Conversion (to convert - ïðåâðàùàòü) - is highly productive in replenishing the English word-stock with new words. The term «conversion» refers to numerous cases of phonetic identity of two words belonging to different parts of speech, e.g.: paper - to paper, work - to work.
From the angle of their morphemic structure these words are root-words. On the derivational level, however, one of them (the 2nd) is a derived word, as it belongs to a different part of speech and is understood through semantic relations with the other, i.e. is motivated by it. The question arises: what serves as a word-building means in these cases? The answer is that the two words differ in the paradigm, and it is the paradigm that is used as a word-building means in cases of conversion. Hence, conversion is the formation of a new word through changes in its paradigm.
There are two main cases of conversion:
- formation of verbs from nouns and rarely from other parts of speech:
doctor - to doctor (from noun); thin - to thin (from adjective); down - to down
(from preposition);
- formation of nouns from verbs and rarely from other parts of speech: to
cut - a cut (from verb); but - to but (from conjunction); ups and downs (from
adverbs).
Conversion has been studied since 1891, and it was H. Sweet who first used this term in his «New English Grammar».
Conversion has been treated differently:
1. The treatment of conversion as a morphological way of forming words
was suggested by prof. Smirnitsky, and according to this approach a
paradigm is considered a morphological category.
2. Syntactic approach to conversion (functional). A number of English
and American linguists regard conversion as a kind of functional change, i.e.
they consider that a word may function as two different parts of speech at the
same time. If so, they no longer distinguish between parts of speech, i.e. be
tween nouns and verbs, nouns and adjectives, etc. But one and the same word
cannot simultaneously belong to different parts of speech.
3. Morphological - syntactic approach to conversion (by I.V. Arnold) as
it involves both a change of the paradigm and a change of the syntactic func
tion of the word. But it is not correct because the syntactical factor is a se
quence of changes in the paradigm, that is irrelevant.
Approaches to Conversion
Diachronic approach analyses which of the two words was derived and the semantic development of each word:
smoke (äûì) - to smoke (äûìèòü) in 1663,
to smoke - êîïòèòü in 1715,
to smoke – êîïòèòüñÿ; smoke – êîïîòü (at present).
Synchronical approach deals with the semantic relations between words related through conversion.