III. Conversion (zero derivation).

Another type of derivation is conversion, or zero derivation. This is a process of coining a new word belonging to a different part of speech without adding any derivative element to the original word. So the basic form of the original word and that of the derived word are homonymous, e.g. Don’t forget to dust the furniture.

As a type of word-building conversion exists in a lot of languages but in English it has developed most intensely due to the lack of morphological signs indicating the part of speech a word belongs to, e.g. home may be a noun (Home, sweet home), an adjective (home assignment), an adverb (go home), a verb (A missile automatically homes the target).

Conversion is the predominant way of forming new verbs in Modern English. They may be formed from nouns (to hand, to shoulder, to knee, to finger, to eye, to nose, etc.), from adjectives (to busy, to slow), from adverbs (to down) and other parts of speech. Nouns may be formed from verbs (a good catch, a short walk, a long drive), adverbs (ups and downs), etc.

A special case of conversion is substantivation of adjectives, i.e. conversion of adjectives into nouns. The degree of substantivation may be full or partial. Fully substantivized adjectives share all the characteristics of nouns: can be used in the singular and in the plural, in the common and possessive cases, with the indefinite, definite or zero articles, e.g. a private, a group of privates, the private’s uniform, privates’ duties. Words female, male, criminal, native, red, grown-up and some others belong to the fully substantivated. Partially substantivated adjectives cannot add –s or ‘s, are always used with the definite article and refer to a group of people, e.g. the blind, the dead, the wounded, the poor, etc.

Most regularly conversion involves simple words but affixed and prefixed words may be converted as well (though less commonly): commission- to commission. Conversion may be combined with compounding, e.g. a drawback, a handout, a take-over, to pinpoint, to blacklist.

IY. Compounding. Classification of compounds. Criteria of compounding. Borderline cases (semi-affixes).

Compounding is a way of forming new words by joining together two or more stems that occur in the language as free forms (separate words).

There are several classifications of compound words.

According to the way the stems are joined we distinguish:

1) compounds made by juxtaposition without any connecting elements, e.g. heartache, heart-beat, heart-burn, heart-attack;

2) compounds with a vowel or a consonant as a linking element between the stems, e.g. speedometer, handicraft, craftsman;

3) compounds with linking elements represented by prepositions, conjunctions, pronouns: son-in-law, up-to-date, hide-and-seek, forget-me-not.

According to the structure of stems we distinguish:

1) compounds consisting of simple stems, e.g. film-star, sun-beam;

2) compounds in which at least one of the stems is a derivative, e.g. chain-smoker, mill-owner;

3) compounds in which at least one of the stems is clipped (shortened), e.g. math-mistress, lab-test;

4) compounds in which at least one of the stems is a compound by itself, e.g. wastepaper-basket.

According to the relations between the stems compounds are divided into endocentric and exocentric. In endocentric compounds one of the stems is the main and the other describes, characterizes it, serves to differentiate it from similar ones. E.g. a sun-beam (not moon-beam or torch-beam), text-book (not exercise-book or note-book or reference book). The main component is also grammatically the most important part which undergoes morphological changes: sunbeams, brothers-in-law, textbooks. In exocentric compounds we cannot distinguish the main stem, the status of stems is equal, e.g. a killjoy.

According to their conformity to current grammatical patterns of the language, compounds are divided into syntactic, which conform to the patterns and may be transformed into corresponding word combinations, and asyntactic, which do not. E.g. syntactic: a sea-shore (a shore of the sea), bookselling (selling books), a bookbinder (a person who binds books). Asyntactic: babysitting (not sitting babies), bookmaker (not a person who makes books).

According to the degree of their motivation, compounds are divided into idiomatic and non-idiomatic. Idiomatic compounds are different in meaning from the corresponding word combinations, e.g. a blackboard is not necessarily black and may be not a board at all being made of plastic, linoleum, etc. In non-idiomatic compounds the meaning is equal to the sum of the meanings of its components, e.g. text-book, seagull.

It is not always easy to differentiate a compound word from a word combination. There are several criteria to help with this task. Unfortunately, no one type of criteria is normally sufficient for establishing the status of a lexical unit, is relevant by itself. We need at least two of them to be sure.

1). Graphic criterion: solid or hyphenated spelling proves that the unit is a compound word. However, English spelling is not consistent enough, e.g. airline, air-line, air line; textbook, phrase-book, reference book.

2). Phonological criterion: compounds usually have a single stress on the first syllable: ice-cream, blackboard (compare: a black board – each word is equally stressed). But the rule doesn’t hold with adjectives which are always double-stressed (green-grey, snow-white), the stress may be logical (It’s an express train, not a passenger train) or the stress may help to differentiate the meaning of compounds (e.g. mankind).

3). Semantic criterion: A compound expresses a single idea, which is not identical in meaning to the sum of the meanings of its components in a free phrase (e.g. blackboard). But it cannot be applied to clearly motivated compounds (e.g. sunrise) or to idiomatic phrases (e.g. it rains cats and dogs).

4). Syntactical criterion is based on comparing a compound and the phrase comprising the same morphemes. E. g. black birds can be modified by very (very black birds) and it is impossible with the compound blackbirds. However, the criterion cannot serve to distinguish compounds from set expressions in which the words cannot be modified either: black market, black list (cannot say a very black list).

5). Morphological criteria include: a) formal integrity (e.g. shipwrecks may be wrecks ofa ship or wreck of several ships or wrecks of several ships; window-cleaner does not clean just one window, the same about cigar-smoker or lip-reading. The plural number present in the corresponding phrases is neutralized in compounds.) But such examples are not numerous; b) connective elements (e.g. Anglo-Saxon, craftsman). But there are very few words like that.

No criterion is sufficient by itself.

Sometimes it is not easy to distinguish a compound from a derivative either. Such elements as man, berry, land, etc. have acquired valency similar to that of affixes. They are now unstressed, their lexical meaning is somewhat weakened, e.g. like, proof, worthy. The elements like this may be called semi-affixes. E.g. fire-proof, damp-proof, kiss-proof; mini-bus, mini-crisis, mini-dress. The factors conducing to transition of free forms into semi affixes are high semantic productivity, adaptability, high valency and brevity.

Дата добавления: 2015-11-16