CC BY
66WORD-FORMATION IS ONE OF THE WAYS OF ENRICHING THE ENGLISH
TERMINOLOGY
D.U. Seytova1
Abstract
This article is dedicated to the investigation of word- formation is one of the ways of enriching the English terminology to the ways in which new words are formed, and the factors, which govern their acceptance into the language, are generally taken very much for granted by the average speaker.
Key words: language, investigate, relationship, new, adjective, concept, produc-tive.
Our article provides a good overviewed of a few of the main word formation processes found in the English language. Word-formation describes the processes of creating new terms in the language. This does not mean, however, that word- formation only describes how words are created on the basis of concepts new to us, current speakers of the language. It also does not mean that we cognitively "form" these new terms every time we use them. Instead it investigates past and present means for creating words in languages; that is some of these means may not be in use any longer. For example, the -ly in friendly or ghostly is no longer used to create new adjectives. But understanding the way in which the word was formed a new at one point in the past helps us see the relationship with other word. For example, in the word ghostly we can see that it was originally derived from the stem ghost and the ending -ly. Other means are still used frequently in English, such as the ending -ness discussed in the article. By the way, it is also helpful to know that rules such as the -ness rule for creating new terms are called productive because we can produce new linguistic forms with them at present. The ways in which new words are formed, and the factors, which govern their acceptance into the language, are generally taken very much for granted by the average speaker. To understand a word, it is not necessary to know how it is constructed, whether it is simple or complex, that is, whether or not it can be broken down into two or more constituents. We are able to use a word, which is a new to us when we find out what object or notion it denotes. Some terms, of course, are more "transparent" than others. For example, in the words unfathomable and indescribable we recognize the familiar pattern of negative prefix +transitive word+ adjective-forming suffix on which many words of similar form are constructed. Knowing the pattern, we can easily guess their meanings - "can not be formed" and "can not be described"- although we are not surprised to find other similar-looking terms, for instance unfashionable and unfavorable for which this analysis will not work.
Many linguists agree over the fact that the subject of word-formation has not until recently received very much attention from descriptive grammarians of English, or from scholars working in the field of general linguistics. As a collection of different processes (compounding, affixation, conversion, backformation, etc) about which, as a group, it is difficult to make general statements.
As a subject of study, word-formation is that branch of lexicology which studies the patterns on which a language, in this case the English language, builds new word. It is self-evident that word-formation can deal only with words which are analyzable both structurally and semantically. The study of the simple term has no place in it. Therefore, writer, displease, atom-free, etc. are relevant to word-formation, but to write, to please, atom, free are not. Like any other linguistic phenomenon word-formation may be studied from two angles-synchronically and diachronically. It is necessary to distinguish between these two approaches, for synchronically the linguist investigates the present-day system of the types of word-formation while diachronically he is concerned with the history of word building. To illustrate the difference of approach we
гСейтова Дамегуль Утарбаевна -кандидат филологических наук, доцент кафедры английского языка и литературы, Каракалпакский государственный университет им. Бердаха, Узбекистан.
YneHbiH XXI BeKa • 2020 • № 12-1 (71)
shall consider affixation. Synchronically a derived word is structurally and semantically more complex than a simple one, while diachronically it was formed from some other term. On the synchronic plane a derived word is regarded as having a more complex structure than its correlated simple word, regardless of the fact whether it was derived from a simple a stem or not. While analysing and describing word-formation synchronically it isn't enough to extract the relevant structural elements from a word, describe I structure in terms of word-formation; it is absolutely necessary to determine position of the constituents within the structural system of the language as a whole. Productivity of a derivative type therefore cannot be overlooked in the description. Some of the ways of forming words in present day English can be resorted to for the creation of new terms whenever occasion demands - these are called productive ways of forming words; other ways of forming words can not be now produce new words, and these are commonly termed non-productive or unproductive. For instance, affixation has been productive way of forming words ever since the Old English period. The available linguistic literature on the subject cites various types and ways of forming words and they are described here. A very common way to form words is affixation.
Affixation means that a bound morpheme is attached to a free morpheme, or stem. There are three places where the bound morpheme can go: before, after, or in the middle of the stem. The affixes that go before the stem are called prefixes (from Latin pre-=before). The ones that go after the stem are referred to as suffixes (from Latin sub-=under). And the affixes that go in the middle are labeled infixes. Examples for pre- and suffixes are plentiful in English. For example, such words as unhappy, unlock. preexist and doubtfUl, lockable, or lovely for pre- and suffixes respectively. We also want to stress that the combination of several affixes a row does not make the affixes closer to the stem infixes. For example, the ending -ist in realistic is not an infix but a suffix.
Affixation is a generally defined as the formation of words by adding derivational affixes to different types of bases. Derived words formed by affixation may be the result of one or several applications of word-formation rule and thus the stems of words making up a word cluster enter into derivational relations of different degrees. The zero degree of derivation is ascribed to simple words, i.e. words whose stem is homonymous with a word form and often with a root-morpheme (e.g. atom, haste, devote, anxious, horror etc). Derived words formed by two consecutive stages of coining possess the second degree of derivation (e.g. atomically, hastily, devotional, etc.) and so forth.
In conformity with the division of derivational affixes into suffixes and prefixes affixation is subdivided into suffixation and prefixation. Distinction is naturally made between prefixal and suffixal derivatives according to the Last stage of derivation, which determines the nature of the derived word with its motivating source unit, e.g. unjust (un+just), justify (just+-ify), arrangement (arrange + - ment), non-smoker (non + smoker).
Words like reappearance, unreasonable, denationalize, are often qualified as prefixal-suffixal derivatives. R.S Ginzburg insists that this classification is relevant only in terms of the constituent morphemes such words are made up of, i.e. from the angle of morphemic analysis. From the point of view of derivational analysis, such words are mostly either suffixal or prefixal derivatives, e.g. sub-atomic = sub- +(atom+ -ic), unreasonable = un- + (reason+ -able), denationalize = de- + (national+ -ize), discouragement= (dis - + courage) + - ment.
A careful study of a great many suffixal and prefixal derivatives has revealed an essential differences between them. In modern English, suffixation is mostly characteristic of noun and adjective formation, while prefixation is mostly typical of verb formation. The distinction also rests on the role different types of meaning play in the semantic structure of the suffix and the prefix.
The part of the speech meaning has a much greater significance in suffixes as compared to prefixes which possess it in a lesser degree. Due to it, a prefix may be confined to one part of speech as, for example, enslave, encage, unbutton or may function in more that one part of speech as over- in overkind, overfeed, overestimation. Unlike prefixes, suffixes as a rule function in any one part of speech often forming a derived stem of a different part of speech as compared with that of the base, e.g. careless-care; suitable-suit, etc. Furthermore, it is necessary to point out that a suffix closely knit together with a base forms a fusion retaining less of its in dependence that a prefix which
is as a general rule more independent semantically, e.g. reading - : the act of one who reads"; "ability to read"; and to re - red - "to red again".
Compounding is another common word formation process. It is probably the most common one in today's English because it is so productively used in technical languages. Compounding is a process whereby two or more individual words are combined as one word. There are several examples given, and they are easy to find in real life as well. For example this is a compound noun "itself". Here are a few examples of what I found: beginning intersect point, exit light fixture symbol, column centerline grid, default Project Architect support directory, and delete project menu. The last example even has a verb (delete) in it. The next way of word-formation is called supple-tion.
Suppletion is a bit tricky but is also rare in English. It is the result of a historical process frozen in time. Briefly, historically there were two words with similar meanings in the language, typically used in different dialects. Over time, the two words merged into one paradigm. For example, in an earlier stage of English there were two words for to be, wesan and eom. These two were combined into one, and forms of both formed the paradigm for to be. Understanding this process fully is not important for teaching English, however, because suppletion is uncommon and its forms can be memorized.
Blending: A blend is a combination of the parts of two words, usually the beginning of one word and the end of another: smog from smoke and fog, brunch from breakfast and lunch, and chortle from chuckle and snort. (Lewis Carroll invented this blend, and his poem "Jabberwocky" contains several other examples of interesting blends. Carroll called them "portmanteau words").
Borrowing: Foreign terms are always being "borrowed" onto other languages, especially to accompany new ideas, inventions, products, and so on. When speakers imitate a word from a foreign language and at least partly adapt it in sound or grammar to their native speech patters, the process is called "borrowing", and the word thus borrowed is a "loanword". A few examples: alcohol (Arabic), boss (Dutch), croissant (French), lilac (Persian), piano (Italian), pretzel (German), robot (Czech), tycoon (Japa-nese),yoghurt (Turkish), zebra (Bantu).
A special type of borrowing is described as "loan-translation" or "calque". In this process, there is a direct translation of the elements of a word into the borrowing language. For example: English hot dogs becomes Spanish perros calientes, English skyscraper becomes French le grate - ciel.
Backformation: Backformation is a word formed by subtraction of a real or supposed affix from an already existing longer word (as burgle from burglar) Backformation is a term borrowed from diachronic linguistics. Backformation makes use of a process called analogy to derive new words, but in a rather backwards manner, that is from an older word that is mistakenly assumed to be a derivative of it. For example, we have words such as revision and revise and supervision and supervise. Revision is formed by regular derivation from revision+ion. When television was invented, the verb televise was back formed on the basis of analogy with revision and revise, that is:
Revision: revise: television: X [Examples from Merriam - Webster's collegiate dictionary. Merriam - Webster, Incorporated: 193].
To cite another example, the verb donate was formed on the basis of pairs such as creation - create. We borrowed donation from French and back formed donate.
Creation: create: donation: X
Another example, in the original the final consonant [-z] of pease is not, as it seems to the ear to be, the English plural suffix -s. It is, in fact, not a suffix at all.
But by the 17th century, pease was mistaken for a plural, and a new singular, pea, was derived from a word that was itself a singular, precisely as if we were to derive a form *chee from cheese just as we have one pea, two peas.
One very regular source of back-formed verbs in English is based on the pattern: worker-work. The assumption seems to have been that if there is a noun ending in -er (or something close in sound), then we can create a verb for what noun -er does. Hence, an editor must edit, a sculptor must sculpt, and burglars, peddlers, and swindlers must burgle, peddle and swindle.
Acronyms: these words are formed by taking the initial sounds or letters of the words of a phrase and uniting them into a combination that is itself pronounceable as a
Ученый XXI века • 2020 • № 12-1 (71)
separate word. Thus NATO is an acronym for North Atlantic treaty Organization, laser for light amplification through the stimulated emission of radiation, and radar for radio detection and ranging.
Clipping: Frequently we shorten words without paying attention to the derivational morphology of the word 9 or related terms). We see here again the element of reduction, already seen in blending. Exam has been clipped from examination, dorm from dormitory, and both taxi and cab from taxi cab (itself clipping from taximeter cabriolet). Because clipping often ignores lexical and morphemic boundaries and cuts instead in the middle of a morpheme, we end up
creating new morphemes and enriching the stock of potential building material for making other terms.
Coinage: terms may also be created without using any of the methods described above and without employing any other term or word parts already in existence; that is, they may be created out of thin air. Such brand names as Xerox, Kodak, and Exxon were made up without reference to any other word, as were the common words pooch and snob. Also called "root creation".
Conversion or Functional Shift: conversion, one of the principal ways of forming words in Modern English, is highly productive in replenishing the English wordstock with new terms. A new word may be created simply by shifting from one part of speech to another one without changing the form of the term - without adding any affixes. Laugh, run, buy, steal are used as nouns as well as verbs, while position, process, contrast are nouns from which verbs have been formed.
References
1. В.И. Кодухов. Введение в языкознание. М.: Просвещение, 1987.
© D.U. Seytova, 2020.
