either ‘become ...’ or ‘make ...’. Intransitive verbs with meaning ‘be...’
(as idle, sly, equal) from quite a small group. Some verbs have a
comparative or superlative as root: better, best, worst, perhaps lower.
Type out verb fr out particle (verbs derived from
locative particles).
Derivation from locative particles is less common than the preceding
types. In Old English there are yppan, fremman (with i-mutation from up,
fram), framian, utian. Later are over ‘to master’ 1456, obs under ‘cast
down’ 1502, off ‘put off’ 1642, down 1778, nigh ‘draw near’ 1200, thwart
1250, west ‘move towards the west’ 1381, south 1725, north 1866, east 1858.
These words, however, are not very common (except out and thwart).
Type hail verb fr hail interjection (verbs derived
from minor particles).
Derivation from exclamation and interjection (most of there
onomatopoeias) is more frequent. It will, however, be noted that many of
these conversions have undergone functional and formal changes only without
acquiring a well - grounded lexical existence, their meaning merely being
«say..., utter the sound...». Exs are hail 1200, nay «say nay, refuse»
13.., mum 1399, obs. Hosht «reduce to silence» etc., whoo (16th century),
humph (17th century), encore, dee-hup (to a horse), pshaw, halloa, yaw
(speak affectedly», hurrah (18th century), tally-ho (fox-hunting term),
boo, yes, heigh-ho «sigh», bravo, tut, bow-wow, haw-haw, boo-hoo «weep
noisily» etc. (Biese/4/ also Jespersen/7/).
The meaning ‘say...’ may occur with other words also when they are
used as exclamation or interjections, as with iffing (other verb forms are
not recorded), hence ‘order hence’ (obs., 1580). And it may be reckoned
here all the words of the type sir ‘call sir’.
From about 1600 on, geminated forms also occur as verbs. A few have
been mentioned in the foregoing paragraph; others are snip-snap
(1593),dingle-dangle, ding-dong, pit-pat (17th century), pitter-patter,
wiggle-waggle (18th century), criss-cross, rap-tap, wig-wag (19th century)
etc.
The limits of verbal derivation.
Derivation from suffixed nouns is uncommon. Biese’s/4/ treatment of
the subject suffers from a lack of discrimination. He has about 600
examples of substantives and adjectives; but the ‘suffixes’ are mere
terminations. Words such herring, pudding, nothing, worship are not
derivatives. The terminations -ace, -ice, -ogue, -y (as in enemy) have
never had any derivative force.
Theoretically it would seem that the case of a suffixal composite such
as boyhood is not different from that of a fill compound such as spotlight.
But obviously the fact that suffixes are categorizes generally prevents
suffixal derivatives from becoming the determinants of pseudo-compound
verbs. There are very few that are in common use, such as waitress (rec.),
package (rec., chiefly in form packaged, packaging), manifold OE
(obsolescent today), forward 1596, referee 1889, such adjectives as dirty,
muddy. Many more are recorded in OED (as countess, patroness, squiress,
traitress ‘play the...’, fellowship, kingdom a.o.).
Another reason seems to be still more important. Many of the nominal
suffixes derive substantives from verbs., and it would be contrary to
reason to form such verbs as arrival, guidance, improvement, organization
when arrive, guide, improve, organize exist. Similar consideration apply to
deadjectival derivatives like freedom or idleness. The verb disrupture is
recorded in OED (though only in participial forms) but it is not common.
Reverence is used as a verb, but it is much older (13.., 1290) than the
verb revere (1661). It should also be noted that the alternation
revere/reverence shows characteristics of vowel change and stress which are
irregular with derivation by means of -ance, -ence. For same reason
reference is not a regular derivative from refer, which facilitated the
coinage reference ‘provide with references’ etc. 1884.
There are no verbal derivatives from prefixed words either. The verb
unfit ‘make unfit’ 1611 is isolated.
Type look substantive fr. look verb (deverbal
substantives).
Deverbal substantives are much less numerous than denominal verbs. The
frequency-relation between the two types has been approximately the same in
all periods of the language. An exception is to be made for the second half
of the 13th century «when the absolute number of conversion-substantives is
larger that of the verbs formed from substantives» (Biese/4/).
Form the 13th century are recorded (unless otherwise mentioned in
parentheses, the resp. Verbs are OE) dread (1175), have, look, steal, weep,
call (1225), crack, ‘noise’, dwell, hide, make, mislike, mourn, show, spit,
‘spittle’, stint, wrest ‘act of twisting’ a.o.
From the later ME period are recorded (indications in parentheses
refer to the respective verbs) fall (OE), feel (OE), keep (OE), lift (ME),
move (ME), pinch (ME), put (ME), run (OE), snatch (ME), sob (ME), walk
(OE), wash (OE).
From the 16th century date craze (ME), gloom (ME), launch (ME), push
(ME), rave (ME), say (OE), scream (ME), anub (ME), swim (OE), wave (OE);
from the 17th century contest (1579), converse (ME), grin (OE), laugh (OE),
produce (1499), sneeze (1493), take (ME), yawn (OE); from the 18th century
finish (ME), hand (OE), pry (ME), ride (OE), sit (OE). From the 19th
century fix (ME), meet (OE), shampoo (1762), spill (OE).
As for the meaning of deverbal substantive, the majority denote the
act or rather a specific instance of what the verbal idea expresses quote,
contest, fall, fix, knock, lift etc. This has been so from the beginning
(Hertrampf and Biese/4/). «The abstract nouns, including nouns of action,
are not only the most common type of conversion-substantives; they are also
those of the greatest importance during the early periods of the
development of conversions» (Biese/4/). «The conversion-substantive used in
a personal or concrete sense are, especially in the earlier stages, of
comparatively slight importance» (ib.).
Concrete senses show mince ‘minced meat’, produce ‘product’, rattle
‘instrument’, sprout ‘branch’, shoot ‘branch’, shear ‘shorn animal’, sink
‘sewer’, clip ‘instrument’, cut ‘passage, opening’, spit ‘spittle’, stride
‘one of a flight of steps’.
Sbs denoting the result of the verbal action are catch, take, win
‘victory’, cut ‘provision’, find, melt ‘melded substance’, snatch ‘excerpt
from a song’ e.c.
Place-denoting are fold, bend, slip, wush ‘sandbank’, dump etc.
Sbs denoting the impersonal agent are draw ‘attraction’, catch (of a
gate, a catching question etc.), sting ‘animal organ’, tread ‘part of the
sole that touches the ground’, do, take-in, all ‘tricky contrivance’, wipe
‘handkerchief’ sl etc.
There are also number of substantives denoting a person. OE knew the
type boda ‘bode’ (corresponding to L scriba, OHG sprecho) which in ME was
replaced by the type hunter. Several words survived, however, as bode, help
(OE help), hint (the last quotation in OED is from 1807), and they are
occasional ME formations, as ally 1380 (if it is not rather French allie);
but could be apprehended as formed after the type. Obs. Cut (a term of
abuse) 1490 does not seem to have any connection with the verb cut, and
scold ‘scolding woman’ 1200 is doubtful, the verb is first quoted 1377.
The word wright, which now occurs only as a second-word of cpds (cart-
wright etc.) is no longer apprehended as an agent noun (belonging to wolk).
Otherwise all deverbal substantives denoting a personal agent are of Modern
English origin, 16th century or more recent. The type probably came into
existence under the influence of the types pickpocket and runabout. Exs are
romp ‘child or woman fond of romping’ 1706, flirt 1732, crack ‘cracksman’
1749 (thieves’ sl), bore ‘tiresome p.’ 1812, sweep ‘chimney sweeper’ 1812,
coach ‘tutor, trainer’ 1848 (misleadingly classed in OED, as if from
substantive coach), discard ‘discarded person’. The great number of
depreciative terms is striking.
For the sake of convenience it is repeated here the examples of such
personal deverbal substantives as form the second-words of cpds: upstart
1555, by-blow 1595=obs. By-slip 1670 ‘bastard’, chimney-sweep 1614, money-
grub 1768, shoeblack and bootbleck 1778, new-come ‘new arrival’ 1577,
bellhop, carhop rec.
The formation if deverbal substantives may be considered from the
angle of syntactical grouping. No doubt there are different frequency-rates
for a word according to the position which it has in a sentence. Biese/4/
has devoted a chapter to the question and has established various types of
grouping which have influenced the growth of the type. It can be seen that
deverbal substantives frequently occur in prepositional groups (to be in
the know), that type are often the object of give, make, have, take (less
so of other verbs), that only 11% of the examples show the deverbal
substantives as subject of the sentence and that they are frequently by
adjuncts. The most important patterns are ‘(be) in the know’ and ‘(have) a
look’. Exs of the first type are phrases such as in the long run, upon the
go, with a thrust of his hair, after this sit, for a tell, for the kill,
for the draw, of English make, at a qulp, etc.
As for the t. ‘(have) a look’, «the use of phrasal verbs with
Ñòðàíèöû: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11
