The functional aspect of w-d-building system: productivity and activity. The main means of w-d-building in E

Productivity is the ability of w-d form. means, derivational patterns & der-l affixes to make new w-ds. If the L needs them & which all who speak E find no difficulty in understanding, in part. their ability to create nonce-w-ds or occasional w-ds.

3 degrees of productivity: highly productive, semi-productive, non-productive.

The productivity of an affix should not be confused with its frequency which is a synchronic characteristic and means the existence in the voc-ry of a great number of w-ds containing the morpheme in question. An affix may occur in a great number of words, but if it is not used to form new ones, it is not productive. Such is for instance the case with the noun-forming suffix -th and its allomorph –t (which may be traced back to OE and is combined with adjective steins: health, growth (OE yowan). Dead suffix is disclosed by etymological analysis, (d-deed, nd-friend, k-walk, red-hatred).

Activity is a qualitative standard. Some suf-s are quantitative (-ee, -ster, -assy) are quantitative, but they’re not active. Productivity is a quantitative standard. Active pattern is a pattern which is working now, not necessarily popular (prioritize, philosophize). If an affix is working hard, it’ll soon be productive.

Synchronically the most important and the most productive ways of w-d-formation are affixation, conversion, w-d-composition and abbreviation. In the course of time the productivity of this or that way of w-d-formation may change. Sound interchange or gradation (blood - to bleed, to abide -abode, to strike - stroke) was a productive way of w-d building in old E. and is important for a diachronic study of the E. l-ge. It has lost its productivity in Modern E. and no new w-d can be coined by means of sound gradation. Affixation on the contrary was productive in Old E. and is still one of the most productive ways of w-d building in Modern E.

The most productive English prefixes and some new words containing them are: de- (decontaminate), re- (rethink, rearrange, re-train), pre- (prefabricate), non-(non-operational), un- (unfunny, unguarded, unheard-of, unsound, uncool), anti- (antibiotic).

The most pro­ductive noun suffixes, besides the highly productive -ing, -ness and -er with their almost unlimited valency, are -ation (automation), -ee (evacuee), -ism (racialism), -ist (racialist), -ry (gimmickry), and also -or (reactor), -ance, -ancy (redundancy), -ics (cybernetics) and some others in technical neologisms. The verb-forming suffixes are only three. -ate, -ify, -ise, -ize, they are all equally productive and form mostly words having special terminological meaning (oxidate, denazify, vitaminize), The productive adjective-forming suffixes are -able, -ed, -ic, -isft, -less, -y: manoeuvrable, ultra-heat-treated, electronic, smartish, jobless, tweedy.

Suffixes & prefixes are extremely selective. Some are never attached to foreign bases (side ward), others (-id, -ory) are never attached to native bases.

The great number of new compound nouns are formed after n + n = N

The bi-directional nature of productive derivational patterns of special interest in connecting with back-derivation as a source of new verbs. Many new backderived verbs are often stylistically marked as colloquial; enthuse from enthusiasm, playact from play-acting, tongue-tie from tongue-tied etc.

Occasional (potential w-ds) built on the analogy with the most productive types of derived and compound w-ds,easily understood and never striking one as “unusual” or “new” they are so numerous that it is impossible not to use them every day. (from the compound noun sit-in formed by analogy teach-in, study-in, talk-in).

10.Affixation in contemporary English

Affixation is 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 whose bases are built on simple stems and thus are formed by the application of one derivational affix are described as having the first degree of derivation, e.g. atomic, hasty, devotion, etc. Derived words formed by two consecutive stages of coining possess the second degree of derivation, etc., e.g. atomical, hastily, devotional, etc.

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 ICs of the pattern that signals the relationship of the derived word with its motivating source unit, cf. unjust (un-+ just), justify, (just+ ify), arrangement (arrange + -ment), non-smoker (non- + smoker). Words like reappearance, unreasonable, denationalise, are often qualified as prefixal-suffixal derivatives. The reader should clearly realise that this qualification 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), denationalise = de- + + (national + -ize), discouragement = (dis- + courage) + -ment.

A careful study of a great many suffixal and prefixal derivatives has revealed an essential difference 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.¹ The part-of-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, e.g., enslave, encage, unbutton or may function in more than one part of speech as, e.g., over- in overkind a, to overfeed v, overestimation n; 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 a — cf. care n; suitable a — cf. suit v, etc. Furthermore, it is necessary to point out that a suffix closely knit together with a base forms a fusion retaining less of its independence than a prefix which is as a general rule more independent semantically, cf. reading — ‘the act of one who reads’; ‘ability to read’; and to re-read — ‘to read again.'

Поиск по сайту: