Comparing the productivity of selected affixes in English and Kurdish
Widad S. Shakir (Asst. Prof.)
College of Languages, Salahaddin University- Erbil
Roza Raza Tahir (MA Holder )
University of Sulaymani
roza.raza935@gmail.com
Abstract
The present paper focuses on comparing the productivity of two affixes in English and their counterparts in Kurdish. The affixes are the negative prefixes un- and na- and the nominal suffixes –ness and –y in English and in Kurdish respectively. The degree of productivity is strongly tied to regularity and generality of affixes The researchers pointed out the productivity of those affixes based on their regularity and generality and the number of words produced by each affix . Dictionaries were used for measuring productivity. The results showed that un- in English is more productive than na- in Kurdish while -y in Kurdish is more productive than -ness in English. It is concluded that affixes with the same meaning in different languages differ in their productivity while they sometimes show similarity in choosing similar word classes as their bases to coin new words in the two languages. Languages use affixes to coin new words from the existing words. Affixes are described as productive or less productive or unproductive due to the number of the new words they can coin in language. The paper aims at contrasting two English affixes, un- and –ness, in English with their counterparts, na- and –y, in Kurdish to show the degree of productivity of those affixes in the two languages. Dictionaries are used to measure the productivity of the affixes in English and Kurdish. The results showed that the negative prefix un- in English is more productive than its counterpart na- in Kurdish while the nominal suffix –y in Kurdish is more productive than the English suffix –ness. It is concluded that both English and Kurdish use affixes to coin new words but that the affixes differ in productivity due to their regularity and generality.
Keywords: Generality, Productivity, Regularity, Word-formation
doi:10.23918/vesal2021v34