PARTS OF SPEECH

Date: 2015-10-07; view: 2310.

§ 37. Every language contains thousands upon thousands of lexemes. When describing them it is possible either to analyse every lexeme separately or to unite them into classes with more or less common features. Linguists make use of both approaches. A dictionary usually describes individual lexemes, a grammar book mostly deals with classes of lexemes, traditionally called parts of speech.

Though grammarians have been studying parts of speech for over two thousand years, the criteria used for classifying lexemes are not yet agreed upon. Hence there is a good deal of subjectivity in defining the classes of lexemes and we, consequently, find different classifications (see § 52). Still parts of speech are not altogether an invention of grammarians: what really lies at the bottom of this division of lexemes is their connection with the world of material reality. The bulk of the class denoting 'substances' is made up of words denoting material objects such as table, window, milk, etc.; the kernel of the class of lexemes naming 'processes' is constituted by lexemes denoting concrete actions, such as those of writing, reading, speaking, etc.

§ 38. The lexemes of a part of speech are first of all united by their content, i. e. by their meaning. Now, this general meaning of a part of speech cannot be grammatical because the members of one lexeme have different grammatical meanings. Cf. boy's (singular number, possessive case), boys (plural number, common case). Nevertheless, the meaning of a part of speech is closely connected with certain typical grammatical meanings.

The general meaning of a part of speech cannot be lexical either. If all the words of a part of speech had the same lexical meaning, they would constitute one lexeme (see § 19). But the meaning of a part of speech is closely connected with the lexical meanings of its constituent lexemes. It is always an abstraction from those meanings.

Thus the general meaning of a part of speech is neither lexical nor grammatical, but it is connected with both, and we call it lexico-grammatical.

§ 39. Lexemes united by the genera! lexico-grammatical meaning of "substance" are called nouns. Those having the general lexico-grammatical meaning of "action" are called verbs, etc., etc.

The definitions "substance", "action", "quality" are conventional. It is easy to see the notion of "substance" in nouns like water or steel. But a certain stretch of imagination is necessary to discern the "substance" in nouns like hatred, silence, (a) swim, or the "action" in the verbs belong, resemble, contain and the like.

§ 40. The general lexico-grammatical meaning is the intrinsic property of a part of speech. Connected with it are some properties that find, so to say, outward expression. Lexico-grammatical morphemes are one of these properties. The stems of noun lexemes often include the morphemes -er, -ist, -ness, -ship, -went (worker, Marxist, firmness, friendship, management). The stems of verb lexemes include the morphemes -ize, -ify, be-, en-, -en (industrialize, electrify, becloud, enrich, darken). Adjective stems often have the suffixes -ful, -less, -ish, -ous, -ive (careful, fearless, boyish, continuous, evasive). Thus, the presence of a certain lexico-grammatical morpheme in the stem of a lexeme often stamps it as belonging to a definite part of speech. Many of these morphemes are regularly used to form lexemes of one class from those of another class. For instance, the suffix -ness often forms noun stems from adjective stems. Cf. dark — darkness, sweet — sweetness, thick — thickness, full — fullness, etc. The absence of the suffix in dark as contrasted with -ness of darkness looks like a zero morpheme characterizing dark as an adjective.

§ 41. Other stem-building elements are of comparatively little significance as distinctive features of parts of speech. For example, the vowel interchange observed in full—-fill, food — feed, blood— bleed is not systematic and is also found within a lexeme (foot — feet, see § 11).

Stem structure is of little help too, because there are stems of various kinds within almost every part of speech: simple (snow, know, low, down), derivative (belief, believe, below, before), compound (schoolboy, broadcast, home-made, everything), composite (get up, at all, one hundred and twenty, in order to).

Certainly English nouns have many more compound stems than other parts of speech, and composite sterns are most typical of the English verb. But this is a case for statistics. As a classification criterion it is of little use.

§ 42. A part of speech is characterized by its grammatical categories manifested in the opposemes and paradigms of its lexemes. Nouns have the categories of number and case. Verbs possess the categories of tense, voice, mood, etc. Adjectives have the category of the degrees of comparison. That is why the paradigms of lexemes belonging to different parts of speech are different. The paradigm of a verb lexeme is long: write, writes, wrote, shall write, will write, am writing, is writing, was writing, were writing, etc. The paradigm of a noun lexeme is much shorter: sister, sister's, sisters, sisters'. The paradigm of an adjective lexeme is still shorter: cold, colder, coldest. The paradigm of an adverb like always, is the shortest as the lexeme consists of one word.

Thus, the paradigm of a lexeme shows to what part of speech the lexeme belongs.

§ 43. It must be borne in mind, however, that not all the lexemes of a part of speech have the same paradigms.

Cf. 1. student book information

2. students books —

3. student's — —

4. students' — —

The first lexeme has opposemes of two grammatical categories: number and case. The second lexeme has only one opposeme — that of number. It has no case opposemes. In other words, it is outside the category of case. The third lexeme is outside both categories: it has no opposemes at all. We may say that the number opposeme with its opposite grammatical meanings of 'singularity' and 'plurality' is -neutralized in nouns like information, bread, milk, etc. owing to their lexical meanings which can hardly be associated with the notions of 'oneness' or 'more-than-oneness' (cf. the uncommonness of * two milks, * three informations, etc.).

Sometimes only the form of an opposeme is neutralized in certain surroundings. Cf. dozen — dozens, but one (five) dozen; foot—feet, but one (four) foot three (inches).

We may define neutralization as the reduction of an opposeme to one of its members under certain circumstances. This member may be called the member of neutralization. Usually it is the unmarked member of an opposeme. In number opposemes, for instance, the member of neutralization is mostly the unmarked 'singular'. However, sometimes the marked 'plural' becomes the member of neutralization, as in the case of trousers, tongs, sweets, etc. The category of number is by no means an exception as regards the neutralization of its opposemes. We may recognize the neutralization of the case opposemes in nouns like book, hand, thought, etc.; of the category of the degrees of comparison in adjectives like deaf, blind, wooden, etc.; of the category of aspect in verbs like to believe, to resemble, etc.

In all such cases we speak of the neutralization of opposemes actually existing in other lexemes of the same class. Cf. hand and man — man's, blind and kind — kinder — kindest, believe and read — be reading.

Note. But there are no grounds to speak of the neutralization of the gender opposeme in the adjective blind (cf. слепой — слепая — слепое) because no adjective lexemes have gender opposemes in English.

§ 44. The influence of the category of number is obliquely felt even in a case like milk. The word milk is closer to the "singular" member of a number opposeme than to the "plural" one.

a) Like the "singular" member it has no positive inflection.

b) It is usually linked with words having the "singular" meaning.

Cf. This (book, milk) is ...

These books are ...

Thus, the word milk can be said to have an oblique "singular" meaning. It is oblique because it is acquired not as a result of direct opposition, but through association and analogy with words having "plural" opposites. Similarly book can be said to have an oblique 'common case' meaning by analogy with words like boy, cook which have an actual meaning of "common case" owing to the opposemes boy — boy's, cook — cook's.

Likewise the verbs creeps, conies have an oblique meaning of 'active voice' by analogy with the first members in such opposemes as keeps — is kept, makes — is made.

Oblique grammatical meanings can also be regarded as potential meanings that can be actualized if necessary. Ordinarily the word room, for instance, has but an oblique meaning of 'common case' with no 'possessive case' opposite, but Galsworthy uses 'the room ' s atmosphere'. We find the same actualization of a potential 'number' meaning in There was no room for the separate bitternesses. (Wilson).

The actualization of a potential 'voice' meaning is observed in a sentence like The bed had not been slept in.

Taking into consideration that oblique grammatical meanings unite numbers of lexemes into more or less homogeneous groups, we may also treat them as lexico-grammatical meanings, for example, nouns like milk, water, steel, self-possession are united by the oblique meaning of 'singular number' into one lexico-grammatical group of uncountables.

Now coming back to the nouns student, book, information we can say that all of them have the meanings of 'singular number' and 'common case'. Only in the noun book the 'case' meaning and in the noun information both of them are oblique, or potential, or lexico-grammatical ones.

§ 45. Another important feature of a part of speech is its combinability, i. e. the ability to form certain combinations of words. As stated (§34), we distinguish lexical, grammatical and lexico-grammatical combinability.

When speaking of the combinability of parts of speech, lexico-grammatical meanings are to be considered first. In this sense combinability is the power of a lexico-grammatical class of words to form combinations of definite patterns with words of certain classes irrespective of their lexical or grammatical meanings.

Owing to the lexico-grammatical meanings of nouns ("substance") and prepositions ("relation (of substances)") these two parts of speech often go together in speech. The model to (from, at) school characterizes both nouns and prepositions as distinct from adverbs which do not usually form combinations of the type * to loudly, * from loudly. The same is true about articles (a book, the book but not *a below, * the speak), adjectives (pleasant silence but not * pleasant silently), etc.

As already mentioned (§ 36), a characteristic feature of articles is their unilateral right-hand combinability with nouns. Unilateral right-hand connections, but with different classes of words, are also typical of particles (even John, even yesterday, even beautiful). Bilateral connections are typical of conjunctions and prepositions. The connections of nouns and verbs in speech are variable, but right-hand connections are more numerous with verbs

(I sent him a letter yesterday),

and left-hand connections are predominant with nouns (to my dear sister). The lexico-grammatical combinability of such words as alas, hurrah (interjections), or perhaps, possibly (modal words) is practically zero or negative in the sense that, as a rule, they do not form combinations with other words.

Thus the combinability of a word, its connections in speech help to show to what part of speech it belongs.

The impossibility of forming combinations with certain classes of lexemes may serve as valuable negative criteria in the classification of lexemes. Thus the fact that the adjective can form no combinations of the 'preposition + adjective' pattern or a verb cannot attach an article help to distinguish them from other parts of speech.

§ 46. Parts of speech are said to be characterized also by their function in the sentence. A noun is mostly used as a subject or an object, a verb usually functions as a predicate, an adjective — as an attribute, etc.

To some extent this is true. There is some connection between parts of speech and parts of the sentence, but it never assumes the nature of obligatory correspondence. The subject of a sentence may be expressed not only by a noun but also by a pronoun, a numeral, a gerund, an infinitive, etc. On the other hand, a noun can (alone or with some other word) fulfil the function of almost any part of the sentence. Besides, the typical functions of student and student's are not the same. Now. prepositions, conjunctions, particles, etc. are usually not recognized as fulfilling the function of any part of the sentence, so with regard to them the meaning of the term 'syntactical function' is quite different (see § 421).

All this and the desire to avoid, as far as possible, the confusion of the two basic units of grammar, the word and the sentence, must necessarily reduce the role of the sentence criterion in defining parts of speech. This is why we place it last though some linguists¹ give it the first place.

§ 47. Thus a part of speech is a class of lexemes characterized by 1) its lexico-grammatical meaning, 2) its lexico-grammatical morphemes (stem-building elements), 3) its grammatical categories or its paradigms, 4) its combinability, and 5) its functions in a sentence.

All these features distinguish, for instance, the lexeme represented by the word teacher from that represented by the word teach and stamp the words of the first lexeme as nouns, those of the other lexeme as verbs.

But very often lexemes or even parts of speech lack some of these features. The noun lexeme information lacks feature 3. The adjective lexeme deaf lacks both feature 2 and feature 3. So do the adverbs back, seldom, very, the prepositions with, of, at, etc.

Features 1, 4 and 5 are the most general properties of parts of speech.

§ 48. In accordance with the principles described above it is possible to distinguish the following parts of speech in English:

1. Nouns

2. Adjectives

3. Pronouns ²

4 Numerals

5. Verbs

6. Adverbs

7. Adlinks (the category of state)

8. Modal words (modals)

9. Prepositions

10. Conjunctions

11. Particles

12. Interjections

13. Articles

14. Response words (yes, no)

^{_____________________________}

² Pronouns are correlated with different parts of speech (see § 140).

§49. Many linguists point out the difference between such parts of speech as, say, nouns or verbs, on the one hand and prepositions or conjunctions, on the other.

V. V. Vinogradov thinks that only the noun, the adjective, the pronoun, the numeral, the verb, the adverb and the category of state in the Russian language may be considered parts of speech, as these words "can fulfil the naming function or be indicative equivalents of names". Besides parts of speech V. V. Vinogradov distinguishes 4 particles of speech: 1) particles proper, 2) linking particles, 3) prepositions. 4) conjunctions.

One may infer that particles of speech are denied the naming function, to which we object. There is certainly some difference between the nature of such words as table and after. One names an object, the other — a relation. But both "can fulfil the naming function". Nouns like relation, attitude, verbs like belong, refer name relations too, but in a way peculiar to these parts of speech. Prepositions and conjunctions name the relations of the world of reality in their own way.

E. Nida makes no distinction between nouns and prepositions as to their 'naming function' when he writes that "words such as boy, fish, run, walk, good, bad, against and with are signals for various objects, qualities, processes, states and relationships of natural and cultural phenomena".

H. Sweet distinguishes fullwords and emptywords. Producing the sentence The earth is round, he writes: "We call such words as the and is form-words because they are words in form only".

Our opinion is that both the and is are words in content as well as in form. The impossibility of substituting an for the in the sentence above is due to the content, not the form of an. When replacing is by another link verb (seems, looks) we change the content of the sentence.

Many authors speak of function words. D. Brown, C. Brown, D. Bailey call "auxiliary verbs, prepositions and articles" function words. V. Zhigadlo, I. Ivanova, L. Iofic name prepositions, conjunctions, particles and articles as functional parts of speech distinct from notional parts of speech. C. Fries points out 4 classes of words called parts of speech and 15 groups of words called function words.

The demarcation line between function words and all other words is not very clear. Now it passes betweenparts of speech, now it is drawn insidea part of speech. Alongside of prepositions, auxiliary verbs are mentioned. Alongside of functional parts of speech, grammarians speak of the functional use of certain classes of words, for instance, verbs.

The criteria for singling out function words are rather vague. After enumerating some of such criteria C. Fries writes: "the basis for separating the words of these 15 groups from the others and for calling them 'function words' is the fact that in order to respond to certain structural signals one must know these words as items". And again: "There are no formal contrasts by which we can identify the words of these lists. They must be remembered as items".

§ 50. The difference between the function words and the others is not so much a matter of form as of content. The lexical meanings of function words are not so bright, distinct, tangible as those of other words. If most words of a language are notional,function words may be called semi-notional.

As suggested by Y. A. Krutikov, this distinction is, to some extent, reflected in the phenomenon of substitution. Notional words usually have substitutes — other words with much more general meanings which are used to replace them in certain environments. E. g. nouns, adjectives, numerals, adverbs can be replaced by pronouns (see § 140), verbs by the verbal substitute do (He speaks better than you do). The lexical meanings of semi-notional words are usually so weak and general that these words can hardly be replaced by substitutes with still more general meanings.

As to form, a semi-notional word may coincide with a notional one. Take, for example, the form grows in the two sentences: He grows roses and He grows old. The first grows expresses an action, What does he do? He grows roses. In the second case the notion of action is very weak. He grows old can make but a facetious answer to What does he do? The linking function of grows comes to the fore. Grows links a word indicating a person (he) with a word denoting a property of that person (old). In this function it resembles (and is often interchangeable with) a few other verbs with faded lexical meanings and clear linking properties (become, turn, get). The fading of the lexical meaning in grows is connected with changes in its combinability. As a linking word it acquires obligatory bilateral connections, whereas grows as a notional word has variable combinability. The semi-notional grows forms connections with adjectives, adlinks, with which the notional grows is not combinable. The fading of the lexical meaning affects the isolatability of words (see § 6). Semi-notional words rarely or never become sentences.

§ 51. A similar distinction can be drawn between notional and semi-notional lexemes within a part of speech (see § 194) and between notional and semi-notional parts of speech.

Prepositions, conjunctions, articles and particles may be regarded as semi-notional parts of speech when contrasted with the notional parts of speech. What unites the semi-notional parts of speech is as follows:

a) their very general and comparatively weak lexical meanings, precluding the use of substitutes;

b) their practically negative isolatability;

c) their obligatory unilateral (articles, particles) or bilateral (prepositions, conjunctions) combinability;

d) their functions of linking (conjunctions, prepositions) or specifying (articles¹ , particles) words.

^{______________________________}

¹ See § 472.

§ 52. Naturally, the system of English parts of speech presented above is not the only one conceivable. If we take into consideration only some of the above-mentioned properties of parts of speech and neglect the others we may obtain a different list. Thus if we regard the grammatical categories of a part of speech as its dominant feature and underestimate the lexico-grammatical meaning, combinability and syntactical function, we are prone to unite adverbs, prepositions, conjunctions, interjections and particles into one class, as H. Sweet and O. Jespersen do. H. Sweet finds the following classes of words in Modern English: nouns, adjectives, numerals, verbs and particles. O. Jespersen names substantives, adjectives, verbs, pronouns and particles. In both cases the term particles denotes the jumble of words of different classes that are united by the absence of grammatical categories.

If we classify only notionalwords in accordance with their distribution in speech(which is essentially the same as their combinability) and neglect or underestimate the other properties, we may arrive at the conclusion that there exist only four classes of words: nouns, adjectives, verbs and adverbs. In modern structural linguistics these classes are usually denoted by the letters N, A, V and D respectively. Since the distribution of John and he is similar in many cases

John (he) is a student.

Can John (he) skate?

both words are thought to belong to the same class N in spite of the differences in their lexico-grammatical meanings and paradigms.

§ 53. The difference between parts of speech (notional words) and particles of speech (semi-notional words) is used in Soviet linguistics to distinguish word-combinations(словосочетания) from combinations of words(сочетания слов). The term word-combination is narrower in meaning and applies only to the combination of at least two notional words. Thus on the table is a combination of words, but it is not a word-combination since only one word, table, is notional.

§ 54. As already mentioned (§ 32) word-combinations have much in common with separate words. One of such common traits is that word-combinations can be divided into groups corresponding to parts of speech. Thus, the combination my father or a beautiful flower can fulfil the same function as a noun and can occupy the same place in a sentence.

Cf. This is John.

This is т у f a t h e r.

This is a beautiful flower.

J о h n was basking in the sunshine.

My father was basking in the sunshine.

A beautiful flower was basking in the sunshine.

That is why we may speak of nounword-combinations (my father), verbword-combinations (speak fluently), adjectiveword-combinations (very beautiful), etc.

Using the above-mentioned symbols of word classes, we may write AN N, which means that a word-combination consisting of an adjective and a noun can be replaced by a noun as far as its distribution is concerned.

Similarly, VD V, DA A.

Thus a word-combination mostly contains a word which defines the properties of the combination as a whole. It is usually called the head-word of the combination. The other words of the word-combination, depending on the head-word, areits adjuncts.In my father the noun father is the headword and the pronoun my is the adjunct. In go to Moscow the verb go is the head-word and to Moscow is the adjunct.

§ 55. The system of parts of speech is historically variable. New parts of speech come into being in the course of language progress. Old English, for instance, did not know the category of state, the articles, the modals as separate classes of words, though they are recognizable as such in New English.

But no matter how many parts of speech we may find in a language, we see that the vocabulary is not a chaotic mass of separate words. Grammar organizes them into a comparatively small number of lexico-grammatical classes — parts or particles of speech.

Every new lexeme that appears in the vocabulary usually joins one of the existing classes and possesses the features of the other lexemes of the same class.

In most cases new lexemes are formed on the basis of already existing ones, e. g. the word steamer was formed on the basis of the word steam, the word motor-car — on the basis of the words motor and car.

Now the new lexeme may either remain in the class to which the basic lexeme belongs, as in the examples above, or pass to another lexico-grammatical class, like the noun follower derived from the verb (to) follow.

In the latter case, i. e. when the new lexeme passes to another part of speech, it. naturally, acquires all the features characterizing the lexemes of that part of speech. The word follower is distinguished from the word follow by all those features which distinguish an English noun from a verb:

1. By the general meaning of "substance" (and not of "action").

2. By its stem-building suffix -er (cf. teacher, worker, etc.).

3. By having opposites of number and case (and not of tense, person, etc.).

4. By its power of attaching articles, prepositions, adjectives (and not adverbs).

5. By its functions in the sentence.

But outwardly the words follow — follower are distinguished only by the suffix -er, which is therefore often considered to be the only means of lexeme-building in this case.

This view is supported by the fact that in such languages as Latin, Greek, Russian, etc., different lexemes have, as a rule, different stems even if their roots are the same.

Cf. Лак, лак-ов-ый, лак-иру-ю

Бел-ый, бел-и-ть, бел-изн-а.

In the examples above the suffixes -ов-, -иру-, -и-, -изн-are at the same time stem-building and lexeme-building suffixes. Thus 'stem-building' and 'lexeme-building' have come to be looked upon as synonyms.

§ 56. In English stem-building and lexeme-building often denote different phenomena. Not infrequently the stems of two (or more) lexemes belonging to different parts of speech have the same form in English. The nouns love, eye, doctor, and the verbs love, eye, doctor do not differ as to the forms of their stems. So one cannot speak of stem-building (the Latin stem-building suffix -or is found both in the noun doctor and in the verb doctor). At the same time doctor n. and doctor v. belong to different lexemes since they belong to different parts of speech, and the verb lexeme is clearly derived from the noun lexeme. What then is the means of lexeme-building in this case? A. I. Smirnitsky has shown that it is the paradigm.

On the one hand, we have doctor on the other, doctor

doctor's doctor s

doctor s doctor ed

doctor s' doctoring, etc.

Taken as a whole the paradigm of one lexeme shows it to be a noun, while the paradigm of the other clearly characterizes it as a verb.

This way of lexeme-building, very common in Modern English, has got the name of conversion ¹.

^{_____________________________________}

¹ Some linguists (for instance, D. Lee) use in Shis case the term functional change, a misapplied term, conveying the idea that we deal here not with the creation of a new lexeme but with a change of the function of the same lexeme, i. e. that the noun doctor and the verb (to) doctor are two words of the same lexeme, consequently that one lexeme may belong to different parts of speech.

§ 57. A. I. Smirnitsky defines conversion as a type of word-building in which the paradigm is the only means of word-building.

We quite agree that the paradigms of doctor (n.) and doctor (v.) characterize them as two separate lexemes belonging to different parts of speech and thus the change of paradigm is really a means of lexeme-building. But do these lexemes differ from each other only in their paradigms? Hardly so.

Out of the five features that may characterize a lexeme as belonging to a certain part of speech they Jack only one: stem-building elements.

Thus the two lexemes are characterized by the remaining four features:

doctor (n.) doctor (v.)

1. General lexico-grammatical meaning Denotes a substance. Denotes an action.

2. Paradigm Has number and case opposemes. Has opposemes of tense, person, mood, etc.

3. Combinability Attaches articles, prepositions, etc. Attaches adverbs, etc.

4. Function Subject, object. Predicate.

Consequently, the creation of the verb doctor on the basis of the noun doctor has been achieved not only by means of changing the paradigm but also by changing the general lexico-grammatical meaning, combinability and function. All these changes have brought about the creation of a new lexeme, i. e. all of them serve as lexeme-building means.

Moreover, the paradigm in Modern English is very often much less significant than the other features:

1. There are very many lexemes in English (both nouns and adjectives and lexemes of other parts of speech) which consist of only one word, e. g. meat, bread, hatred, dead, deaf, alive, must, etc.

2. English paradigms (save those of the verb) are mostly poor, and forms of different words very often coincide. Even in our example the noun forms doctor, doctors coincide with the verb forms doctor, doctors.

Thus, unlike stem-building elements (prefixes, suffixes, stress, etc.) which characterize each word of a lexeme as belonging to a given part of speech, the paradigm in English distinguishes only some of the words of a lexeme, whereas the general lexico-grammatical meaning, combinability and function characterize every word of every lexeme as belonging to a certain part of speech and must, therefore, be considered the most universal features of a part of speech.

So conversion might be defined negatively as a way of lexeme-building without stem-building elements ¹.

The positive definition would be more lengthy:

Conversion is a way of forming new lexemes from already existing ones by means of changing the paradigm, the lexico-grammatical meaning, the combinability and the function, or only the last three features.

This definition covers not only cases like the one discussed above (doctor n. doctor v.) but also changes of the type break v. break п., smooth a. smooth v., native a. native п., home n. home adv., down adv. down v., down adv. down п., down adv. down prep., etc. In cases like down adv. down v. the basic lexeme has no paradigm, and the derived lexeme has a developed paradigm. In down adv. down prep both lexemes are without paradigms and are distinguished only by their lexico-grammatical meanings, combinability and functions.

____________________

¹ This is how Donald W. Lee defines it: "Functional change is the process whereby a word conies to be used in a new grammatical function with no salient change of form, i. e. without the addition or subtraction of a derivative syllable or other similar element." (Functional Change in Early English. Diss, Wisconsin, 1948).

§ 58. Some linguists do not regard the substantivization of adjectives (native a. native n.) and the adverbialization of nouns (home n. home adv.) as types of conversion on account of their slow progress, as distinct from the instantaneous nature of changes like doctor n. doctor v. The so-called 'partial substantivization of adjectives' (see § 109) can be used as an argument in favour of such views. The adjective native was first partially substantivized, then fully. But we may also have partial substantivization in cases like to smoke a smoke (in to have a smoke) where the change was instantaneous.

Anyhow, in cases of full substantivization the results do not differ from those of other kinds of conversion. We might call changes of the type doctor n. doctor v. the verbalization of nouns, break v. break n. — the substantivization of verbs, better a. better n. — the verbalization of adjectives, etc.

§ 59. Summing up, we may say that lexeme-building is closely connected with the division of lexemes into parts of speech, the characteristic features of the latter discharging the functions of lexeme-building means.

When no reference to the history of derivation is made, and no emphasis is laid on the fact that doctor n. is the basic lexeme and doctor v. has been derived by conversion, we can simply say that doctor n. and doctor v. are related by conversion.

One of the characteristic features of English is the abundance of lexemes related by conversion.

§ 60. A part of speech can usually be subdivided into smaller lexico-grammatical classes, or subclasses. This subdivision can be based on the same principles which serve to distinguish parts of speech.

Let us by way of illustration compare the nouns boy, friend, on the one hand, and boyhood, friendship, on the other. All the lexemes represented by these words have the features of English noun lexemes. Yet, these nouns are not homogeneous.

They are united by the lexico-grammatical meaning of 'substance', but boy and friend denote 'countable substances', whereas boyhood and friendship stand for 'uncountable substances'.

Boy and friend have simple stems, while boyhood and friendship have been derived by means of affixation.

The lexemes of boy and friend have four-member paradigms, whereas the lexemes of boyhood and friendship are one-member ones.

The combinability of these words, though essentially alike, is not without certain distinctions. Unlike boy and friend, for instance, boyhood and friendship do not form combinations with numerals.

Thus, within the same lexico-grammatical class of nouns these lexemes belong to different subclasses.

§ 61. So far no systematic analysis of the subclasses of parts of speech has been carried out. Before this is done, it seems feasible to subdivide the lexemes of a part of speech with regard to some leading feature. From the grammatical point of view it is most essential to classify lexemes with regard to the grammatical categories of the part of speech they belong to.

With regard to the category of number, for instance, noun lexemes can be divided into those which possess number opposemes (boy — boys, book — books) and those having no number opposemes (snow, darkness, trousers). These two subclasses are roughly covered by the terms countables and uncountables and we shall call them so, though the uncountability of trousers, tongs or nuptials is rather doubtful.

With regard to the category of case nouns are subdivided into those having case opposemes (man — man's) and those without such opposemes (table, food). The first subclass mostly contains nouns denoting living beings and the second — lifeless things. But instances like a night's rest, a mile's distance, etc. show the need for more adequate terms, possibly, declinables and indeclinables.

Similarly, adjective lexemes can be divided into those possessing opposemes of the degrees of comparison (long — longer — longest, beautiful — more beautiful — most beautiful) and those having no such opposemes (wooden, deaf). These two subclasses are to some extent covered by the terms qualitative and relative. But adjectives like deaf, blind, etc. show the inaccuracy of these terms from the grammatical point of view. It would be more in keeping with grammar to call these classes comparables and non-comparables respectively.

English verbs can also be divided into subclasses, for instance, with regard to the category of voice. Some verb lexemes contain voice opposemes (takes — is taken, wants — is wanted), others do not (sit, resemble). The two subclasses are more or less covered by the terms objective and subjective ¹, though these terms refer to the combinability of the corresponding verbs, not to their paradigms.

^{___________________________________}

¹See § 204.

§ 62. Different lexemes usually belong to different subclasses, but often the dividing line passes within the lexeme. One of the meanings of the noun beauty is "all those qualities that give pleasure to the mind or to the eye or ear", e. g. В e а и t у is only skin deep. In this meaning the word beauty has neither a case nor a number opposite and belongs to the subclass of uncountable indeclinable nouns, like hatred, milk, etc.

When beauty means "an example of what is beautiful" (Her smile was one of her chief beauties) it has a number opposite and belongs to the subclass of countable indeclinable nouns, like book, day, etc. When meaning "beautiful woman" (She is a real beauty) beauty has both a case and a number opposites and belongs to the subclass of countable declinable nouns, like woman, student, etc. Strictly speaking, we might regard beauty in the first meaning as a separate lexeme consisting of one word. The second meaning might be looked upon as uniting two words (beauty, beauties) in another lexeme, the third meaning, as uniting four words (beauty, beauties, beauty's, beauties') in a different lexeme. But the connection between those meanings is so close and obvious that beauty_l, beauty₂, beauty₃ can hardly be considered homonyms. We shall rather regard them as variants of one lexeme.

§ 63. The relations between these variants remind us of conversion:

1. The variants belong to different lexico-grammatical subclasses.

2. They have different paradigms.

3. There is some difference in their combinability (e. g. unlike beauty₂ and beauty₃, beauty₁ cannot be associated with the indefinite article or numerals).

We shall assume then that beauty₁, beauty₂ and beauty₃. are related by internal conversion,i. e. conversion within the same part of speech.

Variants of lexemes related by internal conversion are not uncommon in other parts of speech either. The verb lexeme represented by the word runs (see § 19) consists of at least two variants. The first three meanings unite one variant belonging to the subclass of subjectiveverbs. The second variant, united by the last two meanings, belongs to the subclass of objective,more exactly, transitiveverbs ¹. These variants, as well as the corresponding subclasses, differ from each other in their paradigms and combinability. Unlike runs₁, runs₂ has

a voice opposite — is run and is followed by a noun in the common case or a pronoun in the objective case ².

Sometimes variants of a lexeme have different forms of the same opposemes. Cf. brother — brothers and brother — brethren.

^{__________________________________}

¹See § 198.

²See § 200.

<== previous lecture	\|	next lecture ==>
THE COMBINABILITY OF WORDS	\|	THE NOUN

lektsiopedia.org - 2013 год. | Page generation: 0.581 s.