Homogeneous and heterogeneous word-formation rows with the suffix –ment

Размещено на http://allbest.ru

Homogeneous and heterogeneous word-formation rows with the suffix -ment

Olena Dotsenko

Анотація

Однорідні та неоднорідні словотвірні ряди із суфіксом -мент

У статті розглядається структура словотвірних рядів слів із суфіксом -ment. Автор аналізує ряди з погляду їх гомогенності та гетерогенності, складності та глибини. Словотвірні ряди об'єднано відповідно до класу слів. Класи слів виокремлено за допомогою реляторної мови аплікативної породжувальної моделі, яка використовується для дослідження R-структури похідних слів із суфіксом -ment. R=словам штучної мови відповідають R =слова природньої мови. Аналіз мотиваційних відносин слів засвідчив не тільки наявність повної та неповної мотивації, але й метафоричної мотивації. Мотиваційні відносини досліджуються з позиції синхронії, діахронічний аспект не вивчається.

Ключові слова: словотвірний ряд, множинна мотивація, дериваційний крок, полісемантичні слова, аплікативна породжувальна модель.

Introduction

Nowadays, English word-formation lacks research of word-formation rows. This is where the relevance of the article stems from. The aim of the paper is to investigate motivation relations between words in a word-formation row and describe these rows using the relator language of the applicative generative model introduced by S. K. Shaumian and P. A. Soboleva (1968). The object of the study is the rows with the suffix -ment. The structure of word-formation rows and their motivational relations represent the subject of the research. The theoretical framework of the article is highlighted in the works by such scholars as M. Aronoff (2011), J. Furdik (2008), V. Lehmann (2015), V. N. Musatov (2012), I. A. Shyrshov (1981), P. A. Soboleva (2012), I. S. Ulukhanov (2005), O. A. Zemskaya (1981).

Many attempts by P. A. Soboleva (1972), N. Ye. Vilenskaya (1986), Yu. A. Shepel (2006; 2013) have been made to study and describe one of the complex units of word- formation level i. e. a word-formation row. However, despite all the available linguistics researches, word-formation rows are not studied comprehensively which determines the novelty of the article. The word-formation row can be opposed to other wordforming units (e. g.: chains, paradigms, nests) in which derived words are grouped according to the commonality of the stem. In contrast to this, in a word-formation row a stem is a distinguishing component. Besides, derived words forming a row are not interrelated with motivational relations as compared to chains. These peculiarities of a word-formation row determine its theoretical significance.

The main theoretical concepts

The structural analysis of word-formation rows starts with the investigation of R-words called relators (each R-word, e. g., Ri, R2 or R3 is a relator) in the applicative generative model. This model as «an artificial semiotic system stimulating natural languages» (Шаумян та ін. 1968: 30) was investigated by S. K. Shaumian and P. A. Soboleva (1968). Depending on the part of speech, relators can be identified as R1 to denote a verb, R2 - a noun, R3 - an adjective. Each subsequent relator represents one derivation step which results in a new word-forming or lexical meaning. Zero derivation step always indicates the morphemic (deriving) stem of R-word. This stem is termed as O and the relator determines its part of speech. For example, the noun management corresponds to R-word R2R1O, where R1O is a zero derivation step and O displays the morphemic stem manage, and R1 is a verb, i. e. a part of speech of the deriving stem manage. Next, the suffix -ment is added to the morphemic stem to form the noun management which will be written as R2 and considered the first derivation step (fflenent 2006; 2013).

In this research word-formation rows are studied in terms of homogeneity and heterogeneity, so we will take into account works by Yu. A. Shepel who states that a row can be homogeneous if the meaning of i coincides at n (penultimate) step (fflenent 2006: 15). If the meaning of i at the penultimate derivation step does not coincide, the row is regarded as a heterogeneous one (fflenent 2006: 16). For example, the row detachment, nonattachment, corresponding to R-structures R2R1O, R2R2R1O is homogeneous as the relator R2 is at the penultimate step in both words.

Below there is an explanation how we count derivational steps and what the penultimate step is.

R1O is treated as a zero derivation step standing for the verb detach «to separate something from something else that it is connected to» (Collins). R2 is the first and penultimate derivational step to denote the noun detachment «a group of soldiers separated from the main group in order to perform a particular duty» (Collins). So, in the word detachment R2 is considered to be the penultimate derivation step.

The word nonattachment is represented as the following R-structure R2R2R1O, where R1O is a zero derivational step standing for the verb attach «to fasten, join, or connect» (Collins). R2 is the first and penultimate derivational step for the noun attachment «the act of attaching or the state of being attached» (Collins). R2 is the third and last derivational step meaning the noun nonattachment «the state or quality of not being attached» (Collins). This detailed description shows that R2 in the word detachment and R2 in the word nonattachment are penultimate steps with the meaning of nouns, so the word-formation row detachment, nonattachment is a homogeneous one.

The row agistment, enlistment, reenlistment with the structure R2R1O, R2R1R1O, R2R2R1R1O (R2R1R1R1O) is called heterogeneous due to the different parts of speech of the relator at the penultimate step - R2 and R1.

Taking into account V. Lehmann's (Lehman 2015: 1024) statements that if a motivating word is polysemous, it is possible that derivation does not operate in all of its meanings. We support the scholar's idea concerning derivational categories that select specific senses of the motivating word. On the other hand, the motivated word can obtain a meaning that is not part of the motivating word.

The word agistment (agistv > agistment) includes the stem R1O and the first derivational step R2 which can be considered the penultimate step. In terms of polysemy and referring academic dictionaries, the motivating verbal stem agist with the meaning «to feed or pasture livestock for a fee» (Webster) completely motivates the derived noun agistment with several meanings «1) the act of agisting; 2) a contract or an agreement to agist; 3) the fee paid or the profit made in agisting» (Webster).

The noun enlistment (listv > enlistv > enlistment) means «1) the action of accepting someone into the armed forces or of joining the armed forces; 2) the period of time for which one is committed to military service; 3) an act of enlisting» (Cambridge) and it is completely motivated by the verb enlist which means «to enter or persuade to enter into an engagement to serve in the armed forces» (Cambridge) which is partially motivated by the verb list with meanings «1) to include in a list; 2) an archaic word for enlist; 3) (archaic) to enlist in the armed forces» (Cambridge). In a polysemous word reenlistment, R-word R2R2R1R1O (listv > enlistv > reenlistv > reenlistment) has partial motivation at the first and second steps. There is full motivation at the third step as the meaning of the deriving verb reenlist «to join the armed forces again, or to sign to stay in the armed forces» (Cambridge) is completely preserved in the derived noun reenlistment «1) an act of reenlisting; 2) a person who reenlists; the period of service following a reenlistment» (Cambridge). R-word R2R1R1R1O (listv > enlistv > enlistment > reenlist^^ent) has partial ^motivation in all steps.

Yu. A. Shepel (2006: 35) points out that the depth of a row is determined by the number of derivation steps in the longest derived words. So, the depth of the row detachment, nonattachment will be equal to two, which corresponds to two derivation steps. The number of word structures included in a row comprises the row complexity. The row is considered to be simple if its derived words have a similar R-structure and its number does not exceed one or two R-structures. For instance, the following row is simple:

R2R1O embarrassment (embarrass > embarrassment);

R2R1R1O encompassment (compass > encompass > encompassment).

Its complexity is equal to two because the row consists of only two words with a similar word-formation structure.

The following row can be an example of a complex row with the following R-structure:

R2R1O attachment (attachv >attachmentn), bafflement (bafflev > bafflementn), banishment (banishv > banishmentn), detachment (detachv >detachmentn), embarrassment (embarassv > embarrassmentn), harassment (harassv > harassmentn);

R2R1O V R2R2O solacement (solace_v > solacement V solace_n > solacement), placement (placev > placement V placen > placement);

R2R1R1O V R2R2R1O outplacement (place_v > outplace_v > outplacement V place_n > placementn > outplacement);

R2R1R1O enlistment (listv > enlistv > enlistment).

The row below is composed of six R-structures such as R2R1O, R2R1O V R2R2O, R2R1R1O V R2R2R1O, R2R1R1O so its complexity is six.

Motivational relations play an important role in distinguishing the peculiarities of rows. Thus, J. Furdik states that «motivation is the most important principle of the organization of lexis» (Furdik 2008: 32). The scholar paid special attention to lexical motivation and considers it to be «... as a property or a web of relations among lexical items» (Furdik 2008: 80). We support the scholar's idea that «a lexical item is not arbitrary, but motivated» (Furdik 2008: 31).

The notion «motivation» was studied by I. A. Shyrshov (1981), I. S. Ulukhanov (2005), O. A. Zemskaya (2005), O. I. Blinova (2010) who consider a word-forming motivation to be relations between two words with the same root and the meaning of one word fully or partially coincides with the meaning of the other word. I. A. Shyr- shov (Ширшов 1981: 20) supposes that the motivation is a semantic derivability of one word from another, e. g., the meaning of the word enrockment «mass of large stones thrown into water to form a base» (Collins) can be semantically derived from the noun rock «a piece of rock or stone» (Collins).

According to V. N. Musatov (Мусатов 2012: 18), the metaphorical motivation implies that the transfer of meaning occurs in a derived word not in a deriving one, e. g. the word parchment (parchv > parchmentn) with the meaning «the thin, dried skin of some animals that was used in the past for writing on» (Collins) is metaphorically motivated by the verb parch «to dry something out because of too much heat» (Collins).

M. Aronoff (Aronoff 2011: 36) states that the meanings of the stems are never lost, simply transformed. The words therefore can be partially motivated.

Methodology of the research

Three word-classes representing three word- formation rows are studied in the paper. These word classes consist of 77 words.

The descriptive and structural methods were applied for investigating motivation relations in words. The structural method was realized with the help of the componential analysis to study the meaning of the derived English words with the suffix -ment. The comparative method was employed to compare meanings of the deriving and derived words.

The method of continuous sampling for selecting words with the suffix -ment from academic dictionaries was used. The structure of the words was researched with the help of the applicative generative model.

Analysis of word-formation rows

P. A. Soboleva (2012: 79-80) points out two classes of R-words:

1) Classes of R-words with identical first relators (counting from the root O). There are four such classes: {RiⁿRiO}, {RiⁿR2O}, {RiⁿR3O}, {RiⁿR4O}, where Ri indicates any relator of the four, i. e. R1V R2V R3V R4, R_tⁿ is the abbreviation of Ri applied n times. { } is an indication of a class of R-words. For example, R-structures of this class can be arranged according to word-families such as develop, developer, development, developmental etc. {RiⁿRiO}.

2) Classes of R-words with two identical final relators. There are sixteen such classes:

{RiRiRi^mO}, {RiR2Ri^mO}, {RiRsRi^mO}, {RiR4Ri^mO}, {RiRiRi^mO}, {RRiR,^mO}, {R2R2Ri^mO} etc., where Ri^m is the abbreviation of Ri applied m times. R-words of this class are places in correspondence with word-series, i. e., words with an identical derivational formant, such as abashment (R2RiO), annulment (R2RR3O), enlistment RRiRiO), beguilement (R2RR2O), all belonging to the class {R2RiR,^mO}.

The word class R2R1X is represented (Table 1) by 50 words which have the following R-structures R2R1O, R2R1R3O, R2R1R1O, R2R1R2O, R2R1R1R2O V R2R1R1R3O so the complexity is six and the depth is three.

R-word R2R1O includes 27 words created from the verbal stem and they are fully motivated because the meaning of the deriving words is kept in the derived one, e. g.:

punishment (punishv > punishmentn) - the deriving stem punish with the meaning «to cause someone who has done something wrong or committed a crime to suffer, by hurting them, forcing them to pay money, sending them to prison, etc.» (Collins) fully motivates the word punishment «the act of punishing someone» (Collins). The same motivation occurs in the following words ailment (ailv > ailmentn), adornment (adornv > adornmentn), appointment (appointv >appointmentn), assailment (assailv > assailmentn), arraignment (arraignv > arraignmentn), assignment (assignv > assignmentn), attachment (attachv > attachmentn), bafflement (bafflev > bafflementn), banishment (banishv > banishmentn), chastisement (chastisev > chastisementn), consignment (consignv > consignmentn), detachment (detachv > detachmentn), encroachment (encroachv > encroachmentn), embarrassment (embarassv > embarrassmentn), embellishment (embellishv > embellishmentn), embezzlement (embezzlev > embezzlementn), harassment (harassv > harassmentn), impeachment (impeachv > impeachmentn), management (managev > managementn), nourishment (nourishv > nourishmentn), ointment (ointv > ointmentn), pavement (pavev > pavementn), polishment (polishv > polishmentn), preachment (preachv > preachmentn), publishment (publishv > publishmentn), punishment (punishv > punishmentn), treatment (treatv > treatmentn).

R-word R2R1R3O is characterized by the partial motivation at the first derivation step and the full motivation - at the second one, e. g. the word aggrandizement (grandadj > aggrandizev > aggrandizementn) is motivated by the adjective grand «important and large in degree; impressive and large or important; excellent or enjoyable» (Collins) whose meaning is partially saved in the verb aggrandize «to make someone more powerful or important» (Collins) and the meaning of the verb is fully kept in the noun aggrandizement «an increase in power or importance» (Collins). The following eight words resemble the same motivation: annulment (nulladj > annulv > annulmentn), curtailment (curtadj > curtailv > curtailmentn), enablement (ableadj > enablev >enable- mentn), enlargement (largeadj > enlargev > enlargementn), embrittlement (brittleadj > embrittlev > embrittlementn), disablement (ableadj > disablev > disablementn), embrittlement (brittleadj > embrittlev > embrittlementn), enfeeblement (feebleadj > enfeeblev > enfeeblementn).

R-word R2R1R1O has the full motivation at the first derivation step (razev > erasev) and the partial motivation - at the second one, e. g. the word erasement (razev > erasev > erasementn) which means «the act of erasing; demolition» (Collins) is partially motivated by the verb erase which has two meanings «1) to remove something, especially a pencil mark by rubbing it; 2) to cause a feeling, memory, or period of time to be completely forgotten» (Collins) which is derived from the verb and is raze «to completely destroy a city, building, etc.» (Collins). The same motivation is observed in the following words emplacement (placev > emplacev > emplacementn), assuagement (suagev > assuagev > assuagementn), refurbishment (furbishv > refurbishv > refurbish- mentn), replenishment (plenishv > replenishv > replenishmentn).

R-word R2R1R2O has the partial motivation at the first derivation step and the full motivation - at the second one, e. g. the word beguilement (guilen > beguilev > be- guilementn) means the act of beguiling or the state of being beguiled and is fully motivated by the verb beguile with meanings «1) to persuade, attract, or interest someone, sometimes in order to deceive them; 2) to charm, attract, or interest, sometimes in order to deceive» (Cambridge) and this verb is partially motivated by the noun guile with the meaning «clever but sometimes dishonest behaviour that you use to deceive someone» (Cambridge). The following words are characterized by the same motivation relations impoverishment (povertyn > impoverishv > impoverishmentn), enfranchisement (franchiser,. > enfranchisev > enfranchisementn), advertizement (advertn > advertizev > ad- vertizementn), encompassment (compassn > encompassv > encompassmentn), amassment (massn > amassv > amassmentn).

R-word R2R1R1R2O v R2R1R1R3O is a polysemous word with the multiple motivation i. e. it can be derived not only from the noun but also from the adjective, e. g. enlightenment with the meaning «the state of understanding something» (Collins). R-word R2R1R1R2O enlightenment (lightn > lightenv > enlighten > enlightenmentn) is motivated by the verb enlighten «to provide someone with information and understanding, or to explain the true facts about something to someone» (Collins) which is, in turn, metaphorically motivated by the verb lighten with the meanings «1) to become less dark; 2) to make a difficult situation or responsibility easier; 3) to make something lighter» (Collins) and it is partially motivated by the noun light «the brightness that comes from the sun, fire, etc. and from electrical devices, and that allows things to be seen» (Collins). R-word R2R1R1R3O (lightadj > lightenv > enlighten > enlightenmentn) can be derived from the adjective light with the meaning «lit by the natural light of the day» (Collins) and it partially motivates the verb lighten with the above-mentioned meanings which metaphorically motivates the verb enlighten from which the noun enlightenment is derived.

So, the word-formation row represented by R2R1X class (Table 1) is a homogeneous because there is R1 at the penultimate step in each R-word.

Table 1 - R2R1X Class

The word-class R2R2X is represented (Table 2) by 9 words which have the following R-structures R2R2O, R2R2R1O, R2R2R2O v R2R2R1O v R2R3R3R2O, R2R2R1R1O v R2R2R2O so the complexity is six and the depth is three.

Table 2 - R2R2X Class

R-word R2R2O is characterized by the full motivation, e. g., the noun escarpment (scarpn > escarpmentn) with the meaning «a steep slope or cliff, such as one that marks the edge of a range of hills» (Cambridge) is motivated by the noun scarp «a steep slope or cliff formed by folded or eroded layers of rock» (Cambridge). The same motivation is observed in the following words enrockment (rockn > enrockmentn), furniment (furnituren > furnimentn), rabblement (rabblen > rabblementn).

R-word R2R2R1O has partial motivation at the first derivation step, e. g. in a word nonengagement (engagev > engagement > nonengagementn) the noun engagement has four meanings: «1) an agreement to marry someone; 2) an arrangement to meet someone or do something at a particular time; 3) the fact of being involved with something; 4) the process of encouraging people to be interested in the work of an organization, etc.» (Collins) and it is partially motivated by the verb engage with the meanings «1) to employ someone; 2) to interest someone in something and keep them thinking about it; 3) to become involved, or have contact, with someone or something; 4) to make one part of a machine fit into and move together with another part of a machine; 5) to attack or begin to fight someone» (Collins). There is partial motivation at the second derivation step (engagement > nonengagementn) because the word nonengagement with the meaning «the failure to engage or participate in the pursuits or actions of a group» (Collins) partially keeps only one meaning of the motivating word engagement «the fact of being involved with something» (Collins). The word nonattachment (attachv >attachmentv > nonattachmentn) has the same motivation. suffix ment word metaphor synchrony

R-word R2R2R2O v R2R2R1O v R2R3R3R2O has multiple motivation as it can be derived both from the noun and the verb and it has the following structure underemployment (employn > employmentn > underemploymentn v employv > employmentn > underemployment v employn > employedadj > underemployedadj > underemploymentn).

R-word R2R2R1O has full motivation at the first derivation step because the deriving word employ with the following meanings «1) to have someone work or do a job for you and pay them for it; 2) to use something» (Cambridge) is completely kept in the derived noun employment «1) the fact of someone being paid to work for a company or organization; 2) the use of something for a particular purpose; 3) work that you are paid to do for a particular company or organization» (Cambridge).

There is partial metaphorical motivation at the second step because underemployment with meanings «1) a situation in which someone or something is not used as much as they should be; 2) the fact of not having enough work to do, only working part time, or of having a job that does not use all your skills» (Cambridge) partially keeps the meaning of employment. R-word R2R2R2O has partial motivation at the first step because the deriving word employ as a noun has only meaning «be in smb's employ» (Cambridge) that partially motivates the word employment with a wider range of meanings which, in turn, motivates the word underemployment whose meaning was mentioned above.

R-word R2R3R3R2O (employn > employedadj > underemployedadj > underemploymentn) has full motivation at the first step because the meaning of the deriving word employ as a noun is completely resembled in the derived adjective employed «having a job working for a company or another person» (Cambridge) which is partially kept at the second step in an adjective underemployed which partially motivates the word underemployment at the third step. The same motivation relations occur in a word unemployment (employn > employmentn > unemploymentn V employv > unemployedadj > unemploymentn V employn > employedadj > unemployedadj > unemploymentn).

R-word R2R2R1R1O v R2R2R2O overallotment is a polysemous with multiple motivation. R-word R2R2R1R1O (lotv > allotv > allotmentn > overallotmentn) has partial motivation at the first step because the meaning of the deriving word lot «divide (items) into lots for sale at an auction» (Cambridge) is indirectly kept in a derived word allot «to give a share of something for a particular purpose» (Cambridge).

There is full motivation at the second step because the meaning of the word allotment «the process of sharing something, or the amount that you get» (Collins) completely coincides with its deriving verb allot. There is partial metaphorical motivation at the third step as overallotment with the meaning «1) in a share offering (=time when shares are offered for sale); 2) extra shares that are available if all the main shares are sold» (Cambridge) partially keeps the meaning of the noun allotment. R-word R2R2R2O overallotment (lotn > allotmentn > overallotmentn) has full motivation at the first step because one meaning of the word lot as a noun «in an auction, an object or set of objects that are being sold» (Cambridge) is completely kept in the derived word allotment «the amount of shares that someone is given when new shares are being made available» (Cambridge), partial motivation is at the second step because the meaning of allotment is partially kept in the noun overallotment.

So, the row representing the word class R2R2X is heterogeneous because not only R2 is at the penultimate step but also R2.

The word-class R2R1X v R2R2X is represented (Table 3) by 18 words which have the following R-structures R2R1R1O v R2R2R1O, R2R1R2O v R2R2R2O, R2R1R1R1O v R2R2R2O, R2R1R1R1O v R2R2R1R1O, R2R1R1R2O v R2R2R1R2O. The complexity is ten and the depth is three.

R-word R2R1R1O V R2R2R1O has multiple motivation, e. g., R-word R2R1R1O underachievement (achievev > underachievev > underachievementn) is characterized by partial motivation at the first step because meanings of the deriving verb achieve «1) to succeed in finishing something or reaching an aim, especially after a lot of work or effort; 2) to do or obtain something that you wanted after planning and working to make it happen» (Cambridge) is partially kept in the verb underachieve «to do less well than you could or should» (Cambridge) which, in turn, completely motivates the noun underachievement «the fact of doing less well than expected» (Cambridge).

R-word R2R2R1O (achievev > achievementn > underachievementn) has full motivation at the first step because the meaning of the verb achieve is kept in the derived noun achievement with the meaning «1) something very good and difficult that you have succeeded in doing; 2) the act of achieving something or of achieving things generally» (Cambridge) which partially motivates the noun underachievement. The following words are characterized by the same motivation relations disagreement (agreev > disagreev > disagreement V agreev > agreementn > disagreementn), disengagement (engagev > disengagev > disengagementn V engagev > engagement > disengagement), misgovern- ment (governv > misgovernv >misgovernmentn V governv > governmentn > misgovern- mentn), overinvestment (invest > overinvest > overinvestmentn V invest > investment > overinvestmentn), readjustment (adjust > readjust > readjustment V adjust > adjustmentn > readjustment), reassessment (assessv > reassessv > reassessmentn V as- sessv > assessment > reassessmentn), redeployment (deployv > redeployv > redeploy- mentn V deployv > deploymentn > redeploymentn), redevelopment (developv > redeve- lopv > redevelopmentn V developv > developmentn > redevelopmentn), resettlement (settlev > resettlev > resettlement V settlev > settlement > resettlement), reinvestment (invest > reinvest > reinvestmentn V invest > investmentn > reinvestment), restatement (statev > restatev > restatementn V statev > statementn > restatementn), underachievement (achievev > underachievev > underachievementn V achievev > achieve- mentn > underachievementn), undernourishment (nourishv > undernourishv > under- nourishmentn V nourishv > nourishmentn > undernourishment).

R-word R2R1R2O V R2R2R2O has multiple motivation at the first step, e. g., disguisement (guisen > disguisev > disguisementn) representing R-word R2R1R2O with partial motivation at the first step because the meaning of the deriving noun guise «the appearance of someone or something, especially when intended to deceive» (Cambridge) is partially kept in the verb disguise «1) to give a new appearance to a person or thing, especially in order to hide its true form; 2) to hide an opinion, a feeling, etc.» (Cambridge). There is full motivation at the second step as the meaning of the verb disguise is completely kept in the derived noun disguisement with the meaning «the action of hiding smth or preventing it from being known» (Cambridge). R-word R2R2R2O (guisen > disguisen > disguisementn) has full motivation at the first step because the meaning of the deriving noun guise is completely kept in the derived disguise as a noun with the meaning «something that someone wears to hide their true appearance» and it fully motivates the noun disguisement (Cambridge). The noun disillusionment (illusionn > disillusionv > disillusionmentn V illusionn > illusionmentn > disillusion- mentn) has the same motivational relations.

R-word R2R1R1R1O V R2R2R2O can be derived both from the verb and the noun. R-word R2R2R2O misalignment (linen > alignment > misalignment) has partial motivation at the first step because among 15 meanings of the deriving word line as a noun only one meaning «a row of people or things» (Cambridge) is partially resembled in the derived noun alignment with the meanings «1) an arrangement in which two or more things are positioned in a straight line; 2) in agreement between a group of countries, political parties, or people who want to work together because of shared interests or aims» (Cambridge).

Partial motivation occurs at the second step because the deriving noun misalignment has two meanings «1) an arrangement in which the parts of a machine or structure do not fit together correctly, which causes problems; 2) a situation in which parts of a system are different, so the system does not work well» (Cambridge) which do not completely coincide with the meanings of the deriving noun alignment. R-word R2R1R1R1O misalignment (linev > alignv > misalignv > misalignmentn) can be characterized by partial metaphorical motivation at the first step because the verb align with meanings «1) to put two or more things into a straight line; 2) to change something so that it has a correct relationship to something else; 3) to agree with or support another person, group, organization, or view» (Cambridge) partially resembles the meaning of the deriving word line as a verb «1) to form a row along the side of something; 2) to cover the inside surface of something» (Cambridge).

There is partial motivation at the second step and full motivation at the third one because the meaning of misalign completely coincides with the derived word misalignment with meanings «1) an arrangement in which the parts of a machine or structure do not fit together correctly, which causes problems; 2) a situation in which parts of a system are different, so the system does not work well» (Cambridge).

R-word R2R1R1R1O v R2R2R1R1O has multiple motivation at the second derivation step, e. g., R-word R2R1R1R1O disembodiment (bodyv > embodyv > disembodyv > disembodiment) has partial motivation at the first step because the deriving word body has the following meanings «1) give material form to smth abstract; 2) build the bodywork of (a motor vehicle)» (Cambridge) which are partially kept in the derived verb embody «1) be an expression of or give a tangible or visible form to smth, provide with a physical form; 2) include or contain smth. as a constituent part; 3) form (people) into a body, esp. for a military purpose» (Cambridge) which, in turn, partially motivates the verb disembody «separate smth from its material form» (Cambridge).

There is full motivation at the third step because the noun disembodiment «an act or instance of disembodying or the state of being disembodied» (Cambridge) completely resembles the meaning of the verb disembody. R-word R2R2R1R1O (bodyv > embodyv > embodiment > disembodiment) has partial motivation both at the first step and at the second one because the derived word embodiment with meanings «1) a tangible or visible form of an idea, quality or feeling; 2) the representation of smth in a tangible or visible form» (Collins) partially resembles the meaning of the deriving word embody. There is partial motivation at the third step too because the meaning of the noun embodiment is indirectly resembled in the derived noun disembodiment.

R-word R2R1R1R2O v R2R2R1R2O has multiple motivation at the second step, e. g., R-word R2R1R1R2O disenfranchisement (franchisen > enfranchisev > disenfran- chisev > disenfranchisementn) has the following meanings «1) the action of taking away the right to vote from a person or group; 2) a feeling in a person or group of having no power or opportunities, or of not being represented in the political system» (Cambridge) and it is completely motivated by the verb disenfranchise «1) to take away power or opportunities, especially the right to vote, from a person or group; 2) to take away a person's right to vote» (Cambridge) which is partially motivated by the verb enfranchise «to give a person or group of people the right to vote in elections» (Cambridge) with franchise as a deriving word with meanings «1) a right to sell a company's products in a particular area using the company's name; 2) a series of films that have the same or similar titles and are about the same characters; 3) the right to vote» (Cambridge) where only the third meaning partially motivates enfranchise. R-word R2R2R1R2O (franchisen > enfranchisev > enfranchisement > disenfranchisementn) has partial motivation at the first step. There is full motivation at the second step because the meaning of enfranchise is completely resembled in a derived word enfranchisement «the fact of giving a person or group of people the right to vote in elections» (Cambridge) which partially motivates the noun disenfranchisement.

So, despite polysemous words that constitute the row representing the word class R2R1X v R2R2X, this row (Table 3) is homogeneous because R1 v R2 is at the penultimate step of each word in the row.

Table 3 - R2R1X v R2R2X Class

Conclusions

The analysis of the word-formation rows with the help of the applicative generative model helps study the structure of rows in terms of their homogeneity / heterogeneity, depth and complexity. The motivational relations between words in rows were investigated. Three word-classes such as R2R1X, R2R2X, R2R1X v R2R2X were distinguished according to which three word-formation rows with the suffix -ment were built. So, the investigated rows are not deep because their depth equals three derivational steps. The complexity of rows representing R2R1X and R2R2X word-classes is six and in R2R1X v R2R2X word-class - ten and it means that a word-formation row with multiple motivation and polysemous words is more complex. R2R1X word-class includes a homogeneous row, R2R2X word-class consists of a heterogeneous row, R2R1X v R2R2X word-class comprises a homogeneous row.

This research leads to the conclusion that word-formation rows with the suffix -ment grouped according to three word-classes are more homogeneous than heterogeneous.

Further studies will be devoted to creating and analyzing semantic fields of words comprising word-formation rows with the suffix -ment.

References

1. Блинова О. И. Мотивология и ее аспекты. Москва: Красанд, 2010. 301 с.

[Blinova O. I. Motivologiya i yeye aspekty. Moskva: Krasand, 2010. 301 s.]

2. Виленская Н. С. Становление и развитие суффиксальных словообразовательных рядов английского языка: автореф. дис. ... канд. филол. наук: 10.02.04. Москва, 1986. 23 с. [Vilenskaya N. S. Stanovleniye i razvitiye suffiksalnykh slovoobrazovatelnykh ryadov angliy- skogo yazyka: avtoref. dis. ... kand. filol. nauk: 10.02.04. Moskva, 1986. 23 s.]

3. Земская Е. А. Словообразование. Современный русский язык / под ред. В. А. Белошапко- вой. Москва: Наука, 1981. С. 80-110.

[Zemskaya Ye. A. Slovoobrazovaniye. Sovremennyy russkiy yazyk / pod red. V. A. Beloshapko- voy. Moskva: Nauka, 1981. S. 80-110]

4. Мусатов В. Н. Деривационные суффиксальные форманты, формирующие отраженную полисемию (на материале отглагольных существительных). Москва, ФЛИНТА: Наука. 2012. С. 127-148.

[Musatov V. N. Derivatsionnyye suffiksalnyye formanty, formiruyushchiye otrazhennuyu polisemiyu (na materiale otglagolnykh sushchestvitelnykh). Moskva, FLINTA: Nauka. 2012. S.127-148]

5. Соболева П. А., Шаумян С. К. Основания порождающей грамматики рус. языка: введение в генотипические структуры. Москва: Наука, 1968. 375 с.

[Soboleva P. A., Shaumyan S. K. Osnovaniya porozhdayushchey grammatiki rus. yazyka: vvedeniye v genotipicheskiye struktury. Moskva: Nauka, 1968. 375 s.]

6. Шепель Ю. А. Словообразовательный ряд в системе словообразования. Днепропетровск: Наука и образование, 2006. 304 с.

[Shepel Yu. A. Slovoobrazovatelnyy ryad v sisteme slovoobrazovaniya. Dnepropetrovsk: Nauka i obrazovaniye, 2006. 304 s.]

7. Шепель Ю. А. Словообразовательный ряд и его роль в системной организации лексики. Днепропетровск: Белая Е. А., 2013. 240 с.

[Shepel Yu. A. Slovoobrazovatelnyy ryad i yego rol v sistemnoy organizatsii leksiki. Dnepropetrovsk: Belaya Ye. A., 2013. 240 s.]

8. Ширшов И. А. Множественность словообразовательной мотивации в современном русском языке. Ростов-на-Дону: Изд-во Ростовского университета, 1981. 117 с.

[Shirshov I. A. Mnozhestvennost slovoobrazovatelnoy motivatsii v sovremennom russkom yazyke. Rostov-na-Donu: Izd-vo Rostovskogo universiteta, 1981. 117 s.]

9. Улуханов И. С. Мотивация в словообразовательной системе русского языка. Москва: Либроком, 2010. 320 с.

[Ulukhanov I. S. Motivatsiya v slovoobrazovatelnoy sisteme russkogo yazyka. Moskva: Libro- kom, 2010. 320 s.]

10. Aronoff M., Fudeman K. А. What is Morphology? United States: John Wiley & Sons, 2011. 35 р.

11. Cambridge Advanced Learner's Dictionary. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2003. URL: https://dictionary.cambridge.org/ (16.04.2022).

12. Collins English Dictionary. Glasgow: Collins, 2015 URL: https://www.collinsdictionary.com/ (16.04.2022).

13. Furdik J. Teoria motivacie v lexikalnej zasobe. Theory of motivation in the lexicon / M. Olostiak (ed.). Kosice: Vydavatel'stvo LG, 2008. P. 11-23.

14. Lehmann V. Categories of word-formation. Word-Formation: An International Handbook of the Languages of Europe / P. O. Mьller (ed.). Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton, 2015. P. 1020-1034.

15. Merriam-Webster's Advanced Learner's English Dictionary. Springfield, United States: Merriam Webster U. A., 2008. URL: https://www.learnersdictionary.com/ (16.04.2022).

16. Soboleva P. A. Derivation structure of Russian lexico. Trends in Soviet theoretical linguistics (Foundations of Language Supplementary Series) / F. Kiefer (ed.) Berlin: Springer Science & Business Media, 2012. P. 77-105.

Abstract

Homogeneous and heterogeneous word-formation rows with the suffix -ment

Olena Dotsenko Department of Translation Studies and Linguistic Training for Foreigners, Oles Honchar Dnipro National University, Dnipro, Ukraine.

Background: Modern word-formation in the English language lacks the sufficient investigation of word-formation rows which are often confused with word-formation nests and chains. Polysemous words pose a difficulty in identifying deriving stems in derived words with the suffix -ment.

Purpose: The paper focuses on structural peculiarities of word-formation rows using the relator language of the applicative generative model. The article aims at analyzing homogeneous and heterogeneous structures of rows, their depth and complexity, and peculiarities of motivational relations.

Results: With the help of the applicative generative model, the author identifies the deriving stem in each word from the synchronous point of view and distinguishes three word-classes (R2R1X, R2R2X, R2R1X v R2R2X) of word-formation rows. The research leads to the conclusion that there are two homogeneous rows and one heterogeneous among three word-formation rows. In terms of the depth the rows are not deep and their complexity is different depending on the number of R-structures in each row. Discussion: The study concludes that word-formation rows with the suffix -ment are more homogeneous than heterogeneous despite the polysemy of words. It is necessary to carry out further research into creating semantic fields of word-formation rows with the suffix -ment and investigating their lexical, semantic and structural peculiarities. The choice of the research is determined by insufficient investigation of all aspects of a word-formation row in the English language. Keywords: a word-formation row, multiple motivation, a derivational step, polysemous words, the applicative generative model. Размещено на Allbest.ru