Morphemic composition of the word modern and historical: an example. Historical changes in the morpheme composition of the word

Morphemic composition of the word in the course of language development has not always remained unchanged. The historical transformations that occurred in the language had a profound effect on the foundations. The morphemic composition changed as a result of the action of certain processes, which we will discuss in this article.

Historical change of the basis

The basic element of word formation in modern Russian is the basis, both derivative and non-derivative. The way it was formed during the history of language development underwent changes. And in some cases even the morphemic composition of the word changed. Many morphemes lost their meaning. Let us give an example. At the heart of the word, the west of the morpheme was the value of the prefix. In the course of history, she lost it. Thus, the basis has become non-derivative.

More on the change in the morpheme composition

Not necessarily in the course of history the morpheme composition of the word changed, as in the example above. Only in some cases you can talk about it. In modern language, many words are divided into morphemes in the same way as in the past. But today there are many examples of when they lose touch with the original foundation from which they were formed. In addition, it may be that the word begins to correlate only with part of the producing basis, and not entirely with it. The morphemic composition in these cases has changed. Let's talk about the reasons for such transformations.

Reasons for the change in morphological composition

First, the lexical meanings of the fundamentals, which are related earlier as a producer and a derivative, become different. For example, in Russian today there is no semantic correlation of words such as the porch (part of the house) and the wing (birds), since they are now of different significance. However, in Old Russian it was observed. The basics of these words do not correlate as a derivative and a producer.

Another reason for the change in the morphemic structure is the sound composition of words, which also does not always remain unchanged. Let us give some examples. Wrap words, pillowcase, povoloka, cloud, shell - crocheted, but they have different morphological structure. Derivative basis - envelop (ob-volak-willow), pillowcase (on-drag-to-a), povoloka (in fiber). And the cloud and the shell became non-productive, because they changed the basis because of the loss of sound "in". The modern and historical morpheme composition of the word, thus, in these cases is not the same.

Another reason is the loss of related words or correlative producing bases from the dictionary. Here are some examples of non-derivative foundations in modern Russian: coachman, winch, shirt. From the dictionary, at the present time, correlative derivative bases have fallen out (yam is a stop on the road, a swan is a shaft with a cranked handle, and rub is a piece of cloth).

The modern and historical morpheme composition of the word in some cases does not coincide because of the influence of the productive type of structure on the structure of words etymologically isolated, that is, unproductive types. For example, an umbrella has a foreign origin. At first this word was interpreted as root. However, in the course of time, by analogy with the Russian words, mouth, tail, etc., it began to be divided into the base of the umbrella (non-derivative) and the suffix -ik.

The observed historical changes in the morpheme composition of a word in one or another case are called complication, re-expansion, and reversal of the stem. Let's talk about each of them.


It is a transformation into a non-derivative derivative of the basis of the word. In this case, the latter loses its jointness with morphemes. Simplification plays an important role in the language. Thanks to him, he is enriched with root non-productive words. There are new centers of word formation in the language . Examples: success - successful, etc., hurry-hurry, etc., sing - ripe, etc. On the other hand, thanks to the interrogation, the word-formative suffixes become unproductive. Sometimes there is a complete disappearance of them, which even more changes the morphemic composition. Example: in the basics of words, the old, good, which in modern language are non-productive, the suffix -p- is not delimited. The same suffix fell in the word brother.

The reasons for the interrogation

The shame of the red, the palace was exposed to the basics of words. They became non-productive because they lost in connection with use the connection in meaning with the words from which they were once formed. Examples: shame - sharp, red (color) - beauty, palace - yard.

The morphemic composition of parts of speech has changed due to phonetic processes at the bases of the following words: motley, oar, deceased. They have lost touch with the foundations from which they originated, and separate morphemes ceased to stand out (motley - writing, paddling - carrying, deceased - asleep).

The reasons that lead to a reconsideration can act simultaneously, interbreed. As a result of all these processes, modern and historical morphemes do not coincide. For example, the lack of correlation between the core - food - poison, sound - ringing, tie - knot - union - language is the result not only of the semantic gap observed between these words, but also the consequence of phonetic changes that occurred in their foundations.


Re-expansion is the redistribution within the word of individual morphemes, which leads to the fact that the base (remaining derivative) in its composition allocates other morphemes. So, for example, living creatures, fervor have a suffix-a part (and not a -ost), if to speak about living word-formation connections. The fact is that the adjectives from which they are formed (lively, hot) are not used in modern language. The suffix -ity-with respect to the suffix -ost-is a derivative. It is a combination of the following two suffixes: - n, which was cut off from the stem of the adjective, and - awn.

The formation of the derivative of a derivative is the expression of a kind of process that accompanies the re-enactment of the foundations in the Russian language. It consists in the fact that one word-building element is absorbed by another, or in the dissolution of one or the other of them in the root. For example, at the base of the rod, we can isolate the suffix-ul-, which includes another, -l-. The last suffix refers to the word "bit" lost in the modern language.

Re-expansion can also be between a root and a prefix. For example, in the verb to remove earlier was the prefix of sn- and the following root-i-. Today, this word is divided as follows: c-nya (t).

Re-expansion value

The process of re-enrichment enriches the language by the fact that new word-formation models and affixes appear that are becoming productive over time. Most often this way, new suffixes are formed: - ochk- (bone-ochk-a), -inq- (dust-ink-a), -ness (essence). Much less often there are prefixes (obez-, nebez-, nedo-), which are the result of the merger of the other two consoles (obezvlet, nebezdarnyj, nedo-watch).


To re-arrange and reverse the basics very often lead to different types of analogy. By the latter is meant the likening to the forms of one word of the forms of another, related grammatically. Due to it, the historical morphemic composition of the word is often changed. Analogy is a natural process that is observed in the language. Low-productivity types of form and word formation, by virtue of its action, are likened to certain productive types of forms and words. At the same time, the previous leniency for morphemes or their derivative character is lost.

In modern Russian, a number of forms are due to the origin of the action of analogy. In particular, these are the endings of the middle and masculine nouns-ah, -ami, -om (village-ah, house-ah, house-am, sel-am). They appeared as a result of the analogy of the forms of nouns of the feminine gender (books-am-table, not the table). The result of it was the re-enactment of the basis (instead of the book-m - books). So the historical morphemes have changed.

From the root of the thief was formed the word to open. This happened through the prefix of. This word was influenced by another - to create. As a result of the analogy of creating and creating, the first foundation was re-arranged. It began to be interpreted as an education having the prefix o-. So in the language there was a new base of word-formation (to create, to create, to develop, etc.).


In some cases, the effect of analogy or the emergence of words that are related to those having a non-derivative basis leads to a complication of the latter. Because of this, it becomes a derivative, that is, begins to be joined.

The process of complication is the opposite of the process of reconsideration considered by us. This transformation into a derivative of the one that was previously non-derivative. In particular, the word engraving, borrowed by the Russian from the French language, was initially interpreted as non-derivative. But after the engraving and engraving took place in the system of our language, it was "complicated". This word has become a derivative. In it, the root gravel is distinguished, as well as the suffix -ur-. Many borrowed words have undergone such changes . For example, anarchy, Greek in origin, had previously an unproductive basis. However, due to the fact that in the language were related to her anarchist, anarchist, anarchist, etc., she began to share. Thus, the non-derivative basis of anarch, and also the suffix -and j-, was formed .

Imposing morphemes

Isolated, in addition to the above phenomena, and the imposition of morphemes. It occurs when parts of those that are combined coincide. For example, it is possible between the base and the suffix ( dynamo - Dynamo + sheep, Sverdlovsk - Sverdlovsk + sky ). However, imposing can not occur if it is a root and a prefix ( Priirtyshye, Zamurie ).

All the above changes in the structure of the word (complication, re-expansion, relapse) indicate that the morpheme composition has changed in the course of the historical development of the language. All these changes are studied by etymology. Let us say a few words about it in conclusion.


Etymology is the doctrine of the origin of various words. Their occurrence can be established by means of etymological analysis. It provides an opportunity to clarify historical word-building relationships, what the original morphemic structure was for a particular word, and also the reasons for which it had changed since its inception.

Similar articles





Trending Now






Copyright © 2018 Theme powered by WordPress.