- •L.M. Takumbetоvа english lexicology preface
- •1. Morphological and Derivational Structure of Words.........................................57
- •Abbreviations and symbols
- •Introduction lexicology as a branch of linguistics.
- •Its subject matter and objectives
- •1. The Subject Matter of Lexicology.
- •2. The Theoretical and Practical Value of Lexicology
- •Questions and Tasks
- •2. The Problem of Word Definition
- •3. Types of Nomination and Motivation of Lexical Units
- •4. The Notion of Lexeme. Variants of Words
- •Questions and Tasks
- •Chapter 2 semasiology. The problem of meaning
- •1. Referential and Functional Approaches to Meaning
- •2. Types of Meaning
- •3. The Semantic Structure of Words. Polysemy
- •4. Сauses, Types and Results of Semantic Change
- •Questions and Tasks
- •Exercises
- •I. Which of the following words are monosemantic (use a dictionary)?
- •II. Group together the following pairs of words according to the lsVs they represent. Use dictionaries if necessary.
- •III. Define the meanings of the italicized words in the following sentences. Say how meanings of the same word are associated one with another.
- •IV. Explain the logical associations in the meanings of the same words in the following word combinations. Define the type of transference which has taken place.
- •V. Comment on the change of meanings in the italicized words.
- •Chapter 3 english vocabulary as a system
- •1. Semantic Classes of Lexemes in the Lexico-semantic
- •System of the English Language
- •2. Synonymy
- •3. Antonymy
- •4. Homonymy
- •The Origin of Homonyms in the English Language
- •Questions and Tasks
- •Exercises
- •I. Classify the following words into logical groups on the principle of hyponymy.
- •II. Arrange the following lexemes into three lexico-semantic groups - feelings, parts of the body, education.
- •III. Prove that the following sets of words are synonyms (use dictionaries).
- •IV. Find the dominant synonym in the following synonymic sets. Explain your choice.
- •V. Find antonyms for the words given below.
- •VI. A) Find the homonyms proper for the following words; give their Russian equivalents.
- •VI. Match the italicized words with the phonetics.
- •Chapter 4 morphological structure of english words and word formation
- •1. Morphological and Derivational Structure of Words
- •2. Аffixation
- •Clаssification of Prefixes
- •Classification of Suffixes
- •3. Conversion
- •Patterns of Semantic Relations by Conversion
- •Basic Criteria of Sеmantic Derivation within Conversion Pairs
- •4. Word-Composition (Compounding)
- •Classifications of Compound Words
- •Meaning and Motivation in Compound Words
- •Historical Changes of Compounds
- •5. Minor Types of Word-Formation
- •Questions and tasks
- •Exercises
- •I. A) Give examples of nouns with the following suffixes; state which of the suffixes are productive.
- •II. Explain the etymology and productivity of the affixes given below. Say what parts of speech they form.
- •III. In the following examples the italicized words are formed from the same root by means of different affixes. Translate these derivatives into Russian and explain the difference in meaning.
- •IV. Find cases of conversion in the following sentences.
- •V. Explain the semantic correlations within the following pair of words.
- •VI. Identify the compounds in the word-groups below. Say as much as you can about their structure and semantics.
- •VII. Match the following onomatopoeic words with the names of referents producing the sounds they denote in brackets.
- •VIII. Define the particular type of world-building process by which the following words were formed and say as much as you can about them.
- •Chapter 5 word-groups and phraseological units
- •1. Lexical Valency and Collocability
- •2. Criteria of phraseological units
- •3. Classifications of phraseological units
- •4. Origin of phraseological units
- •Questions and tasks
- •Exercises
- •I. What is the source and meaning of the following idioms?
- •II. Explain whether the semantic changes in the following units are complete or partial.
- •III. Give Russian equivalents of the following phraseological units from the list below.
- •IV. Give the proverbs from which the following phraseological units have developed.
- •V. Match the beginning of the proverb in the left-hand corner with its ending in the right-hand corner.
- •Chapter 6 etymological background of the english vocabulary
- •1. What Is Etymology?
- •2. Native English Vocabulary
- •3. Loan Words and Their Role in the Formation of the English Vocabulary
- •4. Assimilation of Borrowings
- •5. Degree of Assimilation and Factors Determining It
- •5. Impact of Borrowings on the English Language System
- •Quesions and Tasks
- •Exercises
- •I. Subdivide the following words of native origin into a) Indo-European, b) Germanic, c) English proper.
- •II. Distribute the following Latin borrowings into three groups according to the time of borrowing.
- •III. Find the examples of Scandinavian borrowings in the sentences given below. How can they be identified?
- •IV. Point out whether the italicized words in the sentences given below are Norman or Parisian French borrowings. How can they be identified?
- •V. Explain the etymology of the italicized words (native English and borrowings). Use etymological dictionaries if necessary.
- •VIII. Think of 10-15 examples of Russian borrowings in English and English borrowings in Russian. Literary sources
- •II. Optional
- •Dictionaries
- •Internet sources
4. Word-Composition (Compounding)
Compounding or word-composition is one of the major and highly productive types of word-formation, one of the potent means of replenishment of English word-stock. This type of word formation was very productive in Old English and it hasn’t lost its productivity till present time. More than one third of all the new words in modern English are compound words. Compound words as the term itself suggests are lexical units of complex structure.
Many definitions offered by linguists (А.I.Smirnitsky, I.V.Аrnold, О.D.Меshkov, H.Маrchаnd, О.Jesрersеn, R.V.Zаndvоrt) соme to the following one: a compound word is a lexical unit formed by joining together two or more derivational bases and singled out in speech due to its integrity.
The derivational bases may be of different degrees of complexity as, e.g. arm-chair, prizefighter, fancy-dress-maker, forget-me-not, merry-go-round, pay-as-you-earn, etc. Notwithstanding the fact that many linguists devoted their researches to word-composition, still some of the issues concerning this type of word formation are open to debate. One of the difficulties is the problem of distinguishing compound words from word combinations (word-groups, phrases). Comparing such compound words as running water ‘water coming from a mains supply – Rus. водопровод’ a dancing-girl ‘a professional dancer – Rus. танцовщица’ with the word combinations running water ‘water that runs – Rus. проточная вода’ and a dancing girl ‘a girl who is dancing – Rus. танцующая девушка’ and many others, it is difficult to determine whether we deal with compound words or word combinations.
The most important property of compound words is their integrity (see section 1 of chapter I) which is understood as impossibility to insert other units of the language (morphemes, words) between the components of a compound word. Integrity might be also considered the basic criterion of distinguishing compound words from word combinations and other language units. Compound words possess both structural and semantic integrity.
Structural integrity of compound words manifests itself in the fixed order of their components. The second IC (Immediate Constituent) is in overwhelming majority of compound words the structural and semantic centre, the onomasiological basis of the word. In compound words like a house-dog and a dog-house and many others, it is the second component that determines the part of speech, i.e. lexico-grammatical properties of the compound, and its referent, or what actually the word denotes, while the first component modifies the meaning of the second one: a house-dog – a dog trained to guard a house; a dog-house – a house for a dog.
For some types of compound words the indication of integrity is the reverse order of the components as compared with word combinations. It is the case of the compounds with the second components expressed by adjectives and participles, e.g. oil-rich, man-made. In the synonymous word combinations the word order is: rich in oil, made by man.
There are other criteria employed for distinguishing compound words from word combinations taking into account various aspects of compound words. The phonetic (phonic) criterion rests on the marked tendency in English to give compounds a heavy stress on the first component. It is true that compound words in many cases are given single, or the so-called unity stress; or two stresses – a primary and a secondary one. Such stress patterns differ from the stress patterns of word combinations where each notional word is stressed. For instance, each of the words road and house is stressed in a word combination, e.g. a `house by the `road but when they make up a compound word a `roadhouse ‘a building on a main road’ the stress pattern is changed, the word acquires a unity stress on the first component or double stress (the primary and secondary ones) as in the words `blood-vessel, `washing-maֽِchine. The phonic criterion will prove that `laughing `boys ‘the boys who are laughing’ is a word combination (word group) but `laughing-gas ‘gas used in dental surgery’ is a compound word. However, not infrequent are the cases with the so-called level stress when each component is equally stressed: `arm-`chair, `snow-`white, `icy-`cold. Hence, the phonic criterion is not quite reliable.
The structural integrity of a compound word differing from structural separateness of a word combination is backed up by the morphological (morphemic) criterion. A sequence of components making up a compound word is a morphemic unity and it has a single paradigm. It means that the grammatical inflections are added to the word as a whole but not to its separate parts, e.g. earthquake – earthquakes, weekend – weekends. In a word combination each of the component parts is morphemically independent and may attract the grammatical inflections (сf. age-long and ages ago). This criterion, however, is limited for the English language because of the scarcity of its grammatical morphemic means.
To the syntactic criterion besides the above-mentioned fixed order of the components refers the character of syntactic relations. The components of compound words cannot enter into the syntactic relations of their own. Thus in the word combination (a factory) financed by the government each notional word may be modified by an attribute: a factory generously financed by the British government (the example is borrowed from [Мешков 1976: 182]). None of the components of a compound word can be modified by an attribute: *generously government-financed. Modifying a component of a compound word is only possible by introducing one more component into the structure of a compound word: Labour-government-financed. However, syntactic parameters do not unambiguously solve the problem of distinguishing a compound word from a word combination because the collocability of the components of word combinations may be limited.
The semantic criterion presupposes the semantic integrity of a compound word, close semantic links between its components. According to this criterion the following examples refer to compound words: daybreak, blackmail, killjoy and many others. But the semantic criterion seems to be the most unreliable one as it is not always possible to objectively determine to what extent the components are semantically linked together. Besides it is impossible to draw a line between compound words and phraseological units, idioms which are characterized by semantic unity.
As one more criterion of structural integrity of compound words might be named the graphic criterion. The majority of compound words are spelled either solidly or with a hyphen. But there is no consistency in English spelling in this respect. The same words may be spelt either solidly, with a hyphen or with a break. The spelling varies with different texts and even dictionaries (e.g. airline, air-line, air line). There is statistic data concerning the variability of spelling, e.g. complexes with the first components well-, ill- (e.g. ill-advised, ill-affected, well-dressed, well-aimed) in 34 % cases are spelt with a break, in 66% with a hyphen [Харитончик 1992: 180]. The vacillations in spelling are most frequent in ‘n + n’ pattern: war(-)time, money(-)order, post(-)card, etc. E. Pаrtridge in his book “Usage and Abusage” writes that a compound word goes through three stages in its evolution: (1) two separate words (cat bird); (2) a compound word spelt with a hyphen (cat-bird); (3) a solidly spelt word (catbird). Thus, solid spelling of compounds is manifestation of language consciousness, the moment when the lexical unit is perceived as having acquired a semantic unity. Solid or hyphenated spellings are indications of compound words, although cases of a break between components allow of various interpretations.
So far not a single criterion is reliable enough to identify compound words. Moreover, even a combination of criteria is not sufficient enough to unequivocally decide whether the lexical unit is a compound word or a word combination.
The second aspect of the issue of identification of compound words and determining the types of word-formation is the problem of delineation between compounding and other types of word-formation resulting in appearance of compound words. Such words as long-legged, three-cornered, schoolmasterish are complex in their morphological structure but according to the type of word formation they refer to suffixal derivatives. Their derivational patterns are as follows: long-legged ~ (long + leg) +-ed ~ (a + n) + sf , but not long + legged, as there is no such a derivational base as *legged. By analogy: three-cornered ~ (num + n) + sf, schoolmasterish ~ (n + n) + sf. Such words are considered to be compound derivatives. They must be distinguished from the words of the type pen-holder, tongue-twister, which are derived by compounding, i.e. bringing together two derivational bases pen + (hold + -er) ~ n + (n + sf), which are compound words.
Besides suffixal compound derivatives to compound derivatives refer the words formed by conversion: breakthrough n. from to break through, breakdown n. from to break down, based on V > N pattern, to blackmail from blackmail n. (N > V), back formation (see the next section 5): to baby-sit from baby-sitter, to fact-find from fact-finding ‘inquiring into facts’.