Nukus State Pedagogical Institute named after Ajiniyaz

The course paper is devoted to the identification and description of the entire structure of words, such as compounding and word formations in English vocabulary. Analyzing how a new word is structured and what is the root of the word is always researched by linguists. For this term one English linguist Harris stated precise definition: “A compound is an English construction with two free morphemes plus the contour”. Actually, grammar, vocabulary and phonology are known as the important parts of English language.
The aim of the work is to describe what lexicology studies, types of word formations, how compounding is classified, various types of conversion.
The tasks of the investigation include:
To review the parts of lexicology;
Review the ways of forming words;
Identifying how words are compounded;
The main language material of the course paper has been sorted and collected from literary works, Internet resource, articles and some textbooks by English linguistics. I tried to take information that is easy to prove any time and the definitions and examples I gathered from different English resources are authentic and without doubt they are understandable at once. The hypothetical and commonsense esteem of the paper lies in the appropriateness to the course of English Lexicology, Language structure, Common Phonetics and viable English classes.
The structure of the work comprises of the introductory part, two chapters, conclusion and the book index.
Chapter I. Compounding as a major branch of Word-formation
Compounding is a word formation process based on the combination of lexical elements. The elements can be characterized as words, stems, or lexemes, depending on the language and on the theoretical framework adopted. In the theoretical literature, the discussion of compounding is marked by disagreement on basic issues. Here, these issues will be grouped into four main areas, labeled as delimitation, classification, formation, and interpretation. To each of these, a section will be devoted. Not all of the issues are equally important in all theoretical frameworks and perspectives. A question that concerns all of them is to what extent theories can be applied crosslinguistically. The final section gives some general considerations about the relationship between the different issues. As much of the discussion in the literature focuses on English, English compounds will be central in the presentation of issues. However, examples from other languages will be included as well, in particular when they raise issues that do not arise in English.
1. Delimitation
A wide range of criteria have been used to characterize compounds and distinguish them from other phenomena, in particular syntactic phrases and derivations. The preference for certain criteria is determined by three questions, listed in. A typical compound in English is textbook. It has a range of properties that can be evaluated for the three factors in . Morphologically, it consists of two uninflected nouns. Phonologically, it has a characteristic stress pattern. Orthographically, the two components are written together. Syntactically, it behaves as a noun. Semantically, it refers to a type of book, marked in some way by text.
When these properties are considered in the light of , a good example of is the question of whether orthographic criteria are acceptable. In many linguistic theories, starting from Saussure it is assumed that orthography is not itself part of language. Such considerations have to be distinguished from the question how useful the criterion is. It is well known that in English, the orthography of many compounds is variable give the example of flower pot, flower-pot, flowerpot. This makes it difficult to decide whether it is a compound on the basis of this orthographic criterion, a problem of type . Whereas in English, compounds are most often written as two words, in other Germanic languages compounds are generally written together, which highlights the issue in . The combination of problems involved has led to a fairly general rejection of orthography as a criterion for compoundhood.
Phonological criteria offer a good example of the problems involved in a positive answer to .The Dutch examples in illustrate contexts for final obstruent devoicing.