ВУЗ: Не указан
Категория: Не указан
Дисциплина: Не указана
Добавлен: 06.04.2021
Просмотров: 4705
Скачиваний: 79
more proofs of the conversive ability of prefixes, it will then be possible to
draw the conclusion that in this respect there is no functional difference
between suffixes and prefixes, for suffixes in English are also both con-
versive (cf.
hand
—
handless)
and non-conversive (cf.
father — father-
hood, horseman
—
horsemanship,
etc.).
Some recent investigations in the field of English affixation have re-
vealed a close interdependence between the meanings of a polysemantic
affix and the lexico-semantic group to which belongs the base it is affixed
to, which results in the difference between structural and structural-
semantic derivational patterns the prefix forms. A good illustration in
point is the prefix
en-
.
When within the same structural pattern
en
-
+n —> V,
the prefix is
combined with noun bases denoting articles of clothing, things of luxury,
etc. it forms derived verbs expressing an action of putting or placing on,
e.g.
enrobe
(cf. robe),
enjewel
(cf. jewel),
enlace
(cf. lace), etc.
When added to noun bases referring to various land forms, means of
transportation, containers and notions of geometry it builds derived verbs
denoting an action of putting or placing in or into, e.g.
embed (cf.
bed),
entrap
(cf. trap),
embark
(cf. bark),
entrain
(cf. train),
encircle
(cf. cir-
cle), etc.
In combination with noun bases denoting an agent or an abstract no-
tion the prefix
en-
produces causative verbs, e.g.
enslave
(cf. slave),
en-
danger
(cf. danger),
encourage
(cf. courage), etc.
Unlike suffixation, which is usually more
closely bound up with the paradigm of a certain
part of speech, prefixation is considered to be more neutral in this respect.
It is significant that in linguistic literature derivational suffixes are always
divided into noun-forming, adjective-forming, etc. Prefixes, however, are
treated differently. They are described either in alphabetical order or sub-
divided into several classes in accordance with their origin, meaning or
function and never according to the part of speech.
Prefixes may be classified on different principles. Diachronically dis-
tinction is made between prefixes of native and foreign origin.
1
Synchron-
ically prefixes may be classified:
1) according to the class of words they preferably form. Recent inves-
tigations, as has been mentioned above, allow one to classify prefixes ac-
cording to this principle. It must be noted that most of the 51 prefixes of
Modern English function in more than one part of speech forming differ-
ent structural and structural-semantic patterns. A small group of 5 prefixes
may be referred to exclusively verb-forming (
en-, be-, un-,
etc.).
The majority of prefixes (in their various denotational meanings) tend
to function either in nominal parts of speech (41 patterns in adjectives, 42
in nouns) or in verbs (22 patterns);
2) as to the type of lexical-grammatical character of the base they are
added to into: a) deverbal, e. g.
rewrite, outstay, overdo,
etc.; b) denomi-
nal, e.g.
unbutton, detrain, ex-president,
etc. and c) deadjectival, e.g.
1
See ‘Word-Formation’, § 14, p. 125.
117
§ 8. Classification of Prefixes
uneasy, biannual,
etc. It is of interest to note that the most productive
prefixal pattern for adjectives is the one made up of the prefix
un-
and the
base built either on adjectival stems or present and past participle, e.g.
un-
known, unsmiling, unseen,
etc.;
3)
semantically prefixes fall into mono- and polysemantic
1
;
4)
as to the generic denotational meaning there are different groups that
are distinguished in linguistic literature:
a) negative prefixes, such as:
un
1
-, non-, in-, dis
1
-, a-,
e.g.
ungrateful
(cf. grateful),
unemployment
(cf. employment),
non-politician (cf.
politi-
cian),
non-scientific
(cf. scientific),
incorrect (cf.
correct),
disloyal
(cf.
loyal),
disadvantage
(cf. advantage),
amoral
(cf. moral),
asymmetry
(cf.
symmetry), etc.
It may be mentioned in passing that the prefix
in-
occurs in different
phonetic shapes depending on the initial sound of the base it is affixed to;
in other words, the prefixal morpheme in question has several allom-
porphs, namely
il-
(before [l]),
im-
(before [p, m],)
ir-
(before [r]),
in-
in
all other cases, e.g.
illegal, improbable, immaterial, irreligious, inac-
tive,
etc.;
b)
reversative or privative prefixes, such as
un
2
-, de-, dis
2
-,
e.g.
untie
(cf. tie), unleash
(cf. leash),
decentralise
(cf. centralise),
disconnect
(cf.
connect), etc.;
c)
pejorative prefixes, such as
mis-, mal-, pseudo-, e.g. miscalculate
(cf. calculate),
misinform
(cf. inform),
maltreat
(cf. treat),
pseudo-
classicism
(cf. classicism),
pseudo-scientific
(cf. scientific), etc.;
d)
prefixes of time and order, such as
fore-, pre-, post-, ex-,
e.g.
fore-
tell (cf.
tell),
foreknowledge
(cf. knowledge),
pre-war (cf.
war),
post-war
(cf. war),
post-classical
(cf. classical),
ex-president
(cf. president);
e)
prefix of repetition
re-,
e.g.
rebuild
(cf. build),
re-write
(cf. write),
e
tc;
f)
locative prefixes, such as
super-, sub-, inter-, trans-, e.g. super-
structure
(cf. structure),
subway
(cf. way),
inter-continental
(cf. conti-
nental),
trans-atlantic
(cf. Atlantic), etc. and some other groups;
5) when viewed from the angle of their stylistic reference English pre-
fixes fall into those characterised by n e u t r a l s t y l i s t i c
r e f e r e n c e and those p o s s e s s i n g q u i t e a d e f i n i t e
s t y l i s t i c v a l u e . As no exhaustive lexico-stylistic classification
of English prefixes has yet been suggested, a few examples can only be
adduced here. There is no doubt, for instance, that prefixes like
un
1
-, un
2
-,
out-, over-, re-, under-
and some others can be qualified as neutral pre-
fixes, e.g.,
unnatural, unknown, unlace, outnumber, oversee, resell,
underestimate,
etc. On the other hand, one can hardly fail to perceive the
literary-bookish character of such prefixes as
pseudo-, super-, ultra-, uni-,
bi-
and some others, e.g.
pseudo-classical, superstructure, ultra-violet,
unilateral, bifocal,
etc.
Sometimes one comes across pairs of prefixes one of which is neutral,
the other is stylistically coloured/One example will suffice here: the
1
For more details see ‘Word-Formation’, § 11, p. 121. 18
pref i x
over-
occurs in all functional styles, the prefix
super-
is peculiar
to the style of scientific prose.
6) prefixes may be also classified as to the degree of productivity into
highly-productive, productive and non-productive.
1
S u f f i x a t i o n is the formation of
words with the help of suffixes. Suffixes
usually modify the lexical meaning of the
base and transfer words to a, different part of speech. There are suffixes
however, which do not shift words from one part of speech into another; a
suffix of this kind usually transfers a word into a different semantic group,
e.g. a concrete noun becomes an abstract one, as is the case with
child —
childhood, friend — friendship,
etc.
Chains of suffixes occurring in derived words having two and more
suffixal morphemes are sometimes referred to in lexicography as com-
pound suffixes:
-ably = -able + -ly (e.g. profitably, unreasonably); -
ically = - i c + -al + -ly (e.g. musically, critically); -ation
=
-ate
+
-ion
(e.g.
fascination, isolation)
and some others. Compound suffixes do not
always present a mere succession of two or more suffixes arising out of
several consecutive stages of derivation. Some of them acquire a new
qual i t y operating as a whole unit. Let us examine from this point of view
the suffix
-ation
in words like
fascination, translation, adaptation
and
the like.
Adaptation
looks at first sight like a parallel to
fascination,
translation.
The latter however are first-degree derivatives built with the
suffix
-ion
on the bases
fascinate-, translate-.
But there is no base
adap-
tate-,
only the shorter base
adapt-.
Likewise
damnation, condemnation,
formation, information
and many others are not matched by shorter
bases ending in -ate, but only by still shorter ones
damn-, condemn-,
form-, inform-.
Thus, the suffix
-ation
is a specific suffix of a composite
nature. It consists of two suffixes
-ate
and -ion, but in many cases func-
tions as a single unit in first-degree derivatives. It is referred to in linguis-
tic literature as a coalescent suffix or a group suffix.
Adaptation
is then a
derivative of the first degree of derivation built with the coalescent suffix
on the base
adapt-.
Of interest is also the group-suffix
-manship
consisting of the suffixes
-man
2
and
-ship.
It denotes a superior quality, ability of doing something
to perfection, e.g.
authormanship, quotemanship, Upmanship,
etc.
(cf.
statesmanship,
or
chairmanship
built by adding the suffix
-ship
to the
compound base
statesman-
and
chairman-
respectively).
It also seems appropriate to make several remarks about the morpho-
logical changes that sometimes accompany the process of combining deri-
vational morphemes with bases. Although this problem has been so far
insufficiently investigated, some observations have been made and some
data collected. For instance, the noun-forming suffix
-ess
for names of
female beings brings about a certain change in the phonetic shape of the
correlative male noun provided the latter ends in
-er, -or,
e.g.
actress
1
See ‘Word-Formation’, § 13, p. 123.
2
See ‘Word-Structure’, § 3, p. 92.
119
§ 9. Suffixation.
Peculiarities of Some Suffixes
(cf.
actor),
sculptress
(cf. sculptor),
tigress
(cf. tiger), etc. It may be eas-
ily, observed that in such cases the sound [9] is contracted in the feminine
nouns.
Further, there are suffixes due to which the primary stress is shifted to
the syllable immediately preceding them, e.g.
courageous
(cf. courage),
stability
(cf. stable),
investigation
(cf. investigate),
peculiarity
(cf. pecu-
liar), etc. When added to a base having the suffix
-able/-ible
as its compo-
nent, the suffix
-ity
brings about a change in its phonetic shape, namely
the vowel [i] is inserted between [b] and [1], e.g.
possible — possibility,
changeable — changeability,
etc. Some suffixes attract the primary stress
on to themselves, there is a secondary stress on the first syllable in words
with such suffixes, e.g. `e
mploy
´
ee
(cf. em´ploy), `
govern
´
mental
(cf.
govern), `
pictu
´
resque
(cf. picture).
There are different classifications of suffixes
in linguistic literature, as suffixes may be di-
vided into several groups according to differ-
ent principles:
1) The first principle of classification that, one might say, suggests it-
self is t h e p a r t of s p e e c h f o r m e d . Within the scope of the
part-of-speech classification suffixes naturally fall into several groups such
as:
a)
noun-suffixes, i.e. those forming or occurring in nouns, e.g.
-er, -
dom, -ness, -ation,
etc.
(teacher, Londoner, freedom, brightness, justi-
fication,
etc.);
b)
adjective-suffixes, i.e. those forming or occurring in adjectives, e.g.
-able, -less, -ful, -ic, -ous,
etc.
(agreeable, careless, doubtful, poetic,
courageous,
etc.);
c)
verb-suffixes, i.e. those forming or occurring in verbs, e.g.
-en, -fy, -
ise (-ize) (darken, satisfy, harmonise,
etc.);
d)
adverb-suffixes, i.e. those forming or occurring in adverbs, e.g.
-ly, -
ward (quickly, eastward,
etc.).
2) Suffixes may also be classified into various groups according to the
lexico-grammatical character of the base the affix is usually added to. Pro-
ceeding from this principle one may divide suffixes into:
a)
deverbal suffixes (those added to the verbal base), e.g.
-er, -ing, -
ment, -able,
etc.
(speaker, reading, agreement, suitable,
etc.);
b)
denominal suffixes (those added to the noun base), e.g.
-less, -ish, -
ful, -ist, -some,
etc.
(handless, childish, mouthful, violinist, trouble-
some,
etc.);
c)
de-adjectival suffixes (those affixed to the adjective base), e.g.
-en, -
ly, -ish, -ness,
etc.
(blacken, slowly, reddish, brightness,
etc.).
3) A classification of suffixes may also be based on the criterion of
sense expressed by a set of suffixes. Proceeding from this principle suf-
fixes are classified into various groups within the bounds of a certain part
of speech. For instance, noun-suffixes fall into those denoting:
a)
the agent of an action, e.g.
-er, -ant (baker, dancer, defendant,
etc.);
b)
appurtenance, e.g.
-an, -ian,
-
ese
, etc.
(Arabian, Elizabethan,
Russian, Chinese, Japanese,
etc.);
120
§ 10. Main Princi-
ples of Classi-
c)
collectivity, e.g.
-age, -dom, -ery (-ry),
etc.
(freightage, official-
dom, peasantry,
etc.);
d)
diminutiveness, e.g.
-ie, -let, -ling,
etc.
(birdie, girlie, cloudlet,
squireling
,
wolfling,
etc.).
4) Still another classification of suffixes may be worked out if one ex-
amines them from the angle of stylistic reference. Just like prefixes, suf-
fixes are also characterised by quite a definite stylistic reference falling
into two basic classes:
a)
those characterised by neutral stylistic reference such as
-able,
-er, -
ing, etc.;
b)
those having a certain stylistic value such as
-oid, -i/form, -aceous,
-tron,
etc.
Suffixes with neutral stylistic reference may occur in words of differ-
ent lexico-stylistic layers e.g.
agreeable,
cf.
steerable (steerable space-
ship); dancer,
cf.
transmitter, squealer;
1
meeting,
cf.
monitoring (the
monitoring of digestive processes in the body),
etc. As for suffixes of
the second class they are restricted in use to quite definite lexico-stylistic
layers of words, in particular to terms, e.g.
rhomboid, asteroid, cruci-
form, cyclotron, synchrophasotron,
etc.
5) Suffixes are also classified as to the degree of their productivity.
As is known, language is never stable:
sounds, constructions, grammatical elements,
word-forms and word-meanings are all exposed to alteration. Derivational
affixes are no exception in this respect, they also undergo semantic
change. Consequently many commonly used derivational affixes are
polysemantic in Modern English. The following two may well serve as
illustrations. The noun-suffix
-er
is used to coin words denoting 1) persons
following some special trade or profession, e.g.
baker, driver, hunter,
etc.; 2) persons doing a certain action at the moment in question, e.g.
packer, chooser, giver,
etc.; 3) a device, tool, implement, e.g.
blotter,
atomiser, boiler, eraser, transmitter, trailer,
etc.
The adjective-suffix
-y
also has several meanings, such as 1) com-
posed of, full of, e.g.
bony, stony;
2) characterised by, e.g.
rainy, cloudy;
3) having the character of, resembling what the base denotes, e.g.
inky,
bushy.
The various changes that the English language has undergone in the
course of time have led to chance coincidence in form of two or more
derivational affixes. As a consequence, and this is characteristic of Mod-
ern English, many homonymic derivational affixes can be found among
those forming both different parts of speech and different semantic group-
ings within the same part of speech. For instance, the adverb-suffix
-ly
added to adjectival bases is homonymous to the adjective-suffix
-ly
af-
fixed to noun-bases, cf.
quickly, slowly
and
lovely, friendly;
the verb-
suffix -en attached to noun- and adjectival bases is homonymous to the
adjective-suffix
-en
tacked on to noun-bases, cf.
to strengthen, to soften
and
wooden, golden;
the verb-prefix -un
1
added to noun- and verb-bases
1
‘informer, complainer’
(sl.)
121
§ 1 1 . Polysemy and Homonymy