Models, Structures And Status Of Composites-Repetitions In Nakh Languages

Abstract

The actual material of the Nakh languages shows that pure repetitions form all significant parts of speech, but with varying degrees of productivity. Adjectives, adverbs, numerals, verbs and verb forms, sound and onomatopoeic words are especially active in the formation of such repetitions. That can be attributed to other Caucasian languages, according to the descriptions of the corresponding word-formation systems. Sound- and image-imitative words are especially distinguished, built mainly on pure repetition and characteristic in this form for all three Nakh languages. The formation of new lexical units by reduplication without any special changes in the structure of repetitive bases or with the help of some changes in their structure is an extremely interesting word-making process that has a very wide geography of distribution, covering the arsenals of not only Caucasian languages, but also many languages of the Asian and European continents. When distinguishing word formation from cases of form formation, one should rely on one main feature. This is the semantic criterion for us: if the form of a word is formed, then there is no change in the main lexical meaning, the repetition differs from the original word by the presence of a certain grammatical meaning, and when word formation categorical belonging of the repetition and the original word does not coincide, the word takes on a new lexical meaning.

Keywords: Nakh languages, repetitions, sound- and image-imitative words

Introduction

The production of new units by reduplication without any special changes in the structure of repeating bases or with the help of some changes in their structure is a rather interesting word-making process, representing a very extensive geography of distribution, covering groups of not only Caucasian languages, but also many languages of the Asian and European continents. Reduplication is perceived as a productive type of word formation, the oldest, but living phenomenon in studies on Caucasian languages.

Maitinskaya (1964) also sees certain patterns for individual languages or groups of closely related languages in this interesting phenomenon. In particular, she notes that in the Hungarian language, the sound composition of the components of such repetitions is contrasted by the type of vowel of the front row – vowel of the back row, or by the type of non–blurred vowel – blurred vowel. The considered type of reduplication is quite widespread in the Caucasian languages.

Traditionally, it is believed that in such repetitions, the carrier of lexical meaning is the first component, and the second acts as a derivational morpheme.

Thus, the formation of words by reduplication (repetition) constitutes an independent subtype of word formation and is part of the word composition as its constituent. The final act in the formation of reduplicatives is the doubling of the bases, i.e. their addition. At the same time, the meaning of unification (re-formation) is word-formative (Suleibanova, 2018).

Problem Statement

The researchers note that reduplication (repetitions) is a multifunctional means of language. It relates to all its levels: at the lexical level it forms new words, at the grammatical level it forms grammatical categories, stylistics uses all kinds of repetitions.

The formation of new lexical units by reduplication without any special changes in the structure of repetitive bases or with the help of some changes in their structure is an extremely interesting word-making process that has a very wide geography of distribution, covering the arsenals of not only Caucasian languages, but also many languages of the Asian and European continents. Reduplication is perceived as a productive type of word formation, the oldest, but living phenomenon in studies on Caucasian languages.

Research Questions

From the point of view of structure, the following models of repetition or doubling of words and components of words are found in the Nakh languages:

• doubling in the same sound composition (pure repetition);
• doubling in a deformed sound composition (partial, divergent repetition);
• doubling that occurs with the participation of affixes (affine repetition).

Let's consider the structural types of repetitions separately.

Pure repetition. This is the largest group of repetitions, which is formed by repeating the same root or derived morpheme (base) without phonetic and morphological changes. Nouns are practically not formed by repeating nominal bases, usually they are adverbial-circumstantial and pronominal formations:at night,little by little,anyone, – each by himself, separately, separately,over time, – the very first of…, – the most beautiful,the best, the best of…, – the biggest of… etc. Correlated with the above formations in the Batsbian language are used as completely new in semantic terms, such as, for example, – fresh, newest, and there are few such formations. In the Batsbian language, other individual examples of the formation of nouns by the method of pure repetition are also noted: (, the component value itself is darkened) – 1) shine, radiance (of stars), 2) ringing laughter. The fact that the first part of some such formations is a "truncated" basis is not a reason to exclude them from the type of pure repetitions: the final one is, in all cases, short, almost unpronounceable, as a result of which there are two spelling variants of such words in the Chechen orthography ( etc.). In fact, in oral speech, the coincidence of the phonetic structure of such words is complete: etc.

The actual material of the Nakh languages shows that frequent repetitions form all significant parts of speech, but with varying degrees of productivity. Adjectives, adverbs, numerals, verbs and verb forms, sound and onomatopoeic words are especially active in the formation of such repetitions. The above, according to the descriptions of the corresponding word-formation systems, can be attributed to other Caucasian languages. In this respect, sound- and image-imitative words are especially distinguished, built mainly on pure repetition and characteristic in this form for all three Nakh languages.

: хаз-хаза мехкарий – the most beautiful girls, дик-дика к1ентий – the best guys, etc.

: итт-итт д1асавийкъира – distributed by ten, ялх-ялх д1ах1оьттира – we got up six at a time, ворх1-ворх1 дийкъира – divided by seven, etc.

: ша-ша вуьсу – everyone stays with themself, ша- ша гучуволу – everyone discovers himself, мил-мила а ца оьшу – anyone is not needed.

чеч. т1аьхь-т1аьхьа карладуьйлу – more and more often I remember, жим-жима д1анисло – gradually being ordered, бус-буса хеза – at night it is heard, бацб. мацIкъ-мацIкъ – sometimes, etc.

: вилхина-вилхина – after crying enough, 1аш-1āш – sitting for a long time, лела-лелāш – walking for a long time, лехна-лехна – searching-searching, баьхна-баьхна – speaking-speaking (in the past), воьду-воьдуш – walking, лиелла-лиелла – after walking for a long time, ихна-ихна (the same), etc.

. Chechen and Ingush examples mostly coincide, so we give Chechen with parallels from the Batsbian language:, (imitation of a loud hum), (imitation of a soft discordant sound: (in the Batsbian it corresponds to ( –); in Batsbian it is also used in the meaning), – imitating the noise of a waterfall, – smooth oscillation;imitation of slurping when lapping something: in the Batsbian ( –) (imitation of sounds made by turkeys) etc,, Batsbian – rustle,, Batsbian – the sound of chewing, knocking and gnashing of teeth,, Batsbian – noise, uproar; see also purely onomatopoeic Batsbian: – trembling (adverb), – small trot (adverb), – the same thing (repeat), – spread legs.

In appearance, in structure, and in the degree of imagery, expressive saturation, pictorial words (in the scientific literature they are also called iteratives, mimemes) are heterogeneous. They are formed as a result of imitation of various sounds of nature, images, movements, representations. Onomatopoeia is noticeably distinguished, which copy natural sounds and serve the purposes of differentiating not only the sounds made by different objects, but also the sound power of the same object. This feature of pictorial words is also noted by Bubrich (1949): for pictorial words, there is no, for example, just beating, but there are countless ways of beating. For them, there is not just a fall, but there are countless ways of falling. For them, there is not just walking, but there are countless ways of walking.

The same category of words should also include invocational words and words-urging:prodding the cow,words for the call of chickens and chickens,urging the cat to move away,prodding the cat to come up.

It should also be noted that imitative words are often found in a tripled, quadrupled form, serving the purpose of enhancing expression: when calling a cat, for example;

Divergent repetition. These are repeated formations with phonetic changes of components. The following three varieties of this type of repetition are distinguished:

These formations are called or repetitions. The peculiarity of this type of divergent repetition is that the second component, due to phonetic change, serves as a kind of rhyme to the first component, being, as it were, its echo,. The semantics of the repeated components can also be obscured, as, for example, in the example of a Batsbian compound word given below. Here are examples of nouns: chechen, ingush.,,; chechen,,,,; Batsbian –, etc. Divergent repetitions can also be represented by formations with phonetic changes in the input – inside the word, as, for example, in a variety of onomatopoeia objects

The consonants with which rhyming repetitions are formed are not the same both quantitatively and qualitatively. The different frequency of their use is indicated in the work of Kaidarov (1958). These additional consonants are called by researchers. Those in the Nakh languages, as can be seen from the examples, includeIn practice (especially in oral and colloquial speech), such form formation is used endlessly, in written and literary speech it is limited by the following circumstances:

• firstly, words (mainly nominal) in many cases are part of other types of paired words. Such paired words perform stylistic functions of transformed repetitions with no less success;
• secondly, transformed repetitions play an active expressive and stylistic role and are formed from meaningful words that are susceptible to various kinds of metaphorical meanings and stylistic functions. In addition, we must not forget that the language has numerous ways of transmitting stylistic functions and other expressive shades of words, phrases. Therefore, transformed repetitions have a relatively limited scope of use.

A certain semantic role of the rhythmic echo, which modifies the general meaning of the combination, should not be ignored. These changes are directed either towards strengthening the meaning, or concretization, narrowing the ambiguity of the word, acquiring the meaning of indefinite multiplicity by it.

Sometimes this meaning of collective and indefinite multiplicity takes on a special emotional coloring, i.e. the concept of uncertainty, something alien, causes the speaker to disdain the concept or subject:,.

The lexical basis for the formation of such repetitions is mainly nouns суом-куом – куоч-муоч –, шай-кай – some money, etc.

Based on phonetic features, scientists have identified certain patterns that contribute to the rhythmic symmetry of paired-repeated formations on the material of different languages. Rhyme and alliteration are noted as the most significant euphonic factors. Moreover, as Dmitriev (1930) notes, alliteration is usually associated with such types of phrases in which both elements are meaningful words. On the contrary, rhyme is more likely to occur where the second component has no independent meaning and is only a phonetic cast from the first. Euphony of components can be different in different languages.

Maitinskaya (1964) also sees certain patterns for individual languages or groups of closely related languages in this interesting phenomenon. In particular, she notes that in the Hungarian language, the sound composition of the components of such repetitions is contrasted by the type of, or by the.

This type of repetition is also widely represented in the Tatar language:girls, – rumors,stupid, – boys,different smells,tricks, tricks,rags,brushwood, – all sorts of roots,ravines, etc.

Among them there is a large percentage of onomatopoeic repetitions:imitation of crackling, crunching of breaking twigs or burning wood,imitation of the rustle of feet,() – imitation of the crackling of breaking twigs,imitation of frequent and fractional knock of rain, etc.

Partial (truncated) repeat.

It is formed by incomplete repetition of the word, usually in the volume of the initial syllable with the help of the closing consonants (in most cases) and rarely: Turkic. green – the greenest, cold –completely cold, dark –completely dark, green –the greenest, blue –the bluest. Researchers believe that initially the closing sound of a three-phonemic partial reduplication with any sound combinations in the word was represented by a labial-labial bowed To this day, in the Kyrgyz, Kumyk, Nogai languages, only this consonant is used as a closing sound. Bashkir, Karakalpak languages are known for the closing. In Turkish and Azerbaijani languages, the number of closing ones reaches four –.

Truncated repetition historically represents the result of changes in the root repetition, the essence of which consists in repeating the root of the word. This is evidenced by some examples from Chechen (and other Nakh languages), which seem to illustrate the transition stage from root repetition to truncated: Chechen beautiful –the most beautiful, dry –the driest, often – very often. There are other interesting points in partial reduplication, which we will consider in the corresponding chapter in a detailed analysis of such formations.

Observations show that qualitative adjectives consisting of two syllables are almost always truncated. Repetition of monosyllabic and three-syllable words is extremely rare.

Affixed repetition.

The peculiarity of this type of repetition is that the doubled basis in them undergoes morphological change, i.e. various affixes or other grammatical formants are added to the root and derived bases. The choice of an affix depends on the specific type of construction. There are three possible cases:

• the affix is attached to the repetition, doubled formation;
• the formation containing the affix is subject to doubling;
• doubling and affixation occur simultaneously.

But regarding the synchronous analysis of language, the order of these processes in time can only be said conditionally. The varieties of affixed reduplication are distinguished by us on a formal basis:

Repetitions in which the second component is morphologically formed.

These formations can be divided into the following varieties:

a) repetitions with a reduplicator in the form of indirect cases (in this case, some phonetic changes may occur in the first component – as a rule, regressive-distance assimilation, leading to palatalization or coarsening of the vowel root): – leg on leg,hand in hand,half on half,himself,with time, etc;

b) repeats with a reduplicator, decorated with the addition of an amplifying particlethe best,the purest,the most beautiful, etc.

Apparently, to this type, you can add the Batsbian –, in which the second part of a compound word is framed as an adjective with its own affix (Suleibanova, 2013).

As we have noticed, the basis of the word in this case can be expressed by a noun or an adjective.

The considered type of reduplication is quite widespread in the Caucasian languages. For example, Magomedov and Alikhanov (2008) consider reduplication not only in connection with typical models of names formed in this way, but also in connection with the formations of verbs with subject-object semantics, analyzing examples of the type, For the Chechen and Ingush languages, such verbs, and in such a volume as in Avar, are not characteristic; they are not noted in Batsbian, although reduplication in the form of repeated roots with the second affixed part takes place here, as: these verbs do not have subject-object meanings, as in Avar (these are causatives and imperative verbs with subject-object relations inside the composite.

The status of repetitions in the word-formation system of the language

The word-formation value in addition is considered, as is known, the value of the union. The formation of words by reduplication (repetition) is an independent subtype of word formation and is part of the word composition as its constituent. Nemchenko's short dictionary-reference(1985); which gives a lexicographic description of the corresponding word-formation terms, so reveals the content of reduplication (repetition):

Repetition; 1. Formation of compound words by repeating the same word, the same base or root morpheme. as a special way of forming a new word by doubling the root. This is an old, now dead type. But we can talk about repetition and "in a broader sense" as a way of forming one word by doubling the whole word if it turns into one word. Undoubtedly, each of suchwords asetc. in fact, are one word. This is not only a special stylistic device to strengthen the meaning of the word, but also the formation of a new word, i.e., the word-formation process, lively and widespread in modern Russian.

2. A complex word that has arisen because of repeating the same word or base.

All complex compound words, or approximations ... can be divided into four main groups: the first is formed by doubling or repetitions, which are in meaning and expressive in nature reduplication of a word (adjective, verb, adverb, interjection and onomatopoeia):» (Nemchenko, 1985).

The varieties of word-formation reduplication in the same reference book include repetitions: onomatopoeic, incomplete, verbal.

As a clarification, it should be noted that when distinguishing word formation from cases of form formation, one should rely on one main feature. This is the semantic criterion for us: if the form of a word is formed, then there is no change in the main lexical meaning, the repetition differs from the original word by the presence of a certain grammatical meaning, and when word formation categorical belonging of the repetition and the original word does not coincide, the word takes on a new lexical meaning.

Bloomfield (1968) also noted on this occasion that in English, almost every doubled syllable can be used with almost any meaning as such a child's word. ...Thanks to this, the child receives speech forms that he can reproduce relatively easily, and this helps to transform the child's babble into generally accepted signals. One of the conditions conducive to the formation of such words is oral folk art, where they are often instilled as a humorous epithet.

A certain percentage of nouns are formed because of divergent doubling:money,– cloths, etc. In such formations, however, there is a sign of semantic fullness of the second component: its addition somewhat changes the meaning of a new word, it is not just a repetition, but an emphasis on the fact that the named object is meant and something else similar to it or otherwise related to it, that is, in such complex words the word-formative meaning is not just the meaning of a compound, but something else:, –, –, etc.

However, it is traditionally believed that in such repetitions the carrier of lexical meaning is the first component, and the second acts as a derivational morpheme. N.F. Aliyeva, a researcher of repetitions in Southeast Asian languages, notes that judging by the materials known to us divergent doubling has not been grammaticalized to any significant extent anywhere (i.e. it is not used to form grammatical forms of a word). It usually serves for the formation of new words (Alieva, 1980). Reduplicators (i.e. the second components) in divergent repetitions are functionally close to derivational morphemes, and the repetitions themselves are derived words, which, however, have specific features compared to affixal words.: 1) each reduplicator is to only one reduplicant; 2) repetition is not constructed arbitrarily, but in accordance with certain phonetic patterns. At the same time, it can be argued that there are derivation relations between repetition and reduplicant: a) a clear morphological division of repetition into a root morpheme and an additional element; b) semantic correlation of repetition and reduplicant. Let's add to this that the addition of a reduplicator changes the lexical meaning to a certain extent, the formation of a complex word by such repetition is not a simple addition of the second component. The formation of a new meaning is usually marked by a narrowing of the semantic boundaries of the main word, the loss of polysemanticity.

Some researchers classify this type of word formation as. In the work of R.R. Sikoev, such formations were called. However, it cannot be said that the opinions of researchers on this issue are united. Ganiev (1982), for example, notes that this type of paired-repeated nouns can hardly be considered dictionary lexical units with new semantics. In our opinion, there is a meaning here that occurs when stylistic suffixes are attached to the base:. At the same time, he nevertheless notes that, unlike the semantics of stylistic suffixes, in the paired-repeated nouns of this model, in addition to the stylistic meaning – the meaning of neglect, pejorativeness, there is a meaning of collectivity, indefinite multiplicity.

Special attention should be paid to repeated formations with both etymologically obscured components:,. In these examples, traces of repetition are intuitively felt by native speakers, although the repeating components have undergone phonetic deformation. The structure of word-forming root morphemes in diachronic terms should form the subject of a special study on the historical word formation of the Nakh languages.

According to the fair statement of Stepanova (1966), the specific relationship of word formation with synchrony and diachrony is that word formation is both a process and a result of the process. The result of the process refers to synchrony, and the process can be considered both in synchrony and in diachrony. The repetition of the basis in the examples given is the only form of the existence of the word. In our opinion, such repetition should be considered only in the word-formation context. The presence of such words is associated with the phenomenon of described by Bogoroditsky (1936). Its essence lies in the loss of etymological motivation by the word due to the close adhesion into one whole of morphemes that are part of derivatives and compound words: a word that was previously complex is perceived as simple, Bogoroditsky (1936) writes, and turns into.

Shcherbak (1963) notes that many linguists do not consider pictorial words to be words at all, since they do not see an opportunity to distinguish their lexical meaning. However, the absence of lexical meanings is not a sufficient argument in favor of the thesis denying the belonging of pictorial words to the system of means of linguistic communication, i.e., in other words, denying their belonging to words. The type of lexical meanings does not exhaust the whole variety of the content side of the language. In addition to lexical words, words express grammatical meanings, and all categories of service words are devoid of lexical semantics. Pictorial words have a very special type of meaning, imitative, figurative. Consequently, pictorial words, along with independent and official words, are included in the system of means of linguistic communication (Shcherbak, 1963).

Purpose of the Study

• To continue the scientific discussion on the problem of the status of repetitions in the word-formation system in languages of different grammatical structures and in Iberian-Caucasian in particular.
• Pay attention to the fact of the development of this method of composition formation in the Caucasian languages.

Research Methods

The classification method, descriptive method, and linguistic analysis techniques were used in the article, which are widely used by all researchers working with the material of specific languages or language groups.

Findings

1. As lexical units, repeated words (both nouns and adjectives) undergo morphological changes, incline, and can acquire various grammatical formants:In spring, greenery decorates nature;There are a lot of changes going on in everyday life.

2. Repeated words can act as a word-forming basis, for example, for the formation of masdar nouns. The formation of lexemes based on repetition is due to the laws of word formation in force in the language, the word-formation typology that has developed in it. At the same time, there is often a change in their lexical and grammatical category: – The case was settled without complications.He had to travel a lot.

A complete repetition of some official parts of speech can form full-fledged lexical units. The postposition chech., ing behaves interestingly in this regard; It corresponds to Russian prepositionsWhen doubling it acquires the vernacular meaning. The doubled formation of has a purely spatial meaning.

The adverb with the meaningwhen repeated gives a different meaning from the original, in our opinion, is: – They are about to arrive, assuming that I am here (waiting).

It should be noted that various morphological indicators can play a certain role in the formation of adverbs. In constructions like,the second component is decorated with a word-forming suffix --.

It seems to us that a certain degree of lexicalization is evident here. Repeated constructions of this type in some Caucasian languages are qualified as a syntactic-morphological way of word formation. According to Aganin (1959), some morphologized repeated formations are intermediate between forms of morphological and syntactic word formation and syntactic constructions. In other words, many repeated constructions perform two functions simultaneously, the first of which is limited to expressing certain syntactic relations between the members of a sentence; the second, which arose based on the first function, consists in using this repetition as a model of the syntactic-morphological method of word formation.

In such cases, it is not enough to distinguish only two processes – word formation and form formation, the process of transposition is also largely specific, covering those cases of doubling when it forms units that differ significantly from the original ones in syntactic properties.

In the above examples, words with a subject meaning (nouns) in the doubled form act as adverbs in the verbal position. Since the denotative meaning of the original and derived word is the same, there is no actual formation of a new word. However, it is also difficult to talk about the relations of the formative order in these cases, since it is impossible to distinguish formative, grammatical positions that have any regular character. The intermediate nature of the phenomena encourages us to attribute them to a special process – transpositional. Kubryakova (1974) notes that in transposition the role of derivational morphemes is reduced precisely to changing the categorical affiliation of the original word. Transposition is described in the scientific literature as,

Conclusion

Thus, the formation of words by reduplication (repetition) constitutes an independent subtype of word formation and is part of the word composition as its constituent. The final act in the formation of reduplicates is the doubling of the bases, i.e., their addition. In this case, the word-formation value is the meaning of unification (re-formation). The reduplicative word–formation model is characterized by the following features: components can be represented by the bases of significant, rarely – service parts of speech, pseudo morphemes, one basis of the significant part of speech and one pseudo morphemic basis, sound, and onomatopoeic bases. The latter are the most productive. Accordingly, the following varieties of word-formation reduplication are distinguished: full repetition, affixed repetition, divergent repetition, onomatopoeic repetition.

In the Nakh languages, new lexical units related to the following parts of speech are formed by reduplication: nouns, adjectives, adverbs, interjections, and imitative words.

Many nouns (reduplicated) are formed from onomatopoeic bases and are historical in nature. Some of them go back to the children's language. The basis for the formation of adjectives and adverbs are sound and onomatopoeic words, nouns, numerals, some service parts of speech.

References

• Aganin, R. A. (1959). Repetitions and homogeneous paired combinations in the modern Turkish literary language. Oriental Literature Publishing House.

• Alieva, N. F. (1980). Repetitive words and their problems in the languages of Southeast Asia. Science.

• Bloomfield, L. (1968). Language. Progress.

• Bogoroditsky, V. A. (1936). General course of Russian grammar. 5nd ed. Leningrad.

• Bubrich, D. V. (1949). To the problem of pictorial speech. Scientific notes of the Karelo-Finnish University, 3(1), 85–94.

• Dmitriev, N. K. (1930). On paired phrases in the Bashkir language. Bulletin of the USSR Academy of Sciences. Department of the humanit. Sciences, 7, 501–522.

• Ganiev, F. A. (1982). The formation of complex words in the Tatar language. Science.

• Kaidarov, A. T. (1958). Paired words in the modern Uighur language. Publishing House of the Kazakh SSR.

• Kubryakova, E. S. (1974). Word formation and its connections with other linguistic disciplines. In: All-Union Scientific Conference on Theoretical Issues of Linguistics. Abstracts of reports of breakout sessions. Moscow.

• Magomedov, M. I., & Alikhanov, S. Z. (2008). Word formation in the Avar language. Makhachkala.

• Maitinskaya, K. E. (1964). Structural types of doubling (repetition) in Finno-Ugric languages. In: Questions of Finno-Ugric linguistics. Grammar and lexicology (pp. 122–135). Moscow; Leningrad.

• Nemchenko, V. N. (1985). The basic concepts of word formation in terms. Krasnoyarsk University Publishing House.

• Shcherbak, A. M. (1963). On the morphological structure of words in the Turkic languages. In: Morphological structure of a word in languages of various types. Leningrad: Science.

• Stepanova, M. D. (1966). Word-formation and semantic systems (based on the material of German and English). In: Structural and typological description of modern Germanic languages (pp. 114–145). Moscow.

• Suleibanova, M. U. (2013). Composite word formation in the Nakh languages. Publishing house ChSU.

• Suleibanova, M. U. (2018). Composites with a compositional ratio of components (copulative composites) in multi-system languages. European Proceedings of Social and Behavioural Sciences, 2993–2999.