4. Combinability. Word Groups

The vocabulary of any language consists not only of words but also of different word groups and expressions, which, like words, name various objects and phenomena. These are word combinations of different structural types of idiomatic and non-idiomatic character. They are: free word groups (collocations) and set expressions.

These word combinations are very closely connected, but still they are not the same. Compare: (1) at last, point of view, take part - these word groups are functionally and semantically inseparable set phrases and are traditionally regarded as the subject matter of phraseology; and (2) a year ago, a girl of beauty, take lessons - these are semantically and structurally independent word groups. They are produced, not reproduced, in speech. Semantically they are motivated.

Z. Harris commented 'it may be presumed that any two morphemes having different meanings also differ in their distribution. "That means that linguistic analysis is concerned with the distribution of linguistic elements. Distribution may be defined as the occurrence of lexical items relative to other lexical units of the same level. In other words it is the position that lexical units may occupy in the text or in the flow of speech. Lexical difference in distribution is based on the difference in valency. Lexical valency is the possibility of lexico-semantic connections of a word with other words.

Words are used in certain lexical contexts, i. e. in combinations with other words. The words that surround a particular word in a sentence or paragraph are called the verbal context of that word. The combinatorial possibilities of words play an important part in identifying meanings. Lexical collocability is the realisation in speech of the potential connections of a word with other words.

The range of the lexical valency of words is restricted by the inner structure of the language. For example, the verbs lift and raise are considered to be synonyms, but only raise can collocate with the noun question. This characteristic of language is found in collective words -a herd of cows etc. The aptness of a word to appear in different syntactic structures is called grammatical valency.(S.D.Katsnelson in 1948).As you know, words when brought together to form word groups have different patterns. E.G.: a verb can be followed by a noun (V+N). This pattern can include such collocations as to read a book, to eat a book which are quite possible from the point of view of their valency. But to eat a book can't collocate due to some extralinguistic factors. The grammatical valency of each individual word is dependent on the grammatical structure of the language. Grammatical valency of words belonging to the same part of speech isn’t identical. verbs suggest and offer. Both verbs can be followed by a noun, but only offer can be followed by the infinitive of a verb.

The notion of collocation focuses our attention on mutual expectancy between lexemes. D. Crystal considers that the lexical items involved in a collocation are always to some degree mutually predictable. He illustrates it by such sequences as commit a murder and not commit a task, monumental ignorance and not monumental brilliance; we may be green with envy, and a book may have a purple passage.

Structurally word-groups may be classified by the criterion of distribution into endocentric and exocentric e.g. red flower and exocentric.

Виды, классификации: According to the headwords word-groups may be classified into nominal (red flower), verbal (to speak well), and adjectival (kind to people). According to their syntactic pattern into predicative (a syntactic structure is similar to that of a sentence), e.g. he works and non-predicative. Non-predicative groups are subdivided according to the type of syntactic relations between the components into subordinative (redflower) and coordinative (day and night).

It is common knowledge that one of the major prob. in the learning of the 2nd lang. is the interference caused by the diff. b/w the mother tongue of the learner and the target lang.. All the prob-s of foreign lang. teaching will certainly not be solved by contrast. Ling-cs alone. There is no doubt, however, that CA has a part to play in evaluation of errors, in predicting typical errors and thus must be seen in connection with overall endeavors to rationalize and intensify foreign lang. teaching.

Linguistic scholars, e. g. Ch. Fries, proceed from the assumption that the categories, elements, etc. on the semantic as well as on the syntactic and other levels are valid for both lang-s. For ex., linking verbs can be found in Eng. & Rus. Linking verbs having meaning 'become' are diff-ly represented in each of the lang. In Eng., e.g., grow, fall, get; in Rus. — stanovit’sya.

The task set before the linguist is to find out which semantic and syntactic features characterize 1. the Eng. set of verbs (cf. grow thin, get angry, fall ill), 2. the Rus. set of verbs, 3. how the 2 sets compare. Cf., e.g., the Eng. word-groups grow thin, get angry, fall ill and the Rus. verbs pohudet,rasserdit’sya,zabolet. CA can be carried out at 3 ling-c levels: phonology, grammar (morphology and syntax) and lexis (vocabulary). CA is applied to reveal the features of sameness and difference in the lexical meaning and the semantic structure of correlated words in diff. lang-s.

It is commonly assumed by non-linguists that all lang-s have vocab. systems in which the words themselves differ in sound-form but refer to reality in the same way. From this assumption it follows that for every word in the mother tongue there is an exact equiv. in the foreign lang."It is a belief which is reinforced by the small bilingual dictionaries where single word translations are offered. Firstly, it should be borne in mind that though objective reality exists outside human beings and irrespective of the lang. they speak every lang. classifies reality in its own way by means of vocab. units. In Eng., e.g., the word foot is used to denote the extremity of the leg. In Rus. there is no exact equivalent for foot. The word “noga” denotes the whole leg incl. the foot.

One ex. is provided by the words watch and clock. It would seem natural for Rus. speakers to have a single word to refer to all devices that tell us what time it is; yet in Eng. they are divided into 2 semantic classes depend. on whether or not they are customarily portable. CA also brings to light what can be labelled problem pairs, i.e. the words that denote 2 entities in one lang. and correspond to 2 diff. words in another lang. Compare, for ex. “chasy” in Rus. & clock, watch in Eng. Correlated polysemantic words of diff. lang-s are as a rule not co-extensive. Polysemantic words in all lang-s may denote very diff. types of objects and yet all the meanings are considered by the native speakers to be obviously logical extensions of the basic meaning. For ex., to an Englishman it is self-evident that one should be able to use the word head to denote the following: of a person, of a match, head of a bed, whereas in Rus. Diff. words have to be used: golova, golovka, izgolovje.

On the level of the lexical meaning CA reveals that correlated polysemantic words are not co-extensive and shows the T where to expect an unusual degree of learning difficulty. This analysis may also point out the effective ways of overcoming the anticipated difficulty as it shows which of the new items will require a more extended and careful presentation and practice.

CA on the level of the gram. meaning reveals that correlated words in diff. lang-s may differ in the gram. component of their meaning. Russians are liable to say the *news are good, * the money are on the table, *her hair are black, etc. as the words have the gram. meaning of plurality in the Rus. Lang. Besides, CA deals with the meaning and use of situational verbal units, i.e. words, word-groups, sentences which are commonly used by native speakers in certain situations(Vy ne tuda popali-wrong number).