Introduction I. Chapter. The theory of word formation

I. CHAPTER. The theory of word formation.
1.1. Comparative study of word formation methods and tools.
If there are, it is necessary to include their laws and characteristics" (M.M. Makovsky, 1969, p. 24). The main task of typological research is each
It consists in establishing the relationship of models common to a separate language system.
During the examination of word formation, one can witness that as the typological similarity of languages ​​is clearly visible in this area, their differences are also clearly visible. As a confirmation of this opinion, the results of research conducted on five Slavic languages ​​(V.A. Nikonov 1962, c. 103-116) and three Germanic languages ​​(V.V. Gurevich 1970) can be cited.
Since English and Russian belong to Indo-European languages, it is natural that they have many similar features in word formation. But at the same time, the relationships between the individual word-forming tools of the above-mentioned languages ​​have different characteristics, the existence of unique word-formation methods, and the level of productivity of one or another word-formation method in each language. It is distinguished by its individuality.
There are mainly morphological, morphological-syntactic, lexical-semantic and lexical-syntactic methods of word formation. One of the most productive methods of enriching the lexicon of the modern English and Russian languages ​​is the morphological method of word formation. This method is done by adding affixes and adding words and making words without affixes. In the formation of words without affixes, it is carried out by the exchange of sounds and the transfer of stress as a means of word formation. But this way of making words is not widespread. It is especially observed when forming nouns from verbs and adjectives. For example: Russian. svistet - whist, zvat - zov, glukhoy-glush, tihiy - tooth; visual to lose-loss, to bleed-blood, to live-life, to ob´ject-´object, to present´sent-´present.
The method of word formation without affixes can include conversion, which is common in English, that is, the method of word formation by moving a given stem to another paradigm of word change. In this case, due to the change in the syntactic combination of the new word, conversion requires a morphological-syntactic method of word formation. Most of the words formed by conversion are verbs: chair - to chair, light - to light, free - to free, wet - to wet, down - to down, etc. From the examples given above, the verbs are from different word groups, i.e it can be seen that it can be made from nouns, adjectives and adverbs. With the help of conversion, other word groups can be formed, for example, a noun: to run - run, to work - work, native - a native, etc. The phenomenon of conversion is one of its characteristics that distinguishes English from Russian.\

FIGURE 1
Affixation and word addition are the most universal means of word formation in the languages ​​under consideration. Affixation is the formation of a word by adding one or another word-forming agent to the stem. There are three types of word formation using affixes: using suffixes, using prefixes, and using suffix-prefixes.
1. The words contained in the Uzbek language dictionary (also used in our speech) are initially divided into original and artificial words.
For example: cotton is a real word, and cotton is an artificial word; wheat, color words are original words when taken separately, but wheat color (a type of color) is an artificial word; It's a word, but it's not a word; five, ten original words, fifteen artificial words; If the words "hand" and "hand" are considered separate root words, "hand put" as a whole is a made-up word.
Words without a word-forming affix are called root words.
Creating a new word (a new lexical unit) that differs from it in terms of meaning (sometimes both semantically and grammatically) on the basis of a given word is called word formation, compare: іш- ішчан, came to life, white and white, grain field.
2. There are mainly two ways of forming words in modern Uzbek:
1) affixation (or morphological) method;
2) composition (or syntactic) method;
Forming a new lexical unit by adding a word-forming suffix to the root is word formation by affixation.
For example: fruit tree, fertile land are artificial words in compounds such as fruit tree, fertile land, and they are words formed by adding ser-affixes to the stem of fruit, to the stem of fruit.
Compounding is the combination of two or more word forms (often independent words) to form one word.
For example: belt, kitchen, hospitable, the beginning of the word, one hundred and ten, make a covenant, a little, etc.
Some words used in the pair model (pattern) are also considered artificial words, for example: year-by-year, zor-bazar, house-by-house.
In the Uzbek language, words are also divided into types in terms of structure, such as: simple word, compound word, double word (repeated word), complex word. A simple word is a word with a single root morpheme. For example: child, childhood, children, like our children.
Words like Kunbokar, Gultokhoroz, Akkurgan, Sahibjamol are called compound words. Such words are made up of two or more words or word forms, combined into one accent and expressing one concept.
Words whose lexical and grammatical meanings are written separately and can be interpreted in some cases or as a whole are called complex words. For example: orange, light brown, twenty-five thousand, came and sold.
Words used in our speech such as sister-sister, non-pon, mountain-stone, onda-sonda, often, threshing-threat, chala-chulpa, ten-fifteen, water-puv are pairs. is called a word.
It is widely accepted that language changes; this change goes simultaneously with the evolution of the world. Phonetics, morphology, syntax, semantics or pragmatics have evolved and then been examined by linguistics. Word-formation processes have been a widely studied issue because of its complexity and interest; recently, the new tendencies in word-formation patterns have been a recurrent subject of study but have not been explored in great depth. This paper aims to analyse the 712 words included in the Oxford English Dictionary (OED) during 2020 in order to obtain a pattern of the most dominant processes of formation of new words and the essential semantic fields. To this end, some previous knowledge of wordformation was essential, in addition to the need to refer to those few studies on the latest trends. Access to the OED was then required, and, by using the list with the words provided by the OED, an analysis of word-formation processes and semantic fields was carried out. But first, a selection of different sources was needed for the overview of the diverse word-formation processes. My findings show that word formation processes have changed but perhaps not as much as expected: traditionally, compounding and affixation were the most important processes, and this continues to be this way. Nevertheless, new processes are becoming more important – clipping, blending or conversion–; at the same time, some others appear to be quite unproductive –initialisms, acronyms, reduplication or back-formation–. Besides, borrowing has been fundamental in the production of new words and its importance will be mentioned in this study, although it is not really a word-formation process. As a result, language changes but very slowly, and the so-called minor word-formation processes are these days more important than, for instance, during the Old English period. v Apparently, both word-formation processes and semantic fields continue to be quite traditional and not much modification has taken place. Ease is going to influence the selection of the processes of formation of new words; for instance, compounding is much easier and then more productive than blending. Moreover, many words come from specialized fields –linguistics, gastronomy, fashion, health–, whereas semantic fields –such as Internet and technologies–, which were expected to be more dominant, are not so essential. Further research could be carried out with the focus on words related to a particular semantic field, for instance, health. Studying words specifically related to the pandemic would also be valuable since Covid-19 has not finished yet. Other lines of study could also possibly delve into the patterns of formation of clippings or blendings or into the analysis of the many borrowings that were included during the referred year. Key words: derivational morphology, new words, OED, productivity, semantic fields, word-formation processes. 1 1. Introduction Languages of the world have been constantly updated to the latest changes of society and society and language have, in a way, evolved together. For this reason, new words are needed to refer to the new ideas and the new concepts that society incorporates. These words are formed by certain patterns known as word-formation processes.

FIGURE 2
In English, compounding and affixation have been traditionally the most productive ones. As a matter of fact, during the Old English period, compounds were mainly adjectives and nouns, as today; kennings1 were also frequently found especially in poetry. In the Middle English period, many of the new words formed had French roots and some processes, productive in present-day English, begin to appear as minor processes: clipping or blending. In the course of Modern English, wordformation processes became more alike to what we have in Present-day English, but affixation and compounding continued to be the most productive ones –conversion being the third most important process– (Bourcier, 1981; Millward & Hayes, 2012). Word-formation processes such as blending, clipping, or conversion, among many others are growing in importance as years pass. These new words appear first in the speakers and are then incorporated into the different dictionaries of that language. Thus, dictionaries, such as the OED, make updates every year to change as society does. As explained by the OED (Dictionary, n.d.b), the procedure of the inclusion of those words in their dictionary is quite complex and has different steps. The terms go first to a “watch list” coming from many different sources, then they decide which ones could be included. Once the words to be included are decided, the tough labour of doing the entry starts by tracing the development of the term. Then, the remaining sections of the entry are completed. Anonymous people can propose words to 1 Kennings were compounds that denoted an image or metaphor of a word. 2 incorporate into the OED, but all these steps have to be done in order to finally add the term to the dictionary; and, indeed, many words are rejected. The present paper aims to analyse the most productive word-formation processes of the words included in the OED during 2020 in order to obtain a certain pattern of productivity and analyse the new trends in word-formation processes as well as the most dominant semantic fields of those words incorporated. Before the actual analysis, I will provide a general framework of the wide range of word-formation processes available in English and the classification that will be used. To this end, this paper is divided into different sections. The first section will present an overview of the different word-formation processes mentioning a large number of sources. Section two will provide information about the new trends in this field making reference to recent studies. The third and most important part will be devoted to the study of the 712 words included in the OED during 2020; this section will in turn be divided into two parts: the first one will deal with word-formation processes and the second one will analyse the semantic field of those same words. The paper will end with a conclusion providing a discussion of the results. 3 2. Overview of word-formation processes As is well known, in present-day English we can differentiate many different types of word-formation processes. In this section, I will mainly focus on the description of nine of them, namely, affixation, compounding, conversion, acronyms, initialisms, clipping, blending, backformation and reduplication. 2.1. Affixation Huddleston and Bauer (2002) define affixation as “the process of forming a new base by the addition of an affix” (p. 1667), and Plag (2003) defines the term affix as “a bound morpheme that attaches to bases” (p. 72). In affixation, suffixation and prefixation are included; the former adds affixes at the end of words and the latter adds affixes at the beginning of words. According to Brinton and Brinton (2010), the addition of an affix, whether a suffix or a prefix, to a root generates at least one of these changes: a phonological change which can include a modification in stress as the case of drama > dramatize; an orthographic change as in happy > happiness; a semantic change, for example, emerge > emergency; and also, a change in the word class as in impress (verb) > impression (noun). Affixes can have different origins; they might be native –for instance, those which come from Old English– but they can also be taken from a foreign language, the most important source being French (Brinton & Brinton, 2010). The way these different affixes are classified varies in the sources consulted. This paper distributes suffixes according to the class of the resulting form in the same way as Bauer (2002), Bauer, Lieber and Plag (2013), Brinton and Brinton (2010), Carter and McCarthy (2010), Plag (2003), Quirk, Greenbaum, Leech and Svartvik (1995) do. Conversely, prefixes are going to be classified like Quirk et al. (1995) and Brinton and Brinton (1995), i.e. taking into account the 4 meaning of the prefix. However, other distributions are also possible; for instance, Bauer (2002) classifies prefixes into class-changing and class-maintaining and Huddleston and Bauer (2002) put together suffixes with prefixes. 2.1.1. Suffixation As was mentioned above, suffixation is the addition of an affix at the end of the word. Suffixes can be nouns, adjectives, adverbs or verb suffixes (Bauer, 2002; Bauer et al., 2013; Brinton & Brinton, 2010; Carter & McCarthy, 2010; Plag, 2003; Quirk et al., 1995). The following are some of the nominal suffixes and their meaning according to Quirk et al. (1995) and Plag (2003): -age expresses an activity or even locations; -al designs an action; -ance and its variants -ence, -ancy, -ency create an action; -ant refers to people; -ce and -cy design actions; -dom has the meaning of stage of being something, collective entities or territories; -ee designs non-volitional participants; -eer means the person who deals with something; -er and its variant -or are used to refer to the performers of actions, instruments, entities related to an activity or for the origin of a person; -(e)ry indicates location and collectivism; -ese for nouns that design nationality and race; -ess used to refer to women; -ette refers to compact; -ful means measure; -hood refers to state and collectivity; -(i)an and its variant -ean refer to people and places and also designates a person who is a supporter of something; -ing for processes and results; -ion and its variants -ify and -ification for events; -ism refers to state, condition, attitude, system of beliefs or theory; -ist designs a person that has to do a particular activity; -ite means adherent to or member of a set; -ity used for qualities; -let expresses small or unimportant; -ling meaning minor, offspring or if the referent is human means disdainful; -ment used for processes and results; -ness means trait or property and it is the most common suffix in English; -ship means condition; -ster has a pejorative meaning; and -ocracy means government by. 5 Bauer et al. (2013), Plag (2003) and Quick et al. (1995) differentiate four verbal suffixes: -ate, used to refer to heterogeneous groups and in chemical substances; -en means to make something and it is a Germanic suffix attached to monosyllables ending in plosive, fricative or affricate; -ify and -ize are used to mean the same as concepts, such as locative, causative or resultative, among many other. Moreover, Bauer et al. (2013), Plag (2003) and Quirk et al. (1995) mention different adjectival suffixes: -able and -ible, -al and its variants -ail and -ical, - ary, -ed, -esque, -ful, -ic and ical, -ing, -ish, -ive, -less, like, -ly, -ous, and -y. Finally, adverbial suffixes such as -ly meaning in a manner of; -ward refers to direction; and -wise means also in the manner of or like something (Plag, 2003; Quirk et al., 1995). 2.1.2. Prefixation As has been explained, prefixation is the addition of an affix at the beginning of the word. This type of affixes can be very different and are classified, according to Brinton and Brinton (2010) and Quirk et al. (1995), into the following categories: time and order (after-, ex- , fore-, post-, pre-, re-); place (fore-, in-, inter-, sub-, super-, trans-); degree and size (arch-, co- , hyper-, micro-, mini-, out-, over-, sub-, super-, sur- ultra-, under-); privation (a-, de-, dis-, un- ,); negation (a-, anti-, dis-, in-, non-, un-); pejorative (mal-, mis-, pseudo-); orientation and attitude (anti-, contra-, counter-, pro-); and number (tri-, multi-). Some prefixes are not productive anymore in English and have a discrete semantic value but are important since they have modified the class of the word, this is the case of a-, be-, en- or em- (Brinton & Brinton, 2010; Quirk et al., 1995). 6 2.2. Compounding Compounding is the most common process of English word-formation (Plag, 2003). Quirk et al. (1995) define a compound as “a lexical unit consisting of more than one base and functioning both grammatically and semantically as a single word” (p. 1567). There are many different classifications of compounds. Bauer (2002) opts for a distribution that depends on the class of each of the compound elements; this is also the distribution that Bauer et al. (2013), Brinton and Brinton (2010), Huddleston and Bauer (2002) and Plag (2003) follow. However, Adams (1976), Carter and McCarthy (2010) and Quirk et al. (1995) classify them into compound nouns, compound adjectives and compound verbs and then taking into account a presumed syntactic function: subject + verb, verb + object, subject + complement, verb + adverbial, complement + noun or subject + predicative complement (Adams 1976; Carter & McCarthy 2010; Quirk et al., 1995); for instance, headache contains a subject and a verb, ‘a head that aches’ (Carter & McCarthy 2010). The classification adopted by Bauer (2002), Bauer et al. (2013), Brinton and Brinton (2010), Huddleston and Bauer (2002) and Plag (2003) into compound nouns, compound adjectives and compound verbs will be reviewed below. In addition to these three types, another type of compounds will be explained, neoclassical compounds (Adams, 1976; Bauer, 2002; Bauer et al., 2013; Huddleston & Bauer, 2002; Plag, 2003). 2.2.1. Compound nouns Compound nouns are the biggest group of compounds and have two parts; the first element is the modifier and the second element is the head; from a semantic point of view, they can be classified into endocentric and exocentric (Bauer, 2002; Plag, 2003). In endocentric compounds, “the compound is a hyponym of the grammatical head” (Bauer, 2002, p. 30), as 7 the case of armchair designing a type of chair. Exocentric compounds are “hyponyms of some unexpressed semantic head” (Bauer, 2002, p. 30) for example, bluebell is a hyponym of plant. Moreover, an appositional compound is a hyponym of each of the elements that form the compound and this is also the case of maidservant (Bauer, 2002). It is worth mentioning that there is another type of compound noun: the copulative or dvandva compound that designs compounds formed by different entities, does not have a clear head and it is neither a hyponym nor an element on itself, for example, Bosnia-Herzegovina (Bauer, 2002; Huddleston & Bauer, 2002; Plag, 2003). From a morphological perspective, nominal compounds can be formed by noun + noun, adjective + noun, verb + noun, particle + noun, adverb + noun, verb + verb and noun + verb (Bauer, 2002; Bauer et al., 2013; Huddleston & Bauer, 2002). The most productive type of compound is noun + noun (Bauer et al., 2013; Huddleston & Bauer, 2002). 2.2.2. Compound adjectives Compound adjectives can be composed by noun + adjective, verb + adjective, adjective + adjective, adverb + adjective, noun + noun, verb + noun, adjective + noun, particle + noun, noun + verb, verb + verb, adverb + verb and particle + verb (Bauer, 2002; Huddleston & Bauer, 2002). Furthermore, compound adjectives with an adjective in the second element of the word often have a noun in the first element, and the most common compound adjective is noun + adjective (Huddleston & Bauer, 2002). Noun + adjective compounds can indicate comparison or intensification, for instance, bone-dry; they can also design extent such as shoulder-high which are called measure terms; and they can have an element that functions as a modifier, for example, oil-rich indicating rich in oil (Huddleston & Bauer, 2002). Adjective + adjective is also another quite productive class of compound adjective, and the two elements have a relation of coordination or subordination (Huddleston & Bauer, 2002). 8 2.2.3. Compound verbs Compound verbs are the smallest class in the word-formation process of compounding (Huddleston & Bauer, 2002). Most of the compound verbs are formed by backformation and conversion (Bauer, 2002; Huddleston & Bauer, 2002). Compound verbs are very few, but can also be classified depending on the type of components: noun + verb, noun + noun, adjective + noun, preposition + noun, preposition + verb or verb + verb (Bauer, 2002; Huddleston & Bauer, 2002). 2.2.4. Neoclassical compounds Adams (1976), Bauer (2002), Bauer et al. (2013), Huddleston and Bauer (2002) and Plag (2003) include neoclassical compounds in the process of compounding. However, Quirk et al. (1995) include them in the process of affixation. Furthermore, Plag (2003) defines neoclassical compounds “as forms in which lexemes of Latin or Greek origin are combined to form new combinations that are not attested in the original languages” (p. 155). These forms are not free forms, i.e. they cannot occur in an independent form (Bauer et al., 2013). Initial combining forms, which occur in initial position, and final combining forms, which occur in final position, are two types of neoclassical compounds (Bauer et al., 2013; Huddleston & Bauer, 2002; Plag, 2003). Retroflex (retro- ‘backwards’), morphology (morpho- ‘figure’) or biodegradable (bio- ‘life’) are examples of initial combining forms; and suicide (-cide ‘murder’), astrology (-logy ‘science of’), telescope (-scope ‘look at’) or democracy (-cracy ‘rule’) are examples of final combining forms (Plag, 2003). A minority of elements might be added at the end or at the beginning of words as morph-/-morph or phil-/-phile (Bauer et al., 2013). Most of the neoclassical compounds are nouns (Bauer et al., 2013). 9 2.3. Conversion Conversion, also named functional shift by Brinton and Brinton (2010), is defined as “the use of a form which is regarded as being basically of one form class as though it were a member of a different form class, without any concomitant change of form” (Bauer, 2002, p. 227). An example of conversion is the verb humble which comes from the adjective humble, or the preposition anti coming from the prefix anti- (Huddleston & Bauer, 2002). In many cases, it is difficult to state which of the forms was the first one formed. Nevertheless, there are examples of conversion in which knowing the original form is much easier as the meaning of the word born after conversion is more complex than the original word and the meaning of the word of origin is included in the word. The nouns bottle and butter are more basic than the verbs to bottle and to butter (Bauer et al., 2013; Brinton & Brinton, 2010; Huddleston & Bauer, 2002). The most productive type of conversion involves the change from nouns to verbs or from verbs to nouns (Carter & McCarthy, 2010). Besides conversion between nouns and verbs, conversion between adjectives and nouns, and between adjectives and verbs is also essential (Bauer, 2002; Huddleston & Bauer, 2002).

FIGURE 3
Moreover, prepositions, conjunctions, adverbs, interjections and affixes can also be involved in the process conversion (Bauer, 2002). In the process of conversion, a change of stress can occur (Bauer, 2002; Plag, 2003). Plag (2003) puts forward that this shift of stress happens in pairs of noun and verb; this is the case of construct or abstract which as a verb are pronounced with the accent on the last syllable while as a noun have their accent on the first syllable (Bauer, 2002; Plag, 2003). This shift of stress also occurs with phrasal verbs that have the stress on the preposition and the corresponding noun has the stress on the first element, for example, to push up and a push-up (Bauer, 2002; Plag, 2003). During the process of conversion, a change in the sonorization of 10 the final consonant can also take place (Bauer, 2002). According to Bauer (2002), this change is called partial conversion and happens when a noun that ends in a voiceless fricative turns into a verb by changing the final consonant to a voiced fricative, for instance, advice (noun) and advise (verb) or belief (noun) and believe (verb). 2.4. Initialisms and acronyms Initialisms and acronyms are formed by abbreviation; both are words formed by taking the initial letters of a phrase and can be spelt with uppercase or lowercase letters (Brinton & Brinton, 2010; Plag, 2003). Nevertheless, depending on the way these abbreviations are spelt and pronounced, they are classified into initialisms or acronyms (Brinton & Brinton, 2010; Plag, 2003). Initialisms are pronounced letter by letter, while acronyms are articulated as a word (Brinton & Brinton, 2010; Plag, 2003). MTV is an example of an initialism as it stands for Music and Television and it is read letter by letter, whereas the acronym radar stands for Radio Detection and Ranging and is read as a word. Brinton and Brinton (2010) and Plag (2003) distribute these words in initialisms and acronyms; however, this is not always the case. Adams (1976) and Quirk et al. (1995) classify these word-formation processes under the label of acronyms, and Bauer (2002) and Huddleston and Bauer (2002) refer to what Brinton and Brinton (2010) and Plag (2003) call initialisms as abbreviations. 2.5. Clipping Clipping can be considered another type of abbreviation; Bauer (2002) defines clipping as “the process whereby a lexeme (simple or complex) is shortened, while still retaining the 11 same meaning and still being a member of the same form class” (p. 233). Different terms are used to designate each of the parts of the process of clipping: the word of origin is the original; the eliminated one is the superplus; and the residue is the one kept and forms the new word (Huddleston & Bauer, 2002). Bauer (2002), Brinton and Brinton (2010), Huddleston and Bauer (2002) and Quirk et al. (1995) classify them taking into account the way the clipped term is formed and also their productivity. The first and main pattern to form clippings is keeping the beginning and eliminating the end as in ad or advert, coming from advertisement. The second type removes the beginning of the word, for instance, cello from violoncello. In the less frequent type, the middle remains, and the beginning and the end are the superplus: flu from influenza. Huddleston and Bauer (2002) include these types of clippings in the category of plain clippings and add another category, embellished clippings, to refer to those forms that are clipped and then an affix is added to them. Soccer is an example of an embellished clipping as abbreviates the form association football and adds the suffix -er. A great number of clippings are monosyllabic words (Bauer et al., 2013). These nonhypocoristic clippings express diminution and familiarity with the object or concept referred to (Bauer et al., 2013). Furthermore, clippings are often found in informal and colloquial contexts (Adams, 1976; Bauer, 2002; Brinton and Brinton, 2010; Huddleston & Bauer, 2002; Quirk et al., 1995). Clipped words might be formed from adjectives, nouns, verbs, or even phrases, and the syntactic category of the base does not change when clipping the word (Bauer et al., 2013).2 2 Note that Bauer et al (2013) include in the process of clipping “ellipsis in lexicalized phrases” (p. 403), for instance, fries for French fries or the House for the House of Representatives or the State House. 12 2.6. Blending Huddleston and Bauer (2002) define the process of blending as “the formation of a word from a sequence of two bases with reduction of one or both at the boundary between them” (p. 1636) and, as Brinton and Brinton (2010) put forward, blending implies two processes: clipping and compounding. Bauer et al. even (2013) define blends as “compounds where at least one constituent lacks some of its phonological material” (p. 458). Blends can be distributed into different categories. Huddleston and Bauer (2002) distinguish four categories, depending on the formation of the word: the first part of the first base is kept and the second base is kept in a whole (paratroops: parachute + troops); the first base remains unchanged and the second base keeps the final part (newscast: news + broadcast); the blend keeps the beginning of the first base and the final part of the second base (heliport: helicopter + airport); or the two forms overlap as the central part is common in the first and second bases (sexploitation: sex + exploitation). Brinton and Brinton (2010) differentiate two types of blends depending on their origin.