 |
 |
 |
 |
|
 |
 |
105
The freely converted adverbial substantives in prepositional collocations belong to one of the idiomatic
characteristics of English, and may be likened, with due alteration of details, to partially substantivized
adjectives of the adjectivid type (see Ch. XVIII, §4). On this analogy the adverbial substantives in question may
be called "adverbids".
Furthermore, there are in English some other peculiar structural types of adverbs which are derivationally
connected with the words of non-adverbial lexemic classes by conversion. To these belong both adverbs of full
notional value and adverbs of half-notional value.
A peculiar set of converted notional adverbs is formed by adjective-stem conversives, such as fast, late,
hard, high, close, loud, tight, etc. The peculiar feature of these adverbs consists in the fact that practically all of
them have a parallel form in -ly, the two component units of each pair often differentiated in meaning or
connotation. Cf.: to work hard - hardly to work at all; to fall flat into the water - to refuse flatly; to speak loud -
to criticize loudly; to fly high over the lake - to raise a highly theoretical question; etc.
Among the adjective-stem converted adverbs there are a few words with the non-specific -ly originally in-
built in the adjective: daily, weekly, lively, timely, etc.
The purely positional nature of the conversion in question, i.e. its having no support in any differentiated
categorial paradigms, can be reflected by the term "fluctuant conversives" which we propose to use as the
name of such formations.
As for the fluctuant conversives of weakened pronominal semantics, very characteristic of English are the
adverbs that positionally interchange with prepositions and conjunctive words: before, after, round, within, etc.
Cf.: never before - never before our meeting; somewhere round - round the corner; not to be found within –
within a minute; etc.
Of quite a different nature are preposition-adverb-like elements wiich, placed in post-position to the verb,
form a semantic blend with it. By combining with these elements, verbs of broader meaning are subjected to a
regular, systematic multiplication of their semantic functions. E.g.: to give - to give up, to give in, to give out,
to give away, to give over, etc.; to set - to set up, to set in, to set forth, to set off, to set down, etc.; to get - to get
on, to get off, to get up, to get through, to get about, etc.; to work - to work up, to work in, to work out, to work
away, to work over, etc.; to bring - to bring about, to bring up, to bring through, to bring forward, to bring
down, etc.
The function of these post-positional elements is either to impart an additional aspective meaning to the
verb-base, or to introduce a lexical modification to its fundamental semantics. E.g:. to bring about - to cause to
happen; to reverse; to bring up - to call attention to; to rear and educate; to bring through - to help overcome a
difficulty or danger; to save (a sick person); to bring forward - to introduce for discussion; to carry to the next
page (the sum of figures); to bring down - to kill or wound; to destroy; to lower (as prices, etc.),
The lexico-grammatical standing of the elements in question has been interpreted in different ways. Some
scholars have treated them as a variety of adverbs (H. Palmer, A. Smirnitsky); others, as preposition-like
functional words (I. Anichkov, N. Amosova); still others, as peculiar prefix-like suffixes similar to the German
separable prefixes (Y. Zhiuktenko); finally, some scholars have treated these words as a special set of lexical
elements functionally intermediate between words and morphemes (BA. Ilyish; B.S. Khaimovich and B.I.
Rogovskaya). The cited variety of interpretations, naturally, testifies to the complexity of the problem. Still, we
cannot fail to see that one fundamental idea is common to all the various theories advanced, and that is the idea
of the functional character of the analysed elements. Proceeding from this idea, we may class these words as a
special functional set of particles, i.e. words of semi-morphemic nature, correlative with prepositions and
conjunctions.
As for the name to be given to the words for their descriptive identification, out of the variety of those
already existing ("postpositions", "adverbial word-morphemes", "adverbial postpositions", etc.) we would
prefer the term "postpositives" introduced by N. Amosova. While evading the confusion with classical
"postpositions" developed in some languages of non-Indo-European types (i.e. post-nounal analogues of
prepositions), this term is fairly convenient for descriptive purposes and at the same time is neutral
categorially, i.e. it easily admits of additional specifications of the nature of the units in question in the course
of their further linguistic study.
§ 4. Adverbs are commonly divided into qualitative, quantitative and circumstantial.
By qualitative such adverbs are meant as express immediate, inherently non-graded qualities of actions and
other qualities. The typical adverbs of this kind are qualitative adverbs in -ly. E.g.:
The little boy was crying bitterly over his broken toy. The plainly embarrassed Department of Industry
confirmed the fact of the controversial deal.