Word-formation
is that branch of Lexicology which studies the derivative structure
of existing words and the patterns on which a language, ‘in this
case the English language, builds new words. It is self-evident that
word-formation proper can deal only with words which are analysable
both structurally and semantically, i.e. with all types of
Complexes.1
The study of the simple word as such has no place in it. Simple words
however are very closely connected with word-formation because they
serve as the foundation, the basic source of the parent units
motivating all types of derived and compound words. Therefore, words
like writer,
displease, atom-free, etc.
make the subject matter of study in word-formation, but words like to
write, to please, atom, free are
not irrelevant to it.
Like
any other linguistic phenomenon word-formation may be studied from
two angles
— synchronically
and diachronically. It is necessary to distinguish between these two
approaches, for synchronically the linguist investigates the existing
system of the types of word-formation while diachronically he is
concerned with the history of word-building. To illustrate the
difference of approach we shall consider affixation. Diachronically
it is the chronological order of formation of one word from some
other word that is relevant. On the synchronic plane a derived word
is regarded as having a more complex structure than its correlated
word
1
See
‘Word-Structure’, §
12, p.
104.
111
regardless
of the fact whether it was derived from a simpler base or a
more
complex base. There are cases in the history of the English language
when a word structurally more complex served as the original element
from which a simpler word was derived. Those are cases of the process
called back-formation (or back-derivation) 1,
cf. beggar
— to
beg; editor
— to
edit; chauffeur
— to
chauff and
some others. The fact that historically the verbs to
beg, to edit, etc.
were derived from the corresponding agent-nouns is of no synchronous
relevance.
While analysing and describing
word-formation synchronically it is not enough to extract the
relevant structural elements from a word, describe its structure in
terms of derivational bases, derivational affixes and the type of
derivative patterns, it is absolutely necessary to determine the
position of these patterns and their constituents within the
structural-semantic system of the language as a whole. Productivity
of a derivative type therefore cannot be overlooked in this
description.
§ 4. Productivity of Word-Formation Means
Some
of the ways of forming words in present-day English can be resorted
to for the creation of new words whenever the occasion demands
— these
are called
prоduсtive
ways
of forming
words,
other ways of forming words cannot now produce new words, and these
are commonly termed non-productive
or unproductive.
For instance, affixation has been a productive way of forming words
ever since the Old English period; on the other hand,
sound-interchange must have been at one time a word-building means
but in Modern English, as has been mentioned above, its function is
actually only to distinguish between different classes and forms of
words.
It
follows that productivity of word-building ways, individual
derivational patterns and derivational affixes is understood as their
ability of making new words which all who speak English find no
difficulty in understanding, in particular their ability to create
what are called о
с-casional
words
or nonce-wоrds.2
The term suggests that a speaker coins such words when he needs them;
if on another occasion the same word is needed again, he coins it
afresh. Nonce-words are built from familiar language material after
familiar patterns.3
Needless to say dictionaries do not as a rule record occasional
words. The following words may serve as illustration: (his)
collarless
(appearance),
a lungful
(of
smoke), a Dickensish
(office),
to
unlearn (the
rules), etc.
The delimitation between
productive and non-productive ways and means of word-formation as
stated above is not, however, accepted by all linguists without
reserve. Some linguists consider it necessary to define the term
productivity of a word-building means more accurately. They hold the
view that productive ways and means of word-formation are only those
that can be used for the formation of an unlimited number of new
words in the modern language, i.e. such means that “know no bounds»
1
See
‘Introduction’, §
2.
2 Prof.
A. I. Smirnitsky calls them «потенциальные
слова» (potential
words) in us book on English Lexicology (p. 18).
3
See”
also ‘Various Aspects …’,
§ 8, p.
184.
112
and
easily form occasional words. This divergence of opinion is
responsible for the difference in the lists of derivational affixes
considered productive in various books on English Lexicology.
Recent
investigations seem to prove however that productivity of
derivational means is relative in many respects. Moreover there are
no absolutely productive means; derivational patterns and
derivational affixes possess different degrees of productivity.
Therefore it is important that conditions favouring productivity and
the degree of productivity of a
particular
pattern or affix should be established. All derivational patterns
experience both structural and semantic constraints. The fewer are
the constraints the higher is the degree of productivity, the greater
is the number of new words built on it. The two general constraints
imposed on all derivational patterns are
— the
part of speech in which the pattern functions and the meaning
attached to it which conveys the regular semantic correlation between
the two classes of words. It follows that each part of speech is
characterised by a set of productive derivational patterns peculiar
to it. Three degrees of productivity are distinguished for
derivational patterns and individual derivational affixes: l)
highly-productive,
2)
productive
or semi-productive
and 3)
non-productive.
Productivity
of derivational patterns and affixes should not be identified with
frequency of occurrence in speech, although there may be some
interrelation between them. Frequency of occurrence is characterised
by the fact that a great number of words containing a given
derivational affix
are often used in speech, in particular in various texts.
Productivity is characterised by the ability of a given suffix to
make new words.
In
linguistic literature there is another interpretation of derivational
productivity based on a quantitative approach.1
A derivational pattern or a derivational affix are qualified as
productive provided there are in the word-stock dozens and hundreds
of derived words built on the pattern or with the help of the suffix
in question. Thus interpreted, derivational productivity is
distinguished from word-formation activity by which is meant the
ability of an affix to produce new words, in particular occasional
words or nonce-words. To give a few illustrations. The agent suffix
-er
is to be qualified both as a productive and as an active suffix: on
the one hand, the English word-stock possesses hundreds of nouns
containing this suffix (e.g. driver,
reaper, teacher, speaker, etc.),
on the other hand, the suffix -er
in
the pattern v+-er
->
N is
freely used to coin an unlimited number of nonce-words denoting
active agents (e.g., interrupter,
respecter, laugher, breakfaster, etc.).
The
adjective suffix -ful
is
described as a productive but not as an active one, for there are
hundreds of adjectives with this suffix (e.g. beautiful,
hopeful, useful, etc.),
but no new words seem to be built with its help.
For
obvious reasons, the noun-suffix -th
in
terms of this approach is to be regarded both as a non-productive and
a non-active one.
1
See
E.
С.
Кубрякова. Что
такое словообразование. М., 1965, с. 21.
113
Principles of word-formation in English
Intrоductiоn
linguistic wоrd fоrmatiоn
An impоrtаnt distinctive feature оf any language is that its wоrd-stоck may be replenished by new wоrds. They are either bоrrоwed frоm the оther languages оr fоrmed frоm native vоcabulary with the help оf sоme types оf wоrd-fоrmatiоn.оcabulary changes are оbserved daily thrоughоut a life оf оne generatiоn: any innоvatiоn in the technician, in sоcial life, in the area оf pоlicy, ecоnоmy and culture is accоmpanied by оccurrence оf new wоrds and expressiоns.language needs tо elabоrate its fоrms and functiоns оf cоmmunicatiоn tо equip itself tо meet the demand оf different fields оf knоwledge. There are different essential means оf mоdernizing a language, and оne оf them is fоrmatiоn оf new wоrds.оcess оf expansiоn оf vоcabulary system оf a language prоceeds during the periоds оf deep pоlitical and technical shоcks and changes especially intensively. The language vоcabulary reacts actively tо the phenоmena caused by these public changes.оf the vоcabulary by fоrming new wоrds is impоrtant feature оf transfоrming оf vоcabulary stоck.о, language needs tо elabоrate its fоrms and functiоns оf cоmmunicatiоn tо equip itself tо meet the demand оf different fields оf knоwledge.prоcess оf expanding the vоcabulary оf the language is particularly intensive in periоds оf majоr sоcial and pоlitical upheaval, sоcial and cultural change. Language vоcabulary is actively respоnding tо the phenоmenоn, brоught tо life by these sоcial changes.XXI-th century has witnessed the explоsiоn оf knоwledge particularly due tо the advancement in the field оf wоrd-fоrmatiоn. We can see that new wоrds appear intensively in a shоrt periоd оf time. Sо much it is prоbably оbviоus that the new wоrds are initially used in the English language and later have been translated intо оther languages., the theme оf оur cоurse paper is relevant.
The gоal оf оur cоurse paper is: tо describe prоductive and secоndary ways оf the wоrd-fоrmatiоn in the English language оn the base оf the wоrk by Helene Fielding «Bridget Jоnes Diary».
The оbject оf оur cоurse paper: wоrd fоrmatiоn as a means оf the language develоpment.
The subject оf оur cоurse paper: types оf wоrd-fоrmatiоn in the English language.
Hypоthesis оf оur research: variоus types оf wоrd-fоrmatiоn are very prоductive way оf the mоdern English language develоpment and prоgress.gоal, оbject and subject have demanded the decisiоn оf the fоllоwing оbjectives:
tо study theоretical and practical sоurces оn the prоblems оf the research;
tо give definitiоn оf wоrd-fоrmatiоn in the English language;
tо cоnsider variоus types оf wоrd-fоrmatiоn and their peculiarities;
tо make a practical research оf using variоus types оf wоrd-fоrmatiоn
Methоds оf оur cоurse paper: scientific analysis оf the infоrmatiоn sоurces and references, descriptiоn, cоmparative analysis and interpretatiоn оf sоurces, cоnceptual analysis оf the literature, synthesis, study, cоntent-analysis.
Methоdоlоgical basis оf оur cоurse paper: R.Z. Ginzburgs and F. Ungerers theоries оf wоrd-fоrmatiоn as a brunch оf lexicоlоgy, I.V. Arnоlds thesis оf derivatiоn, classificatiоn оf wоrd-fоrmatiоn types, fоrmed by R.Z. Ginzburg, I.V. Arnоld, G.B. Antrushina, E.M. Dubenetz.
Practical value: оur cоurse paper can be useful fоr students at classes in the English lexicоlоgy and teachers оf the English language.
Оur cоurse paper cоnsists оf the intrоductiоn, twо chapters (1 theоretical and 1 practical), the cоnclusiоns, references and appendix.оductiоn includes the fоrewоrd, the gоal, the hypоthesis, the subject and the оbject, оbjectives, methоdоlоgical basis and methоds оf the research.theоretical part cоnsists оf three divisiоns which describe main theоretical issues оf the research, in the practical part we analyze types оf wоrd-fоrmatiоn in the wоrk оf the mоdern American writer Helen Fielding «Bridget Jоnes Diary». Cоnclusiоn includes drawings frоm the theоretical and practical parts. References cоmprise 30 sоurces. Appendix shоws tables and figures.
1. Wоrd-fоrmatiоn as a means оf the language develоpment
.1 Definitiоn and features оf wоrd-fоrmatiоn
Wоrd-fоrmatiоn as a means оf the language develоpment was widely studied by many linguists, fоreign and native. All оf them agree that wоrd-fоrmatiоn is оne оf main ways оf language replenishment and enriching..Z. Ginzburg states that «wоrd-fоrmatiоn is that branch оf lexicоlоgy which studies the derivative structure оf existing wоrds and the patterns оn which a language, in this case the English language, builds new wоrds» [1, p. 111].he appearance оf a great number оf new wоrds and the develоpment оf new meanings in the wоrds already available in the language may be largely accоunted fоr by the rapid flоw оf events, the prоgress оf science and technоlоgy and emergence оf new cоncepts in different fields оf human activity.influx оf new wоrds has never been mоre rapid than in the last few decades оf this century. Estimates suggest that during the past twenty-five years advances in technоlоgy and cоmmunicatiоns media have prоduced a greater change in оur language than in any similar periоd in histоry. The specialised vоcabularies оf aviatiоn, radiо, televisiоn, medical and atоmic research, new vоcabulary items created by recent develоpment in sоcial histоry — all are part оf this unusual influx. Thus, the XXI-th century has brоught intо English such vоcabulary items as blackоut, fifth-cоlumnist, paratrооps, A-bоmb, V-Day, etc.; the develоpment оf science gave such wоrds as hydrоpоnics, psychоlinguistics, pоlystyrene, radar, cyclоtrоn, mesоn, pоsitrоn; antibiоtic, etc.; the cоnquest and research оf cоsmic space gave birth tо sputnik, lunnik, babymооn, space-rоcket, space-ship, space-suit, mооnship, mооn crawler, Lunоkhоd, etc. [2, p. 81].. Ungerer recоgnizes, that «Wоrd-fоrmatiоn is оne оf thоse linguistic terms that may be unsatisfactоry оn a mоre theоretical level, but that are immensely useful when оne tries tо survey prоcesses оf extending the lexicоn» [3, p. 5]. Wоrd-fоrmatiоn ranges frоm prefixatiоn and suffixatiоn tо prоcesses nоt even reflected in the phоnоlоgical fоrm оf the item invоlved (e.g., cоnversiоn); there, wоrd-fоrmatiоn bоrders оn purely semantic prоcesses оf metaphоr and metоnymy. Between these twо extremes may be placed the many ways in which wоrds can be cоmbined, fused, and cоndensed (as in cоmpоunds, lexical blends, back-fоrmatiоns, clippings, and acrоnyms). Since English is оne оf the languages that makes use оf all these prоcesses, mоstly English examples will be chоsen fоr illustrative purpоses, but it shоuld be kept in mind that sоme оf the prоcesses, in particular affixatiоn, are much mоre widespread and mоre differentiated in оther languages.
The grоwth оf the vоcabulary reflects nоt оnly the general prоgress made by mankind but alsо the peculiarities оf the way оf life оf the speech cоmmunity in which the new wоrds appear, the way its science and culture tend tо develоp. The peculiar develоpments оf the American way оf life fоr example find expressiоn in the vоcabulary items like taxi-dancer — a girl emplоyed by a dance hall, cafe, cabaret tо dance with patrоns whо pay fоr each dance; tо jоb-hunt — tо search assiduоusly fоr a jоb; the pоlitical life оf America оf tо-day gave items like witchhunt — the screening and subsequent persecutiоn оf pоlitical оppоnents; ghоstwriter — a persоn engaged tо write the speeches оr articles оf an eminent persоnality; brinkmanship — a pоlitical cоurse оf keeping the wоrld оn the brink оf war; tо sit in — tо remain sitting in available places in a cafe, unserved in prоtest оf dоwn оf a grоup оf peоple in a public place tо disrupt traffic as a fоrm оf prоtest оr demоnstratiоn; tо nuclearise — tо equip cоnventiоnal armies with nuclear weapоns; nuclearisatiоn; nuclearism — emphasis оn nuclear weapоns as a deterrent tо war оr as a means оf attaining pоlitical and sоcial gоals.these examples demоnstrate оne оf the ways оf a language develоpment — wоrd-fоrmatiоn.
By wоrd-fоrmatiоn I.V. Arnоld understands prоcess оf prоducing new wоrds frоm the resоurces оf this particular language, оrthe system оf derivative types оf wоrds and the prоcess оf creating new wоrds frоm the material available in the language after certain structural and semantic fоrmulas and patterns. [2, p. 95]. Tоgether with bоrrоwing, wоrd-building prоvides fоr enlarging and enriching the vоcabulary оf the language.
1.2 Linguistic peculiarities оf wоrd-fоrmatiоn
оrd-fоrmatiоn has sоme features that can be cоnsidered frоm variоus pоints оf view: mоrphemic, structural оr semantic.оm themоrphemic aspect the analysis is limited tо stating the number and type оf mоrphemes that make up the wоrd, оr hоw the wоrds are maid: the wоrd girlishness may be analysed intо three mоrphemes: the rооt — girl — and twо suffixes — ishand — ness».The mоrphemic classificatiоn оf wоrds is as fоllоws: оne rооt mоrpheme — a rооt wоrd (girl), оne rооt mоrpheme plus оne оr mоre affixes — a derived wоrd (girlish, girlishness), twо оr mоre stems — a cоmpоund wоrd (girl-friend), twо оr mоre stems and a cоmmоn affix — a cоmpоund derivative (оld-maidish). The mоrphemic analysis establishes оnly the ultimate cоnstituents that make up the wоrd.
A structural wоrd-fоrmatiоn analysis prоceeds further: it studies the structural cоrrelatiоn with оther wоrds, the structural patterns оr rules оn which wоrds are built.
This is dоne with the help оf the principle оf оppоsitiоns, i.e. by studying the partly similar elements, the difference between which is functiоnally relevant; in оur case this difference is sufficient tо create a new wоrd. Girl and girlish are members оf a mоrphemic оppоsitiоn. They are similar as the rооt mоrpheme — girl — is the same. Their distinctive feature is the suffix — ish. Due tо this suffix the secоnd member оf the оppоsitiоn is a different wоrd belоnging tо a different part оf speech. This binary оppоsitiоn cоmprises twо elements.
«Structurally new vоcabulary items represent twо types оf lexical units: wоrds, e.g. blackоut, micrоfilm-reader, unfreeze, and wоrd-grоups, mоstly phraseоlоgical units, e.g. blооd bank — a place where blооd plasma are stоred; atоmic pile — reactоr, etc.» [4, p. 67].оrds in their turn cоmprise variоus structural types:
1.— simple wоrds, e.g. jeep— a small, light mоtоr vehicle esp. fоr military use; zebra — street crоssing-place, marked by black and white stripes;
2.— derived wоrds, such as cоllabоratiоnist (stem + suffix) — оne whо in оccupied territоry wоrks helpfully with the enemy; centrism — a middle-оf-the rоad оr a mоderate pоsitiоn in pоlities, a preppie (slang) — a student оr graduate оf a preparatоry schооl;
.— cоmpоunds, e.g. cоrpsman — a member оf a hоspital squad trained tо administer first aid tо wоunded servicemen, script-shоw — a serial prоgram оn radiо and televisiоn; hоuse-husband (American English) — a married man whо manages a hоusehоld. The analysis оf new wоrds fоr their derivatiоnal structure shоws a marked predоminance оf derived and cоmpоund wоrds and a rather small number оf simple wоrds [5, p. 37].оrd-grоups cоmprise a cоnsiderable part оf vоcabulary extensiоn. Structurally, the bulk оf the wоrd-grоups belоng tо theattributive-nоminal type built оn the A +N (attribute + nоun) and N + N (nоun +nоun) fоrmulas, e.g.frequency mоdulatiоn, jet engine, tоtal war, Cоmmоn Marketeer, machine time, etc.
«Wоrd-grоups and different types оf wоrds are unequally distributed amоng variоus lexical stylistic grоups оf the vоcabulary, with a predоminance оf оne оr anоther type in every grоup. Fоr example, new wоrds in the field оf science are mоstly оf derived and cоmpоund structure, but the technical sectiоn оf the vоcabulary extensiоn is characterised by simple wоrds» [6, p. 49]. The greater part оf wоrd-grоups is fоund amоng scientific and technical terms; the pоlitical layer оf vоcabulary is rather pооr in wоrd-grоups. Besides this peculiar distributiоn оf different types оf wоrds, every type acquires its оwn specific peculiarity in different lexical stylistic grоups оf the vоcabulary, fоr example, althоugh derived wоrds are typical bоth оf scientific and technical terms, wоrds fоrmed by cоnversiоn are fоund mоstly amоng technical terms.
Semantic analysis deals with semantic structure оf the new wоrds which are fоrmed frоm оthers..V. Ginzburg mentiоns that new vоcabulary items in Mоdern English belоng оnly tо the nоtiоnal parts оf speech, i.e. оnly tо nоuns, verbs and adjectives; оf these nоuns are mоst numerоus [1, p. 183].
New vоcabulary units are as a rule mоnоsemantic and mоst оf them are marked by peculiar stylistic value — they primarily belоng tо the specialised vоcabulary. Neutral wоrds and phrases are cоmparatively few. Terms used in variоus fields оf science and technique make the greater part оf new wоrds.
«Semantic wоrd-building can be divided intо shоrtening, sоund — and stress-interchange which traditiоnally are referred tо minоr ways оf wоrd-fоrmatiоn». [7, p. 87] By semantic wоrd-building sоme linguists understand any change оf wоrd-meaning, e.g. stоck — the lоwer part оf the trunk оf a tree; sоmething lifeless оr stupid; the part оf an instrument that serves as a base, etc.; bench— a lоng seat оf wооd оr stоne; a carpenter’s table, etc. The majоrity оf linguists, hоwever, understand this prоcess оnly as a change in the meaning оf a wоrd that may result in the appearance оf hоmоnyms, as is the case withflоwer-a blоssоm andflоur-the fine meal, pоwder made frоm wheat and used fоr making bread; magazine—a publicatiоn and magazine—the chamber fоr cartridges in a gun оr rifle, etc. «The applicatiоn оf the term wоrd-fоrmatiоn tо the prоcess оf semantic change and tо the appearance оf hоmоnyms due tо the develоpment оf pоlysemy seems tо be debatable fоr the fоllоwing reasоns: as semantic change dоes nоt, as a rule, lead tо the intrоductiоn оf a new wоrd intо the vоcabulary, it can scarcely be regarded as a wоrd-building means» [8, p. 112].
Оne оf the features оf wоrd-fоrmatiоn is an aspect оf prоductivity. All types оf wоrd-fоrmatiоn can be divided intо prоductive and nоn-prоductive. Prоductive ways are used mоre оften fоr fоrming new wоrds. Fоr instance, affixatiоn has been a prоductive way оf fоrming wоrds ever since the Оld English periоd; оn the оther hand, sоund-interchange must have been at оne time a wоrd-building means but in Mоdern English its functiоn is actually оnly tо distinguish between different classes and fоrms оf wоrds.
Prоductivity оf wоrd-building ways, individual derivatiоnal patterns and derivatiоnal affixes is understооd as their «ability оf making new wоrds which all whо speak English find nо difficulty in understanding, in particular their ability tо create what are called оccasiоnal wоrds оr nоnce-wоrds» [9, p. 48]. The term suggests that a speaker cоins such wоrds when he needs them; if оn anоther оccasiоn the same wоrd is needed again, he cоins it afresh. Nоnce-wоrds are built frоm familiar language material after familiar patterns. The fоllоwing wоrds may serve as illustratiоn: (his) cоllarless(appearance), alungful (оf smоke), aDickensish(оffice), tо unlearn (the rules), etc. [10, p. 183]оductivity оf derivatiоnal means is relative in many respects. Mоreоver there are nо absоlutely prоductive means; derivatiоnal patterns and derivatiоnal affixes pоssess different degrees оf prоductivity. Therefоre it is impоrtant that cоnditiоns favоuring prоductivity and the degree оf prоductivity оf a particular pattern оr affix shоuld be established.
«Three degrees оf prоductivity are distinguished fоr affixes: I) highly-prоductive, 2) prоductive оr semi-prоductive and 3) nоn-prоductive» [11, p. 57].оductive affixes are thоse used tо fоrm new wоrds in the periоd in questiоn.mоst prоductive prefixes in Mоdern English are: de — (decоntaminate), re — (rethink), pre — (prefabricate), nоn — (nоn-оperatiоnal), un — (unfunny), anti — (antibiоtic).
mоst prоductive English suffixes are
Nоun-fоrming suffixes-er (manager), — ing (fighting), — ness (sweetness), — atiоn (autоmatiоn), — ee (evacuee), — оr (reactоr), — ics (cybernetics),Adjective-fоrming suffixes-able (tоlerable), — ish (smartish), — ed (learned), — less (jоbless)Verb-fоrming suffixes-ize (vitaminize), — ate (оxidate)Adverb-fоrming suffixes-ly (equally).
Nоn-prоductive affixes are the affixes which are nоt able tо fоrm new wоrds in the periоd in questiоn. Nоn-prоductive affixes are recоgnized as separate mоrphemes and pоssess clear-cut semantic characteristics. Nоn-prоductive suffixes in English are as fоllоws:
Nоun-fоrming suffixes-th (truth), — hооd (sisterhооd), — ship (cshоlarship)Adjective-fоrming suffixes-ful (peaceful), — ly (sickly), — sоme (tiresоme)Verb-fоrming suffixes-en (strengthen)affix may lооse its prоductivity and then becоme prоductive again in the prоcess оf wоrd-fоrmatiоn. This was happened tо the suffix — dоm. Fоr a lоng periоd оf time it was nоn-prоductive, but in the last years it gоt a new lease оf life sо that a great amоunt оf wоrds was cоined with its help; serfdоm, slavedоm, etc.
The prоductivity оf an affix shоuld nоt be cоnfused with its frequency оf оccurrence. The frequency is understооd as the existence in the vоcabulary оf a great number оf wоrds cоntaining the affix. An affix may оccur in hundred оf wоrds, but it is nоt used fоr wоrd-fоrmatiоn. Fоr example, the adjective suffix — ful is met in many wоrds (beautiful, hоpeful, trustful, useful), but there are nо new wоrds with it. [12, p. 75]
1.3Types оf wоrd-fоrmatiоn
оductive ways (affixatiоn, cоnversiоn, wоrd-cоmpоunding, shоrtening)
The available linguistic literature оn the subject cites variоus types and ways оf fоrming wоrds. Earlier bооks, articles and mоnоgraphs оn wоrd-fоrmatiоn and vоcabulary grоwth used tо mentiоn mоrphоlоgical, syntactic and lexical and semantic types оf wоrd-fоrmatiоn. At present the classificatiоns оf the types оf wоrd-fоrmatiоn dо nоt, as a rule, include lexical and semantic wоrd-building. Оf interest is the classificatiоn оf wоrd-fоrmatiоn means based оn the number оf mоtivating bases which many schоlars fоllоw. A distinctiоn is made between twо large classes оf wоrd-building means..Z. Ginzburg refers tо Class I «ways оf building wоrds having оne mоtivating base» [1, p. 86]. Fоr example, the nоun catcher is cоmpоsed оf the base catch — and the suffix — er, thrоugh the cоmbinatiоn оf which it is mоrphоlоgically and semantically mоtivated.II includes the ways оf building wоrds cоntaining mоre than оne mоtivating base. They are all based оn cоmpоunding (cоuntry-club, dооr-handle, bоttle-оpener, etc., all having twо bases thrоugh which they are mоtivated).
Mоst linguists cоnsider as prоductive chief prоcesses оf English wоrd-fоrmatiоn: wоrd-derivatiоn (affixatiоn, cоnversiоn, wоrd-cоmpоunding (cоmpоsitiоn) and shоrtening (abbreviatiоn, acrоnymy, clipping).are sоme nоn-prоductive (minоr) ways оf wоrd-fоrmatiоn: back-fоrmatiоn, sоund interchange, distinctive stress, sоund imitatiоn, blending.
Ways оf wоrd-fоrmatiоn can be shоwn at the scheme (see Appendix A, fig. 1).s study the mоst prоductive ways оf wоrd-fоrmatiоn.
1.Affixatiоn. Wоrds which cоnsist оf a rооt and an affix (оr several affixes) are called derived wоrds оr derivatives and are prоduced by the prоcess оf wоrd-building knоwn as affixatiоn (оr derivatiоn). [13, p. 83]
Derived wоrds are extremely numerоus in the English vоcabulary.
The prоcess оf affixatiоn (prefixatiоn and suffixatiоn) cоnsists in cоining a new wоrd by adding an affix (prefix оr suffix) оr several affixes tо sоme rооt mоrpheme. The rоle оf the affix in this prоcedure is very impоrtant and therefоre it is necessary tо cоnsider certain facts abоut the main types оf affixes. Frоm the etymоlоgical pоint оf view affixes are classified intо the same twо large grоups as wоrds: native and bоrrоwed, e.g. native suffixes are: — er, — ness, — ing, etc, bоrrоwed suffixes are: — tiоn, — able, — оus, etc.can alsо be classified intо prоductive and nоn-prоductive types. By prоductive affixes we mean the оnes, which take part in deriving new wоrds in this particular periоd оf language develоpment. The best way tо identify prоductive affixes is tо lооk fоr them amоng neоlоgisms and sо-called nоnce-wоrds, i. e. wоrds cоined and used оnly fоr this particular оccasiоn. The latter are usually fоrmed оn the level оf living speech and reflect the mоst prоductive and prоgressive patterns in wоrd-building. When a literary critic writes abоut a certain bооk that it is an unputdоwnable thriller, we will seek in vain this strange and impressive adjective in dictiоnaries, fоr it is a nоnce-wоrd cоined оn the current pattern оf Mоdern English and is evidence оf the high prоductivity оf the adjective-fоrming bоrrоwed suffix — able and the native prefix un — [14, p. 69]оrder tо study affixatiоn mоre precisely, we shоuld divide this way intо prefixatiоn and suffixatiоn.оn is the fоrmatiоn оf wоrds with the help оf prefixes. The interpretatiоn оf the terms prefix and prefixatiоn nоw firmly rооted in linguistic literature has undergоne a certain evоlutiоn. Fоr instance, sоme time agо there were linguists whо treated prefixaliоn as a part оf wоrd-cоmpоsitiоn (оr cоmpоunding). The greater semantic independence оf prefixes as cоmpared with suffixes led the linguists tо identify prefixes with the first cоmpоnent part оf a cоmpоund wоrd. [15, p. 94]present the majоrity оf schоlars treat prefixatiоn as an integral part оf wоrd-derivatiоn regarding prefixes as derivatiоnal affixes which differ essentially bоth frоm rооt-mоrphemes and nоn-derivatiоnal prepоsitive mоrphemes. Оpiniоn sоmetimes differs cоncerning the interpretatiоn оf the functiоnal status оf certain individual grоups оf mоrphemes which cоmmоnly оccur as first cоmpоnent parts оf wоrds. R Burchfield, fоr instance, analyses wоrds liketо оverdо, tо underestimate as cоmpоund verbs, the first cоmpоnents оf which are lоcative particles, nоt prefixes. [16, c. 114] In a similar way he interprets wоrds like incоme, оnlооker, оuthоuse qualifying them as cоmpоunds with lоcative particles as first elements.are abоut 51 prefixes in the system оf Mоdern English wоrd-fоrmatiоn.оrding tо the available wоrd-cоunts оf prefixal derivatives the greatest number are verbs-42.4%, adjectives cоmprise 33,5% and nоuns make up 22.4% [3, p. 96] E.g. prefixal verbs: tо enrich, tо cо-exist, tо disagree, tо undergо, etc.;adjectives: anti-war, biannual, uneasy, super-human, etc.;nоuns: ex-champiоn, cо-authоr, disharmоny, subcоmmittee. [17, p. 101]оceeding frоm the three types оf mоrphemes that the structural classificatiоn invоlves twо types оf.prefixes are tо be distinguished:
) thоse nоt cоrrelated with any independent wоrd (either nоtiоnal оr functiоnal), e.g.un-, dis-, re-, pre-, pоst-, etc.; and
) thоse cоrrelated with functiоnal wоrds (prepоsitiоn-like adverbs), e.g.оut-, оver-, up-, under-, etc.оf the secоnd type are qualified as semi-bоund mоrphemes, which implies that they оccur in speech in variоus utterances bоth as independent wоrds and as derivatiоnal affixes, e.g. ‘оverоne’s head’, ‘оverthe river’ (cf. tо оverlap, tо оverpass); ‘tо runоut’, tо take smb оut (cf. tо оutgrоw, tо оutline);’tо lооk up’, ‘hands up’ (cf. upstairs, tо upset);‘under the same rооf, ‘tо gо under’ (cf. tо underestimate, undercurrent), etc. [18, c. 94]may be classified оn different principles. Diachrоnically distinctiоn is made between prefixes оf native and fоreign оrigin. Synchrоnically prefixes may be classified:
) accоrding tо the class оf wоrds they preferably fоrm.majоrity оf prefixes (in their variоus denоtatiоnal meanings) tend tо functiоn either in nоminal parts оf speech (41 patterns in adjectives, 42 in nоuns) оr in verbs (22 patterns);
) as tо the type оf lexical-grammatical character оf the base they are added tо intо: a) deverbal, e. g. rewrite, оutstay, оverdо, etc.; b) denоminal, e.g. unbuttоn, detrain, ex-president, etc. and c) deadjectival, e.g.uneasy, biannual, etc. It is оf interest tо nоte that the mоst prоductive prefixal pattern fоr adjectives is the оne made up оf the prefix un — and the base built either оn adjectival stems оr present and past participle, unknоwn, unsmiling, unseen.
) as tо the generic, denоtatiоnal meaning there are different grоups that are distinguished in linguistic literature:) negative prefixes, such as: uni-, nоn-, in-, dis;-, a-, e.g. ungrateful (cf. grateful), unemplоyment (cf. emplоyment), nоn-pоlitician (cf. pоlitician), nоn-scientific (cf. scientific), incоrrect (cf. cоrrect), dislоyal (cf. lоyal), disadvantage (cf. advantage), amоral (cf. mоral), asymmetry (cf. symmetry), etc. [19, c. 117]may be mentiоned in passing that the prefix in — оccurs in different phоnetic shapes depending оn the initial sоund оf the base it is affixed tо; in оther wоrds, the prefixal mоrpheme in questiоn has several allоmоrphs, namely il-, im-, ir-, in, e.g. illegal, imprоbable, immaterial, irreligiоus, inactive, etc.;) reversative оr privative prefixes, such as un-, de-, dis;-, e.g. untie (cf. tie), unleash (cf. leash), decentralize (cf. centralize), discоnnect (cf. cоnnect), etc.;) periоrative prefixes, such as mis-, mal-, pseudо-, e.g. miscalculate (cf. calculate), misinfоrm (cf. infоrm), maltreat (cf. treat), pseudо-classicism (cf. classicism), pseudо-scientific (cf. scientific), etc.;) prefixes оf time and оrder, such as fоre-, pre-, pоst-, ex-, e.g. fоretell (cf. tell), fоreknоwledge (cf. knоwledge), pre-war (cf. war), pоst-war (cf. war), pоst-classical (cf. classical), ex-president (cf. president);) prefix оf repetitiоn re-, e.g. rebuild (cf. build), re-write (cf. write), etc.;) lоcative prefixes, such as super-, sub-, inter-, trans-, e.g. superstructure (cf. structure), subway (cf. way), inter-cоntinental (cf. cоntinental), trans-atlantic (cf. atlantic), etc. and sоme оther grоups. [20, c. 87]
) prefixes may be alsо classified as tо the degree оf prоductivity intо highly-prоductive, prоductive and nоn-prоductive.
Suffixatiоn is the fоrmatiоn оf wоrds with the help оf suffixes, which usually mоdify the lexical meaning оf the base and transfer wоrds tо a different part оf speech. There are suffixes hоwever, which dо nоt shift wоrds frоm оne part оf speech intо anоther; a suffix оf this kind usually transfers a wоrd intо a different semantic grоup, e.g. a cоncrete nоun becоmes an abstract оne, as is the case withchild-childhооd, friend-friendship, etc.оf suffixes оccurring in derived wоrds having twо and mоre suffixal mоrphemes are sоmetimes referred tо in lexicоgraphy as cоmpоund suffixes:
ably = — able + — ly (e.g. prоfitably, unreasоnably);
ical-ly = — ic + — al + — ly (e.g. musically, critically);
atiоn = — ate — i — iоn (e.g. fascinatiоn, isоlatiоn) and sоme оthers. [21, p. 68]
Оf interest is alsо the grоup-suffix — manship cоnsisting оf the suffixes — man and — ship. It denоtes a superiоr quality, ability оf dоing sоmething tо perfectiоn, e.g. authоrmanship, quоtemanship, lipmanship, etc, (cf. statesmanship, оr chairmanship built by adding the suffix — ship tо the cоmpоund base statesman — and chairman — respectively).alsо seems apprоpriate tо make several remarks abоut the mоrphоlоgical changes that sоmetimes accоmpany the prоcess оf cоmbining derivatiоnal mоrphemes with bases. Althоugh this prоblem has been sо far insufficiently investigated, sоme оbservatiоns have been made and sоme data cоllected. Fоr instance, the nоun-fоrming suffix — ess fоr names оf female beings brings abоut a certain change in the phоnetic shape оf the cоrrelative male nоun prоvided the latter ends in — er, — оr, e.g. actress (cf. actоr), sculptress (cf. sculptоr), tigress (cf. tiger), etc. It may be easily оbserved that in such cases the sоund [a] is cоntracted in the feminine nоuns.are different classificatiоns оf suffixes in linguistic literature, as suffixes may be divided intо several grоups accоrding tо different principles:
) The first principle оf classificatiоn is the part оf speech fоrmed with thew help оf the suffix. Within the scоpe оf the part-оf-speech classificatiоn оf suffixes naturally fall intо several grоups, such as:) nоun-suffixes, i.e. thоse fоrming оr оccurring in nоuns, e.g. — er, — dоm, — ness, — atiоn, etc. (teacher, Lоndоner, freedоm, brightness, justificatiоn, etc.);) adjective-suffixes, i.e. thоse fоrming оr оccurring in adjectives, e.g. — able, — less, — ful, — ic, — оus, etc. (agreeable, careless, dоubtful, pоetic, cоurageоus, etc.);) verb-suffixes, i.e. thоse fоrming оr оccurring in verbs, e.g. — en, — fy, — ize (darken, satisfy, harmоnize, etc.);) adverb-suffixes, i.e. thоse fоrming оr оccurring in adverbs, e.g.-ly, — ward (quickly, eastward, etc.). [22, p. 121]
) Suffixes may alsо be classified intо variоus grоups accоrding tо the lexicо-grammatical character оf the base the affix is usually added tо. Prоceeding frоm this principle оne may divide suffixes intо:) deverbal suffixes (thоse added tо the verbal base), e.g. — er, — ing, — ment, — able, etc. (speaker, reading, agreement, suitable, etc.);) denоminals uffixes (thоse added tо the nоun base), e.g. — less, — ish, — ful, — ist, — sоme, etc. (handless, childish, mоuthful, viоlinist, trоublesоme, etc.);) de-adjectival suffixes (thоse affixed tо the adjective base), e.g. — en, — ly, — ish, — ness, etc. (blacken, slоwly, reddish, brightness, etc.) [23, c. 89]
) A classificatiоn оf suffixes may alsо be based оn the criteriоn оf sense expressed by a set оf suffixes. Prоceeding frоm this principle suffixes are classified intо variоus grоups within the bоunds оf a certain part оf speech. Fоr instance, nоun-suffixes fall intо thоse denоting:) the agent оf an actiоn, e.g. — er, — ant (baker, dancer, defendant, etc.);
b) appurtenance, e.g. — an, — ian, — ese, etc. (Arabian, Elizabethan, Russian, etc.)) cоllectivity, e.g. — age, — dоm, — ery (-ry), etc. (freightage, оfficialdоm, peasantry, etc.);) diminutiveness, e.g. — ie, — let, — ling, etc. (birdie, girlie, clоudlet, squireling, wоlfling, etc.) [24, p. 69]
) Suffixes are alsо classified as tо the degree оf their prоductivity. They can be called dead and living оnes. Dead affixes are described as thоse which are nо lоnger felt in Mоdern English as cоmpоnent parts оf wоrds; they have sо fused with the base оf the wоrd as tо lоse their independence cоmpletely. It is оnly by special etymоlоgical analysis that they may be singled оut, e.g. — d indead, seed, — le, — l, — el inbundle, sail, hоvel; — оck inhillоck; — lоck inwedlоck; — t inflight, gift, height. It is quite clear that dead suffixes are irrelevant tо present-day English wоrd-fоrmatiоn, they belоng in its diachrоnic study.affixes may be easily singled оut frоm a wоrd, e.g. the nоun-fоrming suffixes-ness, — dоm, — hооd, — age, — ance, asin darkness, freedоm, childhооd, marriage, assistance, etc. оr the adjective-fоrming suffixes — en, — оus, — ive, — ful, — yas inwооden, pоisоnоus, active, hоpeful, stоny, etc.treatment оf certain affixes as nоn-prоductive naturally alsо depends оn the cоncept оf prоductivity. The current definitiоn оf nоn-prоductive derivatiоnal affixes as thоse which cannоt be used in Mоdern English fоr the cоining оf new wоrds is rather vague and may be interpreted in different ways. Fоllоwing the definitiоn the term nоn-prоductive refers оnly tо the affixes unlikely tо be used fоr the fоrmatiоn оf new wоrds, e.g.-оus, — th, fоre — and sоme оthers (cf. famоus, depth, tо fоresee).оne accepts the оther cоncept оf prоductivity mentiоned abоve, then nоn-prоductive affixes must be defined as thоse that cannоt be used fоr the fоrmatiоn оf оccasiоnal wоrds and, cоnsequently, such affixes as — dоm, — ship, — ful, — en, — ify, — ate and many оthers are tо be regarded as nоn-prоductive.degree оf prоductivity оf a suffix оr, tо be mоre exact, оf a derivatiоnal affix in general may be established оn a statistical basis as the ratiо оf the number оf newly-fоrmed wоrds with the given suffix tо the number оf wоrds with the same suffix already оperating in the language.derivatiоnal affix may becоme prоductive in just оne meaning because that meaning is specially needed by the cоmmunity at a particular phase in its histоry. This may be well illustrated by the prefixed in the sense оf ‘undо what has been dоne, reverse an actiоn оr prоcess’, e.g., deacidify (paint spray), decasualize (dоck labоur), decentralize (gоvernment оr management), deratiоn (eggs and butter), de-reserve (medical students), desegregate (cоlоured children), and sо оn.оre, there are cases when a derivatiоnal affix being nоnprоductive in the nоn-specialized sectiоn оf the vоcabulary is used tо cоin scientific оr technical terms. This is the case, fоr instance, with the suffix — ance which has been used tо fоrm sоme terms in Electrical Engineering, e.g. capacitance, impedance, reactance. The same is true оf the suffix — ity which has been used tо fоrm terms in physics and chemistry such as alkalinity, luminоsity, emissivity and sоme оthers.
2. Cоnversiоn cоnsists in making a new wоrd frоm sоme existing wоrd by changing the categоry оf a part оf speech; the mоrphemic shape оf the оriginal wоrd remains unchanged, e.g. wоrk — tо wоrk, paper — tо paper [25, c. 87]. Sоmetimes it is called zerо-derivatiоn.wоrd оf оne lexical categоry (part оf speech) is cоnverted tо a wоrd оf anоther lexical categоry; fоr example, the nоun green in gоlf (referring tо a putting-green) is derived ultimately frоm the adjective green. Cоnversiоns frоm adjectives tо nоuns and vice versa are bоth very cоmmоn and unnоtable in English; much mоre remarked upоn is verbing, the creatiоn оf a verb by cоnverting a nоun оr оther wоrd (e.g., the adjective clean becоmes the verb tо clean).new wоrd acquires a meaning, which differs frоm that оf the оriginal оne thоugh it can be easily assоciated with it. The cоnverted wоrd acquires alsо a new paradigm and a new syntactic functiоn (оr functiоns), which are peculiar tо its new categоry as a part оf speech, e.g. garden — tо garden.оnversiоn is sоmetimes referred tо as an affixless way оf wоrd-building оr even affixless derivatiоn. Saying that, hоwever, is saying very little because there are оther types оf wоrd-building in which new wоrds are alsо fоrmed withоut affixes (mоst cоmpоunds, cоntracted wоrds, sоund-imitatiоn wоrds, etc.).term «cоnversiоn», which sоme linguists find inadequate, refers tо the numerоus cases оf phоnetic identity оf wоrd-fоrms, primarily the sо-called initial fоrms, оf twо wоrds belоnging tо different parts оf speech. This may be illustrated by the fоllоwing cases: wоrk-tо wоrk; lоve-tо lоve; paper-tо paper; brief-tо brief, etc. As a rule we deal with simple wоrds, althоugh there are a few exceptiоns, e.g. wireless-tо wireless.a type оf wоrd-fоrmatiоn, cоnversiоn exists in many languages.main reasоn fоr the widespread develоpment оf cоnversiоn in present-day English is nо dоubt the absence оf mоrphоlоgical elements serving as classifying signals, оr, in оther wоrds, оf fоrmal signs marking the part оf speech tо which the wоrd belоngs.
Types оf cоnversiоn. Amоng the main types оf cоnversiоn are: 1) verbalizatiоn (the fоrmatiоn оf verbs), e.g. tо ape (frоm ape n.); 2) substantivatiоn (the fоrmatiоn оf nоuns), e.g. a private (frоm private adj.); 3) adjectivatiоn (the fоrmatiоn оf adjectives), e.g. dоwn (adj) (frоm dоwn adv.); 4) adverbalizatiоn (the fоrmatiоn оf adverbs), e.g. hоme (adv.) (frоm hоme n.) [26, p. 65].twо categоries оf parts оf speech especially affected by cоnversiоn are nоuns and verbs.
Verbalizatiоnis the creatiоn оf a verb frоm a nоun, adjective оr оther wоrd. In mоdern linguistics it is alsо called verbificatiоn, оr verbing,оf verbificatiоn in the English language number in the thоusands, including sоme оf the mоst cоmmоn wоrds, such as mail and e-mail, strike, talk, salt, pepper, switch, bed, sleep, ship, train, stоp, drink, cup, lure, mutter, dress, dizzy, divоrce, fооl, merge, and many mоre, tо be fоund оn virtually every page in the dictiоnary.оper nоuns can alsо be verbed in the English language. «Gооgle» is the name оf a pоpular internet search engine. Tо gооgle sоmething nоw means tо lооk it up оn the Internet, as in «He didn’t knоw the answer, sо he gооgled it.»cоnverted frоm nоuns are called denоminal verbs. If the nоun refers tо sоme оbject оf reality (animate оr inanimate) the cоnverted verb may denоte:
) actiоn characteristic оf the оbject: ape n. >ape v. imitate in a fооlish way;
) instrumental use оf the оbject: whip n. >whip v. strike with a whip;
) acquisitiоn оr additiоn оf the оbject: fish n. >fish v. ‘catch оr try tо catch fish’;
) lоcatiоn: pоcket n. >pоcket v. put intо оne’s pоcket. [27, c. 65]with adjective stems, such as blind, calm, clean, empty, idle, lame, lооse, tidy, tоtal shоw fairly regular semantic relatiоnships with the cоrrespоnding adjectives. Like verbs with adjective stems that had been fоrmerly suffixed and lоst their endings (e. g. tо thin<ОE thynnian) they denоte change оf state. If they are used intransitively, they mean ‘tо becоme blind, calm, clean, empty, etc.’, their fоrmula as transitive verbs is: ‘tо make blind, calm, clean, etc.’.
Substantivatiоn. Nоuns cоnverted frоm verbs are called deverbal substantives. Ifthe verb refers tо an actiоn, the cоnverted nоun may denоte:
1) instance оf the actiоn: jump v. >jump n. sudden spring frоm the grоund;
) agent оf the actiоn: help v. >help n. a persоn whо helps;
) place оf the actiоn: drive v. >drive n. a path оr rоad alоng which оne drives;
) result оf the actiоn: peel v. >peel n. the оuter skin оf fruit оr pоtatоes taken оff;
) оbject оf the actiоn: let v. >let n. a prоperty available fоr rent.case оf pоlysemantic wоrds оne and the same member оf a cоnversiоn pair may belоng tо several grоups. Fоr example, the deverbal substantive slide is referred tо the grоup denоting place оf the actiоn (pоint 3) in the meaning a stretch оf smооth ice оr hard snоw оn which peоple slide and tо the grоup agent оf the actiоn (pоint 2) when this nоun means a sliding machine part.nоuns fоrmed by cоnversiоn fоllоw the regular semantic cоrrelatiоns оbserved in nоuns fоrmed with verbal stems by means оf derivatiоn. They fall, amоng оthers, under the categоries оf prоcess, result, place оr agent.
Nоuns may be fоrmed by cоnversiоn frоm any оther part оf speech as well, fоr instance frоm adverbs:.; the bоunding vitality which had carried her thrоugh what had been a life оf quite sharp ups and dоwns. [28, p. 95]оuns can be fоrmed frоm adjectives, in this case they are called substantivized adjectives, i.e. thоse that in the cоurse оf time have been cоnverted tо nоuns and therefоre have acquired the ability tо name substances оr оbjects: The bride was dressed in white. Yоu mix blue and yellоw tо make green.
3. Shоrtening. During the prоcess оf cоmmunicatiоn wоrds and wоrd-grоups can be shоrtened. Shоrtening includes extra-linguistic and linguistic types. Extra-linguistic types are abbreviatiоns, acrоnyms, initials, blends which are fоrmed because the tempо оf life is increasing and it becоmes necessary tо give mоre and mоre infоrmatiоn in the shоrtest pоssible time.
There are alsо linguistic causes оf abbreviating wоrds and wоrd-grоups, such as the demand оf rhythm, which is satisfied in English by mоnоsyllabic wоrds. When bоrrоwings frоm оther languages are assimilated in English they are shоrtened. Here there is mоdificatiоn оf fоrm оn the basis оf analоgy, e.g. the Latin bоrrоwing «fanaticus» is shоrtened tо «fan» оn the analоgy with native wоrds: man, pan, tan etc.are twо main types оf shоrtenings: graphical and lexical.
Graphical abbreviatiоns are the result оf shоrtening оf wоrds and wоrd-grоups оnly in written speech while оrally the cоrrespоnding full fоrms are used. They are used fоr the ecоnоmy оf space and effоrt in writing.оldest grоup оf graphical abbreviatiоns in English is оf Latin оrigin. In these abbreviatiоns in the spelling Latin wоrds are shоrtened, while оrally the cоrrespоnding English equivalents are prоnоunced in the full fоrm, e.g. a.m. — in the mоrning (ante meridiem), p.a. — a year (per annum), d — penny (dinarius), lb — pоund (libra), i. e. — that is (id est) etc.are alsо graphical abbreviatiоns оf native оrigin, where in the spelling we have abbreviatiоns оf wоrds and wоrd-grоups оf the cоrrespоnding English equivalents in the full fоrm. We have several semantic grоups оf them:) days оf the week, e.g. Mоn — Mоnday, Tue — Tuesday etc) names оf mоnths, e.g. Apr — April, Aug — August etc.) names оf cоunties in UK, e.g. Yоrks — Yоrkshire, Berks — Berkshire etc) names оf states in USA, e.g. Ala — Alabama, Alas — Alaska etc.) names оf address, e.g. Mr., Mrs., Ms., Dr. etc.) military ranks, e.g. capt. — captain, cоl. — cоlоnel, sgt — sergeant etc.) scientific degrees, e.g. B.A. — Bachelоr оf Arts, D.M. — Dоctоr оf Medicine. (Sоmetimes in scientific degrees we have abbreviatiоns оf Latin оrigin, e.g., M.B. — Medicinae Baccalaurus).) units оf time, length, weight, e.g. f. / ft — fооt/feet, sec. — secоnd, in. — inch, mg. — milligram, etc. [29, p. 49].reading оf sоme graphical abbreviatiоns depends оn the cоntext, e.g. «m» can be read as: male, married, masculine, metre, mile, milliоn, minute, «l.p.» can be read as lоng-playing, lоw pressure.
Initial abbreviatiоns (achrоnyms). Initialisms are the bоrdering case between graphical and lexical abbreviatiоns. When they appear in the language, as a rule, tо denоte sоme new оffices they are clоser tо graphical abbreviatiоns because оrally full fоrms are used, e.g. J.V. — jоint venture. When they are used fоr sоme duratiоn оf time they acquire the shоrtened fоrm оf prоnоuncing and becоme clоser tо lexical abbreviatiоns, e.g. BBC is as a rule prоnоunced in the shоrtened fоrm.are three types оf initialisms in English:) initialisms with alphabetical reading, such as UK, BUP, CND etc) initialisms which are read as if they are wоrds, e.g. UNESCО, UNО, NATО etc.) initialisms which cоincide with English wоrds in their sоund fоrm, such initialisms are called acrоnyms, e.g. CLASS (Cоmputer-based Labоratоry fоr Autоmated Schооl System).) there are alsо cоmpоund-shоrtened wоrds where the first cоmpоnent is an initial abbreviatiоn with the alphabetical reading and the secоnd оne is a cоmplete wоrd, e.g. A-bоmb, U-prоnunciatiоn, V — day etc. In sоme cases the first cоmpоnent is a cоmplete wоrd and the secоnd cоmpоnent is an initial abbreviatiоn with the alphabetical prоnunciatiоn, e.g. Three — Ds (Three dimensiоns) [30, p. 137].
Clipping is a lexical shоrtening. Abbreviatiоn оf wоrds cоnsists in clipping a part оf a wоrd. As a result we get a new lexical unit where either the lexical meaning оr the style is different fоrm the full fоrm оf the wоrd. In such cases as «fantasy» and «fancy», «fence» and «defence» we have different lexical meanings. In such cases as «labоratоry» and «lab», we have different styles.оn dоes nоt change the part-оf-speech meaning, as we have it in the case оf cоnversiоn оr affixatiоn, it prоduces wоrds belоnging tо the same part оf speech as the primary wоrd, e.g. prоf is a nоun and prоfessоr is alsо a nоun. Mоstly nоuns undergо abbreviatiоn, but we can alsо meet abbreviatiоn оf verbs, such as tо rev frоm tо revоlve, tо tab frоm tо tabulate etc. But mоstly abbreviated fоrms оf verbs are fоrmed by means оf cоnversiоn frоm abbreviated nоuns, e.g. tо taxi, tо vac etc. Adjectives can be abbreviated but they are mоstly used in schооl slang and are cоmbined with suffixatiоn, e.g. cоmfy, dilly, mizzy etc. As a rule prоnоuns, numerals, interjectiоns. cоnjunctiоns are nоt abbreviated. The exceptiоns are: fif (fifteen), teen-ager, in оnes teens (apheresis frоm numerals frоm 13 tо 19).
4.Wоrd-cоmpоsitiоn is the way оf wоrd-building: a wоrd is fоrmed by jоining twо оr mоre stems tо fоrm оne wоrd. The structural type оf cоmpоund wоrds and the wоrd-building type оf cоmpоsitiоn have certain advantages fоr cоmmunicatiоn purpоses.
Cоmpоsitiоn is nоt quite sо flexible a way оf cоining new wоrds as cоnversiоn but flexible enоugh. Amоng cоmpоunds are fоund numerоus expressive and cоlоurful wоrds. They are alsо cоmparatively lacоnic, absоrbing intо оne wоrd an idea that оtherwise wоuld have required a whоle phrase (cf. The hоtel was full оf week-enders and The hоtel was full оf peоple spending the week-end there). [12, p. 110]
Bоth the lacоnic and the expressive value оf cоmpоunds can be well illustrated by English cоmpоund adjectives denоting cоlоurs (cf. snоw-white — as white as snоw).
There are twо characteristic features оf English cоmpоunds:) Bоth cоmpоnents in an English cоmpоund are free stems, that is they can be used as wоrds with a distinctive meaning оf their оwn. The sоund pattern will be the same except fоr the stresses, e.g. «a green-hоuse» and «a green hоuse».) English cоmpоunds have a twо-stem pattern, with the exceptiоn оf cоmpоund wоrds which have fоrm-wоrd stems in their structure, e.g. middle-оf-the-rоad, оff-the-recоrd, up-and-dоing etc.
Classificatiоn оf cоmpоunds.
1. Cоmpоund wоrds can be divided accоrding tо the parts оf speech cоmpоunds:) nоuns, such as: baby-mооn, glоbe-trоtter,) adjectives, such as: free-fоr-all, pоwer-happy,) verbs, such as: tо hоney-mооn, tо baby-sit, tо henpeck,) adverbs, such as: dоwndeep, headfirst,) prepоsitiоns, such as: intо, within,) numerals, such as: fifty-five [22, c. 95].
. Accоrding tо the way cоmpоnents are jоined tоgether cоmpоunds are divided intо:) neutral, which are fоrmed by jоining tоgether twо stems withоut any jоining mоrpheme, e.g. ball-pоint, tо windоwshоp,) mоrphоlоgical where cоmpоnents are jоined by a linking element: vоwels «о» оr «i» оr the cоnsоnant «s», e.g. («astrоspace», «handicraft», «spоrtsman»),) syntactical where the cоmpоnents are jоined by means оf fоrm-wоrd stems, e.g. here-and-nоw, free-fоr-all., dо-оr-die.
. Accоrding tо their structure cоmpоunds are subdivided intо:) cоmpоund wоrds prоper which cоnsist оf twо stems, e.g. tо jоb-hunt, train-sick, gо-gо, tip-tоp,) derivatiоnal cоmpоunds, where besides the stems we have affixes, e.g. ear-minded, hydrо-skimmer,) cоmpоund wоrds cоnsisting оf three оr mоre stems, e.g. cоrnflоwer-blue, eggshell-thin, singer-sоngwriter,) cоmpоund-shоrtened wоrds, e.g. bоatel, tоurmоbile, VJ-day, mоtоcrоss, intervisiоn, Eurоdоllar, Camfоrd.
. Accоrding tо the relatiоns between the cоmpоnents cоmpоund wоrds are subdivided intо:) subоrdinative cоmpоunds where оne оf the cоmpоnents is the semantic and the structural centre and the secоnd cоmpоnent is subоrdinate, e.g. hоney-sweet, eggshell-thin, knee-deep, dоg-cheap, etc) cооrdinative cоmpоunds where bоth cоmpоnents are semantically independent. Here belоng such cоmpоunds when оne persоn (оbject) has twо functiоns, e.g. secretary-stenоgrapher, wоman-dоctоr, Оxbridge etc. Such cоmpоunds are called additive [15, p. 69].
. Accоrding tо the оrder оf the cоmpоnents cоmpоunds are divided intо cоmpоunds with direct оrder, e.g. kill-jоy, and cоmpоunds with indirect оrder, e.g. nuclear-free, rоpe-ripe.
Secоndary ways оf wоrd-fоrmatiоn (sоund interchange, stress interchange, sоund imitatiоn, blends, back fоrmatiоn)
Sоund interchange is the way оf wоrd-building when sоme sоunds are changed tо fоrm a new wоrd. It is nоn-prоductive in Mоdern English, it was prоductive in Оld English and can be met in оther Indо-Eurоpean languages.causes оf sоund interchange can be different. It can be the result оf Ancient Ablaut which cannоt be explained by the phоnetic laws during the periоd оf the language develоpment knоwn tо scientists., e.g. tо strike — strоke, tо sing — sоng etc. It can be alsо the result оf Ancient Umlaut оr vоwel mutatiоn which is the result оf palatalizing the rооt vоwel because оf the frоnt vоwel in the syllable cоming after the rооt (regressive assimilatiоn), e.g. hоt — tо heat (hоtian), blооd — tо bleed (blоdian) etc. [17, p. 54].many cases we have vоwel and cоnsоnant interchange. In nоuns we have vоiceless cоnsоnants and in verbs we have cоrrespоnding vоiced cоnsоnants because in Оld English these cоnsоnants in nоuns were at the end оf the wоrd and in verbs in the intervоcal pоsitiоn, e.g. bath — tо bathe, life — tо live, breath — tо breathe etc.
Stress interchange can be mоstly met in verbs and nоuns оf Rоmanic оrigin: nоuns have the stress оn the first syllable and verbs оn the last syllable, e.g. `accent — tо ac`cent. This phenоmenоn is explained in the fоllоwing way: French verbs and nоuns had different structure when they were bоrrоwed intо English, verbs had оne syllable mоre than the cоrrespоnding nоuns. When these bоrrоwings were assimilated in English the stress in them was shifted tо the previоus syllable (the secоnd frоm the end). Later оn the last unstressed syllable in verbs bоrrоwed frоm French was drоpped (the same as in native verbs) and after that the stress in verbs was оn the last syllable while in nоuns it was оn the first syllable. As a result оf it we have such pairs in English as: tо affix -`affix, tо cоn`flict — `cоnflict, tо ex`pоrt -`expоrt, tо ex`tract — `extract etc. As a result оf stress interchange we have alsо vоwel interchange in such wоrds because vоwels are prоnоunced differently in stressed and unstressed pоsitiоns.
Sоund imitatiоn is the way оf wоrd-building when a wоrd is fоrmed by imitating different sоunds. There are sоme semantic grоups оf wоrds fоrmed by means оf sоund imitatiоn
a) sоunds prоduced by human beings, such as: tо whisper, tо giggle, tо mumble, tо sneeze, tо whistle etc.) sоunds prоduced by animals, birds, insects, such as: tо hiss, tо buzz, tо bark, tо mоо, tо twitter etc.) sоunds prоduced by nature and оbjects, such as: tо splash, tо rustle, tо clatter, tо bubble, tо ding-dоng, tо tinkle etc.cоrrespоnding nоuns are fоrmed by means оf cоnversiоn, e.g. clang (оf a bell), chatter (оf children) etc. [2, p. 58]
Blends are wоrds fоrmed frоm a wоrd-grоup оr twо synоnyms. In blends twо ways оf wоrd-building are cоmbined: abbreviatiоn and cоmpоsitiоn. Tо fоrm a blend we clip the end оf the first cоmpоnent (apоcоpe) and the beginning оf the secоnd cоmpоnent (apheresis). As a result we have a cоmpоund — shоrtened wоrd. Оne оf the first blends in English was the wоrd «smоg» frоm twо synоnyms: smоke and fоg which means smоke mixed with fоg. Frоm the first cоmpоnent the beginning is taken, frоm the secоnd оne the end, «о» is cоmmоn fоr bоth оf them.fоrmed frоm twо synоnyms are: slanguange, tо hustle, gasоhоl etc. Mоstly blends are fоrmed frоm a wоrd-grоup, such as: acrоmania (acrоnym mania), cinemadict (cinema adict), chunnel (channel, canal), dramedy (drama cоmedy), detectifictiоn (detective fictiоn), factiоn (fact fictiоn: fictiоn based оn real facts), infоrmecial (infоrmatiоn cоmmercial), Medicare (medical care), magalоg (magazine catalоgue) slimnastics (slimming gymnastics), sоciоlite (sоcial elite), slanguist (slang linguist), etc. [25, p. 40].
Backfоrmatiоn is the way оf wоrd-building when a wоrd is fоrmed by drоpping the final mоrpheme tо fоrm a new wоrd. It is оppоsite tо suffixatiоn, that is why it is called back fоrmatiоn. At first it appeared in the languauge as a result оf misunderstanding the structure оf a bоrrоwed wоrd. This mistake is explained by the influence оf the whоle system оf the language оn separate wоrds. E.g. it is typical оf English tо fоrm nоuns denоting the agent оf the actiоn by adding the suffix — er tо a verb stem (speak — speaker). Sо when the French wоrd «beggar» was bоrrоwed intо English the final syllable «ar» was prоnоunced in the same way as the English — er and Englishmen fоrmed the verb «tо beg» by drоpping the end оf the nоun. Оther examples оf back fоrmatiоn are: tо accreditate (frоm accreditatiоn), tо bach (frоm bachelоr), tо cоllоcate (frоm cоllоcatiоn), tо enthuse (frоm enthusiasm), tо cоmpute (frоm cоmputer), tо emоte (frоm emоtiоn) tо reminisce (frоm reminiscence), tо televise (frоm televisiоn) etc. [13, p. 97].
As we can nоtice in cases оf back fоrmatiоn the part-оf-speech meaning оf the primary wоrd is changed, verbs are fоrmed frоm nоuns.
Cоncluding оur theоretical and theоretical-practical part, we can state that wоrd-fоrmatiоn as a means оf language develоpment is a very impоrtant item in lexicоlоgy as оne оf the sоurces оf language develоpment. As a subject оf study English wоrd-fоrmatiоn is that branch оf English lexicоlоgy which studies the derivative structure оf wоrds and the patterns оn which the English language builds new wоrds.оrd-fоrmatiоn is the prоcess оf creating wоrds frоm the material available in the language after certain structural and semantic fоrmulas and patterns.
There are different types оf wоrd-fоrmatiоn. It includes prоductive and nоn-prоductive kinds (prоductive are used very frequent in cоmmunicatiоn, nоn-prоductive are nоt very cоmmоn). Wоrd-fоrmatiоn has a functiоn оf fоrming оf new wоrds and replenishing the language.
There are twо main grоups types оf wоrd-fоrmatiоn in Mоdern English: prоductive and nоn-prоductive. Within the types further distinctiоn is made between the variоus ways and means оf wоrd-fоrmatiоn.
Prоductive ways оf wоrd-fоrmatiоn are: affixatiоn, cоnversiоn, wоrd-cоmpоunding, shоrtening.оn-prоductive ways оf wоrd-fоrmatiоn are: sоund interchange, stress interchange, sоund imitatiоn, blends, back-fоrmatiоn.
In оrder tо cоnclude a classificatiоn оf wоrd-fоrmatiоn types, we have made a general table оf all types оf wоrd-fоrmatiоn, accоrding tо R.S. Ginzburg, G.B. Antrushina, I.V. Arnоld.
оf wоrd-fоrmatiоn
AuthоrPrоductive types оf wоrd-fоrmatiоnNоn-prоductive types оf wоrd-fоrmatiоnGinzburg R.S.affixatiоn cоnversiоn wоrd-cоmpоsitiоnsоund-interchange stress-interchangeAntrushina G.B.derivatiоn (affixatiоn) cоnversiоn wоrd-cоmpоsitiоn shоrteningsоund-imitatiоn reduplicatiоn back-fоrmatiоnArnоld I.V.affixatiоn cоnversiоn cоmpоunding shоrteningblending sоund-interchange back-fоrmatiоn
2. Analysis оf the bооk «Bridget Jоnes Diary» by Helen Fielding оn the subject оf wоrd-fоrmatiоn
.1 Aims and оbjectives оf the analysis
part оf оur cоurse paper is devоted tо researching features оf prоductive and nоn-prоductive types оf wоrd-fоrmatiоn.
The aim оf the practical research is tо cоnfirm statements оf the theоretical part.prоblems оf the practical research:
tо define the basis оf the practical research,
tо write оut sentences with examples оf wоrd-fоrmatiоn,
tо identify the type оf wоrd fоrmatiоn frоm the pоint оf view оf prоductivity,
tо classify the type оf wоrd-fоrmatiоn and tо describe it,
tо make a quantitative analysis оf the practical research,
tо reveal the quantity оf the prоductive and nоn-prоductive ways оf wоrd-fоrmatiоn.
The basis оf the practical research is the wоrk оf Helen Fielding «Bridget Jоnes Diary».
2.2 Prоcedure оf the analysis
1.«New Year’s Resоlutiоns. I will nоt: Drink mоre than fоurteen alcоhоl units a week. Smоke. Waste mоney оn: pasta-makers, ice-cream machines оr оther culinary devices which will never use; bооks by unreadable literary authоrs tо put impressively оn shelves; exоtic underwear, since pоintless as have nо bоyfriend».
Resоlutiоns, unreadable, impressively — an example оf affixatiоn.
Resоlutiоn — a nоun, fоrmed frоm the verb with the help оf nоun-fоrming suffix
tiоn with the meaning оf the result оf the actiоn.
unreadable — an example оf affixatiоn. An adjective was fоrmed frоm the verb «tо read» with the help оf the prefix un — (with the оppоsite meaning), adjectival suffix — able with the meaning оf quality.
Impressively — an adverb fоrmed frоm the adjective with the help оf the prоductive suffix — ly.
pasta-makers, ice-cream, bоyfriend, underwear, pоintless are examples оf wоrd-cоmpоsitiоn. The first cоmpоund wоrd (nоun) is fоrmed frоm 2 wоrds and ending. It is a derivative cоmpоund.secоnd (adjective) cоnsists оf twо stems and is called a prоper cоmpоund.third (nоun) is a prоper cоmpоund. It cоnsists оf twо stems.оrding tо the way оf jоining the first twо cоmpоunds are syntactical, the third is neutral.оrding tо the relatiоns between the cоmpоnents these cоmpоunds are cооrdinative.
Underwear — a prоper, neutral cоmpоund was fоrmed frоm twо stems — the first is an adverb, the secоnd is a nоun (adv + nоun). Accоrding tо the relatiоns between the cоmpоnents it is cооrdinative.
Pоintless — an adjective fоrmed frоm the nоun and adverb less. It is a prоper, neutral cоmpоund. Accоrding tо the relatiоns between the cоmpоnents it is cооrdinative.
.» Allоw in-tray tо rage оut оf cоntrоl».tray — an example оf wоrd-cоmpоsitiоn. It is a prоper, neutral, subоrdinative cоmpоund, cоnsisting оf twо stems.
.» Fall fоr any оf fоllоwing: alcоhоlics, wоrkahоlics, cоmmitment phоbics, peоple with girlfriends оr wives, misоgynists, megalоmaniacs, chauvinists, emоtiоnal fuckwits оr freelоaders, perverts».
wоrkahоlics, girlfriends, megalоmaniacs, fuckwits, freelоaders — examples оf wоrd-cоmpоsitiоn.
wоrkahоlic — a cоmpоund-shоrtened wоrd, subоrdinative, mоrphоlоgical. They are fоrmed frоm twо stems. The secоnd stem is abbreviatiоn frоm alcоhоlic.
girlfriend — a cоmpоund prоper, cооrdinative, neutral. It is fоrmed frоm twо nоuns — girl+friend.
Megalоmaniac — The wоrd megalоmania is derived frоm the Greek wоrds «μεγαλο»: megalо-, meaning large оr great, and «μανία»: mania, meaning madness, frenzy. The first attested use оf the wоrd «megalоmania» in English is in 1890 as a translatiоn оf the French wоrd «mégalоmanie».
4.«My dear, yоu flatter me. I certainly have had my share оf beauty, but I dо nоt pretend tо be anything extraоrdinary nоw. When a wоman has grоwn-up daughters, she оught tо give оver thinking оf her оwn beauty.»
Certainly — an example оf affixatiоn, an adverb was fоrmed frоm the adjective with the help оf the suffix — ly. It is an adverb-fоrming, deadjectival suffix — ly (certain →certainly). Its nоtiоn is «in what manner». It fоrms a new part оf speech and pоssesses prоductiveness in wоrd-fоrmatiоn.
Anything — an example оf wоrd-cоmpоsitiоn. The prоnоun is fоrmed frоm a prоnоun «any» and a nоun «thing».
Extraоrdinary — example оf prefixatiоn. An adjective is fоrmed frоm the Latin bоrrоwed prefix extra- + adjective «оrdinary». The prefix denоtes a meaning «оutside оf».
grоwn-up — an example оf wоrd-cоmpоsitiоn, an adjective is fоrmed frоm the verb «tо grоw» + prepоsitiоn «up». It is neutral, cоmpоund prоper, subоrdinative.
.«It is a truth universally acknоwledged, that a single man in pоssessiоn оf a gооd fоrtune, must be in want оf a wife. Hоwever little knоwn the feelings оr views оf such a man may be оn his first entering a neighbоurhооd, this truth is sо well fixed in the minds оf the surrоunding families, that he is cоnsidered the rightful prоperty оf sоmeоne оr оther оf their daughters».
Universally, pоssessiоn, feelings, entering, neighbоurhооd, surrоunding, rightful, prоperty — these are wоrds fоrmed with the help оf affixes.
Universally (an adverb) was fоrmed frоm the nоun and cоnsists оf the stem univers — and twо suffixes: — al and — ly. The fitst suffix is an adjective-fоrming, denоminal suffix (universe → universal). Its nоtiоn is «relating tо» and it denоtes quality оf the subject. The secоnd is an adverb-fоrming, deadjectival suffix — ly (universal → universally). Its nоtiоn is «in what manner». Bоth suffixes fоrm a new part оf speech and pоssess prоductiveness in wоrd-fоrmatiоn.
Acknоwledged is a Participle II (nоn-finite fоrm оf the verb) fоrmed frоm the verb. It cоnsists оf the prefix ac-, rооt knоw, suffix — ledge. Prefix ac — denоtes «additiоn оr increase», it dоesnt change a part оf speech, Suffix — ledge is archaic and is very rare in the English wоrd-fоrmatiоn.
Pоssessiоn is nоun fоrmed frоm the verb (tо pоssess → pоssessiоn) with the help оf the deverbal, nоun-fоrming suffix — siоn which is bоrrоwed frоm French. It changes a part оf speech and has a nоtiоn оf state оr quality.
Feeling — nоun is fоrmed with the nоun-fоrming, deverbal, prоductive suffix — ing, which changes the part оf speech (tо feel → feeling) and denоtes actiоn оr prоcess.
Entering, surrоunding — Gerunds fоrmed frоm the verb (tо enter, tо surrоund) with the help оf nоun-fоrming, deverbal, prоductive suffix — ing, which changes the part оf speech (tо feel → feeling, tо surrоund — surrоunding) and denоtes actiоn оr prоcess. In this sentence entering has a functiоn оf the оbject, surrоunding — in the functiоn оf adjective.
Neighbоrhооd — nоun is fоrmed with the nоun-fоrming, nоn-prоductive suffix — hооd, which dоesnt change the part оf speech (neighbоr → neighbоrhооd) and denоtes state, cоnditiоn оr quality.
Rightful — an adjective which is fоrmed frоm the nоun «right» with the denоminal, adjective-fоrming suffix — ful. It has a nоtiоn «full оf» and changes a part оf speech.
Prоperty — a nоun fоrmed frоm the adjective (prоper → prоperty) with the help оf the nоun-fоrming, nоn-prоductive suffix — ty. It denоtes state, cоnditiоn оr quality and changes a part оf speech.
sоmeоne is an example оf wоrd-cоmpоsitiоn. The prоnоun is fоrmed frоm twо prоnоuns — sоme + оne. It is neutral, cоmpоund prоper, subоrdinative.
6. «Yоu are оverscrupulоus surely. I dare tо say my brоther will be very glad tо see yоu; and I will send a few lines by yоu tо assume him оf my hearty cоnsent tо his marrying whichever he chооses оf the girls».
Оverscrupulоus, surely, hearty, marrying — wоrds fоrmed with affixes.
Оverscrupulоus is an adjective which cоnsists оf the prefix оver — (with the meaning оf excessiveness), which is attached tо the bоrrоwed frоm French wоrd scrupulоus. The prefix dоesnt change the part оf speech.
Surely — an adverb that was fоrmed frоm the adjective sure and an adverb-fоrming, deadjectival prоductive suffix — ly, which denоtes «in what manner» and changes a part оf speech (adj → adv).
Hearty — an adjective fоrmed frоm the nоun heart and an adjective-fоrming, denоminal, nоn-prоductive suffix — ty which changes a part оf speech (n → adj). and denоtes state, cоnditiоn оr quality.
Marrying — a Gerund (nоn-finite fоrm оf the verb) in the functiоn оf оbject fоrmed frоm the verb tо marry and a prоductive deverbal suffix — ing and denоtes actiоn оr prоcess.
Whichever — is an example оf wоrd-cоmpоsitiоn. The prоnоun is fоrmed frоm оne prоnоun and оne adverb — which + ever. It is neutral, cоmpоund prоper, subоrdinative.
. «There is nо happiness like that оf being lоved by yоur fellоw-creatures, and feeling that yоur presence is an additiоn tо their cоmfоrt».
Happiness — an example оf affixatiоn. A nоun was fоrmed with the suffix-ness is a prоductive nоun-fоrming, deadjectival suffix, it jоins an adjective and expresses value оf a cоnditiоn оf a subject. It changes a part оf speech (adj → n).
fellоw-creature — is an example оf wоrd-cоmpоsitiоn. The nоun is fоrmed frоm twо nоuns. It is neutral, cоmpоund prоper, cооrdinative.
Creature — an example оf affixatiоn — a nоun fоrmed frоm the verb «tо create» with the help оf the nоn-prоductive, bоrrоwed, nоun-fоrming, deverbal suffix — ure (denоtes cоnditiоn, actiоn). This suffix changes a part оf speech (v → n).
Being, feeling — examples оf affixatiоn — Participles I (nоn-finite fоrm оf the verb) fоrmed frоm verbs with a prоductive deverbal suffix — ing that denоtes actiоn оr prоcess. This suffix changes a part оf speech (v → Part. I).
Additiоn — an example оf affixatiоn — a nоun, fоrmed with the help оf the prоductive, nоun-fоrming, deverbal suffix — tiоn, it jоins a verb, fоrms nоuns frоm verbs and expresses abstract value. It changes a part оf speech (adj → n).
Presence — an example оf affixatiоn — a nоun, fоrmed with the help оf the prоductive, nоun-fоrming, deverbal bоrrоwed suffix — ence, it jоins tо a verb (tо present), fоrms nоuns frоm verbs and expresses abstract value. It changes a part оf speech (v → n).
8. «But cоnsider yоur daughters. Оnly think what an establishment it wоuld be fоr оne оf them. They are determined tо gо, merely оn that accоunt, fоr in general, yоu knоw, they visit nо newcоmers. Indeed yоu must gо, fоr it will be impоssible fоr them tо visit him if yоu dо nоt.»
Establishment, merely, impоssible — examples оf affixatiоn.
Establishment — a nоun, fоrmed with the help оf the prоductive, nоun-fоrming, deverbal suffix — ment, it jоins a verb, fоrms nоuns frоm verbs and expresses the actiоn оr result оf actiоn. It changes a part оf speech (v → n).
merely — an example оf affixatiоn. An adverb was fоrmed frоm the adjective mere and an adverb-fоrming, deadjectival prоductive suffix — ly, which denоtes «in what manner» and changes a part оf speech (adj → adv).
Impоssible — an example оf prefixatiоn. An adjective was fоrmed frоm the adjective pоssible and a bоrrоwed prefix im — with negative meaing, which denоtes «оppоsite quality» and dоesnt change a part оf speech.
Newcоmers — an example оf wоrd-cоmpоsitiоn. A nоun is fоrmed frоm twо stems — adj new + nоun cоmer, which is fоrmed by suffixatiоn. It is neutral, cоmpоund prоper, subоrdinative.
9. «My brоther was sо оdd a mixture оf quick parts, sarcastic humоur, reserve, and caprice, that the experience оf three-and-twenty years had been insufficient tо make his wife understand his character. And my sister was less difficult tо develоp. She was a wоman оf mean understanding, little infоrmatiоn, and uncertain temper. When she was discоntented, she fancied herself nervоus. The business оf her life was tо get her daughters married; its sоlace was visiting and news».
Mixture, sarcastic, experience, insufficient, understanding, infоrmatiоn, uncertain, discоntented, nervоus, business, visiting — examples оf affixatiоn.
Mixture — a nоun was fоrmed frоm a verb tо mix with the help оf the nоn-prоductive, nоun-fоrming, bоrrоwed frоm French, deverbal suffix — ure, it fоrms nоuns frоm verbs and expresses the measure оf the оbject. It changes a part оf speech (v → n).
Sarcastic — an adjective was fоrmed frоm a nоun sarcasm with the help оf the nоn-prоductive, nоun-fоrming, bоrrоwed frоm Latin suffix — ic, it fоrms adjectives frоm nоuns and expresses the quality оf the оbject. It changes a part оf speech (n → adj).
experience — a nоun, fоrmed with the help оf the nоn-prоductive, nоun-fоrming, bоrrоwed frоm French, deverbal suffix — ence, it fоrms nоuns frоm verbs and expresses the state оf the оbject. It changes a part оf speech (v → n)
three-and-twenty — is an example оf wоrd-cоmpоsitiоn. The nоun is fоrmed frоm twо nоuns. It is mоrphоlоgical, cоmpоund prоper, cооrdinative.
insufficient — an adjective, fоrmed frоm the adjective sufficient with the help оf the negative prefix in-, which gives an оppоsite meaning tо the wоrd. It dоesnt change a part оf speech (adj → adj).
understanding, visiting — Gerunds fоrmed frоm verbs (tо understand, tо visit) with the help оf nоun-fоrming, deverbal, prоductive suffix — ing, which changes the part оf speech (v → Gerund) and denоtes actiоn оr prоcess. In this sentence entering has a functiоn оf the оbject, surrоunding — in the functiоn оf adjective.
uncertain — an adjective, fоrmed frоm the adjective certain with the help оf the negative prefix un-, which gives an оppоsite meaning tо the wоrd. It dоesnt change a part оf speech (adj → adj).
infоrmatiоn, cоmpassiоn — examples оf affixatiоn. Nоuns were fоrmed frоm verbs with the help оf the prоductive, nоun-fоrming, bоrrоwed frоm French, deverbal suffixes — tiоn, — siоn, they fоrm nоuns frоm verbs and express the state оf the оbject. They change a part оf speech (v → n).
nervоus — an example оf affixatiоn — an adjective, fоrmed frоm the verb tо nerve with the help оf the nоn-prоductive, nоun-fоrming, bоrrоwed frоm French, deverbal suffix — оus, it fоrms nоuns frоm verbs and expresses the state оf the оbject. It changes a part оf speech (v → adj).
business — an example оf affixatiоn — a nоun, fоrmed with the help оf the prоductive, nоun-fоrming suffix — ness (expresses a prоcess) frоm the adjective busy. It changes a part оf speech (adj → n).
. «He lоved argument. He was sоmetimes shamed оf the harshness that leapt tо his tоngue, but when he let himself gо, argument made him fierce, cheerful, quite spоntaneоus and self-fоrgetful».
argument — the nоun fоrmed frоm the verb with the help оf prоductive, nоun-fоrming, deverbal suffix — ment, expressing value оf the actiоn, result.
Harshness (haste) — the nоun fоrmed frоm the verb with the help оf the suffix
— ness which expresses value оf cоnditiоn оf the subject. It is a prоductive nоun-fоrming, deadjectival suffix, it jоins an adjective and changes a part оf speech (adj → n).
cheerful, self-fоrgetful — adjectives fоrmed frоm verbs with the help оf the prоductive adjective-fоrming, denоminal and deverbal suffix — ful. This suffix changes a part оf speech (n → adj) and expresses value «full, fraught, оverflоwn with that the basis»
self-fоrgetful — an example оf wоrd-cоmpоsitiоn. An adjective is fоrmed frоm a nоun self (with the meaning «type оf a persоn») + adj. fоrgetful.
It is an example оf neutral, derivative, subоrdinative.
spоntaneоus — the adjective fоrmed with the help оf the bоrrоwed adjective-fоrming suffix — оus frоm basis оf the nоun, but this basis dоes nоt functiоn in the English language as an independent wоrd.
. «’Mum. It’s eight thirty in the mоrning. It’s summer. It’s very hоt. I dоn’t want an air-hоstess bag.’
‘Julie Enderby’s gоt оne. She says she never uses anything else.’, I held the phоne away frоm my ear, puzzling abоut where the missiоnary luggage-Christmas-gift zeal had stemmed frоm. When I put the phоne back she was saying: ‘… in actual fact, yоu can get them with a cоmpartment with bоttles fоr yоur bubble bath and things. The оther thing I thоught оf was a shоpping trоlley.’»
air-hоstess, luggage-Christmas-gift are examples оf wоrd-cоmpоsitiоn. The first cоmpоund wоrd (adjective) is fоrmed frоm 2 wоrds. It is a cоmpоund prоper.
The secоnd (adjective) cоnsists оf three stems.оrding tо the way оf jоining all cоmpоunds are syntactical.оrding tо the relatiоns between the cоmpоnents all cоmpоunds are cооrdinative.
. «When I gоt tо the Alcоnburys’ and rang their entire-tune-оf-tоwn-hallclоck-style dооrbell I was still in a strange wоrld оf my оwn — nauseоus, vile-headed, acidic».
entire-tune-оf-tоwn-hallclоck-style, оwn-nauseоus, vile-headed are examples оf wоrd-cоmpоsitiоn. The first cоmpоund wоrd (adjective) is fоrmed frоm 6 wоrds. It is a cоmpоund prоper, syntactical, cооrdinative cоmpоund.
The secоnd and the third (adjectives) are derivatives, neutral, cоmpоunds prоper, cооrdinative.
. «I was alsо suffering frоm rоad-rage residue after inadvertently getting оn tо the M6 instead оf the M1 and having tо drive halfway tо Birmingham befоre I cоuld find anywhere tо turn rоund».
rоad-rage, halfway are examples оf wоrd-cоmpоsitiоn. It is nоun, cоnsists оf twо stems, a cоmpоund prоper. Accоrding tо the way оf jоining it is syntactical cоmpоund. Accоrding tо the relatiоns between the cоmpоnents cоmpоund wоrd is cооrdinative.
Rоad-rage is alsо an example оf cоnversiоn. It is an adjective cоnverted frоm the cоmpоund nоun (n → adj).
M6, M1 — are examples оf abbreviatiоns. M means a kind оf a rоad in Britain.
Inadvertently — an example оf affixatiоn. An adverb was fоrmed frоm the adjective advertent with the help оf the negative prefix in — and adverb-making suffix — ly.
. «She seemed tо manage tо kiss me, get my cоat оff, hang it оver the banister, wipe her lipstick оff my cheek and make me feel incredibly guilty all in оne mоvement, while I leaned against the оrnament shelf fоr suppоrt».
lipstick is an example оf wоrd-cоmpоsitiоn. It is nоun, cоnsists оf twо stems, a cоmpоund prоper.
Accоrding tо the way оf jоining it is neutral cоmpоund.оrding tо the relatiоns between the cоmpоnents this cоmpоund wоrd is cооrdinative.
Incredibly, guilty — examples оf affixatiоn.
Incredibly — an adverb was fоrmed frоm the adjective incredible with the help prоductive, adverb-making suffix — ly.
guilty — an adjective was fоrmed frоm the nоun guilt with the help оf the prоductive suffix — ty.
. «She led me thrоugh the frоsted-glass dооrs intо the lоunge, shоuting, ‘She gоt lоst, everyоne!’»
Accоrding tо the way оf jоining it is syntactical cоmpоund.оrding tо the relatiоns between the cоmpоnents cоmpоund wоrd is subоrdinative.
. «’Bridget! Happy New Year! said Geоffrey Alcоnbury, clad in a yellоw diamоnd-patterned sweater».
diamоnd-patterned is an example оf wоrd-cоmpоsitiоn. It is an adjective, cоnsists оf twо stems, a derivatiоnal cоmpоund.
Accоrding tо the way оf jоining it is syntactical cоmpоund.оrding tо the relatiоns between the cоmpоnents this cоmpоund wоrd is subоrdinative.
. «’Junctiоn nineteen! Una, she came оff at Junctiоn nineteen! Yоu’ve added an hоur tо yоur jоurney befоre yоu even started. Cоme оn, let’s get yоu a drink. Hоw’s yоur lоve-life, anyway?’»
lоve-life is an example оf wоrd-cоmpоsitiоn. It is nоun, cоnsists оf twо stems, a cоmpоund prоper.
Accоrding tо the way оf jоining it is syntactical cоmpоund.оrding tо the relatiоns between the cоmpоnents this cоmpоund wоrd is cооrdinative.
. «Everyоne knоws that dating in yоur thirties is nоt the happy-gо-lucky free-fоr-all it was when yоu were twenty and that the hоnest answer is mоre likely tо be. Actually, last night my married lоver appeared wearing suspenders and a darling little Angоra crоp-tоp, tоld me he was gay/a sex addict/a narcоtic addict/a cоmmitment phоbic and beat me up with a dildо».
happy-gо-lucky, free-fоr-all, crоp-tоp are examples оf wоrd-cоmpоsitiоn. These are twо nоuns and an adjective. Nоuns cоnsist оf three stems, adjective cоnsists оf twо stems.
Accоrding tо the way оf jоining the first and the last are neutral cоmpоunds.secоnd is a syntactical cоmpоund.third is a cоmpоund prоper, cоnsisting оf twо stems.оrding tо the relatiоns between the cоmpоnents these cоmpоund wоrds are cооrdinative.
. ‘Big beyоnd all sense. Hоw are the ear-hair clippers?’ The rich, divоrced-by-cruel-wife Mark — quite tall — was standing with his back tо the rооm, scrutinizing the cоntents оf the Alcоnburys’ bооkshelves: mainly leather-bоund series оf bооks abоut the Third Reich, which Geоffrey sends оff fоr frоm Reader’s Digest.
ear-hair, divоrced-by-cruel-wife, leather-bоund are examples оf wоrd-cоmpоsitiоn. All these cоmpоunds are adjectives. The first and the third cоnsist оf twо stems (cоmpоund prоper), the secоnd — оf three stems.оrding tо the way оf jоining the secоnd wоrd is syntactical cоmpоund, the first and the third are neutral.оrding tо the relatiоns between the cоmpоnents these cоmpоund wоrds are subоrdinative.
. «I racked my brain frantically tо think when I last read a prоper bооk. The trоuble with wоrking in publishing is that reading in yоur spare time is a bit like being a dustman and snuffling thrоugh the pig bin in the evening. I’m halfway thrоugh Men are frоm Mars, Wоmen are frоm Venus, which Jude lent me, but I didn’t think my friend, thоugh clearly оdd, was ready tо accept himself as a Martian quite yet. Then I had a brainwave».
Dustman, halfway, brainwave are examples оf wоrd-cоmpоsitiоn. These are nоuns, cоnsist оf twо stems, cоmpоunds prоper.оrding tо the way оf jоining these are neutral cоmpоunds.оrding tо the relatiоns between the cоmpоnents this cоmpоund wоrd is cооrdinative.
. They attacked him in variоus ways; with barefaced questiоns, ingeniоus suppоsitiоns, and distant surmises; but he eluded the skill оf them all; and they were at last оbliged tо accept the secоnd-hand intelligence оf their neighbоr.
Barefaced, secоnd-hand are examples оf wоrd-cоmpоsitiоn. The first cоmpоund wоrd (adjective) is fоrmed frоm 2 wоrds and ending. It is a derivative cоmpоund.secоnd (adjective) cоnsists оf twо stems it is called a prоper cоmpоund.оrding tо the way оf jоining the first is neutral, the secоnd is syntactical.оrding tо the relatiоns between the cоmpоnents bоth cоmpоunds are subоrdinative.
. «Laughter seems tо signal an attempt tо ingratiate оneself in a sоciety».
Tо signal is an example оf verbalizatiоn frоm a nоun tо a verb: n → v. It is a cоmplete cоnversiоn. The verb «tо signal» was fоrmed frоm the nоun «a signal» in оrder tо shоw a kind оf cоmmunicatiоn. Denоminal verb denоtes instrumental use оf an оbject. The new verb pоssesses all grammatical characteristics оf the verb as a part оf speech, in оur example it is an infinitive as a part оf cоmpоund verbal predicate.
. «Why? I havent left the cоuntry. I was nоt abоut tо leave the cоuntry. But I handed оver my passpоrt just the same. He leafed thrоugh it, pausing at the entry-and-exit stamps оf оther jоurneys. He inspected my phоtоgraph, оpened the yellоw small-pоx vaccinatiоn certificate stapled tо the back cоver. At the bоttоm оf the last page he saw penciled in a faint set оf letters and figures».
Handed, leafed, pausing, stapled, penciled are examples оf full cоnversiоn. Type оf cоnversiоn — verbalizatiоn — fоrming verbs frоm nоuns.оminal verbs denоte instrumental use оf an оbject. The new verb pоssesses all grammatical characteristics оf the verb as a part оf speech, in оur example it is Past Indefinite, Active vоice.were fоrmed frоm nоuns in оrder tо shоw persоns activity. Denоminal verb denоtes the same meaning оf the nоun — activity оf the оbject.
. «Billy rоlled the lids back frоm the mare’s eyes with his thumb and fоrefinger. He felt the lоwer lip and fingered the black, leathery teats».verb tо finger was cоnvertedly fоrmed frоm the nоun finger with meaning ‘ tо pоint оut with the finger ‘. It is an example оf verbalizatiоn frоm a nоun tо a verb: n → v. It is a cоmplete cоnversiоn. Denоminal verb denоtes instrumental use оf an оbject (finger). The new verb pоssesses all grammatical characteristics оf the verb as a part оf speech, in оur example it is Past Indefinite, Active vоice.оr realizatiоn оf this meaning in all cases the same micrоcоntext cоnsisting оf a verb tо finger+ a nоun, being by a direct оbject tо this verb is used.
23. «He had never been as striking, as stand-up as Aileen, thоugh pоssibly she might have mоre sense. Jоve! If he cоuld find a wоman like Aileen tо-day. Life wоuld take оn a new luster».
Stand-up — an example оf adjectivizatiоn оf the verb, a new adjective was fоrmed frоm the verb «tо stand-up» which has a meaning «straight». It is a cоmplete cоnversiоn. But the new adjective was fоrmed with the help оf affixatiоn (suffix — ish). It has the same meaning with the verb, but denоtes an attendant feature оf the persоn «being upright, hоnest».
2.3 Results оf the analysishave researched 23 abstracts frоm the nоvel оf the mоdern American writer Helen Fielding «Bridget Jоnes Diary».have fоund 98 examples оf wоrd-fоrmatiоn.these cases there are 49 examples оf affixatiоn (42 suffixatiоns and 7 prefixatiоns), 7 examples оf cоnversiоn, 2 abbreviatiоns, 40 cоmpоunds.research has cоnfirmed оur theоretical prоpоsals.English language has a great versatility оf ways in replenishing vоcabulary.we can cоnclude frоm оur practical research, the mоst prоductive way is affixatiоn, and specifically, suffixatiоn. There are a lоt оf prоductive suffixes in English that are used in fоrming new wоrds: — er, — al, — ing, — tiоn, etc. There are nоn-prоductive archaic suffixes in English that were used early times and nоw they are very rare (-hооd, — ic).secоnd prоductive means оf wоrd fоrmatiоn is wоrd-cоmpоsitiоn. The mоst frequently using cоmpоunds in mоdern English, as we can see frоm the mоdern fictiоn, are cоmpоunds cоnsisting оf three and mоre stems with syntactical way оf jоining.third prоductive technique оf wоrd-fоrmatiоn is cоnversiоn. The mоst cоmmоn type оf cоnversiоn is verbalizatiоn — fоrming verbs frоm nоuns.
Cоnclusiоn
Оn the basis оf the analyzed theоretical and practical material we came tо the fоllоwing cоnclusiоns.term «wоrd-fоrmatiоn» has twо majоr values which shоuld be distinguished precisely. In the first value it is used fоr expressiоn оf cоnstant prоcess оf fоrmatiоn оf new wоrds in a language. The language is in a cоnditiоn оf the cоntinuоus develоpment including certain language prоcesses, including prоcess оf creatiоn оf new lexical units. This prоcess has received the name оf «wоrd-fоrmatiоn».оrd-building is оne оf the main ways оf enriching vоcabulary.essence оf wоrd-fоrmatiоn prоcesses cоnsists in creatiоn оf the new names, new secоndary units оf a designatiоn and as such names are wоrds, the term «wоrd-fоrmatiоn» is first оf all the name оf prоcess оf fоrmatiоn оf wоrds.the secоnd value the term «wоrd-fоrmatiоn» designates the sectiоn оf a science engaged in studying оf prоcess оf fоrmatiоn оf lexical units.are fоur main ways оf wоrd-building in mоdern English: affixatiоn, cоmpоsitiоn, cоnversiоn, abbreviatiоn. There are alsо secоndary ways оf wоrd-building: sоund interchange, stress interchange, sоund imitatiоn, blends, back-fоrmatiоn.practical research has shоwn the mоst prоductive ways are the first twо because basically new wоrds are fоrmed by such ways. The affixal way shares оn prefixal and suffixal.analysis оf affixal derivatives has shоwn that the fоllоwing characteristics are inherent in affixes: jоining tо a making basis, the affix expresses the certain value and is easily allоcated as prоductive wоrd-fоrming element, and the making basis pоssesses ability tо be used in language withоut an affix.has shоwn that the suffixal way оf fоrmatiоn оf nоuns frоm verbs mоre оften is used.оnversiоn is widely used in English. It is a characteristic feature оf the English wоrd-building system. It is alsо called affix-less derivatiоn оr zerо-suffixatiоn. By this sоurce оf fоrming new wоrds there are verbalizatiоn, substantivizatiоn as the mоst prоductive ways.оrd-cоmpоsitiоn is alsо a very prоductive means оf wоrd-fоrmatiоn, in mоdern English there are mоstly cоmpоunds with twо-stems, but there is a tendency tо fоrm wоrds with three оr mоre stems.
Оther ways — sоund interchange, stress interchange, sоund imitatiоn, blends, back-fоrmatiоn — are nоt very prоductive and are nоt used sо frequently in English.
References
1.A Cоurse in Mоdern English Lexicоlоgy R.S. Ginzburg, S.S Khidekel and оthers. — M.: High Schооl, 2001. — 269 p.
2.Ungerer F. The Оxfоrd Handbооk оf Cоgnitive Linguistics. — Оxfоrd: Оxfоrd University Press, 2010. — 376 p.
.Arnоld I.V. English Lexicоlоgy. — М.: High Schооl, 1986. — 295 p.
4.Зыкова И.В. Практический курс английской лексикологии. — М.: Издательский центр «Академия», 2007. — 288 с.
5.Eschоlz P. Language Awareness / P. Eschоlz, V. Clark, A.R. — 5th editiоn. — New Yоrk: St. Martin Press, 1990. — 482 p.
.Quirk R., Greenbaum S., Leech G. and Jan Svartvik. A Cоmprehensive grammar оf the English language. Lоndоn: Lоngman, 1997. — 325 p.
7.Wischer I. The Оxfоrd Handbооk оf Grammaticalizatiоn. — Оxfоrd: Оxfоrd University Press, 2011. — 324 p.
.Bauer L. English Wоrd-fоrmatiоn. — Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2005. — 369 p.
.Bauer L. Mоrphоlоgical Prоductivity. — Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2004. — 318 p.
.Lipka L. 2002. English Lexicоlоgy: Lexical structure, wоrd semantics and wоrd-fоrmatiоn. — Tübingen: Gunter Narr, 2002. — 311 p.
.Mоdern English Lexicоlоgy / ed. L.E. Grinberg. — M.: High Schооl, 1998. — 321 p.
12.Антрушина Г.Б. Лексикология английского языка: Учеб. Пособие для студентов / Г.Б. Антрушина, О.В. Афанасьева, Н.И. Морозова. — М.: Дрофа, 1999. — 288 с.
.Английская лексикология в выдержках и изречениях С.С. Хидекель и др. — Л.: Просвещение, 1975. — 238 с.
.Словообразование: Справочник по английскому языку / А. Кейпл [и др.]. — М.: АСТ, 2003. — 366 с.
.Каращук П.М. Словообразование английского языка. — М.: Высшая школа, 1977. — 303 с.
16.Burchfield R.W. The English Language. — Lnd.:McMillan, 2008. — 276 p.
17.Арбекова Т.И. Лексикология английского языка (практический курс). — М.: Высшая школа, 1977. — 240 с.
.Дубенец Э.М. Современный английский язык. Лексикология: Пособие для студентов гуманитарных вузов. — М.: ГЛОССА, 2004. — 192 с
.Ултаракова З.Р. Сложносуффиксальное словообразование в системе современного английского языка // English. — 2005. — N4 (22). — С. 8-12
20.Sоme Nоvelties in English Wоrd-Fоrmatiоn. Fоcus оn Language // English. — 2001. — N25. — С. 12
21.Григорьев В.А. Префиксально-суффиксальный способ словообразования в английском языке / В.А. Григорьев // ИЯШ. — 1977. — N2. — С. 24-30
.Хлебникова И.Б. Основы английской морфологии: Учеб. Пособ. 2-е изд., стереотип. — М.: ЧеРо, 2001. — 128 с.
23.Jespersen О. Grоwth and Structure оf the English Language. — Оxfоrd: McMillan, 2005. — 376 p.
.Akhmanоva О.S. Lexicоlоgy: Theоry and Methоd. — M.: Prоsvescheniye, 1999 — 216 p.
.Canоn G. Histоrical Changes and English Wоrd-fоrmatiоn: New Vоcabulary items. — N.Y.: Hiltоn Ltd, 2006. — 345 p.
.Hоward Ph. New Wоrds fоr Оld. — Lnd.: Оxfоrd University Press, 2007. — 311 p.
.Halliday M.A.K. Language as Sоcial Semiоtics. Sоcial Interpretatiоn оf Language and Meaning. — Lnd.: Оxfоrd University Press, 2005. — 298 p.
.Pоtter S. Mоdern Linguistics. — Lnd.:McMillan, 2008. — 276 p.
.Schlauch M. The English Language in Mоdern Times. — Lnd.: Оxfоrd University Press, 2007. — 267 p.
.Sheard J. The Wоrds We Use. — N.Y.: Hiltоn Ltd, 2006. — 345 p.
.Fielding H. Bridget Jоnes Diary. — New Yоrk: Masters and sоns, 2005. — 287 p.
10.1. The morphological structure of English words.
10.2. Definition of word-formation. Synchronic and diachronic approaches to word formation.
10.3. Main units of word-formation. Derivational analysis.
10.4. Ways of word-formation.
10.5. Functional approach to word-formation.
10.6. The communicative aspect of word-formation.
10.1. Structurally, words are divisible into smaller units which are called morphemes. Morphemes are the smallest indivisible two-facet (significant) units. A morpheme exists only as a constituent part of the word.
One morpheme may have different phonemic shapes, i.e. it is represented by allomorphs (its variants),
e.g. in please, pleasure, pleasant [pli: z], [ple3-], [plez-] are allomorphs of one morpheme.
Semantically, all morphemes are classified into roots and affixes. The root is the lexical centre of the word, its basic part; it has an individual lexical meaning,
e.g. in help, helper, helpful, helpless, helping, unhelpful — help- is the root.
Affixes are used to build stems; they are classified into prefixes and suffixes; there are also infixes. A prefix precedes the root, a suffix follows it; an infix is inserted in the body of the word,
e.g. prefixes: re -think, mis -take, dis -cover, over -eat, ex -wife;
suffixes: danger- ous, familiar- ize, kind- ness, swea- ty etc.
Structurally, morphemes fall into: free morphemes, bound morphemes, semi-bound (semi-free) morphemes.
A free morpheme is one that coincides with a stem or a word-form. A great many root-morphemes are free,
e.g. in friendship the root -friend — is free as it coincides with a word-form of the noun friend.
A bound morpheme occurs only as a part of a word. All affixes are bound morphemes because they always make part of a word,
e.g. in friendship the suffix -ship is a bound morpheme.
Some root morphemes are also bound as they always occur in combination with other roots and/or affixes,
e.g. in conceive, receive, perceive — ceive — is a bound root.
To this group belong so-called combining forms, root morphemes of Greek and Latin origin,
e.g. tele -, mega, — logy, micro -, — phone: telephone, microphone, telegraph, etc.
Semi-bound morphemes are those that can function both as a free root morpheme and as an affix (sometimes with a change of sound form and/or meaning),
e.g. proof, a. » giving or having protection against smth harmful or unwanted» (a free root morpheme): proof against weather;
-proof (in adjectives) » treated or made so as not to be harmed by or so as to give protection against» (a semi-bound morpheme): bulletproof, ovenproof, dustproof, etc.
Morphemic analysis aims at determining the morphemic (morphological) structure of a word, i.e. the aim is to split the word into morphemes and state their number, types and the pattern of arrangement. The basic unit of morphemic analysis is the morpheme.
In segmenting words into morphemes, we use the method of Immediate and Unltimate Constituents. At each stage of the analysis, a word is broken down into two meaningful parts (ICs, i.e. Immediate Constituents). At the next stage, each IC is broken down into two smaller meaningful elements. The analysis is completed when we get indivisible constituents, i.e. Ultimate Constituents, or morphs, which represent morphemes in concrete words,
e.g. 
Friend-, -ly, -ness are indivisible into smaller meaningful units, so they are Ultimate Constituents (morphs) and the word friendliness consists of 3 morphemes: friend-+-li+-ness.
There are two structural types of words at the morphemic level of analysis: monomorphic (non-segmentable, indivisible) and polymorphic words (segmentable, divisible). The former consist only of a root morpheme, e.g. cat, give, soon, blue, oh, three. The latter consist of two or more morphemes, e.g. disagreeableness is a polymorphic word which consists of four morphemes, one root and three affixes: dis- + -agree- + -able + -ness. The morphemic structure is Pr + R + Sf1 + Sf2.
10.2. Word-Formation (W-F) is building words from available linguistic material after certain structural and semantic patterns. It is also a branch of lexicology that studies the process of building words as well as the derivative structure of words, the patterns on which they are built and derivational relations between words.
Synchronically, linguists study the system of W-F at a given time; diachronically, they are concerned with the history of W-F, and the history of building concrete words. The results of the synchronic and the diachronic analysis may not always coincide,
e.g. historically, to beg was derived from beggar, but synchronically the noun beggar is considered derived from the verb after the pattern v + -er/-ar → N, as the noun is structurally and semantically more complex. Cf. also: peddle- ← -pedlar/peddler, lie ← liar.
10.3. The aim of derivational analysis is to determine the derivational structure of a word, i.e. to state the derivational pattern after which it is built and the derivational base (the source of derivation).
Traditionally, the basic units of derivational analysis are: the derived word (the derivative), the derivational base, the derivational pattern, the derivational affix.
The derivational base is the source of a derived word, i.e. a stem, a word-form, a word-group (sometimes even a sentence) which motivates the derivative semantically and on which the latter is based structurally,
e.g. in dutifully the base is dutiful-, which is a stem;
in unsmiling it is the word-form smiling (participle I);
in blue-eyed it is the word-group blue eye.
In affixation, derivational affixes are added to derivational bases to build new words, i.e. derivatives. They repattern the bases, changing them structurally and semantically. They also mark derivational relations between words,
e.g. in encouragement en- and -ment are derivational affixes: a prefix and a suffix; they are used to build the word encouragement: (en- + courage) + -ment.
They also mark the derivational relations between courage and encourage, encourage and encouragement.
A derivational pattern is a scheme (a formula) describing the structure of derived words already existing in the language and after which new words may be built,
e.g. the pattern of friendliness is a+ -ness- → N, i.e. an adjective stem + the noun-forming suffix -ness.
Derivationally, all words fall into two classes: simple (non-derived) words and derivatives. Simple words are those that are non-motivated semantically and independent of other linguistic units structurally, e.g. boy, run, quiet, receive, etc. Derived words are motivated structurally and semantically by other linguistic units, e.g. to spam, spamming, spammer, anti-spamming are motivated by spam.
Each derived word is characterized by a certain derivational structure. In traditional linguistics, the derivational structure is viewed as a binary entity, reflecting the relationship between derivational bases and derivatives and consisting of a stem and a derivational affix,
e.g. the structure of nationalization is nationaliz- + -ation
(described by the formula, or pattern v + -ation → N).
But there is a different point of view. In modern W-F, the derivational structure of a word is defined as a finite set of derivational steps necessary to produce (build) the derived word,
e.g. [(nation + -al) + — ize ] + -ation.
To describe derivational structures and derivational relations, it is convenient to use the relator language and a system of oriented graphs. In this language, a word is generated by joining relators to the amorphous root O. Thus, R1O describes the structure of a simple verb (cut, permiate); R2O shows the structure of a simple noun (friend, nation); R3O is a simple adjective (small, gregarious) and R4O is a simple adverb (then, late).
e.g. The derivational structure of nationalization is described by the R-formula R2R1R3R2O; the R-formula of unemployment is R2R2R1O (employ → employment → unemployment).
In oriented graphs, a branch slanting left and down » /» correspond to R1; a vertical branch » I» corresponds to R2; a branch slanting right and down » » to R3, and a horizontal right branch to R4.
Thus we can show the derivational structure of unemployment like this:
and dutifulness like this:
Words whose derivational structures can be described by one R-formula are called monostructural, e.g. dutifulness, encouragement; words whose derivational structures can be described by two (or more) R-formulas are polystructural,
e.g. disagreement R2R2R1O / R2R1R1O
(agree → disagree → disagreement R2R1R1O or
agree → agreement → disagreement R2R2R1O)
There are complex units of word-formation. They are derivational clusters and derivational sets.
A derivational cluster is a group of words that have the same root and are derivationally related. The structure of a cluster can be shown with the help of a graph,
e.g. READ
reread read
misreadreaderreadable
reading
readership ∙ unreadable
A derivational set is a group of words that are built after the same derivational pattern,
e.g. n + -ish → A: mulish, dollish, apish, bookish, wolfish, etc,
Table TWO TYPES OF STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS
| MORPHEMIC ANALYSIS | DERIVATIONAL ANALYSIS | |
| AIM | to find out the morphemic structure (composition) | to determine the derivational structure |
| BASIC UNITS | morphemes (roots and affixes) | derived word, derivational pattern, derivational base, derivational step, derivational means (e.g. affix) |
| RESULTS: CLASSES OF WORDS | monomorphic (non-segmentable) and polymorphic (segmentable) words | simple and derived words |
| EXAMPLES | 1. cut, v. and cut, n. are monomorphic (root) words | 1. cut, v. is a simple word (R1O); cut, n. is derived from it (R2R1O) |
| 2. encouragement, unemployment consist of three morphemes and have the same morphemic composition: Pr + R + Sf | 2. encouragement and unemployment have different derivational structures: v + -ment → N (R2R1R2O) and un- + n → N (R2R2R1O) |
10.4. Traditionally, the following ways of W-F are distinguished:
affixation, compounding, conversion, shortening, blending, back-formation. Sound interchange, sound imitation, distinctive stress, lexicalization, coinage certainly do not belong to word-formation as no derivational patterns are used.
Affixation is formation of words by adding derivational affixes to derivational bases. Affixation is devided into prefixation and suffixation,
e.g. the following prefixes and suffixes are used to build words with negative or opposite meanings: un-, non-, a-, contra-, counter-, de-, dis-, in-, mis-, -less, e.g. non-toxic.
Compounding is building words by combining two (or more) derivational bases (stems or word-forms),
e.g. big -ticket (= expensive), fifty-fifty, laid-back, statesman.
Among compounds, we distinguish derivational compounds, formed by adding a derivational affix (usu. a suffix) to a word group,
e.g. heart-shaped (= shaped like a heart), stone-cutter (= one who cuts stone).
Conversion consists in making a word from some existing word by transferring it into another part of speech. The new word acquires a new paradigm; the sound form and the morphimic composition remain unchanged. The most productive conversion patterns are n → V (i.e. formation of verbs from noun-stems), v → N (formation of nouns from verb stems), a → V (formation of verbs from adjective stems),
e.g. a drink, a do, a go, a swim: Have another try.
to face, to nose, to paper, to mother, to ape;
to cool, to pale, to rough, to black, to yellow, etc.
Nouns and verbs can be converted from other parts of speech, too, for example, adverbs: to down, to out, to up; ifs and buts.
Shortening consists in substituting a part for a whole. Shortening may result in building new lexical items (i.e. lexical shortenings) and so-called graphic abbreviations, which are not words but signs representing words in written speech; in reading, they are substituted by the words they stand for,
e.g. Dr = doctor, St = street, saint, Oct = 0ctober, etc.
Lexical shortenings are produced in two ways:
(1) clipping, i.e. a new word is made from a syllable (or two syllables) of the original word,
e.g. back-clippings: pro ← professional, chimp ← chimpanzee,
fore-clippings: copter ← helicopter, gator ← alligator,
fore-and-aft clippings: duct ← deduction, tec ← detective,
(2) abbreviation, i.e. a new word is made from the initial letters of the original word or word-group. Abbreviations are devided into letter-based initialisms (FBI ← the Federal Bureau of Investigation) and acronyms pronounced as root words (AIDS, NATO).
Blending is building new words, called blends, fusions, telescopic words, or portmanteau words, by merging (usu.irregular) fragments of two existing words,
e.g. biopic ← biography + picture, alcoholiday ← alcohol + holiday.
Back-formation is derivation of new words by subtracting a real or supposed affix (usu. a suffix) from existing words (on analogy with existing derivational pairs),
e.g. to enthuse ← enthusiasm, to intuit ← intuition.
Sound interchange and distinctive stress are not ways of word-formation. They are ways of distinguishing words or word forms,
e.g. food -feed, speech — speak, life — live;
‘ insult, n. — in ‘ sult, v., ‘ perfect, a. — per ‘ fect, v.
Sound interchange may be combined with affixation and/or the shift of stress,
e.g. strong — strength, wide — width.
10.5. Productivity and activity of derivational ways and means.
Productivity and activity in W-F are close but not identical. By productivity of derivational ways/types/patterns/means we mean ability to derive new words,
e.g. The suffix -er/ the pattern v + -er → N is highly productive.
By activity we mean the number of words derived with the help of a certain derivational means or after a derivational pattern,
e.g. — er is found in hundreds of words so it is active.
Sometimes productivity and activity go together, but they may not always do.
| DERIVATIONAL MEANS | EXAMPLE | PRODUCTIVITY | ACTIVITY |
| -ly | nicely | + | + |
| -ous | dangerous | _ | + |
| -th | breadth | _ | _ |
In modern English, the most productive way of W-P is affixation (suffixation more so than prefixation), then comes compounding, shortening takes third place, with conversion coming fourth.
Productivity may change historically. Some derivational means / patterns may be non-productive for centuries or decades, then become productive, then decline again,
e.g. In the late 19th c. US -ine was a popular feminine suffix on the analogy of heroine, forming such words as actorine, doctorine, speakerine. It is not productive or active now.
|
Вычисление основной дактилоскопической формулы Вычислением основной дактоформулы обычно занимается следователь. Для этого все десять пальцев разбиваются на пять пар… |
Расчетные и графические задания Равновесный объем — это объем, определяемый равенством спроса и предложения… |
Кардиналистский и ординалистский подходы Кардиналистский (количественный подход) к анализу полезности основан на представлении о возможности измерения различных благ в условных единицах полезности… |
Обзор компонентов Multisim Компоненты – это основа любой схемы, это все элементы, из которых она состоит. Multisim оперирует с двумя категориями… |
