From Non-Decomposable Idioms to Compounds to Some Reflections on the Morphosyntax/Semantics Interface

Nunberg et al. (1994) classified idioms into two groups: idiomatically combining expressions (ICEs), “whose meanings—while conventional—are distributed among their parts” and idiomatic phrases (IPs), “which do not distribute their meanings to their components” (p. 491). This distinction generally correlates with morphosyntactic (in)flexibility in idioms. However, Espinal & Mateu (2010) and others have argued that a sharp ICE/IP distinction is questionable. Here, I highlight a different sort of problematic example for a neat ICE/IP distinction: some putative IPs such as to chew the rag have yielded compounds such as rag(-)chewing, even though the meanings of their wholes do not distribute to their parts. I argue that existing analyses of unexpected flexibility of IPs fail to extend to compounding, formulate a preliminary account using the notions of morphosemantic alignment (Bonami & Strnadová 2019) and (morphological) motivation (e.g., Booij 2017) from morphological theory, and discuss the implications for the morphosyntax/ semantics interface.