I intraduction chapter I theoretical

C) THE VALENCY OF AFFIXES AND STEMS. WORD-BUILDING PATTERNS AND THEIR MEANING
Another essential feature of affixes that should not be overlooked is their combinability or valency and the derivational patterns in which they regularly occur. We have already seen that not all combinations of existing morphemes are actually used. Thus, unhappy, untrue, and unattractive are fairly regular combinations, while the seemingly similar *unsad, *UN-FALSE, *unpretty do not exist. The possibility of adopting a particular affix base depends on phonomorphological, morphological and semantic factors. For example, the suffix - ance/-ence,1 occurs only after b, t, d, dz, v, l, r, m, n: anxiety, perseverance, independence, but not after s or z: densification, organization. Of course, it is impossible to describe the whole system. To clarify our thought, let us take as an example the suffixes that form adjectives. They are mostly joined to noun bases. These include: ~ed (prickly), - en (golden), - ful (cautious), - less (careless), - ly (soldierly), - like (childish), - y (cordial) and some others. The highly productive suffix - able can be combined both with nouns and with verbal bases (clubbable, bearable). It is especially common in the scheme un - + verbal base + - able (unbearable). Sometimes it even joins phrases in which composition and affixation are simultaneous, producing complex derivatives (unbrushoffable, ungetatable). These characteristics are important both structurally and semantically. Their structural significance becomes clear if we realize that in order to describe the system of a given vocabulary, it is necessary to know the typical models by which words are formed. This requires not only knowing the morphemes of which they are composed, but also identifying their recurring regular combinations and the links that exist between them. This approach provides a rigorous linguistic basis for identifying lexical-grammatical classes within each part of speech. In English, these classes have been little studied so far, although research into this problem seems very promising.1 It should also be noted that, from the standpoint of information theory, the fact that not every affix is capable of combining with any given stem makes the code more reliable, protecting it from noise,2 errors and misunderstandings. Thus the valency of bases is not unlimited. Nouns can be followed by nouns that form suffixes: - age (bondage), - dom (serfdom), - eer/-ier (speculator, ringman), - ess (waitress), - ful (spoon), - hood (childhood), - ian (doctor), - ics (linguistics), - iel-y (father), - ing (gender), - ism (heroism), - ist (violinist), - let (cloud), - ship (friendship) - , suffixes forming adjectives: - al/-ial (doctor), - an (African), - ary (revolutionary), - ed (wooded), - ful (encouraging), - ic/-ical (historic, historical), - ish (childish), - like (businesslike), - ly (friendly), - ous/-ious/-eous (spacious), - some (beautiful), - y (cloudy) ', verb-forming suffixes: - ate (to air), - en (to please), - fy/-ify (to speak), - ise (to sympathize). Verbal bases are almost equal in valency to noun bases. They are combined with the following suffixes forming nouns: - age (breakage), - al (betrayal), - ance/-ence (guidance, recommendation), - ant/-ent (assistant, student), - ee (worker), - er/-or (artist, editor), - ing (rebellion), - ion/-tion/-ation (action, information), - ment (government). Adjective-forming suffixes are used with verb bases: - able/-ible (pleasant, understandable), - ive/-sive/-tive (talkative), - some (meddlesome). Adjectives have a shorter list: - dom (freedom), - ism (realism), - ity/-ty (reality, brutality), - ness (brightness), - ish (reddish), - ly (firm), ate (differentiate), - en (sharpen), - fy/-ify (solidify). Noise as a term of information theory is used to refer to any kind of interference in the communication process. Combination possibilities (or valency) are very important from a semantic point of view, since the meaning of a derivative depends not only on the morphemes of which it is composed, but also on the combinations of bases and affixes which may be contrasted with it. Contrast should be sought in the use of the same morpheme in different contexts, as well as in the use of different morphemes in the same context. For example, the difference between the suffixes - ity and - ism will become clear if we compare them in combination with the same bases in the following oppositions: formality:: formalism:: humanity: humanism; reality: realism. Roughly speaking, words in - ity denote the quality of being what the corresponding adjective describes, or an instance of that quality. The resulting nouns are numeralized. The suffix - ism forms nouns naming the disposition of what the adjective describes, or the corresponding type of ideology. Being uncountable, they refer to another
A good example is the suffix - ish, as an adjective suffix. The possibilities for the combinability of the suffix - ish are extensive, but not unlimited. Boyish and waspish are used, while *enemish and *aspish are not. The limitations here are semantic in nature. It regularly appears in names of nationalities, as for example: British, Irish, Spanish.1 When added to noun bases it forms adjectives of the 'having a character' type with a moderately pejorative connotation: bookish, churlish, monkeyish, sheepish, swinish. Childish has a pejorative meaning, an adjective with a good sense - childlike. You could say of a person that he behaves with childlike naivety, but with childlike simplicity. Compare also womanly 'having qualities befitting a woman,' as in womanly compassion, womanly grace, womanly tact, with the pejorative womanish 'effeminate,' as in: womanish fears, traitors to love and duty (Coleridge).
Another critical characteristic of affixes that should be noted is their combinability or valency, as well as the derivational styles in which they frequently occur. We have already seen that nowadays not all combinations of actual morphemes are sincerely used anymore. Thus, unhappy, unfaithful, and unattractive are fairly common combinations, while similar *unsad, *UN-FALSE, and *unpretty no longer exist. The possibility that the chosen base will adopt the chosen affix depends on phonomorphological, morphological, and semantic factors. For example, the suffix - ance/-ence,1 is most easily formed after b, t, d, dz, v, l, r, m, n: disturbance, insistence, independence, but no longer after s or z: condensation, organization. Of course, it is impossible to explain the whole mechanism. To purify our factor, let us take as an example the suffixes that form adjectives. They are usually attached to noun bases. These include: ~ed (barbed), - en (golden), - ful (careful), - less (careless), - ly (soldierly), - like (childlike), - y (hearty) and several others. A particularly effective suffix - capin in position can be mixed both with nouns and with verbal bases (clubbable, bearable). It is especially common in the example un - + verb base + - capin a position (intolerable). Sometimes it is far even related to terms in which composition and affixation are simultaneous, producing compound derivatives (unbrushoffable, ungetatable). These features are extremely important both structurally and semantically. Their structural significance is obvious if we recognize that in order to explain the structure of a given vocabulary, it is necessary to realize the standard styles from which its phrases are derived. For this purpose, it is crucial not only to understand the morphemes of which they are composed, but also to show their recurring common combinations and the connections between them. This method guarantees a thorough linguistic basis for identifying lexical-grammatical lessons within each part of speech. In English, these lessons are still little studied, although research on this problem seems very promising.1 It is also worth saying that, from the point of view of the concept of facts, the fact that not every affix can now be combined with any given base makes the code more reliable, protecting it from noise,2 errors and misunderstandings. The valence of bases is not always, therefore, unlimited. Noun bases can be observed through the mediation of nouns forming suffixes: - age (bondage), - dom (serfdom), - eer/-ier (profiteer, collier), - ess (waitress), - ful (spoonful), - hood (childhood), - ian (physician), - ics (linguistics), - iel-y (daddy), - ing (flooring), - ism (heroism), - ist (violinist), - let (cloudlet), - ship (friendship) - , through suffixes forming adjectives: - al/-ial (doctoral), - an (African), - ary (revolutionary), - ed (wooded), - ful (encouraging), - ic/-ical (historic, historical), - ish (infantile), - like (businesslike), - ly (friendly), - ous/-ious/-eous (spacious), - a few (beautiful), - y (cloudlet) ', verb-forming suffixes: - ate (to air), - en (to please), - fy/-ify (to speak), - ise (to sympathize). Verbal bases are almost identical to noun bases in valency. They are combined with subsequent suffixes forming nouns: - age (breakage), - al (betrayal), - ance/-ence (guidance, recommendation), - ant/-ent (assistant, student), - ee (employee), - er/-or (artist, editor), - ing (rebellion), - ion/-tion/-ation (action, facts), - ment (government). Adjective-forming suffixes are used with verb bases: - capin a position/-ible (pleasant, understandable), - ive/-sive/-tive (talkative), - a few (harmful). Adjectives give a shorter list: - dom (freedom), - ism (realism), - ity/-ty (reality, brutality), - ness (brightness), - ish (reddish), - ly (firm), ate (discern), - en (sharpen), - fy/-ify (firm). Noise as a temporal period of the concept of facts is used
Subsequent nouns are numeral nouns. Nouns with the suffix - ism bureaucracy refer to the disposition of what the adjective describes, or the corresponding form of ideology. Being non-numerative, they belong to a separate lexico-grammatical class. The similarity on which the contest is entirely based may also lie, for the cloth of the adjective paragraph, in the similarity of the suffix. Describing suffixes according to the basis with which they are blended and the lexico-grammatical lessons they distinguish can be helpful in assessing the meanings they convey. A precise example can be given by the example of the suffix - ish, as an adjective suffix. The possibilities of combining the suffix - ish are enormous, but not limitless. Boyish and waspish are used, while *enemish and *aspish are no longer used. The limitations here are semantic in nature. Often the gift is found within names of nationalities, such as: British, Irish, Spanish.1 When transferred to a noun, it bureaucratizes adjectives like 'having character' with a rather derogatory coloring: bookish, churlish, monkeyish, sheepish, swinish. Childish has a pejorative connotation, the adjective with a great deal of seniority is childlike. You could say that the guy acts with infantile intrusiveness, but with childlike simplicity. Compare the complement womanly 'having traits befitting a woman,' e.g., womanly compassion, womanly grace, womanly tact, with the pejorative womanish 'effeminate,' e.g., womanish fears, traitors to like and duty (Coleridge).⁵
Another critical characteristic of affixes that should be noted is their combinability or valency, as well as the derivational styles in which they frequently occur. We have already seen that nowadays not all combinations of actual morphemes are sincerely used anymore. Thus, unhappy, unfaithful, and unattractive are fairly common combinations, while similar *unsad, *UN-FALSE, and *unpretty no longer exist. The possibility that the chosen base will adopt the chosen affix depends on phonomorphological, morphological, and semantic factors. For example, the suffix - ance/-ence,1 is most easily formed after b, t, d, dz, v, l, r, m, n: disturbance, insistence, independence, but no longer after s or z: condensation, organization. Of course, it is impossible to explain the whole mechanism. To purify our factor, let us take as an example the suffixes that form adjectives. They are usually attached to noun bases. These include: ~ed (barbed), - en (golden), - ful (careful), - less (careless), - ly (soldierly), - like (childlike), - y (hearty) and several others. A particularly effective suffix - capin in position can be mixed both with nouns and with verbal bases (clubbable, bearable). It is especially common in the example un - + verb base + - capin a position (intolerable). Sometimes it is far even related to terms in which composition and affixation are simultaneous, producing compound derivatives (unbrushoffable, ungetatable). These features are extremely important both structurally and semantically. Their structural significance is obvious if we recognize that in order to explain the structure of a given vocabulary it is necessary to realize the standard styles from which its phrases are derived.
To do this, it is now crucial not only to realize the morphemes of which they are composed, but also to show their recurrent common combinations and the connections that exist between them. This method guarantees a thorough linguistic basis for identifying lexical-grammatical lessons within each part of speech. In English, these lessons are still little studied, although research on this problem seems very promising.1 It is also worth saying that, from the point of view of the concept of facts, the fact that not every affix can now be combined with any given base makes the code more reliable, protecting it from noise,2 errors and misunderstandings. The valence of bases is not always, therefore, unlimited. Noun bases can be observed through the mediation of nouns forming suffixes: - age (bondage), - dom (serfdom), - eer/-ier (profiteer, collier), - ess (waitress), - ful (spoonful), - hood (childhood), - ian (physician), - ics (linguistics), - iel-y (daddy), - ing (flooring), - ism (heroism), - ist (violinist), - let (cloudlet), - ship (friendship) - , through suffixes forming adjectives: - al/-ial (doctoral), - an (African), - ary (revolutionary), - ed (wooded), - ful (encouraging), - ic/-ical (historic, historical), - ish (infantile), - like (businesslike), - ly (friendly), - ous/-ious/-eous (spacious), - a few (beautiful), - y (cloudlet) ', verb-forming suffixes: - ate (to air), - en (to please), - fy/-ify (to speak), - ise (to sympathize). Verbal bases are almost identical to noun bases in valency. They are combined with subsequent suffixes forming nouns: - age (breakage), - al (betrayal), - ance/-ence (guidance, recommendation), - ant/-ent (assistant, student), - ee (worker), - er/-or (artist, editor), - ing (rebellion), - ion/-tion/-ation (action, facts), - ment (government). Adjective-forming suffixes are used with verb bases: - capin a position/-ible (pleasant, understandable), - ive/-sive/-tive (talkative), - a few (harmful). Adjectives give a shorter list: - dom (freedom), - ism (realism), - ity/-ty (reality, brutality), - ness (brightness), - ish (reddish), - ly (firm), ate (distinguish), - en (sharpen), - fy/-ify (firm). Noise as a temporal segment of the concept of facts is used to denote any kind of interference in the technique of communication. Possibilities of combination (or valency) are very important from a semantic point of view, since the meaning of a by-product now depends not only on the morphemes of which it is composed, but also on combinations of stems and affixes which may be contrasted with it. Contrast is to be sought in the use of identical morphemes in different surroundings, as well as in the use of different morphemes in any other identical surroundings. The distinction between suffixes - ity and - ism, for example, becomes pure if we evaluate them as mixed with the same stem within the following oppositions: formality::: formalism:: humanity:: humanism; reality::: realism. Roughly speaking, phrases in - ity imply pleasantness of what is what the corresponding adjective describes, or an example of that pleasantness. Subsequent nouns are numerator nouns. Nouns with the suffix - ism bureaucracy refer to the disposition of what the adjective describes, or the corresponding form of ideology. Being non-numerative, they belong to a special lexico-grammatical class. The resemblance on which the contest is entirely based may also lie, for the cloth of the adjective paragraph, in the resemblance of the suffix. Describing suffixes according to the basis with which they are blended and the lexico-grammatical lessons they distinguish can be helpful in assessing the meanings they convey. A precise example can be given by the example of the suffix - ish, as an adjective suffix. The possibilities of combining the suffix - ish are enormous, but not limitless. Boyish and waspish are used, while *enemish and *aspish are no longer used. The limitations here are semantic in nature. Often the gift is found within names of nationalities, such as: British, Irish, Spanish.1 When transferred to a noun, it bureaucratizes adjectives like 'having character' with a rather derogatory coloring: bookish, churlish, monkeyish, sheepish, swinish. Childish has a pejorative connotation, the adjective with a great deal of seniority is childlike. You could say that the guy acts with infantile intrusiveness, but with childlike simplicity. Compare the complement womanly 'having features befitting a woman,' e.g., womanly compassion, womanly grace, womanly tact, with the pejorative womanish 'effeminate,' e.g., womanish fears, traitors to like and duty (Coleridge). With adjective stems the meaning is not derogatory, the adjective renders a moderate degree of the quality named: greenish ‘somewhat green’, stiffish ‘somewhat stiff, thinnish ‘somewhat thin’. The model is especially frequent with colours: blackish, brownish, reddish. A similar but stylistically peculiar meaning is observed in combinations with numeral stems: eightyish, fortyish and the like are equivalent to ‘round about eighty’, ‘round about forty’. E. g.: “What’s she like, Min? ” “Sixtyish. Stout. Grey hair. Tweeds. Red face. ” (McCrone)
In colloquial speech the suffix - ish is added to words denoting the time of day: four-o'clockish or more commonly fourish means "about four o'clock. E. g.: Robert and I went to Annette's cocktail party. (It was called "drinks at six thirty'ish"-the word "cocktail" was coming out of use). (W. Cooper).
Studying the correlations of derivatives and bases also helps clarify the meaning of the affix. The lexico-grammatical meaning of the suffix - ness, which forms qualitative nouns from adjective bases, becomes clear when the correlations of derivative and base are studied. A few examples, taken at random, will be sufficient proof: good: kindness; kind: kindness; lonely: loneliness; ready: readiness; righteous: righteousness; slow: slowness.
Suffixes - ion (and its allomorphs - sion and - tion) and - or are nominal suffixes in combination with verbal bases. The opposition between them serves to distinguish two subclasses of nouns: abstract nouns and agentive nouns, e.g., accumulation:: accumulator; action: actor; election:: elector; liberation:: liberator; oppression: oppressor; vibration:: vibrator, etc. An abstract noun in this case can denote an action, a state, or the result of an action, while remaining within the same subclass. Thus, it denotes the process of tilling (most often tillage) and the state of tilling. Things are somewhat different with the suffix - or, because a cultivator is "a person who tills the ground1 and "a machine for loosening the ground, loosening the soil around growing plants and destroying weeds. Thus, we are talking about two different subclasses: one is an animate being and the other is an inanimate thing. They differ not only semantically, but also grammatically; in English, there is a regular opposition of animate and inanimate nouns: the first group is replaced by the pronoun he or she, and the second by the pronoun it. In derivation, this opposition of animate personal nouns to all other nouns is in some cases supported by suffixes such as - ard/-art (braggart), - ist (novelist) and some others, but more often is neutralized. The term neutralization can be defined as the temporary cessation of opposition functioning. Neutralization, as in the word cultivator, is also observed with suffixes such as - ant, - er, which also occur in agentive nouns, both animate and inanimate. For example, accountant is "a person who keeps accounts" and coolant is "coolant"; fitter is "a mechanic who mounts all kinds of metal products" and shutter (in photography) is "a device that regulates the effect of light on a film plate"; runner is "messenger" and "skate blade".
Such structural observations show that an analysis of suffixes in the light of their valency and the lexico-grammatical subclasses they delimit can be useful for analyzing their semantic properties. The notions of opposition, correlation and neutralization introduced into linguistics by N. Trubetskoy turn out to be relevant and useful for morphological analysis as well.
The term word-formation or derivational pattern is used to denote a meaningful combination of bases and affixes that occurs regularly enough to indicate a part of speech, a lexical-semantic category, and semantic features common to most words with a given arrangement of morphemes.1 Each type of word formation (affixation, composition, conversion, compositional derivation, reduction, etc.), as well as each part of speech has a distinctive set of patterns. Some of these, especially those with the derivation suffix -ish, have already been described in this paragraph. It is also clear from the previous description that pattern grouping is possible by base type, by affix, or starting from some semantic grouping.1
The grouping of patterns, their description and study may be based on the same principle of explanatory transformations that we have used for componential analysis in Chapter 3 (see §3.6).
Let us turn again to affixation and see how the dictionary defines words with the prefix un-: