DEPENDENCE OF LEXICAL-SEMANTIC CHARACTERISTICS OF TWO-COMPONENT ATTRIBUTIVE CONSTRUCTIONS ON MORPHOLOGICAL AND QUANTITATIVE FEATURES OF ATTRIBUTE (BASED ON THE GENRES OF ANGLOPHONE OFFICIAL DISCOURSE)
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.17721/folia.philologica/2023/5/3Keywords:
frequency of occurrence, lexical-semantic group, suffix morpheme, text corpus, correlation analysisAbstract
The goal of the work is to determine whether there is a relationship between lexical-semantic characteristics of two-component attributive constructions and morphological and statistical features of their attributes and to present the corresponding results of the analysis carried out based on text corpora of three genres of official discourse. The following methods were used in the study: statistical methods of data calculation, expert assessment method, and methods of contextual and comparative analysis. The article describes two-component attributive constructions (DCACs) functioning in texts of four official discourse genres: “Formula of inventions in physics and electronics (patents)”, “Car operating instructions”, “Legal documentation”, and “Business correspondence”, and this emphasizes the novelty of the proposed work. In the genres of “Instructions” and “Formulas of inventions (patents)”, the DCACs with the attributes having the most frequently used suffixes are included in the following lexical-semantic groups: the nature of the action, process, state; function, purpose of devices; relationship between the part and the whole. In the genres “Legal documentation” and “Business correspondence”, DCACs with the attributes possessing the most frequent suffixes are introduced in the following lexical-semantic groups: documents and financial procedures. The analysis results show that the it is the attributes with the most frequent suffixes that influence the lexical-semantic meanings of DСACs, which (meanings) are basic for the genres under study. Thus, the higher the use of an attribute with a specific suffix in a DCAC, the more likely these constructions will have the above lexical-semantic meanings.
References
Partridge, E. (1971). Usage and abusage: A Guide to Good English. London: Penguin Books.
Shell-Hornby, M. (1986). The linguistic structure of public directives in German and English. Mouton Publishers, Amsterdam.
Shopen, T., Williams, J. (1981). Style and variables in English. Cambridge – Massachusetts: Winthrop Publishers Inc.
Warren, B. (1978). Semantic patterns of N-N compounds. Gothenburg: Acta University Goteborgensis.
Frazer, B. (1970). Some remarks on the action nominalizations in English. Readings in English transformational grammar. [Ed. by R. A. Jacobs and P. S. Rosenbaum]. Toronto.
Fortenay, H. (1966). Le Bonne correspondence. Paris [in French].
Trofimova, A. S., Dantsevych, L. H., Shapa, L. N. (2014). Analiz intehralʹnykh i dyferentsiynykh oznak zhanriv tekhnichnykh instruktsiy i formul vynakhodiv (patentiv) dlya formuvannya yedynoho pidstylyu [Analysis of integral and differential features of genres of technical instructions and formulas of inventions (patents) to form a single sub-style].
Bulletin of Kharkiv National University named after V.N. Karazina Series “Roman-Germanic Philology. Methodology of teaching foreign languages”. 1102. P. 155–159 [in Ukrainian].
Summers, D. (2005). Corpus Lexicography. The importance of representativeness in relation to frequency. Retrieved from http://www.pearsonlongman.com/.../pdfs/corpus-lexicography.pdf.
Köhler, R., Altmann, G. (2005). Quantitative Linguistics: an International Handbook. Quantitative Linguistics: an International Handbook. Berlin. New-York: Walter de Gruyter.
Boʙohoçaeva, M. (2000). Tahlili muqoisavii iʙorahoi ismī: dar asosi zaʙonhoi toçikī va anglisī [Comparative analysis of the nominal word combinations: on the material of the Tadjik and English languages]. PhD thesis [in Tajik].
Quirk, R. A. (1972). Grammar of Contemporary English. London: Longman.
Poutsma, H.A. (1904). Grammar of Late Modern English. Part 1. London: Groningen.
