<<
>>

§ 3. Word-Formation as the Subject of Study

Word-formation is that branch of Lexicology which studies the derivative structure of existing words and the patterns on which a language, �in this case the English language, builds new words.

It is self-evident that word-formation proper can deal only with words which are analysable both structurally and semantically, i.e. with all types of Complexes.1 The study of the simple word as such has no place in it. Simple words however are very closely connected with word-formation because they serve as the foundation, the basic source of the parent units motivating all types of derived and compound words. Therefore, words like writer, displease, atom-free, etc. make the subject matter of study in word-formation, but words like to write, to please, atom, free are not irrelevant to it.

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 existing 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 shall consider affixation. Diachronically it is the chronological order of formation of one word from some other word that is relevant. On the synchronic plane a derived word is regarded as having a more complex structure than its correlated word

1 See �Word-Structure’, § 12, p. 104.

111

regardless of the fact whether it was derived from a simpler base or a more complex base. There are cases in the history of the English language when a word structurally more complex served as the original element from which a simpler word was derived. Those are cases of the process called back-formation (or back-derivation) 1, cf. beggar — to beg; editor — to edit; chauffeur — to chauff and some others. The fact that historically the verbs to beg, to edit, etc. were derived from the corresponding agent-nouns is of no synchronous relevance.

While analysing and describing word-formation synchronically it is not enough to extract the relevant structural elements from a word, describe its structure in terms of derivational bases, derivational affixes and the type of derivative patterns, it is absolutely necessary to determine the position of these patterns and their constituents within the structural-semantic system of the language as a whole. Productivity of a derivative type therefore cannot be overlooked in this description.

<< | >>
Èñòî÷íèê: R. S. Ginzburg S. S. Khidekel, G. Y. Knyazeva, A. A. Sankin. A COURSE IN MODERN ENGLISH LEXICOLOGY. 1979

Åùå ïî òåìå § 3. Word-Formation as the Subject of Study:

  1. 1.9. Àíàëèç ñëó÷àÿ (Case study)
  2. ÌÒÁ
  3. Êóäèíîâ Þ. È., Ïàùåíêî Ô. Ô., Êåëèíà À. Þ.. Ïðàêòèêóì ïî îñíîâàì ñîâðåìåííîé èíôîðìàòèêè: Ó÷åáíîå ïîñîáèå., 2011
  4. Þ. È. ÊÓÄÈÍÎÂ, Ô.Ô. ÏÀÙÅÍÊÎ, À. Þ. ÊÅËÈÍÀ. ÏÐÀÊÒÈÊÓÌ ÏÎ ÎÑÍÎÂÀÌ ÑÎÂÐÅÌÅÍÍÎÉ ÈÍÔÎÐÌÀÒÈÊÈ, 2011
  5. Ëèòåðàòóðà
  6. Èëëþñòðàöèè ê ñêàçàííîìó
  7. Ëàðèñà Àëåêñàíäðîâíà Ìàëèíèíà Âàäèì Âàñèëüåâè÷ Ëûñåíêî Ìàêñèì Àíàòîëüåâè÷ Áåëÿåâ. Îñíîâû èíôîðìàòèêè: Ó÷åáíèê äëÿ âóçîâ, 2006
  8. Èíôîðìàöèÿ è èíòóèöèÿ
  9. Ëèòåðàòóðà
  10. Ëèòåðàòóðà
  11. Ïðèìå÷àíèÿ