The main ways of word formation.

Laws of word formation with examples:

1) Consider lexical meaning words (handcuffs<= рука (ручники по смыслу не подходят)-приставочно-суффиксальный)

2) The derivative and generating stem must differ by a minimum of morphemes (free of charge => free of charge - prefix)

3) Take into account parts of speech (behind our FOREST - non-productive, but go FOREST - transition from one part of speech to another)

I) Suffix

• Adverbs in -o, -e (lightning-lightning)
• Verbs with suffixes -yva-, -iva-, -va- (consider - consider)
• Nouns with suffixes -eni-, -ni-, -i-, -ti- (position - put)

II) The transition from one part of speech to another (I think it’s not worth explaining, since everything is clear)

III) Prefix (if the word exists in the language and explains the original word)

• Verbs (acts-acts ...)
• Adverbs (forever - always ...)
• Noun (superman - man ...)
• Adjective (hyperactive – active….)
• Pronoun (never - when, nowhere - where ..)

IV) Attachment-suffix (the main thing is that the word logically explains the original)

• Verbs (run away - run ...)
• Adjective (helpless - help ...)
• Noun (snowdrop - snow, seaside - sea ...)
• Adverbs (in my opinion - my ..., firstly - first ..., again - new ..., to the right - right)

V) Non-suffix (only nouns by cutting off the ending and suffix from the generating word)

• Image. from verbs (meaning of action) (heating - heat, look - look, run - run ....)
• Image. from adjectives nouns j.r. on "-b" (width - wide, distance - far ....)

VI) Addition of stems (easy, but not to be confused with the suffix: Agricultural<= земледелие, суффиксальный )

VII) Addition and suffixation (there is no such thing on the exam).

VIII) A method that is also not in the exam. Postfixal is an affixal way of word formation, which uses the postfix as a means of word formation: bathe - bathe.

More about word formation methods

Word-building analysis answers the questions:

• what word is this word derived from?
• How is this word formed?

There are the following ways of education:

1) petitionerprostratea ← petitioner(suffixal method, using the suffix -nits-);

3) underwindowsNicka ← window o (additional-suffixal method, using the prefix sub- and suffix -nickname-);

4) explosion← explosion ati (the same common part, the method of formation is non-suffix);

5) heels and floor ny ← five floor her (the addition of two roots).

Rule number 1.

Work only with the initial form of the word (for inflected parts of speech - the nominative case, the singular and, if possible, the masculine gender, for verbs - the indefinite form).

Trap!

reread l ← reread t (suffix way). Error! –т and –л- are formative suffixes, i.e. they are forms of the same word.

Correctly: re-read, n.f. pen chita t - chita be ( attachment method).

Rule number 2.

If the word has a prefix, then try to find, first of all, a single-root word with a prefix.

Trap!

input ← move (prefixed method). Error! Move - not the closest single-root word!

Correctly: input← input it (non-suffix way).

Remember!

When analyzing word-formation, remember that there are historical alternations of vowels and consonants:

E / o / and / a / zero sound (with br at - with bir at - with ber y);

Error: vish ny ← vish nya (suffix way, suffix –enn).

Correctly: cherries ny ← cherries i (suffix way, suffix –n).

Hissing w, w, h, c alternate with g-k, s-s, d-t ( start at, empty it, forest y);

B/bl, p/pl, v/vl, f/fl, m/ml ( love it, love yu, in love enny).

When choosing a single-root word, remember the following:

Part of speech	what part of speech can be formed from	how
noun	noun	prefix, suffix, prefixed-suffixal
	adjective	suffix, non-suffix
	verb
adjective	noun	suffix, adjective-suffix
	adjective	prefixal
	verb	suffixal
verb	verb	prefix, suffix
	noun	suffix, prefixed-suffixal
	adjective
adverb	noun, adjective, adverb, numeral, pronoun	suffix, prefixed-suffixal
	participle	suffixal
participle, participle	only verb	suffix only

Ways of word formation:

1) First of all, it is necessary to exclude the way of transition from one part of speech to another.

Transition- this is a non-morphological way of word formation, which consists in changing the morphological features of a word. Outwardly, this is manifested by the preservation of all morphemes and endings characteristic of the original part of speech, but by changing the question asked for this word.

Into the past (which?) Sunday we went to the circus. - must be rememberedwhat?) past.

In the first case, by the way past a question is asked which?, i.e. question of an adjective, and in the second what? is a noun question. So there is a transition in the second sentence.

2) Attachment method.

Remember!The prefix does not change the part of speech!

Common models:

times / races, over, super, ultra, extra + noun / adjective = noun / adjective.

anti, dez, counter, not, nor + noun/adjective = noun/adjective.

prefix + any non-prefix verb = verb.

3) Suffix method (more often forms a new part of speech).

4) Attachment-suffix method.

5) Addition

When adding, usually two roots are distinguished in the word, parts of the roots, words in a certain case, or the word is an abbreviation (MSU, USE).

Action algorithm.

1) Write out the word in its initial form and highlight the ending or formative suffix (-t, -ch or –ti for verbs).

2) Choose the closest related word (it should include the morphemes of the word being parsed as much as possible) and highlight the ending or formative suffix.

3) Select the common part of two words (coincident morphemes)

4) Determine the method of formation according to the morpheme, which was not included in the general part.

Parsing the task.

From the sentences, write out the word formed by the prefix-suffix method.

And I, first in kindergarten, and then at school, carried the heavy cross of my father's absurdity. Everything would be fine (you never know what kind of fathers!), But it was not clear to me why he, an ordinary locksmith, went to our matinees with his stupid harmonica. I would play at home and not dishonor myself or my daughter!

We argue. If you need to find a word formed with a prefix and a suffix, then they must be present in the word to be written out. Let's try to find these words. There were not so many of them: at first, absurdities, incomprehensible. Now we will select the closest single-root "relative" to these words.

First - the beginning (they differ in both the prefix and the suffix, i.e. the prefix-suffix method),

Absurdity - absurd (formed with the help of the suffix -awn, the method of formation is suffixal),

It is not clear - it is understandable (they differ only in the prefix, which means that this is a prefix method).

In this way, the correct answer is the word first.

Practice.

1. From this sentence, write out the word formed by the prefix-suffix method.

I suddenly felt scared, as if the earth had broken off under me and I found myself on the edge of a bottomless abyss.

2. From this sentence, write out the word formed by the prefix method.

But in the "virtual" can appear as a prince on a white horse.

3. From these sentences, write out the words formed in a non-suffix way (using a zero suffix).

There were insulting cries, threats. Barclay's adjutant had to draw his saber in order to pave the way to the carriage.

1) bottomless

2) appear

What is it - a mistake in the speech of the XXI century, how to improve literacy and why do people in Russia like to capitalize their position so much? We talked about this and much more with candidate of philological sciences, senior researcher at the Russian Language Institute of the Russian Academy of Sciences Elena Shmeleva.

AiF.ru: Elena Yakovlevna, what mistake in speech today can be called the most common and annoying ear?

Elena Shmeleva: This is a rather individual thing. Some are annoyed by the wrong accent. Once my son told me that he met a girl, he liked her, but after she said “they are calling”, he immediately stopped liking her. I am annoyed not so much by mistakes as by the inability to distinguish the style of speech, that is, a person in public speech uses such words, expressions that are permissible only in the kitchen or in a pub. It seems to me that this is the main trouble of our speech now. An educated person who speaks well is one who, speaking in parliament, speaks one language; when drinking with friends - others. The inability to switch from one style to another is really a misfortune of our speech.

AiF.ru: Do you have an answer to the question of how to learn to speak well?

Elena Shmeleva: This is hard science. Previously, they were engaged in rhetoric, they taught speakers to speak. In order to speak well, there is one constant recipe - read more, listen to good speeches more. We imitate our parents, teachers, people we like, who we think speak well. We must try to rid our speech of unnecessary words, to check ourselves. That's what dictionaries are for. But we have a very low culture of their use. In general, no one speaks perfectly, there are always difficult words that cause doubt. For example, one person respected by you speaks so, and another - in a different way. If you have any doubts, do not be lazy, check in the dictionary.

AiF.ru: In order to speak better, you advised listening more to the correct speech, but what about improving literacy in writing?

Elena Shmeleva: This also requires more reading. Another issue is that now books are often published without a proofreader. Why do they say that you need to read more? Because the eye gets used to the spelling of the word, that is, without hesitation, you write the word the way you are used to seeing it. Now there are publications in which there are errors, people also write differently on the Internet, so it happens that the eye gets used to the wrong spelling. I think that sometimes the illiteracy that occurs in previously literate people is due to this very reason.

AiF.ru: Elena Yakovlevna, it is difficult to be literate in a country where everyone wants to write themselves with a capital letter. We have a million different "Presidents", "Chairmen of the Board of Directors", "Managers" in our country...

Elena Shmeleva: It really is kind of an obsession. For some reason, the capital letter is perceived as a sign of special importance. We are constantly arguing about this issue. According to the rules of the Russian language, in a compound name, only the first word is capitalized, for example, Moscow State University. In the phrase "State Duma" only "State Duma" should be capitalized. Our legislators are constantly arguing with us, because they believe that the word "Duma" must be written with a capital letter. It is impossible to explain to people that a capital letter does not mean that you will become a more important person. They send us papers from the Federation Council, where it says “Third Assistant to the Minister ...”, all words with a capital letter. We try to explain that this is wrong, but, unfortunately, it does not work very well.

New words

AiF.ru: How do you assess the level of speech culture today?

Elena Shmeleva: If we talk specifically about the language, then I would not say unequivocally that before everyone spoke well, but now it is much worse. The people on the streets were talking and talking. It's just that earlier in the media there was practically no lively, spontaneous speech. Everything was pre-written, rehearsed, checked by the editors. Therefore, there was a feeling that only the correct speech was heard from the radio and TV. And now there is a lot of live speech. Relatively speaking, the speech of the street is heard from the TV screens. This, of course, annoys many people, because TV and radio hosts, whose speech we used to perceive as a role model, now speak the same way as the people around them. That is, it is not the Russian language that has changed, as linguists say, the conditions for the functioning of the language have changed.

AiF.ru: What is the rate of emergence of new words in the language today, is it growing or falling?

Elena Shmeleva: The Internet contributes to the fact that new words disperse faster throughout the country. Another thing is what to call a new word. Some borrowed or buzzword appeared and very quickly went on the Internet, everyone began to use it. But then this word in the language may not be fixed, the fashion will pass - and that's it. We are in no hurry to include new words in the dictionary. There are different systems of lexicography. I am sometimes asked why American dictionaries are larger than ours, do they have so many more words? The tradition of Russian lexicography is that we are waiting for the word to really enter the Russian language, we are waiting for a while. And American lexicographers, as soon as the word appeared in the language, in the same year it was added to the explanatory dictionary.

AiF.ru: How long do they wait to add a word?

Elena Shmeleva: Not only time plays a role, but also the breadth of use. Usually, at first, a word is included in a dictionary of new words or a dictionary of foreign words, and new words are entered into the explanatory dictionary, as a rule, in ten or even twenty years. But I'm talking about this in a nutshell. It happens that it quickly becomes clear that a word seems familiar and widely used to everyone, but it is still not in the explanatory dictionary, since our explanatory dictionaries are rarely reprinted. It turns out that in our explanatory dictionaries, not only are there not many words, but there are also many new meanings. For example, the words “positive” and “negative” have only a photographic meaning, and given that most people now shoot with digital cameras, it turns out quite funny, because these words now have a completely different meaning. But dictionaries do not have this, and this is bad, because dictionaries must still have time to keep up with the times.

Question from apis on the subject Russian language 03/02/2020:

1. To the question: "What is the rate of appearance of new words in modern Russian?" is probably very difficult to answer. But we know how they appear. We have prefixes, suffixes and different ways of connecting them. Which word is formed with a prefix and a suffix at the same time? Pretty, bathroom, white hand, glass holder, rejuvenate 2. Read an excerpt from the story of M.A. Gorky's "Childhood": "Soon I already read the Psalter in warehouses; usually they did this after evening tea, and each time I had to read the psalm. - Buki-people-az-la-bla; ; our-er-blessed, - I uttered, moving a pointer along the page, and out of boredom I asked: - Blessed is the husband, is this Uncle Yakov? Try to read the words the way the hero of the story read them, and write them down in modern spelling. chambers, rtsy, ilk, sha, er, people, er, qi, er 3. A morpheme model is a scheme, a pattern, according to which words are created in the Russian language. Find "extra" words that differ in morphemic pattern. Resurrection, maturity, praise, glorification, exaltation, return

A neologism that has arisen along with a new object, thing, concept is not immediately included in the active composition of the dictionary. After a new word becomes commonly used, publicly available, it ceases to be a neologism. For example, the words Soviet, collectivization, collective farm, team leader, tractor driver, Komsomol member, pioneer, Michurinist, metro builder, virgin lands, lunar explorer, cosmonaut and many others.

Consequently, due to the continuous historical development of the lexical composition of the language, many words, back in the 19th century. perceived as neologisms with an abstract meaning (for example, fiction, liberty, reality, citizenship, humanism- humanity, idea, public, equality etc.), in the modern language are part of the active stock of the dictionary.

And some words, having arisen quite recently (tax in kind, surplus appropriation, ukom, nepman, swagger, party maximum, party minimum, people's commissar etc.), managed to pass into the category of obsolete.

Reasons for the emergence of new words:

1) In everyday speech, we create new words for the following purposes:

1. With the help of a new word, we name new objects and phenomena: dutik boots, wheat variety "Dnepryanka".

2. However, we can create a name for a phenomenon that is well known, but does not have a verbal designation in the language. For example, the departure of the audience from the hall when they do not like the film is not at all new, but we do not designate this phenomenon with a special word. But one Sverdlovsk resident pointed out: “ The hall splashed».

3. Words are also created when we want to more clearly designate a phenomenon that has a name, instead of intricate, Thuringian porcelain is said to be finicky, the sealant is called sticky donut.

4. You can play with words. This is readily done by children who are learning the language, but adults are sometimes not averse to making up some kind of word for fun: “Since there is a fountain pen, there must be an autoleg. There is neither a new object nor an old phenomenon devoid of a name. There is word-creation here for the sake of a joke, entertainment.

2) What is observed in everyday speech occurs in artistic or journalistic speech. Here, new objects created by the artist's imagination get new names: cybers at the Strugatskys, the best V. Zorin and others.

New words are divided into two groups depending on the reasons for their appearance in the language. Neologisms are new words created to denote new phenomena. All the rest are occasionalisms.

In addition to neologisms, which are the property of the national language, new words formed by one or another author stand out. Some of them entered the literary language, for example, drawing, mine, pendulum, pump, attraction, constellation, etc. (at M. Lomonosov), industry, love, distraction, touching(at Karamzin), fade away(by F. Dostoevsky), etc.

Others remain part of the so-called occasional author's formations. They perform figurative and expressive functions only in an individual context and, as a rule, are created on the basis of existing word-formation models, for example, mandolin, smile, sickle, hammery, chamberlain and many others (by V. Mayakovsky); roared, roiled ( B. Pasternak), furry, the country of Ant and Muravskaya country ( from A. Tvardovsky), magic, cellophane(by A. Voznesensky), broad-bodied, unfamiliarity, overworld, inflexibility and others (from E. Yevtushenko), etc.

Sources of new words

The sources of new words are: word formation and borrowing from another language. Since we are talking about borrowings in 3.2, here we will talk about the word formation of neologisms and occasionalisms.

A common source of new words is education from active word-building patterns or patterns: puffy boots - dutik, boiled - boiled "denim, the color of which is changed during boiling - cooking". Wed: tanned sheepskin coat - sheepskin coat; dutiki- probably like walkers, panties, although these are different models of word formation.

Occasionalisms are also created according to active word-building models, such formations are called potential words: There, the fortune-teller fiddled with dinner, which was heated on the Gretz kerosene stove, wiped her hands on her apron like a cook, took a bucket with enamel that had broken off in places and went out into the yard for water."(I. Ilf, E. Petrov. Twelve chairs).

Adverb like a cook formed according to the productive model “by- + adjective + -i”. We can use it to form a large number of words like: as a cook, as a student, as a journalist, as a driver and so on, depending on our imagination. The model is open. The education we receive in some cases seems unacceptable, like in a chef's way, in others - as if even existing, normative. This is the property of the productive model, in which the boundary between formative and occasional formations is blurred due to units that exist, as it were, at the tip of the pen, so it is impossible to say whether we chose them from our vocabulary or just created them in connection with an emerging need. expressions of thought.

Occasionalisms are also formed according to the word-pattern. In “Newspaper Portraits” by V. Konyakhin, the following series of words was created: “ The most hard-working, the most selfless patriots of their newspaper and their city are obtained from former work correspondents, engineer correspondents, rural correspondents, military correspondents, junkors and housewives correspondents. Their special advantage is their excellent knowledge of the geography and demography of all enterprises and dynasties of the city.».

The words " engineers" and "housewives" modeled after neighboring words. If desired, this series can again be continued, because there are many professions: teacher, physician.

Occasionalism can be obtained through the semantic transformation of the existing model. For example, in Y. Bondarev’s novel “The Shore”, the following adverbs are used: “ The attic turned red with tiles in the hot beams withered by the sun, near - pines, illuminated in the morning on one side of the trunks "; "The lilac bloomed snow"; “Senior sergeant Zykin, in gloomy isolation, stared stone-like at the flame of the bowl”; “... a tinny jingle of corn in the wind».

Adverbs with the help of suffixes -o / -e are formed from qualitative adjectives and denote a feature related to the action: good writing - good writing. Here adverbs are formed from relative adjectives: morning, snowy, stone, tin. Has the general meaning of the resulting adverbs changed? Of course. They stand for
sign of action through comparison: the trunks are illuminated by the sun as
it happens in the morning; the lilac blossomed like snow; stared as motionless as a stone; the buds rang like tin. And again we can replenish a number of similar formations: they blushed like bricks, walked woodenly, smiled heavenly.

Occasionally, occasionalism is a derivational synonym for an existing word. For example, instead of the standard talking shop V. Konyakhin in "Newspaper Portraits" uses the following: " He will not be offended, because in principle he does not go to these sayings».

The root of occasionalism is the same as that of the normative lexical unit, but the word-forming element has changed: instead of the suffix -ln-, the suffix -lk- is used. Here the scope for our imagination has been significantly reduced, we can only try on two or three suffixes for this root: talker, talker, talker, and absolutely
sounds strange" speaking". It must be said that these neoplasms are much less natural than the one used by the writer, and, therefore, if we were to think of including them in our text, we would most likely need some kind of justification, explanation, assessment, in general - an apology to the reader for a clumsy creation. Or it would be necessary to create a special context that would justify our education.
For example: " There was not a hubbub around, but rather a talker - everyone broke into groups and talked, talked, talked about their affairs».

Finally, occasionalism can be created by the author, so to speak, according to an original project, as a result of an original combination of morphemes. For example, S. Kirsanov in the poem "Max-Emelyan" created from the verbs " sleep" and " wake up» two nouns: from usnyavins to prosnyavins. Nouns have no such model; this way of combining morphemes belongs to the poet.

Until now, we have considered occasionalisms that were built from the real morphemic material: existing roots, suffixes, interfixes, prefixes. However, cases have already been shown earlier when the word was built by the author directly from sounds, recall Marshak's "alinon". There's also a sword in "Smart Things" zing zeng- the word is also made up of sounds, not morphemes. These cases are rare and always artistically substantiated, for example, as an experiment. Here is a poem by V. Khlebnikov "Thunderstorm":

Whoa, whoa, whoa!

Take the Zocern. Ve-cerci.

Wow, wow!

Wrap, Wrap, Wrap!

Googog. Gak. Gakri.

Vivavevo...

It is given to someone, it is not given to someone to hear in this set of sounds the roar of a thunderstorm and a fraction of rain. For our topic, the very fact of trying to paint a picture not with musical, but with linguistic sounds is important. This is an extreme case of co-creation. And for completeness of the description, it is necessary to mention it.

1.6.3 Test questions to consolidate the material

1. What groups is the vocabulary of the national language divided into?

2. What words belong to the active vocabulary of the language? Give examples.

3. What words belong to the passive vocabulary of the language? Give examples.

4. What are the features of the process of loss of words by the language?

5. What groups are obsolete words divided into? Tell me about each in detail. Give examples.

6. How can obsolete words be used?

7. What are the ways to explain obsolete words in the text?

8. What words are called neologisms?

9. What are the reasons for the appearance of new words?

10. What are the sources of new words?

After analyzing the dictionaries of neologisms, it is possible to identify the basic principles for the development and expansion of the lexical system in the Russian language. The following ways of the emergence of new words are distinguished:

1. Morphological, in which new formations in the language are the result of derivational (word-forming) processes. For example: "mental", "small things". Derivation implies the formation of new words according to certain patterns from morphemes that already exist in the language.

2. Lexico-semantic. In this case, new meanings appear for known words. For example: "case" (a type of garage), "zebra" - a pedestrian crossing.

3. Lexico-syntactic (unproductive). With this method, word formation occurs on the basis of phrases. For example: "today", "now".

4. Morphological-syntactic (unproductive). This is a way in which one part of speech passes into another. For example: “thanks to” (whom?) - a gerund, (what?) - a preposition.

5. External influence. Borrowings are one of the ways of word-formation stock. This includes words such as: “felt pen”, “know-how”, “ikebana”, etc.

According to researchers, the result of word formations in our language is more than 90% of all neoplasms of the last few decades. The main method today remains morphological, when new words appear from the bases and affixes already existing in the language. They, as a rule, are created on the model of already existing words. For example: "PR man" - by analogy "debater".