Sussex R., Cubberley P. The Slavic Languages

Подождите немного. Документ загружается.

(13b) head þ head:

Pol z

elaz-o-beton-ø ‘ferro-concrete’ [Noun]

iron-LinkVowel-concrete-NomSg

Rus ca

-pu

´ˇ

sk-a (hyphenated) ‘Tsar-cannon’ [Noun]

tsar-cannon-NomSg

(13c) governed (e.g. object) þ governing:

Blg c

ovek-o-nena

vist-en ‘misanthropic’ [Adj]

man-LinkVowel-hatred-AdjMascSg

Rus sam-o-krı

tik-a ‘self-criticism’ [Noun]

self-LinkVowel-criticism-NomSg

8.1.4 Mixed types: prefixation þ suffixation

The combined ‘prefixation þ suffixation’ pattern is common and productive. As we

have seen, verbs are the word-class which dominates straight prefixation (8.1.2). In

word-classes other than verbs prefixation tends to be accompanied by suffixation:

e.g. Sorb bjezstra

sny ‘fearless’ (bjez- ‘without’þ strach ‘fear’ þ -n- [Adj] þ -y [Adj:

MascNomSg] ) and bjezstra

snosc

‘fearlessness’ (bjezstra

sn- þ -osc

[Noun] ). Even

with verbs the prolific patterns of derivation often involve both prefixation and

suffixation: Slk prepracovanie ‘reworking’ ¼ pre- ‘re-’ þ pracova-t’ ‘to work’ þ

-ni( j)-(e) [Abstract Action suffix]. We take up these types of derivation in more

detail below.

A distinction must be made between ‘‘purely synchronic’’ derivation and ‘‘dia-

chronic’’ or ‘‘etymological’’ derivation: the former may disregard etymological

information, that is, the historical derivational process itself, and rely entirely on

surface facts. Thus, Slk prepracovanie may be seen as prefixation in relation to

pracovanie ‘work’, or as suffixation in relation to prepracovat’ ‘to work’, but only

the latter is the etymological process (and semantically the more natural).

Similarly, Sorb bjezstra

sny may be seen as a prefixed form of stra

sny or as

a suffixed form of the nominalized phrase bjez strach-a, only the latter being

‘‘natural’’. Other examples of this are:

(14a) Rus za Vo

lg-oj ‘on the other side of the Volga’

zavo

lzˇ-

e ‘land beyond the Volga’

zavo

lzˇ-sk-ij [Adj]

(14b) Ukr mizˇ hor-a

mi ‘between the mountains’

mizˇhı

ja ‘area between the mountains’

mizˇhı

r-n-yj [Adj]

8.1 Types of word formation 429

In such cases, our preferred analytical approach will be the ‘‘etymological’’ (or

semantically more natural) one.

8.1.5 Morphophonological aspects of word formation

Morphophonological adaptations, which are sometimes signalled explicitly in the

orthography (especially in the more recently codified languages: appendix B),

occur frequently between prefixes and roots. Prefixes may undergo regressive

assimilation of voice before stems beginning with a voiceless consonant, though

the orthography marks this regularly only in Belarusian, B/C/S and Macedonian,

for instance in the prefix ot-/od- ‘from’: B/C/S ot-ku

piti, Pol od-kupywac

[Otk-]

‘redeem’. Prefixes may also undergo some assimilation of place of articulation,

particularly in allegro speech, though the intervening morpheme boundary may

retard such assimilation in comparison with comparable sequences of sounds

within a morpheme (3.4.2, 4.3): Rus bes-c

stnyj ¼ {bez} þ {c

est

} ¼ /(be)sc

(es)/ ¼

[-StS-] ‘dishonourable’.

Prefixes may have alternative forms to preserve phonotactic requirements.

Prefixes ending in a consonant may insert a vowel before a root beginning with a

consonant or consonant cluster which would otherwise result in an unacceptable

cluster: Blg pı

sa ‘write’, v-pı

sa ‘interpolate, enter’ but vleka

‘drag’, va˘ -vleka

‘drag

into’. In Belarusian the restriction of [v] to pre-vocalic position results in a change

of v- to u- before roots not starting with a vowel: Bel vaz

‘I shall take’ [Prfv] has

the infinitive uzja

, cf. Rus voz

, vzjat

With the exception of stress-shifts, which between the stem and the suffix can

bring about changes in vowel quality in East Slavic and Bulgarian, roots are

phonologically otherwise unaffected by the presence of a prefix. Belarusian

marks such shifts, which affect vowel quality, in the orthography: Bel so

x-nuc

‘to

dry out’ [Imprfv], vy

-sax-nuc

‘to dry out’ [Prfv].

Roots undergo important mutations in their interaction with suffixes. These

types of mutation are discussed in chapters 4 and 5 in connexion with inflexional

paradigms. They include palatalization (mutation and additive palatalization);

vowel  zero and vowel grade alternations; -nu loss or gain; and suppletion.

Suffixes interact with stems most obviously with additive palatalization and

mutation, only the latter being always visible:

(15) Rus zˇ u r n a

l-ø ‘magazine’, zˇurnal-ı

st-ø ‘journalist’ (palatalized /l

B/C/S stra

h-ø ‘terror’, stra

´ ˇ

s-an-ø ‘terrible’

However, there are other stem-modifying processes brought about by suffixes,

including the behavior of zero-grade vowels (4.2.1):

430 8. Word formation

(16) Rus son-ø ‘sleep’ [NomSg], sn-a [GenSg], so

n-liv-yj ‘sleepy’

Cz den-ø ‘day’ [NomSg], dn-e [GenSg], den-n-ı

‘daily’

cf. Rus den

-ø, dn-ja, dn-evn-o

In addition, phonotactic constraints across the morpheme boundary between roots

and suffixes can lead to assimilation or simplification of clusters of consonants (e.g.

Blg parizˇ-ski (/zˇ / > [

s] ), Mac radost but rados-en via *radost-n-). What may be a

feature of the spoken language or allegro speech in one language can be part of the

standard language elsewhere (e.g. Rus ra

dost-nyj ¼ [-sn-] in all but very careful speech).

8.2 Word formation and nouns

8.2.1 Prefixation

There are only restricted numbers of nouns in Slavic which consist of a prefix and

an unsuffixed stem, and many of these (as with adjectives: 8.4) are foreign borrow-

ings or calques. In other words, prefixed forms without word-forming suffixes are

much less common than suffixed forms with or without prefixes.

Slavic languages have about thirty prefixes each for the purposes of noun

formation (17a–c). Many prefixed nouns of this sort are, in fact, not cases of

pure prefixation, but are actually zero-suffixed nouns derived from prefixed

verbs (17d) (see discussion above, 8.1.4):

(17a) Prefixed noun: ‘disorder’

ne- [Neg]: Slk ne-poriadok; Pol nie-porza˛ dek

bez-/bes- ‘without’: Blg bes-pore

dak

(17b) Calque (9.6.2): ‘influence’

v- ‘in’: Rus, Blg v-lij-a

ni-e,Czv-liv-ø, Pol w-pływ-ø

(17c) Borrowed prefix þ (borrowed) noun

ober-: Rus o

ber-kondu

ktor ‘senior conductor’

super-: Blg superfo

sfat ‘superphosphate’

(17d) Prefix in a noun derived from a prefixed verb:

roz-/raz-:Sorbroz-sah-ø,Rus,Blgraz-me

r-ø ‘measure, size’

(Sorb roz-sah-ac

, Rus raz-me

r-it

, Blg raz-me

r-ja ‘to measure’)

8.2.2 Suffixation

Suffixed nouns are derived from verbs, adjectives and other nouns. They may

express both concrete and abstract notions, and are highly productive. Gender is

built into suffixes, but in the case of underlying nouns is usually based on the gender

8.2 Word formation and nouns 431

of the noun. The normal way of indicating gender in suffix citation is to add

the nominative singular ending, since its relationship with gender is typical

(consonant ¼ Masc, -a ¼ Fem, -o/-e ¼ Neut (5.4.4) ), so that normally nouns with

-nik are masculine, with -nica feminine and with -je neuter.

Cognate roots may take different suffixes in different languages:

(18) ‘alarm clock’ (root bud- ‘to wake up’):

-l(

)nik:East:Bel budz-ı

nik Ukr bud-y

nik Rus bud-ı

nik

South: Sln 1. bud-ı

lnik B/C/S bu



iln



Mac bud-ilnik Blg bud-ı

lnik

-ik: West: Pol budz-ik Cz 1. bud-ı

k Slk bud-ı

-ic

(e)k:Cz2.bud-ı

-ilka: Sln 2. bud-ı

lka

-ilica:Crbud-ilica

)ak: Sorb budz

´-ak

This variation does not necessarily mean that the parallel suffixes are not present in

the language, but it does often indicate that the suffixes have different meanings or

connotations: in Russian pis-e

c ‘clerk, scribe’ is now archaic, and Rus pı

s-ar

derogatory, meaning ‘scribbler’ – cf. the cognate Pol pis-arz ‘writer’.

It is useful to break the types of suffixal noun formation into semantic-grammatical

groups, broadly following Townsend (1968/1975), into abstracts, persons, animals,

objects, places, collectives and diminutives.

8.2.2.1 Abstracts

Deverbal abstract action nominals in -e/-je are very productive, mainly in conjunc-

tion with -n- or -t- from the past participle passive. Imperfective verbal stems

generate nouns referring to the processes, while perfectives generate nouns refer-

ring to completed actions and/or their results: Rus izda-va

-nie (< [Imprfv] ) ‘pub-

lishing’, izda

-nie (< [Prfv] ) ‘edition’. Examples are legion: in (19) note the

Ukrainian gemination of stem-final consonants before the suffix (infinitive in

brackets):

(19a) ‘carrying’: Pol nies-ienie (nies

-c

)

Mac nos-enje (nos-i)

Ukr nos-ı

nnja (nos-y

ty)

(19b) ‘closing’: Pol zamknie˛ -cie (zamkna˛ -c

)

Rus zakry

-tie (zakry

-t

)

Ukr zakry-ttja

(zakry

-ty)

Blg zakrı

-tie (zakrı

-ja)

432 8. Word formation

Derived abstract action nominals, especially those with a zero suffix, may form new

homophonous lexical items.

(20) Rus vxod ‘entering’ and ‘entrance’, vy

xod ‘exiting’ and ‘exit’

( ¼ v(y)xod-ø-ø: verb stem + zero suffix ( [Action]/[Obj] )+

zero ending ( [NomSg] )

Verbs may also derive nominals of action or result by the use of various other, non-

zero, suffixes:

(21) -(

)ba Blg, B/C/S, Sln bor-ba, Rus bor-

‘battle’ (bor- ‘to fight’)

-tva: Blg kle

-tva, B/C/S kle

-tva (Sln kle

-tev), Rus klja

-tva

(Slk kla-tba) ‘oath’

(PSl *klen-t- > kle˛ -t- ‘swear’, cf. infinitives B/C/S kle

ti,

Rus klja

-st

sja, Slk kln-u

t’, Blg kaÆln-a

)

Other, non-verbal, abstracts are formed mostly from adjectives and nouns. The

feminine suffix -ost

/-ost is highly productive, similar to English formations in -ness,

andtosomeextentin-tion. The words for ‘happiness, joy’ are commonly formed

from rad ‘glad (at something)’. All languages etymologically have the same suffix:

(22) ‘happiness, joy’

Bel ra

d-asc

Ukr ra

d-ist

Rus ra

d-ost

Sorb rad-osc

Pol rad-os

Cz rad-ost Slk rad-ost’

Sln ra

d-o

st B/C/S ra%d-



ost Blg, Mac ra

d-ost

Somewhat less productive, but still strongly active, is the neuter suffix -stvo/-stvı

which is added to the adjective stem. Note that while Belarusian does have the -stvo

suffix (e.g. Bel va

rvar-stva ‘barbarity’), it is not used with the root in (23). We list the

source adjectives as well:

(23) Adjective base PSl bog-at- ‘rich’:

Bel baha

t-y Ukr boha

t-yj Rus boga

t-yj

(baha

c-ce) boha

t-stvo boga

t-stvo

Sorb bohat-y Pol bogat-y Cz bohat-y

Slk bohat-y

bohat-stwo, bogat-stwo bohat-stvı

bohat-stvo

bohat-osc

Sln boga

t B/C/S bo

gat Mac bogat Blg boga

boga

-stvo bo

gat-stvo bogat-stvo boga

t-stvo

8.2.2.2 Persons

Nouns denoting persons and agents are derived from nouns, verbs and adjectives.

Masculines commonly use -tel

/-tel and -ec/-ac, and less commonly -ar

/-ar,

8.2 Word formation and nouns 433

among a large repertoire of suffixes for deverbal agents. We give the source verbs

first:

(24) ‘write(r)’:

Bel pis-a

Ukr pys-a

ty Rus pis-a

pis

-me

nnik pys

-me

nnyk pis-a

tel

Pol pis-ac

Sorb pis-ac

Cz p-sa

t Slk pı

s-at’/s-pis-ovat’

pis-arz s-pis-ac

el pis-atel s-pis-ovatel’

Sln pis-a

ti B/C/S pı

s-ati Mac pi

s-e Blg pı

s-a

pis-a

telj pis-ac pis-atel pis-a

tel

Among the many other agent suffixes are -ac

(Ukr or-a

‘ploughman’ < o-ra

ty ‘to

plough’) and -nik (from -ik via Adj in -n-) (Rus, Blg uc

ˇe-nı

k ‘pupil’ (uc

ˇ-

‘teach,

learn’). The suffix -ist(a) occurs almost exclusively with foreign roots (Rus zˇurnal-

st ‘journalist’ < zˇurna

l ‘magazine’, marks-ı

st ‘Marxist’). But Pol czołg ‘tank’,

czołg-ista ‘tank driver’ derives from czołgac

sie˛ ‘to crawl’, where the foreign affix

is added to a Slavic stem. (Two of the few such examples in Russian are slav-ı

‘Slavist’ and rus-ı

st ‘Russianist’!)

Suffixed nominals not arising from verbs include deadjectivals of bearers

of properties, by means of suffixes like -ak and -ec/-ac: Blg, Rus, Ukr prost-a

Bel prasc-ja

k, Pol prost-ak ‘simpleton’ ( < prost-, Bel prast- ‘simple’); B/C/S sta%r-ac,

Sln sta

r-ec,Slkstar-ec,Russta

r-ec ‘elder, prefect’, Pol starz-ec ‘old man’ ( < star- ‘old’).

Deadjectival nouns can also always be formed by nominalization for all three

genders, as appropriate: Rus bol

-n-o

j ‘sick, ill [MascNomSg]’ can also mean ‘a

sick person’. Such formations can be lexicalized, so that bol

j also means ‘an

invalid’. Where specific suffixed forms like -ak or -nik exist, however, there is a

preference for the suffixed form over the adjective nominalization.

Denominal masculines can also be formed from the names of countries or ethnic

roots to designate bearers of nationality. The -(an)in suffix (5.1.1) has interesting

properties in inflexional paradigms. Other suffixes used in this way are -ø and -ec,

attached to the root: ‘Bulgarian’ ¼ Blg ba

lgar-in, B/C/S Bu%gar-in, Rus bolga

r-in,

Cz Bulhar, cf. Blg Ba

lga

r-ija, B/C/S Bu%gar-sk



a, Rus Bolga

r-ija,CzBulhar-sko

‘Bulgaria’; ‘Ukrainian’ ¼ Ukr ukrajı

n-ec

, Rus, Blg ukraı

n-ec, B/C/S Ukrajı

n-ac,

Cz Ukrajin-ec.

There are also suffixed forms of kinship terms (chapter 9), based on the core

names of family members. For instance, the suffix -ix/-ih derives ‘fiance

’ or ‘bride-

groom’ from the root for ‘wife’: Blg, Rus zˇen-ı

x, Bel zˇan-ı

x, Pol z

en-ich ‘fiance

’

< zˇen-a (Bel zˇan-a

, Pol z

ona) ‘woman, wife’ (cf. also B/C/S zˇ e

nı¯ k, SLn zˇ e

nin).

The East Slavs use a historically complex suffix to derive patronymics: -ov-ic

[Masc] and -ov-n-a [Fem] are each based on the possessive suffix -ov (8.4.3.3) and are

434 8. Word formation

attached to the stem of the father’s name: Rus Iva

n-ovic

‘son of Ivan’, Iva

n-ovn-a

‘daughter of Ivan’. The masculine form of this suffix is used in parts of South

and West Slavic as a family name marker, most often attached to a male name:

B/C/S Milo

s-evic

lit. ‘son of Milo

s’, Jova

n-ovic

lit. ‘son of John’ (cf. English John-son).

See further below on female patronymics and surnames.

The most common means of forming feminine agents is to add to or modify the

masculine agent suffix, most commonly, but by no means only, with -ka or -ca.

Following the order of the masculine agent suffixes above, we find for the feminines:

(25) adding:

-tel

+ nic-a Rus uc

tel

-nica ‘teacher’

+ k-a Blg uc

tel-ka ‘teacher’

-ak + k-a Ukr slova

k  slova

ˇ-ka

‘(a) Slovak’

-ac

+ k-a Mac prodavac

-ka ‘salesman/-woman’

-ist + k-a Rus zˇurnalı

st-ka ‘journalist’

-ø + k-a Cz Bulhar-ka ‘(a) Bulgarian’

altering:

-nik > nic-a B/C/S u%c



ik  u%c

enica ‘pupil’ [Fem]

substituting:

-ec > k-a Sln prodaja

v-ec  prodaja

v-ka ‘salesman/-woman’

-(an)in > (an)k-a Blg ba˘

lgar-in  ba˘

lgar-ka ‘(a) Bulgarian’

Rus anglic

ˇ-a

nin  anglic

ˇ-a

nka ‘Englishman/-

woman’

A special set of suffixes relates to female proper names. As noted above, the East

Slavs build female patronymics from the father’s first name by the addition of

suffixes like -ovna. All Slavs have feminine forms of surnames, which may be

feminine forms of the homonymous adjective if the name ends in an adjective

desinence (Rus Stanisla

v-sk-ij, Stanisla

v-sk-aja, Pol Wis

niew-sk-i, Wis

niew-sk-a,

Blg Mixajlo

v-sk-i, Mixajlo

v-sk-a); or derived feminine forms from non-adjectival

surnames (in /ov-a/: Pol Michniewicz-owa ‘wife of Michniewicz’). In Polish unmar-

ried women have a special form of the surname in /uvn-a/: Pol Michniewicz-o

wn-a

‘daughter of Michniewicz’.

8.2.2.3 Objects

Nouns and verbs, much more than adjectives or adverbs, can derive common

inanimate nouns.

Masculines in -(n)ik can refer to objects: Rus pa

mjat-nik, Blg pa

met-nik,

Cz pamat-nik/pom-nik ‘monument’ ( < pam-/pom- ‘remember’). There are feminines

in -ka and expanded suffixes including it (B/C/S pı



al-jka, Blg pisa

-lka ‘pen’

8.2 Word formation and nouns 435

( < pis- ‘write’); Rus vint-o

vka, Ukr hvynt-ı

vka, Bel vint-o

u˘ ka ‘rifle’ < Rus, Bel vint,

Ukr hvynt ‘screw’). And there are neuters in -(d)lo (Sln mı

-lo,Rusmy

-lo,Polmy-dło,

Cz my-dlo ‘soap’ [ < mi-/my- ‘wash’] ) and -to (Blg, Sln, Rus, Ukr sı

-to, B/C/S sı``to,

Cz sı

-to ‘sieve’ ( [sej- ‘sift, sow’] ).

All these formations are of low productivity in the modern languages.

8.2.2.4 Animals

The females of animals are formed with suffixes like -ica, though this is by no means

universal, particularly when the female of the species is also the generic name for

the species (when -ka is more common):

female ¼ generic:

(26a) ‘cat’: Rus ko

ska,Czko

ska, Slk mac

ˇka

Sln ma

ka, Blg ko

tka

male ¼ generic:

(26b) ‘wolf’: Rus volk Blg va

lk B/C/S vu

k Cz vlk Pol wilk

‘she-wolf’: volc

-ı

ca va

-ı

ca vu

-ica vlc

-ice wilcz-yca

Immature animals, especially domesticated animals, usually retain the older -(

( < PSl -e˛ and consonant(-nt)-declension) in South and West Slavic. Russian uses

the suffix -

en(o)k in the singular, and Ukrainian and Belarusian use -en, at least for

wild animals. All have plurals in -at-a (5.5.1.6):

(27a) ‘calf’: Rus tel-

en(ok) (Cz, Blg, Mac, B/C/S, Sln tel-e, Pol ciel-e˛ ,

Ukr tel-ja

, Bel cal-ja

); Rus [Pl stem] tel-ja

(27b) ‘wolf-cub’: Rus volc

-o

n(o)k (Ukr vovc

-enja

/vov-c

, Bel vau

-anja

);

Rus [Pl stem] volc

-a

t-, Ukr vovc

-enja

t-)

8.2.2.5 ‘‘Places’’ and ‘‘containers’’

The names of locations and containers are derived mainly from nouns meaning

people or objects with suffixes like the masculine -inec:Czhost-inec ‘inn’ (< host

‘guest’) and feminine -nica: Rus gost-ı

nica ‘inn, hotel’ (< gost

‘guest’, via the

possessive adjective gost-ı

n-yj); B/C/S zˇ ı ``tnica, Sln, Rus zˇ ı

t-nica, Ukr zˇ y

t-nycja,

Bel zˇ y

t-nica ‘granary’ (< zˇit-/zˇyt- ‘grain, rye’). We have described above the for-

mation of neuter place names from prepositional phrases of the type represented by

Rus primo

e (pri ‘by, near’ + mo

r-e ‘sea’ + suffix -j(e): 8.1.4).

8.2.2.6 Collectives

Collectives are built mainly with -(

)j-e and -stv-o (-stv-ı

in Czech). They are non-

countable, and express groups of entities as a single unit. However, the stem need

436 8. Word formation

not refer to countable nouns itself: Rus bel-

e ‘linen’ is derived from the adjective

bel- ‘white’, Sln mla

d-je ‘youth’ from mla

d- ‘young’. The suffix –(

)j-e/-ı

also derives

uncountable mass nouns for products like vegetables, which are also often singu-

laria tantum if attached to underived nouns (roots): Blg ze

l-e, Bel ze

l-le,Czzel-ı

‘cabbage’, Pol ziel-e ‘herbs’, B/C/S ze

l-je ‘vegetables’, Sln ze

l-je ‘cabbage’ (all

< zel-/ziel- ‘green’).

The -stv-o suffix is used more of collections of professionals: Rus uc

tel

‘teacher’, uc

ˇı

tel

-stvo ‘teachers; the teaching profession’, Czech uc

ˇitel/ucˇitel-stvı

Pol nauczyciel/nauczyciel-stwo, Blg uc

tel/uc

tel-stvo.

8.2.2.7 Diminutives and augmentatives

Diminutive and augmentative forms (8.1.2) are productive in nouns, especially in

the spoken languages. Other than with abstracts and collectives, they are common

with most categories of nouns. Augmentatives are much less common than

diminutives.

Diminutives express overtones of either size, or emotion, or both. Diminutives

form first- and second-degree suffixes (Townsend, 1968/1975: 198), where the use

of both suffixes, in the order second–first, makes the derived word strongly emo-

tional. The use of just the first-degree suffix can add implications of size, or

emotion, or both (e.g. Rus knı

g-a ‘book’, knı

zˇ-k-a ‘small book’, knı

zˇ-ec

-k-a ‘book-

let, nice little book’ < PSl *-{k-{k-a). While the first diminutive suffix may supply

overtones relating to either size or endearment, further suffixes relate to increased

levels of endearment: Blg glav-a

‘head’, glav-ı

c-a ‘head [Dim]’, glav-ı

k-a ‘dear

(little) head’ (< PSl -*ik-{k-a). Diminutives may be inherently pejorative, like

Rus gorod-ı

sk-o ‘nasty little hole of a town’ (< Rus go

rod ‘town, city’), or either

endearing or pejorative, according to context, and include the rich diminutive

suffix systems for personal names (8.1.2).

Where the base lexical form has a different gender in the different languages, it

will naturally select different suffixes. With the words for ‘flower’, Russian,

Ukrainian, Belarusian and Sorbian have standard diminutives based on the root

meaning ‘colour’, and the unsuffixed form is either not used (Ukrainian,

Belarusian, Sorbian), or semantically different (Russian). Only in Russian is the

masculine gender retained in the suffixed form:

(28) ‘flower’

Masculine:

Rus cvet-(o

)

k-ø

(cvet ‘colour, blossom’)

Pol kwiat Cz kve

t Slk kvet

Sln cvet B/C/S cve

t Blg cve

t-e [Neut] Mac cvet

8.2 Word formation and nouns 437

Feminine:

Ukr kvı

t-k-a Bel kve

t-k-a Sorb kwe

t-k-a

In the list of common suffixes in (29), the unsuffixed (non-diminutive) forms are

given in parentheses where they exist, otherwise a dash is given in brackets. For

lexical diminutives – that is, words where the addition of suffixes modifies the

meaning in predictable ways as described above – the base meaning is not given. We

indicate where the unsuffixed form has a different meaning, which implies that the

diminutive form has become an autonomous lexical item.

(29) Diminutives

Masculine:

-ac/-ec Slk dom-(e)c ‘house’ (dom)

B/C/S gra

d-(a)c ‘town’ (grad )

-ok/-ek Sln gu

mb-(e)k ‘button’ (gumb)

Ukr holos-(o

)k, holos-o

(e)k ‘voice’ (ho

los)

-ic

Sln gra

d-ic

‘castle’ (gra

d )

-ic

B/C/S bro



‘ship’ (bro

d )

-on

(o)k Rus volc

-o

n(o)k ‘wolf-cub’ (volk)

Feminine:

-k-a Blg, Rus lo

d-k-a ‘boat’ (–)

Ukr kny

zˇ-ka (–)

Rus knı

zˇ-ka ‘book’ (knı

g-a)

-ic

k-a/-ec

k-a Cz nozˇ-ic

k-a ‘leg’ (noha, nozˇ-k-a)

Cz chvil-ec

ˇk-a

‘moment’ (chvı

l-e)

-ic-a B/C/S gla

v-ica ‘head’ (gla

v-a)

Neuter:

-c-e Rus bolo

t-c-e ‘bog’ (bolo

t-o)

-ic-e Blg jajc

-ice

‘egg’ ( jajc-e

)

-c

ˇ-e

Blg cvet-c

ˇe

‘flower’ (cve

t-e)

B/C/S gu%

s-c

e ‘gosling’ (gu%sk-a)

-k-o Slk dievc

ˇat-k-o

‘girl’ (dievc

ˇa-t-

)

-i

sk-o Rus z

ern-y

sk-o ‘grain’ (zern-o

)

(30) Augmentatives

Masculine:

-ak Cz chlap-ak ‘lad’ (chlap)

-och Pol s

pi-och ‘sleepy-head’ (–)

-ac Cz hlav-ac ‘big-head’ (hlava ‘head’)

-uk Cz ps-uk ‘dog’ (p(e)s)

438 8. Word formation