Article.
Oksana Putilina
УДК 81371+81367.625=811.112.2=811.161.2(075.8)
INNOVATIVE PROCESSES IN THE PRESENT-DAY ENGLISH LANGUAGE IN COMPARISON WITH
UKRAINIAN ONE: INNOVATIONS AND PSEUDO-INNOVATIONS
Стаття присвячена характеристиці інноваційних / псевдоінноваційних процесів
і явищ (американізмів) у сучасній англійській мові (у зіставленні з
українською), встановленню природи і причин змін у лексичному складі, а також
на рівні фонетики й орфоепії англійської мови (порівняно з українською),
розмежуванню форм функціонування англійської мови в британському та
американському варіантах (у зіставленні з українською), кваліфікуванню типів
неологізмів в обох зіставлюваних мовах.
Ключові слова: власне-неологізм, інноваційний процес, конверсія,
неологічний бум, псевдоінновації, семантичний неологізм, синтаксичний
неологізм, стилістичний неологізм, термінологічний неологізм, трансномінація,
переосмислення, фонетичний неологізм.
Under the global
integration that results in strengthening intercultural relations, development
of languages, including English and Ukrainian, is a rapid process, in
particular on the lexical level, which is not always predictable. Analysis of
examples adjusted by many authors, particularly A. Paunder, L. Bauer, R.
Lieber et al., who are concerned about this fact, revealed new structural types
of lexical items, such as fragmented elements (splinters), a significant
number of highly unstable compound nouns with a separate writing, but common
unifying accent (block compounds) and a creation on their basis of compound
words / pseudo-compound words (other parts of speech), whose self-morphological
identity usually defined only within a specific context for the fulfillment of
their syntactic role, that is, their appearance has a strengthening influence
of analogy in the formation of composites / quasi-composites that
can lead to structural changes of lexical units, including the conversion of
compound words in derivatives for potentially unlimited number of new words
with unstable and unpredictable grammatically-categorical indicators.
This process is one
of the differential features of present-day English, especially British (BE)
and American (AmE) variants as competitors that stand out against other
variants of English (such as the Australian or Canadian ones) with multiplicity
of media, geographical area due to extralinguistic factors of their
spread – as the classic, 'original ', 'true' English (as claimed by some
supporters of BE) in the status of one of the languages of international
communication and as less conservative language with signs of language-cosmopolitan,
that absorbed into itself the elements of other languages, which directly
contacted, and in the role of the language of the powerful state in the world
(AmE), respectively. Lack of substantial research in this area makes the relevance of proposed research.
However, a
comprehensive analysis of innovative processes that currently take place in the
English language (as opposed to Ukrainian), primarily on the lexical and
phonetic levels, not be possible without the differentiation of specific and
borrowed items, events, processes, etc. in modern English in comparison with
the Ukrainian that is the purpose of
our study.
It is quite obvious
there is a determination of the main
tasks, namely: a characterization of lexical and phonetical processes in
present-day English (in comparison with Ukrainian) and their interpreting pro
rata AmE, an establishing of the nature and causes of changes in the vocabulary
of English (compared with the Ukrainian), a separation of literary / colloquial
functioning BE-form of AmE (in comparison with Ukrainian), a classifying types
of neologisms in both languages.
It should be noted that the
repeated emphasis on the difference
between BE and AmE as crucial in today's English language development has
serious theoretical basis, which gradually formed on the basis for fixing the
regularity of the differential expressions of features in both variants of English
language at all levels: from phonetics to
syntax. The reason for extension of the active
scope of the AmE primarily driven by extralinguistic factors: the dominating
position of the United States on the world economic market, the active politically in the
international political arena and, of course, a huge
influence on other nations through the movies, music and other areas of
culture.
In this regard, we note the
existence of a large group of words that can not be called new in the U.S., but
they recently entered the active vocabulary of world English-speaking community
(outside their own States and Canada): majorly
(slang extremely) ‘надзвичайно,
неймовірно, класно’ has gained such popularity that has joined the list of new
words in English without even a mark AmE in many dictionaries.
If we continue the theme of lexical
changes and new processes at this level, the massive borrowing of American words occur in areas related to
business, all possible manifestations of youth sub-culture, music (and not only
pop, as noted by V. Yelisejeva, but also in other directions – especially the exponential trend
becomes
since the late 90's about hip hop and R&B, as well as the 70th – beg. 80th
marked dominance a soul),
Internet and computer technology, and properly is one of the most striking trends in contemporary BE.
Since the beginning AmE and BE
were not differentiated, which explained that the first colonists from the Great Britain brought with
them the language that was native to them and which, of course, spoke in
England (without taking into account the many Irish whose speech was different from the English
language), ie language
on the exit of the 17th century that is fundamental in this context, because the English of that time has demonstrated exceptional
variety and noncodification,
varying of the time very vague idea of "normal" depending on the location (County) and social
segment of the population belonged to a speaker, and even much more so than
now, which is visible even in the analysis of spelling, grammar and overall
style of W. Shakespeare`s and J. Milton`s texts, whose works traditionally
considered to be models of contemporary standard written speech.
Further deepening of these
processes were stimulated with the influx of immigrants to North America from England, because the
processes that occurred in the 17th century, not only contributed to achieving the only
acceptable norm, but also provoked further changes during the 18th, 19th and 20th centuries and differentiation of various
variants of the English, from which began
to form AmE as a
kind of integrity, as opposed to BE. Important, if not dominating, role played
in this political-territorial and socio-economic factors, such as a community,
the area of integrity, confrontation with British colonization policy in
the New World and the independence,
the beginning of a new independent state and with it – the origin of national ideas and laying the
principles of national identity – understanding ourselves as a nation other
than the British, though genetically related, a rapid economic growth and the
emergence of the concept of the American dream etc. Understandably, all this
strengthened the differentiation and, in some sense, the confrontation of two
variants of the English.
It is noteworthy that the differences between BE and AmE
easy to find, but remember that expressions of this divergence is not proper innovations, whatever the level of language they are concerned, – is only a manifestation of the
internal stratification of the English. Let's briefly list the features of pseudo-innovations that is separate from the real
innovation by phonetic, lexical, grammatical and other levels:
1. In the field of spelling differential features of two versions were, in fact,
codified by the American lexicographer Noah Webster (1758-1843), who suggested
replacement of suffixes in AmE,
including -er instead of -re, for example, center ‘центр’ (AmE) instead centrе
(BE), meter ‘метр’ (AmE)
instead metrе (BE), theater
‘театр’(AmE) instead theatrе (BE); -our → -or,
for example, favour
‘послуга’ (BE) → favor (AmE), honour ‘честь’ (BE) → honor (AmE), labour ‘праця’ (BE) → labor (AmE).
2. It belongs to the linguist as an
attempt to gradual replacement of French borrowings at the vocabulary if not with actually English words, then at least relatively
adapted to the English model lexemes (check ‘чек’
instead cheque, connection instead connexion
‘зв’язок’, jail ‘в’язниця’ instead gaol, story ‘поверх’ instead storey
etc.). It should be noted that lexical differences relate mainly those areas of
slang words or standard English, that means strictly American or British
reality purely in the social, political, economic, technical and artistic field
[Müller 2008], for example: Tube – Subway in London, but their majority is already
evidence of innovative processes in both versions of English, not their internal differentiation,
the most of such lexemes origins in AmE, even if they
subsequently lose its expressive of American origin, getting to the active
vocabulary of representatives of all English society (as evidenced by the
analysis of factual material), eg: Tinseltown (AmE) – Hollywood (normative English and BE), ride-in – protest against discrimination
in travel on buses for whites in the
U.S. (the end of 60th of the 20th century) and in the southern states until today
(especially in Utah).
3. In the field of normative grammar differences between
American and British versions are not consistent and they can be reduced generally to:
1) avoiding by native AmE set of verbal forms in
conjunction with collective nouns, as Ukrainian language media does, resulting in a literal
translation of British constructions sometimes seems rather strange (cf., the audience were ‘публіка були’
(BE) – the audience was ‘публіка була’ (AmE), the government have ‘уряд мають’ (BE) – the government has ‘уряд має’
(AmE))
[Access mode:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wpdyn/content/article/2011/02/19/AR2011021904205.html?hpid=topnews];
2) the Americans more often than the
British form nouns from verbs by means of the conversion (in
Ukrainian grammar we have
instead morpho-syntactic way of creation)
(cf., a research
‘дослідження’ → to research
‘досліджувати, вивчати’, an author
‘автор’ → to author ‘створювати’);
3) in AmE replacement of shall by will in the
Future Tense forms and, accordingly, should
by would in Future in the Past Tense forms
is typical;
4) the Americans speakers prefer to have got instead of single-component have ‘мати’ and the compound have gotten usually used
in cases where the British use became
‘став (стала, стало), почав (почала, почало)’.
Overall, much more significant,
according to many linguists dealing with differentiation of these two variants
of English, is the general attitude of native speakers to the concept of
grammatical correctness [Lieber, Štekauer 2009]: the Americans who have received the
appropriate level of education, seek to follow the rules, while the British
tend to in order to break them (but this applies only to spoken communication, because the speech of American and British media
demonstrate the opposite).
4. In phonetics features of two options are less visible in pronunciation of individual sounds, but more expressive in rhythmics and
melody of speech. In AmE the following features are characteristic:
1) vowel in words like God ‘Бог’, got ‘отримав (отримала, отримало)’, rob ‘грабувати’ usually pronounced more like [a:] in father, what as [ɔ] in the cloth ‘тканина’
[Access mode: http://minnesota.publicradio.org/features/npr.php?id=135040267];
2) u-like sound in words like dew ‘роса’, duke ‘герцог’, new
‘новий’ most Americans rhymes with too
‘теж, занадто’, and not with you ‘ти’, ie pronounce it like [u:], and not like [ju:]
[Access mode: http://video.forbes.com/fvn/inidaily/ken-kamen-avoid-the-financial-noise];
3) a middle combination of sounds
tt, like in butter ‘масло’, AmE speakers pronounce very similar to [d] [Access mode: http://minnesota.publicradio.org/features/npr.php?id=135040267];
4) postvokal r, like in car ‘машина’ or ‘картка’, Americans are often overlooked,
unlike the British, and
pronounce in his place a certain fuzzy r-like
sound [Access mode: http://video.forbes.com/fvn/celeb2011/randy-jackson-reveals-his-american-idol];
5) melodics of American speech differs from the BE less variability in pitch (of tone). At the same time this melodic
contour of the end of a sentence in AmE departure from the BE
[Access mode: http://minnesota.publicradio.org/features/npr.php?id=135040267%; http://edition.cnn.com/2011/SHOWBIZ/01/05/amsale.aberra.designer/index.html ; http://video.forbes.com/fvn/celeb2011/randy-jackson-reveals-his-american-idol];
6) in index of variability
(alternating of accented
and unaccented syllables) American speech inherent in preserving the words of
three syllables or more secondary accent, and they pronounce unstressed syllables
more clearly, cf.: se`creta`ry (AmE) – se`cret'ry (BE), e`xtrao`rdina`ry (AmE) – extr'o`rdin'ry (BE), la`b'rato`ry (AmE) – la`b'rat'ry
(BE) або labo`rat'ry (BE)
[Access mode: http://video.forbes.com/fvn/business/inside-frank-gehrys-skyscraper; http://www.blackstarnews.com/news/135/ARTICLE/7112/2011-02-08.html].
In contrast to the mentioned speech characteristics of representatives of AmE and BE, pointing not to the
development of innovative processes in modern English, but only on the
equivariant contrast, there are several indicators of the new active processes
in the English language as a whole at different levels of language, namely:
1. In the field of phonetics and orthoepy there is
currently a tendency to change the features of pronunciation of certain sounds
and combinations of sounds under the influence of AmE and some of the related
option extralinguistic factors [Levelt 1993], cited above. As noted E. Dubenets, which was a
direct participant of the team conducted a similar study, revealing in this
regard is the speech of teachers and students of Southern England [Дубенец 2003: 5]. These changes are equally
affecting vowels and consonants, so conditionally can be divided into changes in
the system of English consonants, namely:
1) after vowel a consonant r is
increasingly beginning to articulate, although he has not actually pronounced, eg.: car [kα:r] ‘машина’, heart [hαr:t] ‘серце’
[Access mode: http://minnesota.publicradio.org/features/npr.php?id=135040267];
2) there is a hlotalizatsiya of deaf breakthrough consonants p, t before vowels: butter [´bʌ?ə] ‘масло’, happy [´hæ?i] ‘щасливий’, matter [´mæ?ə] ‘справа, питання’, and before
consonants in the middle of words: hopeless
[´həu?lis] ‘безнадійний’
[Access mode: http://video.forbes.com/fvn/business/inside-frank-gehrys-skyscraper];
3) appearance of the intrusive
sound [r] in word combinations, in
which initial vowel of next word
comes after
the final vowel in
the first word, eg., idea of, by
analogy with compound words here and
there, where r before vowel
sounds. In addition, today the intrusive [r]
sounds after the majority of words ending on r before vowel and even in the middle of word: drawing [´drɔ:riŋ] ‘малюнок’
[Access mode: http://video.forbes.com/fvn/inidaily/ken-kamen-avoid-the-financial-noise];
4) voiced utterance
of sound [∫] in intervocalic position in geographical names: Asia [´eiʒə] ‘Азія’ [Access mode: http://video.forbes.com/fvn/forbeslife/the-worlds-new-largest-cruise-ship];
5) disappearance of sounds [t], [d] at the end of words: old man [´əul ´mæn] ‘стара людина’, half past five [´hα:f pα:s ´faiv] ‘пів на шосту’;
6) disappearance of sound [h] at the beginning of word in an unstressed syllable: have [æv] ‘мати’ (дієслово), him [im] ‘йому’;
7) use of sound [s] instead of [∫] before the letter i, which is part of the suffix: social [´səusəl] ‘соціальний’, negotiate [ni´gəusieit] ‘вести переговори, укладати
угоду’
[Access mode: http://video.forbes.com/fvn/inidaily/ken-kamen-avoid-the-financial-noise];
8) vocalization / disappearances [i] at the end of words: fill ‘заповнювати’, де [i] близький за звучанням до [v];
9) compounds tu, du, su in words like tube ‘труба’, duke ‘герцог’, suit ‘костюм’ have 2 spellings:
[tju:b] – [t∫u:b], [dju:k] – [du:k], [sju:t] – [su:t] [Access mode: http://video.forbes.com/fvn/forbeslife/the-worlds-new-largest-cruise-ship];
and in the system of English vocalism:
1) sound [i] goes into [ə] in
unstressed position: September [səp´təmbə] ‘вересень’;
2) extension of sound [i] at the end of word: funny [´fʌni:] ‘веселий, кумедний’;
3) secondary accent stored in
words with three or more syllables, cf.: interesting [´intə´restiŋ] ‘цікавий’, necessary [´nesə´seri] ‘необхідний’
[Access mode: http://minnesota.publicradio.org/features/npr.php?id=135040267];
4) reduction of long vowels
(especially at the end of the word and before voiceless consonants): see [si] ‘бачити’, keep [kip]
‘тримати, зберігати’
[Access mode: http://video.forbes.com/fvn/forbeslife/selling-a-home-made-of-subway-cars];
5) lengthening of
short vowels in preposition to the voiced consonants: big [bi:g] ‘великий’, good [gu:d] ‘добрий’, come [ka:m] ‘приходити’, that is most
peculiar to the inhabitants of London [Luoma 2004] [Access
mode: http://video.forbes.com/fvn/forbeslife/selling-a-home-made-of-subway-cars];
6) lengthening of vowel in adjectives with -ad (South
England): bad [bæ:d] ‘поганий’, glad [glæ:d] ‘гідний, задоволений’, sad [sæ:d] ‘похмурий’;
7) diphthong [əu] changed with the sound [u], especially in the
speech of young people: soap [sup] ‘мило’;
8) diphthong [uə] changed with the sound [ɔ:], for example, for this reason, sure ‘упевнений’ becomes a homophone shore ‘берег’, and the pronunciation ['∫uə] is
old-fashioned;
9) [ju:] → [u:] after fricative consonants and sounds n, m: resume [rə´zu:m] ‘резюме, висновок’, music [´mu:zik] ‘музика’, news [nu:z] ‘новини’;
10) vowel in
monosyllabic, at least – disyllabic (the second silent vowel) words such as class
‘класс’, half ‘половина’, pass ‘перепустка’, dance ‘танець’ before a fricative consonant and combination of
sounds with fricative usually pronounced like in the word bad
‘поганий’ ([æ]) and not as [a:] in father ‘батько’ [Access mode: http://video.forbes.com/fvn/inidaily/ken-kamen-avoid-the-financial-noise].
The general tendency, inherent to phonetic level of modern English, is convergence of
pronunciation and spelling, for example: often [´ɔftən] ‘часто’.
2. At the lexical level, there is rapid development of English
vocabulary, which was the primary cause of scientific-technical revolution
(from the end of 80s of the 20th century) that triggered the
emergence of an array of words in science and technology to describe new concepts,
which in turn influenced the culture and social relations, so it is not surprising that a large
group of
new lexemes is terminological neologisms, eg.: sleep-teaching ‘навчання уві сні’, telecommuter ‘консультант, дослідник,
програміст, пов’язаний за допомогою комп’ютера з установою’, to troublshoot ‘усувати неполадки в роботі
комп’ютера’ etc. However, new words and phrases can occur in order to create
expression, having been emotionally neutral counterpart (descriptive word or
reverse), ie stylistic neologisms: brain-drain ‘виїзд науковців з країни (рос.
«утечка мозгов»)’, trigger-happy ‘войовничий’, baby-kisser ‘політикан, який вдається до
будь-яких хитрощів, щоб зацікавити виборців’ and so on.
In the process of creating new
lexical items, there are three ways:
а) change of
meaning, ie the use of existing lexical unit for naming the new object (rethinking
or semantic neologism): an umbrella – ‘1) парасолька від дощу; 2) авіаційне прикриття; 3) політичне прикриття’;
b) modified form, ie introducing a new sign to denote an
object that already has a name (transnomination). The main scope –
American slang: трущоби – slums – ghetto – inner city; burned-out ‘смертельно втомлений’;
с) changes
in form and content (proper neologisms – the bulk of new items): UFO ‘НЛО’, saucerman ‘іншопланетянин’. Such neologisms can have 2 options: 1) the word
completely loses the old meaning and used only with the new semantics, eg.: sophisticated lost its meaning "one who behaves
unnaturally" and has become a new positive meaning "modern,
technologically progressive" (sometimes also perceived as a synonym for expensive ‘дорогий’); 2) new and old values exist in the semantic structure
of word, eg., the word mafia has expanded its meaning and now it refers "any secret society,
closed circle (direct value), clan, group", resulting in a type of
emerging constructions like literary mafia ‘літературна мафія’, trade mafia ‘торгова мафія’, etc.
Given the diversity of possible
manifestations of innovative processes at the lexical level of modern English (in comparison with the Ukrainian), we should speak about their 4
main types, namely:
1) phonological (phonetic)
neologisms, which are created from single sounds and they are "strong" neologisms [Дубенец 2003: 25]. This group includes tokens
formed by onomatopoeia, sometimes – with the addition of morphemes of classical languages, eg.: sis-boombah ‘видовищні види спорту (особливо футбол)’ –
formed as imitation of sounds, shouts that issue for the fans for encouragement players; to whee ‘хвилюватися’ – comes from the exclamation expressing
admiration; rah-rah ‘широка коротка спідниця’ – up
sounds that create the girls during a marching at sports events and shows where they are
dressed in short wide skirts;
2) borrowings, which also belong to the
"strong" neologisms, especially phonetic borrowings. Their sound
compositions are not
adapted to the norms of English: karaoke (from the Japanese language) (empty music – a sound system with pre-recorded soundtrack of popular music which
allows an individual to sing along with it) (cf. in Ukrainian language брифінг, маркетинг, менеджер, that came from the English). Typical signs of such neologisms are the lack of semantic motivation
and atypical morphological division, eg.: word hamburger for native speakers consists of two morphemes – ham and burger, while in German, from which it
originates, is a combination of Hamburg
+ er. The same group belong to barbarisms (unassimilated units) like intifada (Arabic) ‘інтифада’ (uprising in
Arab countries) or Islamic Jihad
(Arabic) ‘ісламський джихад’ (group of Islamic extremist organizations in the Middle East) and tracing such
as gliding time (German)
‘змінний графік’;
3) semantic neologisms
created by changing the value with the preservation of word form, cf.: cosmetic ‘косметичний’
has a new meaning – "decorative" (cosmetic repair
‘косметичний ремонт’, that caused an establishment of some other synonymic
neologisms with the same value: redecorating, face-lift, etc.) and "misleading /
hypocritical / false" (сosmetic
measures, сosmetic steps, сosmetic actions ‘косметичні засоби / заходи’);
4) syntactic neologisms formed
by means of syntactic (in terms of
English grammar) / morphological and morpho-syntactic (grammar of Ukrainian position)
ways, such as compounding, conversion, affixation, abbreviation, reverse
derivation etc. – morphological
neologisms,
and phraseological ways, as a
result of
which occurs phrases – phraseological neologisms (scope of technique, especially
space, politics, education, 97% of which occur in terminology / terminologizated constructions) [Libben, Jarema 2006], eg.: off-the-wall ‘нетрадиційний, незвичний’, middle-of-the-road ‘поміркований’ (morphological neologisms), to play Russian roulette ‘вести ризиковану гру’, double zero ‘повне знищення зброї ближнього
радіуса дії’, Fourth World ‘малорозвинуті країни Африки,
Азії, Латинської Америки’ (from a speech by Robert Strange McNamara, American
businessman, politician, Republican, U.S. Secretary of Defense during the reign
of John Kennedy and Lyndon Jones) (phraseological
neologisms) and so
on.
It should be
stressed once again that the neologisms, which are a central feature of the
innovative processes that indicate the rapid development of English (as well as
Ukrainian), which linguists have been dubbed a neological boom, are
widely used and favorable conditions for active formation (because a
significant percentage of them appears similar to existing ones) on the pages
of periodicals to the powerful emotional impact on audiences, to establish
active interaction with it (for this purpose any English-language periodical
that is meant to be higher for the "yellow press" has the electronic
equivalent with constantly updated information throughout the day and the
opportunity for readers to leave comments or to communicate directly with the
authors of articles on-line). It is not surprising that the vocabulary of these
publications has been made a huge English-speaking audience around the world,
getting into colloquial speech of readership, and then – to the literary
language. Of course, not the entire volume of new words and word combinations
is becoming an integral part of the literary language – about 50% of neologisms
disappear, and those entrenched in the literary version of its component lose
their novelty over time.
Thus, the great
changes taking place in modern English (as well as in Ukrainian), reflect only
partially in phonetics and mainly – in the words, which display changes in
computer technology (including – related research in space), medicine, in the
words relating to those issues that consciously / unconsciously interested and
confused by native speakers (eg, the existence of extraterrestrial life), which
shows changes in a society, in the political structure of many countries, as
well as vocabulary that captures the relationships among people (both in family
and in society) – all those areas that determine the existence of contemporary
socium (both in English and Ukrainian) and perceived as dominating, essential
to reflect its philosophy and its vision of the meaning of the existence and
future development. Perspective of this study is to analyze the processes that
deepen the internal stratification of modern English and Ukrainian vocabularies
as a whole system within each of the languages the whole and its individual
variants in English (AM) (British, American, Australian, etc.), the latter more
deeper trends in the breeding options for English as a relatively independent
entities and strengthening of the sociolinguistic factors that determine the
formation of vocabulary as well as language forms exist mainly in the Ukrainian
language (UM) (literary and spoken forms (UM) and literary / common,
colloquial (AM)) taking into account the relationships between regional, social
and situational parameters that lead to the selection of specific lexical items
by carriers of both compared languages based on communicative situation.
References.
References
Дубенец 2003: Дубенец, Э.М. Лингвистические
изменения в современном английском языке [Текст] / Э. М. Дубенец. – М. : «Глосса-Пресс», 2003. – 256 с. – ISBN 5-7651-0088-0
Путіліна 2011: Путіліна, О.Л.
Інновації в сучасних українській та англійській мовах (Фонетика. Лексикологія.
Фразеологія). Навчальний посібник для студентів вищих навчальних закладів [Текст] / О. Л. Путіліна / За ред.
А. П. Загнітка. – Донецьк : ДонНУ, 2011. – 277 с.
Levelt 1993: Levelt, W.J.M. Speaking : from intention to articulation [Text] / W. J. M. Levelt. – Cambridge (Mass.) : MIT Press, 1993. – 584 pp. – ISBN
0-262-12137-9 (HB)
Libben, Jarema 2006: Libben, G., Jarema, G. The representation and
processing of compound words [Text] / G. Libben,
G. Jarema. – Oxford : Oxford University Press,
2006. – 242 pp. – ISBN 0-19-928506-3
Lieber, Štekauer 2009: Lieber, R., Štekauer, P. The Oxford
handbook of compounding [Text] / R. Lieber,
P. Štekauer. – Oxford : Oxford University Press, 2009. – 691 pp. –
ISBN 978-0-19-921987-2
Luoma
2004: Luoma, S. Assessing speaking [Text] / S. Luoma. – Cambridge : Cambridge
University Press, 2004. – 212 pp. – ISBN 0 521 80052 8 hardback
Müller 2008: Müller, S. The Mental Lexicon [Text] / S. Müller. – GRIN Verlag,
2008. – 56 pp. – ISBN 978-3-638-94517-2
Putilina 2012: Putilina, O. Historical and Contemporary
Factors
of Innovative Processes in the Present-Day
English Language in Comparison with Ukrainian One : Conflict or
Cooperation? [Текст]
/ О. Putilina // Лінгвістичні студії : Зб.
наук. праць. – Донецьк : ДонНУ, 2012. – Випуск 25. – С. 89-94.
List of
Sources
1)
Black Star News
2)
CNN (Cable News
Network)
3)
Forbes
4)
Minnesota Public Radio
5)
The Washington Post
В
статье рассматривается характеристика инновационных / псевдоинновационнных
процессов и явлений (американизмов) в современном английском языке (в
сопоставлении с украинским), устанавливается природа и причины изменений в
лексическом составе, а также на уровне фонетики и орфоэпии английского языка (в
сравнении с украинским), дифференцируются формы функционирования английского
языка в британском и американском вариантах (в сопоставлении с украинским),
квалифицируются типы неологизмов в сопоставляемых языках.
Ключевые слова: собственно неологизм, инновационный процесс,
конверсия, неологический бум, псевдоинновации, семантический неологизм,
синтаксический неологизм, стилистический неологизм, терминологический
неологизм, трансноминация, переосмысление, фонетический неологизм.
The paper denoted to a characterization of innovative
/ pseudo-innovative and phenomena
(Americanisms) processes in Present-day English (in comparison with Ukrainian),
an establishing of the nature and causes of changes in the vocabulary,
phonetics and orthoepy of English (compared with the Ukrainian), a separation
of functioning forms in British and American English (in comparison with
Ukrainian), a classifying types of neologisms in both languages.
Keywords: proper neologism, innovative processes,
conversion, neological boom, pseudo-innovations, semantic neologism, syntactic neologism, stylistic
neologism, terminological neologism, transnomination, rethinking, phonetic
neologism.
Надійшла до редакції 21 серпня 2012 року.
|