Күрделі сөздер туралы толық конспект, шет тілі пәні

1 What types of bases do the immediate constituents (ICs) of compound words represent?

In a compound word the immediate constituents obtain integrity and structural cohesion that make them function in a sentence as a separate lexical unit. E. g.: I'd rather read a time-table than nothing at all.

The structural cohesion of a compound may depend upon unity of stress, solid or hyphenated spelling, semantic unity, unity of morphological and syntactic functioning, or, more often, upon the combined effect of several of these or similar phonetic, graphic, semantic, morphological or syntactic factors.

The integrity of a compound is manifest in its indivisibility, i.e. the impossibility of inserting another word or word-group between its elements. If, for example, speaking about a sunbeam, we can insert some other word between the article and the noun, e. g. a bright sunbeam, a bright and unexpected sunbeam, because the article a is a separate word, no such insertion is possible between the stems sun and beam, for they are not words but morphemes here.

In describing the structure of a compound one should examine three types of relations, namely the relations of the members to each other, the relation of the whole to its members, and correlation with equivalent free phrases.

Some compounds are made up of a determining and a determined part, which may be called the d e t e r m i n a n t and the d e t e r m i n a t u m. The second stem, in our case beam, is the basic part, the determinatum. The determinant sun serves to differentiate it from other beams. The determinatum is the grammatically most important part which undergoes inflection, с f. sunbeams, brothers-in-law, passers-by.

2 What components does the meaning of a compound word consist of?

As English compounds consist of free forms, it is difficult to distinguishthem from phrases. The combination top dog 'a person occupyingforemost place', for instance, though formally broken up, is neithermore nor less analysable semantically than the combination underdog'a person who has the worst of an encounter', and yet we count the first(top dog) as a phrase and the second (underdog) as a word. How far isthis justified? In reality the problem is even more complex than thisisolated example suggests. Separating compounds from phrases andalso from derivatives is no easy task, and scholars are not agreed uponthe question of relevant criteria. The following is a brief review of varioussolutions and various combinations of criteria that have beenoffered.

The problem is naturally reducible to the problem of defining wordboundaries in the language. It seems appropriate to quote E. Nida whowrites that "the criteria for determining the word-units in a languageare of three types: (1) phonological, (2) morphological, (3) syntactic.No one type of criteria is normally sufficient for establishing the wordunit.Rather the combination of two or three types is essential."

E. Nida does not mention the graphic criterion of solid or hyphenatedspelling. This underestimation of written language seems to be amistake. For the present-day literary language, the written form isas important as the oral. If we accept the definition of a written wordas the part of the text from blank to blank, we shall have to accept thegraphic criterion as a logical consequence. It may be argued, however,that there is no consistency in English spelling in this respect. Withdifferent dictionaries and different authors and sometimes even withthe same author the spelling varies, so that the same unit may exist ina solid spelling: headmaster, loudspeaker, with a hyphen: head-master,loud-speaker and with a break between the components, head master,loud speaker. Compare also: airline, air-line, air line, matchbox, match-box,match box, break-up, breakup. Moreover, compounds that appearto be constructed on the same pattern and have similar semantic relationsbetween the constituents may be spelt differently: textbook, phrasebookand reference book. Yet if we take into consideration the comparativefrequency of solid or hvphenated spelling of the combinationsin question, the criterion is

10. What are derivational compounds?

D e r i v a t i o n a l c o m p o u n d s or c o m p o u n d-d e r i vat i v e s like long-legged do not fit the definition of compounds aswords consisting of more than one free stem, because their second element(-legged) is not a free stem. Derivational compounds are included for two reasons: because the number of root morphemes is morethan one, and because they are nearest to compounds in patterns.

D e r i v a t i o n a l c o m p o u n d s or c o m p o u n d-d e r i vat i v e s are words in which the structural integrity of the two freestems is ensured by a suffix referring to the combination as a whole, notto one of its elements: kind-hearted, old-timer, schoolboyishness, teenager.In the coining of the derivational compounds two types of wordformationare at work. The essence of the derivational compounds willbe clear if we compare them with derivatives and compounds properthat possess a similar structure. Take, for example, brainstruster, honeymoonerand mill-owner. The ultimate constituents of all three are: nounstem + noun stem + er. Analysing into immediate constituents, we seethat the immediate constituents (IC's) of the compound mill- owner aretwo noun stems, the first simple, the second derived: mill+owner, ofwhich the last, the determinatum, as well as the whole compound, namesa person. For the word honeymooner no such division is possible, since*mooner does not exist as a free stem. The IC's are honeymoon+-er, andthe suffix -er signals that the whole denotes a person: the structure is(honeymoon) + er.

11. That was the historical development of English compounds?

Compounding, one of the oldest methods of word-formation occurringin all Indo-European languages, is especially developed in Germaniclanguages. English has made use of compounding in all periods ofits existence. Headache, heartache, rainbow, raindrop and many othercompounds of the type noun stem+noun stem and its variant, suchas manslaughter<OE mannslᴂht with the deverbal noun stem for a secondelement, go back to Old English. To the oldest layer belong alsothe adjective stem+noun stem compounds: holiday, sweetmeat, and soon.

Some compounds (among them all those listed above) preserve theirtype in present-day English, others have undergone phonetic changesdue to which their stems ceased to be homonymous to the correspondingfree forms, so that the compounds themselves were turned into root words.

The phenomenon was investigated by Russian and Soviet philologistsV.A. Bogoroditsky, L.A. Bulakhovsky and N.N. Amosova, who usedthe Russian term опрощениеосновы which may be translatedinto English as "simplification of stem" (but this translation canbe only tentative) S i m p l i f i c a t i o n is defined as "a morphologicalprocess by which a word of a complex morphological structureloses the meaning of its separate morphological parts and becomes amere symbol of the notion given."

The English grammarians, such as J.C. Nesfield, for instance, usedthe term d i s g u i s e d c o m p o u n d s , which is inconvenient becauseit is misleading. In English, when a morpheme becomes the constituentof a compound, this does not affect its sound pattern. Exceptionsto this rule signify therefore that the formation cannot be regarded asa compound at the present stage of the language development, althoughit might have been the result of compounding at some earlier stage.

8. What structural patterns of compound adjectives can be singled out? What semantic relations may compound adjectives and their corresponding free phrases have?

C o m p o u n d a d j e c t i v e s regularly correspond to freephrases. Thus, for example, the type threadbare consists of n noun stemand an adjective stem. The relation underlying this combination correspondsto the phrase 'bare to the thread'. Examples are: airtight, bloodthirsty,carefree, heartfree, media-shy, noteworthy, pennywise, poundfoolish,seasick, etc.

The type has a variant with a different semantic formula: snowwhitemeans 'as white as snow', so the underlying sense relation inthat case is emphatic comparison, e. g. dog-tired, dirt-cheap, stone-deaf.Examples are mostly connected with colours: blood-red, sky-blue,pitch-black; with dimensions and scale: knee-deep, breast-high, nation-wide,life-long, world-wide.

The red-hot type consists of two adjective stems, the first expressingthe degree or the nuance of the second: white-hot, light-blue, reddish-brown.The same formula occurs in additive compounds of the bitter-sweettype correlated with free phrases of the type adjectiveand adjective (bitter and sweet) that are rather numerousin technical and scholarlyvocabulary: social-economic, etc. The subgroup of Anglo-Saxon has beenalready discussed.