The article focuses on the structure of Lithuanian compounds with neoclassical constituents and their integration into the native word formation system. The paper also discusses the morphological status of the constituent parts of neoclassical compounds. Two types of hybrid neoclassical formations can be singled out in Lithuanian from the point of view of their morphonological accommodation and integration into the word formation system: (1) compounds with the first indigenous or neoclassical stem or the first neoclassical and second indigenous stem and (2) compounds with the first bound stem. The patterns of neoclassical hybrid compounds that belong to the first type conform to the patterns of native compounds in the recipient language (cf. betòn-maiš-ė ‘concrete-mixer’ and pùs-metal-is see, examples 2a-6a), meanwhile neoclassical hybrid formations that belong to the second type show, as a rule, no morphonological accommodation and weak integration into the Lithuanian word formation system. In the morphological system such words function as if no neoclassical stem existed (cf. hidro-elektrìn-ė ‘hydrostation’ and elektrìn-ė ‘power-station’). However, in native word formation system, a new tendency to accommodate and integrate words with the first neoclassical bound stem can be observed (cf. turb-ó-grąžt-is ‘drill’ and turbo- ‘turbo’, grą̃žtas ‘drill’).
The majority of analysed Lithuanian compounds with neoclassical constituents as compounds in general are determinative, namely they are characterized by a subordinate relation in which the first constituent modifies the second one which functions morphosyntactically and semantically as the head of the construction (e.g. pùs-metal-is ‘semi-metal’). Moreover, there are also some copulative compounds that encompass a coordinative relation between the native and indigenous constituent (e.g. atòm-laiv-is ‘tanker’).
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.