Classification of suffixes

Depending on purpose of research, various classifications of suffixes have been used and suggested. Suffixes have been classified according to their origin, parts of speech they served to form, their frequency, productivity and other characteristics. Within the parts of speech suffixes have been classified semantically according to lexico-grammatical groups and types of stems they are added to.

Noun-forming suffixes: -age (vicarage), -dom (kingdom), -ee (employee), -eer (profiteer), -er (writer), -ess (actress), -hood (motherhood), -ing (building), -ism/ -icism (heroism, criticism), -ist (noverist), -ment (government)

Adjective-forming suffixes: -able/ -ible/ -uble (unbearable, audible, soluble), -al (formal), -ic (poetic), -ical (ethical), -ant/ -ent (repentant, dependent), -ary (revolutionary), -ed/ -d (wooded), -ful (delightful), -ian (African, Australian)

Adverb-forming suffixes: -ly (coldly), -ward/ -wards (upward, northwards), -wise (likewise).

Alongside with adding some lexico-grammatical meaning to the stem, certain suffixes charge it with emotional force. They may be derogatory: -ard (drunkard), -ling (underling), -ster (gangster), -ton (simpleton).

13. Conversion and minor types of word-building.

The process of coining a new word in a different part of speech and with a different distribution characteristic but without adding any derivative element, so that the basic form of the original and the basic form of the derived words are homonymous, is variously called conversion (the difference between silence n and silence v is morphological, syntactic and semantic: the original and the resulting word are grammatically different)

Conversion is not only a highly productive but also a particularly English way of word-building. It is a convenient and “easy” way of enriching the vocabulary with new words. Verbs made from nouns are the most numerous amongst the words produced by conversion: e.g. to hand, to face, to eye, to nose, to monkey, to room. Nouns are frequently made from verbs: do, make, find, cut, walk, show, move, etc. Verbs can also be made from adjectives: to pale, to yellow, to cool, to grey, to rough. Other parts of speech can also be produced by conversion as the following examples show: to down, to put, the ups and downs, the ins and outs.

Sound-imitation (cock-a-doodle-doo, quack,meow, moo).

Reduplication In reduplication new words are made by doubling a stem, either without any phonetic change (bye-by, ping-pong, chit-chat (this second type is called gradational reduplication).

BACK FORMATION The earliest examples of this type of word-building are the verb to beg that was made from the French borrowing beggar. In all these cases the verb was made from the noun by subtracting what was mistakenly associated with the English suffix –er (instead of a noun made from a verb by affixation (as in painter from to paint).

14. Composition. Structural, semantic and theoretical approaches.

Composition is the way of word-building when a word is formed by joining

two or more stems to form one word.

Structural aspect of composition:

1.Neutral

- simple (blackbird, tallboy)

- derived (blue-eyed, coffee-lover)

- contracted (T-shirt, X-mass)

2.Morphological (handicraft, speedometer)

3.Syntactic (forget-me-not, marry-goes-roud)

Semantic aspect of composition of compound words deals with the question of correlations of the separate meanings of the constituent parts and the actual meaning of a compound word. Two types (Idiomatic, Non-idiomatic)

Non-idiomatic compounds have a perfectly clear motivation and their meanings can be described as the sum of their constituent meanings, e.g. seaman “a man connected with the sea”; other examples include: spaceship, classroom, bedroom, evening-gown, etc.

In idiomatic compounds the meaning of a whole is not a mere sum of its elements. For example, a chatterbox is not a box, but a person who talks a lot without saying anything important. A lady-killer kills on one, but he is a man who fascinates women.

Theoretical aspects of composition is the criteria for distinguishing b/w a compound and a word combination.

The graphic criterion is advanced by A.M. Ball, G.H. Vallins, N.G. Guterman and some others.

Arguable questions:

· There is no consistency in English spelling in this respect

· With different dictionaries and different authors the spelling varies, so that the same unit may exist in a solid spelling, e.g. headmaster, loudspeaker, with a hyphen – head-master, loud-speaker, and with a space b/w the components – head master, loud speaker

· This lack of uniformity in spelling is the chief reason why many authors consider this criterion insufficient. Some combine it with the phonetic criterion of stress (due to that criterion stress are: high(first syllable), double and level).

· All compound nouns with very few exceptions, are stressed on the first syllable. But the rule does not hold with the adjectives. Compound adjectives are double stressed like `gray - `green, etc.

· It follows that phonological criterion holds for certain types of words only.

H. Paul, O. Jespersen, E. Kruisinga and many others suggest the semantic criterion, and define a compound as a combination forming a unit expressing a single idea which is not identical n meaning to the sum of the meanings of its components in a free phrase. From this point of view dirty work with the figurative meaning ‘dishonorable proceedings’ is a compound, while clean work or dry work are phrases.

Arguable points:

It is difficult to decide whether the combination in queston expresses a single integrated idea. Besides, b/w a clearly motivated compound and an idiomatic one there are a great number of intermediate cases.

As to morphological criteria of compounds, they are manifold. Prof. A.I. Smirnitsky introduced the criterion of formal integrity. He compares the compound «shipwreck» and the phrase «(the) wreck of (a) ship» comprising the same mophemes, and points out that although they do not differ either in meaning or reference, they stand in very different relation to the grammatical system of a language. It follows that a word is characterized by structural integrity non-existent in a phrase.

L. Bloomfield points out that the word black in the phrase «black birds» can be modified by very (very black birds) unlike the compound-member black in blackbirds. This argument, however, doesn’t permit the distinguishing of compounds from set expressions: the first element of black market or black list cannot be modified by very either. The argument of indivisibility was advanced by B. Bloch, and G. Trager who pointed out that we cannot insert any word b/w the elements of the compound blackbird. But the example of black market serves H. Marchand to prove the insufficiency of this criterion. Black market is indivisible and yet the stress pattern show that it is a phrase.

E. Nida - No one type of criteria is sufficient for establishing whether the unit is a compound or a phrase. In the majority of cases we have to depend on the combination of two or more types of criteria (phonological, morphological, syntactic or graphical).