Изучение деривационного потенциала словообразовательных единиц на синтагматическом уровне


педагогические науки

Данная статья посвящена изучению деривационного потенциала словообразования, который приобретает в настоящее время универсальный характер с учетом диапазона его изучения на всех уровнях языковой системы. Производный потенциал рассматривается в широкой и узкой перспективе. Когнитивная наука экстраполировала понятие производного потенциала на концептуальном уровне.

Похожие материалы

The question of derivational potential, due to its secondary nature to the concept of derivation, was taken into account by researchers relatively recently, and it was studied not as a separate object, but as one of the aspects of derivation as a whole. The linguist, covering any modification in the language, as a rule, considers in one way or another the question of its derivational potential. Despite the aforementioned secondary object, the term itself has an interdisciplinary nature with a rather long history.

So, in scholastic philosophy, such a concept as “potentiality” was known, which was defined as the property of matter to manifest its various capabilities in a certain continuum of time and space. Modern philosophy is trying to reveal the causes of potentiality, to reveal its dependence both on the nature of the object and on external factors. So, firstly, it is noted that a certain substance is inherent in potentiality. Secondly, this substance must have “vital” energy, and the more alive this substance, the greater its potentiality. Potentiality as a kind of energetic matter has the prospect of a change in structure, manifested in some form, in a certain space and period of time. Potentiality is directly related to the fact of realization: it is very difficult to imagine any potentiality without ever “seeing” it in a dynamic movement and not fixing its results. Therefore, in most cases, the study of potentiality, especially in linguistics, is of a retrospective nature.

A substance with a tendency to change has a certain structure, and the structure assumes the presence of elements that have a potentiality, that is, the internal force of change. The potency of the elements correlates with the potentiality of the whole system in the same way as the quotient correlates with the general, which, according to A.V. Bondarko, gives language elements the ability to "participate in the transmission of a certain semantic and / or structural-syntactic content" and determines the "perspective of the functioning of this element" [3, p. 22].

The totality of the potentiality and potency of the elements to change we will call the derivational potential. This category, in our opinion, is universal, since it takes place at all levels of the language. Depending on the purpose of the study, linguists distinguish derivational potential at the lexical, semantic, text and discourse levels, and the emerging cognitive direction automatically extrapolated this category to a conceptual level, which allowed determining the possibilities of thinking development through the derivational potential of language units.

By analyzing the derivational potential of the elements of the language system, the researchers reveal the specific aspects of the derivational abilities of language units, and in general the derivational potential is studied in a narrow and broad aspects.

A wide understanding of derivational potential is associated with its generalized analysis and with the study of those laws that underlie the entire word-formation system of the language, which has a combination of language categories. Due to the versatility of the object of study, at the moment there are various options for the studied concept, which take into account not only the syntagmatic level, but also the paradigmatic one, both in the synchronous and diachronic planes.

Derivation potential realization, according to K.I. Brineva occurs in two directions. The first is manifested in the specialization of the meaning of the derivative, “and the development of this specification is expressed both formally and semantically,” and the derivative is a linguistic unit of a complicated type [4, p. 78].

The second side of the realization of derivational potential, according to K.I. Brinev, “is associated with the extraction of direct non-specialized meaning of a motivating word / meaning that finds expression in its internal form” [4, p. 79]. The author emphasizes the need for a joint study of the semantic structure of a linguistic unit and its derivational potential, since it is against the background of the semantic structure that it is possible to most fully determine the features of its change. By K.I. Brinev's intrasystemic position of motives is a supposition, a prerequisite that determines the potential of their derivative functioning. The concept of “motive” is defined as the productive element of the once proceeding derivative process. It is an element of the language system and an independent functioning unit, due to the parameters of the communicative order [4, p. 78].

A narrow understanding of potential examines the derivational capabilities of each language element individually. In most cases, the central object of research is the word-building potential, that is, the identification of the derivational potential of words, word-formation and word-changing units, and the need to study not just a list of word-formation tools, but to analyze them in conjunction with the entire word-formation system is emphasized [11, p. 8-9]. S.V. adheres to a similar point of view. Artyu-hova, considering the word-building potential in three directions: the integrity of the language system, the totality of derivational processes and the relationship of word-forming units. According to the scientist, the identification of the word-building potential of any language units is predicted by their semantic structure, consisting of components, that is, a specific set of sem, individual for each token. Thus, the semantic component is considered as the most important element in derivation [2, p. 3]. A number of other researchers also consider the semantic factor as determining, if possible, linguistic units for various transformations, calling this ability a semantic potential [16, p. 24].

The study of the derivational potential of word-formation units at the syntagmatic level also allowed the authors to reveal some features of the formation and change of lexical units. So, according to N.N. Shcherbakova word-building potential is creative in nature, drawing closer to such a concept as a language game. In this case, it is necessary to study the contextual environment of the new unit, which in turn helps to rethink not only its semantic, but also the word-formation structure [19, p. 219]. A.V. Morozov, as the main method for studying the derivational possibilities of a language, offers translation from one language to another with subsequent reverse translation. In this case, as the author claims, a certain inter-linguistic space arises, in which the derivational possibilities of the linguistic paradigm are revealed, which may not be visible to speakers of their native language T. A. Ageeva analyzes the derivational capabilities of linguistic units through the associative potential, which is a platform for the development of the word ambiguity. On vivid examples of the formation of a language game, T. A. Ageeva shows a direct dependence of the derivational potential of a word on its polysemy. To describe the derivational field of the polysemantic word, T. A. Ageeva introduces the concept of “base”, characterizing it as a kind of potency for every multi-valued language unit [1, p. 46]. In our opinion, the study of associative potential allows us to consider only one side of the ramified process of derivation, namely, the transformative ability of a linguistic unit based on associative thinking, without affecting many other aspects.

Another aspect of the study of associative potential is an attempt to predict the emergence of new lexical units. So, exploring the word-building potential of Russian substances with zero suffix, T.Yu. Gavrilkina claims that the word derivative types of substances with the meanings “face”, “abstract attribute” and “place” possess the greatest derivative potential. The author calls the constraints on the realization of the derivative potential “anti-melodious sound” factors (for example, small ^ * trifle, violent ^ * storm), "anti-synonymity" and "anti-monomony". According to the results of the scientist’s research, the limited derivational potential is possessed by nouns with the name of tools, abstract concepts and femininity [6, p. 41-43].

When studying the nominative potential of verb-nominal phrases M.A. Grosheva is trying to identify those models that are defined as a way of designating an object of reality, consisting of nominative opportunities and those cognitive-communicative properties that determine the "competitiveness" of a particular method of nomination in the language system.

Some researchers consider the word-building potential in a more generalized manner, revealing the patterns of inflection of a particular language. For example, A.R. Popova comes to the conclusion that the derivational ability of a word as a whole is realized in two ways: in depth and in breadth. The derivation of the “in-depth” type takes place when the ideal content is changed while the material envelope is fully preserved, and when the “breadth” is derivative, not only the “ideal content” changes, but the material envelope also partially changes [14, p. 128]. It should be noted that the two directions of the development of words corresponds to the three highways of the nomination proposed by V.G. Hack: the formation of new meanings, the creation of derivative words and the formation of phraseological units, the composition of which this word is included as a component [5, p. 109].

At the level of derivational possibilities of text or discourse, the authors distinguish a retrospective and perspective approach. The retrospection method involves identifying the characteristics of intra- and interlingual derivation and establishing the genetic unity of the base text and its derivative. With a promising approach, derivation of the text is considered as a process of functional-semantic extension of the base text in the speech activity of a native speaker, which is an internal form for the derivative. Both approaches have such unifying components as an abstract situation, addressee, and addressee [18, p. 234-232]. This fact, in our opinion, brings the concept of text closer to proposition, which emphasizes the universality of the latter. Also, some researchers, when analyzing the derivational potential of the text, rely on the concept of “internal form”. The content of the internal form, according to N.N. The hairpin is made up of a set of semantic "spheres" (that is, a subject, object, predicate) that reflect the whole complex of processes of meaning-formation, which receive concretization at the text level. The derivational potential of the internal form of the text is determined by its internal contradictions, due to its reflective and symbolic (conditionally technical) nature.

When considering the derivational potential of the language system, it is impossible not to take into account the cognitive basis of derivation. Studying the ability of linguistic units to derivation, scientists identify various aspects of this process, which is reflected in its names: for example, nominative-cognitive potential; cognitive-derivational potential; functional cognitive potential.

So, K.A. Shipkov sees in the cognitive-derivational potential of linguistic units "the ability to form conceptual-semantic blocks, the components of which can be classified according to certain models" [17, p. 28].

V.S. Gorbunova, characterizing the nominative-cognitive potential of lexical units, in addition to indicating their ability to “serve as a means of naming any objects or concepts,” focuses on the accompanying ability to “store and transmit relevant information” about the realities of human life [8, p. 4].

The most important indicator of the nominative cognitive potential of lexemes denoting the material world of a person, V.S. Gorbunov acknowledges the presence of an artifact.

The functional and cognitive potential of a language unit is realized, according to F.R. Imamutdinova, in knowledge of an object or phenomenon that is verbalized with the help of a linguistic structure. Functional and cognitive potential is realized where the functions of the language and the functions of the activity with which the concept is associated are intertwined and interact. For example, exploring the functional and cognitive potential of the concept of "talk", F.R. Imamutdinova points to the interaction of the function of the language and, accordingly, the function of speech activity [10, p. 28]. The same can be said, for example, about the concept of “game”, if we consider it in the light of this concept — the functional and cognitive potential of this concept is realized in the interaction of the language function and the function of human game activity.

Following F.R. Imamutdinova, we proceed from the fact that there is a certain beginning, a certain element that determines the essence of cultural concepts. When combining the elements of such concepts with various life situations that have developed in modern society, such elements begin to interact, acquiring different social colors. In general, the problem of the interaction of the conceptual and linguistic levels is very complex, since the speaker has to realize his knowledge (conceptual structures), which are characterized by endless wealth, with the help of a determinable and relatively limited number of language units. Consequently, the semantic component of the same language unit can be implemented differently in different speech conditions. In this regard, M. Turner and J. Focognier expressed the idea that it is necessary to abandon the concept of “expression value”, and it is more legitimate to use the term “value potential” [meaning potential]. Developing the provisions of the theory of conceptual integration by J. Focognier and M. Turner, F. Grea notes that the semantic potential of a lexical unit is fully revealed only inside a kind of integrative network. In his opinion, it is unlawful to limit oneself to the consideration of the semantic potential of the lexeme, it should also be about its conceptual potential.

We believe that units of the linguistic and conceptual levels not only possess the “power” of those elements that are typical for them at the moment of the state of the linguistic / conceptual system, but that it potentially also contains elements that have lost their significance in changing socio-historical conditions. They seemed to “fade”, but at a certain point they are ready to “flare up again”, thereby giving an impetus to the derivative processes.

Список литературы

  1. Ageeva Yu.V. Semantic derivation in the Russian language of the newest period: On the basis of adjective vocabulary: dis. ... cand. filol. sciences. — 1997. — Kazan. — 179 p.
  2. Artyukhova S.V. The word-building potential of verbs with the seme “emotion” in modern Russian: dis. ... cand. filol. Sciences: 10.02.01. — 2005. — Makhachkala. -205 s
  3. Bondarko A.V. Subjective-predicative-object situations. — St. Petersburg: Nauka, 1992 .-- 304 p.
  4. Brinev K.I. The internal form of the Russian word as a carrier of the potential of its derivational functioning: dis. ... cand. filol. Sciences: 10.02.01. — 2002. — Kemerovo. — 144 p.
  5. Huck V.G. National-cultural specificity of meronymic phraseological units // Phraseology in the context of culture. — M .: Languages ​​of Russian culture, 1999. — S. 260-265.