Heterogeneity of signs and classification criteria for compound words

• Marzhan U. Suleibanova Chechen State University https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3956-0227
• Lyudmila M. Dudarova Ingush State University https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6429-2669
• Marziyat M. Bidanok Adyghe Republican Institute for Humanitarian Research named after T.M. Kerashev https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7401-0736

DOI: https://doi.org/10.46925//rdluz.34.30

Keywords: classification and typologization of complex words, heterogeneity of features of composites, derivational systems of the Chechen and Russian languages, Language varieties

Abstract

The purpose of the article is to draw attention to the fact of the development of compositology in languages of different grammatical structures and in the Iberian-Caucasian in particular. We used classification, descriptive methods, linguistic analysis techniques, which are widely used by all researchers who work with the material of specific languages or linguistic groups. The method of typological comparison used in this study should be especially highlighted, which confirms the sufficient efficiency when comparing languages of different genetic and structural affiliation. The main and easily established difference when comparing the word-formation systems of the Chechen and Russian, for example, languages, is that in the Chechen language, of the two main ways of forming words (word production and base formation), the second clearly predominates. The reliance of the Chechen word-formation on the basis is not a new phenomenon and not a specificity of the Chechen language. It is known that in many languages, word-formation affixes historically go back to the components of additions. Consequently, compounding precedes affixation. Composites in Nakh languages ​​go back to syntactic combinations of words and the most acceptable for the Chechen language is the classification according to the method of their formation.

References

Chavchavadze, T.A. (1981). Nominational Composition in the New Persian Language. Tbilisi: Metsniereba,. 375 p.

Kadagidze, N. (1984) Tsova-Tushino-Georgian-Russian dictionary. Prepared for publication by R.R.Gagua. Tbilisi: Metsniereba, 935 p.

Klimov, G.A. (1986) Introduction to Caucasian Linguistics. Moscow, 208 p.

Kuzminskaya, T.B. (1955) Compoundwords in modern Czech literary language: Diss. Cand. Kiev, 280 p.

Marchand, H. (1960) Substantial composites-bachuvrihs of the anthroposemic field in English.

Mazanaev, I.A. (1988) Morphological features of Lezgi sound-visual words. Questions of the morphology of the Russian and Dagestan languages. Interuniversity scientific-thematic collection. Makhachkala, DSU publishing house, Pp. 108-114.

Sapir, E. (1934) Language. Introduction to the study of speech. Moscow - Leningrad: Sotsekgiz, 223 p.

Stepanova, M.D. (1953) Word formation of the modern German language. Moscow: Publishing house of literature in foreign languages, 374 p.

Suleibanova, M.U. (2008) Nominal and verbal composites in Nakh and foreign languages. Grozny. 165 p.