4. Conversion

Conversion is a pattern of derivation.

Conversion – process of forming a new word in different part of speech and with different distribution but without adding any derivative element.

There are the following reasons for conversion:

1. There’s always one base involved.

2. the derivative belongs to different part of speech.

One word serves as a base for another word, no other morphemes are added. The result is the existence of two or more homonyms belonging to different parts of speech with appropriate paradigms. They are semantically related to the base which motivates them. The semantic relations are often the same as in affixal derivation.

e. g. to gossip – a gossip

The semantic relations between the derivative and the base are regular, the motivation is clear.

e. g. to abrade – abrasive

Conversion is a very productive pattern of word-formation. This is confirmed by neologisms and occasionalisms.

e. g. I’ll specially delivery myself. (the whole phrase is used as a verb)

e. g. You’ll be anchoring the news tonight (an anchor – ведущий на TV)

the anchor position – роль ведущего

5. Regularity of semantic types of conversion.

Noun – verb

1. An action characteristic of the object (the base) – “to act as / like …”

e. g. to crowd, to fox (хитрить), to duck (нырять), to nurse, to police

e. g. The USA cannot police the world

2. The instrumental use of the object

e. g. to pen, to hammer (выбивать, молотить), to axe

3. Acquisition of the object, taking away

e. g. to fish, to bone, to coat (to put a coat of paint on smth)

4. If noun denotes smth empty, the verb may denote “putting smth into”

e. g. to pocket the money, to bottle a secret

5. Time relations

e. g. to winte

Verb – Noun

1. An act or instance of smth:

e. g. a ride, a walk, a step

2. an agent who performs an action

e. g. a gossip, a tramp

3. The place for V-ing

e. g. a drive (подъездная дорожка), slide (ледяная горка)

4. The object or result of V-ing

e. g. a tear (разрыв), a cut (порез), a crack (трещина)

5. The sound accompanying V-ing

e. g. a crack (треск), a crash

Sometimes such word-formations do not correspond to Russian words and must be rendered by means of phrases

e.g. to collar (схватить за шиворот),

to horse around (носиться как лошадь)

to table (положить на (в) стол)

The semantic pattern on which verbs are formed from adjectives seems always to be the same.

e. g. to clean, to dirty, to tidy, to warm, to clear

These are cases when the semantic relations are not so clear:

e. g. to chair the meeting, to star, to screen

The nouns “intellectual”, “relative”, “native” are obviously formed from adjectives but their semantic relations are irregular. The result can never be predicted. It is the result of a long process of substantivation or substantivization. It is no conversion.

Another group of substantivated adjectives has a different problem.

e. g. the poor, the sick, the rich, the priviledged

The semantic relations are regular. It is a conversion, but not full, complete. They denote only a group of people and can be used only in the singular form with the definite article.