Marchand's analysis of back-formation revisited: Back-formation as a type of conversion

Marchand (1960; 1969) presents a unique analysis of back-formation (e.g., editor_N > edit_V) as a combination of zero-derivation (editor_N > editor_V) and clipping (editor_V > editor_V). This paper will take a closer look at his analysis and argue that its revised version, which uses the notion of conversion rather than zero-derivation, is superior to the mainstream analyses of back-formation. Citing a lot of instances of back-formed verbs, we will show that back-formation does not necessarily delete an affix (e.g., liaison_N > liaise_V) and that it is semantically parallel not to affixation (e.g., film_N > filmize_V) but to conversion (e.g., referee_N > referee_V). Almost all the preceding analyses fail to deal with these facts, for they are based on the assumption that backformation deletes a (supposed) affix, or it is the reverse of affixation. Our new analysis, on the other hand, is free from this traditional assumption and can account for various properties of back-formation, including the above two, in terms of general characteristics of conversion and clipping.