Лекции по "Английскому языку"

2) The noun is the name of an animal, the verb denotes an action or aspect of behaviour considered typical of this animal: to dog, to wolf, to monkey, to ape, to fox, to rat. Yet, to fish does not mean "to behave like a fish" but "to try to catch fish". The same meaning of hunting activities is conveyed by the verb to whale and one of the meanings of to rat; the other is "to turn in former, squeal" (sl.).

3) The name of a part of the human body — an action performed by it: to hand, to leg (sl.), to eye, to elbow, to shoulder, to nose, to mouth. However, to face does not imply doing something by or even with one's face but turning it in a certain direction. To back means either "to move backwards" or, in the figurative sense, "to support somebody or something".

4) The name of a profession or occupation — an activity typical of it: to nurse, to cook, to maid, to groom.

5) The name of a place — the process of occupying the place or of putting smth. / smb. in it (to room, to house, to place, to table, to cage).

6) The name of a container — the act of putting smth. within the container (to can, to bottle, to pocket).

7) The name of a meal — the process of taking it (to lunch, to supper).

The suggested groups do not include all the great variety of verbs made from nouns by conversion. They just represent the most obvious cases and illustrate, convincingly enough, the great variety of semantic interrelations within so-called converted pairs and the complex nature of the logical associations which specify them.

In actual fact, these associations are not only complex but sometimes perplexing. It would seem that if you know that the verb formed from the name of an animal denotes behaviour typical of the animal, it would be easy for you to guess the meaning of such a verb provided that you know the meaning of the noun. Yet, it is not always easy. Of course, the meaning of to fox is rather obvious being derived from the associated reputation of that animal for cunning: to fox means "to act cunningly or craftily". But what about to wolf? How is one to know which of the characteristics of the animal was picked by the speaker's subconscious when this verb was produced? Ferocity? Loud and unpleasant howling? The inclination to live in packs? Yet, as the following example shows, to wolf means "to eat greedily, voraciously": Charlie went on wolfing the chocolate. (R. Dahl)

In the same way, from numerous characteristics of the dog, only one was chosen for the verb to dog which is well illustrated by the following example:

And what of Charles? I pity any detective who would have to dog him through those twenty months. (From The French Lieutenant's Woman by J. Fowles)

(To dog — to follow or track like a dog, especially with hostile intent.)

The two verbs to ape and to monkey, which might be expected to mean more or less the same, have shared between themselves certain typical features of the same animal:

to ape — to imitate, mimic (e. g. He had always aped the gentleman in his clothes and manners. — J. Fowles);

to monkey — to fool, to act or play idly and foolishly.

To monkey can also be used in the meaning "to imitate", but much rarer than to ape.

The following anecdote shows that the intricacies of semantic associations in words made by conversion may prove somewhat bewildering even for some native speakers, especially for children.

"Mother", said Johnny, "is it correct to say you 'water a horse' when he's thirsty?"

"Yes, quite correct."

"Then", (picking up a saucer) "I'm going to milk the cat."

The joke is based on the child's mistaken association of two apparently similar patterns: water, n. — to water, v.; milk, n. — to milk, v. But it turns out that the meanings of the two verbs arose from different associations: to water a horse means "to give him water", but to milk implies getting milk from an animal (e.g. to milk a cow).

Consider your answers to the following.

1. What are the main ways of enriching the English vocabulary?

2. What are the principal productive ways of word-building in English?

3. What do we mean by derivation?

4. What is the difference between frequency and productivity of affixes? Why can't one consider the noun-forming suffix -age, that is commonly met in many words (cabbage, village, marriage, etc.), a productive one?

5. Give examples of your own to show that affixes have meanings.

6. Look through Chapter 3 and say what languages served as the main sources of borrowed affixes. Illustrate your answer by examples.

7. Prove that the words a finger and to finger ("to touch or handle with the fingers") are two words and not the one word finger used either as a noun or as a verb.

8. What features of Modern English have produced the high productivity of conversion?

9. Which categories of parts of speech are especially affected by conversion?

10. Prove that the pair of words love, n. and love, v. do not present a case of conversion.