Classification and comparative analysis of English negative affixes free essay sample

International University of Nature, Society and Man # 8220 ; Dubna # 8221 ; Course paper # 171 ; Classification and comparative analysis of English negative affixes # 187 ; Made by: A.A. Yakovleva, 3042 Supervised by: S.V. Verbitskaya Dubna 2009 Content The debut 1. Word-formation. Affixation 2. The semantics of the negative affixes and their comparative analysis 3. The topographic point of affixes in the categorization of morphemes and categorizations of negative affixes 4. The maps of negative affixes The decision The debut The purpose of our work is to individual out, describe, comparison and happen the possible ways of categorization of English negative affixes. The scientific involvement of this work can be the undermentioned: we will familiarise ourselves with English negative affixes, larn how they differ semantically from each other, which affixes are used with roots of different parts of address and what parts of address they form ( there we can besides see if these affixes are able to transform words of one portion of address into another ) , what their maps and distinctive features of use are, and which affixes are more productive and widely used today. It is really of import to cognize as more affixes, as possible, because many English words are formed by uniting prefixes and postfixs to establish words. The more prefixes and postfixs we know, the easier it will be for us to calculate out the significances of these words [ 1, 287 ] . Harmonizing to this the undertakings of the work will be the followers: 1 ) to happen out which affixes may be considered as negative ; 2 ) to look for their significances in different lexicons and add them with illustrations ; 3 ) to happen out how affixes can be divided into categories and the topographic point of negative affixes in these categorizations ; 4 ) to see how these affixes are realized in different contexts, what functions they perform ; 5 ) to happen out which affixes are used with roots of different parts of address and what parts of address they form together. 1. Word-formation. Affixation The system of English linguistic communication is an unfastened system. That means that it is invariably added by new words. Harmonizing to the Oxford Dictionary, merely 7,5 % words in the vocabulary of English are adoptions [ 7 ] . The huge bulk of words appear through changings in the lexical units preserved in the linguistic communication system, trough the word-formation. Word-formation is the procedure of constructing up new words from words of the same root, and as a consequence of this there is a formal-semantic correspondence between derivative and derived words [ 4, 56 ] . It should be mentioned, that there are certain forms of word-formation in English. It is the circuit, sample, parallel, theoretical account, all that fix a regulation of building of derivative words, regulation, which takes into history a type of derivative bases and word-building agencies and general semantics, formed as a consequence of their interaction, of the same words. One theoretical account can besides match to different alterations of significance and be a beginning of confusion and misconstruing for foreign scholars. These forms may be productive or non in different linguistic communications. It was noticed by many bookmans long ago, that one derivative form can give about space or, at least, important figure of derived functions, others are characterized by inability to free word-building. There are several sorts of word-formation and different sorts of them are productive in different linguistic communications. The major ways of word-formation are intensifying, affixation and transition ( besides called zero-affixation ) . Affixation remains a really productive type of word-formation in English linguistic communication. Affixation is the derivation of new words by adding affixes to them, which are postfixs and prefixes. We can analyze a peculiar word from the point ofmorphologicalandderivational analyses. Covering with morphological analysis we merely split the word into constitute parts. When the word is divided into its ultimate constituencies the morphological analysis is completed. While making derivational analysis we find how the word was constructed, which is its derivative and what agencies have been used to construct up the word [ 4, 59 ] . So, the procedure of affixation should be explored within derivational analysis, non morphological. But talking of affixes in general we are interested in both morphological and derivational analyses. There is a certain division of morphemes within the morphemic analysis. English syntacticians normally point out two standards, which are the bases of the morphemic construction. They arethe positional standard the location of the morphemes with respect to each other, andthe semantic ( or functional ) standard the part of the morphemes to the general significance of the word. So harmonizing to the first there are root-morphemes and affixial morphemes, roots and affixes. The semantic difference between them is obvious: root morphemes have the concrete, # 8220 ; stuff # 8221 ; significance, while affixes merely stipulate the chief significance, or transform the significance of the root [ 4, 59 ] . Finally, we can see that there are several types of word-building in English pointed out by many bookmans and affixation is one of the most productive. There are certain forms of word-formation and several types of morphemes. The latter can be studied from the point of position of two complementary analyses. 2. The semantics of the affixes and their comparative analysis affix negative morpheme semantic The first measure in our analyzing English negative affixes is to give a definition of the affix itself. Here is a definition given in Oxford Advanced Lerner # 8217 ; s Dictionary of Current English.Affixis a missive or group of letters added to the beginning or terminal of a word to alter its significance [ 8 ] . This definition takes into history merely prefixes and postfixs. But it does non cover all the sorts of affixes. It is of import to maintain in head that there are besides different types of affixes present in the English linguistic communication every bit good: -circumfix( one part appears at the forepart of a root, and the other at the rear, like in ascattered) , -simulfix( alterations a section of a root, like in mouse-micvitamin E ) , -suprafix( alterations a suprasegmental phoneme of a root, for illustration, the alteration of an similar in produce ( noun ) -produCe ( verb ) ) ; -duflifix( incorporates a reduplicated part of a root ( may happen in forepart, at the rear, or within the root ) , like in Teeny-weeny ) [ 9 ] . So we see that the definition should be wider. So, if we besides take into history that the morphemes are by and large divided into root- and affixial morphemes, the definition will be the followers:affifxis a morpheme that is attached to the root to organize a new word with another significance. It was written much about semantics of an affix. There are heated arguments in the lingual literature, whether the affix has significance in general, and if yes, what type of significance. There are different points of position, often opposite, which, nevertheless, can be reduced to several basic waies: 1 ) The affix has no independent significance ; it merely forms the external side of a word ; 2 ) The affix carries out fundamentally merely transporting map, interpreting a footing from one lexical and grammatical category in another, and lexically is empty ; 3 ) The affix can be characterized by presence of a assorted kind of significances: one affixes show a broad and assorted circle of lexical significances, others merely grammatic significances [ 3, 138 ] . It is besides of import to detect that # 8220 ; affixes specify, or transform the significance of the root. Affixal specification may be of two sorts: of lexical or grammatical character. So, harmonizing to the semantic standard affixes are farther subdivided intolexical, orword-building ( derivational ) affixes, which together with the root constitute the rootof the word, and grammatical, or word-changing affixes, showing different morphological classs, such as figure, instance, tense and others. With the aid of lexical affixes new words are derived, or built ; with the aid of grammatical affixes the signifier of the word is changed # 8221 ; [ 2, 57 ] . One of our farther purposes will be to analyze whether English negative affixes are lexical or grammatical or they can be of both types. On this phase of the analyses rises the inquiry of the standard for mentioning affixes to negative and what affixes can be called negative. For the reply it is better to look up the word # 8221 ; negative # 8221 ; in the dictionary first. So, the Longman dictionary gives the undermentioned definition: negative: 1 ) a refusing, doubting, or disapproving ; stating or intending # 8216 ; no # 8217 ; , B incorporating one of the words # 8216 ; no # 8217 ; , # 8216 ; non # 8217 ; , # 8216 ; nil, # 8216 ; neer # 8217 ; etc. 2 ) without any active, utile or assisting qualities ; non constructive 3 ) demoing the deficiency of what was hoped for or expected [ 6 ] . From the present definition we see that the first significance of these words is better applicable to stick on, and this significance should be the standards for calculating out negative affixes. Our following undertaking is to see, which affixes are considered to be negative. Harmonizing to the old statement they are the undermentioned: a- , ant ( I ) , dis- , dys- , in- , mal- , mis- , nega- , non- , un- [ 9 ] . From this list we can see, that they are all prefixes. So arises the inquiry, is the negative map in English world-building performed merely by prefixes. If we consult other beginnings we see that there is one postfix altering the significance of the word to the antonym: -less ( motion-motionless) [ 3, 137 ] . And we besides add it to this list. As for the prefixes, de- can besides transport the thought of opposition, and il- , im- and ir- must be added excessively, as they are the allomorphs of in- . So allow us see what their significances are. So if we consult Longman Dictionary of English Language and civilization, the consequence will be the undermentioned. a- :( demoing an opposite or absence of something ) non ; without: amoral ( =not lesson ) anti- :1 apposed to ; against: antinuclear ( apposing the usage of atomic arms and power ) 2 antonym of: an anticlimax ( =an unexciting stoping of the expected flood tide ) contra- :opposite ( workss is contradiction to animate beings ) de- :( in verbs and nouns ) ( demoing an opposite ) : a depopulated country ( which all or most of the population has left ) dis- :( demoing an opposite or negative ) : I disapprove ( =do non O.K. ) il-:unlogical ( =not logical ) im- :immobilise in- :( particularly in adjectives and nouns ) ( demoing a negative, an apposite, or a deficiency ) non: insensible ir- :non: guerrilla ( =not habitue ) mal-: bad or severely: a malformed ( =wrongly shaped ) limb mis-: 1 bad or severely: bad luck ; 2 incorrect or wrongly: a misreckoning 3 ( demoing an antonym or the deficiency of something ) : I mistrust ( =do non trust ) him non-: ( particularly in adjectives and nouns ) ( demoing a negative ) non: a non-smoker ( =someone who does non fumes ) un- :1 ( particularly in adjectives and adverbs ) demoing a negative, a deficiency, or an opposite ) non: unfair ; 2 ( particularly in verbs ) ( demoing an opposite ) : undress ( take one # 8217 ; s apparels off ) less( in adjectives ) : 1 without a : a childless twosome ( = who have no kids ) ; 2 that neer -s or can non be -ed: helpless ( = can non be helped ) [ 6 ] For the prefixes il- , im- , ir- there are no definitions in the dictionary, as they all refer to the suffix in- . The facet of their difference is explained by allo-morphemic theory. When analyzing morphemes, we should separate morphemes as generalised linguistic units from their concrete manifestations, or discrepancies in specific textual environments ; discrepancies of morphemes are called # 8220 ; allo-morphs # 8221 ; . The allo-morphemic theory distinguishes morphemes harmonizing to their concrete realisation. In the survey of morphemes it was developed in Descriptive Linguistic by agencies of distributional analysis. There are three types of distribution so: incompatible distribution, non-contrastive distribution and complementary distribution. Contrastive distribution means that morphs express different significances in indistinguishable environments, e.g. : He startedexpress joying # 8211 ; He startsexpress joying. The morphs are said to be in non-contrastive distribution if they express indistinguishable significance in indistinguishable environments ; such morphs constitute # 8216 ; free discrepancies # 8217 ; of the same morpheme, e.g. : learned # 8211 ; learnt. The morphs are in complementary distribution when they express indistinguishable significances in different environments, e.g. : He started express joying # 8211 ; He stopped express joying ; such morphs constitute discrepancies, or allo-morphs of the same morpheme [ 4, 60-61 ] . Allo-morphemic theory plays an of import function in the descriptive analysis of negative affixes. One of the most active negative affixes is in- . Its allomorphs are il- , im- , ir- . That means that they carry on the same significance, but they are attached to different roots. It can be a great job for English scholars, therefore it is of import to clear up the regulations of allo-morphemic affixes. The in- alterations or is assimilated toil-if the root begins with cubic decimeter, as in illuminate; toim-before B, as in imbibe, before m, as in immediate, before P, as with implant; and toir-before R, as in irrigate.So the distribution of the allo-morphs concerned is complementary. It is rather sensible to give the illustrations to these affixes and the definitions of these words given in the lexicon. untypical: non typical ; different from what is usual: Her reaction to the drug was untypical. flak: directed against enemy aircraft: flak missiles contraindication: a physical mark or status that makes it unadvisable to take or go on taking a medical specialty: High blood force per unit area is a contraindication for this drug. destabilise: to do less house or steady, particularly politically: a deliberate effort to destabilise the economic system of a rival state disclaim: to province that 1 does non hold or accept ; to deny: He disclaimed all duty for the accident. nonreader: who has nor learnt to read or compose: ( fig. ) an illiterate note. immodest: screening or be givening to show a high sentiment of oneself and oneself # 8217 ; s abilities, possibly higher than is truly deserved ; non modest: immodest behavior. inactivity: deficiency of action or activity ; quality or province of making nil irrational: non utilizing ground ; against sensible behavior: After taking the drug she became rather irrational. miscount: to number wrongly: The instructor miscounted the figure of male childs. nonresident: a individual non populating in a certain topographic point: Are nonresidents entitled to vote? unheralded: holding given no mark of being present ; appear out of the blue: He burst into physician # 8217 ; s room rather unheralded and started shouting at her. countless: really many ; excessively many to be counted: infinite grounds against it. [ 6 ] Since we have even more illustrations of words with the negative affixes, it is more possible to use the definitions of the affixes to the definitions of the words with these affixes. It is going clear so that the significances of the affixes given in the lexicon are rather general. It was stated above, that affix has no independent significance, so merely when attached to words, affixes get a more specific significance in each instance. The ground for it is that affix is non an independent unit ; therefore its significance taken individually can be stated merely by and large. To do the analysis more complete we should confer with at least one other dictionary. So if it is Oxford Advanced Lerner # 8217 ; s Dictionary of Current English, the consequence will be the undermentioned. a- :( in nouns, adjectives and adverbs ) non ; without: amoral ( =not moral ) : atheists anti- :1 apposed to ; against: anti-tank arms 2 the antonym of: an anti-hero contra- :( in nouns, verbs and adjectives ) against ; opposite: contraflow de- :( in verbs and related nouns, adjectives and adverbs ) : the antonym of: decentalisation dis- :( in adjectives, adverbs, nouns and verbs ) : non ; the antonym of: dishonest il-suffix=in im-=in in- :( besides il- im- ir- ) ( in adjectives, adverbs and nouns ) : non ; the antonym of: space ir-=in mal- :( in nouns, verbs and adjectives ) : bad or severely ; non rectify or right: malpractice mis- :( in verbs and nouns ) bad or incorrect ; severely or wrongly non- :( in nouns, adjectives and adverbs ) : non: bunk un- :1 ( in adjectives, adverbs and nouns ) : non ; the antonym of: unable 2 ( in verbs that describe the antonym of a procedure ) : unlock less- :( in adjectives ) : 1without: treeless 2 non making ; non affected by: tireless [ 7 ] Such affixes like mys- and nega- , which are present in the list of negative affixes, are non present in both Longman and Oxford lexicons, every bit good as words with them, so we can do a suggestion that they are non productive presents, that is no words are built with it. But there are found some words get downing with dys- , like dysfunctional ( =not working in a satisfactory or successful manner ) , or dyslexia ( =a little upset of the encephalon that causes trouble in reading and spelling, for illustration, but does non impact intelligence ) . Therefore, it should be included in the list of negative affixes to do it more complete. It is obvious, that the prefix dys- truly exists and has about the same significance as the prefix dis- . Analyzing the significances given by both lexicons we can do a decision that they merely somewhat differ in significances in different lexicons ( for illustration, contra- in Longman Dictionary means # 8220 ; opposite # 8221 ; , while Oxford Dictionary gives a wider definition # 8211 ; # 8220 ; against ; opposite # 8221 ; , and like ) , and harmonizing to the illustrations the significances given there reflect the extra significance, which they bring to the derivative word. All the negative affixes posses the significance of either resistance or deficiency of something that besides carries the thought of negation. The Oxford lexicon marks the word category of the word the affix belongs to, what is non ever done in Longman lexicon. It is really utile for our farther classificatrional analysis. But it is known that some words can get several negative affixes and new words can look semantically similar to linguistic communication scholars. It is a ill-mannered error to misapply the affixes. So on this phase of analysis appears a inquiry, why some words are attached with a certain negative affix and others are attached with others. And it is besides really of import to happen out how non to blend up some affixes with really similar significances. The Longman lexicon contains an article comparing prefixes un- , in- and non- , which look really much alike at the first sight. # 8220 ; The difference between them is the grade to which they suggest the thought of the antonym instead than negative. Non- is normally merely negative ( for illustration, nonalcoholic drinks contain no intoxicant ) , but un- is frequently used to propose an opposite quality. Comparison: He is applied for a nonscientific occupation ( =not connected with scientific discipline ) in the Civil Service. | It was really unscientific ( =showing excessively small attending to scientific rules ) non to mensurate your consequences. Of the three prefixes ( un- , in- , non- ) , in- tends most frequently to propose opposite qualities. Comparison: their inhuman ( =very cruel ) intervention of political captives | The archaeologists discovered both human and non-human castanetss # 8221 ; . This account is a great aid for linguistic communication scholars and besides for the practical intents of our work. [ 6 ] 3. The topographic point of affixes in categorizations of morphemes. The categorizations of negative affixes It has already been said that English syntacticians normally point out two chief standards for the general categorization of morphemes: the positional standard and the semantic ( or functional ) standard. And harmonizing to them there areroot-morphemesandaffixal morphemes, roots and affixes [ 4, 58 ] . For illustration, in the word miscast # 8220 ; cast # 8221 ; is a root and # 8220 ; mis- # 8221 ; is an affix. The semantic difference between them is obvious: root morphemes have the concrete, # 8220 ; stuff # 8221 ; significance, while affixes merely stipulate the chief significance, or transform the significance of the root. In the given illustration # 8220 ; cast # 8221 ; means # 8220 ; to to take histrions to plot the different parts in the film/movie, play etc. # 8221 ; , while # 8220 ; mis- # 8221 ; means # 8220 ; severely or wrongly # 8221 ; [ 7 ] . So the complete significance of the word is compound from these two significance, but the first is the chief, as it i s independent, and the 2nd is linear. There is besides another division of morphemes in Descriptive Linguistics. Morphemes can befreeoredge. Free morphemes can construct up words by themselves, for illustration, place. Bound morphemes are used merely as parts of words, like dis- in neglect[ 4, 58 ] . So, as all the affixes are attached to some root ( as affixes do ) , they are all can be referred to the category of edge morphemes. Morphemes besides can be divided intoovertandcovert. The latter shows the meaningful absence of a morpheme distinguished in the resistance of grammatical signifiers in paradigms [ 4, 59 ] . For illustration in the paradigm of noun in the word manus # 8211 ; s is a covert morpheme. As postfixs can be either present or absent in the word construction they can be of both sorts in different contexts. Full moonO R meaningful morphemes are opposed toemptymorphemes. The ulterior 1s have no significance like the full 1s, for illustration, in the word # 8216 ; kids morphemes. The ulterior 1s have no significance like the full 1s, for illustration, in the word ‘children # 8217 ; child- is the root of the word, bearing the nucleus of the significance, -en is the postfix of the plural, while -r- is an empty morpheme. In this instance it is clear that postfixs can besides be of both sorts, but normally, as it was already mentioned, they have a certain significance [ 4, 59 ] . ’ child- is the root of the word, bearing the nucleus of the significance, -en is the postfix of the plural, while -r- is an empty morpheme. In this instance it is clear that postfixs can besides be of both sorts, but normally, as it was already mentioned, they have a certain significance [ 4, 59 ] . Segmentalmorphemes consist of phonemes, whilesupra-segmentalgo forth the phonemic content of the word unchanged, but the significance of the word is specified with the aid of assorted supra-segmental linguistic units, like in`convert ( a noun ) con`vert ( a verb ) . As postfixs refer to the segmental degree, they are all segmental morphemes [ 4, 60 ] . Linearmorphemes, which are freely combined in a word, e.g. : look+ed, small+er, are opposed toreplacivemorphemes, or root morphemes, which replace each other in paradigms, e.g. : sing -sang # 8211 ; sung [ 4, 60 ] . Within this categorization affixes are certain to mention to linear morphemes. And one more division is touninterruptedanddiscontinuousmorphemes. Continuous 1s are combined with each other in the same word, like in worked, while discontinuous consist of two constituents, used to organize analytical signifiers, for illustration, isrunning[ 4, 60 ]. As affixes can non dwell of several parts, so they are uninterrupted. The specification of affixes themselves can be of two sorts: lexical and grammatical. And harmonizing to this standard there arelexical, or word-building, or derivational affixes andgrammatical, or word changing affixes. The latest group expresses different morphological classs, such as figure, instance, tense and others. Grammar survey is chiefly concerned with grammatical affixes, because they change the word harmonizing to its grammatical classs and serve to infix the word into an utterance.Lexical affixes serve to construct new words, grammatical # 8211 ; to alter the signifier of the word, for illustration, travel # 8211 ; goes [ 4, 56 ] . Sing this categorization we can come to a decision that negative affixes, which we are interested in, refer to the group of lexical affixes, as they change the lexical significance of the word, non its signifier. For illustration, tobacco user # 8211 ; a individual who smokes ; non-smoker # 8211 ; a individual who does non smokes. Prefixes i n English are merely lexical, they do non transform a word into another portion of address ( understand-misunderstand ) . Suffixs can be both lexical and grammatical. For illustration, home-homeless, but go-goes. Grammatical postfixs are besides called inflections ( inflexions, inflectional terminations ) [ 4, 56 ] . Grammatical postfixs form word-changing, or morphological paradigms of words, which is typical for inflexional linguistic communications, but they can be observed in English excessively ( boy-boys ) . Lexical affixes are the topic of lexicology, because they change the significance of the word. In grammar they are regarded as formal indexs of belonging of the word to one or another portion of address. They form lexical ( word-building, or derivational ) paradigms of words united by a common root, for illustration, to make up ones mind determination decisive # 8211 ; resolutely [ 4, 56 ] . Affixs can besides be divided harmonizing to theirplace. They are divided intoprefixes( before the root ) andpostfixs( after the root ) [ 5, 136 ] . There are other types of affixes in different linguistic communications, but prefixes and postfixs are the most typical for English. As we have seen, the negative affixes tend to come largely from prefixes. One more meaningful parametric quantity in categorization of affixes is their semantic impact, due to which they are united in semantic groups of a type: affixes with significance of similarity( -al, -ial, -ed, -esque, -ful, -ic, -ical, -ish, -like, -ly, -ous, -some, -y, crypto- , neo- etc. ) ; affixes with significance of denying( a- , dis- , in- , non- , un- , -less ) , and it is the group of our peculiar involvement, as they besides can de callednegative; bantam affixes( -ette, -ie/-y, -ikin, -let, -ling ) ; affixes with meaningof the individual( -an, -ian, -arian, -ant, -ard, -by, her ( it ) , -een, -eer, -er, -ess, -ette, -ician, -ie, -ing, -ist, -ister, -kin, -ing, -ster, -ton ) ; affixes with significance of figure( bi- , demi- , di- , mono- , multi- , pan- , poly- , semi- , tri- , twi- , uni- ) ; and many others. It is impossible to talk about one complete categorization of this type, because many affixes are polysemous and different lexicographer refer them to different groups [ 5, 148 ] . Prefixs and postfixs form assorted subgroups depending on what from all assortment of belongingss, that they inherit, is selected as categorization parametric quantity. That can go, for illustration theirbeginning, on the footing of which there is a division intonative affixesandborrowed[ 5, 145 ] . As an illustration of borrowed affix we can take anti- , as in anticyclone, and as native # 8211 ; less, as in motionless. There is besides one more really of import categorization of affixes. It is known that affixes are attached to roots of different parts of address. And harmonizing to this they are called: substantial( like anti- , non- , dis- , -less ) ; adjectival( like dis- , un- , in- ) verbal( like dis- , de- , mis- ) ; adverbial( like un- , anti- , re- , non- ) [ 5, 146 ] . For illustration, if we take a noun ability, it can be attached with a prefix dis- : disablement. A verbal root codification can be transformed with the verbal prefix de: decode. An adverbial root, like easy, can be attached with the adverbial prefix un- : anxiously. It is besides notable to advert, that the footing of the categorization can be the portion of address, into which the given affix transforms a word. This categorization is referred to suffixes, as their function in definition of the features of derived functions # 8217 ; parts of address is more obvious, than that of prefixes. It is interesting that the names of the groups are the same as in the old categorization. So while categorization the standards for it must ever be mentioned. The groups are: -substantive( -dom, -ness ) ; verbal( -en, -ize ) ; adverbial( -ly ) ; -adjectival( -less ) [ 5, 146 ]. As it is seen, there is merely one negative affix in this categorization # 8211 ; suffix -less, so this categorization is non of much importance in our analysis. Due to the postfix # 8211 ; less we can transform a noun coloring materialto the adjectival colourless. Prefixs are non included into this categorization as they normally do non alter the portion of address of the word, but touch merely its significance. Several more categorizations are given in one of the Russian Dictionaries. Harmonizing to their map affixes are of two sorts: -of nominative map ( functioning to denote some objects, phenomena etc. ) ; -of structural ( linking ) map. To the first group belong word-building affixes and flexures. The first service to construct new words and the 2nd # 8211 ; to mention a word to this or that grammatical signifier. Affixes of structural map are called interfixes. They are used for connexion of two united morphemes, like in # 1087 ; # 1072 ; # 1088 ; # 1086 ; # 1074 ; # 1086 ; # 1079 ;[ 2, 153 ] . They are non typical for English linguistic communication and all the negative affixes must be referred to the first group. Harmonizing to the distinctive features of combinability there is the undermentioned resistance: -regular ( multivalent ) affixes ; -irregular ( univalent ) affixes. Regular affixes are combined within the word with the different sorts of affixal or root morphemes, for illustration, un- ( unable, unacceptable) . Irregular affixes posses restricted combinability and are called unifixes ( like # 8211 ; # 1091 ; # 1093 ; in # 1076 ; # 1074 ; # 1091 ; # 1093 ;) . It is rather obvious that all the negative affixes are included into the first group excessively, because all they posses a certain word-building form and their grade of combinability is really high. [ 2, 153-154 ] Summarizing up, holding consulted some beginnings, we have found out, that there is a figure of categorizations of morphemes, and affixes in peculiar, harmonizing to different standards. 4. The maps of negative affixes As it was said above, negative affixes are lexical, because they are used to construct new words. And they besides ever convey some negative extra significance to the derivative word, altering its significance to opposite. From this it can be made a decision that one of the maps of English negative affixes is: 1 )To make opposite word of the derived functions. This map is performed merely if the portion if address is non changed ( and merely the postfix lupus erythematosus does alterations it ) . And if we look at them more by and large, as a portion of the discourse one more map appears: 2 )Bringing the negation to the sentence. Talking about the 2nd map it is of import to advert that there are 6 ways of negation on the sentence:negative affixes, negative atoms, negative pronounsand adverbs,negative concurrencesandnegative prepositions.Affixation is a morphological manner of negation ( while others are sintactical ) . The most popular negative affixes areun- , dis- , de-. To the verbs such prefixes likeun- , dis- , de-give the significance of opposite action. So, such affixes like dis- , mis- , in- , un- , less- and such bring to the sentence the thought of absence, want and opposition. It is of import to advert that there are certain regulations of combinability of affixes. For illustration, the prefixun- ,Germanic in its beginning, is non normally combined with the root of the word. Such words likeunlikeare non typical for English.More oftenthe atomnonis used alternatively. The prefix un- should be used with attention, as when is attached to the verbs, it tends to convey the significance of the opposite ac tion, every bit good asmis- , dis- , de-( tie untie ) . There are merely several verbs in English with these affixes, possessing the significance # 8220 ; non # 8221 ; . They are to dislike, discredit, misgiving. [ 3, 14-15 ] Nouns and adjectives are normally attached with such affixes likeun- , non- , in- ( im- , il- , ir- ) dis- , mis-. The closest to each other in intending arenon-andun-( but it was spoken earlier about their difference ) . The suffix less- is besides normally added to nouns and adjectives. The prefixun-is the closest in intending to this postfixless-( eternal unending, profitless unprofitable ) [ 3, 16 ] . So, we can come to the decision that the most widely used are the affixes de- , un- , Dis ; and negative affixes tend to come with nouns and adjectives. The root of verbs are non combined with them and the negation is expressed in the sentence by the analytical negative verb-form. So, the map of making opposite word can barely happen its application in verbs, but typical for nouns and adjectives. Let us take the novel of Lauren Weisberger # 8220 ; Chasing Harry Winston # 8221 ; for different illustrations of these two maps. We will take non merely sentences incorporating words with negative affixes, but besides sentences where negation is expressed in other ways, for illustration participialnon. It will assist to turn out ( or non to turn out the statement that the negation of actions are more likely to be expressed by the atomnon) . 1 ) When Leigh # 8217 ; s doorbell rangout of the blueat nine on Monday dark, she did non believe, Gee, I wonder who that could be. [ 8, 1 ] Here we see that the map of negation is performed here: it is stressed that Leigh did non anticipate the buzzer. Unexpectedly is derived from the wordanticipate( because there is no such word in English as # 8221 ;expectedly # 8221 ; [ 7 ] ) , so the first map is non performed here. 2 ) Where there people who really welcomedunheraldedvisitants when they merely stopped to # 8220 ; state hullo # 8221 ; or # 8220 ; look into in # 8221 ; ? [ 8, 1 ] In this illustration both maps are realized: there is a negation in the sentence ( there are few people who welcome visitants who arenonannounced ) , and the word unannounced comes from the word announced, being its opposite word. 3 ) The flat might hold been the most perfect she # 8217 ; vitamin D seen in a twelvemonth and a half of looking, but she hadnonwanted to take any opportunity. [ 8, 2 ] Here the negation in the sentence is expressed by the negative atomnon. It is used to alter the significance of the verb to the antonym, what is really frequent, as it was said above. 4 ) Before her, taking a QVC catalog from anunbarredletter box, stood an fleshy adult female in a polka-dot housedress. [ 8, 3 ] In the illustration above both maps are performed: unbarred is an opposite word forlockedand there is an thought of negation on the sentence ( from the letter box which was non locked ) . 5 )Nota twenty-four hours younger than 80, thought Leigh, and she breathed a suspiration of alleviation. [ 8, 3 ] This sentence is another illustration of the negation expressed by the negative atomnon. 6 ) How could she perchance have predicted that the apparentlyinnocuousupstairs neighbour was a dedicated wearer of monolithic wooden orthopedic getas? [ 8, 3 ] In the given illustration merely the 2nd map is performed ( the neighbour didnonlook a individual meaning to make injury ) , because there is no such a word as # 8220 ;nocuous # 8221 ; [ 8 ] , so antonymic map is irrelevant here. 7 ) Before she had spotted her neighbour have oning the offending places, Leigh had created an luxuriant account for therelentlessupstairs racket. [ 8, 4 ] Here we see the adjectival built with the postfix # 8211 ; less. As we remember it is the lone negative affix which transports a word from one portion of address to another. So it can non execute the antonymic map, because opposite word must mention to one portion of address ( relent is a verb, relentless is an adjectival [ 7 ] ) . The decision can be made that merely the 2nd map is expressed by the affix ( the upstairs racket which neer stopped traveling ) . 8 ) Leigh # 8217 ; s pharynx constricted and her pulsationinexplicablyquickened. [ 8, 5 ] In the sentence above inexplicably is derived fromexplicable, but non # 8220 ;explicably # 8221 ; , so it does non execute the antonymic map. But the affix expresses the map of negation in the sentence ( it wasnoneasy to explicate, why her pulsation quickened ) . 9 ) Leigh didnonbelieve she was a likely campaigner for a coronary: It was a panic onslaught, field and simple. [ 8, 5 ] 10 ) I amnonfalling for this, she thought as she stealthily dialed her doorkeeper. [ 8, 5 ] In the last two examples we can detect the look of the negation in the sentence with the participialnon. 11 ) In anuneffectiveeffort to chase away the terror, Leigh pressed her fingertips into her temples and stretched her cervix from side to side. [ 8, 5 ] Here uneffective is an opposite word ofeffectual, and the 2nd map is besides expressed by the affix ( the effort isnoneffectual ) . 12 ) Never mind that in 80 old ages of metropolis life she didnonpersonally known anyone who had been so much as pickpocketed, or that the opportunities of a psychopathologic liquidator taking her flat from more than two hundred other units in her edifice wasimprobable # 8230 ; 8, 6 ] In the illustration given in the first instance the negation is expressed by the atomnon, and in the 2nd instance improbable, which affix un- is besides one manner of showing the negation in the sentence, is besides an opposite word forprobably. From the illustrations above it can be seen that the most popular manner of negation is atomnon, as it is used in five illustrations from 12. The most active of the negative affixes areun-andin- (they are used in three illustrations each ) . The least active of the present 1s is the postfixless- ,it is used merely one time. What is besides of import for the classificational analysis of the negative affixes is to use different categorization to concrete illustrations of affixes. Therefore, when we deal with certain illustrations, we can see, how the categorizations given work. So let us take the illustrations 1, 6 and 7: out of the blue, innocuousand relentless. Unexpectedly: negative affix un- . Morphemic analysis: un-expect-ed-ly. Derivational analysis: expected # 8211 ; out of the blue. As all the affixes un- is bound, overt, full, segmental, linear, uninterrupted morpheme ( the same will be common for other classified affixes ) . It is a prefix, since it is in preposition to the root. It is a native affix. As it is an adjective harmonizing to the pert of address it is attached to. We can non talk of the categorization based on the standards of the portion of address of the built word, because it is non merely the affix which transfers the word from one portion of address to another. It is an affix of nominative map, because it is non an interfix, and it is regular, every bit long as it has certain theoretical accounts of combinability ( derivational forms ) . Innocuous: negative affix in- . Morphemic analysis: in-nocuous. Derivational analysis: can non be done, the word is non-derived. In- is a prefix. We can non use to it the categorizations, based on the portion of address the affix is attached to and the portion of address if signifiers, because this word does non hold derived functions, it was non built from any other word, it was created as it is. It has a nominative map, and it is regular. Relentless: negative affix # 8211 ; less. Morphemic analysis: relent-less. Derivational analysis: relent # 8211 ; relentless. It is verbal harmonizing to the standards of the word it is attached to, and adjective harmonizing to the portion of address of the derived word. It is besides regular and performs a nominative map. Summarizing up the written above, we can detect that: 1 ) All the negative affixes in context bring the negation into a sentence, and viewed independently, some of them execute the antonymic map. 2 ) Though it was stated that un- , dis- and de- are the most popular negative affixes, harmonizing to the present examples the most frequent are un- and in- . 3 ) Negative affixes are seldom attached to verbs. For the intent of negation verbs are more frequently preceded by a atomnonand the analytical signifier is used. The decision So, we are done with the comparative and classificational analysis. In this work we, foremost, managed to analyze different beginnings and to do one complete list of negative affixes. We found out that all affixes can be studied from two standards: morphological and derivational. These two standards were really utile in the farther classificational analyses. We besides studied one of the morphemic categorizations and stated the topographic point of affixes at that place. There are different points of position on the semantics of affixes, but most bookmans agree, that they have a sort of general, extra significance. So, lodging to this sentiment, we gave the significances of the negative affixes from different lexicons, compared them, and observed how they are expressed in different contexts. There are legion ways of sorting affixes. We tried to give as many categorizations of both morphemes in general and affixes in peculiar as possible and besides happen out, what topographic point is occupied by the negative affixes in any of so. Different sunglassess of significances were besides studied and the pick for different affixes for one and the same root was explained. We besides found out the chief maps of the negative affixes, taken independently and in the context. A popular novel was used for the context, which is an illustration of modern-day British literature. We besides studied which affixes are attached to different parts of address and which parts of words they so build. Analyzing the illustrations from the novel, we made a decision, which affixes are the most active presents ( which affixes are used most often ) . After giving the illustrations of the negative affixes in context, we singled out several words incorporating them and gave a complete descriptive analysis of the negative affixes utilizing all the possible ways of categorization studied earlier. Making this class paper, we gave a general overview to affixation as a manner of word formation, familiarized ourselves with English negative affixes, learned how they differ in sunglassess of intending from each other, and learned to distinguish them. We studied which affixes are used with roots of different parts of address and saw which of them are able to transform words of one portion of address into another, studied the distinctive features of their use. It is really utile for a linguist and a transcriber, it can be a great aid particularly in our hereafter survey and work. Bibliography 1. M.L Burns Scope English Writing and Language skill Level three # 8211 ; Scholastic Inc. , 1982. 2. # 1051 ; . # 1051 ; . # 1050 ; # 1072 ; # 1089 ; # 1072 ; # 1090 ; # 1082 ; # 1080 ; # 1085 ; , # 1045 ; . # 1042 ; . # 1050 ; # 1083 ; # 1086 ; # 1073 ; # 1091 ; # 1082 ; # 1086 ; # 1074 ; , # 1055 ; . # 1040 ; . # 1051 ; # 1077 ; # 1082 ; # 1072 ; # 1085 ; # 1090 ; # 1050 ; # 1088 ; # 1072 ; # 1090 ; # 1082 ; # 1080 ; # 1081 ; # 1089 ; # 1087 ; # 1088 ; # 1072 ; # 1074 ; # 1086 ; # 1095 ; # 1085 ; # 1080 ; # 1082 ; # 1087 ; # 1086 ; # 1089 ; # 1086 ; # 1074 ; # 1088 ; # 1077 ; # 1084 ; # 1077 ; # 1085 ; # 1085 ; # 1086 ; # 1084 ; # 1091 ; # 1088 ; # 1091 ; # 1089 ; # 1089 ; # 1082 ; # 1086 ; # 1084 ; # 1091 ; # 1103 ; # 1079 ; # 1099 ; # 1082 ; # 1091 ; . # 8211 ; # 1052 ; . : # 1042 ; # 1099 ; # 1089 ; # 1096 ; # 1072 ; # 1103 ; # 1096 ; # 1082 ; # 1086 ; # 1083 ; # 1072 ; , 1995. # 8211 ; 382 # 1089 ; . 3. # 1051 ; . # 1043 ; . # 1055 ; # 1072 ; # 1088 ; # 1072 ; # 1085 ; # 1091 ; # 1082 ; , # 1047 ; . # 1057 ; . # 1061 ; # 1072 ; # 1073 ; # 1077 ; # 1082 ; # 1080 ; # 1088 ; # 1086 ; # 1074 ; # 1072 ; , # 1060 ; . # 1057 ; . # 1040 ; # 1076 ; # 1079 ; # 1080 ; # 1085 ; # 1086 ; # 1074 ; # 1072 ; # 1065 ; # 1090 ; # 1088 ; # 1080 ; # 1094 ; # 1072 ; # 1085 ; # 1080 ; # 1077 ; # 1074 ; # 1084 ; # 1085 ; # 1086 ; # 1083 ; # 1086 ; # 1075 ; # 1080 ; # 1095 ; # 1077 ; # 1089 ; # 1082 ; # 1086 ; # 1081 ; # 1080 ; # 1076 ; # 1080 ; # 1072 ; # 1083 ; # 1086 ; # 1075 ; # 1080 ; # 1095 ; # 1077 ; # 1089 ; # 1082 ; # 1086 ; # 1081 ; # 1088 ; # 1077 ; # 1095 ; # 1080 ; , # 1052 ; # 1072 ; # 1081 ; # 1082 ; # 1086 ; # 1087 ; , 2004. 4. # 1040 ; . # 1040 ; . # 1056 ; # 1080 ; # 1074 ; # 1083 ; # 1080 ; # 1085 ; # 1072 ; . # 1058 ; # 1077 ; # 1086 ; # 1088 ; # 1077 ; # 1090 ; # 1080 ; # 1095 ; # 1077 ; # 1089 ; # 1082 ; # 1072 ; # 1103 ; # 1075 ; # 1088 ; # 1072 ; # 1084 ; # 1084 ; # 1072 ; # 1090 ; # 1080 ; # 1082 ; # 1072 ; # 1072 ; # 1085 ; # 1075 ; # 1083 ; # 1080 ; # 1081 ; # 1089 ; # 1082 ; # 1086 ; # 1075 ; # 1086 ; # 1103 ; # 1079 ; # 1099 ; # 1082 ; # 1072 ; : # 1091 ; # 1095 ; # 1077 ; # 1073 ; # 1085 ; # 1086 ; # 1084 ; # 1077 ; # 1090 ; # 1086 ; # 1076 ; # 1080 ; # 1095 ; # 1077 ; # 1089 ; # 1082 ; # 1086 ; # 1077 ; # 1087 ; # 1086 ; # 1089 ; # 1086 ; # 1073 ; # 1080 ; # 1077 ; . # 1041 ; # 1083 ; # 1072 ; # 1075 ; # 1086 ; # 1074 ; # 1077 ; # 1097 ; # 1077 ; # 1085 ; # 1089 ; # 1082 ; : # 1041 ; # 1043 ; # 1055 ; # 1059 ; , 2009. 118 # 1089 ; . 5. # 1047 ; . # 1040 ; . # 1061 ; # 1072 ; # 1088 ; # 1080 ; # 1090 ; # 1086 ; # 1085 ; # 1095 ; # 1080 ; # 1082 ; # 1051 ; # 1077 ; # 1082 ; # 1089 ; # 1080 ; # 1082 ; # 1086 ; # 1083 ; # 1086 ; # 1075 ; # 1080 ; # 1103 ; # 1072 ; # 1085 ; # 1075 ; # 1083 ; # 1080 ; # 1081 ; # 1089 ; # 1082 ; # 1086 ; # 1075 ; # 1086 ; # 1103 ; # 1079 ; # 1099 ; # 1082 ; # 1072 ; . # 8211 ; # 1052 ; # 1080 ; # 1085 ; # 1089 ; # 1082 ; : # 1042 ; # 1099 ; # 1089 ; # 1096 ; # 1072 ; # 1103 ; # 1096 ; # 1082 ; # 1086 ; # 1083 ; # 1072 ; , 1992. 6. Addison Wesley Longman. Longman Dictionary of English Language and civilization. 1998. 7. A.S. Hornby. Edited by Sally Wehmeier. Oxford Advanced Lerner # 8217 ; s Dictionary of Current English. Oxford University Press. 2000 8. L. Weisberger Chasing Harry Winston. # 8211 ; New York: Symon and Svhuster. # 8211 ; 2008. 9. hypertext transfer protocol: //www.affixes.org/typesofaffix.html