Specific features of forming compound words

For compound word blackboard such changes are not possible. Similarly, the combination of a stone wall in a sentence: There is a stone wall between the two gardens can rebuild and say: There is a wall of stone between the two gardens. The proposal: There is some stoneware on the shelf such permutation is not possible. Nor can we say instead: an earthquake- a quake of earth.

Morphological criteria

Some complex words undisputed indicator of their fusion and unifying factor is the morphological non-separability. Thus, all compound nouns, even derived from other parts of speech, get in the plural suffix -s

forget-me-nots - незабудки; good-for-nothings - бездельники

Unification phrases in a compound word contributes syntactic function. This is particularly true in the attribute function. Too many phrases, when combined attribute function together as an accent and graphically - hyphen:an old-age pensioner пенсионер, получающий пенсию no старости

a not-to-be-forgotten expression незабываемое выражение

her four-year-old son ее четырехлетний сын

a devil-may-care aititude бесшабашное отношение

a three-and-six tea чай и еда, стоящие три шиллинга и шесть пенсовThus all of these criteria: graphic, phonetic, semantic, structural and morphological are not absolute, and the question of the boundaries between the complex words and phrases remains controversial.

3.3 Inseparability of Compound Words

Structurally the inseparability of compounds manifests itself in the specific order and arrangement of stems which stand out most clearly in all asyntactic compounds. It is of interest to note that the difference between words and stems even when they coincide morphemically is especially evident in compound adjectives proper. Adjectives like long, wide, rich are characterized by grammatical forms of degrees of comparison longer, wider, richer. The corresponding stems lack grammatical independence and forms proper to the words and retain only the part - of - speech meaning, thus compound adjectives with adjective stems for their second components, e.g. age-long, oil-rich, do not form degrees of comparison the way words long, rich do. They conform to the general rule of polysyllabic adjectives having analytical forms of degrees of comparison. This difference between words and stems is not so noticeable in compound nouns with the noun stem for the second component, as the paradigm of the compound word coincides with the paradigm of the noun whose stem constitutes its structural centre [28,78p].

Graphically most compounds have two types of spelling they are spelt either solidly or with a hyphen. Both types of spelling when accompanied by structural or phonetic peculiarities serve as a sufficient indication of inseparability of compound words in contradistinction to phrases. It is true that hyphenated spelling when not accompanied by some other indications of inseparability may be sometimes misleading, as it may be used in word-groups to underline the phraseological character of combination as in, e.g. daughter-in-law, father-in-law, man-of-war, brother-in-arms, etc. which are neither structurally, nor phonetically marked by inseparability.

The two types of spelling typical of compounds, however, are not rigidly observed and there are numerous fluctuations between solid or hyphenated spelling on the one hand and spelling with a space between the components on the other, especially in nominal compounds built on the n+n formula. The spelling of these compounds varies from author to and author from dictionary to dictionary. For example, words--war-path, war-time, money-lender--are spelt both with a hyphen or solidly; blood-poisoning, money-order, wave - length, blood-vessel, war-ship--with a hyphen end with a break;1 underfoot, insofar, underhand--solidly and with a break. This inconsistency of spelling in compounds, very often accompanied by a level stress pattern (equally typical of word groups) makes the outer indications of inseparability stand out less clearly and gives rise to the problem of distinguishing between compound words and word-groups.

The numerous borderline cases between compounds and word-groups are connected with one of the most controversial problems in word-composition, known in linguistic literature as "the stonewall problem", in other words the problem whether complexes like stone wall, peace movement, summer days regularly spelt with a break should he regarded as compound words or word-groups. The solution of the problem centers on the nature of the first member of such formations. There are two approaches to this problem and linguists, consequently, give different appraisals of the graphic and phonetic integrity of such complexes.

Some linguists class such complexes as a specific group of compound words on the ground that the connection between the members of such complexes cannot be regarded as syntactic, as the usual means of connection between two nouns typical of Modern English syntax is either the possessive cafe or various prepositions:" They consequently conclude that the connection in formation of the "stone wall" type is asyntactic hence the members of these complexes are not words but grammatically unshaped elements, i.e. stems. As a junction of two noun-stems they are referred to compound words. The asyntactic structure is taken for a sufficient proof of their inseparability and lack of graphic integrity is disregarded. The proponents of this point of view go on to stale that these complexes may also be interpreted as combinations of an adjective with a noun, the adjective being formed from the noun-stem by means of conversion for the given occasion, in which case a compound word would remain primary and a word-group secondary. This brings the linguists to the conclusion that these complexes make a specific group of compound words, often termed neutral.1 they are characterized by structural instability due to which they can be easily disintegrated into free word-groups under the influence of parallel attributive combinations, level stress and spelling with a break between the components [29, 160p].

The above-cited treatment of these nominal complexes and the disregard of the outer, formal manifestations of inseparability is open to grave doubts. On the one hand, the productivity of conversion in formation of adjectives does not seem convincing because there are very few adjectives' of the type in independent use in Modern English; on the other hand it is argued that Modern English nouns in the Common case, singular are used in the attributive function and a purely syntactic nature of the combination of two; full-fledged nouns has been almost universally recognized in the last few decades. If we share the opinion, we shall come-to the obvious conclusion that there exists a nominal type of free phrases built on the formula N+N and a group of nominal compounds built on the n+n formula which stands in correlative relations to each other. The recognition of nominal free phrases deprives "neutral compounds" of theoretical validity. Nominal compounds remain a specific class of compounds but in this case the distributional formula even in the most indisputable cases has only a weakened distinguishing force and can by no means be taken for an overall criterion of their inseparability. It is evident that the hyphenated spelling or at least fluctuations between hyphenated spelling and spelling with a break become most significant in distinguishing nominal compound words from word-groups. Consequently nominal complexes which are regularly spelt with a space between the components and are characterized by level stress pattern can hardly be regarded as inseparable vocabulary units. It is noteworthy that occasional compounds of this type which have become-registered vocabulary units tend to solid or hyphenated spelling.

3.4 Motivation in Compound words

Compound words are motivated through the individual lexical meanings of their components and the meaning of the structure. In motivated compound words the native speaker can see a connection between the lexical meanings of the stems and the meaning of the order and arrangement of components of the word. Motivation in compound words varies in degree. There are compounds which are completely motivated, i.e. the lexical meaning of these words is transparent and is easily deduced from the lexical meanings of the stems and the meaning of their distributional formulas. Compound words like wind-driven, sky-blue, foot-step, foot-pump, door-handle, and bottle-opener may serve as examples of completely transparent or motivated compound words. Motivation in compound words may be partial, but again the degree will vary. Compound words like hand-bag, flowerbed, handcuff are all only partially motivated, but still the degree of transparency of their meanings is different: hand-bag, e.g., is essentially 'a bag designed to be carried in the hand', whereas handcuffs retain only a resemblance to cuffs and in fact are 'metal rings placed round the wrists of 3 prisoner'; a f lower-bed is not 'a mattress or piece of furniture' as the lexical meaning of the second component suggests; but 'a piece1 of ground where flowers grow'. Compound words with a smaller degree-of partial motivation may be illustrated" by the words: walkup--'a house without an elevator where one has to walk upstairs', cast-off--'discarded', castle-builder--'a day-dreamer, one who builds castle; in the air'[20,21p].

There are compound words that lack motivation altogether, i.e. the native speaker does not see any obvious connection between the meaning of their structure and the individual meanings of the stems and consequently cannot deduce the lexical meaning of the word. Compound words like eye-wash -`something said or done to deceive a person', fiddlesticks - 'nonsense rubbish', wall-flower--'a woman who remains. by the wall as a spectator at a dance, because not chosen as a partner', eye-servant--'a servant who attends faithfully to his duty only when watched', night-cap--'a drink taken before going to bed at night', dog-eared--'having the corners of the leaves turned down' all lack motivation and their lexical meanings cannot be deduced from the meanings of their components and the meaning of their structure. Lack of motivation in compound words may be often connected with the transferred usage of the denotational meanings of the components or of the whole word as in slow-coach--'a person who acts slowly', sweet-tooth--'one who likes sweet food and drink', wall-flower; the words consequently acquire a new co notational meaning not proper to either of their components. Lack of motivation is of ten due to the specialized and unexpected semantic relations embedded in the compound word as in, e.g., eye-servant, dog-days--'the hottest part of July and August' [57, 165p].

Sometimes the motivated and non-motivated meanings of the same word are felt as two homonymous words, e.g. night-cap 1) a cap worn in bed at night and 2) a drink taken before going to bed at night; eye-wash 1) a liquid for washing the eyes and 2) something said or done to deceive a person; eye-opener 1) enlightening or surprising circumstance and 2) a drink of liquor. Motivation in compound words may be partial, but again the degree will vary. It is evident that the hyphenated spelling or at least fluctuations between hyphenated spelling and spelling with a break become most significant in distinguishing nominal compound words from word-groups.

3.5 Semantic Classifications

Semantically compound words may be classified (1) according to the degree of motivation, and (2) according to the structural meaning of various distributional

formulas described through the interrelation of the components.

1) According to the degree of motivation compound words are subdivided into (a) motivated or non-idiomatic, i.e. words marked either by complete or partial motivation which makes the meaning of the word transparent; (b) non-motivated or idiomatic, i.e. "words the lexical meanings of which cannot be inferred from the individual meanings of their components and the meaning of the distributional formula they are built after.

2) According to the structural meaning or the type of semantic relations between the components compound words may be classified into various groups as words based on the relations of: (a) agent and action, e.g. sunrise, earthquake, (b) object and action, e.g. warship, handshake, (c) the part and the whole, e.g. plum-tree, shirt-collar, eye-ball, etc., (d) the place end the action, or the doer, e.g. street-fighting, grass-hopper, garden-party, (e) the time and the action. e.g. day-flight, night-school, winter-sport, etc., (f) purpose, e.g. table-cloth, driving-suit, bird-cage, etc.

The internal structure of subordinative compounds is marked by a specific pattern of order and arrangement in which the stems follow one another. The order in which the stems are placed within a compound is rigidly fixed in Modern English as the structural centre of the word is always its second component. Stems of almost every part of speech are found in compounds but they are combined to make up compound words according to a set of rigid rules for every part of speech. The choice of stems and the rules of their arrangement and order are known as distributional or structural formulas and patterns of compound words.

A compound word possesses a single semantic structure. The meaning of the compound is first of all derived from the combined lexical meanings of its components, which as a rule; retain their lexical meanings, although their semantic range becomes considerably narrowed. The lexical meanings of the components are closely fused together to create a new semantic unit with a new meaning that is not merely additive but dominates the individual meanings of the components. The semantic centre of the compound is found in the lexical meaning of the second component which is modified and restricted by the lexical meaning of the first, e.g. hand-bag is essentially 'a bag carried in the hand for money, papers, face-powder, etc.'; pencil-case is 'a case for pencils' [49, 116p].

Most English compound nouns are noun phrases that include a noun modified by adjectives or attribute nouns. Due to the English tendency towards conversion, the two classes are not always easily distinguished. Most English compound nouns that consist of more than two words can be constructed recursively by combining two words at a time. The compound science fiction writer, for example, can be constructed by combining the resulting compound with writer. Some compounds, such as salt and pepper or mother - of pearl, can be constructed in this way, however.

3.6 Derivational compounds

Derivational compounds or compound-derivatives like long-legged do not fit the definition of compounds as words consisting of more than one free stem, because their second element (-legged) is not a free stem. Derivational compounds are included in this chapter for two reasons: because the number of root morphemes is more than one, and because they are nearest to compounds in patterns. Derivational compounds or compound-derivatives are words in which the structural integrity of the two free stems is ensured by a suffix referring to the combination as a whole, not to one of its elements: kind-hearted, old-timer, schoolboyishness, teenager. In the coining of the derivational compounds two types of word-formation are at work. The essence of the derivational compounds will be clear if we compare them with derivatives and compounds proper that possess a similar structure. Take, for example, brainstraster, honeymooner and mill-owner. The ultimate constituents of all three are: noun stem + noun stem+-er. Analysing into immediate constituents, we see that the immediate constituents (IC's) of the compound mill-owner are two noun stems, the first simple, the second derived: mill+owner, of which the last, the determinatum, as well as the whole compound, names a 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, and the suffix -er signals that the whole denotes a person: the structure is (honey+moon)+-er. The process of word-building in these seemingly similar words is different: mill-owner is coined by composition, honeymooner -- by derivation from the compound honeymoon. Honeymoon being a compound, honeymooner is a derivative. Now brains trust `a group of experts' is a phrase, so brainstruster is formed by two simultaneous processes -- by composition and by derivation and may be called a derivational compound. Its IC's are (brains+ trust)+-еr1. The suffix -er is one of the productive suffixes in forming derivational compounds. Other examples of the same pattern are: backbencher `an M.P. occupying the back bench', do-gooder (ironically used in AmE), eye-opener `enlightening circumstance', first-nighter `habitual frequenter of the first performance of plays', go-getter (colloq.) `a pushing person', late-comer, left-hander `left-handed person or blow'. Nonce-words show some variations on this type. The process of their formation is clearly seen in the following examples: "Have you ever thought of bringing them together?” "Oh, God forbid. As you may have noticed, I'm not much of a bringer-together at the best of times.” (Plomer) "The shops are very modern here,” he went on, speaking with all the rather touchy insistence on up-to-dateness which characterises the inhabitants of an under-bathroomed and over-monumented country (Huxley). Another frequent type of derivational compounds are the possessive compounds of the type kind-hearted: adjective stem+noun stem+ -ed. Its IC's are a noun phrase kind heart and the suffix -ed that unites the elements of the phrase and turns them into the elements of a compound adjective. Similar examples are extremely numerous. Compounds of this type can be coined very freely to meet the requirements of different situations. Very few go back to Old English, such as one-eyed and three-headed, most of the cases are coined in Modern English. Examples are practically unlimited, especially in words describing personal appearance or character: absent-minded, bare-legged, black-haired, blue-eyed, cruel-hearted, light-minded, ill-mannered, many-sided, narrow-minded, shortsighted, etc. The first element may also be a noun stem: bow-legged, heart-shaped and very often a numeral: three-coloured. The derivational compounds often become the basis of further derivation. Cf. war-minded : : war-mindedness; whole-hearted : : whole-heartedness : : whole-heartedly, schoolboyish : schoolboyishness; do-it-yourselfer : : do-it-yourselfism. The process is also called phrasal derivation: mini-skirt>mini-skirted, nothing but>nothingbutism, dress up>dressuppable, Romeo-and-Julietishness, or quotation derivation as when an unwillingness to do anything is characterised as let-George-do-it-ity. All these are nonce-words, with some ironic or jocular connotation.

3.7 Diachronic approach to compound words

Compounds, as has been mentioned are made up of two ICs which are both derivational bases. Compound words are inseparable vocabulary units. They are formally and semantically dependent on the constituent bases and the semantic relations between them which mirror the relations between the motivating units. Compound words represent bases of all three structural types. The bases built on stems may be of different degree of complexity as, e.g., week-end, office-management, postage-stamp, aircraft-carrier, fancy-dress-maker, etc. However, this complexity of structure of bases is not typical of the bulk of Modern English compounds. In this connection care should be taken not to confuse compound words with polymorphic words of secondary derivation, i.e. derivatives built according to an affixal pattern but on a compound stem for its base such as, e.g., school-mastership ([n+n]+suf), ex-housewife (prf+[n+n]), to weekend, to spotlight ([n+n]+conversion).

Compound words like all other inseparable vocabulary units take shape in a definite system of grammatical forms , syntactic and semantic features. Compounds, on the one hand, are generally clearly distinguished from and often opposed to free word-groups, on the other hand they lie astride the border-line between words and word-groups and display close ties and correlation with the system of free word-groups. The structural inseparability of compound words finds expression in the unity of their specific distributional pattern and specific stress and spelling pattern.

Structurally compound words are characterized by the specific order and arrangement in which bases follow one another. The order in order in which the two based are placed within a compound is rigidly fixed in modern English and it is the second IC that makes the head-member of the word, i.e. its structural and semantic centre. The head-member is of basic importance as it `preconditions both the lexico-grammatical and semantic features of the first component. It is of interest to note that the difference between stems (that serve as bases in compound words) and word-forms they coincide with is most obvious in some compounds, especially in compound adjectives. Adjectives like long, wide, rich are characterized by grammatical forms of degrees of comparison longer, wider, richer [36, 115p].

The corresponding stems functioning as bases in compound words lack grammatical independence and forms proper to the words and retain only the part-of-speech meaning; thus compound adjectives with adjectival stems for their second components, e.g.

age-long, oil-rich, inch-wide, do not form degrees of comparison as the compound adjective oil-rich does not form them the way the word rich does, but conforms to the general rule of polysyllabic adjectives and has analytical forms of degrees of comparison. The same difference between words and stems is not so noticeable in compound nouns with the noun-stem for the second component. Phоnetiсallу compounds are also marked by a specific structure of their own. No phonemic changes of bases occur in composition but the compound word acquires a new stress pattern, different from the stress in the motivating words, for example words key and hole or hot and house each possess their own stress but when the stems of these words are brought together to make up a new compound word, `keyhole-- `a hole in a lock into which a key fits', or `hot-house

- `a heated building for growing delicate plants', the latter is given a different stress pattern -- a unity stress on the first component in our case. Compound words have three stress patterns:

a) a high or unity stress on the first component as in `honeymoon, doorway, etc. a double stress, with a primary stress on the first component and a weaker, secondary stress on the second component, e.g. blood-vessel, mad- doctor-psychiatrist, `a psychiatrist', washing- machine, etc. These two stress patterns are the commonest among compound words and in many cases they acquire a contrasting force distinguishing compound words from word-groups, especially when the arrangement and order of the parallel the word-order and the distributional pattern of a phrase, thus a ` greenhouse- `a glass house for cultivating delicate plants' is contrasted to a ` green `house -- `a house that is painted green'; ` dancing-girl-`a dancer' to a `dancing `girl- `a girl who is dancing'; aґmad-`doctor- `a psychiatrist' to `mad `doctor -- `a doctor who is mad'. The significance of these stress patterns is nowhere so evident as in nominal compounds built on the n+n derivational pattern in which the arrangement and order of the stems fail to distinguish a compound word from a phrase.

It is not infrequent, however, for both ICs to have level stress as in, e.g.,`arm-'chair, `icy-'cold, `grass-'green, etc. The significance of the stress pattern by itself should not be overestimated though, as it cannot be an overall criterion and cannot always serve as a sufficient clue to draw a line of distinction between compound words and phrases. This mostly refers to level stress pattern. In most cases the level stress pattern is accompanied by other structural and graphic

indications of inseparability. Graphically most indications of inseparability. Graphically most compounds have two types of spelling -they are spelt either solidly or with a hyphen. Both types of spelling when accompanied by structural and phonetic peculiarities serve as a sufficient indication of inseparability of compound words in contradistinction to phrases. It is true that hyphenated spelling by itself may be sometimes misleading, as it may be used in word-groups to emphasise their phraseological character as in e.g. daughter-in-law, man-of-war, brother-in-arms or in longer combinations of words to indicate the semantic unity of a string of words used attributively as, e.g.,

I-know-what-you're-going-to-say expression, we-are-in-the-know jargon, the young-must-be-right attitude.

The two types of spelling typical of compounds, however, are not rigidly observed and there are numerous fluctuations between solid or hyphenated spelling on the one hand and spelling with a break between the components on the other, especially in nominal compounds of the n+n type. The spelling of these compounds varies from author to author and from dictionary to dictionary. For example, the words war-path, war-time, money-lender

are spelt both with a hyphen and solidly; blood-poisoning, money-order, wave-length, war-ship -- with a hyphen and with a break; underfoot, insofar, underhand-- solidly and with a break.

It is noteworthy that new compounds of this type tend to solid or hyphenated spelling. This inconsistency of spelling in compounds, often accompanied by a level stress pattern (equally typical of word-groups) makes the problem of distinguishing between compound words (of the n+n type in particular)and word-groups especially difficult. In this connection it should be stressed that Modern English nouns (in the Common Case, Sg.) as has been universally recognized possess an attributive function in which they are regularly used to form numerous nominal phrases as, e.g. peace years, stone steps, government office, etc. Such variable nominal-phrases are semantically fully derivable from the meanings of the two nouns and are based on the homogeneous attributive semantic relations unlike compound words. This system of nominal phrases exists side by side with the specific and numerous class of nominal compounds which as a rule carry an additional semantic component not found in phrases. It is also important to stress that these two classes of vocabulary units -- compound words and free phrases -- are not only opposed but also stand in close correlative relations to each other. Semantically compound words are generally motivated units. The meaning of the compound is first of all derived from the combined lexical meanings of its components. The semantic peculiarity of the derivational bases and the semantic difference between the base and the stem on which the latter is built is most obvious in compound words. Compound words with a common second or first component can serve as illustrations. The stem of the word board is polysemantic and its multiple meanings serve as different derivational bases, each with its own selective range for the semantic features of the other component, each forming a separate set of compound words, based on 'specific derivative relations Thus the base board meaning `a flat piece of wood square or oblong' makes a set of compounds chess-board, notice-board, key-board, diving-board, foot-board, sign-board; compounds paste-board, car-board are built on the base meaning `thick, stiff paper'; the base board-meaning `an authorized body of men', forms compounds school-board, board-room. The same can be observed in words built on the polysemantic stem of the word foot.

For example, the base foot- in foot-print, foot-pump, foothold, foot-bath, foot-wear has the meaning of `the terminal part of the leg', in foot-note, foot-lights, foot-stone the base foot- has the meaning of `the lower part', and in foot-high, foot-wide, foot rule-- `measure of length'. It is obvious from the above-given examples that the meanings of the bases of compound words are interdependent and that the - choice of each is delimited as in variable word-groups by the nature of the other IC of the word. It thus may well be said that the combination of bases serves as a kind of minimal inner context distinguishing the particular individual lexical meaning of each component. In this connection we should also remember the significance of the differential meaning found in both components which becomes especially obvious in a set of compounds containing identical bases [32, 106p].

Like all other linguistic phenomena compounding may be approached synchronically and diachronically. If a synchronic treatment concentrates on structural and semantic features relevant for productive patterning of compound words, the diachronic treatment is concerned with the various changes compound words undergo in the course of time and the way compound words appear in the language. Once a compound has been formed it is subject to all the phonological changes affecting English polysyllabic words. Various changes in the phonetic structure and stress pattern of compound words may result in a number of changes in its morphemic structure. The separate morphemes in a compound may become fused or even lost altogether; the meanings of the components may also fuse in the course of time into a newer meaning or become forgotten. As a result of this process, known as the process of simplification, compound words may undergo such radical changes that they may be even transformed into derived or simple words.

There are many words in Modem English that do not in any way differ fromthe bulk of simple words and yet have undergone the process of simplification andmay be traced back to their original compound structure. The actual process of building compound words may take different forms:

1) Compound words as a rule are built spontaneously after productive distributional formulas of the given period. Formulas productive at one time may lose their productivity at another period. Thus at one time the process of building verbs by compounding adverbial and verbal stems was productive, and numerous compound verbs like, e, g.outgrow, overturn, overthrow(adv+v), were formed. The structure ceased to be productive and today no verbs are built in this way.

2) Compounds may be the result of a gradual process of semantic isolation and structural fusion of free word-groups. Such compounds as forget-me-not -- 'a small plant with blue flowers', scarecrow (from an earlier scare-the-crows)--'a figure used to scare birds away from crops', pickpocket (from pick the pocket) --'one who steals from pockets', bridesmaid--'an unmarried woman attending the bride at a wedding', bull's-eye --'the centre of a target; a kind of hard, globular candy", mainland --'a continent all go back to free phrases which became semantically and structurally isolated in the course of time [46, 93p].

The words that once made up these phrases have lost, within these particular formations, their integrity, their part-of-speech meaning and the whole phrase has become isolated in form, specialized in meaning and thus turned into an inseparable unit--a word acquiring semantic and morphological unity. Most of the syntactic compound nouns of the (a+n) structure, e. g. bluebell, blackboard, mad-doctor, are the result of such semantic and structural isolation of free word-groups; to give but one more example-- highway was once actually a high way for it was raised above the surrounding countryside for better drainage and ease of travel. Now we use highway without any idea of the original sense of the first element. According to the type of correlation all productive types of compound wordsmay be classified into four major classes:

1. Adjectival-nominal compounds comprise four subgroups of compoundadjectives-three of them are proper and one derivational, they are built after thefollowing formulas and patterns:

a, b) the n+a formula, e. g. snow-white, colour-blind, journey-tired correlative; with word-groups of the A + as+N,. A+prp+ N type, e. g.white as snow, blind to colours, tired of journey.The structure is polysemantic;

c) the s+ved formula, e g.fear-stained, duty-bound, wind-driven correlated with word-groups of the type Ved with/by+N, e. g. stained with tears,bound by duty, etc. The distributional formula is monosemantic and is based onthe instrumental relations between the components;

d) num+n formula, e. g. (a) two-day (beard), (a) seven-year (plan),(a) forty-hour

(week) correlative with Num + N type of phrases, e. g. two days,seven years, etc. Adjectives of this subgroup are used only attributively;

e) the (a+n) + -ed pattern of derivational compounds, e. g. long-legged, low-ceilinged. This structure includes two more variants; the first member of the first component may be a numeral stem or a noun-stem (num+n) +-ed,(n+n) +-ed,

e. g. one-sided, three-cornered, doll-faced, bell-shaped . Compoundsof this subgroup are correlative with phrases of the type--with (having) + A+N,with (having) + Num+N, with (having)+N+N (or N+of+N), e. g. with (or having)a low ceiling, with

(or having) one side, with (or having) three corners, with (or having) a doll face for with (or having) the face of a doll, with (or having) theshape of a bell.

2.Verbal-nominal compounds belong to compound nouns. They may all bedescribed through one general distributional structure n+n v, i. e. a combination of asimple noun-stem with a deverbal noun-stem. This formula includes four patternsdiffering in the character of the deverbal noun-stern. They are all based on verbal-nominal word-groups, built after the formula V+N or V+prp+N:

a) [n+v+-er )] pattern, e. g.bottle-opener, stage-manager, baby-sitter, peace-fighter, is monosemantic and is based on agcntive relations that can be interpreted as 'one who does smth';

b) [n+ (v+-ing)] pattern, e. g, rocket-flying, stage-managing,is monosemantic and may be interpreted as 'the act of doing smth';c) [n+ (v+tion/-ment)] pattern, e. g.

price-reduction, office-management, is monosemantic and may be interpreted as 'the act of doing smth';d) compound nouns with the structure n+(v+ conversion), i, e.

a combination of - a simple noun-stem with a deverbal noun-stem resulting from conversion, e. g.wage-art, dog-bite, chimney-sweep. The pattern is monosemantic.

3.V e r b a l v e r b compounds are a11 derivational compound nouns builtafter one formal n [( v+adv)+conversion] and correlative with phrases of theV+Adv type, a. g.a break-down from

(to) break down, a hold-up from (to): hold up, a lay-outfrom (to) lay out. The pattern is polysemantic and iscircumscribed by the manifold semantic relations typical of conversion pairs.

Nominal compounds are all nouns built after the most polysemanticdistributional formula (n+n); both stems are in most cases simple,

e. g. pencil-case,windmill, horse-race. Compounds of this class correlate with nominal word-groups mostly characterized by the N+prp+N structure. Compounds may be also classified according to the nature of the bases and theinterconnection with other ways of word-formation into the so-called compounds proper and' derivational compounds [54, 119p].

There are compounds which arecompletely motivated, i.e. the lexical meaning of these words is transparent and iseasily deduced from the lexical meanings of the stems and the meaning of their distributional formulas. Compound words like wind-driven, sky-blue, foot-step,foot-pump, door-handle, and bottle-opener may serve as examples of completelytransparent or motivated compound words. Motivation in compound words may be partial, but again the degree will vary. Compound words like hand-bag, flowerbed,handcuff are all only partially motivated, but still the degree of transparency of their meanings is different: hand-bag, e.g., is essentially 'a bag designed to becarried in the hand', whereas handcuffs retain only a resemblance to cuffs and infact are 'metal rings placed round the wrists of 3 prisoner'; a f lower-bed is not 'amattress or piece of furniture' as the lexical meaning of the second componentsuggests; but 'a piece1 of ground where flowers grow'. Compound words with asmaller degree-of partial motivation may be illustrated" by the words: walkup--'a house without an elevator where one has to walk upstairs', cast-off--'discarded',castle-builder--'a day-dreamer, one who builds castle; in the air'.There are compound words that lack motivation altogether, i.e. the nativespeaker does not see any obvious connection between the meaning of their structure and the individual meanings of the stems and consequently cannot deducethe lexical meaning of the word [41, 159p].

Compound words like eye-wash -`something saidor done to deceive a person', fiddlesticks - 'nonsense rubbish', wall-flower--'awoman who remains. by the wall as a spectator at a dance, because not chosen as a partner', eye-servant--'a servant who attends faithfully to his duty only whenwatched', night-cap--'a drink taken before going to bed at night', dog-eared --'having the corners of the leaves turned down' all lack motivation and their lexical meanings cannot be deduced from the meanings of their components andthe meaning of their structure. Lack of motivation in compound words may beoften connected with the transferred usage of the denotational meanings of thecomponents or of the whole word as in slow-coach--'a person who acts slowly',sweet-tooth--'one who likes sweet food and drink', wall-flower; the wordsconsequently acquire a new co notational meaning not proper to either of their components[52, 126p].

Lack of motivation is of ten due to the specialized and unexpectedsemantic relations embedded in the compound word as in, e.g., eye-servant, dog-days--'the hottest part of July and August'.Sometimes the motivated and non-motivated meanings of the same word arefelt as two homonymous words, e.g. night-cap 1) a cap worn in bed at night and 2)a drink taken before going to bed at night; eye-wash 1) a liquid for washing theeyes and 2) something said or done to deceive a person; eye-opener 1) enlighteningor surprising circumstance and 2) a drink of liquor.Semantically compound words may be classified (1) according to the degreeof motivation, and (2) according to the structural meaning of various distributionalformulas described through the interrelation of the components.1) According to the degree of motivation compound words are subdividedinto (a) motivated or non-idiomatic, i.e. words marked either by complete or partial motivation which makes the meaning of the word transparent; (b) non-motivatedor idiomatic, i.e. "words the lexical meanings of which cannot be inferred from theindividual meanings of their components and the meaning of the distributionalformula they are built after.2) According to the structural meaning or the type of semantic relations between the components compound words may be classified into various groups aswords based on the relations of: (a) agent and action, e.g. sunrise, earthquake, (b)object and action, e.g. warship, handshake, (c) the part and the whole, e.g. plum-tree, shirt-collar, eye-ball, etc., (d) the place end the action, or the doer, e.g. street-fighting, grass-hopper, garden-party, (e) the time and the action. e.g. day-flight,night-school, winter-sport, etc., (f) purpose, e.g. table-cloth, driving-suit, bird-cage,

Conclusion

In this work, we explore the ways of formation of compound words in modern English, reviewed the various classifications of compound words revealed semantic relationships between components and word formation and semantic features of compound words. In the practical part of this work were analyzed models (methods) formation of compound words. In practical ways of analyzing the formation of complex lexical units, it was found that in the modern English language most complex tumors occupy lexical units formed on the model of compounding. Methods of education and affixation conversion takes less number of complex lexical units in the field of vocabulary. This confirms the fact that convertible neologisms have significantly reduced their activity, although affixation and is still a popular model of word formation (this is confirmed by a large number of affixes used in the formation of new words and their diverse distribution in the modern language). Also pay attention to the most modern method is currently derivation, such as a merger (one type of reduction). This model is widely used in recent years to create new words, as we can find in Dictionaries these units are presented in sufficient quantities. According to linguists, the process of merger is still in "development" in the future he will get the most widely used in the creation of new words, which is typical for modern terminology, as well as the language of youth. English, as well as other languages, is in constant change and dynamics. Lexicon as the mobile layer of language, the most sensitive to changes in the social, cultural and other spheres of life speaking staff, because it is the word "mirror of life." On the other hand, the growing interest in modern linguistics to various aspects of word formation due to the fact that the word is the central unit of the language. Intrinsic properties of the word as a lexical unit crossed it with those of other language elements. This interaction is the basis of operation of the language system.

Formative study of modern English language makes it possible to establish certain rules and laws of the construction of words. The ability to isolate a part of a word derivational elements define the way of its formation and derivational model on which it is created, contributes to master the language lexical units and, ultimately, a higher level of mastery of a foreign language. Continuous development of lexical system provided endless material not only for the study of the effect of word-formation at this particular stage of its development, but also to compare the nature of its operation at various stages of development.

Word-formational system of English is a single unit, individual elements which, depending on the needs of the collective language more or less differentiated and actively used to create new lexical items. The use of a word-formation process means or the model is dictated by a number of factors - linguistic and extralinguistic.

Bibliography

1. Англо-русский толковый словарь компьютерных терминов под ред.

Колисниченко Д.Н. - Спб.:Наука и Техника, 2008. - 280c

2. Антрушина Г.Б. Лексикология английского языка. - М.:Наука, 2000. 288с

3. Аракин В.Д. Очерки по истории английского языка. - М.:Наука, 1955. 253с

4. Арнольд И.В. Лексикология современного английского языка. -М.:Наука, 1986. - 296с

5. Арнольд И.В. Стилистика современного английского языка. - М.: Просвещение, 1990. - 305с

6. Ахманова О.С. Словарь лингвистических терминов. -М:Наука,1969. - 430с

7. Бархударов Л.С. Очерки по морфологии современного английского языка. - М.:Наука, 1975. - 156с

8. Бортничук Е.Н. Словообразование в современном английском языке : учеб. пособие для студентов / Е.Н. Бортничук, И.В. Василенко, Л.П. Пастушенко. - Киев:Наукова Думка, 1988. - 297с

9. Будагов Р. А. Новые слова и значения - М.:МГУ, 1976. - с.275 - 283.

10. Виноградов В.В. Словообразование в его отношении к грамматике и лексикологии. -М.:Наука, 1952. - 243с

11. Воронцова Г.Н. Очерки по грамматике английского языка. М.,1960. - 399с.

12. Гак В.Г. Семантическая структура слова как компонент семантической структуры высказывания / А.А. Леонтьев. Семантическая структура слова. - М.:Наука,1971. - с. 78 - 96

13. Гак В. Г. Сопоставительная лексикология. - М.:Наука,1977. - 264с

14. Гальперин И. Р. Лексикология английского языка. - М.:Наука,1956. - 178с

15. Елисеева В.В. Лексикология английского языка. - М.:Наука,1999. - 209с

16. Ермолаева Л.С. Очерки по сопоставительной грамматике германских языков. - М.:Наука,1987. - 127с

17. Жлуктенко Ю. А., Березинский В. А. Английские неологизмы. -Киев.: Наукова думка, 1983. - 154с

18. Заботкина В. И. Новая лексика современного английского языка. - М.:ВШ, 1989. - 126с

19. Зятковская Р.Г. Суффиксальная система современного английского языка. -М.:Наука, 1971. - 187с

21. Иванова И.П. О характеристике сложного слова в английском языке. -Л.:Наука,1967. - 95с

22. Ильиш Б.А. Строй современного английского языка (теоретический курс). - Л.:Наука, 1971. - 315с

23. Ильченко Л. М. Компрессивное словообразование как один из способов реализации принципа языковой экономии: (На примере соврем. англ. яз.): Автореф. Дис. … канд. филол. наук / Пятигор. гос. пед. ин-т иностр. яз. Пятигорск, 1993. - 34с

24. Каращук П. М. Словообразование английского языка. - М.:ВШ , 1977.302с

25. Кобрина Н.А. Грамматика английского языка. Морфология. Синтаксис. - М.:Наука,1990. - 211с

26. Мешков О.Д. Семантические аспекты словосложения английского языка. - М.:Наука,1986. - 270с

27. Мороховский А.Н. Слово и предложение в истории английского языка. - Киев: Наукова Думка,1979. - 216с

28. Никитин М. В. Некоторые вопросы теории словообразования и определение конверсии. «Владимирский гос. пед. Институт», серия «Иностранные языки», вып.I, 1966.- 127с

29. Пассек В.В. Некоторые вопросы конверсии. / Вопросы языкознания. - М.:Наука,1957. - с.144 - 148

30. Плоткин В.Я. Строй английского языка. -М.,:Наука,1989. - 291с

31. Реформатский А.А. Введение в языковедение. - М.:Наука,1967. - 289с

32. Смирницкий А. И. Лексикология английского языка. - М.:Наука,1956.260с

33. Смирницкий А. И. Морфология английского языка. - М.:Наука,1959. -321с

34. Смирницкий А.И. По поводу конверсии в английском языке. / Иностранный язык в школе. №3. -М.:Наука,1953. - с.12 - 24

35. Смирницкий А.И. Так называемая конверсия и чередование звуков в английском языке. / Иностранный язык в школе. №5. -М.:Наука,1959. с.21 - 31

36. Троицкая Г.П. Семантические связи при словообразовании по конверсии в современном английском языке. - М.:Наука, 1964. - с.20 - 27

37. Уфимцева А.А. Слово в лексико-семантической системе языка. - М.:Наука, 1968. - 272с

38. Хаймович Б.С., Роговская Б.И. Теоретическая грамматика английского языка. - М.:Наука,1967. - 298с

39. Хлебникова И.Б. Основы английской морфологии. - М.:Наука,1994. - 124с

40. Царев П. В. Продуктивное именное словообразование в современном языке. - М.:Наука,1984. - 289с

41. Andrews, S. (1986). Morphological influences on lexical access: Lexical or nonlexical effects? Journal of Memory and Language, 25(6), 726-740.

42. Andrews, S., Miller, B., & Rayner, K.(2004). Eye movements and morphological segmentation of compound words: There is a mouse in mousetrap. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 16 (1-2), 285-311.

43. Baayen, R. H., Lieber, R., & Schreuder, R.(1997). The morphological complexity of simplex nouns. Linguistics, 35, 861-877.

44. Baayen, R. H. Piepenbrock & Gulikers L. (1995). The CELEX lexical database. [CD-ROM]. Philadelphia: University of Philadelphia, Linguistic Data Consortium.

45. Bertram, R., Baayen, R. H., & Schreuder, R. (2000). Effects of Family Size for Complex Words. Journal of Memory and Language, 42, 390-405.

46. Bertram, R., & Hyona, J. (2003). The length ofa complex word modifies the role of morphological structure: Evidence from eye movements when reading short and long Finnish compounds. Journal of Memory and Language, 48(3), 615-634.

47. Coltheart, M., Rastle, K., Perry, C., Langdon, R., & Ziegler, J. (2001). DRC: A dual route cascaded model of visual word recognition and reading aloud. Psychological Review, 108 (1), 204-256.

48.de Jong, N. H., Feldman, L. B., Schreuder,R., Pastizzo, M., & Baayen, R. (2002). The processing and representation of Dutch and English compounds: Peripheral morphological and central orthographic effects. Brain and Language, Compound Recognition and Family Size de Jong, N. H., Schreuder, R., & Baayen, R. H. (2000). The morphological family

49. Jong, N. H., Schreuder, R, & Baayen, R. H. (2003). Morphological resonance in the mental lexicon. In R. H. Baayen, & R. Schreuder. (Eds.), Morphological structure in language processing (pp. 65-88).

50. Ярцева В.Н. Развитие национального литературного английского языка. - М.: Наука,1969. - 286с

51. Blokh M.Y. A Course in Theoretical English Grammar. - M.:Наука,1983. 383с

52. Dr. Stephen Wilbers, Spelling compounds with and without hyphens. - Minneapolis Star Tribune, 1997. - 335с

53. Longman Dictionary of Contemporary English. Harlow: Longman Ltd Group, London, 1995. - 775с

54. Karimov I.A. Harmoniously Developed Generation is the basis of Progress of Uzbekistan. T. “Shark” 1998. p. 9.

55 Buranov J.B, Muminov A.A. Practical Course in English Lexicology. 1990. p. 54.

56. Berezin F.M. Lectures on Linguistics. M.Higher school Publishing House.1969. p. 95.

57. Гинзбург Р.З. и др. Лексикология английского языка. М. 1979.

58. Арбекова Т.И. Лексикология английского языка. М. 1977.

59. Мешков А.Д. Словообразование современного английского языка. М. 1976. стр. 33.

60. Смирницкий Лексикология английского языка. М. 1956. стр. 33.

61. Хидекель С.С. Лексикология в выдержках и извлечениях. Л. 1969.

62. Glipson G.B. Fast ideas for Busy Teachers. USA. Good Apple. 1989. p. 36.

63. Канцельсон С.Д. Содержание слова, значение и обозначение. М. 1965.

64. Ярцева В.Н. Историческая морфология английского языка. М. 1960.

65. E. Nida. Morphology University of Michigan. Press. 1976.

66. Т.М. Беляева «Вопросы английского языка в синхронии и диахронии». Л. 1967. стр. 89.

67. Мюллер. В.К. «Англо - Русский словарь» М. 1962.

68. TheWorldBookEncyclopedia. USA. 1994. №. G.G. Volumep/ 905/

...