Phraseological units constitute the subject matter of the special section of phraseological lexicography, and the free combination study syntax. However, the grammar does not pass by phraseological units, comparing them on internal grammatical properties and relations with the free combinations. To prove the point, consider the following examples: good for nothing —good for the job; in the lap of Providence — in the lap of the nurse; to take the upper hand —to take the longer pencil (of the two); to come down handsome —to come down safe and so on and so forth.
Phraseoms can offer as a combination of phrase called for convenient distinction of two types of phrases in the descriptions. Basic English phrases being performed by notional compound words are formed by one or more substantive syntagmas around (or equivalent), verbal, adjectival and adverbial centers. At the same adjectival and adverbial combinations, are generally included in the substantive and the verb phrase as their constituents. The following examples represent the idea: the previous night; something very affectionate and intimate; the others, far less responsible; to delay the departure; to turn the mind to the suggested subject; to radically improve one’s position, etc.
However, the actual original form of derivation in the various detections general paradigmatic naming scheme can serve as a word of any class that gives grounds to say, respectively, of the substantive (N →), verb (V →), adjective (A →) and adverbial (D →) derivation perspective of a particular series of paradigmatic naming:
N → nation — to nationalize — national — nationally.
man — to man — manful — manfully.
time — to time —timely — timely.
V → to defy — defiance — defiant — defiantly.
to decide — decision — decisive — decisively.
to appear — appearance — apparent — apparently.
A → simple — simplicity — to simplify — simply.
sweet — sweetness — to sweeten — sweetly.
bold — boldness — to embolden — boldly.
D → near — nearness — to near — near.
off — offing — to off — off.
down — down — to down — down.
In a complex and interesting interaction with generalized values naming paradigm stages (options subject of values — values of process options — options object property values — the values of the options non-subject properties) is private foundations semantics of words in the immediate ranks paradigm. In the framework of this basic semantics can be detected nuclear certain value, which in turn decomposes too (in the form of a constant characteristic) on four headings semantic naming significant variations with different meaning. As a result, a paradigm forms nominative general objective, the process of feature or plan, which may be the same or may be different from the nature of the derivation of a number of perspectives. We therefore: stone — to stone — stony — stonily (subject to a number of semantic core); movement — to movemovable — movably (number with process semantic core); warmth — to warm — warm — warmly (with a number of semantic core objective, primary property); haste — to haste — hasty — hastily (with a number of semantic core non-subject, secondary properties).
The interaction is basically the core of lexical-semantic naming rows with the values of the four stages of a paradigm implements a rich and subtle range of meanings for the measurement of objects and phenomena of reality in the real complexity of their qualitative certainty and an infinite variety of relationships.
Additional point for discussion in the given subparagraph is author’s substantivation which can be created by an author in order to give wider description of a character or to invent pun. Having analysed the existing sources, we have not found particular examples from literature, however, the possible instances can be:
— Have you seen Mary?
— Do you mean the one that is upabove?
In the given sentence up is used to denote not only the position, but also «a person who lives on the upper floor». The following examples can represent another case:
— I have already done everything you asked me to accomplish.
— You are the Ms. Quickly, aren’t you?
In the sentence Quickly means «the person who does everything very quickly».
Bill is one of my NEVERs. = I will never go out with him.
However, it is still dubious, whether such an example can be considered to be substantivation or not. The mentioned above structures are not typical for the English language and can be used only if indented as occasionalism, pun or other figures of speech.
Therefore, it is possible to make a conclusion that it is typical for substantivation in the English language to be based exceptionally on adjectives. Adverbs cannot participate in this process and, consequently, cannot become a noun in the given, if it is not intended as figure of speech or any other author’s occasionalism.
3 Substantivation in Spanish.
3.1 Substantivation of Spanish Adjectives.
Substantivation, which is a permanent or casual (occasional) transition into the category of nouns, that initially they are widespread in Spanish. A substantivized word is a word belonging to any part of speech, as well as the whole phrase and sentence. Along with the adjective, participle, adverb, pronoun, often exposed substantivizing Spanish infinitive, which many regard as Hispanics verbal noun expressing an abstract name of an action. The fact that the infinitive combines the properties of the verb and the properties of the name defines the various approaches to its study and is reflected in the definitions of the infinitive, which are offered in Spanish grammars. The named properties of infinitive manifested in its ability to substantivize.
Although a substantivized word is a word belonging to any part of speech, as well as the phrase and the whole sentence, it is mostly often transposed into the category of nouns adjectives. This is due to that the adjectives and nouns have something in common in terms of morphological properties (presence categories gender, number) and functionally (these names can perform similar functions in the sentence).
Both generic forms of adjectives in the singular and plural can be substantivized. A feature substantivizing feminine form of the adjective is usually correlated with a feminine noun (replacement of the noun), indicated in the text or implied:
— ¡Juana, Juana! — ll amó Enriqueta. — ¿Qué? — contestó l a al udida, vol viéndose; Marí a esperó mient ras l a j oven ent raba en un despacho.
As it can mentioned, la joven in the second sentence relates with the lexeme una mecanógrafa which is referred to in the previous paragraph.
The same type of transient substantivizing (sustan-tivación transitoria, pasajera) may apply and adjectives in the masculine form:
En el grupo de niños… «Nadie dice que queremos dejarte solo» — dijo el más pequeño.
However, substantivizing contextual correlation with the noun is optional for the male gender:
El rojo de la tierra.
El interior del recinto es angustioso; En el blancoinfinito, nieve, nardo y salina.
It should be borne in mind that the presence of the article el at substantivized adjective is optional, as there are other ways of transposition and its detection in the text: Lo ideal era ir de un lugar a otro. As can be seen from the example above, constructions with lo most often acts as a so-called partitive attribute (lo empinado de unmonte). In its value lo + adjective structure is synonymous with derived names: lo verde — laverdura, lo oscuro — la oscuri dad, lo sereno — la serenidad and so on and so forth.
An important feature of the design with lo is that the adjective can appear in a variety of shapes and kinds, i.e. retains signs of the category matching characteristic of adjectives: en lo fría que está el agua, Sin ser visto lo afanados que estaban ellos en el juego.
Objectified adjectives and the second objectified nouns are most often used in explosive subordinate clauses, which were isolated by noun transferred from a subordinate clause in the main. Therefore, it is sensible to compare the following: (le contaré) que fuiste amiga — le contaré lo amiga que fuiste.
Since lo does not duplicate the morphological characters substantivized words (lo amiga, not la amiga), its role is clearly limited to the designation of syntactic functions allocated words. In other words, thanks to lo, the word of the sentence is constituted in the subject matter. Constructions of this type have emphatic character.
Substantivation adjectives the most common of all types are carried out by means of articles el (expresses a specific, individual) and lo (expresses the abstract, collective).
El azul es el color del cielo.
Lo bueno cuesta caro.
Siempre soñamos con lo imposible.
Thus, in the Spanish language they distinguish the phenomenon of full or morphological substantivizing. However, it should be noted that the phenomenon of morphologic substantivizing observed in modern Spanish is less than phenomenon of partial or syntactic substantivizing, realized in particular speech act, at which most infinitives is substantivized partially acquiring symptoms characteristic category noun temporarily, only under certain conditions, in particular context.
3.2 Substantivation of Spanish Adverbs.
In Spanish any part of speech can substantivized as a landmark, and utility: adverb, gerunds, pronouns, numerals; prepositions, conjunctions, particles, article, interjection and even individual phrases, for instance: Tenemos que olvidar el ayer. El hoy es lo que merece la pena valorar.
An important feature of substantivized adverbs design is that it is substantivized in the same manner as adjectives: Pepita Jiménez… ha sabido por mi padre lo mucho que me gustan las huertas de por aquí.
Conclusion.
C onversion and substantivization occupy a special place in English word formation system as the ways to create new words (lexemes). T hese two ways of word formation have attracted attention of many researchers, speaking English and other languages of the world.
H owever, definition and characterization of these methods were different and sometimes represent contradictory points of view. O n the other hand, specificity of the syntactic behavior of adjectives is their ability to move into the category of nouns. T.
he process of moving into the category of nouns is traditionally called substantivation. T here are also other terms: transposition, migration, functional shift, conversion (which can be easily mistaken for the reasons, pointed above). Substantivation is treated in the dictionary of linguistic terms as a process of transition in the name of the category of nouns from other parts of speech as a result of the acquired ability to directly indicate the subject.
O ne of the common types of the transposition process is substantivization. T he term substantivation derived from the Latin ‘substantivum' which means Noun is the transition of words from other parts of speech into nouns discharge.
T he most significant bit of words, converted to noun class, is adjectives and participles. R esearch substantivizing process in the Russian language has a long history. H owever, it is common not only for the Russian linguists; thus, we can find various definition given by German, Italian, Spanish and American researchers of the given problem.
M any essential observations in this area were done by linguists in XIX — early XX centuries. Therefore, substantivation is a dubious process, which can be easily mistaken with other phenomenon of any language; we have proved in the given research that different languages have not common results on the topic.
Nouns and adjectives are close to each other in origin; as it often happens in many European languages, the adjective stood out later, and many of them come from nouns. English nouns are commonly used as functional synonyms for the corresponding adjective, and very often they are used in the absence of the corresponding attributive adjectives relative. For example, it can be proved with a collocation a platinum card, where the noun platinum is attributive. As it has been mentioned above, the term ‘substantivization' usually means transition of adjective into noun, with all its features, including morphological. It usually occurs at a steady ellipse in attributive noun phrase: a private (soldier), a native (inhabitant).
E nglish adjectives do not have concordance with forms of nouns, but only a small part of word is made by a special word-formation suffix among relative adjectives. T he absence of morphological parameters makes it possible to use a noun as a definition of the subsequent noun. I n this model, the first word on semantic and syntactic characteristics reminiscent of a relative adjective, but it can hardly be regarded as indisputable adjective. T.
hus, in the English language boundaries between the parts of speech are blurred. A t the same time, it is possible to make a conclusion that it is typical for substantivation in the English language to be based exceptionally on adjectives. Adverbs cannot participate in this process and, consequently, cannot become a noun in the given, if it is not intended as figure of speech or any other author’s occasionalism.
Along with the adjective, participle, adverb, pronoun, often exposed substantivizing Spanish infinitive, which many regard as Hispanics verbal noun expressing an abstract name of an action. The fact that the infinitive combines the properties of the verb and the properties of the name defines the various approaches to its study and is reflected in the definitions of the infinitive, which are offered in Spanish grammars. The named properties of infinitive manifested in its ability to substantivize. It should be noted that the phenomenon of morphologic substantivizing observed in modern Spanish is less than phenomenon of partial or syntactic substantivizing, realized in particular speech act, at which most infinitives is substantivized partially acquiring symptoms characteristic category noun temporarily, only under certain conditions, in particular context. An important feature of Spanish substantivized adverbs design is that it is substantivized in the same manner as adjectives.
Bibliography.
Адскова Т. П. Субстантивы адъективного склонения в системе словообразования гнезд современного русского языка. АКД. А., 1993.
Амосова Н. Н. Этимологические основы словарного состава современного английского языка. М., 1956.
Амирова Ж. Р. Проявление субстантивации на разных языковых уровнях // Вестник Каз.
ГУ. Филол. серия, № 11.
Арнольд И. В. Лексикология современного английского языка. М., 1959.
Балли Ш. Общая лингвистика и вопросы французского языка. М., 1955.
Бархударов Л.С. и др. Грамматика английского языка. М., 1973.
Бузаров В. В. Субстантивация в свете теории языковой экономии // Уровни лингвистического анализа в синхронии и диахронии. Пятигорск, 1997.
Бурлакова В.В. и др. Теоретическая грамматика современного английского языка. Л., 1983.
Виноградов В. В. Изб.труды. Исследования по русской грамматике. М., 1975.
Волкова Н.О. К вопросу о направлении производности при конверсии в парах имя — глагол // ИЯШ. № 9. 1974. C. 52 — 62.
Гайсина Р.М. проблема значения и семантизации отсубстантивных относительных прилагательных // Теория языка и словари. Кишинев, 1988.
Голубева Н. П. Изменение лексико-грамматических признаков прилагательных, связанных с субстантивацией. АКД, Киев, 1963.
Жлуктенко Ю. А. Конверсия в современном английском языке как морфолого-синтаксический способ словообразования // Иностранные языки в школе. № 5. 1958. С. 53- 54.
Зуева Р. С. Окказиональное слово в контексте художественного целого. // Индивидуальность автора и контекст. Сб. науч. тр. А., 1992.
Зыкова И. В. Практический курс английской лексикологии. М., 2006.
Иванова И.П., Бурлакова В. В., Почепцов Г. Г. Теоретическая грамматика современного английского языка. М., 1981.
Каращук П. М. Словообразование английского языка. М., 1977.
Ким О. М. Транспозиция на уровне частей речи и явление омонимии в современном русском языке. Ташкент, 1978.
Кубрякова Е. С. Типы языковых значений. М., 1981.
Лопатин В. В. Субстантивация как способ словообразования в совр. русск. языке. // Русский язык: Грамматич.
исследования. М., 1967.
Мешков О. Д. Словообразование современного английского языка. М., 1976.
Никитевич В. М. Основы номинативной деривации. Минск, 1985.
Никишина В. В. Конверсия и субстантивация в современном английском языке // Проблемы лексической и словообразовательной семантики. Пятигорск, 1984. С. 74 — 75.
Остапенко С. А. Субстантивация как процесс взаимодействия грамматических классов слоев и проблема ее изучения. // Языковые категории и закономерности. Межвуз. сб. Кишинев: «Штиница», 1990.
Розенталь Д.Э., Теленкова М. А. Словарь-справочник лингвистических терминов. М., 1985.
Ройзензон Л.И. К типологии субстантивированных прилагательных и причастий. Самарканд, 1962.
Смирницкий А. И. По поводу конверсии в английском языке // ИЯШ. № 3. 1953. С. 12 — 24.
Смирницкий А. И. Лексикология английского языка. М., 1956.
Соболева П. А. Об основном и производном слове при словообразовательных отношениях по конверсии // ВЯ. № 2. 1959. С. 92 — 95.
Соболева П.А. Семантико-стилистические факторы, ограничивающие продуктивность конверсии глагол — существительное в современном английском языке. М., 1961.
Сошальская Е. Г. Стилистическое исследование отыменных глаголов в современном английском языке: Автореф. дис … канд. филол. наук. М., 1952.
Турапина Е. Н. Некоторые случаи употребления конверсионных образований типа «существительное — глагол» в различных функциональных стилях современного английского языка. Вып.
57. М., 1966. С. 103 — 107.
Ханпира Эр. Окказиональные элементы речи. // Стилистические исследования. М., 1972.
Щерба Л. В. Избр. работы по языкознанию и фонетике. Т.1, ЛГУ, 1958.
Юнусова Л. К. Прилагательное и наречие в английском языке. Махачкала, 1991.
Arnold I.V. The English Word. M., 1986.
Arthur G.K. Conversion and Confusion of the Parts of Speech // Reading in Modern English Lexicology. Leningrad, 1975.
Barber Ch. Change in the Present — day English. London, 1964.
Biese M. Origin and Development of Conversion in English. Helsinki, 1941.
Blokh M.Y. A Course in Theoretical English Grammar. M., 2000.
Ginsburg R.S. et al. A Course in Modern English Lexicology. Moscow, 1966.
Ginsburg R.S. Ginsburg et al. A Course in Modern Lexicology. Moscow, 1979.
Gordon E.M., Krylova I.P. A Grammar of Present-day English. M., 2000. С. 338 — 339.
Kirchner G. Die syntactische Eigentumliche des amerikanischen Englisch. Bd II. Leipzig, 1972.
Kobrina N.A., Korneyeva E.A. The English Morphology. M., 1985.
Morokhovskaya E.M. Fundamentals of Theoretical English Grammar. Киев, 1984.
Pérez Rioja J.A. Gramática de la lengua española / J. A. Peréz Rioja. Madrid: TECNOS, S. A.,.
Francisco Matte Bon. Gramática comunicativa del español. De la lengua a la idea — Tomo I / Matte Bon Francisco. Madrid: Edelsa, 20p.
José Roca Pons. Introducciόn a la gramática. Tomo II /Roca Pons José. Barcelona: Vergara Editorial, 1960.
