America. Other examples are absotively which means both absolutely and positively, and fappy which refers to both fat and happy. Other examples are happymonius happy x harmonious, scanlate scan x translate, slungry sleepy x hungry, toughicult tough x difficult, Chindia China x India, and fertigate fertilize x irrigate. The third type of blend is appositional blends. Similar to copulative blends, appositional blends have two semantic heads. The difference lies on the entity of the description of two source words denotes. Appositional blends belong to one entity, while copulative blends belong to two entities. Appositional blends also have equal relation between source words. This kind of blends is categorized according to the usage. First, appositional blends refer to a combination of two things which create a new entity. For example, the blend linner is not a combination of lunch and dinner meal nor eating lunch followed by dinner. Rather, it refers to a meal time between lunch and dinner, usually around 3 or 4 PM so that it belongs to one time of eating. Similarly, mornoon morning x noon denotes time of late morning or early afternoon. Another example is transceiver transmitter x receiver which is recognized as one entity. It is not a transmitter and receiver separately. Rather, it is a device of one package of transmitting and receiving radio or electronic signals. Other examples, desknote desktop x notebook and lapdesk laptop x desktop, are understood in the same way. Desknote is a combination of desktop computer and notebook computer, while lapdesk is a combination of laptop and desktop computer. In particular, desknote is a computer which is similar to a netbook in size, yet is designed to remain stationary like a desktop. Lapdesk is a portable laptop which remains steady like a desktop which enables people to use on their lap. Others are smaze smoke x haze and snizzle snow x drizzle. Smaze and snizzle are a mixture of smoke and haze and a mixture of snow and drizzle, respectively. Second, appositional blends are also used to describe one with different descriptions or profession. For instances, the blend saladent salaryman x student refers to salaryman who is also a student. Another example is the blend momager mom x manager denotes a mom who is also a manager for her daughter. Similarly, hackerazzi hacker x paparazzi is a paparazzi who is also a hacker. In the same way, hacktivist hacker x activist is a computer hacker who further an activist agenda. Other example is wactress waitress x actress is an aspiring actress working as a waitress. Third, appositional blends refer to hybrids of animal and plants. Hybrids create a new entity from the process of breeding among animals and plants. The examples of hybrids of animal are puggle pug x beagle, geep goat x sheep, wallaroo wallaby x kangaroo, zony zebra x pony, zorse zebra x horse, zebrass zebra x ass, beefalo beef x buffalo, cama camel x llama, liger lion x tiger, shoat sheep x goat, tigon tiger x lion, triticale triticum x secale, wholphin whale x dolphin, and zonkey zebra x donkey. The examples of plantation‟ hybrids are plumcot plum x apricot, broccoflower broccoli x cauliflower, pluot plum x apricot, grapple grape x apple, crapple cranberry x apple, crape cranberry x grape, and tomacco tomato x tobacco. Apart from animal and plant breeding, it includes the hybrids of other things. The examples are tangelo tangerine x pomelo, swacket sweater x jacket, chork chopsticks x fork, camkini camisole x bikini, and spife spoon x knife. The least popular type of blends is exocentric blends. This type of blends does not have a head so that their meaning cannot be guessed easily from its constituent parts. For example, a veghead vegetable x head is not a kind of head. Rather, it refers to person who only consumes vegetable and will not consume meat. Another example is clamato clam x tomato. Clamato is neither a kind of clam nor tomato. It is a kind of juice, mostly mixed of tomato and clam. Similarly, fruitopia fruit x utopia is neither a kind of fruit nor a kind of a utopia. It refers to a drink with a fruit-flavor introduced by Coca Cola. In the same way, corpsicle corpse x popsicle is neither a corpse nor a popsicle. Rather, it denotes a person who has been cryonically frozen like a popsicle in the hope of later revival in science fiction. Another example is adorabubble adorable x bubble and photopia photo x utopia. Adorabubble and photopia are realized as happiness and day vision, respectively. In terms of the meaning construction, blends are quite similar to compounds since blends can be regarded as shortened compounds. The difference is that it is common for compounds to have exocentric meaning, yet blends are not say, rare. The reason is that, unlike compounds, some parts of words in blends are omitted so that the component of blends cannot be obtained explicitly by reader or hearer. As the consequence, the reader or hearer needs to think twice harder to guess the idea of a certain blend. First, the hearer or reader needs to guess what components which make up blends. Second, the hearer and reader needto guess the meaning. In this case, exocentric meaning does not fit well with blends. It can be a reason that exocentric blends are rare. Actually, blends are created to be easily guessed by people, so that if people hear or read a certain blend, they get the idea of what it is. People can get the idea of blends because they occur in context. On the contrary, if blends occur in isolation without the help of context, it will be difficult for people to guess the components which make up blends. For example, Sprite launches a new variant of Sprite, namely limon. The consumer can easily get the idea of limon because the advertisement acts such a way until the consumer perceives that limon is the combination of lime and lemon.

CHAPTER V CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

This final chapter consists of two sections. The first section presents the conclusions which can be drawn from this research. The second section attempts to propose some recommendations for future research.

A. Conclusions

Blends really reflect the style of communication among people in the current English. It is obvious that smartphones and internet services have revolutionized communication in these last decades, creating an innovative way of communication through social media. Evidently, people are likely to communicate one another in a form of written language via smartphones. Additionally, one of the characteristics of blends is that they are economical, especially in reducing sounds so that to some extents it can save effort and time. Furthermore, people can obtain a meaningful concise of two or more words at once, just by holding parts of each word. This characteristic is suitable to the language in social media, considering that people like to condense a lengthy message into a short message. In addition to the economical factor as the characteristic of blends, blends are also considered as funny and creative words. It is mentioned that blends in nature are formed by combining two or more existing words and deleting one or more parts of them. The way a blend is formed is like a word play in which people can create by themselves. People always create new words which are fun and innovative for an entertaining reason. In short, these three characteristics are also the 126 characteristics of blends which resemble the style of communication via social media nowadays: economical, funny, and creative. However, a blend is originally a word, just like another “common” word which has been stored to the lexicon of English. In some extents, English blends could be regarded as a comic word play, yet in actual fact they are not really that random. Actually, blends are a smart word play. They have rules and restrictions that should be obeyed in order to be acknowledged as English words, yet in the case of some blends they keep the elements of fun and entertainment. Regarded as a smart word play, blends follow the rule of morphology, semantic, and phonology just as the new word manufacturing. This study presents the answers of four formulated problems by conducting morphological, phonological, and semantic analysis. The morphological analysis is used to answer first and second research questions. The result of first research question indicates that blends show regularities which can be seen through combining patterns of blends. Besides, blends show variations in these combining patterns. Blends do not only combine contiguous parts but also noncontiguous parts. There are seven combining patterns which are classified as contiguous blends, namely type A, B, C, D, OV0, OV1, and OV2. Type A combines whole SW1 and last parts of SW2. The examples are actorvist actor x activist, facekini face x bikini, and daycation day x vacation. Type B combines first parts of SW1 and whole SW2. The instances are docudrama documentary x drama, yestergay yesterday x gay, and cosplay costume x play. Type C combines first parts of SW1 and last parts of SW2. The examples are ginormous gìgantic x enormous, chofa chair x sofa, and bromance brother x romance. Type D combines first parts of both SW1 and SW2. The instances are agitprop agitation x propaganda, desknote desktop x notebook, and fanfic fanatic x fiction. Type OV0 has zero splinter. The examples are guesstimate guess x estimate, scanxiety scan x anxiety, and dadventure dad x adventure. Type OV1 has one splinter. The examples are bustaurant bus x restaurant, carbage car x garbage, and steelionaire steel x millionaire. Type OV2 has two splinters. The examples are advertorial advertisement x editorial, lupper lunch x supper, and advermation advertisement x information. In terms of noncontiguous blends, there are two patterns which can be observed, namely type E and F. Type E consists of blends with infixation. Blends of this type insert part of one of the source words and delete part of another. The examples are ambisextrous ambidextrous x sex and adverteasement advertisement x tease. Type F involves blends with interfixation. The proses is that the interfixes are inserted to connect two blended elements. The examples are hairagami hair x origami and smelloscope smell x telescope. The result of the analysis of the second problem shows that blends do not strict to the particular word category, meaning that there is no fixed formula in determining the word category of each source word. According to the result, there are ten pairs of word category in blends. Chiefly, blends can be formed from two adjectives, two nouns, two verbs, two adverbs, an adjective and a noun, a noun and an adjective, a noun and a verb, a verb and a noun, an adverb and an adjective, and a pronoun and a noun. These ten pairs are classified into four major categories, namely noun blends, adjective blends, verb blends, and adverb blends. The analysis of the prosodic morphology conducted to answer the third research question shows that there are different characteristics of the stress assignment in contiguous and noncontiguos blends. In contiguous blends, there are three characteristics which can be observed. First, the vast majority of blends are most likely to have primary stress which have the same position as in the source words, whether it is in SW1, SW2, or both SW1 and 2. Second, the position of SW2 is more stable in determining the primary stress in resulting blends. Third, the stress of blends is not necessarily determined by the stress of one or both source words. Rather, it is assigned from the beginning, following the rule of new word manufacturing. Dealing with noncontiguos blends, the characteristic of stress assignment in blends with infixation is that the stress is most likely to follow the stress of the base as long as the substituted elements deleted segments and infixes have the same number of syllables syllable size and more specifically have the same number of X-positions in rhyme syllable weight. The result of the semantic analysis conducted to answer the fourth problem is that in terms of the meaning identification, blends can be classified into four categories. These four categories are endocentric, copulative, appositional, and exocentric blends. Among these four categories, endocentric blends are the most popular, while exocentric blends are the least popular. It illustrates that the huge number of blends has one head and a modifier which is used to restrict the meaning. On the contrary, blends which do not have heads in one or both source words are uncommon. The reason is that determining heads within two source words is essential to identify the meaning of resulting blends. If blends do not have heads, it will be difficult for the hearers and readers to identify the meaning. Dealing with this issue, it is essential to provide contexts since it can be used as a clue to identify the source words and henceforth the meaning of resulting blends. To sum up, the essential finding from this research is that blending is said to be one of the simple ways to enrich the vocabulary of English since itmerely uses the existing words. Accordingly, the analysis of blends should deal with the analysis of morphology and phonology simultaneously, henceforth prosodic morphology. It is due to the fact that the combination of two or more words in blends is sometimes morphologically acceptable, but phonologically violated. The huge number of blends in this research in their written forms has been taken from mass media and social media. In this regard, people would be awkward to pronounce blends they are not familiar with and even they have never heard before. Therefore, it is essential to analyze blends for the sake of pronunciation. Despite their unique characteristic, it is essential to treat blends as other “common‟ words which have undergone some restrictions in all their linguistics aspects especially in the word manufacturing. Furthermore, a blend will be regarded as an English word due to their appropriateness to the English language and their usage in the actual speech. When a certain blend is used widely among English speaker, it will be familiar to the English speaker and automatically it will be added to the lexicon of people. The more familiar they become, the more accepted they are as other “common” words.