[Lexicog] Spanish V + O = S compounds (was Re: Lexical Relations vs. Etymology)

[Michael Nicholas]

Dear David,
   "Imported" meaning an object is invented. The country of origin is not Spain. The object appears in Spain. It has to be given a name in Spanish. I suspect that 150 years ago, French was the language spoken by the cultured classes. I also suspect that if the imported object already had a word to describe it in French, then a calque would be applied.
   I also think that although apposition obviously exists in Spanish it is now the most popular way to create a description in Spanish for an object which is new to the language. I believe this descriptive process is so popular that it is even present in what would be considered "vulgar" speech hence Plaza Castilla not Plaza de Castilla or "Bocata jamón" and even in incorrect combinations  such as "un misil Sam" Finally, I rather think it is not a problem of "being dense" but of my inability to explain myself with sufficient clarity!
  Michael
David Tuggy <david_tuggy at sil.org> escribió:
          Who originally calqued from whom is of course a question for historical linguists to answer if they can (and perhaps in this case they can do so with some degree of certainty.) I am sure the V+O=S construction is very firmly entrenched in Spanish at this point and not foreign in any relevant synchronic sense I can think of. The "but" in the phrase "but 'calques'" I would object to. Seeing them as calques doesn't explain them away.

I don't know what the phrase means, "if there is a Spanish construction that is visually the same it will attract 'calques'." I can think of a couple of ways it could be understood, and agree with at least one of them, but I'm confused by it.

What does it mean for an object to be "imported"? 

Are you saying that each individual compound goes through these three stages, that "matamoscas" (kills-flies) 'flyswatter' was once a N+A compound and some day will be N+N? Surely not? So what are you saying? Granted that Spanish does have all three compound types (and others)—why or where does it help us to think of one type evolving into another? 

Also, I don't get the point of the examples. Granted, techo solar is N+A and probably best seen as a phrase rather than a compound. Guardacoches is a 3ps V + (obj) N, whether it is a phrase or a compound probably being somewhat moot (I would lean towards calling it a compound; people write it both as one word [5K on Google] and as two [1K incl hyphenated guarda-coches]). Delantero centro can be taken as N+N (but also as N+A, or A+A -- why not?) and is likely a phrase as opposed to a compound. What does Plaza Castilla have to do with it, or how is its use in popular speech different from its use in other genres?

Sorry if I'm being dense.

--David Tuggy

Michael Nicholas wrote:     Dear David, 
  I was once told by a French lexicographer that the modern objects in Spanish which are identified by  the "para" initial component are but "calques" from the French. I was also told that if there is a Spanish construction that is visually the same it will attract "calques" 
  I think compounds in Spanish - when they refer to objects that are imported tend to go through the stages of: noun plus adjective (non compound) verb - third person singular - plus noun and finally evolve into noun plus noun. This can be seen modern terms So: techo solar, guarda coches,  delantero centro and even - in popular speech - Plaza Castilla

David Tuggy <david_tuggy at sil.org> escribió:
<snip>   

                           

       
---------------------------------

Enviado desde Correo Yahoo!
Disfruta de una bandeja de entrada más inteligente..
  
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/lexicography/attachments/20080319/b72f5adb/attachment.htm>