Composite Words With Component Composition In Russian And Chechen Languages

Abstract

It is generally accepted that stem composition is a language universal. The division of complex words into certain types and identification of specific properties and characteristics that distinguish them from each other, have great theoretical and practical significance. It enables to study their every form, examine specific peculiarities and characteristics that distinguish them. Researchers have the same ideas on assigning to the category of complex words such words as steamship, steam locomotive, dark blue, etc., that is such words which include two (or more) root morphemes, combined into one word by means of a connecting vowel. There are the most contradictory points of view concerning compound words (convergence, doubling, and repetitions). Along with other complex words, paired words are ancient forms of word formation and are functionally equal to simple words. They belong to one or another part of speech and are able to have corresponding grammatical forms (number, case, etc.) and perform the function of other member of the sentence. In normative Russian textbooks, such words as hut-reading room, reconnaissance aircraft, chair-bed, etc. are considered to be complex words. In modern Chechen language, a comprehensive study of paired words has not been conducted. We find a relatively complete description of Chechen paired words in monographs of K.Z. Chokaeva, M.U. Suleybanova. The authors dispute the opinions of some linguists regarding a word forming function of paired words and conclude that paired words belong to one type of word formation in the Chechen language”.

Keywords: Stem compositionlanguage universaltypespropertiessigns

Introduction

Scholars do not have a single view on the nature of complex words and their classification. Some of them expand the boundaries of complex words, other specialists narrow them. Academician Shcherba (1958) considered stem composition widely. He wrote

... stem composition does not need a formal expression, and any syntactic group can turn out to be a difficult word, which should differ from the group only in that it means more than the sum of the meaning of words. Thus, word combinations like railroad, notebook, toothbrush, red cinema, etc. should be considered to be complex words. (Shcherba, 1958, p. 9)

“It goes without saying that such words as roll-over, for each day, notebook, are complex words”; “Even a phrase like drink tea starts to feel like a complex word ...”. Even such word combinations as be in a dressing gown, be in an evening gown, be in melancholy, be in (not) the mood, in an unpleasant way, in an unexpected way, etc., are considered by the author to be complex words from syntactic groups (Shcherba, 1958).

The illegality of such extended interpretation of stem composition is obvious. Academician Vinogradov (1952), for example, objects to the illegal expansion of syntactic word formation at the expense of set phrases such as pea, railway, etc., since “from the grammatical point of view, the combinations such as railway, small fry, an idiom to rub glasses, and others cannot be recognized by words” (p. 97).

Researchers have the same ideas on assigning to the category of complex words such words as steam-ship, steam locomotive, dark blue, etc., that is such words which include two (or more) root morphemes, combined into one word by means of a connecting vowel (Shcherba, 1958).

There are the most contradictory points of view concerning compound words (convergence, doubling, and repetitions), lexicalized phrases like insane, wild growing, etc., production and complex types like shipping, foreign words like morphology, telescope, telephone.

In modern Chechen language, the study of paired words can be found in work of Suleybanova (2013). The authors dispute the opinions of some linguists regarding a word forming function of paired words and conclude that paired words belong to one type of word formation in the Chechen language.

Along with other complex words, paired words are ancient forms of word formation and are func-tionally equal to simple words. They belong to one or another part of speech and are able to have corre-sponding grammatical forms (number, case, etc.) and perform the function of other member of the sen-tence. Like any words, they can be a part of phrases and be a basis for neoplasms. Study the examples.

Problem Statement

Researchers have the same ideas on assigning to the category of complex words such words as steam-ship, steam locomotive, dark blue, etc., that is such words which include two (or more) root morphemes, combined into one word by means of a connecting vowel (Shcherba, 1958).

In normative Russian textbooks, such words as hut-reading room, Minister-resident, saw-fish, coffee- shop, reconnaissance aircraft, chair-bed , etc. are considered to be complex words (Ditmar, 1971).

The studies of Chechen paired words can be found in work of Suleybanova (2013). Authors dispute the opinions of some linguists regarding a word forming function of paired words, and they come to the conclusion that paired words are one type of word formation in the Chechen language.

Research Questions

Compound words are such formations that take an intermediate position between complex words and word combinations. Convergence, doubling, repetitions also belong to complex words.

Convergence is such composite words that are formed as a result of combining the words of synonyms, as well as the addition of applications. They are very common in works of art literature and folklore.

There are more than three hundred of such words in works of Sholokhov (1956). Some examples: a) Words-synonyms: road-path, chuckle-smile, seeders-rows, glade-road, longing-numb, stitches-paths, endlessly, kissed-waving, walk, step over, etc.

Doublings are such language complexes in which two identical words are combined. Doubling components are tied with a dash (sometimes separated by a comma). Doubling serves as one of grammatical means of enhancing the degree of sign, quality, and duration of action.

Some examples: “... somewhere far, far away the rumble melted away ...”; “Slowly, slowly, Red Guard officers took off their hats ...”; “Behind a rosy, cheerful, girlish smile, a little cloud loomed in the sky, a thin, thin edge of the month”; etc.

Repetitions are compound words in which two words with the same root are combined, and one of the words is different from the other by affixes, belonging to another part of speech, transferring the stress to another syllable. Some examples are:

- What is there! So paid-repaid; "The old woman wait-wait, no, etc.

As already noted, compound words are very common in works of fiction, especially in works of folk art.

N.V. Gogol, L.N. Tolstoy, A.M. Gorky and other writers widely used all kinds of compound words. Synonymous combinations (convergence) are richly used in oral poetry. There are some interesting observations of prof. Evgeneva (1963) in “Essays on the language of Russian oral poetry in records of the 18th - 20th centuries”, as well as in other studies.

Such words as winter-pear, sky-high, one and only, stupid-stupid, etc., although include two significant words, are not grammatically combined into one complex word. They are not integral. Each part in these words has the main stress. In the formation of forms, if it is possible, both parts change (winter -pear, winter-pears, etc., one and only one, ones and only one, etc.). In these words there is no and cannot be a connecting vowel. In compound words the forms of the same word (stupid-stupid, white-white) can be combined, different words (one and only, live healthy).

In normative Russian textbooks, such words as hut-reading room, Minister-resident, saw-fish, cof-fee-shop, reconnaissance aircraft, chair-bed, etc. are considered to be complex words (Ditmar, 1971).

Many researchers wrote about compound words. Potebnya (1899), one of pre-revolutionary scholars, wrote in great detail about one of groups of compound words - convergence. He divides synonymous pairs into three groups: 1. attributive (money-duties), 2. combinations of “dwandwa” (race-tribe), 3. tautology (path-way).

Academician Fortunatov (1956) wrote about doubled words: “A doubled word is formed by the repetition of words that is recognized by the speaker as changing the meaning of a given word in a known manner, for example, in Russian, big-big (that is very large), red-red, hardly-hardly” (p. 113).

Privalova (1953), a Soviet scholar, studied compound words. She believes that such words as Ivan-tea (willow-herb), mother-earth, bread and salt, hands and feet, do not belong to complex words, since they do not have those lexical and grammatical peculiarities that characterize complex words: wholeness, lexical unity of components, etc.

Grigorev (1955) supports tis idea. He writes: “... various phraseological combinations, as well as constructions with an application such as saw-fish, hut-reading room, koper airplane, the division of which is expressed, in particular, in the declinability of both components ... "(Grigorev, 1955, p. 6).

Compound words-convergence, doubling, repetitions are considered as special groups of complex words in PhD theses by Galenko (1953), Chedia (1955).

Professor Kozhin (1953) refers such words as raincoat-tent, train-bath, torquedo-wedge to complex words. He believes that in such words the components are connected according to the name of the creative connection and do not depend on each other. This independence of components “is expressed by means of stress: each element of stem composition keeps its stress” (Kozhin, 1953, p. 10). Further, the author says that “in some complex nouns, not only the final but also the initial component changes" (Kozhin, 1953, p. 12).

Bertagaev (1957), Melnikova (1959) and some other scholars refer to compound words only the ones in which the first component lost the ability to change: tsar-gun (Tsar Cannon) , firebird, headstrong woman, etc.

In normative Russian textbooks, such words as hut-reading room, Minister-resident, saw-fish, cof-fee-shop, reconnaissance aircraft, chair-bed, etc. are considered to be complex words (Beloshapkova, 1964).

Other paired combinations are not included in the category of complex words; combinations of synonymic nature: truth-verity, friend-fellow, sadness-grief; antonymic character: purchase and sale, reception and distribution, questions and answers; associative character: bread-salt, tea-sugar, etc. (Beloshapkova, 1964).

Thus, the question of referring paired words to stem composition remains controversial.

For example, some researchers believe that paired words are not included in the category of complex ones. They allow separate formation of component parts and these words do not possess semantic integrity of components in the full sense of the word.

In modern Chechen language, a comprehensive study of paired words has not been conducted. We find a relatively complete description of the nature of Chechen paired words in monograph by Suleybanova (2013). There is a detailed analysis of the structural peculiarities and models of paired words and types of communication between their components. The authors conclude that paired words are one type of word formation in the Chechen language.

Along with other complex words, paired words are ancient forms of word formation and are functionally equal to simple words, belong to one or another part of speech. They are able to have corresponding grammatical forms (number, case, etc.) and perform the function of other member of the sentence. Like any words, they can be a part of the phrases and a basis for neoplasms. Study the examples.

In the following sentences, paired words act as different members of the sentence (subject, object, definition, predicate): 1er-dahar tuolush laitta vah makhkha “Life on our earth is improving” (1er-dahar acts as a subject); Khalkan 1er-dahar tuodesh, kyahyogushu vayn president President “People’s life is improving, our president is working” (1er-dahar acts as an object); 1er-daharan khelash khollarekh dikka khiamash bayhna vain halkyo "Our people have made good living conditions by establishing good achievements" (literal translation); Kortanig tuodela 1er-dahar du “The main thing is an adjusted life”.

The basis of the formation of these units, accept lexical-grammatical and phonetic signs, is also semantic regularity. Paired words cannot be combined into any words, but only those that are related among themselves certain semantic relations, namely they can be linked by synonymous, antonymic, associative correlates.

The given information testifies the value orientation of stem composition: everything that stops the person’s gaze that attracts his attention, included in the sphere of vital interests, and receives an apt and precise expression in the language. A more detailed study of this problem on the basis of other languages will make interesting and important facts related not only to the peculiarities, but also to the similarity of the linguistic pictures of various ethnic groups. The study of this material in the context of ethno-linguistics seems very interesting.

Paired words belong to the category of copulative complex words, the relations between the components of which are syntactically equal. The basis of the formation of these units, in addition to the lexical-grammatical and phonetic peculiarities, is also semantic regularity. Not any words in the lexical system of the language can be combined into paired words, but only those that are related to each other, namely: they can be connected by synonymous, antonymic, and associative correlates (Suleybanova, 2013).

Thus, general lexical meaning of an associative paired word goes far beyond the values of the components denoting subtypes. A paired word means all types in general. For example, a paired word cad-1aig “kitchenware” has a broader meaning than “ladle-pollen”; this includes other items of kitchen utensils.

This is typical not only for Nakh languages, but also for other Caucasian languages. Sevortian (1968) notes the following aspect:

In pair-formed words, qualitatively homogeneous or the same concepts are connected, with the result that value of a paired word can be significantly expanded against the meanings of elements connected in a pair, while the content of a new concept, expressed in a paired word, is not qualitatively different from the content of the original concepts. In all its varieties, a paired word, without making significant changes to the meanings of words connected in a pair, always expands the scope of the original concepts, covering all concepts related to a given series, or expressing their majority, intensity. (p. 284)

Purpose of the Study

1. To continue the scientific discussion on the problem of complex words such as: friend-fellow, sadness-grief,: truth-verity; daar-malar "food", cad-1ayg "dishes" , etc.

2. Illustrate signs of vocabulary in these formations.

Research Methods

Description of the methods used to carry out the study. The work used a classification method, a descriptive method, an opposing method, a modeling method, translation techniques, linguistic experiments and other techniques and methods of linguistic analysis which are widely used by all researchers working with materials of specific languages or language groups.

 At the same time, it is necessary to highlight a typological comparison method used in this study, which proved to be effective not only when comparing languages of different genetic and structural affiliations. In researches devoted to one language or group of languages, the studies often provide an opportunity to reveal and explain such facts and peculiarities of the studied language that could not be detected without such a background.

Findings

The results obtained in this study: in the Chechen language and in general in Nakh languages, the most productive vocabulary models (they are also recognized as the oldest) are:

a) reduplications (repetition of the root or stem of the word): sikh-sikha “quickly, often”, idda-idda “oncoming”, etc.;

b) models of formation of paired words: kouch-macha “clothes”, tukha-siskal “food”, etc.

The main semantic peculiarity of complex words is that the overall value of a composite word is determined by a number of various factors, one of which is the nature of intertwining of component values, which in turn follows from the lexical meanings of the parts, which also determine the type of composite word. Reproducibility of a compound word implies the existence of a “nomenandum”, that is designations with its help of an undifferentiated concept, whereas the phrase has a dismembered onomasiological structure.

Conclusion

Word formation by reduplication (repetition) is an independent subtype of word formation and is a part of a phrase as its constituent. The final act in formation of reduplicative is doubling of the foundations that is their addition. The value of association (re-formation) is considered to be word-building. A reduplicative word-educational model is characterized by the following peculiarities: components can be represented by the basics of significant, rarely - service parts of speech, pseudomorphs, one basis of a significant part of speech, and one pseudomorphic basis, sound and image-supporting bases. The latter are the most productive ones.

In Nakh languages, these formations are considered as copulative and belong to the category of complex words with a composing relation of components. Among them are the main structural and semantic types of paired words (nouns): 1) synonymous; 2) antonyms; 3) associative.

References

  1. Beloshapkova, V. A. (1964). Modern Russian language, vol. II (Morphology. Syntax). Мoscow: Moscow University publishing.
  2. Bertagaev, Т. А. (1957). Delimitation of combinations with an application from similar combinations. Russian language at school, 1, 17.
  3. Chedia, V. V. (1955). Complex words in Russian fiction language of the first half of the 19th century. Tbilisi: АКD.
  4. Ditmar, E. R. (1971). Modern Russian language. Мoscow: Moscow University publishing.
  5. Evgeneva, А. P. (1963). Essays on language of Russian oral poetry in records of the 18-20 centuries. Мoscow; Leningrad: USSR Academy of Sciences Publishing.
  6. Fortunatov, F. F. (1956). Comparative linguistics. General course. Selected Works. Мoscow: Uchpedgiz.
  7. Galenko, I. G. (1953). Complex words in Russian language in the second half of the 18th century. Мoscow: АКD.
  8. Grigorev, V. P. (1955). Some aspects of stem composition theory (based on complex nouns with a verb second component in modern Russian language). Мoscow: АКD.
  9. Kozhin, A. I. (1953). Stem composition in Russian language. Russian language at school, 5, 13.
  10. Melnikova, А. I. (1959). Single word applications and transition combined with an application into compound words. Russian language at school, 1, 110.
  11. Potebnya, А. А. (1899). Notes on Russian grammar, vol. 3. Kharkov.
  12. Privalova, М. I. (1953). Complex words and their function in works by M.E. Saltyv-Shchedrin. LSU. Мoscow: АКD.
  13. Sevortian, E. V. (1968). Verb affixes in Azerbaijani. Мoscow: Science.
  14. Shcherba, L. V. (1958). Collected works in language studies and phonetics, 1, LSU.
  15. Sholokhov, М. А. (1956). Collected works. GIKHL in 8 volumes. Мoscow.
  16. Suleybanova, М. U. (2013). Composite word formation in Nakh languages. Grozny.
  17. Vinogradov, V. V. (1952). Word formation in its relation to grammar and lexicology. St Petersburg: USSR Academy of Sciences.

Copyright information

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.

About this article

Publication Date

21 January 2020

eBook ISBN

978-1-80296-075-4

Publisher

Future Academy

Volume

76

Print ISBN (optional)

-

Edition Number

1st Edition

Pages

1-3763

Subjects

Sociolinguistics, linguistics, semantics, discourse analysis, science, technology, society

Cite this article as:

Suleybanova*, M., Bakhaeva, L., & Khabusieva, Т. (2020). Composite Words With Component Composition In Russian And Chechen Languages. In D. Karim-Sultanovich Bataev, S. Aidievich Gapurov, A. Dogievich Osmaev, V. Khumaidovich Akaev, L. Musaevna Idigova, M. Rukmanovich Ovhadov, A. Ruslanovich Salgiriev, & M. Muslamovna Betilmerzaeva (Eds.), Social and Cultural Transformations in the Context of Modern Globalism, vol 76. European Proceedings of Social and Behavioural Sciences (pp. 2993-2999). Future Academy. https://doi.org/10.15405/epsbs.2019.12.04.403