THE LANGUAGE STATUS OF SUBJECTIVELY-EVALUATIVE DERIVATIVES (A CASE STUDY OF THE RUSSIAN LANGUAGE)

被引:0
|
作者
Makleeva, Elena A. [1 ]
Kosova, Vera A. [1 ]
Antonakova, Darina [2 ]
机构
[1] Kazan Fed Univ, Kazan, Russia
[2] Presov Univ, Presov, Slovakia
来源
关键词
word-formation; suffixes of subjective evaluation; Kazan linguistic school; the category of subjective evaluation; modification; WORD-FORMATION;
D O I
暂无
中图分类号
F [经济];
学科分类号
02 ;
摘要
The suffixes of subjective evaluation of nouns have high expression. For a long time, such formations were considered to be the forms of words and not independent words, as a result of which a tradition of not including them in dictionaries has been formed, which can cause difficulties in interpreting the meaning of these derivatives by persons for whom the Russian language is not native; in addition, even in lexicographic sources, such derivatives may have incorrect interpretations. All this determines the relevance of this research. The main methods used in the paper are a descriptive method, comparative analysis method, descriptive-analytical method. Modern linguistics tends to refer to the suffixes of subjective evaluation to word formation, however, the theoretical understanding of their status in the language is not always unambiguous and has a long history. Initially, several scholars believed them to be dependent, considering these names to be forms of inflection, rather than derivation. The article traces the evolution of determining the status of the suffixes of expressive evaluation beginning from the 18th century to the present. It is shown that from the point of view of modern linguistics, the formations of subjective evaluation are independent words, and not the forms of words and have a modifying word-formation meaning. However, it should be remembered that many suffixes of the Russian language are characterized by ambiguity, therefore the same suffix can act both as a modification and as a mutation.
引用
收藏
页数:7
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [31] The Social Status of a Merchant in the Russian Language: Nominative and Characterising Features
    Frolova, Olga E.
    STUDIA Z FILOLOGII POLSKIEJ I SLOWIANSKIEJ, 2019, 54
  • [32] Social professional status of Russian-language migrants in Israel
    Doobson, B. I.
    SOTSIOLOGICHESKIE ISSLEDOVANIYA, 2007, (04): : 96 - 102
  • [33] A Study of Language Transfer between Chinese and English to Russian as a Second Foreign Language
    Xu Yumin
    Shuang, Zhang
    2019 INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ARTS, MANAGEMENT, EDUCATION AND INNOVATION (ICAMEI 2019), 2019, : 246 - 250
  • [34] Visualisation of digital media discourses: a case study of Russian language esports media
    Boguslayskaya, Vera
    Sharakhina, Larisa, V
    Tomascikova, Slavka
    SKASE JOURNAL OF THEORETICAL LINGUISTICS, 2020, 17 (05): : 192 - 201
  • [35] An Indonesian EFL Learner's Use of Evaluative Language and Gestures in a Spoken Persuasive Presentation: A Case Study
    Marsakawati, Ni Putu Era
    Mujiyanto, Januarius
    Agustien, Helena I. R.
    Astuti, Puji
    JOURNAL OF ASIA TEFL, 2019, 16 (01): : 401 - 410
  • [36] STUDENTS STUDY ADJECTIVES: RUSSIAN AS A FOREIGN LANGUAGE
    Bin, Zhang
    Firdinatovna, Yusupova Zulfiya
    Lui, Yu
    LAPLAGE EM REVISTA, 2020, 6 : 64 - 70
  • [37] Transition of English Language Teaching in Saudi Arabia: A Critical Evaluative Study
    Khawaji, Ahmed
    ARAB WORLD ENGLISH JOURNAL, 2022, 13 (04) : 265 - 280
  • [38] Russian language as non Slavic, vol 1, Contemporary study of the Russian language and Russian culture in a non-Slavic environment
    Pavlovic-Sajsnac, Maja
    ZBORNIK MATICE SRPSKE ZA SLAVISTIKU-MATICA SRPSKA JOURNAL OF SLAVIC STUDIES, 2010, 78 : 285 - 289
  • [39] To the question about foreign language and russian abbreviations and their derivatives in the aspect of the norms of russian orthography
    Zyuzina, Elena A.
    Gasanova, Marina A.
    Samedov, Jalil S.
    AMAZONIA INVESTIGA, 2019, 8 (19): : 588 - 594
  • [40] Language policy and language governance: a case-study of Irish language legislation
    John Walsh
    Language Policy, 2012, 11 : 323 - 341