in - (inside, include, impress);

out - (outcome, outlaw «бандит»);

ex - (exclude, express);

ad - (going back to the Latin preposition ad «to», cf. L. ad patres «к праотцам», per aspera ad astra «через трудности к звездам»): adverb (i.e. added to the verb); add (where - d is the root morpheme). Ad - (like in-) has several allomorphs, which are formed through regressive assimilation: abbreviate, accustom, affirm, approve, appoint, arrange, assimilate, attract;

inter - (international);

sub - (subway, suppress), etc.

Prefixes denoting time: fore - (to foresee, to foretell), pre - (prewar, prerevolutionary, prehistoric), post - (post-war).

Prefixes denoting manner: mis - (misspell, mistake, misunderstand, mispronounce).

Prefixes denoting degree: under - «too little» (to underfeed, to underpay), over - «too much» (to overeat, to overdo (oneself) «перестараться», to oversleep (oneself) «проспать», to overhear; cf. meat underdone - meat overdone.

4) Prefix denoting repetition of an action: re - (rewrite, redevelop a centre «перестраивать центр»);

5) Prefix denoting views: pro - (pro-reform).

Productivity of affixes.

Productive affixes form new words in present-day English: - er, - less, un-, etc.

Non-productive affixes do not form new words, but they are recognized in words, e.g. - t in weight (from to weigh), complaint (from to complain), flight (from to fly), gift (from to give), height (from high); - th in breadth (from broad); fore - in forehead; - al in historical, - ancy / ency in frequency.

Dead affixes do not form new words and cannot be recognized in modern English words: - k in walk, talk.

Productivity is not stable, it changes with times.

Polysemy, homonymy and synonymy in affixes.

Affixes as well as words can be polysemantic. E.g. - er has four meanings: 1) profession: teacher, 2) feature of a character: early-riser, poor eater, 3) occupation at the moment: passer-by, watcher, 4) device: lighter «зажигалка».

Affixes as well as words can be homonymous. E.g. there are a few suffixes - ly: adverb-building - ly (exactly, nicely), adjective-building - ly (friendly, weekly); there are a few suffixes - y: adjective-building - y (pricey «дороговатый», fruity «с фруктовым вкусом»), diminutive noun-forming suffix - y (sonny).

Affixes as well as words can be synonymous, e.g. - ent, - ous build adjectives, which denote presence of a quality: intelligent, famous.

Etymology of affixes.

Affixes as well as words are native or borrowed. E.g. - hood, - dom, - ship, etc. are native affixes; - able, - ee, - ess, - ence / ance, - nik (sputnik), - ik (sundayik), etc. are borrowed affixes.

Words including etymologically different morphemes are called hybridsHy. bridism can be illustrated by words refusenik, renew, etc.

8. Conversion

Definition of conversion.

To give the definition of conversion as a way of word-building we must analyse its characteristic features. Cf. the word voice in the following sentences:

1. I hear her voice. - 2. The workers voice their protest.

Linguists pointed out grammatical features distinguishing voice₁ and voice_2. A.I. Smirnitsky pointed out that voice₁ and voice₂ have different paradigms (i.e. a set of grammatical forms). Voice₁ has only two forms in its paradigm: 1) voice, 2) voices. The paradigm of voice₂ includes many forms: 1) voice, 2) voices, 3) voiced, 4) is voicing, 5) has voiced, 6) is voiced, 7) will voice, etc. It shows that voice moved from noun paradigm to verb paradigm. Now that voice₁ and voice₂ have different paradigms they belong to different parts of speech.

I.V. Arnold pointed out the difference in their syntactical environment and function: voice₁ is an object, voice₂ is a predicate.

Besides, these words differ in their lexical meaning: voice₁ denotes a thing and voice₂ denotes an action.

So conversion is the making of a new word in a different part of speech with a different syntactical environment and function, with a different lexical meaning, but without changing the basic form of the original word.

Conversion differs from affixation as in affixation the basic form of the original word is changed, cf. teach - teacher. Conversion contrary to affixation is semantic derivation.

Some linguists (S.D. Katsnelson, M.A. Sternina, etc.) interpret conversion as categorial polysemy.

Semantic relations between the members of a conversion pair.

One of the problems difficult to solve is the question: which member of the conversion pair is the source of conversion and which is the result of conversion?; in other words, which is the «father» of conversion and which is the «child»? - e.g. pale _adj. or pale _v?

The best criterion suggested by linguists is the criterion based on semantic relationships between the members of the conversion pair. At first we shall consider some semantic relationships between the noun and the denominal verb converted from it after the pattern N V.

1) One member of the conversion pair denotes an instrument; the other member denotes the use of this instrument, i.e. instrumental use. Logically we come to the conclusion that the name of the instrument appeared first, and only after that came the name of the action connected with this instrument: pen to pen, radio to radio, pencil to pencil, head to head, eye to eye (She eyed him from head to foot).

2) One member of the conversion pair denotes a place, the other member denotes the action connected with this place: pocket to pocket, table to table.

Next we shall consider some semantic relationships between the verb and the deverbal noun converted from it after the pattern V N.

1) One member of the conversion pair denotes an action, the other member denotes the result of this action: to cut a cut (He had a big cut), hand out handouts, cast off cast-offs.

2) One member of the conversion pair denotes an action, the other member denotes a specific instance of this action: to laugh a laugh (She gave a laugh), to knock a knock, to smile a smile.

Productivity of conversion.

Conversion is very productive in modern English. It is a peculiarly English type of word-building. Apart from denominal verbs converted from nouns, verbs are easily converted from adjectives, e.g. Adj. V: grey to grey. Apart from deverbal nouns converted from verbs, nouns can be converted from adverbs, e.g. Adv. N: abroad the abroad (the near abroad «ближнее зарубежье»).

To express similar semantic relationships Russian resorts to affixation. Cf. English pocket to pocket, Russian «карман» - «прикарманить»; English pale to pale, Russian «бледный» - «бледнеть», etc.

Formation of denominal verbs by conversion is extremely productive. Formation of deverbal nouns is not so productive, it has some restrictions.

There are three kinds of restrictions in the formation of deverbal nouns.

Morphological restrictions. Formation of deverbal nouns is productive with root monosyllabic words: to cut - a cut, to burn - a burn.

Semantic restrictions. Deverbal nouns are converted from the verbs that represent a number of isolated actions. E.g. to walk denotes the action which can be represented as a succession of a few steps, therefore the deverbal noun a walk is converted from it.

Phraseological restrictions. Some deverbal nouns are used only in certain contexts: He is not in the know («не в курсе дела»). He caught a great take of fish. It is of American make.

Formation of denonimal verbs has practically no restrictions: to star in a film, to beach a boat, to stomach an insult «проглотить обиду», to butterfly «слоняться по городу без дела», to surface «подняться на поверхность», to rendezvous in space «осуществить стыковку в космосе». Denonimal verbs can be converted even from compounds: to water-ski «кататься на водных лыжах», to weekend (somewhere), etc.

Nonce words (окказиональные слова). New words in a different part of speech can be created by way of conversion for one occasion only. They are termed nonce words. Nonce words are not registered in dictionaries, they die as soon as they have been created and used. Here are some nonce words:

- Dear … - Don't dear me! (Adj. V); He dears me! (Adj. V); He sirs me! (N V); - But … - No buts! (conjunction N). Even phrases can become a source of nonce words: They my-loved each other! (phrase V), etc.

Conversion and substantivation.

Substantivation is a type of word-building in English and in Russian, cf. Russian «красный, белый, больной, столовая» - English relatives, sweets, natives, hand-mades, two-year-olds, etc. Substantivation is a type of word-building in which an adjective or participle stem functions as a noun, i.e. acquires features of a noun: an article, plural form and the form of the possessive case, syntactical functions and environment peculiar to a noun. E.g. in the sentence He is a relative. the adjective relative functions as a noun, i.e. it is used with the indefinite article, has the syntactical function of a predicative.

Conversion and substantivation are alike - they are types of word-building in which a new word is built in a different part of speech without changing the basic form of the original word. Therefore some linguists, e.g. I.V. Arnold, claim that substantivation is a kind of conversion.

But there is some difference between conversion and substantivation. In conversion the word acquires a new paradigm, a new syntactical function and environment at once, while in substantivation they are acquired gradually, through a very long use for centuries.

So the way from an adjective or participle to a substantivised noun is very long and some adjectives and participles are at present only on halfway to noun, i.e. they have acquired not all, but only some features of a noun. This phenomenon is termed partial substantivation. For example the young, the rich, the poor can be used to describe many people, but if we want to speak about one person we must add the word man: a rich man, a poor man, a young man. So the adjectives young, rich, poor are partially substantivised as they have acquired only a few features of a noun: they can be used with the definite article and have syntactical functions of a noun. But they cannot be used with the definite article and have neither plural nor possessive forms. The substantivised participle the coloured has acquired, apart from syntactical features of a noun, two morphological features of a noun: it is used with the indefinite article and has the plural form: the coloureds. But this substantivised participle cannot be used with the indefinite article to describe one person. To express this idea we should add the word man: a coloured man.

9. Word-composition

General characteristics of word-composition.

Word-composition is the formation of words by joining together two or more stems

Word-composition is a productive type of word-building. Compared with other languages English word-composition has some specific features:

1) stems of English compounds are mainly free morphemes (e.g. headmaster, schoolmaster, etc.), while in Russian compounds stems are mainly bound morphemes (cf. railway - железнодорожный);

2) the majority of English compounds have two stems, while German compounds can consist of many more stems.

The problem of distinction between a compound word and a word-group.

The problem arises as compound words and word-groups display similarity: structural, phonetical and graphical similarity.

1. Structural similarity is displayed in the following. 1) Both compound words and word-groups consist of free elements (free morphemes): in compound words they are stems, in word-groups they are words. 2) Many compound words and word-groups are built after the same patterns: Adj. + N (cf. blackbird - black bird); N + N (cf. ice-cream - cream cake); V + N (cf. pickpocket - pick flowers), etc.

To begin with we shall compare two units: the free word-group dirty board «грязная доска» and the compound word blackboard «классная доска». The free word-group admits of some changes which show that components of a free word-group are structurally independent and separable: 1) components of the free word-group dirty board can be separated, we can say a dirty black board; 2) each word can be replaced by some other word, e.g. long board, dirty table; 3) an intensifier can be added to the first word, e.g. very dirty board. All this shows that components of a free word-group are independent, i.e. they possess structural separability.

On the other hand components of the compound word blackboard cannot be separated. We cannot describe the classroom object called blackboard as «black and large board»,» very blackboard», or «greyboard». Consequently we can conclude that compound words are characterised by structural inseparability, while free word-groups are characterised by structural separability. So the criterion of structural inseparability helps distinguish between a compound word and a word-group.

Phonetically there are three types of compound words.

1) Compound words of the first type («classical compounds») possess the unity stress. They are easily distinguished from word-groups which are as a rule characterised by the level stress; cf. 'blackbird «дрозд» - 'black 'bird «черная птица»; 'blackberry «черная смородина, ежевика» - 'black 'berry «черная ягода».

2) Compound words of the second type possess the double stress: 'blue-jacket (sailor), 'red-?coat (a British soldier of old times), 'baby-sitter. The double stress can serve as a criterion in distinguishing compound words and free word-groups because the latter are characterised by the level stress.

3) Compound words of the third type as well as word-groups possess the level stress, cf. 'black-'eye «синяк» - 'black 'eyes; the level stress characterises compound adjectives: 'easy-'going, 'new-'born, etc.

So not all the types of compound words can be distinguished from word-groups on the basis of the phonetical criterion; this criterion is most suitable for the first type, i.e. classical compounds characterised by the unity stress. The unity stress shows that compound words are characterised by phonetical inseparability.

Graphically three types of compound words are distinguished.

1) Classical compounds are characterised by solid spelling, e.g. blackboard.

2) Compounds of the second group are spelt with a hyphen, e.g. blue-jacket, red-coat, baby-sitter.

3) Compounds of the third group are spelt with a break like phrases: loud speaker, etc.

So the criterion of English spelling is not very much reliable. Some units have two or three graphical variants, cf. headmaster - head-master - head master; Thank you - thank-you - thankyou. Only compounds of the first group (classical compounds) are characterised by graphical inseparability. The analysis of structural, phonetical and graphical inseparability brings us to the conclusion that the most reliable criterion of distinguishing between compound words and word-groups is the criterion of structural inseparability.

The problem of distinguishing between compound words and word-groups is still more complicated due to the productivity of the patterns N + N and V + postposition.

In modern English many new units are built after the pattern N + N; they are spelt differently: moon walk «выход на поверхность луны», spacewoman, catwalk «подиум для моделей», King size, etc. The question arises whether units of the type silk dress, geography teacher are words or phrases. Similar questions boil down to the so-called «stone wall» problem. Linguists came to the conclusion that the borderline between nominal compounds and nominal phrases is not distinct. Diachronically nominal phrases develop unity of meaning and change into compound words. Many compound words came into use as phrases, e.g. God be with you > good-bye.

Units built after the pattern V + postposition (give up, give in, lie back «отклониться в кресле», fall off «сваливаться» [например, о ботинке], act out [the dialogue], try out «испытать» [a new method on smb.], etc.) also present a certain difficulty as they display semantic unity like compound words but possess features of a word-group. To answer the question whether units of this type are compounds or phrases we must see if they are characterised by inseparability. The analysis shows that

1) they are not characterised by graphical inseparability because they are spelt as two words;

2) they are not characterised by phonetical inseparability because each of the two components is stressed: 'put 'on, 'come 'in;

3) they are not characterised by structural inseparability because

- two components can be separated, cf. think over the problem, but think it over; Take off the coat, but Take it off;

grammatical inflexion also separates the two components, cf. He gives up…, He looked up…, but: He whitewashed…

The consequent conclusion is that units of give in, put on type are not compound words but phrases.

Classification of compounds.

Compound words can be classified according to various principles.

Grammatical classification includes the following groups:

compound verbs (to whitewash);

compound nouns (sweet-tooth);

compound adjectives (snow-white);

compound numerals (twenty-two).

Structural classification includes the following groups:

compounds built by means of the juxtaposition of stems.

Juxtaposition of stems is joining two or more stems without any linking element. There are four kinds of juxtaposition of stems in a compound word:

- juxtaposition of non-derived stems (snow-white, heartburn «изжога»);

- juxtaposition of a non-derived and a derived stems (head-teacher);

- juxtaposition of a non-derived and an abbreviated stems (A-level, H-bomb, H-bag (hand bag), A-bomb, TV-show);

- juxtaposition of phonetically similar stems forming reduplicative compounds (bye-bye, ping-pong, tip-top «первоклассный», wishy-washy «жидкий», sing-song «монета», сriss-cross «перекресток»). Juxtaposition of phonetically similar stems or words is often found in Russian too, e.g. «тип-топ», «дурак-дураком», «нос к носу»;

compound derivatives (a.k.a. «derivational compounds») formed by adding a word-building suffix to a compound stem: blue-eyed, light-minded, reform-minded, dog-eared. Compound stem is the stem consisting in its turn of two stems (cf. a simple root stem in worker). These derivational compounds are built after the pattern: Compound stem + - ed, e.g. blue-eye + ed. They are derivational compounds, but not compound words because eyed, minded, eared do not exist as words. Russian words «длинноногий», «голубоглазый» are also derivational compounds but not compound words because «ногий», «глазый» do not exist. On the other hand words of the shoe-maker type are compound words built after the pattern: a non-derived stem + a derived stem.

Many derivational compounds are built in English after the pattern compound stem + - er, e.g. sit-downer (a person taking part in a sit-down demonstration), baby-sitter, hard-liner, do-gooder. There are other suffixes forming derivational compounds, e.g. horsemanship «верховая езда»;

compounds built by means of the linking elements: - o-, - i-, - s - (gasometer, Indo-China, Anglo-Russian; handicraft; sportsman, salesman, saleswoman, statesman);

compounds which are termed «lexicalized phrases»; they consist of more than two stems (up-to-date, out-of-door, man-of-war «военный корабль», good-for-nothing [the elements - to-, - of-, - for - are not independent words, they are stems], forget-me-not).

Structural and semantic correlation between the stems of a compound word.