Abstract

Chomsky & Halle (1968) have explained the difference observed between compounds with a lefthanded stress contour such as salt water and syntactic phrases with a righthanded stress pattem such as salty water by subjecting the former to the Compound Stress Rule while characterizing the latter by the Nuclear Stress Rule. The studies of Marchand (1969) and Liberman & Sproat (1992) have noticed that right-stressed N+N sequences also exist in English, cf. winter night, silicon chip and kidnapper-killer. These linguists maintain that the stress pattem of this type of nominal collocation distinguishes the structures from morphological compounds and characterizes them as syntactic phrases. The present study takes issue with this view, arguing that all N+N pattems are morphological compounds. The difference between the left and right stress contours signals two distinct overall patterns of interpretation for compounds: Lefthand stress results when the interpretation is based on a compound-intemal inferred relation between the two constituents while righthand stress contours arise when a compound-extemal modifier-like r::lation is called for.