What is productivity in word formation

Productivity is
the ability to form new words after existing patterns which are
readily understood by the speakers of a language. The most important
and the most productive ways of word-formation are affixation,
conversion,
word-composition
and abbreviation
(contraction).
In the course of time the productivity of this or that way of
word-formation may change. Sound
interchange
or gradation
(blood −
to bleed, to abide − abode, to strike − stroke) was
a productive way of word building in old English and is important for
a diachronic study of the English language. It has lost its
productivity in Modern English and no new word can be coined by means
of sound gradation. Affixation on the contrary was productive in Old
English and is still one of the most productive ways of word building
in Modern English.

3. Affixation. General characteristics of suffixes and prefixes.

The process of affixation
consists
in coining a new word by adding an affix or several affixes to some
root morpheme.

Suffixation
is more productive than prefixation.
In Modern English suffixation is characteristic of noun and adjective
formation, while prefixation is typical of verb formation (incoming,
trainee, principal, promotion).

From
the etymological point of view affixes are classified into the same
two large groups as words: native
and
borrowed (see
Lecture
1; Table 2).
It would be wrong, though, to suppose that affixes are borrowed in
the same way and for the same reasons as words. The
term borrowed
affixes
is not very exact as affixes are never
borrowed as such, but only as parts of loan words. To enter the
morphological system of the English language a borrowed affix has to
meet certain conditions. The borrowing of the affixes is possible
only if the number of words containing this affix is considerable, if
its meaning and function are definite and clear enough, and also if
its structural pattern corresponds to the structural patterns already
existing in the language.

If
these conditions are fulfilled, the foreign affix may even become
productive and combine with native stems or borrowed stems within the
system of English vocabulary like
-able <
Lat
-abilis
in
such words as laughable
or
unforgettable
and
unforgivable.
The
English words balustrade,
brigade, cascade are
borrowed from French. On the analogy with these in the English
language itself such words as blockade
are
coined.

Affixes are usually divided
into living
and dead
affixes.
Living affixes are easily separated from the stem (care-ful).
Dead affixes have become fully merged with the stem and can be
singled out by a diachronic analysis of the development of the word
(admit
− L.
ad+mittere).

Affixes can also be
classified into productive
and
non-productive
types. By productive
affixes
we mean the ones, which take part in deriving new words in this
particular period of language development. The best way to identify
productive affixes is to look for them among neologisms
and
so-called nonce-words,
i.e. words
coined and used only for this particular occasion. The latter are
usually formed on the level of living speech and reflect the most
productive and progressive patterns in word-building:

unputdownable thrill;

“I
don’t
like Sunday evenings: I feel so Mondayish”;

Professor Pringle was a
thinnish, baldish, dispeptic-lookingish
cove with an eye like a haddock. (From Right-Ho,
Jeeves by
P.G. Wodehouse)

In many cases the choice of
the affixes is a means of differentiating meaning:

uninterested −
disinterested;

distrust − mistrust.

One should not confuse the
productivity of affixes with their frequency of occurrence. There are
quite a number of high-frequency affixes which, nevertheless, are no
longer used in word-derivation (e. g. the adjective-forming native
suffixes -ful,
-ly; the
adjective-forming suffixes of Latin origin -ant,
-ent, -al which
are quite frequent).

Unlike
roots, affixes are always bound forms. The difference between
suffixes and prefixes, it will be remembered, is not confined to
their respective position, suffixes being “fixed after” and
prefixes “fixed before” the stem. It also concerns their function
and meaning.

A
suffix
is
a derivational morpheme following the stem and forming a new
derivative in a different part of speech or a different word class,
сf.
-en,
-y, -less in
hearten,
hearty, heartless. When
both the underlying and the resultant forms belong to the same part
of speech, the suffix serves to differentiate between
lexico-grammatical classes by rendering some very general
lexico-grammatical meaning. For instance, both -ify
and
-er
are
verb suffixes, but the first characterises causative verbs, such as
horrify,
purify, rarefy, simplify, whereas
the second is mostly typical of frequentative verbs: flicker,
shimmer, twitter and
the like.

If we realise that suffixes
render the most general semantic component of the word’s lexical
meaning by marking the general class of phenomena to which the
referent of the word belongs, the reason why suffixes are as a rule
semantically fused with the stem stands explained.

A
prefix
is a derivational morpheme standing before the root and modifying
meaning, cf. hearten
—
dishearten.
It
is only with verbs and statives that a prefix may serve to
distinguish one part of speech from another, like in earth
n
—
unearth
v,
sleep
n
—
asleep
(stative).

It
is interesting that as a prefix en-
may
carry the same meaning of being or bringing into a certain state as
the suffix -en,
сf.
enable,
encamp, endanger,
endear, enslave and
fasten,
darken, deepen, lengthen, strengthen.

Preceding
a verb stem, some prefixes express the difference between a
transitive and an intransitive verb: stay
v
and outstay
(sb)
vt. With a few exceptions prefixes modify the stem for time (pre-,
post-), place
(in-,
ad-) or
negation (un-,
dis-) and
remain semantically rather independent of the stem.

An
infix
is an affix placed within the word, like -n-
in
stand.
The
type is not productive. An affix should not be confused with a
combining form.
A
combining form is also a bound form but it can be distinguished from
an affix historically by the fact that it is always borrowed from
another language, namely, from Latin or Greek, in which it existed as
a free form, i.e. a separate word, or also as a combining form. They
differ from all other borrowings in that they occur in compounds and
derivatives that did not exist in their original language but were
formed only in modern times in English, Russian, French, etc., сf.
polyclinic,
polymer;
stereophonic, stereoscopic, telemechanics, television. Combining
forms
are mostly international. Descriptively a combining form differs from
an affix, because it can occur as one constituent of a form whose
only other constituent is an affix, as in graphic,
cyclic.

Also
affixes are characterised either by preposition with respect to the
root (prefixes) or by postposition (suffixes), whereas the same
combining
form may occur in both positions. Cf.
phonograph,
phonology and
telephone,
microphone, etc.

Соседние файлы в предмете [НЕСОРТИРОВАННОЕ]

• #
• #
• #
• #
• #
• #
• #
• #
• #
• #
• #

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

In linguistics, productivity is the degree to which speakers of a language use a particular grammatical process, especially in word formation. It compares grammatical processes that are in frequent use to less frequently used ones that tend towards lexicalization. Generally the test of productivity concerns identifying which grammatical forms would be used in the coining of new words: these will tend to only be converted to other forms using productive processes.

Examples in English[edit]

In standard English, the formation of preterite and past participle forms of verbs by means of ablaut (as Germanic strong verbs, for example, sing–sang–sung) is no longer considered productive. Newly coined verbs in English overwhelmingly use the ‘weak’ (regular) ending -ed for the past tense and past participle (for example, spammed, e-mailed). Similarly, the only clearly productive plural ending is -(e)s; it is found on the vast majority of English count nouns and is used to form the plurals of neologisms, such as FAQs and Muggles. The ending -en, on the other hand, is no longer productive, being found only in oxen, children, and the now-rare brethren (as a plural of brother). Because these old forms can sound incorrect to modern ears, regularization can wear away at them until they are no longer used: brethren has now been replaced with the more regular-sounding brothers except when talking about religious orders. It appears that many strong verbs were completely lost during the transition from Old English to Middle English, possibly because they sounded archaic or were simply no longer truly understood.

In both cases, however, occasional exceptions have occurred. A false analogy with other verbs caused dug to become thought of as the ‘correct’ preterite and past participle form of dig (the King James Bible preferred digged in 1611) and more recent examples, like snuck from sneak and dove from dive, have similarly become popular. Some American English dialects also use the non-standard drug as the past tense of drag.

Significance[edit]

Since use to produce novel (new, non-established) structures is the clearest proof of usage of a grammatical process, the evidence most often appealed to as establishing productivity is the appearance of novel forms of the type the process leads one to expect, and many people would limit the definition offered above to exclude use of a grammatical process that does not result in a novel structure. Thus in practice, and, for many, in theory, productivity is the degree to which speakers use a particular grammatical process for the formation of novel structures. A productive grammatical process defines an open class, one which admits new words or forms. Non-productive grammatical processes may be seen as operative within closed classes: they remain within the language and may include very common words, but are not added to and may be lost in time or through regularization converting them into what now seems to be a correct form.

Productivity is, as stated above and implied in the examples already discussed, a matter of degree, and there are a number of areas in which that may be shown to be true. As the example of -en becoming productive shows, what has apparently been non-productive for many decades or even centuries may suddenly come to some degree of productive life, and it may do so in certain dialects or sociolects while not in others, or in certain parts of the vocabulary but not others. Some patterns are only very rarely productive, others may be used by a typical speaker several times a year or month, whereas others (especially syntactic processes) may be used productively dozens or hundreds of times in a typical day. It is not atypical for more than one pattern with similar functions to be comparably productive, to the point that a speaker can be in a quandary as to which form to use —e.g., would it be better to say that a taste or color like that of raisins is raisinish, raisiny, raisinlike, or even raisinly?

It can also be very difficult to assess when a given usage is productive or when a person is using a form that has already been learned as a whole. Suppose a reader comes across an unknown word such as despisement meaning «an attitude of despising». The reader may apply the verb+ment noun-formational process to understand the word perfectly well, and this would be a kind of productive use. This would be essentially independent of whether or not the writer had also used the same process productively in coining the term, or whether he or she had learned the form from previous usage (as most English speakers have learned government, for instance), and no longer needed to apply the process productively in order to use the word. Similarly a speaker or writer’s use of words like raisinish or raisiny may or may not involve productive application of the noun+ish and noun+y rules, and the same is true of a hearer or reader’s understanding of them. But it will not necessarily be at all clear to an outside observer, or even to the speaker and hearer themselves, whether the form was already learnt and whether the rules were applied or not.

English and productive forms[edit]

Developments over the last five hundred years or more have meant English has developed in ways very different from the evolution of most world languages across history.^{[citation needed]} English is a language with a long written past that has preserved many words that might otherwise have been lost or changed, often in fixed texts such as the King James Version of the Bible which are not updated regularly to modernise their language. English also has many conventions for writing polite and formal prose, which are often very different from how people normally speak.

As literacy among English-speakers has become almost universal, it has become increasingly easy for people to bring back into life archaic words and grammar forms, often to create a comic or humorously old-fashioned effect, with the expectation that the new coinings will be understandable. Those processes would be much rarer for languages without a culture of literacy.

English has also borrowed extensively from other languages because of technology and trade and often borrows both plural and singular forms into standard English. For example, the plural of radius (from Latin) has not decisively settled between radiuses and the original Latin radii, but educated opinion prefers the latter. In some cases, new words have been coined from these bases (often Latin) on the same rules.

Examples in other languages[edit]

One study, which focuses on the usage of the Dutch suffix -heid (comparable to -ness in English) hypothesizes that -heid gives rise to two kinds of abstract nouns: those referring to concepts and those referring to states of affairs. It shows that the referential function of -heid is typical for the lowest-frequency words, while its conceptual function is typical for the highest-frequency words. It claims that high-frequency formations with the suffix -heid are available in the mental lexicon, whereas low-frequency words and neologisms are produced and understood by rule.^[1]

See also[edit]

• Word formation
• Inflection

References[edit]

• Baayen, Harald. (1992). Quantitative aspects of morphological productivity. In G. Booij & J. van Marle (Eds.), Yearbook of morphology, 1991. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers, 109–149. ISBN 0-7923-1416-6.
• Baayen, Harald & Rochelle Lieber. (1991). Productivity and English derivation: A corpus-based study. Linguistics 29, 801-844.
• Bauer, Laurie. (2001). Morphological productivity. Cambridge studies in linguistics (No. 95). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. ISBN 0-521-79238-X.
• Bolozky, Shmuel. (1999). Measuring productivity in word formation. Leiden: Brill. ISBN 90-04-11252-9.
• Hay, Jennifer & Harald Baayen. (2002). Parsing and productivity. In G. Booij & J. van Marle (Eds.), Yearbook of morphology, 2002, 203–35. Dordrecht: Kluwer.
• Palmer, Chris C. (2015). Measuring productivity diachronically: nominal suffixes in English letters, 1400–1600. English Language and Linguistics, 19, 107-129. doi:10.1017/S1360674314000264.
• Plag, Ingo. (1999). Morphological productivity: Structural constraints in English derivation. Topics in English linguistics (No. 28). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. ISBN 3-11-015833-7.
• Säily, Tanja. (2014). Sociolinguistic variation in English derivational productivity: Studies and methods in diachronic corpus linguistics. Helsinki: Société Néophilologique.
• Schröder, Anne. (2011). On the productivity of verbal prefixation in English: Synchronic and diachronic perspectives. Tübingen: Narr.
• Trips, Carola. (2009). Lexical semantics and diachronic morphology: The development of -hood, -dom and -ship in the history of English. Tübingen: Niemeyer.

Notes[edit]

Lecture №3. Productive and Non-productive Ways of Word-formation in Modern English

Productivity is the ability to form new words after existing patterns which are readily understood by the speakers of language. The most important and the most productive ways of word-formation are affixation, conversion, word-composition and abbreviation (contraction). In the course of time the productivity of this or that way of word-formation may change. Sound interchange or gradation (blood-to bleed, to abide-abode, to strike-stroke) was a productive way of word building in old English and is important for a diachronic study of the English language. It has lost its productivity in Modern English and no new word can be coined by means of sound gradation. Affixation on the contrary was productive in Old English and is still one of the most productive ways of word building in Modern English.

WORDBUILDING

Word-building is one of the main ways of enriching vocabulary. There are four main ways of word-building in modern English: affixation, composition, conversion, abbreviation. There are also secondary ways of word-building: sound interchange, stress interchange, sound imitation, blends, back formation.

AFFIXATION

Affixation is one of the most productive ways of word-building throughout the history of English. It consists in adding an affix to the stem of a definite part of speech. Affixation is divided into suffixation and prefixation.

Suffixation

The main function of suffixes in Modern English is to form one part of speech from another, the secondary function is to change the lexical meaning of the same part of speech. (e.g. «educate» is a verb, «educator» is a noun, and music» is a noun, «musical» is also a noun or an adjective). There are different classifications of suffixes :

1. Part-of-speech classification. Suffixes which can form different parts of speech are given here :

a) noun-forming suffixes, such as: —er (criticizer), —dom (officialdom), —ism (ageism),

b) adjective-forming suffixes, such as: —able (breathable), less (symptomless), —ous (prestigious),

c) verb-forming suffixes, such as —ize (computerize) , —ify (minify),

d) adverb-forming suffixes , such as : —ly (singly), —ward (tableward),

e) numeral-forming suffixes, such as —teen (sixteen), —ty (seventy).

2. Semantic classification. Suffixes changing the lexical meaning of the stem can be subdivided into groups, e.g. noun-forming suffixes can denote:

a) the agent of the action, e.g. —er (experimenter), —ist (taxist), -ent (student),

b) nationality, e.g. —ian (Russian), —ese (Japanese), —ish (English),

c) collectivity, e.g. —dom (moviedom), —ry (peasantry, —ship (readership), —ati (literati),

d) diminutiveness, e.g. —ie (horsie), —let (booklet), —ling (gooseling), —ette (kitchenette),

e) quality, e.g. —ness (copelessness), —ity (answerability).

3. Lexico—grammatical character of the stem. Suffixes which can be added to certain groups of stems are subdivided into:

a) suffixes added to verbal stems, such as: —er (commuter), —ing (suffering), — able (flyable), —ment (involvement), —ation (computerization),

b) suffixes added to noun stems, such as: —less (smogless), —ful (roomful), —ism (adventurism), —ster (pollster), —nik (filmnik), —ish (childish),

c) suffixes added to adjective stems, such as: —en (weaken), —ly (pinkly), —ish (longish), —ness (clannishness).

4. Origin of suffixes. Here we can point out the following groups:

a) native (Germanic), such as —er,-ful, —less, —ly.

b) Romanic, such as : —tion, —ment, —able, —eer.

c) Greek, such as : —ist, —ism, -ize.

d) Russian, such as —nik.

5. Productivity. Here we can point out the following groups:

a) productive, such as: —er, —ize, —ly, —ness.

b) semi-productive, such as: —eer, —ette, —ward.

c) non-productive , such as: —ard (drunkard), —th (length).

Suffixes can be polysemantic, such as: —er can form nouns with the following meanings: agent, doer of the action expressed by the stem (speaker), profession, occupation (teacher), a device, a tool (transmitter). While speaking about suffixes we should also mention compound suffixes which are added to the stem at the same time, such as —ably, —ibly, (terribly, reasonably), —ation (adaptation from adapt). There are also disputable cases whether we have a suffix or a root morpheme in the structure of a word, in such cases we call such morphemes semi-suffixes, and words with such suffixes can be classified either as derived words or as compound words, e.g. —gate (Irangate), —burger (cheeseburger), —aholic (workaholic) etc.

Prefixation

Prefixation is the formation of words by means of adding a prefix to the stem. In English it is characteristic for forming verbs. Prefixes are more independent than suffixes. Prefixes can be classified according to the nature of words in which they are used: prefixes used in notional words and prefixes used in functional words. Prefixes used in notional words are proper prefixes which are bound morphemes, e.g. un— (unhappy). Prefixes used in functional words are semi-bound morphemes because they are met in the language as words, e.g. over— (overhead) (cf. over the table). The main function of prefixes in English is to change the lexical meaning of the same part of speech. But the recent research showed that about twenty-five prefixes in Modern English form one part of speech from another (bebutton, interfamily, postcollege etc).

Prefixes can be classified according to different principles:

1. Semantic classification:

a) prefixes of negative meaning, such as: in— (invaluable), non— (nonformals), un— (unfree) etc,

b) prefixes denoting repetition or reversal actions, such as: de— (decolonize), re— (revegetation), dis— (disconnect),

c) prefixes denoting time, space, degree relations, such as: inter— (interplanetary) , hyper— (hypertension), ex— (ex-student), pre— (pre-election), over— (overdrugging) etc.

2. Origin of prefixes:

a) native (Germanic), such as: un-, over-, under— etc.

b) Romanic, such as: in-, de-, ex-, re— etc.

c) Greek, such as: sym-, hyper— etc.

When we analyze such words as adverb, accompany where we can find the root of the word (verb, company) we may treat ad-, ac— as prefixes though they were never used as prefixes to form new words in English and were borrowed from Romanic languages together with words. In such cases we can treat them as derived words. But some scientists treat them as simple words. Another group of words with a disputable structure are such as: contain, retain, detain and conceive, receive, deceive where we can see that re-, de-, con— act as prefixes and —tain, —ceive can be understood as roots. But in English these combinations of sounds have no lexical meaning and are called pseudo-morphemes. Some scientists treat such words as simple words, others as derived ones. There are some prefixes which can be treated as root morphemes by some scientists, e.g. after— in the word afternoon. American lexicographers working on Webster dictionaries treat such words as compound words. British lexicographers treat such words as derived ones.

COMPOSITION

Composition is the way of word building when a word is formed by joining two or more stems to form one word. The structural unity of a compound word depends upon: a) the unity of stress, b) solid or hyphеnated spelling, c) semantic unity, d) unity of morphological and syntactical functioning. These are characteristic features of compound words in all languages. For English compounds some of these factors are not very reliable. As a rule English compounds have one uniting stress (usually on the first component), e.g. hard-cover, best—seller. We can also have a double stress in an English compound, with the main stress on the first component and with a secondary stress on the second component, e.g. blood—vessel. The third pattern of stresses is two level stresses, e.g. snow—white, sky—blue. The third pattern is easily mixed up with word-groups unless they have solid or hyphеnated spelling.

Spelling in English compounds is not very reliable as well because they can have different spelling even in the same text, e.g. war—ship, blood—vessel can be spelt through a hyphen and also with a break, insofar, underfoot can be spelt solidly and with a break. All the more so that there has appeared in Modern English a special type of compound words which are called block compounds, they have one uniting stress but are spelt with a break, e.g. air piracy, cargo module, coin change, penguin suit etc. The semantic unity of a compound word is often very strong. In such cases we have idiomatic compounds where the meaning of the whole is not a sum of meanings of its components, e.g. to ghostwrite, skinhead, brain—drain etc. In nonidiomatic compounds semantic unity is not strong, e. g., airbus, to bloodtransfuse, astrodynamics etc.

English compounds have the unity of morphological and syntactical functioning. They are used in a sentence as one part of it and only one component changes grammatically, e.g. These girls are chatter-boxes. «Chatter-boxes» is a predicative in the sentence and only the second component changes grammatically. There are two characteristic features of English compounds:

a) Both components in an English compound are free stems, that is they can be used as words with a distinctive meaning of their own. The sound pattern will be the same except for the stresses, e.g. «a green-house» and «a green house». Whereas for example in Russian compounds the stems are bound morphemes, as a rule.

b) English compounds have a two-stem pattern, with the exception of compound words which have form-word stems in their structure, e.g. middle-of-the-road, off—the—record, up—and—doing etc. The two-stem pattern distinguishes English compounds from German ones.

WAYS OF FORMING COMPOUND WORDS

Compound words in English can be formed not only by means of composition but also by means of:

a) reduplication, e.g. too—too, and also by means of reduplication combined with sound interchange , e.g. rope-ripe,

b) conversion from word-groups, e.g. to micky—mouse, can—do, makeup etc,

c) back formation from compound nouns or word-groups, e.g. to bloodtransfuse, to fingerprint etc ,

d) analogy, e.g. lie—in (on the analogy with sit-in) and also phone—in, brawn—drain (on the analogy with brain—drain) etc.

CLASSIFICATIONS OF ENGLISH COMPOUNDS

1. According to the parts of speech compounds are subdivided into:

a) nouns, such as: baby-moon, globe-trotter,

b) adjectives, such as : free-for-all, power-happy,

c) verbs, such as : to honey-moon, to baby-sit, to henpeck,

d) adverbs, such as: downdeep, headfirst,

e) prepositions, such as: into, within,

f) numerals, such as : fifty—five.

2. According to the way components are joined together compounds are divided into: a) neutral, which are formed by joining together two stems without any joining morpheme, e.g. ball—point, to windowshop,

b) morphological where components are joined by a linking element: vowels «o» or «i» or the consonant «s», e.g. («astrospace», «handicraft», «sportsman»),

c) syntactical where the components are joined by means of form-word stems, e.g. here-and-now, free-for-all, do-or-die.

3. According to their structure compounds are subdivided into:

a) compound words proper which consist of two stems, e.g. to job-hunt, train-sick, go-go, tip-top,

b) derivational compounds, where besides the stems we have affixes, e.g. ear—minded, hydro-skimmer,

c) compound words consisting of three or more stems, e.g. cornflower—blue, eggshell—thin, singer—songwriter,

d) compound-shortened words, e.g. boatel, VJ—day, motocross, intervision, Eurodollar, Camford.

4. According to the relations between the components compound words are subdivided into:

a) subordinative compounds where one of the components is the semantic and the structural centre and the second component is subordinate; these subordinative relations can be different: with comparative relations, e.g. honey—sweet, eggshell—thin, with limiting relations, e.g. breast—high, knee—deep, with emphatic relations, e.g. dog—cheap, with objective relations, e.g. gold—rich, with cause relations, e.g. love—sick, with space relations, e.g. top—heavy, with time relations, e.g. spring—fresh, with subjective relations, e.g. foot—sore etc

b) coordinative compounds where both components are semantically independent. Here belong such compounds when one person (object) has two functions, e.g. secretary-stenographer, woman-doctor, Oxbridge etc. Such compounds are called additive. This group includes also compounds formed by means of reduplication, e.g. fifty-fifty, no-no, and also compounds formed with the help of rhythmic stems (reduplication combined with sound interchange) e.g. criss-cross, walkie-talkie.

5. According to the order of the components compounds are divided into compounds with direct order, e.g. kill—joy, and compounds with indirect order, e.g. nuclear—free, rope—ripe.

CONVERSION

Conversion is a characteristic feature of the English word-building system. It is also called affixless derivation or zero-suffixation. The term «conversion» first appeared in the book by Henry Sweet «New English Grammar» in 1891. Conversion is treated differently by different scientists, e.g. prof. A.I. Smirntitsky treats conversion as a morphological way of forming words when one part of speech is formed from another part of speech by changing its paradigm, e.g. to form the verb «to dial» from the noun «dial» we change the paradigm of the noun (a dial, dials) for the paradigm of a regular verb (I dial, he dials, dialed, dialing). A. Marchand in his book «The Categories and Types of Present-day English» treats conversion as a morphological-syntactical word-building because we have not only the change of the paradigm, but also the change of the syntactic function, e.g. I need some good paper for my room. (The noun «paper» is an object in the sentence). I paper my room every year. (The verb «paper» is the predicate in the sentence). Conversion is the main way of forming verbs in Modern English. Verbs can be formed from nouns of different semantic groups and have different meanings because of that, e.g.:

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

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

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

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

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

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

Nouns can also be formed by means of conversion from verbs. Converted nouns can denote: a) instant of an action e.g. a jump, a move,

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

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

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

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

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

CRITERIA OF SEMANTIC DERIVATION

In cases of conversion the problem of criteria of semantic derivation arises: which of the converted pair is primary and which is converted from it. The problem was first analized by prof. A.I. Smirnitsky. Later on P.A. Soboleva developed his idea and worked out the following criteria:

1. If the lexical meaning of the root morpheme and the lexico-grammatical meaning of the stem coincide the word is primary, e.g. in cases pen — to pen, father — to father the nouns are names of an object and a living being. Therefore in the nouns «pen» and «father» the lexical meaning of the root and the lexico-grammatical meaning of the stem coincide. The verbs «to pen» and «to father» denote an action, a process therefore the lexico-grammatical meanings of the stems do not coincide with the lexical meanings of the roots. The verbs have a complex semantic structure and they were converted from nouns.

2. If we compare a converted pair with a synonymic word pair which was formed by means of suffixation we can find out which of the pair is primary. This criterion can be applied only to nouns converted from verbs, e.g. «chat» n. and «chat» v. can be compared with «conversation» – «converse».

3. The criterion based on derivational relations is of more universal character. In this case we must take a word-cluster of relative words to which the converted pair belongs. If the root stem of the word-cluster has suffixes added to a noun stem the noun is primary in the converted pair and vica versa, e.g. in the word-cluster: hand n., hand v., handy, handful the derived words have suffixes added to a noun stem, that is why the noun is primary and the verb is converted from it. In the word-cluster: dance n., dance v., dancer, dancing we see that the primary word is a verb and the noun is converted from it.

SUBSTANTIVIZATION OF ADJECTIVES

Some scientists (Yespersen, Kruisinga) refer substantivization of adjectives to conversion. But most scientists disagree with them because in cases of substantivization of adjectives we have quite different changes in the language. Substantivization is the result of ellipsis (syntactical shortening) when a word combination with a semantically strong attribute loses its semantically weak noun (man, person etc), e.g. «a grown-up person» is shortened to «a grown-up». In cases of perfect substantivization the attribute takes the paradigm of a countable noun, e.g. a criminal, criminals, a criminal’s (mistake), criminals’ (mistakes). Such words are used in a sentence in the same function as nouns, e.g. I am fond of musicals. (musical comedies). There are also two types of partly substantivized adjectives: 1) those which have only the plural form and have the meaning of collective nouns, such as: sweets, news, finals, greens; 2) those which have only the singular form and are used with the definite article. They also have the meaning of collective nouns and denote a class, a nationality, a group of people, e.g. the rich, the English, the dead.

«STONE WALL» COMBINATIONS

The problem whether adjectives can be formed by means of conversion from nouns is the subject of many discussions. In Modern English there are a lot of word combinations of the type, e.g. price rise, wage freeze, steel helmet, sand castle etc. If the first component of such units is an adjective converted from a noun, combinations of this type are free word-groups typical of English (adjective + noun). This point of view is proved by O. Yespersen by the following facts:

1. «Stone» denotes some quality of the noun «wall».

2. «Stone» stands before the word it modifies, as adjectives in the function of an attribute do in English.

3. «Stone» is used in the Singular though its meaning in most cases is plural, and adjectives in English have no plural form.

4. There are some cases when the first component is used in the Comparative or the Superlative degree, e.g. the bottomest end of the scale.

5. The first component can have an adverb which characterizes it, and adjectives are characterized by adverbs, e.g. a purely family gathering.

6. The first component can be used in the same syntactical function with a proper adjective to characterize the same noun, e.g. lonely bare stone houses.

7. After the first component the pronoun «one» can be used instead of a noun, e.g. I shall not put on a silk dress, I shall put on a cotton one.

However Henry Sweet and some other scientists say that these criteria are not characteristic of the majority of such units. They consider the first component of such units to be a noun in the function of an attribute because in Modern English almost all parts of speech and even word-groups and sentences can be used in the function of an attribute, e.g. the then president (an adverb), out-of-the-way villages (a word-group), a devil-may-care speed (a sentence). There are different semantic relations between the components of «stone wall» combinations. E.I. Chapnik classified them into the following groups:

1. time relations, e.g. evening paper,

2. space relations, e.g. top floor,

3. relations between the object and the material of which it is made, e.g. steel helmet,

4. cause relations, e.g. war orphan,

5. relations between a part and the whole, e.g. a crew member,

6. relations between the object and an action, e.g. arms production,

7. relations between the agent and an action e.g. government threat, price rise,

8. relations between the object and its designation, e.g. reception hall,

9. the first component denotes the head, organizer of the characterized object, e.g. Clinton government, Forsyte family,

10. the first component denotes the field of activity of the second component, e.g. language teacher, psychiatry doctor,

11. comparative relations, e.g. moon face,

12. qualitative relations, e.g. winter apples.

ABBREVIATION

In the process of communication words and word-groups can be shortened. The causes of shortening can be linguistic and extra-linguistic. By extra-linguistic causes changes in the life of people are meant. In Modern English many new abbreviations, acronyms, initials, blends are formed because the tempo of life is increasing and it becomes necessary to give more and more information in the shortest possible time. There are also linguistic causes of abbreviating words and word-groups, such as the demand of rhythm, which is satisfied in English by monosyllabic words. When borrowings from other languages are assimilated in English they are shortened. Here we have modification of form on the basis of analogy, e.g. the Latin borrowing «fanaticus» is shortened to «fan» on the analogy with native words: man, pan, tan etc. There are two main types of shortenings: graphical and lexical.

Graphical abbreviations

Graphical abbreviations are the result of shortening of words and word-groups only in written speech while orally the corresponding full forms are used. They are used for the economy of space and effort in writing. The oldest group of graphical abbreviations in English is of Latin origin. In Russian this type of abbreviation is not typical. In these abbreviations in the spelling Latin words are shortened, while orally the corresponding English equivalents are pronounced in the full form, e.g. for example (Latin exampli gratia), a.m. – in the morning (ante meridiem), No – number (numero), p.a. – a year (per annum), d – penny (dinarius), lb – pound (libra), i. e. – that is (id est) etc.

Some graphical abbreviations of Latin origin have different English equivalents in different contexts, e.g. p.m. can be pronounced «in the afternoon» (post meridiem) and «after death» (post mortem). There are also graphical abbreviations of native origin, where in the spelling we have abbreviations of words and word-groups of the corresponding English equivalents in the full form. We have several semantic groups of them: a) days of the week, e.g. Mon – Monday, Tue – Tuesday etc

b) names of months, e.g. Apr – April, Aug – August etc.

c) names of counties in UK, e.g. Yorks – Yorkshire, Berks – Berkshire etc

d) names of states in USA, e.g. Ala – Alabama, Alas – Alaska etc.

e) names of address, e.g. Mr., Mrs., Ms., Dr. etc.

f) military ranks, e.g. capt. – captain, col. – colonel, sgt – sergeant etc.

g) scientific degrees, e.g. B.A. – Bachelor of Arts, D.M. – Doctor of Medicine. (Sometimes in scientific degrees we have abbreviations of Latin origin, e.g., M.B. – Medicinae Baccalaurus).

h) units of time, length, weight, e.g. f./ft – foot/feet, sec. – second, in. – inch, mg. – milligram etc.

The reading of some graphical abbreviations depends on the context, e.g. «m» can be read as: male, married, masculine, metre, mile, million, minute, «l.p.» can be read as long-playing, low pressure.

Initial abbreviations

Initialisms are the bordering case between graphical and lexical abbreviations. When they appear in the language, as a rule, to denote some new offices they are closer to graphical abbreviations because orally full forms are used, e.g. J.V. – joint venture. When they are used for some duration of time they acquire the shortened form of pronouncing and become closer to lexical abbreviations, e.g. BBC is as a rule pronounced in the shortened form. In some cases the translation of initialisms is next to impossible without using special dictionaries. Initialisms are denoted in different ways. Very often they are expressed in the way they are pronounced in the language of their origin, e.g. ANZUS (Australia, New Zealand, United States) is given in Russian as АНЗУС, SALT (Strategic Arms Limitation Talks) was for a long time used in Russian as СОЛТ, now a translation variant is used (ОСВ – Договор об ограничении стратегических вооружений). This type of initialisms borrowed into other languages is preferable, e.g. UFO – НЛО, CП – JV etc. There are three types of initialisms in English:

a) initialisms with alphabetical reading, such as UK, BUP, CND etc

b) initialisms which are read as if they are words, e.g. UNESCO, UNO, NATO etc.

c) initialisms which coincide with English words in their sound form, such initialisms are called acronyms, e.g. CLASS (Computor-based Laboratory for Automated School System). Some scientists unite groups b) and c) into one group which they call acronyms. Some initialisms can form new words in which they act as root morphemes by different ways of wordbuilding:

a) affixation, e.g. AVALism, ex- POW, AIDSophobia etc.

b) conversion, e.g. to raff, to fly IFR (Instrument Flight Rules),

c) composition, e.g. STOLport, USAFman etc.

d) there are also compound-shortened words where the first component is an initial abbreviation with the alphabetical reading and the second one is a complete word, e.g. A-bomb, U-pronunciation, V -day etc. In some cases the first component is a complete word and the second component is an initial abbreviation with the alphabetical pronunciation, e.g. Three -Ds (Three dimensions) – стереофильм.

Abbreviations of words

Abbreviation of words consists in clipping a part of a word. As a result we get a new lexical unit where either the lexical meaning or the style is different form the full form of the word. In such cases as «fantasy» and «fancy», «fence» and «defence» we have different lexical meanings. In such cases as «laboratory» and «lab», we have different styles. Abbreviation does not change the part-of-speech meaning, as we have it in the case of conversion or affixation, it produces words belonging to the same part of speech as the primary word, e.g. prof. is a noun and professor is also a noun. Mostly nouns undergo abbreviation, but we can also meet abbreviation of verbs, such as to rev. from to revolve, to tab from to tabulate etc. But mostly abbreviated forms of verbs are formed by means of conversion from abbreviated nouns, e.g. to taxi, to vac etc. Adjectives can be abbreviated but they are mostly used in school slang and are combined with suffixation, e.g. comfy, dilly etc. As a rule pronouns, numerals, interjections. conjunctions are not abbreviated. The exceptions are: fif (fifteen), teen-ager, in one’s teens (apheresis from numerals from 13 to 19). Lexical abbreviations are classified according to the part of the word which is clipped. Mostly the end of the word is clipped, because the beginning of the word in most cases is the root and expresses the lexical meaning of the word. This type of abbreviation is called apocope. Here we can mention a group of words ending in «o», such as disco (dicotheque), expo (exposition), intro (introduction) and many others. On the analogy with these words there developed in Modern English a number of words where «o» is added as a kind of a suffix to the shortened form of the word, e.g. combo (combination) – небольшой эстрадный ансамбль, Afro (African) – прическа под африканца etc. In other cases the beginning of the word is clipped. In such cases we have apheresis, e.g. chute (parachute), varsity (university), copter (helicopter), thuse (enthuse) etc. Sometimes the middle of the word is clipped, e.g. mart (market), fanzine (fan magazine) maths (mathematics). Such abbreviations are called syncope. Sometimes we have a combination of apocope with apheresis, when the beginning and the end of the word are clipped, e.g. tec (detective), van (vanguard) etc. Sometimes shortening influences the spelling of the word, e.g. «c» can be substituted by «k» before «e» to preserve pronunciation, e.g. mike (microphone), Coke (coca-cola) etc. The same rule is observed in the following cases: fax (facsimile), teck (technical college), trank (tranquilizer) etc. The final consonants in the shortened forms are substituded by letters characteristic of native English words.

NON-PRODUCTIVE WAYS OF WORDBUILDING

SOUND INTERCHANGE

Sound interchange is the way of word-building when some sounds are changed to form a new word. It is non-productive in Modern English, it was productive in Old English and can be met in other Indo-European languages. The causes of sound interchange can be different. It can be the result of Ancient Ablaut which cannot be explained by the phonetic laws during the period of the language development known to scientists, e.g. to strike – stroke, to sing – song etc. It can be also the result of Ancient Umlaut or vowel mutation which is the result of palatalizing the root vowel because of the front vowel in the syllable coming after the root (regressive assimilation), e.g. hot — to heat (hotian), blood — to bleed (blodian) etc. In many cases we have vowel and consonant interchange. In nouns we have voiceless consonants and in verbs we have corresponding voiced consonants because in Old English these consonants in nouns were at the end of the word and in verbs in the intervocalic position, e.g. bath – to bathe, life – to live, breath – to breathe etc.

STRESS INTERCHANGE

Stress interchange can be mostly met in verbs and nouns of Romanic origin: nouns have the stress on the first syllable and verbs on the last syllable, e.g. `accent — to ac`cent. This phenomenon is explained in the following way: French verbs and nouns had different structure when they were borrowed into English, verbs had one syllable more than the corresponding nouns. When these borrowings were assimilated in English the stress in them was shifted to the previous syllable (the second from the end). Later on the last unstressed syllable in verbs borrowed from French was dropped (the same as in native verbs) and after that the stress in verbs was on the last syllable while in nouns it was on the first syllable. As a result of it we have such pairs in English as: to af«fix -`affix, to con`flict- `conflict, to ex`port -`export, to ex`tract — `extract etc. As a result of stress interchange we have also vowel interchange in such words because vowels are pronounced differently in stressed and unstressed positions.

SOUND IMITATION

It is the way of word-building when a word is formed by imitating different sounds. There are some semantic groups of words formed by means of sound imitation:

a) sounds produced by human beings, such as : to whisper, to giggle, to mumble, to sneeze, to whistle etc.

b) sounds produced by animals, birds, insects, such as: to hiss, to buzz, to bark, to moo, to twitter etc.

c) sounds produced by nature and objects, such as: to splash, to rustle, to clatter, to bubble, to ding-dong, to tinkle etc.

The corresponding nouns are formed by means of conversion, e.g. clang (of a bell), chatter (of children) etc.

BLENDS

Blends are words formed from a word-group or two synonyms. In blends two ways of word-building are combined: abbreviation and composition. To form a blend we clip the end of the first component (apocope) and the beginning of the second component (apheresis) . As a result we have a compound- shortened word. One of the first blends in English was the word «smog» from two synonyms: smoke and fog which means smoke mixed with fog. From the first component the beginning is taken, from the second one the end, «o» is common for both of them. Blends formed from two synonyms are: slanguage, to hustle, gasohol etc. Mostly blends are formed from a word-group, such as: acromania (acronym mania), cinemaddict (cinema adict), chunnel (channel, canal), dramedy (drama comedy), detectifiction (detective fiction), faction (fact fiction) (fiction based on real facts), informecial (information commercial), Medicare (medical care), magalog (magazine catalogue) slimnastics (slimming gymnastics), sociolite (social elite), slanguist (slang linguist) etc.

BACK FORMATION

It is the way of word-building when a word is formed by dropping the final morpheme to form a new word. It is opposite to suffixation, that is why it is called back formation. At first it appeared in the language as a result of misunderstanding the structure of a borrowed word. Prof. Yartseva explains this mistake by the influence of the whole system of the language on separate words. E.g. it is typical of English to form nouns denoting the agent of the action by adding the suffix -er to a verb stem (speak- speaker). So when the French word «beggar» was borrowed into English the final syllable «ar» was pronounced in the same way as the English —er and Englishmen formed the verb «to beg» by dropping the end of the noun. Other examples of back formation are: to accreditate (from accreditation), to bach (from bachelor), to collocate (from collocation), to enthuse (from enthusiasm), to compute (from computer), to emote (from emotion), to televise (from television) etc.

As we can notice in cases of back formation the part-of-speech meaning of the primary word is changed, verbs are formed from nouns.

23

Lecture 3 Word-formation in Modern English 1. Productivity. Productive and non-productive ways of word-formation. 2. Derivation. 2.1. Semantics of Affixes. 2.2. Boundary cases between derivation, inflection and composition 2.2.1 Semi-Affixes. 2.2.2. Combining forms. 2.3. Reduplication. 3. Compounds. 3.1. Neutral Compounds 3.3. Morphological compounds 3.4 Syntactic compounds 3.5. Specific features of English Compounding 3.6. The criteria of compounds. 3.7. Pseudo-compounds. 11 December 2017 1

1. PRODUCTIVITY. PRODUCTIVE AND NON-PRODUCTIVE WAYS OF WORD-FORMATION. Productivity is the ability to form new words after existing patterns which are readily understood by the speakers of a language. Figure 1 , 11 December 2017 2 The most productive ways of word-formation Abbreviation (contraction) Conversion (Functional Shift) Derivation (Affixation) Word-composition

In the course of time the productivity of this or that way of word-formation may change. Sound interchange or gradation (blood − to bleed, to abide − abode, to strike − stroke) was a productive way of word building in old English and is important for a diachronic study of the English language. It has lost its productivity in Modern English and no new word can be coined by means of sound gradation. Affixation on the contrary was productive in Old English and is still one of the most productive ways of word building in Modern English. 11 December 2017 3

2. DERIVATION The addition of a word-forming affix is called derivation. The process of affixation consists in coining a new word by adding an affix or several affixes to some root morpheme. Suffixation is more productive than prefixation. Suffixation is characteristic of noun and adjective formation, while prefixation is typical of verb formation (incoming, trainee, principal, promotion). Figure 2 11 December 2017 4

a phonological change: reduce > reduction, clear > clarity, fuse > fusion, include > inclusive, drama > dramatize, relate > relation, permit > permissive, impress > impression, electric > electricity, photograph > photography; an orthographic change to the root: pity > pitiful, deny > denial, happy > happiness; a semantic change: husband > husbandry, event > even­tual, post > postage, recite > recital, emerge >emergency; a change in word class: eat (V) > eatable (A), impress (V) > impression (N). 11 December 2017 5

In English, derivational affixes are either prefixes or suffixes. They may be native (deriving from Old English) or foreign (borrowed along with a word from a foreign language, especially French). Their productivity may range from very limited to quite extensive, depending upon whether they are preserved in just a few words and no longer used to create new words or whether they are found in many words and still used to create new words. An example of an unproductive suffix is the -th in warmth, width, depth, or wealth, whereas an example of a productive suffix is the -able in available, unthinkable, admirable, or honorable. Which affix attaches to which root is always quite arbitrary and unpredictable; it is not a matter of rule but must be stated separately for each root . 11 December 2017 6

Derivation is part of the lexicon, not part of the grammar of a language. Only three prefixes, which are no longer productive in English, systematically change the part of speech of the root: а- N/V > A ablaze, asleep, astir, astride, abed, abroad be- N > V betoken, befriend, bedeck, becalm, besmirch en- A/N > V enlarge, ensure, encircle, encase, entrap Other prefixes change only the meaning of the root, not its class. 11 December 2017 7

11 December 2017 8 Table 1. Semantic Classes of Prefixes in English

Many suffixes attached to nouns change their meaning but not their class: The diminutive suffixes -ling, -let, -y, -ie (as in princeling, piglet, daddy, hoodie), Diminution (e.g. doggy) is not the only use for the diminutive suffix; it may also express degradation (e.g. dummy), amelioration (e.g. hubby), and intimacy (e.g. Jenny < Jennifer). 11 December 2017 9 Functions of Suffixes to change the meaning of the root and to change the part of speech of the root Figure 3

the feminine suffixes -ess, -ette, -rix, -ine (as in actress, usherette, aviatrix, heroine) − which, for social and cultural reasons, are now falling out of use, the abstract suffixes -ship, -hood, -ism, making abstract nouns out of concrete nouns (as in friendship, neighborhood, hoodlumism), or suffixes denoting people such as -(i)an, -ist, -er (in librarian, Texan, Canadian, Marxist, Londoner). Some suffixes attached to adjectives likewise change only their meaning: -ish means ‘nearly, not exactly’ in greenish, fortyish, coldish -ly express ‘resemblance’ in goodly, sickly, lonely More often, however, suffixes change the word class of the root as shown in Table 2 11 December 2017 10

11 December 2017 11 Table 2. Derivational Suffixes in English

11 December 2017 12 Table 2. Derivational Suffixes in English (Continued)

The false morphological division of words may result in more or less productive suffixes, which one scholar calls “splinters”, as in the following: ham/burger > cheeseburger; fishburger; mushroomburger; vegieburger alc/oholic > workaholic; chocaholic; rageaholic mar/athon > workathon; telethon; swimathon; walkathon pano/rama > autorama ; motorama caval/cade > aquacade; motorcade heli/copter > heliport; helidrome; helistop 11 December 2017 13

Derivation can be stated in terms of lexical rules: mis- + align (V) + -ment > misalignment (N) image (N) + -ine + -ary > imaginary (A) false (A) + -ify> falsify (V) 11 December 2017 14

11 December 2017 15 the number of words containing this affix is considerable its meaning and function are definite and clear enough its structural pattern corresponds to the structural patterns already existing in the language Conditions for borrowing an affix Figure 4 From the etymological point of view affixes are classified into the same two large groups as words: native and borrowed.

If these conditions are fulfilled, the foreign affix may even become productive and combine with native stems or borrowed stems within the system of English vocabulary like -able < Lat -abilis in such words as laughable or unforgettable and unforgivable. The English words balustrade, brigade, cascade are borrowed from French. On the analogy with these in the English language itself such words as blockade are coined. Affixes are usually divided into living and dead affixes. Living affixes are easily separated from the stem: care-ful) Dead affixes have become fully merged with the stem and can be singled out by a diachronic analysis of the development of the word: admit < Lat. ad+mittere. 11 December 2017 16

Affixes can also be classified into productive and non-productive types. By productive affixes we mean the ones, which take part in deriving new words in this particular period of language development. The best way to identify productive affixes is to look for them among neologisms and so-called nonce-words (words coined and used only for this particular occasion). The latter are usually formed on the level of living speech and reflect the most productive and progressive patterns in word-building: unputdownable thrill; “I don’t like Sunday evenings: I feel so Mondayish”; Professor Pringle was a thinnish, baldish, dispeptic-lookingish cove with an eye like a haddock. 11 December 2017 17

In many cases the choice of the affixes is a means of differentiating meaning: uninterested − disinterested; distrust − mistrust. One should not confuse the productivity of affixes with their frequency of occurrence. There are quite a number of high-frequency affixes which, nevertheless, are no longer used in word-derivation, cf.: the adjective-forming native suffixes -ful, -ly; the adjective-forming suffixes of Latin origin -ant, -ent, -al Affixes are always bound forms. 11 December 2017 18

The difference between suffixes and prefixes is not confined to their respective position, suffixes being “fixed after” and prefixes “fixed before” the stem. It also concerns their function and meaning. A suffix is a derivational morpheme following the stem and forming a new derivative in a different part of speech or a different word class, сf. : -en, -y, -less in hearten, hearty, heartless. When both the underlying and the resultant forms belong to the same part of speech, the suffix serves to differentiate between lexico-grammatical classes by rendering some very general lexico-grammatical meaning, cf.: -ify (characterises causative verbs) horrify, purify, rarefy, simplify; -er (is mostly typical of frequentative verbs) flicker, shimmer, twitter. 11 December 2017 19

A prefix is a derivational morpheme standing before the root and modifying meaning, cf.: hearten — dishearten. It is only with verbs and statives that a prefix may serve to distinguish one part of speech from another, cf.: earth n — unearth v, sleep n — asleep (stative). Preceding a verb stem, some prefixes express the difference between a transitive and an intransitive verb: stay v — outstay (sb) vt. With a few exceptions prefixes modify the stem for time (pre-, post-), place (in-, ad-) or negation (un-, dis-) and remain semantically rather independent of the stem. 11 December 2017 20

2.1. SEMANTICS OF AFFIXES Meanings of affixes are specific and considerably differ from those of root morphemes. Affixes have widely generalised meanings and refer the concept conveyed by the whole word to a certain category, which is vast and all-embracing. Figure 5 11 December 2017 21 the noun-forming suffix -er the object of their occupation / labour: painter — the one who paints their place of origin / abode: southerner — the one living in the South

Some words with this suffix have no equivalents in Ukrainian and may be rendered in descriptive way: The sheriff might have been a slow talker, but he was a fast mover (Irish). − Можливо, шериф і говорив повільно, та рухався він швидко. I’m not a talker, boys, talking’s not what I do, but I want you to know that this is not…. (King). − Я не дуже балакучий… Other noun-forming suffixes designating the same semantic field both in English and Ukrainian are given in table 3: 11 December 2017 22

11 December 2017 23 Table 3

11 December 2017 24 Table 3 (Continued)

11 December 2017 25 Table 4

2.2. BOUNDARY CASES BETWEEN DERIVATION, INFLECTION AND COMPOSITION 2.2.1 SEMI-AFFIXES There are a few roots in English which have developed great combining ability in the position of the second element of a word and a very general meaning similar to that of an affix. These are semi-affixes − semantically, functionally, structurally and statistically they behave more like affixes than like roots. Their meaning is as general. They determine the lexical and grammatical class the word belongs to, cf.: sailor ↔ seaman, -or is a suffix, -man is a semi-affix: sportsman, gentleman, nobleman, salesman, seaman, fisherman, countryman, statesman, policeman. 11 December 2017 26

Semantically, the constituent -man in these words approaches the generalised meaning of such noun-forming suffixes as -er, -or, -ist ( artist), -ite (hypocrite). Other examples of semi-affixes are: -land Ireland, Scotland, fatherland, wonderland -like ladylike, unladylike, businesslike, starlike, flowerlike, -worthy seaworthy, trustworthy, praiseworthy . The component -proof, standing between a stem and an affix, is regarded by some scholars as a semi-affix: “… The Great Glass Elevator is shockproof, waterproof, bombproof and bulletproof…” Lady Malvern tried to freeze him with a look, but you can’t do that sort of thing to Jeeves. He is look-proof. Better sorts of lip-stick are frequently described in advertisements as kissproof. Some building materials may be advertised as fireproof. Certain technical devices are foolproof meaning that they are safe even in a fool’s hands. 11 December 2017 27

All these words, with -proof for the second component, stand between compounds and derived words in their characteristics. On the one hand, the second component seems to bear all the features of a stem and preserves certain semantic associations with the free form proof. On the other hand, the meaning of -proof in all the numerous words built on this pattern has become so generalised that it is certainly approaching that of a suffix. The high productivity of the pattern is proved, once more, by the possibility of coining nonce-words after this pattern: look-proof. Semi-affixes may be also used in preposition like prefixes. Thus, anything that is smaller or shorter than others of its kind may be preceded by mini-: mini-budget, mini-bus, mini-car, mini-crisis, mini-planet, mini-skirt, etc. Other productive semi-affixes used in pre-position are midi-, maxi-, self- and others: midi-coat, maxi-coat, self-starter, self-help. 11 December 2017 28

In Ukrainian the following semi-affixes are used: повно- ново- само- авто- повноправний, новостворений, самохідний, автобіографія -вод, -воз діловод, тепловоз. Figure 6 . 11 December 2017 29 The factors conducing to transition of free forms into semi-affixes High semantic productivity Adaptability Combinatorial capacity (high valency), Brevity

2.2.2. COMBINING FORMS An affix should not be confused with a combining form. Combining forms are linguistic forms which in modern languages are used as bound forms although in Greek and Latin from which they are borrowed they functioned as independent words. They constitute a specific type of linguistic units . Combining forms are mostly international. Descriptively a combining form differs from an affix, because it can occur as one constituent of a form whose only other constituent is an affix, cf.: graphic, cyclic. Affixes are characterised either by preposition with respect to the root (prefixes) or by postposition (suffixes), whereas the same combining form may occur in both positions, cf.: phonograph, phonology and telephone, microphone, etc 11 December 2017 30

Combining forms differ from all other borrowings in that they occur in compounds and derivatives that did not exist in their original language but were formed only in modern times in English, Russian, French, etc., сf.: polyclinic, polymer; stereophonic, stereoscopic, telemechanics, television. Combining forms are particularly frequent in the specialised vocabularies of arts and sciences. They have long become familiar in the international scientific terminology. Many of them attain widespread currency in everyday language: astron − star → astronomy; autos − self → automatic; bios − life → biology; electron − amber → electronics; ge − earth → geology; graph − to write → typography; hydor − water →hydroelectric; logos − speech → physiology; philein − love → philology phone − sound, voice → telephone; 11 December 2017 31

Combining forms mostly occur together with other combining forms and not with native roots. Almost all of the above examples are international words, each entering a considerable word-family: autobiography, autodiagnosis, automobile, autonomy, autogenic, autopilot, autoloader; bio-astronautics, biochemistry, bio-ecology, bionics, biophysics; economics, economist, economise, eco-climate, eco-activist, eco-type, eco-catastrophe; geodesy, geometry, geography; hydrodynamic, hydromechanic, hydroponic, hydrotherapeutic. hydrography, phonograph, photograph, telegraph. lexicology, philology, phonology. 11 December 2017 32

2.3 Reduplication Reduplication is a process similar to derivation, in which the initial syllable or the entire word is doubled, exactly or with a slight phonological change. Reduplication is not a common or regular process of word formation in English, though it may be in other languages. In English reduplication is often used in children’s language (e.g. boo-boo, putt-putt, choo-choo) or for humorous or ironic effect (e.g. goody-goody, rah-rah, pooh-pooh). 11 December 2017 33

11 December 2017 34 Exact reduplication papa, mama, goody-goody, so-so, hush-hush, never-never, tutu, fifty-fifty, hush-hush Ablaut reduplication criss-cross, zig-zag,flip-flop, mish-mash, wishy-washy, clip-clop, riff-raff, achy-breaky Rhyme reduplication hodge-podge, fuddy-duddy, razzle-dazzle, boogie-woogie, nitty-gritty, roly-poly, hob-nob, hocus-pocus Figure 7 Reduplication

Reduplications can be formed with two meaningful parts: flower-power, brain drain, culture vulture, boy toy, heart smart. Reduplication has many different functions. it can express: 1) disparagement (namby- pamby), 2) intensification (super-duper), diminution (teeny-weeny), 3) onomatopoeia (tick- tock), or alternation (ping-pong), among other uses. Reduplication is greatly facilitated in Modern English by the vast number of monosyllables. 11 December 2017 35

Stylistically speaking, most words made by reduplication represent informal groups: colloquialisms and slang: walkie-talkie − a portable radio; riff-raff − the worthless or disreputable element of society; chi-chi − sl. for chic as in a chi-chi girl. In a modern novel an angry father accuses his teenager son of doing nothing but dilly-dallying all over the town. (dilly-dallying — wasting time, doing nothing, loitering) Another example of a word made by reduplication may be found in the following quotation from The Importance of Being Earnest by O. Wilde: I think it is high time that Mr. Bunbury made up his mind whether he was going to live or to die. This shilly-shallying with the question is absurd. (shilly-shallying — irresolution, indecision) 11 December 2017 36

3. COMPOUNDS A compound is the combination of two or more free roots (plus associated affixes). The bulk of compound words is motivated and the semantic relations between the two components are transparent. The great variety of compound types brings about a great variety of classifications (see Figure 7). 11 December 2017 37

11 December 2017 38 Compound words may be classified The type of composition and the linking element The part of speech to which the compound belongs The type of composition and the linking element Within each part of speech according to the structural pattern Semantically Motivated Idiomatic compounds Structurally Endocentric Exocentric Bahuvrihi Syntactic Asyntactic Figure 8 Phrase compounds Reduplicative compounds Pseudo-compounds Quotation compounds

Eendocentric: Eng. beetroot, ice-cold, knee-deep, babysit, whitewash; UA. землеустрій, сівозміна, літакобудування; Exocentric: Eng. scarecrow — something that scares crows; UA гуртожиток, склоріз, самопал; Bahuvrihi: Eng. lazy-bones, fathead, bonehead, readcoat ; UA. шибайголова, одчайдух, жовтобрюх; Syntactic and asyntactic combinations: Which of those fellows do you like to command a search-and-destroy mission?; “Now come along, Bridget. I don’t want any silliness”, she said in her Genghis-Khan-at-height-of-evil voice; Kurtz caught sight of Permutter’s sunken, I-fooled-you grin in the wide rearview mirror. 11 December 2017 39

The classification according to the type of composition establishes the following groups: 1) The predominant type is a mere juxtaposition without connecting elements: heartache n, heart-beat n, heart-break n, heart-breaking adj, heart-broken adj, heart-felt adj. 2) Composition with a vowel or a consonant as a linking element. The examples are very few: electromotive adj, speedometer n, Afro-Asian adj, handicraft n, statesman n. 3) Compounds with linking elements represented by preposition or conjunction stems: down-and-out n, matter-of-fact adj, son-in-law n, pepper-and-salt adj, wall-to-wall adj, up-to-date adj, on the up-and-up adv, up-and-coming. 11 December 2017 40

The classification of compounds according to the structure of immediate constituents distinguishes: 1) compounds consisting of simple stems: film-star. Compounds formed by joining together stems of words already available in the language and the two ICs of which are stems of notional words are also called compounds proper: Eng. ice-cold (N+A), ill-luck (A+N); UA диван-ліжко, матч-реванш, лікар-терапевт. 2) compounds where at least one of the constituents is a derived stem: chain-smoker; 3) compounds where at least one of the constituents is a clipped stem: maths-mistress (in British English) math-mistress (in American English). The subgroup will contain abbreviations like H-bag (handbag) or Xmas (Christmas), whodunit n (for mystery novels); 11 December 2017 41

4) compounds where at least one of the constituents is a compound stem: wastepaper-basket. In coordinative compounds neither of the components dominates the other, both are structurally and semantically independent and constitute two structural and semantic centres, cf.: breath-taking, self-discipline, word-formaiton. Compounds are not homogeneous in structure. Traditionally three types are distinguished: neutral, morphological and syntactic. In neutral compounds the process of compounding is realised without any linking elements, by a mere juxtaposition of two stems: blackbird, shop-window, sunflower, bedroom, tallboy, etc. There are three subtypes of neutral compounds depending on the structure of the constituent stems. The examples above represent the subtype which may be described as simple neutral compounds: they consist of simple affixless stems. 11 December 2017 42

The productivity of derived or derivational compounds (compound-derivatives) is confirmed by a considerable number of comparatively recent formations, cf.: teenager, babysitter, strap-hanger, fourseater (car or boat with four seats), doubledecker (a ship or bus with two decks). Numerous nonce-words are coined on this pattern which is another proof of its high productivity: luncher-out (a person who habitually takes his lunch in restaurants and not at home), goose-flesher (murder story). In the coining of the derivational compounds two types of word-formation are at work. The essence of the derivational compounds will be clear if we compare them with derivatives and compounds proper that possess a similar structure. 11 December 2017 43

brainstraster, honeymooner UC’s = noun stem + noun stem+-er. mill-owner mill-owner IC’s = two noun stems mill+owner (Composition) honeymooner IC’s = mooner does not exist as a free stem IC’s = honeymoon + er (honey+moon)+-er (Derivation: honeymoon a compound honeymooner a derivative) brains trust (a phrase) brainstruster = composition +derivation = a derivational compound IC’s = (brains+ trust)+-еr. 11 December 2017 44

Another frequent type of derivational compounds are the possessive compounds of the type kind-hearted: adjective stem+noun stem+ -ed. kind-hearted IC’s = a noun phrase kind heart + -ed The first element may also be a noun stem or a numeral: bow-legged, heart-shaped, three-coloured. The derivational compounds often become the basis of further derivation, cf. : war-minded → war-mindedness; whole-hearted → whole-heartedness → whole-heartedly, schoolboyish → schoolboyishness; do-it-yourselfer → do-it-yourselfism. The process is also called phrasal derivation: mini-skirt → mini-skirted, nothing but → nothingbutism, or quotation derivation as when an unwillingness to do anything is characterised as let-George-do-it-ity. All these are nonce-words, with some ironic or jocular connotation. 11 December 2017 45

` Morphological compounds, words in which two compounding stems are combined by a linking vowel or consonant are few in number. This type is non-productive: Anglo-Saxon, Franko-Prussian, handiwork, handicraft, craftsmanship, spokesman, statesman. Syntactic compounds (the term is arbitrary) are formed from segments of speech, preserving in their structure numerous traces of syntagmatic relations typical of speech: articles, prepositions, adverbs, cf.: lily-of-the-valley, Jack-of-all-trades, good-for-nothing, mother-in-law, sit-at-home. 11 December 2017 46

Both the semantics and the syntax of compound are complex. Often the semantics of compounds are not simply a sum of the meaning of the parts, that is, if we know the meaning of the two roots, we cannot necessarily predict the meaning of the compound, as in firearm, highball, makeup, or handout. Note the various ways in which the meanings of the roots of these compounds interact with home: homeland ‘land which is one’s home’ homemade ‘something which is made at home’ homebody ‘someone who stays at home’ homestead ‘a place which is a home’ homework ‘work which is done at home’ homerun ‘a run to home’ homemaker ‘a person who makes (cares for) the home’ 11 December 2017 47

The syntax of compounds is even more complex. Any combination of parts of speech seems possible, with almost any part of speech resulting. One principle which holds is that the word class of the compound is determined by the head of the compound, or its rightmost member, whereas the leftmost member carries the primary stress. The only exception to this rule is a converted compound or one containing a class changing suffix. Look at the syntactic patterns of compounding shown in Table 5. 11 December 2017 48

11 December 2017 49 Table 5. Syntactic Patterns in English Compounds

11 December 2017 50 Table 5. Syntactic Patterns in English Compounds. (Continued)

11 December 2017 51 Table 5. Syntactic Patterns in English Compounds. (Continued)

A problem for the differentiation of compounds and phrases is the phrasal verb. Older English preferred prefixed verbs, such as forget, understand, withdraw, befriend, overrun, outdo, offset, and uproot, but prefixing of verbs is not productive in Modern English, except for those with out- and over-. Modern English favors verbs followed by postverbal particles, such as run over, lead on, use up, stretch out, and put down. Like compounds, phrasal verbs have semantic coherence, evidenced by the fact that they are sometimes replaceable by single Latinate verbs, as in the following: break out → erupt, escape think up → imagine count out → exclude put off → delay take off → depart, remove egg on → incite work out → solve put out → extinguish bring up → raise put away → store go on — continue take up → adopt 11 December 2017 52

The meaning of the combination of verb and particle in the phrasal verb may be opaque, that is, not predictable from the meaning of the parts. Often, the difference in meaning between the simple and the phrasal verb is ‘completive’; the phrasal verb expresses termination or completion of the action: burn vs. burn down, up, on, out work vs. work out, up eat vs. eat up, through wash vs. wash up, down, out Unlike compounds, however, phrasal verbs exhibit internal modification (burn down/burned down, burning down), carry two primary stresses (work out), and behave syntactically like phrases since the particle may move after the object, or an adverb may intercede between the verb and the particle: He burned down the house. ↔ He burned the house down. ↔ He burned the house right down. cf. *He burned right down the house. *He burned right the house down. For these reasons, we must conclude that phrasal verbs are phrases, not compounds. 11 December 2017 53

A further problem in the analysis of compounds is phrase compounds, formed from entire phrases, such as lady-in-waiting, dog-in-the-manger, forget-me-not, has-been, run- of-the-mill, break-and-enter, nuts-and-bolts, whiskey-and-soda, bubble-and-squeak, or son- in-law, which are generally written as compounds (hyphenated) and have semantic unity. Many of these behave normally as compounds by being externally modified, such as all has-beens, five whiskey-and-sodas. 11 December 2017 54

But some are internally modified like a phrase, as in the all her ladies-in-waiting or our two sons-in-law. These forms are increasingly taking external modification, e.g. our two son-in-laws. When they are inflected for the possessive, however, they show external modification like a compound, as in son-in-law’s (new car). What precedes the possessive ending need not be a single-word compound but can be a phrase, as in my neighbor next door’s dog, or even a clause, as in a woman I know’s niece. By no criteria would my neighbor next door be considered a compound. Thus, phrase compounds seem to be phrasal in nature. 11 December 2017 55

Another problem for analysis is amalgamated compounds — words which in origin are compounds, but which in the course of time have become fused and no longer separable into two distinct parts: barn < bere ‘barley’ + ærn ‘place’ halibut < hȃlig ‘holy’ + butte ‘flatfish’ garlic < gar ‘spear’+ lêac ‘leek’ neighbor < neah ‘near’ + gebur ‘dweller’ cobweb < coppe ‘kind of spider’ + web midrif < mid + hrif ‘belly’ earwig < ear + wicga ‘one that moves’ mildew < mele ‘honey’ + dew Since these words are no longer recognizable as compounds, all are considered single, unanalyzable morphemes. In the last four examples only half of the compound is opaque (cob-, -rif, -wig, mil-); the other half is identifiable. 11 December 2017 56

3.1. NEUTRAL COMPOUNDS In neutral compounds the process of compounding is realised without any linking elements, by a mere juxtaposition of two stems, as in blackbird, shop-window, sunflower, bedroom, tallboy, etc. There are three subtypes of neutral compounds depending on the structure of the constituent stems. The examples above represent the subtype which may be described as simple neutral compounds: they consist of simple affixless stems. Compounds which have affixes in their structure are called derived or derivational compounds (compound-derivatives): absent-mindedness, blue-eyed, golden-haired, broad-shouldered, lady-killer, film-goer, music-lover, honey-mooner, first-nighter, late-comer, newcomer, early-riser, evildoer. 11 December 2017 57

Another frequent type of derivational compounds are the possessive compounds of the type kind-hearted: adjective stem+noun stem+ -ed. Its IC’s are a noun phrase kind heart and the suffix -ed that unites the elements of the phrase and turns them into the elements of a compound adjective. Similar examples are extremely numerous. Compounds of this type can be coined very freely to meet the requirements of different situations. Very few go back to Old English, such as one-eyed and three-headed, most of the cases are coined in Modern English. Examples are practically unlimited, especially in words describing personal appearance or character: absent-minded, bare-legged, black-haired, blue-eyed, cruel-hearted, light-minded, ill-mannered, many-sided, narrow-minded, shortsighted, etc. The first element may also be a noun stem: bow-legged, heart-shaped and very often a numeral: three-coloured. 11 December 2017 58

The third subtype of neutral compounds is called contracted compounds. These words have a shortened (contracted) stem in their structure: TV-set (-program, -show, -canal, etc.), V-day (Victory day), G-man (Government man “FBI agent”), H-bag (handbag), T-shirt, etc. 11 December 2017 59

3.2. MORPHOLOGICAL COMPOUNDS Morphological compounds are few in number. This type is non-productive. It is represented by words in which two compounding stems are combined by a linking vowel or consonant: Anglo-Saxon, Franko-Prussian, handiwork, handicraft, craftsmanship, spokesman, statesman. 11 December 2017 60

3.3 SYNTACTIC COMPOUNDS Syntactic compounds (the term is arbitrary) are formed from segments of speech, preserving in their structure numerous traces of syntagmatic relations typical of speech: articles, prepositions, adverbs, as in the nouns lily-of-the-valley, Jack-of-all-trades, good-for-nothing, mother-in-law, sit-at-home. Syntactical relations and grammatical patterns current in present-day English can be clearly traced in the structures of such compound nouns as pick-me-up, know-all, know-nothing, go-between, get-together, whodunit. The last word (meaning “a detective story”) was obviously coined from the ungrammatical variant of the word-group who (has) done it. The structure of most compounds is transparent, as it were, and clearly betrays the origin of these words from word-combinations: leg-pulling, what-iffing, what-iffers, up-to-no-gooders, breakfast-in-the-bedder, etc. 11 December 2017 61

3.4. SPECIFIC FEATURES OF ENGLISH COMPOUNDING There are some important peculiarities distinguishing compounding in English from compounding in other languages. 1. Both immediate constituents of an English compound are free forms, i.e. they can be used as independent words with a distinct meaning of their own. The conditions of distribution will be different but the sound pattern the same, except for the stress: afternoon, anyway, anybody, anything, birthday, day-off, downstairs, everybody, fountain-pen, grown-up, ice-cream, large-scale, looking-glass, mankind, mother-in-law, motherland, nevertheless, notebook, nowhere, post-card, railway, schoolboy, skating-rink, somebody, staircase, Sunday. 11 December 2017 62

The combining elements in Russian and Ukrainian are as a rule bound forms: руководство, жовто-блакитний, соціально-політичний, землекористування, харчоблок. In English combinations like Anglo-Saxon, Anglo-Soviet, Indo-European socio-political or politico-economical or medicochirurgical where the first elements are bound forms, occur very rarely and seem to be avoided. They are coined on the neo-Latin pattern. 11 December 2017 63

In Ukrainian compound adjectives of the type соціально-політичний, історико-філологічний, народно-демократичний, are very productive, have no equivalent compound adjectives in English and are rendered by two adjectives: газонафтова компанія — gas and oil company фінансово-політична група — financial political group військово-промисловий комплекс — military industrial complex 11 December 2017 64

2. The regular pattern for the English language is a two-stem compound. An exception to this rule is observed when the combining element is represented by a form-word stem, cf.: mother-in-law, bread-and-butter, whisky-and-soda, deaf-and-dumb, good-for-nothing, man-of-war, mother-of-pearl, stick-in-the-mud. If, however, the number of stems is more than two, so that one of the immediate constituents is itself a compound, it will be more often the determinant than the determinatum, cf.: aircraft-carrier, waste-paper-basket words baby outfit village schoolmaster syntactic groups with two stresses night watchman book-keeper and typist phrase with the conjunction and 11 December 2017 65

3. One more specific feature of English compounding is the important role the attributive syntactic function can play in providing a phrase with structural cohesion and turning it into a compound: … we’ve done last-minute changes before …( Priestley) four-year course, pass-fail basis 11 December 2017 66

It often happens that elements of a phrase united by their attributive function become further united phonemically by stress and graphically by a hyphen, or even solid spelling. Cf. common sense → common-sense advice; old age → old-age pensioner; the records are out of date → out-of-date records; the let-sleeping-dogs-lie approach (Priestley). → Let sleeping dogs lie (a proverb). This last type is also called quotation compound or holophrasis. The speaker/or writer creates those combinations freely as the need for them arises: they are originally nonce-compounds. In the course of time they may become firmly established in the language: the ban-the-bomb voice, round-the-clock duty. 11 December 2017 67

3.5. THE SEMANTIC ASPECT OF COMPOUND WORDS As to the correlations of the separate meanings of the constituent parts and the actual meaning of the compound they are represented as follows: 1. This group represents compounds whose meanings can really be described as the sum of their constituent meanings: Classroom, bedroom, working-man, evening-gown, Yet, there may be a slight shift of meaning: Dining-room, sleeping-car, reading-room, dancing-hall. The first component in these words, if taken as a free form, denotes an action or state of whatever or whoever is characterised by the word. Yet, a sleeping-car is not a car that sleeps (cf. a sleeping child), nor is a dancing-hall actually dancing (cf. dancing pairs). 11 December 2017 68

2. In the second group of compounds the meaning of the whole word cannot be defined as the sum of the constituent meanings: Blackboard, blackbird, football, lady-killer, pick pocket, good-for-nothing, lazybones, chatterbox. It is clear that in all these compounds the process of change of meaning has gone so far that the meaning of one or both constituents is no longer in the least associated with the current meaning of the corresponding free form, and yet the speech community quite calmly accepts such seemingly illogical word groups as a white blackbird, pink bluebells or an entirely confusing statement like: Blackberries are red when they are green. Yet, despite a certain readjustment in the semantic structure of the word, the meanings of the constituents of the compounds of this second group are still transparent: you can see through them the meaning of the whole complex. 11 December 2017 69

3. In the third group of compounds the process of deducing the meaning of the whole from those of the constituents is impossible: man-of-war — warship, merry-to-round — carousel, horse-marine — a person who is unsuitable for his job or position, butter-fingers — clumsy person; one who is apt to drop things), wall-flower — a girl who is not invited to dance at a party, whodunit — detective story. The compounds whose meanings do not correspond to the separate meanings of their constituent parts (2nd and 3rd group listed above) are called idiomatic compounds, in contrast to the first group known as non-idiomatic compounds. The suggested subdivision into three groups is based on the degree of semantic cohesion of the constituent parts, the third group representing the extreme case of cohesion where the constituent meanings blend to produce an entirely new meaning. 11 December 2017 70

The group of bahuvrihi compound nouns is not very numerous. The term bahuvrihi is borrowed from the grammarians of ancient India. Its literal meaning is ‘much-riced’. It is used to designate possessive exocentric formations in which a person, animal or thing are metonymically named after some striking feature they possess, chiefly a striking feature in their appearance. This feature is in its turn expressed by the sum of the meanings of the compound’s immediate constituents. The formula of the bahuvrihi compound nouns is adjective stem +noun stem, cf.: I got discouraged with sitting all day in the backroom of a police station with six assorted women and a man with a wooden leg. At the end of a week, we all knew each other’s life histories, including that of the woodenleg’s uncle, who lived at Selsey and had to be careful of his diet (M. Dickens). 11 December 2017 71

Semantically the bahuvrihi are almost invariably characterised by a deprecative ironical emotional tone, cf.: Bigwig — a person of importance, black-shirt — an Italian fascist (also, by analogy, any fascist), fathead — a dull, stupid person, greenhorn — an ignoramus, highbrow — a person who claims to be superior in intellect and culture, lazy-bones — a lazy person. 11 December 2017 72

Among compounds are found numerous expressive and colourful words. They are also comparatively laconic, absorbing into one word an idea that otherwise would have required a whole phrase, cf.: The hotel was full of week-enders ↔ The hotel was full of people spending the week-end there. snow-white ↔ as white as snow. 11 December 2017 73

3.6. THE CRITERIA OF COMPOUNDS Figure 9 11 December 2017 74 The Criteria of Compounds The graphic criterion The semantic criterion The phonetic criterion The morphological and syntactic criteria

3.6.1. THE GRAPHIC CRITERION With the exception of the rare morphological type most English compounds originate directly from word-combinations and are often homonymous to them: cf. a tall boy — a tallboy (a piece of furniture, a chest of drawers supported by a low stand). In this case the graphic criterion of distinguishing between a word and a word-group seems to be sufficiently convincing, yet in many cases it cannot wholly be relied on as there is no consistency in English spelling in this respect, cf.: airline, air-line, air line, matchbox, matchbox, match box, Moreover, compounds that appear to be constructed on the same pattern and have similar semantic relations between the constituents may be spelt differently: textbook, phrase-book, reference book. Sometimes hyphenation may serve aesthetic purposes, helping to avoid words that will look too long, or purposes of convenience, making syntactic components clearer to the eye: peace-loving nations, old-fashioned ideas. 11 December 2017 75

3.6.2. THE SEMANTIC CRITERION According to the semantic criterion a compound is defined as a combination forming a unit expressing a single idea which is not identical in meaning to the sum of the meanings of its components in a free phrase. From this point of view dirty work with the figurative meaning “dishonorable proceedings” is a compound, while clean work or dry work are phrases. The insufficiency of this criterion will be readily understood if one realises how difficult it is to decide whether the combination in question expresses a single integrated idea. Besides, between a clearly motivated compound and an idiomatic one there are a great number of intermediate cases. Finally, what is, perhaps, more important than all the rest, as the semantic features and properties of set expressions are similar to those of idiomatic compounds conveying a single concept and some of them are characterised by a high degree of semantic cohesion, we shall be forced to include all idiomatic phrases into the class of compounds. 11 December 2017 76

3.6.3. THE PHONETIC CRITERION The phonetic criterion for compounds may be treated as that of a single stress. There is a marked tendency in English to give compounds a heavy stress on the first element. It is true that all compound nouns, with very few exceptions, are stressed on this pattern. Cf. ′blackboard ′ black′ board, ′blackbird ′black’bird; ′bluebottle ′blue′bottle. In all these cases the determinant has a heavy stress, the determinatum has the middle stress. The only exception as far as compound nouns are concerned is found in nouns whose first elements are all- and self-, e. g. ′All-‘Fools-Day, ′self-con’trol. The rule does not hold with adjectives. Compound adjectives are double stressed like ′gray-‘green, ′easy-‘going, ′new-‘born. Only compound adjectives expressing emphatic comparison are heavily stressed on the first element: ′snow-white, ′dog-cheap. 11 December 2017 77

Moreover, stress can be of no help in solving this problem because word-stress may depend upon phrasal stress or upon the syntactic function of the compound. Thus, light-headed and similar adjectives have a single stress when used attributively, in other cases the stress is even. Very often the stress is structurally determined by opposition to other combinations with an identical second element: ′dining table ′writing table ′passenger train ′freight train ex’press train. Notwithstanding the unity stress, these are not words but phrases. Besides, the stress may be phonological and help to differentiate the meaning of compounds: ‘overwork − extra work ‘over’work − hard work injuring one’s health ‘bookcase − a piece of furniture with shelves for books ‘book’case −a paper cover for books It thus follows that phonological criterion holds for certain types of words only. 11 December 2017 78

3.6.4. THE MORPHOLOGICAL AND SYNTACTIC CRITERIA Morphological and syntactic criteria can also be applied to compound words in order to distinguish them from word-groups. The word-group: a tall boy They were the tallest boys in their form. a tall handsome boy. The first component is grammatically invariable The plural form ending is added The compound: tallboy to the whole unit: tallboys No word can be inserted between the components, even with the compounds which have a traditional separate graphic form. 11 December 2017 79

TRANSFORMATIONAL TEST a stone wall a wall of stone, a toothpick a pick for teeth. This impossibility of transformation proves the structural integrity of the word as compared with the phrase, yet the procedure works only for idiomatic compounds, whereas those that are distinctly motivated permit the transformation readily enough: a toothpick a pick for teeth tooth-powder powder for teeth a tooth-brush a brush for teeth If the transformation is done within the frame of context, this test holds good and the transformation, even if it is permissible, brings about a change of meaning, cf.: The wall-papers and the upholstery recalled the refinements of another epoch to the papers on the wall and the upholstery recalled the refinements of another epoch. 11 December 2017 80

That is why no one type of criteria is normally sufficient for establishing whether the unit is a compound or a phrase, and for ensuring isolation of word from phrase. In the majority of cases we have to depend on the combination of two or more types of criteria (phonological, phonetic, semantic, morphological, syntactic, or graphical). But even then the ground is not very safe and with that we come to “the stone wall problem” that has received so much attention in linguistic literature. 11 December 2017 81

3.7. PSEUDO-COMPOUNDS The words like gillyflower or sparrow-grass are not actually compounds at all, they are cases of false-etymology, an attempt to find motivation for a borrowed word, cf.: gillyflower < OFr giroflé, crayfish < OFr crevice, sparrow-grass < Latin asparagus. May-day/May Day < a distortion of the French m’aidez ‘help me’ The other examples are: fifty-fifty, goody-goody, drip-drop, helter-skelter, super-dooper, fuddy-duddy, etc. I expect you’re sick to death of us old fuddy-duddies (Fielding) “Excuse me, does the word “queue” mean anything to you?” I said in a hoity-toity voice, turning round to look at him. (Fielding) In Ukrainian the words of this type are not compounds at all: А очі у нього сині-синї. 11 December 2017 82

• 
• 
• 

© 2023 Prezi Inc.
Terms & Privacy Policy