Derivational types of words

According to their derivational structure words fall into two large classes: simple words (simplexes) and derivatives (complexes).

According to the type of the underlying derivational pattern complexes are subdivided into: derived and compound words. Derived words fall into affixational words (suffixal and prefixal derivatives) and conversions. Derived words numerically constitute the largest class of words in the existing word-stock. However in actual speech simple words occupy a predominant place in English. At the same time it should be pointed out that new words that appear in the. vocabulary are mostly words of derived and compound structure.

Word-formation

Various ways of forming words

In the classification of word-formation types we proceed from the principles suggested by A.I. Smirnitsky in his book on English Lexicology. Word-formation is the system of derivative types of words and the process of creating new words from the material available in the language after certain structural and semantic formulas and patterns. The following two types of word-formation may be distinguished: word-derivation and word-composition (or compounding). Words created by word-derivation have only one derivational base and one derivational affix, e.g. to overestimate (from to estimate), chairmanship (from chairman). Some derived words have no derivational affixes, because derivation is achieved through conversion (e.g. to paper from paper, a fall from to fall). Words created by word-composition have at least two bases (e.g. lamp-shade, ice-cold). Within the types, further distinction may be made between the ways of forming words.

The basic ways of forming words in word-derivation are: affixation and conversion. We exclude from the scope of word-formation semantic word-shortening, sound-and stress interchange which traditionally are referred to minor ways of word-formation. The application of the term word-formation to the process of semantic change and to the appearance of homonyms due to the development of polysemy seems to be debatable for the following reasons.

As semantic change does not lead to the introduction of a new word into the vocabulary, it can scarcely be regarded as a word-building means. The appearance of homonyms is not a means of creating new words, but it is the final result of a long and laborious process of sense-development. Furthermore, there are no patterns after which homonyms can be made in the language. For these reasons diverging sense-development resulting in the appearance of homonyms should be regarded as a way of the replenishment of the vocabulary and not a way of word-formation. The shortening of words (e.g. lab, exam, v-day) cannot be regarded as part of either word-derivation or word-composition for the reason that neither the derivational base nor the derivational affix can be singled out from the shortened word. There are no derivational patterns of shortened words. For the same reasons, such ways of coining words as acronymy (the USSR, the UNESCO), blending (smog = smoke + fog), sound and stress interchange should not be treated as means of word-formation; strictly speaking they are specific means of replenishing the vocabulary different in principle from affixation, conversion and compounding.

Some ways of forming words in present — day English can be resorted to for the creation of new words whenever the occasion demands — these are called productive ways of forming words, other ways of forming words cannot now produce new words, and these are commonly termed non­productive or unproductive. For instance, sound-interchange must have been at one time a word-building means, but in Modern English its function is to distinguish between different classes and forms of words. Thus productivity of word-building ways is understood as their ability to make new words in particuIar, occasional words or nonce- words. The term suggests that a speaker coins such words when he needs them (e.g. lungful, to unlearn). Three degrees of productivity are distinguished for derivational patterns and individual derivational affixes: 1) highly-productive; 2) productive and 3) non-productive.

Productivity of derivational patterns and affixes should not be identified with frequency of occurrence in speech. Frequency of occurrence is characterized by the fact that a great number of words containing a given derivational affix are often used in speech, in particular in various texts.

Productivity is characterised by the ability of a given affix to make new words. The Russian linguist Kubryakova E.S. distinguishes between derivational productivity and word-formation activity. She qualifies a derivational pattern or a derivational affix as productive in case there are hundreds of derived words built on the pattern or with the help of the suffix. Word-formation activity is defined by Kubryakova E.S. as the ability of an affix to produce new words, in particular, occasional or nonce-words. This is a quantitative approach to derivational productivity.