English prefixes and their productiveness in word formation

i MINISTRY OF EDUCATION AND TRAINING HANOI OPEN UNIVERSITY DO THI TIEU YEN ENGLISH PREFIXES AND THEIR PRODUCTIVENESS IN WORD FORMATION TIỀN TỐ TIẾNG ANH VÀ TÍNH SẢN SINH CỦA CHÚN

i

MINISTRY OF EDUCATION AND TRAINING

HANOI OPEN UNIVERSITY

DO THI TIEU YEN

ENGLISH PREFIXES AND THEIR PRODUCTIVENESS IN WORD FORMATION

TIỀN TỐ TIẾNG ANH VÀ TÍNH SẢN SINH CỦA CHÚNG TRONG CẤU TẠO TỪ

ii

DECLARATION

I hereby declare that no part of the enclosed Master Thesis has been copied

or reproduced by me from any other’s work without acknowledgement and that the

thesis is originally written by me under strict guidance of my supervisor

Hanoi 28th November, 2013

Đỗ Thị Tiểu Yến

Approved by

of English prefixes during the course of my thesis

I would also like to acknowledge the contribution of our friends in the same department, who continuously encourage and provide us with the materials

I am very thankful to the authors of general and special books and documents on English prefixes used in the thesis

Last but not least, my warmest thanks go to my beloved family, my colleagues, my friends for their kind and helpful supports and useful encouragements

iv

TABLE OF CONTENTS

DECLARATION i

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS iii

PART I: INTRODUCTION 1

1 Rationale of the study 1

2 Aims and objectives of the study 1

3 Research questions 2

4 Scope of the study 2

5 Methods of the study 2

6 Design of the study 3

PART II: DEVELOPMENT 3

CHAPTER 1 : THEORETICAL BACKGROUND 4

1.1 Literature review 4

1.2 Theoretical background 4

1.2.1 The English word structure 4

1.2.1.1 The word: General problems for definition 4

1.2.1.2 The morpheme 8

1.2.1.3 Types of words and morphemes 8

1.2.1.3.1 Types of words 8

1.2.1.3.2 Types of morphemes 9

1.2.2 The English word formation 10

1.2.2.1 Definition 10

1.2.2.2 Productivity 11

1.2.2.3 Ways of word- formation 11

1.2.2.3.1 Affixation 11

1.2.2.3.2 Compounding 12

1.2.2.3.3 Shortening 14

1.2.2.3.4 Conversion 15

v

1.2.2.3.5 Back- formation 17

1.2.2.3.6 Sound imitation 17

1.3 English prefixes 18

1.3.1 Definition 18

1.3.2 Main features of the English prefixes 20

1.3.2.1 Class-changing prefixes: 20

1.3.2.2 Class -maintaining prefixes 20

1.3.2.3 Stress of prefixes 21

1.3.2.4 Other features of English prefixes 22

1.3.3 The classification of English prefixes 22

1.3.3.1 The classification of English prefixes according to their origins 26

1.3.3.2 The classification of English prefixes according to their uses 27

1.3.3.3 The classification of English prefixes according to their functions 27

1.3.3.4 The classification of English prefixes according to Randolph Quirk 28

CHAPTER 2 : METHODOLOGY 38

2.1 Research questions 38

2.2 Research Design 38

2.3 Instruments 42

2.4 Processing and Analysis of data 42

CHAPTER 3 : FINDING AND DISCUSSIONS 44

3.1 Finding 44

3.1.1 The productive prefixes in English 45

3.1.1.1 “Counter-“ 45

3.1.1.2 “Dis-“ 46

3.1.1.3.“Non-”: 49

3.1.1.4 “Out-” 54

3.1.1.5 “Pre-“: 55

3.1.1.6 “Re-”: 57

3.1.1.7 “Super-”: 59

vi

3.1.1.8 “Un-”: 60

3.2 Discussions 60

3.2.1 Some problems and solutions for the prefixes 61

3.2.1.1 Problems: 62

3.2.1.2 Solutions: 63

CHAPTER 4 : IMPLICATIONS FOR TEACHING 67

4.1 The target population : 67

4.1.1 English language proficiency level: 67

4.1.2 Motivation and Attitude: 67

4.1.3 Language needs: 68

4.2 The acquisition of English productive prefixes: 69

4.3 Teaching strategies: 72

4.3.1 Presenting: 72

4.3.2 Practice: 73

4.3.3 Expansion of vocabulary: 74

PART III: CONCLUSION 74

1 A brief summary of the thesis and main conclusions 75

2 Suggestions for further study 75

REFERENCES 75

1

PART I: INTRODUCTION

1 Rationale of the study

As we know, there has been a demand for the learning of English all over the world It is frequently used in nearly every field from communication, economics, and technology to sports, games and so forth English is also widely used in literature This is the reason why English is a now compulsory subject in most schools and tertiary institutions However, both English teaching and learning still leave something to be desired When learning English, Vietnamese students cope with a number of such as grammar, sounds, vocabulary, etc Words, therefore, play

a very important role

Wallace points out: “Not being able to find the words you need to express yourself is the most frustrating experience in speaking another language” As a matter of fact, it is the experience of most language teachers that the single, biggest component of a language is vocabulary No matter how well students learn grammar, no matter how well the sounds of languages are mastered, without words, communication totally breaks down Prefixes are extremely common in English and they cause so many problems for students for instance how to add them to words, how to pronounce those words This is the reason why I choose this topic and carry out a thorough scrutiny in English prefixes and their productiveness

2 Aims and objectives of the study

2.1 Aims of the study

I decided to study English prefixes with the following aims:

- Systematizing all kinds of English prefixes

- Clarifying English Prefixes

- Carrying out a thorough scrutiny into productive prefixes

- Discovering the Vietnamese learners ’mistakes in using vocabulary

- Finding out solutions for overcoming problems in using English prefixes

- Helping students get a deeper understanding of English prefixes in general and English prefixes in particular

2

2.2 Objectives of the study

- Students must use common prefixes effectively They can add productive ones rather easily (like: re, non etc)

- In future study, future research they can grasp the whole system of prefixes

- They can have feeling about not only English vocabulary but also Vietnamese vocabulary

For example: learn again – relearn

Produce again – reproduce

3 Research questions

1) What is the role of prefixes in English word formation?

2) What are the types of English prefixes?

3) Which prefixes are productive and which are non-productive?

4) What problems are caused by prefixes in English for Vietnamese learners?

4 Scope of the study

Firstly, the thesis refers briefly to English words as well as ways of forming words The focus of my study is on English prefixation, a main way of forming words because most derived words in English are through prefixation

Secondly, the thesis goes into the productiveness of English prefixes which are most often used and most easily used by native speakers and especially foreign students

Finally, the thesis points out some mistakes Vietnamese learners usually make and discusses common mistakes concerning English prefixes

5 Methods of the study

Linguistics has many ways and methods to research into certain matters There are synchronic approach and diachronic approach In this thesis we follow the diachronic approach dealing mainly with the matters of the present day prefixation The thesis goes into the matters related to words formation in English in general and English prefixes in particular There is a careful discussion as well We look

6 Design of the study

My thesis, system of delivered materials for a more systematic study will concentrate on the following:

− Part 1 is the production which presents rationale, aims, objectives, research questions, scope, methods and design of the study

− Part 2 is divided into 3 chapters:

o Chapter 1 introduces a brief review of prefix presence in the English word formation

o Chapter 2 is methodology which describes the processes or procedures I have done the study

o Chapter 3 covers finding and discussions about the main focus, their productiveness in English word formation and Vietnamese students’ problems in using English prefixes

o Chapter 4 refers to implication and strategies for successful instructions of the English prefixes and their productiveness

− Part 3 is the conclusion, which sum up the issues recorded and makes some suggestions for further study

in many others about English Text books, students’ books, in internet and so on do research into them very carefully However, very few of them investigate their productiveness in order to enable students to use prefixes more effectively Learning prefixes is often a matter of great difficulty for non- native English learners Thus, many books on this subject are written by linguistics in hope of helping learners to have full understanding of prefixes In 1983, Laurie Bauer published a book name” English word-formation” Through reading this book, we can understand, and then remember different ways of usage as well as individual meaning of words in real –life situation

Unlike “English word-formation” by Laurie Bauer (1983) the book “A University grammar of English” by Randolph Quirk, Sidney Green Baum (1987),

“A University grammar of English” analysis prefixes details The writer gave kinds of prefixes; their classification, function… In Vietnam, Truong, Hoang Tat wrote “Basic English Lexicology” in 1993, which go deeply into the prefixes: their classification, their definition, their meaning, and their functions but in this thesis I concentrate on the productiveness of English prefixes

1.2 Theoretical background

1.2.1 The English word structure

1.2.1.1 The word: General problems for definition

Between linguistic units the border line is not always sharp and clear “Word”

as the basic unit of language appears to be a simple concept but as a matter of fact,

it is hardly possible to define accurately because the words have many different

Following is the mention of some definitions to show the sotiphicateness One of the great British philosophers Thomas Hobber (1588-1679), stated a materialistic approach to the problem of nomination He wrote “Words are not mere names but sounds of matter” Three centuries later, the Great Russian physiologist IP Pavlov (1849-1936) examined the word in his study of the second signal system, and defined it as a universal signal that can substitute any other signal from the environment in evoking a response in human organism

In linguistics, the word has been defined syntactically, semantically, phonologically and by combining various approaches

Haslet syntactically defined it as “the minimum sentence” later L.Bloomfield defined it as “a minimum free form” This last definition is equivalent to Sweet’s to

a certain degree, as practically it amounts to the same thing: free forms are later defined as “forms, which occur as sentences”

The semantic aspect is taken into consideration by Escaper, when he calls the word “one of the smallest, completely satisfying bits of isolated meaning”, into which the sentence revolts itself He also points out one more a very important characteristic of the word: its indivisibility “It cannot be without a disturbance of meaning, one or two other or both of the several parts remaining as a waif on our hands” The essence of indivisibility will be clear from the comparison of the article “a” and the negative prefix “a” in “a house” and “amoral” A house is a word group because we can separate its elements and insert other words between them: “a beautiful house”, “a detached house” whereas “amoral” is a word, it is

6

indivisible, i.e structurally impermeable: nothing can be inserted between its elements The morpheme “a” is not free; it is not a word The situation becomes more complicated if we cannot be guided by solid spelling

Taking about the internal cohesion of the word, the English linguist John Lyons points out that it should be discussed in terms of two criteria “positional mobility” and “uninteruptablity” To illustrate the first, he divides into morphemes the sentence:

The- boy- s- walk- ed- slow- ly- up- the hill

The sentence may be regarded as a sequence of ten morphemes, which occur in

a particular order relative to another There are several possible changes in this order, which yield an acceptable English sentence:

Slow- ly- the boy- s- walk- ed- up- the- hill

Up- the- hill- slow- ly- walk- ed- the- boy- s

However, under all the permutations certain groups of morphemes behave as

“blocks” –they occur always together, and in the same order relative to one another There is no possibility of the sequence “S- the- boy- ly- slow- ed- walk” “One of the characteristic of the words is that it tends to be internally stable (in terms of the order of the morphemes), but positional mobile (permutable with other words in the same sentence)” A pure semantic treatment will be found in Stephen William’s explanation: with him connected discourse, if analyzed from the semantic point of view;” will fall into a number of meaningful segments, which are ultimately composed of meaningful units These meaningful units are term words”

The semantic- phonological approach may be illustrated on Gardiner’s definition” “A word is an articulate sound symbol in its aspect of denoting something, which is spoken about”

A.Meilet an eminent French linguist combines the semantic, phonological grammatical criteria and advances a formula which underlines many subsequent definition both abroad and in our country: “A word is defined by the association of

7

a particular meaning with a particular group of sounds capable of a particular grammatical employment”

This statement does not distinguish words from phrases because not only

“child” but “a pretty child” as well is the combinations of a particular group of sounds with a particular meaning capable of a particular grammatical employment This is acceptable if we add “A word is characterized by positional mobility within a sentence and indivisibility, and that the word is the smallest significant unit of a given language, capable of functioning alone”

All the above definitions are not very convincing in that they don’t establish the relationship, between language and thought, which is formulated if we treated the word as a dialectical unity of form and content, in which the form in the spoken

or written expression which calls up a specific content, whereas the content is the meaning rendering the emotion or the concept in the mind of the speaker which he intends to convey to his listeners

These different definitions, can lead us to the conclusion that they are bound to

be strongly dependent upon the line of approach, the aim the scholar has in view For a comprehensive word theory, therefore, a description seems more appropriate than a definition

The problem of creating a word theory based upon the materialistic understanding of the relationship between word and thought, on the other hand, and language and society, on the other hand, has been one of the most discussed for many years Many eminent scholars have exerted many effort to name but a few resulted in throwing light on the problem and achieved a clear exposition of the word as the basic unit of language So, let us, for the time being, accept the following definition, which seems to be the most satisfactory: “The word is one of the fundamental units of language It is a dialectical unity of form and content, independent unit of language to form a sentence by itself, for example: “table, drink, forget- me- not” and so forth

8

1.2.1.2 The morpheme

If we describe a word as a autonomous unit of language in which a particular meaning is associated with a particular sound complex and which is capable of a particular grammatical employment and able to form a sentence by it self, we have the possibility to distinguish its form the fundamental language unit, namely, the morpheme

Looking at the word We can see that most of them are made up of various of smaller elements Consider, for example, the word: “untouchables” This can be segmented to show its constituent element thus: “untouchable s” these segments / elements are called “morphemes” Each has its own form, meanings and its own distributions Thus “un-“ has a fixed phonological form /in/, a meaning of negation, “touch” has a fixed phonological form and fixed meaning “able” sometimes occurs as /ib(∂) l/ ible/ has a fixed meaning “-s” has a rage of phonetic forms (/s, z, iz/) but a constant meaning of plurality None of segments

or elements “un, touch, able” can be further subdivided into smaller segments, which function in the same kind of way as they do There are morphemes may

be defined as the minimal unit of grammatical analysis Is an association of given meaning with a given sound pattern but unlike a word it is not autonomous Morphemes occur in speech only as constituent part of words, not independently, although a word may consist of a single morpheme Nor are they devisable into smaller meaningful units That is why the morpheme may be defined as the minimum meaningful language unit

1.2.1.3 Types of words and morphemes

1.2.1.3.1 Types of words

The morphological analysis of word structure on the morphemic level aims at splitting the word into its constituent morphemes- the basic units at this level of analysis- and at determining the number and types According to the number of morphemes, word can be classified into “monomorphic” and “polymorphic”

“Monomoorphic” or “simple word” or “root word” consists of only one root

1.2.1.3.2 Types of morphemes

It has been universally acknowledged that great many words are made up of morphemes However, though morphemes are as a rule easily singled out in words, are not independent and are found in actual speech only as integral part of the word Even a cursory examination of the morphemic structure of English words reveals that they are composed morphemes of different types: roof morphemes and affixational morphemes

The roof morpheme is also called the lexical morpheme or simply the root It is the nucleus of the word, it has a very general and abstract lexical meaning common

to a set of semantically related words constituting one word cluster, E.g: “to work”,

“worker”, “working”, “worked” Besides the lexical meaning, the roots possess all other types of meaning proper to morpheme except the part of speech meaning, which is not found in roots The root remains after removing all the other elements and cannot be analyzed any further

Affixational morphemes include inflectional affixes or inflections or endings and derivational affixes Inflections carry only grammatical meaning so they are also called grammatical morphemes, and are thus relevant only for the formation of word- from A complete set of forms of words in an inflectional pattern is called

“inflectional paradigm” It is the system of grammatical form characteristic of a word, E.g: “child, children, child-like, childish” Whereas derivational affixes are relevant for building various types of words, they are lexically always dependent the root which they modify They carry both lexical and grammatical meaning;

10

therefore they are also called lexical- grammatical morphemes Due to this component of their meaning, the derivational affixes are classified into affixes building different parts of speech such as nouns, verbs, adjectives or adverbs Root and derivational affixes are general easily distinguished and the difference between them is clearly felt as, E.g., in the words: homeless, childish, brotherhood, unhappy etc The root home-, child-, brother-, -happy are understood

as the lexical centers of the words, and –less, -ish, -hood are felt as morphemes dependent on these roots

As root morphemes are, in general, free morphemes because they can function independently and very few roots are bound morphemes, i.e., the morphemes that cannot function independently and have to be combined with other morphemes, e.g.: “theo-“ in the word theory, theoretical or horr- in the words horror, horrible, horrify Therefore, distinction between the root morpheme and derivational morpheme is also made of free and bound morpheme It’s obvious that free morpheme can be found only among roots and bound morphemes have no identical word- forms

1.2.2.The English word formation

1.2.2.1 Definition

According to Sankin (1966) word formation is the process creating new words from the material available language after certain structural and semantic formula and patterns

The principles of word- formation can be look at in two different ways One is simply to consider them for learners in the way we describe and explain grammatical rules or pronunciation rules But we can also look at word- formation

as a resource in the language, something learners should be allowed to experiment with and use strategically Creative word-formation can also be seen as a communicative strategy for supplying formations on when the right words cannot

be found Possible ways of exploiting word-formation will be mentioned in later

However, the productivity of word formation has been a major factor in providing the huge vocabulary of English, and the fact that the process of creating new lexemes with new forms can be said to be more or less productive according to the number of new words which it is used to form Therefore, there are some ways

of forming words very productive but there are also some other ways which cannot now produce new words and these are commonly termed non-productive or unproductive In the following parts, due to limited conditions, I cannot mentions to the productivity of all ways of word-formation in English I only have a wish to have a brief list of principle ways graded according to their productive degree

1.2.2.3 Ways of word- formation

1.2.2.3.1 Affixation

Affixation is general defined as the formation of words by adding derivational affixes to the stems Derivational affixes consist of suffixes and prefixes In conformity with this, affixation is subdivided into suffixation and prefixation Warriner (1988: 1740) says about affixation in English as follows: “The parts that are added are called fixes and an affixes added before the root is called a prefix, one added are after the root is called a suffix Word may have one or more affixes of either kind, or several of both kinds”

For example:

12

“tax + free = tax-free”, or verbs E.g: “hand + wash = handwash ”

It is clear that the components of a compound may be either simple or derived words or even other compound words However, in general, English compounds have two bases The second one, usually expresses a general meaning hence is the basic part and called “determinatum” The first part, being the determining one, is called “determinant” Concerning compound words there are still many problems that cause controversy In fact, there are no formal criteria that can be used for a general definition of compounds in English phonologically; compounds can be identified as having a main stress on the first element or determinant

Hence the compound “ ’dancing girl” (the girl whose job is dancing) has the stress ’ is different from “ ’dancing ’girl” (the girl who is dancing) has the stress ’ ’ and is a free word group

On the other hand, many compound words which have a secondary stress on the first element in, for example “headmaster, sociolinguistics etc”, and there are also compounds which have double stress (even stress) E.g: “ ’good ’egg”, “

’happy-go –lucky” etc

Therefore, phonological criteria are insufficient

Semantically, compounds can be seen to be isolated from ordinary syntactic constructions by having a meaning, which may be relates to but can not simply be inferred from the meaning of its components For example, a greenhouse (a building with glass sides and roof, for searing plants) is not just a green house since

13

most green house are not greenhouses On the other hand, it is difficult to see anything in common between the ordinary noun “dog” and the second element in the compound “hot dog” (a sausage in a sandwich) Besides, we can also see the insufficiency of this criteria because in some cases it is difficult to decide whether there is only one single idea E.g: “window-cleaner”

Orthographically, compounds are written:

(i) Solid, e.g: bedroom

(ii) Hyphenated, e.g: goal-keeper

(iii) Open, e.g: red tape (bureaucratic)

This criterion often causes arguments as well There no safe ruler –of –thumb that will help in the choice between these 3 possibilities Practice varies in many words, on same way even occur in three different compound forms, for example

“airline- airline- air line” different people, and different dictionaries have different spelling In AmE there seems to be a trend away form the use of hyphens; compounds usually written solid as soon as they have gained some permanent status otherwise they’re written open In BrE, however, there tends to be more extensive use of the hyphen For example:

Air- brake, call- girl, letter- write (BrE)

air- brake, call- girl, letter- write ( AmE )

Therefore, in order to consider whether such and such word groups are compound, it’s necessary to refer to at least two or even all the criteria

In some cause, we meet difficulties in distinguishing between compounds and derivational words There are words built by a simultaneous application of these types of words- derivational compounds, E.g absent-minded, newsmonger, copyright, chairman, mini-skirt, self-service, etc the elements: “-monger, -right, -man, -mini, -self” have great combining ability, they may be independent words having distinctive meaning but they loose their grammatical independence and even their meaning, some are used combinations Thus, these derivational words can also be called “semi-affixes” or “affixal words” We can also divide semi-

14

affixes into semi-prefixes and semi-suffixes So, this type of compositing words can be said to be a source of building prefixal and suffixal words

1.2.2.3.3 Shortening

Shortening of words stands apart from the above types It cannot be regarded

as part of either word-derivation or word-composition for the simple reason that neither the root morpheme nor the derivational affixes can be single out from the shortened words, E.g: lab, exam, bike, fridge, T.V, brunch, etc it is also a productive ways of building words in English, especially in colloquial speech and advertisement

There are many types of shortening: They are as follows:

a Clipping: some linguists also call “shortening” “clipping” but it is not

accurate The term “clipping” denotes the subtraction of one or more syllables from a word, which is also available in its full form The clipped form is normally felt to be informal Clipping is subdivided into:

Intial clipping: e.g: telephone, airplane

Final clipping: e.g: ad, photo, exam, taxi, Prof., doc, uni, etc

Initio-final clipping (clipped at both ends of words): flu (influenza), fridge (refrigerator), etc

Medical clipping (the middle part is clipped): maths, V-day, H-bomb

Elliptico-conversational clipping (phrasal clipping), this is a special way in which there is a combination of clippies, conversion and clipping: E.g: sit-down (demonstration), pop (popular music), pub (public house), etc

b Blends: is a special type of shortening where parts of words merge into one

new word E.g: brunch (a meal subsuming breakfast and lunch) is derived from br (eakfast) + (l) unch Many blend have only a very short life and are very informal, E.g: swim sensation ~ swim+ sensation They are often conscious and deliberate formation, and license perhaps particularly common in commercial and scientific language, E.g: lubritection ~ lubrication protections Medicare =medical + healthcare Quite a few blends,

15

however, have become more or less fully accepted in the language, E.g:

“electrocute, heliport, Interpol model motel, smog telecast, transistor”, etc

c Acronyms: are words built from the initial letter (or larger parts) of words

that make up a descriptive phrase or a proper name

Quirk (1972: 1031) divides acronyms into two main types:

(i) Acronyms which is pronounced as sequences of letters can be called

“alphabetize” In writing, the more institutionalized formations have no periods between the letters

a The letters represent full words, E.g: C.O.D, O.A.O, U.N, F.B.I, E.C, etc

b The letters represent elements in a compound or first part of word, E.g:

TV, I.O (identification card), etc

(ii) Ac which is pronounced as a word and are often used without knowing what the letters stand for, E.g: NATO, UNESCO, radar, AIDS, etc

1.2.2.3.4 Conversion

Quirk (1972: 1009) defines that conversion is the derivational process whereby

an item is adapted or converted to a new word- class without the addition of an affix Therefore, it is also called: functional change” or “zero derivation”, E.g:

“release, to release; elbow, to elbow; arm, to arm; skin, to skin; lecture, to lecture; hand, to hand”, etc Conversion is an extremely productive way of producing new words in English There don’t appear to be morphological restrictions on the form that can undergo conversion, so that other types of word formation are all acceptable inputs to the conversion process Similarly, all form classes seem to be able to undergo conversion and conversion seems to be able to produce words of almost any form class, particularly the open form classes (N, V, adj., etc) Some grammars make a distinction between “full conversation: and “partial conversation” where a word of one class appears in a function which is characteristic of another word class, E.g: “rich, the rich; wealthy, the wealthy”, etc The adjectives are partially converted to noun status

16

As stated above, conversion is able to produce word of almost any form class

It can be classified into some main types They are:

Noun-verb conversion which established examples are: “to badger, to bottle, to bridge, to commission, to skin, to mail, to cash, to vacation, to boat, to knife”, etc Recent examples are: “to chopper, to data, to network, to leaflet:, etc Most

of these verbs of this category are transitive

Verb-noun conversion which established examples are: “a call, a command, a dump, a guess, a spy” and recent examples are: “a commute, a goggle, an interrupt:, etc

Adjective-verb conversion which established examples are: “to dirty, to dry, to better, to open, to right”, and recent example is “to total” (a car)

Adjective-noun conversion which established examples are relatively rare and frequently restricted in their syntactic occurrence, E.g: “the poor, the wealthy” cannot be made plural or have any other determiners, less restricted examples are:

“a daily, a regular, a roast” This type seems to have become much more productive recently; more examples are: “a creative, a crazy, a gay, a nasty”, etc

None-adjective conversion Membership of this can be postulated only when the noun form occurs in predicative as well as in attribute positions, E.g: “This wall is brick This furniture is reproduction This teacher is head” In the above examples, “brick, reproduction, and head” have become adjective by conversion

There are cases of change in form class a verb to a noun and from a verb to an adjective which do not involve any affixation, but which are not clearly instances

of conversion there cases are called approximate rather than complete conversion (i e, a word, in the course of changing its grammatical, function, may undergo a slight change of pronunciation or spelling) The most important kinds of attenuation are:

*Voicing of final consonants; the unvoiced fricative consonants /s/, /f/ and /θ/

in many noun- conversions are voices to /z/, /v/ and /ð/ respectively, E.g:

17

“house /s/ (n)- house /z/ (v); advice /s/ (n)- advise /z/ (v); thief /f/ (n)- thieve /v/ (v); belief /f/ (n)- believe /v/ (v); mouth /θ/ (n)- mouth /ð/ (v)”, etc

(i) Shift of tress: when verbs of two syllables are converted into nouns,

the stress is sometimes shifted from the second to the first syllable; E.g: abstract, record, conduct, and export, rebel, etc

(ii) Sound interchange: The new word is built by changing the root vowel

or consonant of the old word, E.g: food (n) feed (v); sing (v)- song (n), speak (v), long (a)- length (n) These cases of conversion are marginal and very unproductive ways of word forming

1.2.2.3.5.Back- formation

This is the forming of new word This it is opposite process to affixation so we can offer the term “deapfixation” as opposed to “affixation” We can make it clear thought some example:

To edit (from editor); to window – shop (from window – shopping) to escalate (from escalators) The great majority of back – formation in modern English are verbs which are built from compound nouns with suffixes: “er” or “ing-“, E.g: “to- air condition” (from air – conditioner) to tape-recorder to escalate Some grammarians prefer the term back derivation to back formation However, it is not always a derivational process which is reserved in back formation, E.g: the word

“pea”, a back formation from an earlier singular (uncountable) from “peas” (plural); “cherry”- the back formation from the French “cerise”, again with the final /z/ perceived as a plural market, “alms”- back formation from “alms”

1.2.2.3.6 Sound imitation

Sound imitation is the way to build words by imitating sounds produced by actions, things, etc This is also called phonetically motivation This type of word formation is subdivided into following cases:

Words showing animals, E.g: crow, cuckoo, etc

Words showing movement of water, E.g: splash, pattern, babble, etc

Words showing actions made by man, E.g: giggle, chatter, murmur, etc

Words showing sounds made by animals, E.g: moo, roar, howl, etc

18

Many authorities introduce some other minor types of word formation such as: Word from name, E.g: “Have you read Nguyen Du?; sandwich, hamburger, robot, cardigan, Roll Royce”, etc

Reduplicative, E.g: “ tock ping- pong, hocus- pocus tip- top”,…etc However, they are unproductive so I mention as reference

Finally, there are many ways and types of forming words Each has its own strong points, characteristics and also restrictions In the next chapter I would prefer to go study deeply in the productiveness of English Prefixes, which is a most interesting and no less difficult problem in English

1.3.English prefixes

1.3.1 Definition

“A prefix is a syllable or group of syllables placed at the beginning of a word, affecting its meaning”

Geddes and Grosses, 1994:465

There is another definition “prefix is a letter or group of letters which is added to beginning of word in order to make a new word”

Oxford advanced learner’s dictionary, 1995:909

The following examples can serve as illustrations:

19

From the above example, it is noticeable that prefixes “it”, “mis”, “counter-“ precede the roots “regular”, “understand” and “revolution”, and they modify the meanings of the original roots in different ways

Knowing the formation of prefixes and some principal prefixes in English can facilitate us to figure out the meaning of unfamiliar words It is as well helpful to express the ideas in different ways within a limited stock of vocabulary There are some examples for fully understanding:

Pre-intermediate learners may say “I have to consider this plan again” In fact,

we can officially shorten the form of the verb “consider” like this “I have to

reconsider this plan”

The prefix “mis-” in the above example makes the meaning of the newly – formed word clearer: “ to misunderstand” means “ to understand something

wrongly”, learners can say “he misunderstands the lesson”

Prefixation, all in all, offers another way of learning English new words and broadens our vocabulary When we have mastered the mechanic of word –

formation through prefixation and taken in the nature of some common prefixes, it

is very easy for us to automatically utter or guess the meaning and pronunciation of relevant word or a group of words

For example, supposing that we all know that “mis-” refers to something wrong or not righteous We, thus cam guess the meaning of the new words like:

Misuse = mis + use ( use in a wrong way or not use for its right purpose )

Mistake = mis + take ( take something of another person)

Mislead = mis + lead ( lead so in a wrong way )

Misfortune = mis + fortune ( unlock )

Mispronounce = mis + pronounce (pronounce wrongly )

From the above list of examples and explanation it can be said that prefixation

is a small aspect, yet important one for learners Knowing the importance of

Prefixes forms adjectives

Examples : a + sleep(v)  asleep(adj)

A +wash(v)  awash(adj) Be- Prefixes forms transitive verbs from adjectives, verbs or, most

frequently nouns

Examples : be + calm(adj)  becalm(v)

be + moan(v)  bemoan(v)

be + friend(v)  befriend(v) En- Prefix form transitive verbs, mainly from noun

Example : De + colonize  decolonize

Dis + believe  disbelieve Non + academic  non-academic

Un + aware  unaware

1.3.2.2 Class -maintaining prefixes

Prefixes rarely form new part of speech They mainly modify the lexical meaning of the words, therefore simple words but derived words are often in the same word-class

Example: Happy(adj)  unhappy(adj)

Continue(v)  discontinue(v)

Ordinate(adj)  subordinate(adj) Modifying the lexical meaning of the word and maintaining word class are typical features of English prefixes

21

1.3.2.3 Stress of prefixes

Almost all English prefixes do not have effect on stress of derivatives as for Laurie Bauer “ the most general rule that can be given for prefixes is that they do not bear primary stress and do not affect the stress of derivatives”

Laurie Baure,1983:123

On the other hand, “the effect on the stress does not have the comparative regularity, independence and predictability of suffixes and there is no prefix of one

or two syllable that always carries primary stress

Consequently, the best treatment seem to be to say that stress in words with

prefixes is governed by the same rules as those for words without prefixes”

However, according to Laurie Bauer : “there are also innumerable

exceptions There is frequently as subsidiary stress on a prefix and always one if the prefix consists of more than one syllable”

Lauries Baure, 1983:123 Example: quasi quasi-offical

22

1.3.2.4 Other features of English prefixes

Almost English prefixes will be meaningless if they are used alone as words They are called bound

Example:

• “en” in enable, ensure

• “hemi” in hemisphere

• “un” in unclean, unkind

Some prefixes, however, may be used independent as word They are called free forms

Example:

• “counter” in counter-attack, counter-action

• “under” in underweight, undersigned

• “over” in overbook, overburden, overdo

May prefixes have more than one constant meaning The prefix ”un” have two meanings, the first meaning is “not” in such words as “untrue, unhappy, unable”, the second meaning is “back, reversal” as in “untie, undo, undoubted” On the other word, several prefixes have various meanings as prefix “dia” that has meaning “through” as in ”apart” as in “diacritical” and “across” as in “diameter”

1.3.3 The classification of English prefixes

Derivational morphemes affixed before the stem are called prefixes Prefixes modify the lexical meaning of the stem, but in so doing they seldom affect its basic lexico – grammatical component Therefore both the simple word and its prefixed derivative mostly belong to the same part of speech The prefix mis-, for instance, when added to verbs, conveys the meaning ‘wrongly’, ‘badly’, ‘unfavourably’: it does not suggest any other part of speech but the verb Compare the following oppositions: behave :: misbehave, calculate :: miscalculate, inform :: misinform, lead :: mislead, pronounce :: mispronounce The above oppositions are strictly proportional semantically, i.e the same relationship between elements holds throughout the series There may be other cases where the semantic relationship is

to view a film or a play before it is submitted to the general public Compare also: graduate :: postgraduate ( about the course of study carried on after graduation), Impressionism :: Post- impression The latter is so called because it came after Impression as a reaction against it The prefixes in-, a-,ab- modify the root for place: e.g ‘in a manner that surpasses’: outlive ‘ to live longer’, outnumber ‘to exceed in number’, outrun ‘ to surpass in running’ Cf in “ Hamlet”: It out- herod, where out- herod means ‘to surpass in violence or extravagance of Herod’ (the ruler

of Judea at the time of Christ’s birth, who was noted for his despotic nature) Compare also the modification for degree in such verbs as overfeed

The group of negative prefixes is so numerous that some scholars even find

it convenient to classify prefixes into negative and non-negative ones They are: , dis-, in-/im-/it-/ ir-, un- This group has been also more accurately classified as prefixes giving negative, reverse or opposite meaning

de-The prefix de- occurs in many neologisms, such as decentralize, remove contamination from the area or the clothes’, etc

The general idea of negation is expressed by dis-; it may mean ‘not’, ‘the reverse of’, ‘asunder’, ‘away’, ‘apart’ Cf.: agree :: disagree ‘not to agree’, appear ::disappear (disappear is the reverse of appear), disgorge ‘eject as from the throat’,

‘throw out, evict’ In-/im-/ir-/il- have already been discussed, so there is no necessity to dwell upon them Non- is often used in abstract verbal nouns such as noninterference, non- sense or nonresistance, and participles or former participles

24

like non-commissioned (about an officer in the army below the rank of a commission- ned officer), non-combatant ( about any one who is connected with the army but is there for some purpose other than fighting, as, for instance, an army surgeon)

The most frequent by far is the prefix un-; it should be noted that it may convey two different meanings, namely

1) Simple negation, when attached to adjective stems or to participles: happy :: unhappy; kind :: unkind; even :: uneven It is immaterial whether the stem is native or borrowed, as the suffix un-readily combines with both groups For instance, uncommon, unimportant, etc are hybrids

2) The meaning is different when un- is used with verbal stems In that case it shows action contrary to that of the simple word: bind :: unbind, do :: undo, mask :: unmask, pack :: unpack

A very frequent prefix with a great combining power is re-denoting repetition of the action expressed by the stem It may be prefixed to al- most any word or verbal noun: rearrange v, recast v ‘put into new shape’, reinstate v ‘to place again in a former position’, ‘repairs and renewal’, remarriage, n, etc There are, it must be remembered, some constraints Thus, while reassembled or revisited are usual, received

The meaning of a prefix is not so completely fused with the meaning of the primary stem as is the case with suffixes, but retains a certain degree of semantic independence

It will be noted that among the above examples verbs predominate This is accounted for by the fact that prefixation in English is chiefly characteristic of verbs and words with deverbal stems

The majority of prefixes affect only the lexical meaning of words but there are some important cases where prefixes serve to form words belon-ging to different parts of speech as compared with the original word

These are in the first place the verb-forming prefixes be- and en-, which combine functional meaning with a certain variety of lexical meanings Be- forms

25

transitive verbs with adjective and noun stems and changes intransitive verbs into transitive ones Examples are: belittle v ‘to make little’; benumb v ‘to make numb’; befriend v ‘to treat like a friend’; becloud v (bedew v,) ‘to cover with clouds ( with dew or with foam)’; bemadam v ‘to call madam’; besiege v ‘to lay siege on’ Sometimes the lexical meanings are very different; compare, for instance, bejewel

v ‘to deck with jewels’ and behead v which has the meaning of ‘to cut the head from’ There are on the whole about six semantic verb-forming varieties and one that makes adjectives from noun stems following the pattern be-+noun stem+-ed, as

in benighted, bespectacled, etc This pattern is often connected with a contemptuous emotional colour

The prefix en-lem- is now used to form verbs from noun stems with the meaning

‘put (the object) into, or on, something’, as in embed, engulf, encamp, and also to form verbs with adjective and noun stems with the meaning ‘to bring into such condition or state’, as in enable v, enslave v, encash v Sometimes the prefix en-/em- has an intensifying function, cf enclasp

The prefix a-is the characteristic feature of the words belonging to stative: aboard, afraid, asleep, awake, etc

This prefix has several homonymous morphemes which modify only the lexical meaning of the stem Cf arise v, amoral adj

The prefixes very productive in present-day English serve to form adjectives retaining at the same time a very clear lexical meaning, e.g anti-war, pre-war, post-war, non-party, etc

The borderline cases present considerable difficulties for classification It is indeed not easy to draw the line between derivatives and compound words or between derivatives and root words Such morphemes expressing relationships in space and time as after-, in-, off-, on-, out-,, over-, under-, with-, and the like which may occur as free forms have a combining power at least equal and sometimes even superior to that of the affixes Their function and meaning as well as their position are exactly similar to those characteristic of prefixes They modify the respective stems for time, place or manner exactly as prefixes do They also are

26

similar to prefixes in their statistical properties of frequency And yet prefixes are bound forms by definition, whereas these forms are free This accounts for the different treatment they receive in different dictionaries Thus Chambers’s Dictionary considers after growth a derivation with the prefix after-, while similar formations like afternoon, afterglow or afterthought are classified as compound nouns Webster’s Dictionary does not consider after-as a prefix at all The Concise Oxford Dictionary, alongside with the preposition and the adverb on gives a prefix on- with the examples: on-coming, on- flow, on-looker, whereas in Chambers’s Dictionary, on-come v is treated as a compound

The other difficulty concerns borrowed morphemes that were never active as prefixes in English but are recognized as such on the analogy with other words also borrowed from the same source A strong protest against this interpretation was expressed by N N Amosova In her opinion there is a very considerable confusion

in English linguistic liter-ature concerning the problem of the part played by foreign affixes in English word-building This author lays particular stress on the distinction between morphemes that can be separated from the rest of the stem and those that cannot Among the latter she mentions the following prefixes listed by

H Sweet: amphi-, ana-, cata-, exo-, en-, hypo-, meta-, sina- (Greek) and ab-, ad-, amb- ( Latin) The list is rather a mixed one Thus, amphi- is productive in terminology and with good reason considered by dictionaries a combining form ( amphitheatre, amphibiotic ‘terrestrial in adult state but aquatic as a larva’) Ana- in such words as anachronism, anagram, anaphora is easily distinguished, because the words readily lend themselves for analysis into immediate constituents The prefix ad- derived from Latin differs very much from these two, being in fact quite a cluster of allomorphs assimilated with the first sound of the stem: ad-/ac-/af-/ag-/al-/ap-/at-/ E.g adverbial, accumulation affirm, aggravation, etc

1 1.3.3.1 The classification of English prefixes according to their origins

During the process of development modern English language borrowed many words from other languages

- Old French origin: en, demi, etc

27

- Old English origin: for, fore, etc

- Greek origin: anti, agro, auto, di, hemi, homo, etc

- Latin origin: dis, bi, inter, infra, etc

1.3.3.2 The classification of English prefixes according to their uses

English prefixes can also be grouped in accordance with their productive use Yet, this way of classification is applied in a limited scope with certain elements only

Examples:

Negation: a-, ids-, in-, non-, etc

Space and time relations: fore-, pre-, over-, super-, etc

1.3.3.3 The classification of English prefixes according to their functions

This classification is not hew but in deed carried out for both meaningful prefixes (e.g: “mock-“ (ashamed), “mini- (small), “iter- (between) and prefixes that don’t have lexical meanings Thus, the level of complication of the classification proves to be higher But first of all , here is the system:

* Preposition – like prefixes

E.g inter – (between) in intersection

* Adjective- like prefixes

E.g: mini- (small) in mini-cap

Neo-(new) in neo-classical

* Adverbial prefixes

Re-(again) in redo Mis-(wrongly) in misunderstand

28

into daily use which facilitates learners in taking in the notable prefixes are presented

1.3.3.4 The classification of English prefixes according to Randolph Quirk

There are many ways to classify English prefixes, according to Hoang Tat Truong, for example: “prefixes are classified in many ways, either according to their origin or meaning or function”

Hoang Tat Truong,1993:17 However, Randolph Quirk, a famous world linguist, put forth a more detailed classification According to him, English prefixes are divided into ten types:

- Negative prefixes: non, un, dis, in, a

- Private prefixes: un, dis, de

- Pejorative prefixes: mal, mis, pseudo

- Prefixes of degree or size: over, arch, out, super, sur, under, sub

- Prefixes of attitude: co, pro, anti

- Locative prefixes: inter , super, sub

- Prefixes of time and order: pre , fore, post

- Number prefixes: mono, uni, multi, bi, poly, tri

- Conversion prefixes: a , be, en

- Other prefixes: semi, auto, vice, proto

1.3.3.2.1 Negative prefixes

Un- “the opposite of”,

“not”

Adjectives participles

Unwise unhappy, Unaffected,

Non- “not” Various classes Non-fiction, non-stick, non-plus

Dis- “not” “the opposite

of”

Adjectives, verbs abstract nouns

Disable, dishonest, disbelieve, disapprove, disagreement, discomfort,

29

a- “lacking in” Adjectives nouns Asexual asymmetry , Atypical

The prefix “un” is derived from old English and it is commonly used with two different meanings

+ It has meaning as “not” when it is added to adjectives or participles such as : unclean, unexpected, untie, unkind, unwise, unfair”

+ It has meaning as “back, reversal” when it is added to verbs such as:

“unfasten, undo, unfold, untie,”

The prefix “non” is used widely with various classed such as nouns, adjectives, adverbs and regarded as corresponding to clause negation

Non-event( an event that is expected to be important or interesting, but is in fact a disappointment)

Non-union(not belonging to a trade union)

Non-stop(a journey without any stops)

The prefix “in” is derived from Latin and added widely to adjectives such as:” insignificant, insane, insensitive”

+ Sometimes it is regarded as prefix “im” and used with verbs transitive with meaning “not” as in” imprint, intake”

The prefix “im” is derived from Latin and has same meaning with “ in” It usually stands before the letter” b, m and p”

Examples: imbalance, immature, impossible

+ Sometimes it is regarded as prefixes “il, ir” with meaning “not” and formed with adjectives, adverbs and nouns as in “inadequate, infinite, insincere”

The prefix “il” is derived from Latin and usually stands before the letter “l”

as in “illegal, illiterate, illogical, illegal, illegible”

The prefix “ir” is derived from Latin and stands before the letter “r” as in

“irrelevant, irresponsible, irregular, irreligious”

- The prefix “dis” is from Latin or French and added to adverbs apart from nouns, verbs and adjectives as in disagreeably It has another form “dif”

30

that stands before “f” as in “differentiate” It carries two meanings: negative and reversative

Example: disobedient, dislike, disqualify, distrust

- The prefix “a” is derived from English and added to adjectives and nouns In addition, it also added to verbs to form adjectives “asleep”

Examples: asleep,…

1.3.3.2.2 Private prefixes

Unhappiness

To reverse action

Verbs, abstract Nouns

Deactivate deforestation

To deprive of

Verbs, nouns, Participles

Discolored, dissatisfy

• The prefixes “un-”,”dis-” are by far the most productive of all

• The prefixes ”de-” is borrowed from Latin It also has the meaning “off”,

”from”, ”away”

Examples : desert, defect, deduction and demote Demote = move down in rank

Deduction = a conclusion drown from reasoning

• The prefix “ dis- ” is derived from Latin It also has the meanings “ apart ” ,

“ away ”

Examples : disagree , dislike,

disrupt (break apart ) , dismiss ( send away )

1.3.3.2.3 Pejorative prefixes

“ astray ” Nouns, participles misconduct

Abstract nouns malodorous Participles malfunction

• The prefix “ mis- ” means “ hate ” – the opposite of “ loving ” and “ fond of

” It is borrowed from Greek

Examples : misanthrope ( hate of humanity )

( Leaven : 96 -178)

• The prefix “ pseudo - ” which is derived from Greek does not seem to be used in common English

1.3.3.2.4 Prefixes of degree or size

”

Nouns ( mainly human )

Arch duke, arch - enemy

“ more than ”

Nouns, adjectives Superman, super

market supernatural

faster longer etc than ”

Verbs ( mainly intransitives)

Outrun Outlive

Overconfident Overdressed overeat

32

“ least, small ”

• The prefix “ sub - ” is borrowed from Latin It has another forms such as “

su - ”, “ sum - ”, “ sus - ”, and “ sup - ”

Examples : substandard, summon, suffuse, suppose, suspect, etc

• The prefix “ hyper - ” originated from Greek It has the same meaning as “ over ”, “ above ” and “ beyond the ordinary” as in the following

• The prefix “ out - ” is very productive

Examples : He outrun me = He run faster than me

• The prefix “ mini - ” meaning ( large , long ) and “ midi ” meaning ( medium ) are less common

1.3.3.2.5 Prefixes of attitude

Cooperate

nouns

Counteract Counter – revolution

Demonical adjectives

Antimissile, anti – clockwise, anti – social

Demonical

Pro –communist Pro – common

33 adjectives market

34

The prefix “co- ” is borrowed from Latin It has other forms “con-”

“ col - ”, “ cor - ” and “ com - ” to make words in English

Examples : colloquy, compose, co – director , conspire, correspond

• The prefix “ anti - ” suggests actions in opposition to or in response to a previous action They originated from Greek

• The prefix “ pro - ” stems from Greek with 2 meanings:

“ on the side of ” as in “ pro – communist”, “ before ” as in “ progress”, “ program ” etc

1.3.3.2.6 Locative prefixes

“ less than in rank ” Verbs

Adjectives

Sub study subconscious

Adjectives Verbs, nouns

International Interaction interrupt

place to another ”

Demonical Adjectives Verbs

Transatlantic transplant

• The prefix “ super - ” originated from Latin It has the meanings “ above ”, “ over ”, and “ extra ”

Ex : supernatural,

- The prefixes “ inter- ”, “ sub - ” and “trans -” are borrowed from Latin “ sub - ” are dealt in details in II.5.4