Comparative linguistic analysis of noun affixal derivatives

Comparative linguistic analysis of noun affixal derivatives

Kazakbaeva Mavluda

A second-year masters' degree student at the department of English Linguistics,

Karakalpak state University named after Berdakh

Scientific supervisor: PhD. Nurjan Jalgasov

Abstract

The verb-noun pairings in the Princeton WordNet were subjected to a morphosemantic analysis. The findings are shown in the standoff file, which has pairs annotated with a set of 14 semantic connections. We detected the affixes, automatically differentiated between zero-derivation and affixal derivation in the data, and manually verified the outcomes. The findings indicate that an affix predominates in the creation of new words for each semantic relation. However we are unable to discuss their specificity with regard to such a relation. Additionally, for each semantic connection, some verb-noun semantic prime pairings are better represented than others, leading to the emergence of various semantic clusters (in the form of WordNet subtrees). In order to capture finer regularities in the derivation process as represented in the semantic properties of the words involved and as reflected in the structure of the lexicon, we therefore employ a large-scale data-driven linguistically motivated analysis made possible by the rich derivational and morphosemantic description in WordNet. [1:42]

Keywords: predicative expression, nouns

INTRODUCTION

What does the word "affixation" mean? Affixation, in our understanding, refers to the morphological process in which a set of letters (the affix) are joined with a base or root word to create a new word. Sometimes the new term has a completely new meaning, and other times it only provides us with more grammatical details.

For instance, the suffix "-s" at the end of the word "apple" indicates that there are several apples.

Morphological process: Adding to or changing a base word to produce a term that is more suited to the situation. Affixes are a form of bound morpheme, which implies that in order to convey their meaning, they must coexist with a base word. Look at an illustration of affixes below[2:87]

On its own, the affix '-ing' does not really mean anything. However, placing it at the end of a base word, such as 'walk' to create the word 'walking,' lets us know that the action is progressive (ongoing).

Let's start by taking a look at the various affixes that we may use to modify basic words. Suffixes and prefixes are the two most prevalent forms of affixation, with circumfixes being the third and least common type. Prefixes are affixes that go at the beginning of a base word. Prefixes are very common in the English language, and thousands of English words contain a prefix. Common English prefixes include in-, im, un-, non-, and re-.

Prefixes are commonly used to make based words negative/positive (e.g., unhelpful) and to express relations of time (e.g., prehistoric), manner (e.g., underdeveloped), and place (e.g., extraterrestrial) [3:98]

Here are some common English words with prefixes:

impolite midnight outrun

hyperactive irregular semicircle

A more complete list of all English prefixes can be found towards the end of this explanation! The adopted perspective is semantic, with two correlated goals: identifying semantic regularities involved in derivation (i.e., semantic relations between the members of a derivational pair) and identifying the semantic contexts in which it takes place (the semantic classes to which the nouns and verbs belong expressed in terms of semantic primitives, or primes. All studies take words into account as participants in the process; however, this analysis is done at the word sense level and is made possible by PWN's organizing principle, which uses the word sense as the smallest possible analytical unit. A thorough examination of the regularities will aid in illuminating the distribution of derivation, whether it be affixal or zero derivation, in more detail. Conclusions will emphasize the parallels and contrasts between the socalled "zero" morpheme conversion and the affixes used in derivation based on the perspective used in this work.[4:54]

We refer to the process of creating new words without using any lexical material, or, in other words, with the zero affix, as conversion and zero derivation throughout this essay; affixal derivation refers to the morphological process that involves attaching a non-zero affix to a base form to create a new word;

The significance of these linkages can be deduced from the observation of the data even when it is not expressly stated. We doodle out an improved version of a description underneath. Many of the relations have a more or less direct correspondence in the area of thematic relations; in fact, the V-to-N derivation was accounted for as theta-role assignment from the predicate argument structure of the verb within the word structure of the noun in the lexicalist approaches in the Generative grammar of the 1980s, but this is not a one-to-one correspondence as the overview below shows.

A human (noun.person), a social entity (noun.group), an animal (noun.animal), or a plant (noun.plant) that is able to act in order to produce a result is referred to as an agent.

An instrument can be tangible, generally man-made, or abstract, such as a word with the primary: communication (n), such debug:1 - debugger:1 (a tool for identifying and fixing programming bugs) or cognition(n), such as stem:4 - stemmer:3 (an algorithm that eliminates inflectional and derivational ends in order to condense word forms to a single common stem). It is usually assumed that the Instrument works on the agent's behalf. While excluding tangible items like living creatures, natural (noun.object) or man-made (noun.artifact) objects, etc., the relation Event defines a processual nominalization and involves nouns such as act, event, phenomenon, process.

Feelings (feeling), cognition (noun cognition), and other non-dynamic states of affairs, such as synsets with the prime state, are all denoted by the relation State.[5:78]

The connection the term "undergoer" refers to entities impacted by the specified scenario and generally equates to the thematic function of "patient/theme."

Entities produced or created as a result of the scenario the verb describes are included in the relation Result. Multiple characteristics and attributes are indicated by the relation Property. The prime noun attribute and, less frequently, the prime location are the main components of this connection.

Using the related word nets, our approach may be expanded to derivational relations for other languages. The study of derivation across languages and maybe in comparison is made easier by the semantic dimension of morphosemantic relations being transferable between languages utilizing the interlingual indexing inside PWN. Regular polysemy is mirrored in morphosemantic relationships, particularly as a verb's sense nowadays may be thought of as connected to more than one (closely related) noun sense or vice versa. An illustration of this may be seen using nouns of the class artifact (primarily containers) and nouns designating the amount that each container carries[6:97]

CONCLUSION

Our analysis, which is based on the standoff collection of noun-verb pairs tagged with one of a group of 14 semantic connections, reveals the distribution of zero and affixal derivation within the data, both generally and in regard to each such relation. The most common affixes used to create words in the subgroups represented by relations labeled identically were also presented, and it was demonstrated that the zero affix is one of the most common ones for each of these subgroups: for some relations, it is the predominate affix, while for others, it competes with the predominate one.

REFERENCES

1. L. Bauer, R. Lieber, I. Plag. 2013. The Oxford Reference Guide to English Morphology. Oxford University Press.

2. B. Cetnarowska. 1993. The Syntax, Semantics and Derivation of Bare Nominalisations in English. Katowice. Uniwersytet Slaski.

3. E. Clark, and H. H. Clark. 1979. When Nouns Surface as Verbs. Language. 55 (4).

4. Ch. Fellbaum (ed.). 1998. WordNet: An Electronic Lexical Database. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

5. Ch. Fellbaum, A. Osherson, and P. E. Clark. 2009. Putting Semantics into WordNet’s ‘Morphosemantic’ Links. In: Z. Vetulani, H. Uszkoreit (eds) Human Language Technology. Challenges of the Information Society. LTC 2007. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 5603. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg.

6. S. Koeva, S. Leseva, I. Stoyanova, T. Dimitrova, M. Todorova. Automatic Prediction of Morphosemantic Relations. In: Proceedings of GWC 2016. Bucharest. R. Lieber. 2004. Morphology and Lexical Semantics. Cambridge University Press.