The pragmalinguistic nature of the grammatical unification of lexico-semantic groups

Matveeva Galina Grigor'evna Doctor of Philology Department of Integrative and Digital Linguistics, Don State Technical University 34000, Russia, Rostov region, Rostov-On-Don, Gagarin str., 1 gegemat2337633@rambler.ru Myasischeva Marina Alekseevna Department of Integrative and Digital Linguistics, Don State Technical University 34000, Russia, Rostov region, Rostov-On-Don, Gagarin str., 1, office 8603a myasisheva.marine@yandex.ru Belanova Fotina Mihailovna Department of Integrative and Digital Linguistics, Don State Technical University 34000, Russia, Rostov region, Rostov-On-Don, Gagarin str., 1 tina-rostov@mail.ru

Alyaeva Marina Yul'evna Department of Integrative and Digital Linguistics, Don State Technical University 34000, Russia, Rostov region, Rostov-On-Don, Gagarin str., 1 maryna.alyaeva@yandex.ru

In modern pragmalinguistics, the issue of the pragmatic choice of speech units is considered both in line with functional pragmalinguistics and from the standpoint of hidden pragmalinguistics. These two directions of pragmalinguistics are distinguished on the basis of differentiation of speech effects: functional (open) pragmalinguistics relies on direct, conscious speech effects, and latent pragmalinguistics studies hidden, unconscious speech effects by the speaker^[1]. When studying the choice of speech units by native speakers of different national languages, it is found that there is a single system of unconscious choice of morphemes by speakers for the formation of new lexemes, which is the subject of hidden pragmalinguistics ^[2-4].

The systematic unification of such units follows the principle of the speaker's intuitive choice of final morphemes by analogy with the model existing in collective speech experience. It should be noted that in this case we are not talking about the manifestation of the norm inherent in the literary language, but rather about the model of choosing the form of a grammatical category, which is fixed in speech practice and is inherent in all speakers of this national group.

Turning to the analysis of sources on this issue, the authors revealed the relevance of this topic in scientific polemics. For example, in the work of Ivlieva E.A. "Features of affixal ways of word formation in Spanish computer terminology", the results of studying productive models of computer term formation created using suffixation and prefix are presented. The distinctive features of affixal terminology, which are characteristic of the Spanish language, are highlighted^[5].  

Rio Tsutahara's work "Los nombres en –dor y –nte y causatividad" addressed the issues of causativity of nouns ending in the suffixes –dor and –nte^[6]. The author conducted a quantitative analysis of the use of suffixes, which served as a starting point for studying the issue of grammatical unification of lexico-semantic groups.

In the work of Petrova G.V. "The names of the days of the week in Portuguese. Cultural shock?" based on the material of various languages, a comparative cultural and linguistic analysis of the names of the days of the week is given. Special attention was paid to the influence of the specifics of the cultural code on the formation of the names of the days of the week^[7].

The authors of studies on the lexicology of the Spanish language come to similar conclusions, considering it in the aspect of cultural, historical and national components of the language ^[8-11].

      The pragmatic nature of speech signals in the Indo-European languages considered in the article is studied in the works of Bogdanova E. A., Kotenyatkina I. B. ^[12], Gornostaeva Yu.A., Kolesnikov Yu.S.^[13], Ilyina M. G. ^[14], Bocharova E. V. ^[15].

      The issues of the peculiarities of grammatical categories, including their pragmatic potential, are considered in detail in the studies of Tunitskaya E. L. ^[16], Chervonoi A.M. ^[17], Gusev O. A., Popova E. A. ^[18], Titarenko N. V. ^[19], Zelikova M. V., Ivanova A.V. ^[20]

Let's consider a number of examples of lexico-semantic groups (hereinafter referred to as LSG), in which the unification of grammatical final morphemes is manifested.

LSG for professional activity. Let's start with the Russian language. The existing ancient na–ar model (plowman, baker, cooper, bell ringer, healer, medicine man) is implemented with the appearance of a new lexeme denoting a new profession: locksmith, goalkeeper. Lexemes denoting other new professions may acquire system components characteristic of the new linguistic era as a whole: radio operator, signalman, artist, etc.

It should be noted that there are clearly perceived differences between the professions of "radio operator", "artist" and "locksmith". The function of working with metal products inherent in the locksmith has always existed in the professional environment, whereas the "artist" is not identical in cultural archetype with the previously existing buffoons and actors, i.e. it is perceived as a new profession.

For comparison, let's take examples from Spanish and French.

As we can see from the above comparison, the morphemes –ero, -dero, -dor and –er, -ier, -eur, respectively, were used in Spanish and French to denote people engaged in ancient professions.

Even based on such a small sample, it can be seen that in Russian the morpheme –ist is used to form new lexemes more often than in Spanish and French –ista and –iste, respectively.

Thus, the morpheme –ista (Spanish), –iste (French), -ist (Russian), which came from ancient Greek through Latin into Spanish and French, and then into Russian, has been actively used since the 19th century to the present day to form lexemes of LSG in professional activity.

A similar model of the formation of new lexemes using morphemes existing in the language is observed in Spanish in LSG, combining verbs from the field of computer vocabulary. To form verbs denoting actions related to the new computer reality, the Spanish language uses the morpheme –ear.

 The morpheme –ear is used in Spanish to form verbs with the meaning of repeating an action (for example, parpadear, bromear, regatear), however, it was this morpheme that was chosen to form verbs denoting actions related to working at a computer. This trend is not observed in Russian and French.

An example of the following LSG is the names of the months in the republican calendar of France.

After the revolution of 1789 in France, a purposeful choice of grammatical unification was observed when creating new lexemes denoting the months in the republican calendar:

- autumn months have a final morpheme –aire: vendemiaire, brumaire, frimaire;

- winter -ose: nivose, pluviose, ventose;

- spring -al: germinal, floreal, prairial;

- summer -idor: messidor, thermidor, fructidor.

In this case, the choice of final morphemes occurs consciously, which suggests the existence in the minds of speakers of a tendency to unify grammatical forms for the formation of new lexemes both on a conscious and unconscious level.

Let's turn to the consideration of cultural and linguistic models of the formation of the names of the days of the week.

The Latin model of the formation of the names of the days of the week –dies, in French and Italian was transformed into a lexical series with a common final (final morpheme) –di, in Spanish – with a final – es, but at the same time words that traditionally have a special specificity for the Roman Catholic cultural code – Sabato (it.), S?bado (Spanish.) (from Hebrew. Shabat), Domenica (Italian), Domingo (Spanish), Dimanche (French) (lit. "Lord's Day") – have excellent finales. Let's compare with Russian: Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday, Friday, Saturday, Sunday, where the general finals are remotely traced only in the first words; with Galician - Luns, Martes, M?rcores, Xoves, Venres, S?bado, Domingo, Catalan - Dilluns, Dimarts, Dimecres, Dijous, Divendres, Dissabte, Diumenge where differences are present in the root morphemes, but the same system of finals is traced. The names of the days of the week, which were scalped by the Romano-Germanic languages, were in turn borrowed or partially scalped by the Finnish language: six names of the days of the week (with the exception of keskiviikko) are united by a common final –tai: Maanantai, Tiistai, Keskiviikko, Torstai, Perjantai, Lauantai, Sunnuntai. This example shows the inherent ability of speakers to perceive the unified components of clause groups and translate them into national languages, regardless of their origin. Thus, non-Indo-European Finnish (the Finno-Ugric group of the Uralic language family) calculated the Indo-European system of designating the days of the week, whereas Indo-European Russian borrowed only the name of one day of the week (Saturday - from Hebrew. Shabat), and the last one – Sunday – was reinterpreted in the spirit of the cultural and religious tradition inherent in all European languages.

The only Romance language where the days of the week are named in order after the rest day (and the first day of the week is Sunday) is Portuguese. It is also the only language among the Romance languages in which unified final morphemes are not used in the formation of lexemes denoting the days of the week:

 A similar ordinal system of names of days of the week is adopted in Russian, as well as in Tajik.

The Tajik language has a clearly differentiated final –anbe: dushanbe, seshanbe, chorshanbe, panshanbe,умumaa, shanbe, Yakshanbe, which resembles the Spanish –es, but unlike the Latinized root morphs in Spanish ("lunar day", "day of mars", etc.), the Tajik language has an ordinal system Names: yak (first), du (second), se (third), chor (fourth), Pan (fifth), shash (sixth). Friday is a sacred day that differs morphologically from ordinary calendar days. Comparing with the Corsican names of the days of the week, it can be observed that the identical final affixal substrate is not at all necessary: Luni, Marti, Mercuri, Ghjovi, Vennari, Sabatu, Dumenica. In this case, the dominant of Latinized roots is clearly traced, in which the final elements are part of the root. We see similar examples in languages where the seven–day week division system, traditional for Eurocentric cultures, is introduced into the culture, For example, in the Bantu language of Shona, the names of the days of the week do not have identical finals:  Muvhuro, Chipiri, Chitatu, China, Chishanu, Mugovera, Svondo, although the principle is borrowed from the European cultural tradition.

 Thus, the considered examples of LSG taken from various languages, analyzed within the framework of a pragmatic-functional approach using a comparative method, allow us to assume the presence of a universal tendency to use word-formation morphemes existing in the language when new lexemes appear in lexico-semantic groups, regardless of the specifics of the cultural code.