>В
8. Conversion
В
Definition of conversion.
To give the definition of conversion as a way of word-building we must analyse its characteristic features. Cf. the word voice in the following sentences:
1. I hear her voice. - 2. The workers voice their protest.
Linguists pointed out grammatical features distinguishing voice 1 and voice < span align = "justify"> 2. A.I. Smirnitsky pointed out that voice 1 and voice 2 < span align = "justify"> have different paradigms (ie a set of grammatical forms). Voice 1 has only two forms in its paradigm: 1) voice, 2) voices. The paradigm of voice 2 includes many forms: 1) voice, 2) voices, 3) voiced, 4) is voicing, 5) has voiced, 6) is voiced, 7) will voice, etc. It shows that voice moved from noun paradigm to verb paradigm. Now that voice 1 and voice 2 have different paradigms they belong to different parts of speech.
I.V. Arnold pointed out the difference in their syntactical environment and function: voice 1 is an object, voice 2 is a predicate.
Besides, these words differ in their lexical meaning: voice 1 denotes a thing and voice 2 denotes an action.
So conversion is the making of a new word in a different part of speech with a different syntactical environment and function, with a different lexical meaning, but without changing the basic form of the original word.
Conversion differs from affixation as in affixation the basic form of the original word is changed, cf. teach - teacher. Conversion contrary to affixation is semantic derivation.
Some linguists (SD Katsnelson, MA Sternina, etc.) interpret conversion as categorial polysemy.
Semantic relations between the members of a conversion pair.
One of the problems difficult to solve is the question: which member of the conversion pair is the source of conversion and which is the result of conversion?; in other words, which is the В« father В»of conversion and which is theВ« child В»? - E.g. pale adj. or pale v ?
The best criterion suggested by linguists is the criterion based on semantic relationships between the members of the conversion pair. At first we shall consider some semantic relationships between the noun and the denominal verb converted from it after the pattern N Г° V.
1) One member of the conversion pair denotes an instrument; the other member denotes the use of this instrument, ie instrumental use. Logically we come to the conclusion that the name of the instrument appeared first, and only after that came the name of the action connected with this instrument: pen Г° to pen, radio Г° to radio, pencil Г° to pencil, head Г° to head, eye Г° to eye (She eyed him from head to foot).
2) One member of the conversion pair denotes a place, the other member denotes the action connected with this place: pocket Г° to pocket, table Г° to table.
Next we shall consider some semantic relationships between the verb and the deverbal noun converted from it after the pattern V Г° < span align = "justify...
