Конверсионное словообразование прилагательных цветообозначения. Методика преподавния в нач.классах

infelicitous. The term itself doesn’t enter another functional category,

which becomes quite evident when it is considered the inflected forms.

Endings and derivation.

In inflected languages the derivant and derivative usually have a

characteristic nominal or verbal ending. But, ending are not derivative

morphemes. When English was still a more amply inflected language, the

present type existed, but inflectional differences were more in evidence.

Cf. the OE verbs besceopian, fugelian, gamenian, hearmian, freon

(freogian), dernian and their respective bases besceop, fugol, and the

weakening of ending was little bearing on this subject. With regard to

denominate derivation, however, it is interesting to note that the

levelling of endings brought about the loss of distinction in ME between

the OE conjugations. The -an of ryth-an as well as the -ian of loc-ian

resulted in -en. This reducted the number of patterns for denominal verbs

to one.

Derivation connection between verbs and nouns.

With respect to both denominal verbs (type loan verb f. loan

substantive) and deverbal substantives (type look substantive f look verb)

it can be seen that as early as Old English a derivational connection

existed between the present-infinitive stem of weak verb on the one hand

and the stem of nouns on the other. As for deverbal substantive, there was

some competition in the early stages of the language. Like other Germanic

languages, Old English had strong verbs that were connected with

substantives containing an ablaut vowel of the verb (ridan/rad,

bindan/bend, beran/bora). However , this derivational type was unproductive

so far back as Old English. The present-infinitive stem of strong verbs

came to be felt to represent the derivative basis for deverbal substantives

in exactly the same way as did the corresponding stem of weak verbs: ride

verb/ride substantive=look verb/look substantive. But this contention of

Biese’s/4/ needs qualification: ‘these facts indicate the resistance should

by strong verbs to the process of converting them into nouns before, owing

to the introduction of weak inflections, a distinct idea of a universal

verb-stem had been developed’. Many of the verbs had weak forms that

derived substantives at an early date have either never had weak forms are

rare or later than the substantives. Verbs such as bite, fall, feel, fold,

freeze, have, grind, hide make steal, tread are cases in point. This goes

to show that the existence of weak verb forms is incidental to the rise of

a derivational connection between the present infinitive stem of strong

verbs and the stem of substantive.

This derivational connection is partly due to class where a strong

verb and a substantive of the same root existed in OE and where phonetic

development resulted in closely resembling forms for both in ME. OE for,

faru was fare by the end of the 12th century while the corresponding OE

verb faran had reached the stage of faren or fare about the same time.

Other examples of pairs are bidan ‘stay’/bid ‘delay, dwelling place’,

bindan ‘bind’/bind ‘band, tie’, drincan ‘drink’/drinc, drinca ‘drink’,

fleotan ‘float’/fleot ‘place, where water flows’, helpan ‘help’/help,

hreowan ‘rue’/hreow ‘rue’, slepan ‘sleep’/sl p, slep ‘sleep’. The

derivational relation as it have been described them were fully established

around 200.

Zero-derivation as a «specifically English process».

It is usually assumed that the loss of ending gave rise to derivation

by a zero morpheme. Jespersen/7/ gives a somewhat to simplifying picture of

its rise and development . ‘As a great many native nouns and verbs

had...come be identical in form..., as the same things happened with

numerous originally French words..., it was quite natural that the speech-

instinct should take it as a matter of course that whenever the need of a

verb arose, it might be formed without any derivative ending from the

corresponding substantive’. He called the process ‘specifically English’.

As a matter of fact, derivation by a zero morpheme is neither specifically

English nor does it start, as Jespersen’s/7/ presentation would make it

appear when most ending had disappeared. Biese’s/4/ study shows quit

clearly that it began to develop on a larger scale at the beginning of the

13th century , i.e. at a time when final verbal -n had not yet been

dropped, when the plural ending of the present was not yet -en or zero, and

when the great influx of French loan words had not yet started. Bauer/2/

doesn’t think that the weakening of the inflectional system had anything to

do with the problem of zero derivation. Stems are immediate elements for

the speaker, who is aware of the syntagmatic character of an inflected

form. He therefor has no trouble in connecting verbal and nominal stems

provided they occur in sufficiently numerous pairs to establish a

derivational pattern. In Latin which is a highly inflected language,

denominal verbs are numerous: corona/coronare, catena/catenare,

lacrima/lacrimare; cumulus/cumulare, locus/locare, truncus/truncare, nomen,

nomin-/nominare; sacer/sacrare. In Modern Spanish there are full sets of

verbal ending (though in the declension only gender and number are

expressed) both types of zero-derivation are very productive. The weakening

of the inflectional system in English, therefor , can’t have much to do

with development of zero-derivation.

On the other hand, it cannot be denied that despite the relative

productivity of corresponding derivational types in other languages, the

derivative range the English patterns, that of denominal verbs, is still

greater. The explanation of this seems to de that English, unlike Latin,

French, Spanish, or German, never had any competitive types. So, whenever

a derivation was made nouns, it followed the one pattern that existed, i.e.

derivation by zero morpheme. The only derivative morphemes PE has for

denominal verbs are -ate, -ize, -ify. They have restricted range of

derivative force: -ate is latinizing and leaned, -ify is learned while -ize

is chiefly technical. All three derive almost exclusively on a Latin

morphologic basis. The suffixal type dark-en was not originally a

deadjectival pattern; in any case, it would have to a certain extent

rivaled the type idle verb f. Idle adjective only. Derivation by a

morpheme, esp. The type loan verb f. Loan substantive, must therefore be

considered the norm and is quite naturally very strong in English. In

German, there are many competitive types. It is bath mutated and unmutated

verbs (faul-en, hart-en, draht-en, haut-en). There are also denominal verbs

with a derivative morpheme ( stein-ig-en, rein-ig-en; with a foreign

morpheme telefon-ier-en, lack-ier-en ). In addition, German makes use of

the prefixes be-, er-, ver-. Such types as ver-rohen, ver-jung-er,

vergrosser-n; er-kalt-en, er-leichter-n; be-end-ig-en, be-herz-ig-en, ver-

eid-ig-en have no counterparts in English. English be- has never played a

serious role in denominal derivation. Nor has the type em-bed ever become

productive to any larger extent. The productivity of the type loan verb f.

Loan substantive seems to be thus reasonably for. The deverbal type look

substantive f. Look verb has been less prolific and is partly bound up with

certain syntactic patterns of grouping. For this, it is do had competitive

patterns. There are the suffixal types arriv-al, break-ade, guid-ance,

improve-ment, organiz-ation and the verbal substantive type writ-ing though

the latter has now chiefly role of deriving action nouns proper. This is

the reason why so many zero-derivatives from verbs of Latin and French

origin, coined the 15th and 16th centuries, were subsequently replaced by

suffixal derivatives in -al, -age, -ance, ment. «After 1650 the suffix

formation have completely gained the upper hand of the direct conversion of

the disyllabic and trisyllabic words derived from French and Latin

verbs»(Biese/4/).

Zero-derivation with loan-words.

As for Latin and French words and derivation from, there are

comparatively few derivatives before (Biese/4/). French words were for some

time felt to be foreign elements and were not «converted» with the same

ease as native stems were. The phenomenon is in no way different from the

one it is observed with derivation by suffixes. Loan words remain strangers

for a time, and it usually takes time before a derivation type is applied

to a heterogeneous class of words. Zero - derivation was facilitated by the

eo-existence of borrowed substantives and verbs., as anchor substantive a

880 (=L) / anchor verb e 1230 (the OED has doubts, but F ancrer is recorded

in the 12th e., as Bloeh ). Account substantive 1260/verb 1303, change

substantive 1225/verb 1230, charge substantive 1225/verb 1297, cry

substantive 1275/verb 1225, dance substantive 1300/verb 1300, double

adjective 1225/verb 1290, doubt substantive 1225/verb 1225, poison

substantive 1230/verb 13.., rule substantive 1225/verb 1225.

There are quite a few verbs with French roods for which no French

verbs are recorded and which may accordingly be treated as zero

derivatives: feeble verb 1225/adjective 1175, hardy verb 1225/adjective

1225, master verb 1225/substantive a 1000, pool verb 1275/adjective 1200,

saint verb 1225/substantive 1175. On the other hand, the substantive grant

1225 may be derived from the verb grant 1225. It is only after 1300 that

the process of zero-derivation is as firmly rooted with French as with

native words. Though French originals for later English words may occur, it

is just as safe to consider them as derivatives, as centre verb 1610 fr,

centre substantive 1374, combat verb 1564 fr, combat substantive 1567 (or

the reverse), guard verb 1500 fr, guard substantive 1426 and others.

Words of Scandinavian origin were more easily incorporated than French

words, and derivation occurs as early as the 13th c.: trist «trust», boon

«ask as a boon, pray for», brod «shoot, sprout», smithy «make into a

smithy» a.o. (see Biese /4/).

The illustration of various types.

Type loan verb fr. loan substantive

(desubstantival verbs.)

Many PE verbs. go back to OE : answer (andsharu / andswarian), blossom

(blostm / blostnian), claw (clawu / clawian), fish (fisc / fiscian), fire

(fyr / fytian), harm (hearm / hearmian),wonder (wundor / wundrian), bill

«strike with the bill, peck», ground «bring to the ground», loan (1240),

back (OE), butter (OE), experiment (ME), lamb (OE), night (OE), piece (ME),

pit «cart into a pit»(OE), plank (ME), plate (ME), plow, plough (OE),

plague (ME), priest (OE), promise (ME), prose (ME), ridge (OE), rivet (ME),

rode (ME), root (EME), sack (OE), sauce «season» (ME), scale (ME), screen

(ME), shoulder (OE), side (OE), silver (OE), sponge (OE), spot (ME), story

(ME), streak (OE), summer (OE), table (ME), thong (OE), tin (OE), veil

(ME), winter (OE), all before 1500.

Angle «run into a corner» (ME), balance (ME), butcher (ME), cipher

(ME), cloister (ME), coffin (ME), collar (ME), colt «run wild as a colt»

(ME), cipher (ME), fancy (1465), fin (OE), gesture (ME), girdle (OE), glove

(OE), gossip (OE), grade (1511), husk (ME), kennel (ME), knob (ME), ladle

(OE), latch (ME), launder (ME), lecture (ME), libel (ME), mother (OE),

neighbor (OE), place (ME), pole (ME), riddle «speak in riddles» (OE), shell

(OE), shop (ME), star (OE), stomach «be offended» (ME), sun (OE), vision

(ME), all 16th century blanket (ME), casket (1467), lamp (ME), leaf (OE),

pilot (1530), race «run» (ME), soldier (ME), all 17th century Capture

(1541), diamond (ME), onion (ME), stocking (1583), tour (ME), all 18th

century Scrimmage (1470), shin (OE), signal (ME), torpedo (1520), vacation

(ME), wolf «eat like a wolf» (OE), 19th century, major 1927.

It would be difficult to give a complete list of derivatives as there

is an ever growing tendency verbs from substantives without derivative

morphemes. A few recent are service, contact (1929), audition, debut,

package, chairman, page, date (1928), process (1945), waitress (1946),

pressure (not in OED or Spl.), feature (rec., as in the play features).

Mencken/11/ gives many more, most of which are, however, hardly used.

It is likewise useless to try a classification to sense-groups, as

there is no class-denoting formative. The verb may denote almost any verbal

action connected with the basis of the underlying substantive. The verb bed

has or has had the meanings «spread a bed», «put to bed» (with various

implications), «go to bed», «sleep with», and there are more technical

meanings. Bladin/5/ had already pointed out that «every action or

occurrence can be designated by a verb derived from the very noun the idea

of which most easily enters the mind of the person wanting to state a

fact», and if Jespersen/7/ says that «it is difficult to give a general

definition of the sense-relation between substantive and de-substantival

verbs», this is rather an understatement. It may be recognized certain

groups, as «put in ...», «furnish, cover, affect ...», but it should be

noted that each of these senses is only one the many which the same verb

has or may have. Biese/4/, therefore, makes no attempt at classification,

and he is certainly right in doing so. It may, however, be worthy of note

that the privative sense as in dust «remove the dust (from)» is frequent

only with technical terms denoting various kinds of dressing or cleaning.

Exs are bur wool or cotton, burl cloth, poll, pollard trees, bone, gut,

scale fish.

The meaning of a certain verb is clear in a certain speech situation.

That brain means «smash the b.»,can «preserve in cans», winter «pass the

winter», is a result of given circumstances which establish the bridge of

understanding between the speaker and the person or persons spoken to.

There are derivatives from proper names, as boycott 1880 (orig. spelt

with a capital, from the name of Captain Boycott who was first boycotted),

Shanghay 1871 ‘drug and press on board a vessel’, Zeppelin 1916 ‘bomb from

a zeppelin’ (also clipped = zap).

Some verbs often occur in the -ing substantive only (originally or

chiefly), while finite verb forms or infinitives are not or rarely used, as

hornpiping ‘dancing a hornpipe’ (no verb rec.), slimming, orcharding

‘cultivation of fruit trees (no verb rec.). Dialling ‘the art of

construction dials’, speeching, electioneering, engineering,

parlamenteering, volunteering are the original forms. Converted cpds with

-monger for a second-word are current only in the -ing form (merit-

mongering, money-mongering etc.). Innings are not matched by any other verb

form, nor are cocking ‘cock-fighting’, hopping ‘hop-picking’, moon-shining

‘illicit distilling’ and others.

Type idle verb fr. idle adjective. (deadjectival verbs).

To the OE period go back bitter, busy, cool, fair, fat, light, open,

right, yellow (obs black, bright, dead, strong, old).

From the period between about 1150 and 1200 are recorded obs sick

‘suffer illness’, soft, low (obs meek, hory, hale). The following date

from the period between about 1200 and 1300 (Biese/4/ has included the

Cursor Mundi in this period): black, brown, loose, slight, better, blind

(obs hardly, certain, rich, wide, broad, less). From the 14th century are

recorded ready, clear, grey, sore, pale, full, dull, round, gentle,

English, tender, perfect (obs able, sound, weak, unable, honest, noble).

From the 15th century purple, stale, clean, from the 16th century shallow,

slow, quiet, empty, bloody, idle, equal, dirty, parallel (and many other

now obs words, as Biese/4/ points out). The 17th century coined crimson,

giddy, worst, blue, gallant, shy, tense, ridicule, unfit, ruddy (and many

how obs words. Biese/4/). From 18th century Are recorded net ‘gain as a net

sum’ 1758, total (once 1716, then 1859), negative, northern (said of

landscape), invalid ‘enter on the sick-list’, queer ‘cheat’ , from the

19th century desperate ‘drive desperate’, stubborn, sly ‘move in a

stealthy manner’, chirk ‘make cheerful’, gross ‘make a gross profit’

1884, southern (said of wind), aeriform, true. From our century there are

such words as pretty, wise, lethal, big.

Usually, deadjectival verbs denote change of state, and the meaning is

either ‘become ...’ or ‘make ...’. Intransitive verbs with meaning ‘be...’

(as idle, sly, equal) from quite a small group. Some verbs have a

comparative or superlative as root: better, best, worst, perhaps lower.

Type out verb fr out particle (verbs derived from

locative particles).

Derivation from locative particles is less common than the preceding

types. In Old English there are yppan, fremman (with i-mutation from up,

fram), framian, utian. Later are over ‘to master’ 1456, obs under ‘cast

down’ 1502, off ‘put off’ 1642, down 1778, nigh ‘draw near’ 1200, thwart

1250, west ‘move towards the west’ 1381, south 1725, north 1866, east 1858.

These words, however, are not very common (except out and thwart).

Type hail verb fr hail interjection (verbs derived

from minor particles).

Derivation from exclamation and interjection (most of there

onomatopoeias) is more frequent. It will, however, be noted that many of

these conversions have undergone functional and formal changes only without

acquiring a well - grounded lexical existence, their meaning merely being

«say..., utter the sound...». Exs are hail 1200, nay «say nay, refuse»

13.., mum 1399, obs. Hosht «reduce to silence» etc., whoo (16th century),

humph (17th century), encore, dee-hup (to a horse), pshaw, halloa, yaw

(speak affectedly», hurrah (18th century), tally-ho (fox-hunting term),

boo, yes, heigh-ho «sigh», bravo, tut, bow-wow, haw-haw, boo-hoo «weep

noisily» etc. (Biese/4/ also Jespersen/7/).

The meaning ‘say...’ may occur with other words also when they are

used as exclamation or interjections, as with iffing (other verb forms are

not recorded), hence ‘order hence’ (obs., 1580). And it may be reckoned

here all the words of the type sir ‘call sir’.

From about 1600 on, geminated forms also occur as verbs. A few have

been mentioned in the foregoing paragraph; others are snip-snap

(1593),dingle-dangle, ding-dong, pit-pat (17th century), pitter-patter,

wiggle-waggle (18th century), criss-cross, rap-tap, wig-wag (19th century)

etc.

The limits of verbal derivation.

Derivation from suffixed nouns is uncommon. Biese’s/4/ treatment of

the subject suffers from a lack of discrimination. He has about 600

examples of substantives and adjectives; but the ‘suffixes’ are mere

terminations. Words such herring, pudding, nothing, worship are not

derivatives. The terminations -ace, -ice, -ogue, -y (as in enemy) have

never had any derivative force.

Theoretically it would seem that the case of a suffixal composite such

as boyhood is not different from that of a fill compound such as spotlight.

But obviously the fact that suffixes are categorizes generally prevents

suffixal derivatives from becoming the determinants of pseudo-compound

verbs. There are very few that are in common use, such as waitress (rec.),

package (rec., chiefly in form packaged, packaging), manifold OE

(obsolescent today), forward 1596, referee 1889, such adjectives as dirty,

muddy. Many more are recorded in OED (as countess, patroness, squiress,

traitress ‘play the...’, fellowship, kingdom a.o.).

Another reason seems to be still more important. Many of the nominal

suffixes derive substantives from verbs., and it would be contrary to

reason to form such verbs as arrival, guidance, improvement, organization

when arrive, guide, improve, organize exist. Similar consideration apply to

deadjectival derivatives like freedom or idleness. The verb disrupture is

recorded in OED (though only in participial forms) but it is not common.

Reverence is used as a verb, but it is much older (13.., 1290) than the

verb revere (1661). It should also be noted that the alternation

revere/reverence shows characteristics of vowel change and stress which are

irregular with derivation by means of -ance, -ence. For same reason

reference is not a regular derivative from refer, which facilitated the

coinage reference ‘provide with references’ etc. 1884.

There are no verbal derivatives from prefixed words either. The verb

unfit ‘make unfit’ 1611 is isolated.

Type look substantive fr. look verb (deverbal

substantives).

Deverbal substantives are much less numerous than denominal verbs. The

frequency-relation between the two types has been approximately the same in

all periods of the language. An exception is to be made for the second half

of the 13th century «when the absolute number of conversion-substantives is

larger that of the verbs formed from substantives» (Biese/4/).

Form the 13th century are recorded (unless otherwise mentioned in

parentheses, the resp. Verbs are OE) dread (1175), have, look, steal, weep,

call (1225), crack, ‘noise’, dwell, hide, make, mislike, mourn, show, spit,

‘spittle’, stint, wrest ‘act of twisting’ a.o.

From the later ME period are recorded (indications in parentheses

refer to the respective verbs) fall (OE), feel (OE), keep (OE), lift (ME),

Страницы: 1, 2, 3, 4