Word-building

Lecture IV

A morpheme—(Gr. morphe “form” + -eme)—the smallest indivisible component of the w-d possessing a meaning of its own.

Morphemes—constituents of w-s ↔ free & bound

A free m-me —a m-me ~ may stand alone without changing its meaning. It can form a w-d without adding other morphemes. Free m-es are homonymous to separate w-s. A great № of root-morphemes are free m-es: friendship.

A bound m-me —a m-me always bound to some other m-me & it can’t stand alone (independently): -s, -ing, -ly, -ize, -ty, dis-, de-

According to the role they play in constructing w-s, m-es ↔ roots & affixes ↔ prefixes, suffixes, infixes.

According to their function & meaning affixes ↔ derivational & functional (endings).

Derivational aff. —an aff., serving to create new w-s (lex. units of structural & semantic type, differing from the type represented in the form from ~ a new w-d was produced (the underlying & the resultant forms).

Functional aff.—an aff., serving to convey grammatical meaning (create different forms of the same w-d). 10 functional aff-es.

When a derivational or functional aff. Is stripped from the w-d, what remains is a stem (the part of the w-d that remains unchanged throughout its paradigm).

“hearty” & the paradigm heart (Sg.) – hearts (Pl.)

heart- a simple stem, a free stem, as it is homonymous to the w-d “heart”

the paradigm hearty-heartier-(the) heartiest its stem hearty- —a free stem, a derived stem (a root m-me + aff.)

If after deducing the aff. The remaining stem isn’t homonymous to a separate w-d of the same root—a bound stem: cordial (on the analogy with “bronchial”, “social”, “radial”)—the remaining stem can not form a separate w-d by itself—bound.

“cordially”, “cordiality”—free stems.

A root —the semantic nucleus of a w-d with ~ no grammatical properties of the w-d are connected.

~ m.b. also regarded as the ultimate constituent element ~ remains after the removal of all functional & derivational aff-s & doesn’t admit any further analysis. It is the common element of w-s within a w-d-family

-heart- —the common root of the following series of w-s: heart, hearten, hearty, heartily, heartless, heartiness, heart-broken, kind-hearted, whole-heartedly, dishearten.

The root in E. is very often homonymous with the w-d—the fact of fundamental importance as it’s 1 of the most specific features of the E. language, arising from its general grammatical system on the one hand, & from its phonemic system, on the other. The usual phonemic shape most favoured in E.—one-single stressed syllable: bear, man, wood, go, do, run, red, land. This doesn’t give much space for a 2^nd m-me to add classifying lex.-gram. meaning to the lex. mean. already present in the root-stem.

According to their etymology (origin) aff. ↔ native & borrowed (pp.50-51, 80)

Aff-s ↔ productive (take part in deriving new w-s in this particular period of language development) & non-productive. (ass-s II,III; pp.82-83-Antrushina).

The proof of productivity—the existence of new w-s coined by these aff-s: neologisms & nonce-w-s (w-s coined & used only for this particular occasion; formed on the level of living speech—don’t exist in dictionaries): unputdownable book, a lungful of smoke.

The productivity of an aff. shouldn’t be confused with its frequency ~ is a synchronic characteristic & means the existence in the voc-ry of a great № of w-s containing the morpheme in question. An aff. may occur in a great № of w-s but if it is not used to form new ones it is not productive. Productive aff.—always frequent but not every frequent aff.— productive: -ous—frequent but not productive; the noun-forming –th & its allomorph –t which may be traced to OE & is combined with adjective stems: health, height, truth; with verbal stems: flight, frost, growth; but there are no neologisms — non-productive.

Suffixation & Prefixation —the oldest ways of w-d-building.

Usage of the means already existing in the lexical system & the expression of new senses (meanings) with the help of their combination is very important for a speaker & listener. The speaker’s message appears to be >/< economical. Thus, the speaker avoids the necessity of a detailed explanation of the name, if it were an absolutely conventional

name, not connected with any other lexical unit. For the listener, whose task is to understand the speaker’s message, the decoding of such units is significantly made easier due to those connections, ~ are established between a resultant name & its “old” constituents of the lexical system.

70% lex. units—complex units—units formally & semantically formed & thus dependent on the corresponding initial units.

Suffix usually modifies the lexical meaning of the w-d & transforms it into another p/speech. But may not transform: child → childhood, friend → friendship

Complex suf-s: -ably = -able + -ly, -ation = -ate + -ion, –ically = -ic +-al + -ly

~ according to the formed p/sp. suffixes ↔ a) noun-forming: -er, -ation, -ness, -dom; b) adjective-forming: -able, -less, -ful, -ic; c) verb-forming: -ate, -en, -fy/-ify, -ize; d )adverb-forming: -ly, -ward

~ according to lex.-grammatical character of the initial form (base) to ~ a suffix is attached, ↔ a) deverbal: -er, -ing, -ment, -able — speaker, agreement, reading;

b) denominal: -less, -ish, -ful, -ist, -ism, -some; c) deadjectival: -en, -ly, -ish, -ness

~ according to the meaning contained in the suffix:

a) agent of action: -er, -ant—dancer, defendant;

b) names of nationality, belonging to smth.: -an, -ian, -ese — Arabian American, Japanese;

c) collectivity: -age, -ery, -dom — peasantry, officialdom

d) a special subgroup of feminine suf-s: -ess, -ine, -ette;

e) the absence / presence of quality: -less, -ful;

f) diminutiveness: -ie, -let, -ling — birdie, girlie, duckling, wolfling;

~ according to the connotational characteristics: together with the meaning certain aff-s add to the stem emotional force, mainly derogatory:

OE ester: spinestre — та, что пряла, MdE: spinster; gangster, youngster

-ton: simpleton; -ard: stinkard; -o: bosso; -ie: oldie; -ling: kingling;

Stylistic reference:

a) neutral: -able, -er, -ing;

b) stylistically coloured: -oid, -form, -aceous, -tron (belong mainly to the terms): asteroid, cyclotron, cruciform.

Prefixation

Some time ago there were linguists who treated pref-n as part of w-d-composition. The greater semantic independence of prefixes as compared with suf-s led the linguists to identify pref-s with the first component of a compound w-d (E.Kruisinga). At present: the majority of scholars regard pref-s as derivational aff-s.

H. Marchand: overdo, underestimate, income, onlooker, outhouse—compounds with locative particles as 1^st elements (not prefixes)

2 types of prefixes are to be distinguished:

1) those not correlated with any independent w-d (either notional or functional):

2) those correlated with any independent w-d (prepositions or preposition-like adverbs)

out-, over-, up-, under- — are called semi-bound morphemes.

to overpass, over the river; to outline, to take smb. out;

upstairs, to look up; under the table, undercurrent

~ according to the lexico-gram. character of the base they are added to pref-s are↔:

a) deverbal: rewrite, outstay, overdo;

b) denominal: unbutton, detrain, ex-president;

c) deadjectival: biannual, uneasy.

~ according to the denotational meaning:

a) negative: un-, non-, in-, dis-, a- (amoral, asymmetry);

b) pref. of time & order: fore-, pre-, post-, ex- —foretell, foreknowledge, pre-war, post

c) of repetition: re- — rebuild

d) locative: super-, sub-, trans-, inter- — superstructure, subway, intercontinental, transatlantic;

e) pejorative: mis-, mal- pseudo- —miscalculate, misinform, maltreat, pseudoclassical;

~ according to their stylistic reference:

a) neutral: un-, over-, re-

b) possessing stylistic value: pseudo-, super-, ultra-, uni-, bi- — the literary, bookish character: ultraviolet, unilateral (односторонний), bifocal (двухфокусный)

From the point of view of w-d-structure w-s are ↔ into simple, derived, compound & compound derivatives.

Morphological analysis of w-s—on 3 levels:

1) morphemic —state the № of morphemes & their types.

unwashedness 4 morphemes: 1 root-morpheme, 3 affixational morphemes

2) derivational —to deal with stem

unwashedness the derivative stem with 3 degrees of derivation

3) Immediate Constituents (IC)— a kind of segmentation revealing not the history of the w-d but its motivation. It shows not only the morphemic const-s of the w-d but also the structural pattern on ~ it’s built.

unwashedness unwashed + ness / un + washed (as un- m.b. + to a № of other w-s:unexplored, unfulfilled, unfathered) / wash + ed

Breaking a w-d into its ICs we observe in each cut the structural order of the constituents (~ m. differ from their actual sequence). We obtain only 2 const-s at each cut, the ultimate const-s.

Composition —1 of the most productive types in MdE (conversion, affixation), in ~ new w-s are produced by combining 2 / > stems. It was active in the OE period & now it is still productive, as > than 1/3 of all new coined w-s in MdE—compound w-s.

Structurally —3 types of compounds: neutral, morphological, syntactic. (AntrushinaG.B

According to the degree of semantic cohesion of the constituent parts compounds ↔ idiomatic & non-idiomatic. Idiomatic comp-s—the meaning of the whole isn’t a mere sum of its elements. Idiomatic comp-s ↔

1) comp-s whose 1 (2) component has changed its meaning & it is no longer associated with the current meaning of the corresponding free form:

blackbird, football (not a ball but some game), book-keeper, highway (not a way but a broad main road used esp. by traffic going from one town to another)

And yet the speech community quite calmly accepts such seemingly illogical w-d-groups as pink bluebells; blackberries are red when they are green.

But despite all these semantic transformations the meanings of the constituents of the comp-s are still transparent: you can see them through the meaning of the whole complex: blackbird—some kind of bird, good-for-nothing—not a compliment.

2) comp-s in ~ the process of deducing the meaning of the whole from its constituents--impossible:

chatterbox, fuss-pot, blackmail, bluebottle—not a bottle but:1) flower (василёк)

2) insect (муха трупная) 3) coll. cop

Non-idiomatic comp-s —comp-s whose meaning can be described as the sum of their constituent meanings:

Classroom, medium-sized, theatre-goer, pocket-book, reading-hall, sleeping-car

but in the last 2 w-s we can observe a slight shift of meaning.

Some comp-s are made up of a determining & determined part, ~ m.b. called the determinant & determinatum.

The determinatum (the basic part)—the grammatically most important part ~ undergoes inflections.

The determinant serves to differentiate the determinatum from other determinata:

sunbeam: beam — determinatum, sun — determinant (from other beams)

sunbeams, brothers-in-law, passers-by

Endocentric comp-s — comp-s in ~ the constituent elements are clearly the determinant & the determinatum

maidservant (the 1^st element restricts the wide sphere of servants)

looking-glass, green-grocer (who sells vegetables but not who is green)

Exocentric comp-s — opposed to endocentric ones—their determinatum lies outside; it isn’t expressed but implied & understood but not formally expressed.

killjoy—a person who throws gloom over social enjoyment

scarecrow—a person/thing employed in scaring birds

cut-throat—a reckless person, a murderer

daredevil—someone doing dangerous things for enjoyment, not worrying about the risk

pick-pocket—a thief; turncoat—a renegade

start-back—a deserter

die-hard (iron.)—an irreconcilable conservative (твердолобый консерватор)

pick-up (iron.)—a chance acquaintance, a prostitute

blackout—a period of complete darkness

hangover—an unpleasant after-effect (пережиток, наследие, разг.похмелье)

the group of bahuvrihi compound nouns (bahuvrihi—borrowed from the grammarians of ancient India, literal meaning “much-riced”)

bahuvrihi —dessignate possessive exocentric formations in ~ a person / animal / thing are metonymically named after some striking feature they possess, chiefly a striking feature in their appearance.

Its formula: Adj.stem + Noun stem. Semantically they are almost invariably characterized by a depreciative (умаляющий, унижающий) ironical emotional tone

black-shirt—an Italian fascist (any fascist)

fathead—a dull, stupid person (олух, болван)

highbrow—a person who claims to be superior in intellect & culture

lazy-bones

Criteria distinguishing between a compound & a w-d-combination

~ the most difficult problem

1) phonological—a comp-d: a uniting heavy stress on the 1^st element or 1 primary & secondary stress ≠ the equal, identical stress on both elements in the phrase

key-hole, hot-house, mad-doctor, bedroom, blackbird

But: comp-d nouns with the 1^st element – all, self – All-Fools-Day, self-control—double even stress;

comp. adj-s: blue-eyed, absent-minded, light-hearted—double stressed.

& in w-d-combination only 1 component c.b. stressed on logic purpose.

2) graphical—comp. w-s have either solid or hyphenated spelling.

But: the variants of 1 & the same w-d with different dictionaries & different authors & sometimes even with the same author m.b. different:

headmaster head-master head master

loudspeaker loud-speaker loud speaker

matchbox match-box match box

comp-s constructed on the same pattern & having similar semantic relations, m.b. spelt differently: textbook, phrase-book, reference book.

Comp-s with the 1^st element –well-, ill-: 34% - separately, 66% - hyphenated,

Man-made: 6% - separately, 82% - hyphenated, 12% - solid.

3) morphological—formal integrity of comp-s ≠ doesn’t exist in w-d-comb-s.

The combination of components forming the complex whole, is morphologically designed as the united whole, having 1 paradigm. The w-d functions as an independent morphological unit. A derivational suffix is attached to the whole complex but not its separate parts.

blackbird’s paw, shipwreck – shipwrecks ≠ (the) wreck(s) of (a) ship(s)

preserve their independence

Adj-s – long, wide, rich – degrees of comparison: longer, wider, richer. The corresponding stems functioning as bases in comp. w-s lack grammat. independence &

forms proper to the w-s & retain only the p/sp. meaning. Thus, comp. adj-s – age-long, oil-rich, inch-wide - don’t form degrees of comparison the way the w-d “rich” does but conforms to the general rule of polysyllabic adj-ve—analytical forms of degr./compar-n

But: due to the scarcity of morphol. means, to the absence of morphol. signs in the majority of w-d-forms of many p/sp. in English this criterion is insufficient.

sweetheart & sweet heart — sweethearts & sweet hearts

connective elements, ~ ensure the integrity: Anglo-Saxon, craftsman, But the № of comp-s containing them is relatively insignificant. There are only few such elements.

4) syntactical—(non)possibility of combining the w-s of the definite p/sp., the definite w-d-order; you have no right to insert anth. between the comp-s of a comp. w-d.

grass-green—can not combine with the adverb, though it’s typical of adj-s: very green grass. WO—unusual (N + A) for w-d-comb-n (A + N)

a black bird—other w-s c.b. inserted inside the phrase: a black small bird ≠ a blackbird

But “very” can not be attached to “black market / black list”

The coincidence of WO: blue-stocking & blue stocking

round-fish & round fish

5) semantic—the integrity of a comp. w-d as a lex. unit is reflected in >/< solid constant semantic cohesion of its components ≠ a complete deduction & transparency of its meaning from the meanings of the constituent parts of a w-d-combination.

tallboy—“not a tall boy”, but “a tall piece of bedroom furniture with several drawers.

slowcoach—a person who does things too slowly.

But: a) phraseological w-d-comb-s denote the unifying concept too & some of them are characterized by a high degree of semantic cohesion, then: it’s necessary to include phraseological w-d-comb-s in comp. w-s. But it’s impossible.

to rain cats & dogs, to pull one’s leg

b) There are intermediate cases except clearly motivated w-d-comb. & idiomatic ones.

Conclusion: None of these criteria is the principal for identification of comp-s. It’s indispensable to use 2/> criteria, but even, taking into account all the criteria it’s difficult to decide: stone wall—either a compound or w-d-combination (N + N) or a substantivized adj. formed by conversion + noun (A + N).

Semi-Affixes

The problem of distinguishing a comp-d from a derivative is actually equivalent to distinguishing a stem from an affix. In most cases the task is simple enough: the ICs of a comp-d—free forms ~ are likely to occur in the same phonic character as independent w-s, whereas a combination containing bound forms as its ICs—a derivative.

However: borderline cases that do not fit in, so—present difficulties.

Man, land, berry, proof, worthy, like—as the 2^nd element—stand between comp-s & derived w-s in their characteristics.

~ very frequent as 2^nd elements of w-s for a long time (man, berry, land)—seem to have acquired valency similar to that of aff-s;

~ are unstressed,- [ə], although the reduction isn’t quite regular: when the concept “man” is clearly present in the w-d—no reduction;

[lənd] only in ethnic names: Scotland, Finland, but not in “homeland”, “fatherland”.

~ combining activity is very great

seaman, airman, spaceman, policeman, horseman, gentleman;

~ the 2^nd element –man is considerably generalized semantically & approaches in meaning a mere suffix of the doer –er.

The fading of the lexical meaning is especially evident—about women:

The chairman Miss Ellen McGregor… (unofficially: Chairwoman);

~ a great combining capacity characterizes the elements –like, -proof, -worthy:

ladylike, unladylike, manlike, unbusinesslike, suchlike,, noteworthy, praiseworthy, trustworthy, waterproof, shockproof, bombproof, fire-proof, kissproof (about a lipstick)

-monger, -wright (<OEmangere—a tradesman, <OEwyrhta—a worker)—very productive in combinations, completely dead as independent w-s: fictionmonger, fashionmonger, newsmonger, scandalmonger, warmonger—have a strongly disparaging character; playwright, shipwright, wheelwright.

All these w-s stand between comp-d w-s & derived w-s in their characteristics.

Conversion— the way of w-d-forming, in ~ a w-d of 1 p/sp is formed from the form of another p/sp & the only w-d-forming means—paradigm of the w-d & its valency with other w-s (thanks to its valency with other w-s in the sentence, thanks to the context we can see what p/sp the w-d belongs to).

Eye v & eye n—aren’t the same w-d, as they differ by their paradigm & functionally therefore they are different w-s, formed by changing of their paradigms.

If you are lucky, you can have a good buy. “buy” occupies the position of a noun, possesses the syntactical ties of a noun (it is preceded by the indefinite article & modified by an adjective). Isolated “buys”—it’s impossible to identify its paradigm: whether it’s the plural of a noun or the 3^rd person, singular of a verb.

Conversion isn’t only a highly productive but also a particularly English way of w-d-building. Certain features of the E. lang. encourage it: a) the analytical structure of MdE facilitates process of making w-s of 1 p/sp. from w-s of another; the absence of morphological elements marking the p/sp. to ~ the w-d belongs (back n, back v, back adj, back adv) b) the simplicity of paradigms of E. p/sp.; c) a great № of 1-syllable w-s: they are > mobile & flexible than polysyllables.

Not only the w-s consisting of 1 root are involved, but also w-s with a suffix, prefix:

difference n—difference v counterattack n—counterattack v

discomfort n—discomfort v blacklist n—blacklist v

inconvenience n—inconvenience v nightwatch n—nightwatch v

Conversion is highly productive so that many neologisms & nonce-w-s c.b. illustrated: An afternoon discussion was chaired by Mr.Richard Doll; other examples: to microfilm, to wireless, to orbit. If anybody oranges me again tonight, I’ll knock his face off (O’Henry). Let me say in the beginning that even if I wanted to avoid Texas I could not, for I am wived in Texas & mother-in-lawed & uncled & aunted & cousined within an inch of my life (J.Steinbeck, Travels with Charley).

2p/sp. are especially affected by conversion—nouns & verbs, N→V—the most numerous: to hand, to back, to monkey, to stage, to nose, to room, to honeymoon.

V→N: a must, a chat, a talk, a fly, a jump, a rush, a make

Adj→V: to pale, to cool, to rough, to wet, to blind, to dirty, to narrow. But he retained my hand, & I could not free it.

Converted w-s have meaning ~ differs from the meaning of the w-d, from ~ it was derived. But their meanings c.b. associated.

N→V

1) the action peculiar to that, denoted by N (to ape, to monkey, to wolf, to father);

2) to act by means of that, denoted by N (to chain, to finger, to water, to iron);

3) to supply, cover with that, denoted by N (to curtain, to dust, to shelter);

4) to deprive of that, denoted by N (to dust, to skin);

5) to place to that denoted by N (to table, to pocket, to house)

V→N

1) isolated action (a jump, a move, a look);

2) an acting object (a drill, a dig);

3) a place of action (ride, forge, drive, walk);

4) an object/result of action (find, tear, peel, burn, catch, lift)

H.Marchand—a very interesting detail: the verbal personal nouns formed by conversion & denoting the doer—mostly derogatory: bore, cheat, flirt, scold, tease.

It’s significant as it shows that the language has in store some patterned morphological ways to convey emotional meaning; these ways can form a parallel to the suffixes denoting deprecation: -ard, -ling, -ster.

Дата добавления: 2014-01-11