Nukus State Pedagogical Institute named after Ajiniyaz

Synchronic and diachronic approaches
Word-formation can be analyzed like any other linguistic phenomenon. Synchronically and diachronically, from two angles. It is imperative to distinguish between these two methods, for the linguist synchronically Investigates the current system of word-forming forms when diachronically investigating The history of word-building affects him. To highlight We will consider affixation as the difference in approach. Diachronically speaking, it is the chronological order in which one word is created from another word, that's significant. A derived term is seen on the synchronous plane as being having a more complex structure than a correlated term, irrespective of whether it is derived from a simpler base or from a more complex base. In the past of the English language, there are instances when a more structurally complicated word acted as the original feature of the Which was derived from a simpler word. Those are instances of the mechanism known as -formation (or back-derivation and some others. Historically, the fact that from the corresponding agent nouns, the verbs to beg, edit, etc. No synchronous significance is present. When synchronically analyzing and explaining word-formation, it is describing the related structural elements from a word is not enough to remove them, in terms of derivational bases, derivational affixes and form, its structure. It is completely important to decide the form of derivative patterns, the place within the systemic semantic of these patterns and their constituents method of the entire language, a derivative's efficiency. Therefore, form cannot be disregarded in this classification.
Productive and non-productive ways of forming words
Any of the ways that words are created in the present— English for the day can be resorted to for the Production of new words every time the occasion occurs requirements are classified as productive ways of forming words, it is impossible that other methods of shaping words can now create new words, these are usually known as the non-productive way of word-formation. Affixation, for example, has been one of the best way of shaping words since the Old English period; sound exchange, on the other hand, it must have been a word-building tool at one time, but in the role of modern English, as mentioned above is actually only to differentiate between various groups and word types. The efficiency of word-building methods, individual derivational methods, follows. Patterns and derivative affixes are understood to be their potential for make new phrases that anyone who speaks English has no challenge in understanding, in particular, their capacity to generate what is known as occasional words or nonce-words. The expression means that the speaker coins these words when he wants them; if the speaker coins them on another occasion, again the same word is necessary, he coins it as fresh. There are nonce-words constructed from familiar content of the language after familiar patterns. There is no need to suggest that dictionaries do not record occasional terms as a rule. As an example, the following words can be used: (his) collarless (appearance), lungful (smoke), Dickensish (office), unlearned (rules), etc. Delimitation of productive and non-productive forms and methods however the means of word formation as mentioned above are not agreed by all. Some linguists believe it is important to explain more specifically, the term efficiency of a word-building implies. They have keep the view that only productive forms and means of word-forming are the ones that can be used to build an infinite number of new ones in the modern language, terms, i.e. such suggest that "know no bounds" and occasional words are easily created. This difference in opinion is responsible for this divergence of opinion considered productive for the difference in the lists of derivative affixes in a number of English Lexicology texts. Nevertheless, recent studies seem to show that derivational productivity in certain ways, the definition is subjective. Furthermore, there is absolutely no productive means; patterns of derivation and affixes of derivation have varying degrees of efficiency. It is therefore necessary that productivity-favoring conditions and the degree of productivity of a particular patterns or affixes should be specified.
Experience of all derivative trends structural as well as semantic constraints. The less the restrictions are, the greater the degree of efficiency, the greater the number built on it with new words. The two general limitations imposed on all derivation restrictions patterns are the portion of speech in which the pattern works and the importance attached to it that conveys the periodic semantic connection between the terms of the two schools. It follows that any component of a collection of peculiar active derivative patterns characterizes expression. Productivity is divided into three degrees for derivational patterns and individual derivational affixes: 1) highly productive; 2) productive or semi-productive; 3) non-productive it is not important to define productivity of derivative patterns and affixes with speech frequency, although there may be some their interrelationship. The incidence frequency is defined by the fact that a large number of terms contain a derivative affix that is given speech, in particular in different writings. Clearly, productivity is usually characterized by the ability of given suffix to make words. Another interpretation of derivational interpretation in linguistic literature is productivity based on a quantitative approach. A pattern of derivation or derivational affixes are considered as productive if they are present in the dozens and hundreds of derived words built on the pattern or the word-stock with the help of the appropriate suffix. Derivational productivity, thus interpreted, the word-forming activity by which it is meant is distinct from the capacity of an affix to generate new words especially occasional words, phrases or nonce-words. A few illustrations to offer. The suffix of agent -er is to count as both a productive suffix and an active suffix: on the one hand, the English word-stock has hundreds of nouns containing this however. On the other side, the suffix (e.g. driver, instructor, speaker, etc.), the suffix -er is openly used in the pattern v+-er - N to coin an infinite number. Number of nonce-words denoting active agents (for example, interrupt, comply, Laughter, breakfast, and so on). The adjective suffix is described as a productive suffix, but not as an active suffix. One, and with this suffix, there are hundreds of adjectives (e.g. stunning, hopeful, helpful,) but no new terms tend to be constructed with its aid. For obvious purposes, in terms of this strategy, the noun-suffix-th is to both a non-productive one and a non-active one are considered.
Major and minor types of Word-formation
It is possible to classify all ways of forming new words into two broad groups: major and minor forms of producing new words. There are two main kinds of word-formation they are known to be word-derivation and word-composition. The minor types – comprise shortening, blending, acronymy, sound imitation, sound interchange, back-formation, distinctive stress.