Classification of the Compounds

The following groups are established according to the type of composition:

1. A mere juxtaposition without connecting elements

heartache, heatbreake, heartbreaking (a)

2. Composition with a vowel or a consonant as a linking element

speedometr, Afro-Asian, handicraft

3. Compounds with linking elements represented by preposition or junction stems

matter of fact, son-in-law, up-to-date

4. Compound-derivatives in which the structural integrity of the two free stems is ensured by a suffix referring to the combination as a whole, not to one of its elements

kind-hearted, schoolboyishness

5. Compounds where at least one of the constituents is a clipped stem

H-bag, H-bomb, A- bomb, V-Day

When we group compounds according to the parts of speech principle, we can distinguish compound nouns, compound verbs, compound adjectives and compound adverbs.

Historical Changes in the Structure of Compound Words

We pointed out that composition in ancient way of forming new words. A great number of English compounds is preserved from OE. Here we can mention gold - smith, firelight, midnight, quicksilver.

Other compounds have undergone phonetic changes so that compounds themselves were turned into the root words. The phenomenon was investigated by Russian philologists Bogoroditsky and Amosova, who used the Russian term “опрощение основы” which may be translated into English as "simplification of stem".

The degree of change can be very different. Sometimes the compound is altered beyond all recognition. Thus in the name of the flower "daizy" or in the word "woman" composition can be discovered by etymological analysis only:

daizy - OE days eye

woman - OE wifman

husband - OE master of the house

Demotivation (деэтимологизация) is closely connected with simplification. They may be considered as different aspects of changes that may occur simultaneously. Demotivation is etymological isolation, when the word loses its ties with other word or words with which it was formerly associated, ceases to be understood as belonging to its original word - family.

e.g. kidnap - literally means to seize a young goat (now to steal a child and recently - a public figure).

In present English all associations with "goats" or "nabbing" (arrest) are forgotten; the word is isolated from its etymological relatives and functions as a simple sign.

The process of demotivation starts from semantic change. The change of the sound form comes later.

e.g. lady - OE hlafdige (hlaf – loaf), dig (месить) – хлеб месящая

lord- OE hlaford - breadkeeper

Both words have become morphologically indivisible and have changed their meaning so that neither of them is connected with the word "loaf". With some compounds the changes are still under way.

e.g. cupboard

breakfast - to break the fast

waistcoat

These words might be regarded as borderline cases, as simplification is not completed graphically.

The Problem of Distinguishing Compounds

from Word-combinations in English

As English compounds consist of free forms, it is difficult to distinguish them from phrases. The combination "top dog" though formally broken up is not analyzable semantically as well as the word "underdog". And yet the 1-st is counted as a phrase (a top dog) and the second as a word. How can we explain this? In reality the problem is still more complicated - separating compounds from phrases and also from derivatives is not an easy task, and scientists do not agree upon the question of criteria. This problem did not receive its final solution yet. Some scientists suggest different criteria for separating compounds from phrases. They are:

1. The graphic criterion of solid or hyphenated spelling. But this criterion may be argued because there is no consistency in English spelling in this respect.

headmaser, loudspeaker ( both are possible)

head master, loud speaker

2. The phonic creation of stress. There is a marked tendency in English to give compounds a heavy stress on the first element. It is true with compound nouns (blackboard but black board , bluebottle but blue bottle). But the rule doesn't hold with adjectives. Compound adjectives are double-stressed (grey-green, new-born, easy-going). It follows that phonological creation holds for certain types of words only.

3. The semantic criterion, the advocates of which are Jespersen, Kruisinga and many others. They define a compound as a combination forming a unit, expressing a single idea, which is not identical in meaning to the sum of the meanings of its components in a free. If to take this criterion we should include all idiomatic phrases into the class of compounds. Thus no type of criteria is normally sufficient for establishing whether the unit is a compound or a phrase and for ensuring isolation of word from phrase. In the majority of cases we have to depend on the combination of two or more criteria. But even then the ground is not very safe.