АвтоАвтоматизацияАрхитектураАстрономияАудитБиологияБухгалтерияВоенное делоГенетикаГеографияГеологияГосударствоДомДругоеЖурналистика и СМИИзобретательствоИностранные языкиИнформатикаИскусствоИсторияКомпьютерыКулинарияКультураЛексикологияЛитератураЛогикаМаркетингМатематикаМашиностроениеМедицинаМенеджментМеталлы и СваркаМеханикаМузыкаНаселениеОбразованиеОхрана безопасности жизниОхрана ТрудаПедагогикаПолитикаПравоПриборостроениеПрограммированиеПроизводствоПромышленностьПсихологияРадиоРегилияСвязьСоциологияСпортСтандартизацияСтроительствоТехнологииТорговляТуризмФизикаФизиологияФилософияФинансыХимияХозяйствоЦеннообразованиеЧерчениеЭкологияЭконометрикаЭкономикаЭлектроникаЮриспунденкция

Correlation Types of Compounds

Читайте также:
  1. B) minor types
  2. C. Syntactic compounds.
  8. Correlation between Compounds and Free Phrases
  9. Different types of classification of English idioms.

The description of compound words through the correlation with variable word-groups makes it possible to classify them into four major classes: adjectival-nominal, verbal-nominal, nominal and verb-adverb compounds.

I. Adjectival-nominal comprise four subgroups of compound adjectives, three of them are proper compounds and one derivational. All four subgroups are productive and semantically as a rule motivated. The main constraint on the productivity in all the four subgroups is the lexical-semantic types of the head-members and the lexical valency of the head of the correlated word-groups.

Adjectival-nominal compound adjectives have the following patterns,

1) the polysemantic n+a pattern that gives rise to two types:

a) compound adjectives based on semantic relations of resemblance with adjectival bases denoting most frequently colours, size, shape, etc. for the second IC. The type is correlative with phrases of comparative type as A +as + N, e.g. snow-white, skin-deep, age-long, etc.

b) compound adjectives based on a variety of adverbial relations. The type is correlative with one of the most productive adjectival phrases of the A + prp + N type and consequently semantically varied, of. colour-blind, road-weary, care-free, etc.

2) the monosemantic pattern n+vea based mainly on the instrumen-




tal, locative and temporal relations between the ICs which are conditioned by the lexical meaning and valency of the verb, e.g. state-owned, home-made. The type is highly productive. Correlative relations are established with word-groups of the Ven+ with/by + N type.

3) the monosemantic num + n pattern which gives rise to a small and peculiar group of adjectives, which are used only attributively, e.g. (a) two-day (beard), (a)seven-day (week), etc. The type correlates with attributive phrases with a numeral for their first member.

4) a highly productive monosemantic pattern of derivational compound adjectives based on semantic relations of possession conveyed by the suffix -ed. The basic variant is [(a+n)+ -ed], e.g. low-ceilinged, long-legged. The pattern has two more varfants: [(num. + n) + -ed], i(n+n)+ -edle.g. one-sided, bell-shaped, doll-faced. The type correlates accordingly with phrases with (having) + A + N, with (having) + Num + N, with +N + N or with + N + of + N.

The system of productive types of compound adjectives is summarized in Table 2. The three other types are classed as compound nouns. Verbal-nominal and nominal represent compound nouns proper and verb-adverb .derivational compound nouns. All the three types are productive.

II. Verbal-nominal compounds may be described through one derivational structure n+na, i e. a combination of a noun-base (in most cases simple) with a deverbal suffixal noun-base. The structure includes four patterns differing in -the character of the deverbal noun-stem and accordingly in the semantic subgroups of compound nouns. All the patterns correlate in the final analysis with V+N and V+prp+N type which depends on the lexical nature of the verb:

1) (n+(v+er)], e.g. bottle-opener, stage-manager, peace-fighter. The pattern is monosemantic and is based on agentive relations that can be interpreted 'one/that/who does smth.2) [n+(v+ -ing)], e.g. stage-managing, rocket-flying. The pattern is monosemantic and may be interpreted as the act of doing smth'. The pattern has some constraints on its productivity which largely depends on the lexical and etymological character of the verb,

3) [n+(v+-tion/ment)], e.g. office-management, price-reduction. The pattern is a variant of the above-mentioned pattern (No 2). It has a heavy constraint which is embedded in the lexical and etymological character of the verb that does not permit collocability with the suffix -ing for deverbal nouns.

4) [n+(v + conversion)], e.g. wage-cut, dog-bite, hand-shake, the pattern is based on semantic relations of result, instance, agent, etc.

III. Nominal c o m p o u n d s are all nouns with the most polysemantic and highly-productive derivational pattern n+n; both bases are generally simple stems, e.g., windmill, horse-race, pencil-case. The pattern conveys a variety of semantic relations, the most frequent are the relations of purpose, partitive, local and temporal relations. The pattern correlates with nominal word-groups of the N+prp+N type.

IV. Verb-adverb compounds are all derivational nouns, highly productive and built with the help of conversion according to the



[1] See 'Various aspects...', § 6, p. 180


[2] Here and elsewhere definitions of the meanings of words are borrowed from a number of English explanatory dictionaries, such as the Concise Oxford Dictionary, Oxford Advanced Learner's Dictionary of Current English by A. S. Hprnby, L., 1974 and others.

[3] Each part of speech is characterized by a paradigm of its own. Nouns are declined, verbs conjugated, qualitative adjectives have degrees of comparison. Some adverbs also have degrees of comparison (e.g. well, badly, etc.), others are immutable (e.g. here, there, never). Word-forms constituting a paradigm may be both synthetic and analytic. Unlike synthetic forms an analytic form is composed of two separate components (cf. (he) takes ... and (he) has taken .. .). In some cases the system of word-forms combines different roots (cf. to go – went – gone; good – better – best).


[4] The symbol ( ) stands for the so-called zero-inflection, i.e. the significant absence of an inflectional affix.

[5] Pairs of vocabulary items like economic – economical, historic – historical differing in meaning cannot be regarded as morphological variants.


[6] See 'Introduction', § 1.,

[7] Sometimes the term semantics is used too, but in Soviet linguistics preference is given to s e m a s i о l o g у as the word semantics is often used to designate one of the schools of modern idealistic philosophy and is also found as a synonym of meaning.

[8] D. Bolinger. Getting the Words In. Lexicography in English, N. Y., 1973.

[9] See, e. g., the discussion of various concepts of meaning in modern linguistics in: Л. С. Бархударов. Язык и перевод. М., 1975, с. 50 – 70,

[10] As terminological confusion has caused much misunderstanding and often makes it difficult to grasp the semantic concept of different linguists we find it necessary to mention the most widespread terms used in modern linguistics to denote the three components described above:

sound-form – concept – referent

symbol – thought or reference – referent

sign – meaning – thing meant

sign – designatum – denotatum

[11] See, e. g., L. Bloomfield. Language. N. Y., 1933, p. 139.

[12] А. И. Смирницкий. Значение слова. – Вопр. языкознания, 1955, № 2. See also С. И. Ожегов. Лексикология, лексикография, культура речи. М., 1974, с. 197/

[13] By the term distribution we understand the position of a linguistic unit in relation to other linguistic units.


[14] It is of interest to note that the functional approach is sometimes described as contextual, as it is based on the analysis of various contexts. See, e. g., St. Ullmann. Semantics. Oxford, 1962, pp. 64-67.

[15] For a more detailed discussion of the interrelation of the lexical and grammatical meaning in words see § 7 and also A. И.Смерницкий. Лексикология английского языка. M., 1956, c. 21 – 26.

[16] See the stylistic classification of the English vocabulary in: /. R. Galperin. Stylistics. M., 1971, pp. 62-118.

[17] It should be pointed out that the interdependence and interrelation of the emotive and stylistic component of meaning is one of the debatable problems in semasiology. borne linguists go so far as to claim that the stylistic reference of the word lies outside the scope of its meaning. (See, e. g., В. А. Звегинцев. Семасиология. М-, 1957, с. 167 – 185).

[18] Compare the Russian equivalents: женственный – женский – женоподобный, бабий.

[19] See 'Word-Structure', § 2, p. 90.


[20] А. И. Смирницкий. Лексикология английского языка. М., 1956, с, 18 – 20.

[21] See St. Ullmann. The Principles of Semantics. Chapter 8, Oxford, 1963

[22] See 'Semasiology', § 19, p. 27.

[23] For details see 'Semasiology', § 29, p. 36.

[24] десять заповедей (библ.)

[25] In dictionaries ear (L. auris) and ear (L. acus, aceris) are usually treated as two homonymous words as dictionary compilers as a rule go by etymological criterion.

[26] There are several terms used to denote approximately the same concepts: basic (m a j о r) m e a n i n g as opposed to minor meanings or central as opposed to marginal meanings. Here the terms are used interchangeably.

[27] All data concerning semantic frequencies are reproduced from M, A. West. General Service List of English Words. London, 1959.

[28] See 'Semasiolegy', § 1, p. 13

[29] Not only words but other linguistic units may be homonymous. Here, however, we are concerned with the homonymy of words and word-forms only, so we shall not touch upon the problem of homonymous affixes or homonymous phrases.

[30] See ‘Semansiology’, § 23, p. 31.

[31] See ‘Introduction’, § 2.

[32] See 'Semasiology', § 4, p. 18.

[33] See 'Semasiology', §§ 45-50, pp. 51-61.

[34] See also 'Methods and Procedures of Lexicological Analysis', § 4, p. 246.

[35] See 'Semasiology', § 3, p. 17. Conventional symbols habitually used in distributional patterns are as follows

N – stands for nouns or their functional equivalents, e.g. personal pronouns.

V – stands for verbs except auxiliary and modal verbs (be, have, shall, etc.).

A – stands for adjectives or their functional equivalents, e.g. ordinal numerals.

D – stands for adverbs or their functional equivalents, e.g. at home.

[36] St. Ullmann. Semantics. Oxford, 1962, pp. 130, 131. See also 'Semasiology', § 8, p. 20.

[37] In practical language learning thematic groups are often listed under various headings, e. g. "At the Theatre", "At School", "Shopping", and are often found in textbooks and courses of conversational English.

[38] See, e. g., Roget's Thesaurus of English Words and Phrases, London, 1973.

[39] See 'Methods ... ', § 6, p. 216.

[40] See 'Semasiology1, § 41, p. 48

[41] See also 'Methods ...',§ 5, p. 214.

[42] See 'Semasiology', §§ 40-42, p. 47-50.

[43] See also St. Ullmann. The Principles of Semantics. Glasgow, 1957, p. 108.

[44] R. Quirk. The Use of English. London, 1962, p. 129.

[45] In Modern English both words have lost this meaning. See also 'Semasiology', § 15, p. 24.

[46] Roget's Thesaurus of English Words and Phrases London, 1962.

[47] See, e. g., Webster's Dictionary of Synonyms. Springfield, USA, 1961, Introductory Matter, Antonyms. Analysis and Definition.

[48] See 'Introduction', §§ 4, 5.

[49] See 'Semasiology', §41, p. 48.

[50] See, e. g., R. Quirk, op. cit., p. 206. 'It is self-evident that cliches are of great importance in practical language learning as speech is not so much the mastery of Vocabulary as such, but acquisition of a set of speech habits in using word-groups in general and cliches in particular.'

[51] See 'Semasiology', § 42, p. 49.

[52] This classification was the issue of heated discussion in Soviet linguistics. It was argued that the so-called predicative word-groups actually comprise the subject and the predicate, i.e. the main components of the sentence and should be regarded as syntactical rather than lexical units. Here we are concerned only with non-predicative word-groups.

[53] See 'Semasiology', §§ 15, 16, p. p. 24, 25,

[54] See 'Semasiology', §§ 41-45, p. 48-53.

[55] See 'Semasiology', § 17, p. 25.

[56] It should be recalled that the first attempt to place the study of various word-groups on a scientific basis was made by the outstanding Russian linguist A. A. Schachmatov in his world-famous book Syntax. Schachmatov's. work was continued by Academician V. V. Vinogradov whose approach to phraseology is discussed below. Investigation of English phraseology was initiated in our country by prof. A. V. Kunm (A. B. Kyнин. Англо-русский фразеологический словарь. М., 1955). See also A, V. /Си/т-English Idioms. 3d ed. M., 1967.

[57] Cf., e. g., the interpretation of these terms in the textbooks on lexicology by I. V. Arnold, A. I. Smirnitsky and in A. V. Kunm's Англо-русский фразеологический словарь. М., 1967.

[58] For a different interpretation of the term idiom see: А. И. Смирницкий. Лексикология английского языка. М., 1956.

[59] This approach to English phraseology is closely bound up with the research work carried out in the field of Russian phraseology by Academician V. V. Vinogradov. See Русский язык. Грамматическое учение о слове. Учпедгиз. Л., 1947.

[60] This classification was suggested by Academician V, V. Vinogradov.

[61] See 'Word-Groups and Phraseological Units', § 1, p. 64. Here the terms phraseological collocations and habitual collocations are used synonymously.

[62] Cf., e.g., The Advanced Learner's Dictionary by A. Hornby, E. Gatenby, H. Wake-held; The Universal English Dictionary by H. Wyld and A General Service List of English Words with Semantic Frequencies by M. West.

[63] See 'Word-Groups and Phraseological Units', § 1, p. 64.

[64] This approach and the ensuing classification were suggested by Prof. A. I. Smirnitsky in his monograph "Лексикология английского языка". М., 1956.

[65] See 'Word-Groups and Phraseological Units', § 4, p. 68.

[66] Idiomaticity in the functional approach is understood as intralingual phenomenon.

[67] It should be noted that the status of give up and structurally similar groups as phraseological units is doubted by some linguists who regard up in give up as a particle but not as a word, and consequently the whole is viewed not as a word-group but as a single composite verb. See, e.g., I. V. Arnold. The English Word, M., 1973, pp. 144,145.

[68] Definitions are reproduced from V. H. Collins. A Book of English Idioms. London, I960,

[69] This approach is suggested by Prof. N. N. Amosova in her book Основы английской фразеологии. ЛГУ, 1963, and later on elaborated in "English Contextology", L., 1968.

[70] See проф. А. И. Смирниикий. Лексикология английского языка. М., 1956. §§254, 255.

[71] This approach is suggested and worked out by Prof. A; V. Kunin.— See: А. В. Кунин. Английская фразеология. М., 1970.

[72] The process of lexicalization may be observed in Modern English too. The noun yesterday, e.g., in the novels by Thomas Hardy occurs as a free word-group and is spelled with a break yester day.

[73] See sources of English idioms in: Logan Smith. Words and Idioms. London, 1928.

[74] The Russian terms are: живое, условное и дефектное морфологическое членение слов.

[75] See 'Semasiology', §§ 13-16, pp. 23-25.

[76] Needless to say that the noun ham denoting 'a smoked and salted upper part of a pig's leg' is irrelevant to the ham- in hamlet.

[77] See 'Semasiology', §§13-16, pp. 23-25.

[78] See 'Word-Structure', § 8, p. 97.

[79] 1 The Russian term is относительно связанные (относительно свободные).

[80] See 'Semasiology', §§ 15, 16, р, 24, 25.

[81] See 'Semasiology', § 17, p. 25.

[82] See 'Word-Formation', § 16, p. 127.

[83] See 'Word-Structure', § 7, p. 96.

[84] See 'Word-Formation', §§ 16, p. 127.

[85] See 'Word-Structure',§ 7, p. 96

[86] See 'Word-Formation', § 18, p. 131.

[87] See 'Semasiology', § 17, p. 25.

[88] See 'Word-Structure', § 8, p. 97.

[89] See 'Semasiology', §§ 13-16, pp. 23-25.

[90] See also 'Methods ...,§§ 3, 4, p. 245, 246.

[91] See also 'Word-Structure', § 3, p. 92.

[92] See 'Word-Groups', §7,p. 70.

[93] Though no figures for verbs are available we have every reason to believe that they present a similar relation.

[94] We may presume that a similar if not a more striking difference is true of verbs, adverbs and all form words.

[95] See 'Semasiology', §§ 17, 22, pp. 25-30.

[96] See also 'Word-Structure', § 3, p. 92.

[97] Another term for "conversion."

[98] These are based on the principle of coining words in phonetically variated rhythmic twin forms, e. g. bibble-babble, shilly-shally, boogie-woogie, claptrap, etc.

[99] This is the coining of artificial new words by welding more or less arbitrary parts of given words into a unit, e. g. Pluto ('pipeline under the ocean'), Com inch ('Commander in chief), etc.

[100] See 'Word-Structure', § 11, p. 103.

[101] See 'Conversion', § 16, p. 127; see also 'Word-Structure', § 7, p. 96.

[102] See also 'Semasiology', § 22, p. 30; §§ 25, 26, 39, pp. 34-47.

[103] See 'Word-Structure', § 12, p. 104.

[104] See 'Introduction', § 2.

[105] Prof. A. I. Smirnitsky calls them «потенциальные слова» (potehtial words) in his book on English Lexicology (p. 18).

[106] See also 'Various Aspects ...', § 8, p. 184.

[107] See E. С. Кубрякова. Что такое словообразование. М., 1965, с. 21.

[108] See 'Word-Structure', § 9, p. 100.

[109] See, for instance, E. Kruisinga. A Handbook of Present-Day English, pt. II, 1939.

[110] The figures are borrowed from: К. В. Пиоттух. Система префиксации в современном английском языке. Канд. дисс. М., 1971.

[111] See 'Word-Structure', § 3, p. 92.

[112] See 'Word-Formation', § 14, p. 125.

[113] For more details see 'Word-Formation', § 11, p. 121.

[114] See 'Word-Formation', § 13, p. 123.

[115] 2 See 'Word-Structure', § 3, p. 92.

[116] 'informer, complainer' (sl.)

[117] See 'Word-Formation', § 4, p. 112.


[118] Lists of all derivational affixes of Modern English containing detailed information of the kind necessary for the practical analysis just referred to may be found in various handbooks and manuals such as L. Bankevich,. English Word-Buidling. L., 1961; M. Rayevskaya, English Lexicology Kiev, 1957; D. Vesnik, S. Khidekel. Exercises in Modem English Word-Building. M., 1964; О. Д. Мешков. Словообразование английского языка. М., 1976.

[119] See also 'Word-Structure', § 7, p. 96.

[120] See, for instance, I. V, Arnold. The English Word. L.— M., 1973.

[121] See, for instance, А. И. Смирницкий. Лексикология английского языка. М., 1956, с. 71—72; also О. С. Ахманова. Некоторые вопросы семантического анализа слов.— Вестн. МГУ, 1957, № 2, с. 70.

[122] See 'Word-Formations', § 6, p. 114.

[123] Information concerning the stems of the parts of speech the English suffixes are regularly added to may be found in "Exercises in Modern English Word-Building" by D. Vesnik and S. Khidekel, M., 1964.

[124] See Я, О. Волкова. К вопросу о направлении производности при конверсии в парах имя — глагол (на материале современного английского языка).— Сб., Иностр. яз. в высшей школе, вып. 9. М., 1974.

[125] See 'Fundamentals of English Lexicography', § 5, p. 214.

[126] See П. А. Соболева. О трансформационном анализе словообразовательных отношений.— Сб. Транформационный метод в структурной лингвистике. М., 1964.

[127] See 'Methods and Procedures of Lexicological Analysis', §5, p. 251.

[128] The sign → shows the possibility of transformation.

[129] The sign → denotes the impossibility of transformation.

[130] Because of the regular character of semantic correlation within such word-pairs as well as within conversion pairs formed on the semantic patterns I. P. Ivanova introduces the notion of patterned homonymy. She points out that conversion is one of the sources of homonymy, there are also other sources such as coincidence in sound-form of words of different parts of speech, borrowing two words of different parts of speech in the same phonetic shape, and some others. (See И. П. Иванова. О морфологической характеристике слова в современном английском языке.— Сб. : Проблемы морфологического строя германских языков. М., 1963; see also I. Arnold. The English Word. M., 1973, ch. VIII.)

[131] See П. М. Каращук. Реконверсия и ее роль в развития семантических структур соотносящихся по конверсии слов.— Сб. "Словообразование и его место в курсе обучения иностранному языку", вып. I. Владивосток, 1973.

[132] The figures in brackets show the year of the first use of the word in the given meaning.

[133] See 'Word-Structure', § 8, p. 97.

[134] See ‘Word-Formation’, § 6, p. 114.


[135] See ‘Word-Structure’, § 8, p.97.

[136] The spelling is given according to Webster's New Collegiate Dictionary, 1956 and H. C. Wyld. The Universal English Dictionary, 1952.

[137] See Word-Composition', § 34, p. 151,

[138] See 'Semasiology', § 15, p. 24.

[139] See also 'Word-Groups', § 5, p. 69.

[140] See also 'Word-Groups', § 8, p. 71.

[141] Prof. A. I. Smirnitsky as far back as the late forties pointed out the rigid parallelism existing between free word-groups and derivational compound adjectives which he termed "grammatical compounds".

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 |

Все материалы представленные на сайте исключительно с целью ознакомления читателями и не преследуют коммерческих целей или нарушение авторских прав. Студалл.Орг (0.037 сек.)