ixes re-, un-non-, anti - etc are productive prefixes.
Non-productive affixes are those which are not used to form new words in Modern English. Ex, - ard, - cy, - ive, - en, - dom, - ship, - ful, - en, - ify etc are not productive suffixes; in, ir (im-), mis - dis-, are non-productive prefixes. These affixes may occur in a great number of words but if they are not used to form new words in Modern English they are not productive.
But recent investigations prove that there are no productive and non-productive affixes because each affix plays a certain role in wordformation. There are only affixes with different degrees of productivity, besides that productivity of affixes should not be mixed up with their frequency of occurence in speech. Frequency of affixes is characterised by the occurence of an affix in a great number of words. But productivity is the ability of a given suffix or prefix to make new words. An affix may be frequent but not productive, ex, the suffix «-ive» is very frequent but non-productive.
Some linguists distinguish between two types of prefixes:
1) those which are like functional words (such as prepositions or adverbs) (ex. out-, over-, up - .)
2) those which are not correlated with any independent words, (ex. un-, dis-, re-, mis-, etc).
Prefixes out-, over-, up-, under-, etc are considered as semibound morphemes. However, this view is doubtful because these prefixes are quite frequent in speech and like other derivational affixes have a generalized meaning. They have no grammatical meaning like the independent words. We think they are bound morphemes and should be regarded as homonyms of the corresponding independent words, ex. the prefix «out-» in outdoor, outcome, outbreak etc is homonymous to the preposition «out» in «out of door» and the adverb «out» in «He went out».
Prefixes and suffixes may be classified according to their meaning.
1) prefixes of negative meaning such as; de-, non-, un - in-, ir-, il-, im-, dis - (ex. defeat, decentralize, disappear, impossible, discomfort etc); 2) prefixes, denoting space and time relations: after, under-, for-, pre-, post-, over-, super - (ex, prehistory, postposition, superstructure, overspread, after¬noon, forefather); 3) prefixes denoting relation of an action such as: re - (ex. reread, remake).
Like prefixes the suffixes are also classified according to their meaning:
1) the agent suffixes: - er, - or, - ist, - ee etc. (baker, sailor, typist, employee); 2) appurtenance: - an, - ian, - ese (Arabian, Russian, Chinese, Japanese); 3) collectivity: - age, - dom, - hood, - ery (peasantry, marriage, kingdom, childhood); 4) dimi-nutiveness: - let, - ock, - ie etc (birdie, cloudlet, hillock); 5) quan-titativeness1: - ful, - ous, - y, - ive, - ly, - some.
Suffixes may be divided into different groups according to what part of speech they form:
1) noun - forming, i. e. those which are form nouns: - er, - dom, - ness, - ation, - ity, - age, - ance. - ence, - ist, - hood, - ship, - ment etc; 2) adjective-forming: - able/, - ible/. - uble, - al, - ian, - ese, - ate, - ed, - ful, - ive, - ous, - y etc; 3) numeral-forming: - teen, - th, - ty etc; 4) verb-forming: - ate, - en, - ify, - ize etc.; 5) adverb-forming: - ly, - ward, - wise etc.
Suffixes may be added to the stem of different parts of speech. According to this point of view they may be:
1) those added to verbs: - er, - ing, - ment, - able; 2) those added to nouns: - less, - ish, - ful, - ist, some etc; 3) those added to adjectives: - en, - ly, - ish, - ness etc.
Suffixes are also classified according to their stylistic reference: 1) suffixes, which characterize neutral stylistic reference: - able, - er, - ing (ex. dancer, understandable (helping); 2) suffixes which characterize a certain stylistic reference:
- oid, - form, - tron etc (astroid, rhomboid, cruciform, cyclo¬tron etc).
Bibliography
1. Ginsburg R.S. et al. A Course in Modern English Lexicology. M., 1979 pp.72-82
2. Buranov, Muminov Readings on Modern English Lexicology T. Oqituvchi 1985 pp. 34-47
3. Arnold I.V. The English Word M. High School 1986 pp. 143-149
4. O. Jespersen. Linguistics. London, 1983, pp. 395-412
5. Jespersen, Otto. Growth and Structure of the English Language. Oxford, 1982 pp. 246-249
5. The Concise Oxford Dictionary of Current English. Oxford 1964. pp. 147, 167, V.D. Arakin English Russian Dictionary M. Russky Yazyk 1978 pp. 23-24, 117-119, 133-134
7. Abayev V.I. Homonyms T. Oqituvchi 1981 pp. 4-5, 8, 26-29
8. Smirnitsky A.I. Homonyms in English M.1977 pp.57-59, 89-90
9. Dubenets E.M. Modern English Lexicology (Course of Lectures) M., Moscow State Teacher Training University Publishers 2004 pp. 17-31
10. Akhmanova O.S. Lexicology: Theory and Method. M. 1972 pp. 59-66
12. Burchfield R.W. The English Language. Lnd. 1985 pp. 45-47
13. Canon G. Historical Changes and English Wordformation: New Vocabulary items. N.Y., 1986. p. 284
14. Howard Ph. New words for Old. Lnd., 1980. p. 311
15. Sheard, John. The Words we Use. N.Y., 1954.p. 3
16. Maurer D.W., High F.C. New Words - Where do they come from and where do they go. American Speech. 1982.p. 171
17. Aпресян Ю.Д. Лексическая семантика. Омонимические средства языка. М. 1974. с. 46
18. Беляева Т.М., Потапова И.А. Английский язык за пределами Англии. Л. Изд-во ЛГУ 1971 С. 150-151
19. Арнольд И.В. Лексикология современного английского языка. М. Высшая школа 1959. с. 212-224
20. Виноградов В.В. Лексикология и лексикография. Избранные труды. М. 1977 с. 119-122
21. Bloomsbury Dictionary of New Words. M. 1996 с. 276-278
22. Hornby The Advanced Learners Dictionary of Current English. Lnd. 1974 с. 92-93, 111
23. Longman Lexicon of Contemporary English. Longman. 1981 pp. 23-25
24. Трофимова З.C. Dictionary of New Words and New Meanings. Павлин, 1993.
25. World Book Encyclopedia NY Vol 8 1993 p. 321
26 Internet: http://www.wikipedia.com/English/articles/homonymy.htm
27. Internet: http://www mpsttu.ru/works/english philology/ Э.М. Дубенец. Курс лекций и планы семинарских занятий по лексикологии английского языка
...........
Страницы: 1 | 2 | [3] |
|
