e.g.: little (A) - belittle (V);

friend (N) - befriend (V);

able (A) - enable (V);

courage (N) - encourage (V);

sleep (N) - asleep (word of the category of state);

foot (N) - afoot (Adv);

war (N) - prewar (A) ;

war (N) - postwar (A).

But usually prefixes do not change a part of speech.

The Source of Prefixes

Prefixes originated from notional words, which in the course of time lost their independent meanings and became prefixes.

e.g.: re (Lat. Adv.) - once again or back;

under (OE Adv., Prep.) - under;

fore (OE Adv., Prep) - foresee.

Nowadays this process continues. In Modern English there exist the so-called semi-prefixes - words which are losing their meanings.

e.g.: stone-blind, stone-deaf, ill-tempered, ill-fated.

The Classification of Prefixes

Among them we can single out prefixes of the negative meaning: un-, in-, dis-, mis-.

e.g.: comfortable - uncomfortable, convenient - inconvenient, satisfied - dissatisfied, understand - misunderstand.

Prefixes denoting reversal or repetition of an action: un-, dis-, re-, роз-, пере-.

e.g.: lock - unlock, regard - disregard, consider - reconsider, єднати - роз'єднати, писати - переписати.

In the Ukrainian language the most productive is the prefix не-, which is used to form adjectives and nouns, but never verbs: нелегкий, невільний. A very productive prefix is the prefix без-: безпомічний. In the English language this prefix corresponds to the suffix -less: defenceless. The prefixes де-, дис-, а- are used as parts of borrowed words and they are unproductive: децентралізація, дисбаланс, асиметричний.

Prefixes denoting space and time relations: fore-, pre-, post-, over-, super-, до-, перед-, над-, під-, пере-, після-.

e.g.: tell - foretell, war - prewar, war - postwar, spread - overspread, structure - superstructure, історичний - доісторичний, воєнний - післявоєнний, водний - підводний.

Prefixes can be international:

- Anti-/анти- (antifascist, антифашист);

- Counter-/контр (countermarch, контрмарш);

- sub-/суб (submarine, субмарина).

Some prefixes can have a semantic identity only (but no linguistic similarity):

- foresee - передбачити;

- extranatural - надприродний.

There can be semantically alien prefixes pertaining to one of the contrasted languages:

- de- (decamp);

- mis- (misstate);

- по- (по-українському);

- що- (щонайкраще).

A specifically Ukrainian phenomenon is the usage of the prefix по- (попоїсти).

Suffixation

Suffixation is the formation of words with the help of suffixes. Suffixes usually modify the lexical meaning of stems and transfer words to a different part of speech. There are suffixes, however, which do not shift words from one part of speech into another. A suffix of this kind usually transfers a word into a different semantic group.

e.g.: A concrete noun becomes an abstract one: child - childhood.

Suffixes can be classified according to their ability to form a new part of speech, to their origin, productivity.

Noun-forming suffixes:

-er (teacher, worker),

-ing (living, reading);

-ness (kindness, tenderness). These suffixes are productive.

-age (voyage, courage);

-ard (coward, drunkard);

-ment (agreement, employment);

-th (strength, length). These suffixes are non-productive.

In the Ukrainian language these are the following suffixes:

-ар (шахтар, лікар);

-ик (історик, радник);

-ець (гравець, українець);

-ач (оглядач, наглядач);

-ак (співак, мастак);

-нь (учень, здоровань).

Adjective-forming suffixes:

-able (movable, readable);

-ful (powerful, delightful);

-ish (whitish, bookish);

-less (useless, hopeless);

-y (noisy, sunny). These are productive suffixes.

-en (golden, woollen) - non-productive.

In the Ukrainian language these are the following suffixes:

ов- (зимовий, раптовий)

н- (хмарний, класний)

ив- (щасливий, кмітливий)

ськ-/ цьк- (англійський, німецький).

Some suffixes are homonymous. For example, the suffix ful- can form adjectives and nouns: careful (Adj) - handful (N).

In the Ukrainian language (but not in English) diminutive suffixes are often used:

-ньк (малесенький), -чк (дівчатко), -ець(вітерець).

Numeral-forming suffixes:

-teen (thirteen, fifteen);

-ty (sixty, seventy);

-th (seventh, eighth). These are non-productive suffixes.

Pronoun-forming suffixes:

-s (ours, yours). The suffix is non-productive.

Verb-forming suffixes:

- ate (complicate, navigate);

- en (darken, strengthen);

- fy (signify, simplify);

- ute (attribute, execute). These suffixes are non-productive.

In the Ukrainian language these are the suffixes: (ув)ати-, ити-(сушити, головувати).

Adverb--forming suffixes:

- ly (quickly, lately);

- long (sidelong, headlong);

- ward(s) forward, toward(s);

-ways, wise (clockwise, otherwise, crabways). Of all these suffixes only the suffix

-ly is productive.

In the Ukrainian language that is the suffix о-: високо, широко.

From the point of view of semantics suffixes can be classified in the following way:

1. Agent suffixes:

-ist/ -іст/-ист (journalist, артист) ;

ar/ -ар/-яр (scholar, школяр);

ier-/-yer/ -ир (cashier, бригадир).

2. Suffixes denoting abstract notions:

-ism/ -ізм (socialism, комунізм);

-tion/ -ац (demonstration, демонстрація);

-dom/ -ств/-цтв (kingdom, газетярство);

-hood/ -ств (brotherhood, братство).

3. Evaluative suffixes:

-ette (kitchenette);

-y/-ie/-ey (sissy);

-ling (duckling).

-атк/ ятк (дівчатко, оленятко)

-ик (ротик);

-ечк (донечка);

-ичк (сестричка);

-ньк (дівчинонька).

All Ukrainian diminutive suffixes are productive. In English only -ie/ey, -ette are productive.

4. Gender/sex expressing suffixes.

In the Ukrainian language they can express masculine gender:

- -ар/яр (лікар, школяр);

- -ист/іст (бандурист);

- -ій (водій);

- -ант/ент (студент).

Feminine gender can be expressed by means of the following suffixes:

-к (артистка);

-их (кравчиха).

Neuter gender is expressed by means of:

-атк (курчатко);

-к (вушко);

-ц (винце).

English gender suffixes are only sex expressing: actor - actress.

5. International suffixes:

-er/or ор(conductor, кондуктор);

-ist/іст (socialist, соціаліст);

-tion/ц (revolution, революція);

-able/абельн(readable, читабельний).

In both languages there are semi-affixes. In English these are the elements:

loadsa-, friendly, -something.

In Ukrainian the semi-suffixes are: повно-, ново-, само-, авто-, -вод, -воз (повноправно, автопілот, водовоз, тепловоз).

4. Conversion

As a type of word-formation conversion exists in many languages. What is specific for the English vocabulary is not its mere presence, but its intense development.

The main reason for the widespread development of conversion in present-day English is no doubt the absence of morphological elements serving as classifying signals, or, in other words, of formal signs marking the part of speech to which the word belongs. The fact that the sound pattern does not show to what part of speech the word belongs may be illustrated by the word back. It may be a noun, a verb, an adjective, an adverb.

Many affixes are homonymous and therefore the general sound pattern does not contain any information as to the possible part of speech.

e.g.: maiden (N), darken (V), woollen (A), often (Adv).

O. Jesperson points out that the causes that made conversion so widely spread are to be approached diachronically. The noun and verb have become identical in form firstly as a result of the loss of endings. More rarely it is the prefix that is lost (mind < gemynd). When endings had disappeared phonetical development resulted in the merging of sound forms for both elements of these pairs.

e.g.: OE carian (verb) and caru (noun) merged into care (verb, noun); OE drinkan (verb) and drinca, drinc (noun) merged into drink (verb, noun).

A similar homonymy resulted in the borrowing from French of pairs of words of the same root but belonging in French to different parts of speech. These words lost their affixes and became phonetically identical in the process of assimilation.

Prof. A. Smirnitsky is of the opinion that on a synchronic level there is no difference in correlation between such cases as listed above, i.e. words originally differentiated by affixes and later becoming homonymous after the loss of endings (sleep - noun :: sleep - verb) and those formed by conversion (pencil - noun :: pencil - verb).

Prof. I. Arnold is of the opinion that prof. Smirnitsky is mistaken. His mistake is in the wish to call both cases conversion, which is illogical if he, or any of his followers, accepts the definition of conversion as a word-building process which implies the diachronistic approach. Prof. I. Arnold states that synchronically both types sleep (noun) - sleep (verb) and pencil (noun) - pencil (verb) must be treated together as cases of patterned homonymy. But it is essential to differentiate the cases of conversion and treat them separately when the study is diachronistic.

Conversion has been the subject of a great many discussions since 1891 when

H. Sweet first used the term in his New English Grammar. Various opinions have been expressed on the nature and character of conversion in the English language and different conceptions have been put forward.

The treatment of conversion as a morphological way of forming words was suggested by A.I. Smirnitsky and accepted by R.Z. Ginzburg, S.S. Khidekel,

G.Y. Knyazeva, A.A. Sankin.

Other linguists sharing, on the whole, the conception of conversion as a morphological way of forming words disagree, however, as to what serves here as a word-building means. Some of them define conversion as a non-affixal way of forming words pointing out that its characteristic feature is that a certain stem is used for the formation of a categorically different word without a derivational affix being added

(I.R. Galperin, Y.B. Cherkasskaya).

Others hold the view that conversion is the formation of new words with the help of a zero-morpheme (H. Marchand).

There is also a point of view on conversion as a morphological-syntactic word-building means (Y.A. Zhluktenko), for it involves, as the linguists sharing this conception maintain, both a change of the paradigm and of the syntactic function of the word.

e.g.: I need some paper for my room : He is papering his room.

Besides, there is also a purely syntactic approach commonly known as a functional approach to conversion. In Great Britain and the United States of America linguists are inclined to regard conversion as a kind of functional change. They define conversion as a shift from one part of speech to another contending that in modern English a word may function as two different parts of speech at the same time.

The two categories of parts of speech especially affected by conversion are the noun and the verb. Verbs made from nouns are the most numerous among the words produced by conversion.

e.g.: to hand, to face, to nose, to dog, to blackmail.

Nouns are frequently made from verbs: catch, cut, walk, move, go.

Verbs can also be made from adjectives: to pale, to yellow, to cool.

A word made by conversion has a different meaning from that of the word from which it was made though the two meanings can be associated. There are certain regularities in these associations which can be roughly classified. In the group of verbs made from nouns some regular semantic associations are the following:

- A noun is a name of a tool - a verb denotes an action performed by the tool: to knife, to brush.

- A noun is a name of an animal - a verb denotes an action or aspect of behaviour typical of the animal: monkey - to monkey, snake - to snake. Yet, to fish does not mean to behave like a fish but to try to catch fish.

- A noun denotes a part of a human body - a verb denotes an action performed by it : hand - to hand, shoulder - to shoulder. However, to face does not imply doing something by or even with one's face but turning it in a certain direction.

- A noun is a name of some profession or occupation - a verb denotes an activity typical of it : a butcher - to butcher, a father - to father.

- A noun is a name of a place - a verb denotes the process of occupying this place or putting something into it: a bed - to bed, a corner - to corner.

- A noun is the name of a container - a verb denotes an act of putting something within the container: a can - to can, a bottle - to bottle.

- A noun is the name of a meal - a verb denotes the process of taking it: supper - to supper, lunch - to lunch.

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 the great variety of semantic interrelations within the so-called converted pairs and the complex nature of the logical associations which underlie them.

In actual fact, these associations are more complex and sometimes even perplexing.

Types of Conversion