We can repeat the evaluation at the level of phrase formation, showing now not only the best morphemic elements of the phrase, but also the structural pattern on which it is built; this can be completed in expressions of proportional oppositions. The primary requirements are essentially the same: the score must screen styles defined in different phrases of the same language, the stems obtained after the affix has been removed must correspond to a separate phrase, the derivational affix segregation is based entirely on the proportional opposition of phrases having the same affix with the same lexical and lexico-grammatical means. Ungentlemanly, therefore, is now hostile not to ungentleman (this type of phrase no longer exists), but to gentlemanly. Other pairs connected further correlate with this opposition. Examples: ungentlemanly __ unfair __ unkind __ unselfish gentlemanly fairkindselfish This correlation is known by the pattern un - + adjective stem. This type of phrase formation is described as affixal derivation. The sense un - used in this example means either simply "now no more" or, more commonly, "on the contrary, with the implication of censure or praise, and in the case of ungentlemanly it is miles blame. The next step is similar, only this time the suffix -sya is removed: gentlemanly __ womanly _ scholarly gentlemanwoman scholar The collection shows that these adjectives are modeled after nouns with a base + - ly. The uncommon place that denotes the temporal period of the numeral is "function (gentlemanly, womanly, scholarly)." Evaluation for instantaneous elements, as recommended in American linguistics, has been further refined in the above means by combining a simple formal method with semantic evaluation of the pattern. Semantic evaluation means, for example, that we will distinguish the species gentlemanly from the species month-to-month, even though they all correspond to the same structural noun base + - ly. The semantic correspondence is exceptional, because - ly in the first case is qualitative, and in the second case it is frequent, i.e. month-to-monthly means "going every month. This factor is evident in the correlations that follow: any adjective modeled after the non-public noun stem+-/# equals 'function or 'possessing the high qualities of the person designated through stem'. gentlemanly - *having the characteristics of a gentleman masterly - having the characteristics of a masterly masterly - having the characteristics of a soldierly - having the characteristics of a soldier womanly - having the characteristics of a woman Monthly no longer fits in this collection, so we write: month-to-month ±five having the characteristics of a month. On the other hand, the adjectives of this group, i.e. phrases patterned after a noun base denoting a time interval + - ly are all equal to the formula 'going to every time interval denoted through the base': month-to-monthly → going to every month hourly → going to every yearly → going to every yearly Gentlemanly now no longer exhibits this type of equivalence, remaking is clearly not possible, so we write gentlemanly ↔ going on each gentlemanly The above method is a simple case of transformational evaluation, in which the semantic similarity or difference of phrases is clarified through the possibility or impossibility of converting them according to a prescribed variant and following certain rules directly into an exclusive form, called their remaking. The situations of equivalence between the unique form and the remake are formulated in advance. In our case, the situations to be fulfilled are the sameness of this means and the core morpheme. E. Nida discusses another complicated case: the untruly adj may seem to be split into two variants, with IC's being either un-+genuinely or un-true+-ly. However, looking at various utterances, we see that the prefix un- is almost never mixed with adverbs and very freely with adjectives; examples have already been given above. Thus we are entitled to doubt that IC's are untrue+-ly. Other examples of the same pattern are: uncommonly, unlikely.1 There are, of course, cases, mostly among borrowed phrases, which cannot be evaluated at all; such are, for example, calendar, nasturtium, or chrysanthemum. The evaluation of various phrases may also remain open or unresolved. Some linguists, for example, hold the view that phrases like pocket cannot be morphologically evaluated. Their argument is that, although we are entitled to isolate the element-et, since the correlation can be considered normal (hog:: hogget, lock::: locket), the means of suffixation in each case is especially diminutive, the closing component pock-cannot be considered as a base, since it does not now occur ubiquitously.
Others, like Prof. A.I. Smirnitsky, assume that the stem is morphologically divisible if at the least one in every of its factors may be proven to belong to a normal correlation. Controversial troubles of this nature do now no longer invalidate the standards of evaluation into instant elements. The 2nd factor of view appears extra convincing. To illustrate it, allow us to take the phrase hamlet ‘a small village’. No phrases with this stem arise in present-day English, however it's miles honestly divisible diachronically, as it's miles derived from OFr hamelet of Germanic origin, a diminutive of hamel, and a cognate of the English noun home. We have to now no longer neglect about that masses of English region names give up in - ham, like Shoreham, Wyndham, etc. Nevertheless, creating a combination of ancient and structural technique will in no way do. If we maintain to the 2nd, and search for ordinary identities in step with structural procedures, we will locate the phrases booklet, cloudlet, flatlet, leaflet, ringlet, city permit, etc. In all those - permit is a honestly diminutive suffix which does now no longer contradict the that means of hamlet. A.I. Smirnitsky’s technique is, therefore, supported through the proof afforded through the language material, and additionally lets in us to maintain inside strictly synchronic limits. Now we will make one extra conclusion, namely, that during lexicological evaluation phrases can be grouped now no longer best in step with their root morphemes however in step with affixes as well. morphological shape english phrase The complete method of the evaluation into instant elements is decreased to the popularity and type of equal and exclusive morphemes and equal and exclusive phrase styles. This is exactly why it lets in the tracing and knowledge of the vocabulary system.
Do'stlaringiz bilan baham: |
