link262 link263 link264 link265 link266 link267 link268 link269 link270 link271 link272 link273 link274 link275 link276 link277 link278 link279 link280 link281 link282 link283 link284 link285 link286 link287 link288 link289 link290 link291 link292 link293 link294 link295 link296 link297 link298 link299 link300 link301 link302 link303 link304 link305 link306 link307 link308 link309 link310 link311 link312 link313 link314 link315 link316 link317 link318 link319 link320 link321 link322 link323 link324 link325 link326 link327 link328 link329 link330 link331 link332 link333 link334 link335 link336 link337 link338 link339 link340 link341 link342 link343 link344 link345 link346 link347 link348 link349 link350 link351 link352 link353 link354 link355 link356 link357 link358 link359 link360 link361 link362 link363 link364 link365 link366 link367 link368 link369 link370 link371 link372 link373 link374 link375 link376 link377 link378 link379 link380 link381 link382 link383 link384 link385 link386 link387 link388 link389 link390 link391 link392
конспект лекций, вопросы к экзамену

Dynamic word-formation. Lexical morphological categories and translation of derivative words.

The dynamic aspect of derivation is called item and process. It’s opposed to the item and arrangement, which relates to the analysis of already existing words. Item and process deals with making of new words, with the productivity of word-building patterns.

A word-building pattern is said to be productive if it can be freely used to form words easily understood by most speakers of the language, or, at any rate, are recognized by them as 'acceptable'.

These new words are always formed to serve the needs of a given speech community. There are two different spheres of application of derivative words:

productive word-formation patterns are naturally used to form neologisms responding to the most vital changes in social, cultural, or political life as well as in science and technology they coin words 'for the nonce'. Writers of fiction may opt for such 'occasional' formations and start using them to produce a desired stylistic effect.

English has a large number of commonly used prefixes and suffixes, so we often can easily form and re-form words (like-dislike, happy-unhappy). But there are many gaps: we can say inept (неумелый), but never — *ept, unkempt (растрёпанный), but not *kempt.

(It’s also illogical that sometimes negative affixes don’t make the meaning of the word negative: flammable-inflammable, valuable-invaluable.
English is so flexible in forming derivative words as to make items reversible in compounding: casebook-bookcase, table water and water table.)

Productive word-formation is a historical category, and words that had been 'new' at certain stages in language development may cease to be ones. For ex., -ness, -en, -ish, -y, -er, -ise/-ize etc. continue to be used in forming new words while others (-dom in boredom, officialdom; -lock in warlock, wedlock) mostly remain in established ones.

Knowing the word-building patterns makes your speech not just plain usage of words, but an act of creation. But we should be careful and check whether a certain pattern is productive or not.

Leech distinguishes the following three stages: 1. the actual acceptability o f derived items which make dictionary entries because they "have attained institutional acceptance"; 2.the potential acceptability o f words which in principle can be generated on the basis o f a given lexical rule; 3.the unacceptability o f the form as not being allowed for by the lexical rule ("for example, *sheepable - where the deverbal suffix -able is added to onto the noun stem sheep - is not a possible English word at all — unless

Affixes deal with the lexical morphological categories. LMC is a general feature of language which becomes apparent in semantic contrasting with other word/words and has a systemic expression. In English this notion is usually called ‘the word-formation rule’.

In a certain language each oа LMC serves one or a several affixes. The LMC of quality in English has at least two of them: -ity and –ness, but they slightly differ in meaning (words with –ness are more abstract) and the latter is much more productive. In Russian we have different affixes of the LMC of quality, but –(н)ость seems to be most close to –ness.

In translation we observe a tendency to render English potential or occasional formations either by means of words already established in the Russian lexicon or in a descriptive way. It is not always possible to form a structurally similar equivalent due to the discrepancy in the morphological type between the two languages. The synthetic Russian structure with regular alternations of inflections within longish segments and fusion at morpheme boundaries often impairs derivational processes by making the elements within the word difficult to separate or combine with other word-formation devices. In English, conversely, productive derivational patterns have an enormous potential to be used in 'constructing' words which can be more or less 'assimilated' in the language, e.g.:

distanceless беспредельной

horizonless бесконечным

At the same time occasional items are also created in Russian to match English original formations in meaning, imagery, and expressiveness, for example:

примеры !!!

The category of likeness (категория уподобления) is represented by
‘-like’
(‘-подобный’)

пример

the LMC of the ‘doer’ (категория делателя).
‘-er’ with almost an unlimited productivity.
a number of formants: ‘-ер’ (borrowed), -тель, -ец…

примеры

LMC of caritiveness (каритивности). If related to smth unexpected or extraordinary -
-less
без-/бес-

Kuang twisted and banked above the horizonless fields of the Tessier-Ashpool cores

"Куань" развернулся и пустился в горизонтальный полет над бескрайней равниной инфопространственных недр "Тесье-Ашпул"

doorless

без двери

the riderless

сиденья были пусты