My speciality is certainly not morphology, but all the books I've read call this kind of "derivation without change in form" a morphological change that is variously called "conversion," "functional shift," or "zero-morph derivation. 

Kathleen M. Ward
UC Davis
On May 29, 2008, at 7:34 AM, John Crow wrote:

If a word changes function but does not change form, is that considered to be a morphological change?  For example, rich, normally considered to be an adjective, can easily function as a noun (the rich).  If it becomes an adverb (richly), morphology is obviously involved here.  What about the adjective-to-noun shift?

Thanks,
John
To join or leave this LISTSERV list, please visit the list's web interface at: http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/ateg.html and select "Join or leave the list"

Visit ATEG's web site at http://ateg.org/


To join or leave this LISTSERV list, please visit the list's web interface at: http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/ateg.html and select "Join or leave the list"

Visit ATEG's web site at http://ateg.org/