Conversion as the way of word formation

Conversion
is the main way of forming verbs in Modern English. Verbs can be
formed from nouns of different semantic groups and have different
meanings because of that, e.g.

a)
verbs have instrumental meaning if they are formed from nouns
denoting parts of a human body e.g. to eye, to finger, to elbow, to
shoulder etc. They have instrumental meaning if they are formed from
nouns denoting tools, machines, instruments, weapons, e.g. to hammer,
to machine-gun, to rifle, to nail,

b)
verbs can denote an action characteristic of the living being denoted
by the noun from which they have been converted, e.g. to crowd, to
wolf, to ape,

c)
verbs can denote acquisition, addition or deprivation if they are
formed from nouns denoting an object, e.g. to fish, to dust, to peel,
to paper,

d)
verbs can denote an action performed at the place denoted by the noun
from which they have been converted, e.g. to park, to garage, to
bottle, to corner, to pocket,

e)
verbs can denote an action performed at the time denoted by the noun
from which they have been converted e.g. to winter, to week-end .

Verbs
can be also converted from adjectives, in such cases they denote the
change of the state, e.g. to tame (to become or make tame) , to
clean, to slim etc.

Nouns
can also be formed by means of conversion from verbs. Converted nouns
can denote:

a)
instant of an action e.g. a jump, a move,

b)
process or state e.g. sleep, walk,

c)
agent of the action expressed by the verb from which the noun has
been converted, e.g. a help, a flirt, a scold ,

d)
object or result of the action expressed by the verb from which the
noun has been converted, e.g. a burn, a find, a purchase,

e)
place of the action expressed by the verb from which the noun has
been converted, e.g. a drive, a stop, a walk.

Many
nouns converted from verbs can be used only in the Singular form and
denote momentaneous actions. In such cases we have partial
conversion. Such deverbal nouns are often used with such verbs as :
to have, to get, to take etc., e.g. to have a try, to give a push, to
take a swim .

4. Different problems of conversion:

a)
synchronic and diachronic approaches to the present day conversion
pairs;

Conversion
pairs are distinguished by the structural identity of the root and
phonetic identity of the stem of each of the two words.

Synchronically
we deal with pairs of words related through conversion that coexist
in contemporary English. The two words, e.g. to
break and
a
break, being
phonetically identical, the question arises whether they have the
same or identical stems, as some linguists are inclined to believe.¹
It will be recalled that the stem carries quite a definite
part-of-speech meaning; for instance, within the word-cluster to
dress
— dress
— dresser
— dressing
— dressy,
the
stem dresser
— carries
not only the lexical meaning of the root-morpheme dress-,
but
also the meaning of substantivity, the stem dressy-
the
meaning of quality, etc. These two ingredients
— the
lexical meaning of the root-morpheme and the part-of-speech meaning
of the stem
— form
part of the meaning of the whole word. It is the stem that requires a
definite paradigm; for instance, the word dresser
is
a noun primarily because it has a noun-stem and not only because of
the noun paradigm; likewise, the word materialise
is
a verb, because first and foremost it has a verbal stem possessing
the lexico-grammatical meaning of process or action and requiring a
verb paradigm.

What
is true of words whose root and stem do not coincide is also true of
words with roots and stems that coincide: for instance, the word atom
is
a noun because of the substantival character of the stem requiring
the noun paradigm. The word sell
is
a verb because of the verbal character of its stem requiring the verb
paradigm, etc. It logically follows that the stems of two words
making up a conversion pair cannot be regarded as being the same or
identical: the stem hand-
of
the noun hand,
for
instance, carries a substantival meaning together with the system of
its meanings, such as: 1)
the
end of the arm beyond the wrist; 2)
pointer
on a watch or clock; 3)
worker
in a factory; 4)
source
of information, etc.; the stem hand-
of
the verb hand
has
a different part-of-speech meaning, namely that of the verb, and a
different system of meanings: 1)
give
or help with the hand, 2)
pass,
etc. Thus, the stems of word-pairs related through conversion have
different part-of-speech and denotational meanings. Being
phonetically identical they can be regarded as homonymous stems.

A
careful examination of the relationship between the lexical meaning
of the root-morpheme and the part-of-speech meaning of the stem
within a conversion pair reveals that in one of the two words the
former does not correspond to the latter. For instance, the lexical
meaning of the root-morpheme of the noun hand
corresponds
to the part-of-speech meaning of its stem: they are both of a
substantival character; the lexical meaning of the root-morpheme of
the verb hand,
however,
does not correspond to the part-of-speech meaning of the stem: the
root-morpheme denotes an object, whereas the part-of-speech meaning
of the stem is that of a process. The same is true of the noun fall
whose
stem is of a substantival character (which is proved by the noun
paradigm fall
— falls
— fall’s
— falls’,
whereas
the root-morpheme denotes a certain process.

It
will be recalled that the same kind of non-correspondence is typical
of the derived word in general. To give but two examples, the
part-of-speech meaning of the stem blackness
—
is
that of substantivity, whereas the root-morpheme black-denotes a
quality; the part-of-speech meaning of the stem eatable-
(that
of qualitativeness) does not correspond to the lexical meaning of the
root-morpheme denoting a process. It should also be pointed out here
that in simple words the lexical meaning of the root corresponds to
the part-of-speech meaning of the stem, cf. the two types of meaning
of simple words like black
a,
eat
v,
chair
n,
etc.
Thus, by analogy with the derivational character of the stem of a
derived word it is natural to regard the stem of one of the two words
making up a conversion pair as being of a derivational character as
well. The essential difference between affixation and conversion is
that affixation is characterised by both semantic and structural
derivation (e.g. friend
— friendless, dark
— darkness,
etc.),
whereas conversion displays only semantic derivation, i.e. hand
— to hand, fall
— to
fall, taxi
— to
taxi, etc.;
the difference between the two classes of words in affixation is
marked both by a special derivational affix and a paradigm, whereas
in conversion it is marked only by paradigmatic forms.

A
diachronic
semantic
analysis of a conversion pair reveals that in the course of time the
semantic structure of the base may acquire a new meaning or several
meanings under the influence of the meanings of the converted word.
This semantic process has been termed reconversion
in linguistic literature.²
There is an essential difference between conversion and reconversion:
being a way of forming words conversion leads to a numerical
enlargement of the English vocabulary, whereas reconversion only
brings about a new meaning correlated with one of the meanings of the
converted word. Research has shown that reconversion only operates
with denominal verbs and deverbal nouns. As an illustration the
conversion pair smoke
n
— smoke
v
may
be cited. According to the Oxford
English Dictionary some
of the meanings of the two words are:

SMOKE
я

1.
the
visible volatile product given off by burning or smouldering
substances (1000)¹
c)
the act of smoke coming out into a room instead of passing up the
chimney (1715)

SMOKE
v

1.
intr.
to
produce or give forth smoke (1000)

‘c)
of a room, chimney, lamp, etc.: to be smoky, to emit smoke as the
result of imperfect draught or improper burning (1663)

Comparison
makes it possible to trace the semantic development of each word. The
verb smoke
formed
in 1000
from
the noun smoke
in
the corresponding meaning had acquired by 1663
another
meaning by a
metaphorical
transfer which, in turn, gave rise to a correlative meaning of the
noun smoke
in
1715
through
reconversion.

b)
the word-building means in conversion.

Соседние файлы в предмете [НЕСОРТИРОВАННОЕ]

• #
• #
• #
• #
• #
• #
• #
• #

  13.04.2015341.5 Кб43.doc

• #
• #
• #

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

In linguistics, conversion, also called zero derivation or null derivation, is a kind of word formation involving the creation of a word (of a new word class) from an existing word (of a different word class) without any change in form,^[1] which is to say, derivation using only zero. For example, the noun green in golf (referring to a putting-green) is derived ultimately from the adjective green.

Conversions from adjectives to nouns and vice versa are both very common and unnotable in English; much more remarked upon is the creation of a verb by converting a noun or other word (e.g., the adjective clean becomes the verb to clean).

Verbification [edit]

Verbification, or verbing, is the creation of a verb from a noun, adjective or other word.

In English[edit]

In English, verbification typically involves simple conversion of a non-verb to a verb. The verbs to verbify and to verb, the first by derivation with an affix and the second by zero derivation, are themselves products of verbification (see autological word), and, as might be guessed, the term to verb is often used more specifically, to refer only to verbification that does not involve a change in form. (Verbing in this specific sense is therefore a kind of anthimeria.)

Examples of verbification in the English language number in the thousands, including some of the most common words such as mail and e-mail, strike, talk,^{[dubious – discuss]} salt, pepper, switch, bed, sleep, ship, train, stop, drink, cup, lure, mutter, dress, dizzy, divorce, fool, merge, to be found on virtually every page in the dictionary. Thus, verbification is by no means confined to slang and has furnished English with countless new expressions: «access», as in «access the file», which was previously only a noun, as in «gain access to the file». Similar mainstream examples include «host», as in «host a party», and «chair», as in «chair the meeting». Other formations, such as «gift», are less widespread but nevertheless mainstream.

Verbification may have a bad reputation with some English users because it is such a potent source of neologisms. Although some neologistic products of verbification may meet considerable opposition from prescriptivist authorities (the verb sense of impact is a well-known example), most such derivations have become so central to the language after several centuries of use that they no longer draw notice.

In many cases, the verbs were distinct from their noun counterparts in Old English, and regular sound change has made them the same form: these can be reanalysed as conversion. «Don’t talk the talk if you can’t walk the walk» is an example of a sentence using those forms.^{[citation needed]}

In other languages[edit]

In other languages, verbification is a more regular process. However, such processes often do not qualify as conversion, as they involve changes in the form of the word. For example, in Esperanto, any word can be transformed into a verb, either by altering its ending to -i, or by applying suffixes such as -igi and -iĝi; and in Semitic languages, the process often involves changes of internal vowels, such as the Hebrew word «גגל» (Gigél, «He/it googled»), from the proper noun גוגל (Google).
In Toki Pona, any content word may function as a noun, verb or adjective depending on syntax. For example, moku may either mean food or to eat.

Noun conversion in English[edit]

Many English nouns are formed from unmodified verbs: a fisherman’s catch, to go for a walk, etc.^[2]

Humor[edit]

Verbification is sometimes used to create nonce words or joking words. Often, simple conversion is involved, as with formations like beer, as in beer me («give me a beer») and eye, as in eye it («look at it»).^{[clarification needed]} Sometimes, a verbified form can occur with a prepositional particle, e.g., sex as in sex it up («make it sexier»).

A Calvin and Hobbes strip dealt with this phenomenon, concluding with the statement that «Verbing weirds language»,^[3] demonstrating the verbing of both verb and weird. (The former appears in its use as a gerund.)

References[edit]

External links[edit]

• «Grammar Puss» by Steven Pinker
• Figures of Speech
• «Verbing Nouns»

Lecture 3.
Word-building: affixation, conversion, composition, abbreviation.
THE WORD-BUILDING SYSTEM OF ENGLISH
1.
Word-derivation
2.
Affixation
3.
Conversion
4.
Word-composition
5.
Shortening
6.
Blending
7.
Acronymy
8.
Sound interchange
9.
Sound imitation
10. Distinctive stress
11. Back-formation
Word-formation is a branch of Lexicology which studies the process of building new
words, derivative structures and patterns of existing words. Two principle types of wordformation are distinguished: word-derivation and word-composition. It is evident that wordformation proper can deal only with words which can be analyzed both structurally and
semantically. Simple words are closely connected with word-formation because they serve as the
foundation of derived and compound words. Therefore, words like writer, displease, sugar free,
etc. make the subject matter of study in word-formation, but words like to write, to please, atom,
free are irrelevant to it.
WORD-FORMATION
WORD-DERIVATION
AFFIXATION
WORD-COMPOSITION
CONVERSION
1. Word-derivation.
Speaking about word-derivation we deal with the derivational structure of words which
basic elementary units are derivational bases, derivational affixes and derivational patterns.
A derivational base is the part of the word which establishes connection with the lexical
unit that motivates the derivative and determines its individual lexical meaning describing the
difference between words in one and the same derivative set. For example, the individual lexical
meaning of the words singer, writer, teacher which denote active doers of the action is signaled by
the lexical meaning of the derivational bases: sing-, write-, teach-.
Structurally derivational bases fall into 3 classes:
1. Bases that coincide with morphological stems of different degrees оf complexity, i.e.,
with words functioning independently in modern English e.g., dutiful, day-dreamer. Bases are
functionally and semantically distinct from morphological stems. Functionally the morphological
stem is a part of the word which is the starting point for its forms: heart – hearts; it is the part
which presents the entire grammatical paradigm. The stem remains unchanged throughout all
word-forms; it keeps them together preserving the identity of the word. A derivational base is the
starting point for different words (heart – heartless – hearty) and its derivational potential
outlines the type and scope of existing words and new creations. Semantically the stem stands for
the whole semantic structure of the word; it represents all its lexical meanings. A base represents,
as a rule, only one meaning of the source word.
2. Bases that coincide with word-forms, e.g., unsmiling, unknown. The base is usually
represented by verbal forms: the present and the past participles.
3. Bases that coincide with word-groups of different degrees of stability, e.g., blue-eyed,
empty-handed. Bases of this class allow a rather limited range of collocability, they are most
active with derivational affixes in the class of adjectives and nouns (long-fingered, blue-eyed).
Derivational affixes are Immediate Constituents of derived words in all parts of speech.
Affixation is generally defined as the formation of words by adding derivational affixes to
different types of bases. Affixation is subdivided into suffixation and prefixation. In Modern
English suffixation is mostly characteristic of nouns and adjectives coining, while prefixation is
mostly typical of verb formation.
A derivational pattern is a regular meaningful arrangement, a structure that imposes
rigid rules on the order and the nature of the derivational base and affixes that may be brought
together to make up a word. Derivational patterns are studied with the help of distributional
analysis at different levels. Patterns are usually represented in a generalized way in terms of
conventional symbols: small letters v, n, a, d which stand for the bases coinciding with the stems
of the respective parts of speech: verbs, etc. Derivational patterns may represent derivative
structure at different levels of generalization:
- at the level of structural types. The patterns of this type are known as structural
formulas, all words may be classified into 4 classes: suffixal derivatives (friendship) n + -sf →
N, prefixal derivatives (rewrite), conversions (a cut, to parrot) v → N, compound words (musiclover).
- at the level of structural patterns. Structural patterns specify the base classes and
individual affixes thus indicating the lexical-grammatical and lexical classes of derivatives
within certain structural classes of words. The suffixes refer derivatives to specific parts of
speech and lexical subsets. V + -er = N (a semantic set of active agents, denoting both animate
and inanimate objects - reader, singer); n + -er = N (agents denoting residents or occupations Londoner, gardener). We distinguish a structural semantic derivationa1 pattern.
- at the level of structural-semantic patterns. Derivational patterns may specify semantic
features of bases and individual meaning of affixes: N + -y = A (nominal bases denoting living
beings are collocated with the suffix meaning "resemblance" - birdy, catty; but nominal bases
denoting material, parts of the body attract another meaning "considerable amount" - grassy,
leggy).
The basic ways of forming new words in word-derivation are affixation and conversion.
Affixation is the formation of a new word with the help of affixes (heartless, overdo).
Conversion is the formation of a new word by bringing a stem of this word into a different
paradigm (a fall from to fall).
2. Affixation
Affixation is generally defined as the formation of words by adding derivational affixes
to different types of bases. Affixation includes suffixation and prefixation. Distinction between
suffixal and prefixal derivates is made according to the last stage of derivation, for example,
from the point of view of derivational analysis the word unreasonable – un + (reason- + -able) is
qualified as a prefixal derivate, while the word discouragement – (dis- + -courage) + -ment is
defined as a suffixal derivative.
Suffixation is the formation of words with the help of suffixes. Suffixes usually modify
the lexical meaning of the base and transfer words to a different part of speech.
Suffixes can be classified into different types in accordance with different principles.
According to the lexico-grammatical character suffixes may be: deverbal suffixes, e.d.,
those added to the verbal base (agreement); denominal (endless); deadjectival (widen,
brightness).
According to the part of speech formed suffixes fall into several groups: noun-forming
suffixes (assistance), adjective-forming suffixes (unbearable), numeral-forming suffixes
(fourteen), verb-forming suffixes (facilitate), adverb-forming suffixes (quickly, likewise).
Semantically suffixes may be monosemantic, e.g. the suffix –ess has only one meaning
“female” – goddess, heiress; polysemantic, e.g. the suffix –hood has two meanings “condition or
quality” falsehood and “collection or group” brotherhood.
According to their generalizing denotational meaning suffixes may fall into several
groups: the agent of the action (baker, assistant); collectivity (peasantry); appurtenance
(Victorian, Chinese); diminutiveness (booklet).
Prefixation is the formation of words with the help of prefixes. Two types of prefixes can
be distinguished: 1) those not correlated with any independent word (un-, post-, dis-); 2) those
correlated with functional words (prepositions or preposition-like adverbs: out-, up-, under-).
Diachronically distinction is made between prefixes of native and foreign origin.
Prefixes can be classified according to different principles.
According to the lexico-grammatical character of the base prefixes are usually added to,
they may be: deverbal prefixes, e.d., those added to the verbal base (overdo); denominal
(unbutton); deadjectival (biannual).
According to the part of speech formed prefixes fall into several groups: noun-forming
prefixes (ex-husband), adjective-forming prefixes (unfair), verb-forming prefixes (dethrone),
adverb-forming prefixes (uphill).
Semantically prefixes may be monosemantic, e.g. the prefix –ex has only one meaning
“former” – ex-boxer; polysemantic, e.g. the prefix –dis has four meanings “not” disadvantage
and “removal of” to disbrunch.
According to their generalizing denotational meaning prefixes may fall into several
groups: negative prefixes – un, non, dis, a, in (ungrateful, nonpolitical, disloyal, amoral,
incorrect); reversative prefixes - un, de, dis (untie, decentralize, disconnect); pejorative prefixes
– mis, mal, pseudo (mispronounce, maltreat, pseudo-scientific); prefix of repetition (redo),
locative prefixes – super, sub, inter, trans (superstructure, subway, intercontinental,
transatlantic).
3. Conversion
Conversion is a process which allows us to create additional lexical terms out of those
that already exist, e.g., to saw, to spy, to snoop, to flirt. This process is not limited to one syllable
words, e.g., to bottle, to butter, nor is the process limited to the creation of verbs from nouns, e.g.,
to up the prices. Converted words are extremely colloquial: "I'll microwave the chicken", "Let's
flee our dog", "We will of course quiche and perrier you".
Conversion came into being in the early Middle English period as a result of the leveling
and further loss of endings.
In Modern English conversion is a highly-productive type of word-building. Conversion
is a specifically English type of word formation which is determined by its analytical character,
by its scarcity of inflections and abundance of mono-and-de-syllabic words in different parts of
speech. Conversion is coining new words in a different part of speech and with a different
distribution but without adding any derivative elements, so that the original and the converted
words are homonyms.
Structural Characteristics of Conversion: Mostly monosyllabic words are converted,
e.g., to horn, to box, to eye. In Modern English there is a marked tendency to convert
polysyllabic words of a complex morphological structure, e.g., to e-mail, to X-ray. Most converted
words are verbs which may be formed from different parts of speech from nouns, adjectives,
adverbs, interjections.
Nouns from verbs - a try, a go, a find, a loss
From adjectives - a daily, a periodical
From adverbs - up and down
From conjunctions - but me no buts
From interjection - to encore
Semantic Associations / Relations of Conversion:
The noun is the name of a tool or implement, the verb denotes an action performed by the
tool, e.g., to nail, to pin, to comb, to brush, to pencil;
The noun is the name of an animal, the verb denotes an action or aspect of behavior
considered typical of this animal, e.g., to monkey, to rat, to dog, to fox;
When the noun is the name of a part of a human body, the verb denotes an action
performed by it, e.g., to hand, to nose, to eye;
When the noun is the name of a profession or occupation, the verb denotes the activity
typical of it, e.g., to cook, to maid, to nurse;
When the noun is the name of a place, the verb will denote the process of occupying the
place or by putting something into it, e.g., to room, to house, to cage;
When the word is the name of a container, the verb will denote the act of putting
something within the container, e.g., to can, to pocket, to bottle;
When the word is the name of a meal, the verb means the process of taking it, e.g., to
lunch, to supper, to dine, to wine;
If an adjective is converted into a verb, the verb may have a generalized meaning "to be
in a state", e.g., to yellow;
When nouns are converted from verbs, they denote an act or a process, or the result, e.g.,
a try, a go, a find, a catch.
4. Word-composition
Compound words are words consisting of at least two stems which occur in the language
as free forms.
Most compounds in English have the primary stress on the first syllable. For example,
income tax has the primary stress on the in of income, not on the tax.
Compounds have a rather simple, regular set of properties. First, they are binary in
structure. They always consist of two or more constituent lexemes. A compound which has three
or more constituents must have them in pairs, e.g., washingmachine manufacturer consists of
washingmachine and manufacturer, while washingmachine in turn consists of washing and
machine. Compound words also usually have a head constituent. By a head constituent we mean
one which determines the syntactic properties of the whole lexeme, e.g., the compound lexeme
longboat consists of an adjective, long and a noun, boat. The compound lexeme longboat is a
noun, and it is а noun because boat is a noun, that is, boat is the head constituent of longboat.
Compound words can belong to all the major syntactic categories:
• Nouns: signpost, sunlight, bluebird, redwood, swearword, outhouse;
• Verbs: window shop, stargaze, outlive, undertake;
• Adjectives: ice-cold, hell-bent, undersized;
• Prepositions: into, onto, upon.
From the morphological point of view compound words are classified according to the
structure of immediate constituents:
• Compounds consisting of simple stems - heartache, blackbird;
• Compounds where at least one of the constituents is a derived stem -chainsmoker,
maid-servant, mill-owner, shop-assistant;
• Compounds where one of the constituents is a clipped stem - V-day, A-bomb, Xmas,
H-bag;
• Compounds where one of the constituents is a compound stem - wastes paper basket,
postmaster general.
Compounds are the commonest among nouns and adjectives. Compound verbs are few in
number, as they are mostly the result of conversion, e.g., to blackmail, to honeymoon, to
nickname, to safeguard, to whitewash. The 20th century created some more converted verbs, e.g.,
to weekend, to streamline,, to spotlight. Such converted compounds are particularly common in
colloquial speech of American English. Converted verbs can be also the result of backformation.
Among the earliest coinages are to backbite, to browbeat, to illtreat, to housekeep. The 20th
century gave more examples to hitch-hike, to proof-read, to mass-produce, to vacuumclean.
One more structural characteristic of compound words is classification of compounds
according to the type of composition. According to this principle two groups can be singled out:

words which are formed by a mere juxtaposition without any connecting elements,
e.g., classroom, schoolboy, heartbreak, sunshine;

composition with a vowel or a consonant placed between the two stems. e.g.,
salesman, handicraft.
Semantically compounds may be idiomatic and non-idiomatic. Compound words may be
motivated morphologically and in this case they are non-idiomatic. Sunshine - the meaning here
is a mere meaning of the elements of a compound word (the meaning of each component is
retained). When the compound word is not motivated morphologically, it is idiomatic. In
idiomatic compounds the meaning of each component is either lost or weakened. Idiomatic
compounds have a transferred meaning. Chatterbox - is not a box, it is a person who talks a great
deal without saying anything important; the combination is used only figuratively. The same
metaphorical character is observed in the compound slowcoach - a person who acts and thinks
slowly.
The components of compounds may have different semantic relations. From this point of
view we can roughly classify compounds into endocentric and exocentric. In endocentric
compounds the semantic centre is found within the compound and the first element determines
the other as in the words filmstar, bedroom, writing-table. Here the semantic centres are star,
room, table. These stems serve as a generic name of the object and the determinants film, bed,
writing give some specific, additional information about the objects. In exocentric compound
there is no semantic centre. It is placed outside the word and can be found only in the course of
lexical transformation, e.g., pickpocket - a person who picks pockets of other people, scarecrow an object made to look like a person that a farmer puts in a field to frighten birds.
The Criteria of Compounds
As English compounds consist of free forms, it's difficult to distinguish them from
phrases, because there are no reliable criteria for that. There exist three approaches to distinguish
compounds from corresponding phrases:
Formal unity implies the unity of spelling

solid spelling, e.g., headmaster;

with a hyphen, e.g., head-master;

with a break between two components, e.g., head master.
Different dictionaries and different authors give different spelling variants.
Phonic principal of stress
Many compounds in English have only one primary stress. All compound nouns are
stressed according to this pattern, e.g., ice-cream, ice cream. The rule doesn't hold with
adjectives. Compound adjectives are double-stressed, e.g., easy-going, new-born, sky-blue.
Stress cannot help to distinguish compounds from phrases because word stress may depend on
phrasal stress or upon the syntactic function of a compound.
Semantic unity
Semantic unity means that a compound word expresses one separate notion and phrases
express more than one notion. Notions in their turn can't be measured. That's why it is hard to
say whether one or more notions are expressed. The problem of distinguishing between
compound words and phrases is still open to discussion.
According to the type of bases that form compounds they can be of :
1.
compounds proper – they are formed by joining together bases built on the stems
or on the ford-forms with or without linking element, e.g., door-step;
2.
derivational compounds – by joining affixes to the bases built on the word-groups
or by converting the bases built on the word-groups into the other parts of speech, e.g., longlegged → (long legs) + -ed, a turnkey → (to turn key) + conversion. More examples: do-gooder,
week-ender, first-nighter, house-keeping, baby-sitting, blue-eyed blond-haired, four-storied. The
suffixes refer to both of the stems combined, but not to the final stem only. Such stems as nighter,
gooder, eyed do not exist.
Compound Neologisms
In the last two decades the role of composition in the word-building system of English has
increased. In the 60th and 70th composition was not so productive as affixation. In the 80th
composition exceeded affixation and comprised 29.5 % of the total number of neologisms in
English vocabulary. Among compound neologisms the two-component units prevail. The main
patterns of coining the two-component neologisms are Noun stem + Noun stem = Noun;
Adjective stem + Noun stem = Noun.
There appeared a tendency to coin compound nouns where:
 The first component is a proper noun, e.g., Kirlian photograph - biological field of
humans.
 The first component is a geographical place, e.g., Afro-rock.
 The two components are joined with the help of the linking vowel –o- e.g.,
bacteriophobia, suggestopedia.
 The number of derivational compounds increases. The main productive suffix to coin
such compound is the suffix -er - e.g., baby-boomer, all nighter.
 Many compound words are formed according to the pattern Participle 2 + Adv =
Adjective, e.g., laid-back, spaced-out, switched-off, tapped-out.
 The examples of verbs formed with the help of a post-positive -in -work-in, die-in,
sleep-in, write-in.
Many compounds formed by the word-building pattern Verb + postpositive are numerous
in colloquial speech or slang, e.g., bliss out, fall about/horse around, pig-out.
ATTENTION: Apart from the principle types there are some minor types of modern wordformation, i.d., shortening, blending, acronymy, sound interchange, sound imitation, distinctive
stress, back-formation, and reduplicaton.
5. Shortening
Shortening is the formation of a word by cutting off a part of the word. They can be
coined in two different ways. The first is to cut off the initial/ middle/ final part:
 Aphaeresis – initial part of the word is clipped, e.g., history-story, telephone-phone;
 Syncope – the middle part of the word is clipped, e.g., madam- ma 'am; specs
spectacles
 Apocope – the final part of the word is clipped, e.g., professor-prof, editored, vampirevamp;
 Both initial and final, e.g., influenza-flu, detective-tec.
Polysemantic words are usually clipped in one meaning only, e.g., doc and doctor have
the meaning "one who practices medicine", but doctor is also "the highest degree given by a
university to a scholar or scientist".
Among shortenings there are homonyms, so that one and the same sound and graphical
complex may represent different words, e.g., vac - vacation/vacuum, prep —
preparation/preparatory school, vet — veterinary surgeon/veteran.
6. Blending
Blending is a particular type of shortening which combines the features of both clipping
and composition, e.g., motel (motor + hotel), brunch (breakfast + lunch), smog (smoke + fog),
telethon (television + marathon), modem , (modulator + demodulator), Spanglish (Spanish +
English). There are several structural types of blends:

Initial part of the word + final part of the word, e.g., electrocute (electricity +
execute);

initial part of the word + initial part of the word, e.g., lib-lab (liberal+labour);

Initial part of the word + full word, e.g., paratroops (parachute+troops);

Full word + final part of the word, e.g., slimnastics (slim+gymnastics).
7. Acronymy
Acronyms are words formed from the initial letters of parts of a word or phrase,
commonly the names of institutions and organizations. No full stops are placed between the
letters. All acronyms are divided into two groups. The first group is composed of the acronyms
which are often pronounced as series of letters: EEC (European Economic Community), ID
(identity or identification card), UN (United Nations), VCR (videocassette recorder), FBI
(Federal Bureau of Investigation), LA (Los Angeles), TV (television), PC (personal computer),
GP (General Practitioner), ТВ (tuberculosis). The second group of acronyms is composed by the
words which are pronounced according to the rules of reading in English: UNESCO (United
Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization), AIDS (Acquired Immune Deficiency
Syndrome), ASH (Action on Smoking and Health). Some of these pronounceable words are
written without capital letters and therefore are no longer recognized as acronyms: laser (light
amplification by stimulated emissions of radiation), radar (radio detection and ranging).
Some abbreviations have become so common and normal as words that people do not think
of them as abbreviations any longer. They are not written in capital letters, e.g., radar (radio
detection and ranging), laser (light amplification by stimulated emission of radiation) yuppie,
gruppie, sinbads, dinkies.
Some abbreviations are only written forms but they are pronounced as full words, e.g.,
Mr, Mrs, Dr. Some abbreviations are from Latin. They are used as part of the language etc. - et
cetera, e.g., (for example) — exampli gratia, that is - id est.
Acromymy is widely used in the press, for the names of institutions, organizations,
movements, countries. It is common to colloquial speech, too. Some acronyms turned into
regular words, e.g., jeep -came from the expression general purpose car.
There are a lot of homonyms among acronyms:
MP - Member of Parliament/Military Police/Municipal Police
PC - Personal Computer/Politically correct
8. Sound-interchange
Sound-interchange is the formation of a new word due to an alteration in the phonemic
composition of its root. Sound-interchange falls into two groups: 1) vowel-interchange, e.g., food
– feed; in some cases vowel-interchange is combined with suffixation, e.g., strong – strength; 2)
consonant-interchange e.g., advice – to advise. Consonant-interchange and vowel-interchange
may be combined together, e.g., life – to live.
This type of word-formation is greatly facilitated in Modern English by the vast number
of monosyllabic words. Most words made by reduplication represent informal groups:
colloquialisms and slang, hurdy-gurdy, walkie-talkie, riff-raff, chi-chi girl. In reduplication new
words are coined by doubling a stem, either without any phonetic changes as in bye-bye or with a
variation of the root-vowel or consonant as in ping-pong, chit-chat.
9. Sound imitation or (onomatopoeia)
It is the naming of an action or a thing by more or less exact reproduction of the sound
associated with it, cf.: cock-a-do-doodle-do – ку-ка-ре-ку.
Semantically, according to the source sound, many onomatopoeic words fall into the
following definitive groups: 1) words denoting sounds produced by human beings in the process of
communication or expressing their feelings, e.g., chatter; 2) words denoting sounds produced by
animals, birds, insects, e.g., moo, buzz; 3) words imitating the sounds of water, the noise of metallic
things, movements, e.g., splash, whip, swing.
10. Distinctive stress
Distinctive stress is the formation of a word by means of the shift of the stress in the
source word, e.g., increase – increase.
11. Back-formation
Backformation is coining new words by subtracting a real or supposed suffix, as a result
of misinterpretation of the structure of the existing word. This type of word-formation is not
highly productive in Modern English and it is built on the analogy, e.g., beggar-to beg, cobbler to cobble, blood transfusion — to blood transfuse, babysitter - to baby-sit.

English is an ever-evolving language. According to Global Language Monitor¹, a new word is created every 98 minutes. Conversions are responsible for giving new meaning to existing words, and the conversion process in English is more commonplace in the twenty-first-century lexicon than ever before.

Библиографическое описание:

Сеит-Асан, Ф. Э. Conversion is one of the most efficient ways of enlarging the lexicon of modern English language / Ф. Э. Сеит-Асан, Ш. Ф. Умирбоева, Х. И. Хакимов. — Текст : непосредственный // Молодой ученый. — 2019. — № 47 (285). — С. 72-73. — URL: https://moluch.ru/archive/285/64164/ (дата обращения: 14.04.2023).

The article deals with various aspects of conversion as one of the basic ways of English word-formation: definition and classification. The main types of conversion models are described and the frequency of their use in the language is commented on. Different types of conversion stem of the modern stage of development of the language system are analyzed. In conclusion, the enormous productive potential of conversion in the English language is determined.

Key words: conversion, verbalization, substantivation, adjectivation, adverbialization productivity, word-stem.

Any language can be considered expressive and rich due to its vocabulary. Therefore, the ways of word derivation and word formation are researched carefully to expand the lexicon of language. The existence of a language system and its development are mainly due to the development of the word formation paradigm, the change in the existing types of word formation, and the increase or decrease in the proportion of their productivity. One of the effective ways of that is conversion which even does not need any suffix or prefix in creating new words.

The emergence of new words in the English language is carried out mainly in three ways: by borrowing from other languages; using various means of word formation (such as affixation, composition, conversion, etc), as a result of polysemy (the appearance of new, additional meanings in words already existing in the language). Word formation is “the richest source of new vocabulary in the language, and, as a result of this fact, is the object of close attention of scientists and linguists. [2.87–88]

The term “conversion” at the present stage of development of linguistics is understood as a “method of word formation without the use of special word formative affixes; a kind of transposition, in which the transposition of a word from one part of speech is used without any material change as a representative of another part of speech”. [3.33] Some researchers also use terms such as the non-affixing or root method of word formation.

Conversion as a linguistic phenomenon interested philologists as early as the first half of the 19th century (the beginning of the study of this method of word formations associated with the work of J. Greenwood and G.Sweet).

Conversion is customarily understood as “…the change in the part of speech of a form without any overt affix marking the change” as such, it has traditionally been regarded as particularly widespread in English in comparison with other languages with other word formation processes. The virtual unanimity in the definition of this concept is, however, not paralleled by the actual term given to it. “Conversion,” “functional shift,” “zero derivation,” and several variants of these have at one or the other time competed to name this process. Such different terms as the above only the result of various perspectives from which the same process can be contemplated, and arguments for and against every one of them can be accordingly found. Thus, for example, “functional shift” is preferred in some references because it readily mirrors the adoption of new syntactic capacities by converted units. Explicit as this term is from the syntactic point of view, it also has to be admitted that, as pointed out by Tournier, it rather overlooks complete lack of change in the derivational morphology of the word that is proper to conversion, while focusing on a syntactic property common to other parallel but still clearly different word formation processes like, for example, suffixation. An opposite view is apparently held by other authors, who prefer to use the term “zero derivation” instead, thus laying emphasis on the morphological dimensions of the process, i.e., indicating that no morphological variation occurs under this operation and, by contrast, somehow overshadowing the new syntactic capacities of this units. This latter term has been particularly wide spread, probably it parallels other word formation patterns which involve word class change and thus fits an orderly structure of word-formation processes. [1.181] However, the most frequent term for this operation has clearly been “conversion.” Certain objections to it, have sometimes been raised, for example, by Adams, who rejects this term on the grounds that it may be understood, rather than as the adoption of new syntactic capacities, as implying a complete loss of the original identity of the word, like in the noun stimulant, nowadays hardly an adjective. Similarly, as pointed out by Lipka, it has sometimes also been proposed that the use of the term “conversion” he avoided in strictly synchronic approaches. However, current practice shows that, more often than not, this term occurs regardless of any diachronic consideration. [1.182] One way or the other, all these terms coincide in describing the operation by a lexical unit gains access to syntactic functions habitually realized by members of a word-class different than the one which that unit originally belonged, like in the following examples, where nouns become verbs, and verbs become respectively: (1) My boss faxed a letter which was very important. (2) Jimmy had a look at his toys and began crying as his plane was missing. (3) He told himself that all men are cowards when it came to a showdown with a woman.

No less difficult is the question of the types of conversion, as well as the classification of its components. In lexicology, there are four main types of conversion according to the belonging of components to certain parts of speech and, accordingly, four conversion models:

1. Verbalization (the formation of the verb). This type represents the semantic transformation of the “object” — the “action associated with this object”: flower (the type of a plant which is often brightly coloured with a pleasant smell) — to flower (to blossom, to develop completely); water (a clear liquid, without colour or taste, which falls from sky and is necessary for animal and plant life) — to water (to pour water on to plants or the soil that they are growing in); an elbow (the part in the middle of an arm where it bends) — to elbow (to push someone with your elbow);
2. Substantivation (formation of nouns). The semantic transformation of an “action” is being implemented — the “object as a result of an action”; to look (to direct your eyes in order to see) — look (when you look at someone or something); to sleep (to be in the state of rest when your eyes are closed, your body is not active, and your mind is unconscious) — sleep (the resting state)
3. Adjectivation (formation of adjectives). The model expresses the semantic transformation of the “subject” into “characteristic phenomenon of the subject”; christian (someone who believes in Jesus Christ) — christian(relating to christianity); granny (grandmother)- granny(means having the style like those worn by old woman)
4. Adverbialization (education of adverbs). At the present level of development of the language system, this type is not productive due to the presence of the –ly suffix in the language. The most productive type of conversion is substantivation, and the formation of nouns from adjectives is much more common than their formation from verbs. Next comes verbalization with the frequency realization of the linking “nounverb”. The least productive are adjectival and adverbialization conversion types.

According to the degree of transfer of meaning, researchers distinguish two conversion classes: transposable and word-formation (lexical) In a transposable conversion, the denotative component of the word does not change, but only the syntactic function changes.

The basis sign of conversion as a process of the word education is the emergence of a new lexeme with lexical and grammatical content. The peculiarity of this phenomenon is the fact that there is a rethinking of the rotation of the meaning of the word- basis and its consideration in another aspect. However, one can not but agree with the fact that the word, which appeared as a result of a conversion, includes a certain semantic area of the original word-basis.

In conclusion, there are a great number of ways to expand the number of words in any language, say, adopting words from other languages, through the way of derivation, forming words and so on. Conversion is one of the most effective ways in enriching the lexicon of English language which makes it expressive. This way does not need any change to the word which makes creating new words elementary without difficulties. Among the types of conversion such as, verbalization, substantivation, adjectivation, adverbialization the type of substantivation is the most fruitful way which is seen in making nouns from different forms of speech like verbs, adjectives, etc. So, being aware of the way of conversion helps any kind of learner of English to be an eloquent speaker who express their opinion with the help of various words and word combination.

References:

1. Revista Alicantina de Estudios Ingleses 12 (1999) p. 181–182
2. Zikova I. V. Practical course in English lexicology.(2007) p.87–88
3. Kubryakova E. S., Gireyev V. A. Conversion in modern English language.(2002) p.33