The realisation of the language economy principle in infantile word creation as evidenced by the use of new transitive verbs

Размещено на http://www.allbest.ru/

The realisation of the language economy principle in infantile word creation as evidenced by the use of new transitive verbs

O. L. Nekrylova

The current article deals with infantile word creation as an example of the language economy principle in action.

Analyzing examples of childrens use of intransitive verbs as verbs with transitive meaning provides an argument for saying that a child has the potential ability to express the result of an activity immediately, and here the realization of the language economy principle is traced.

The creation of new transitive verbs gives a child an opportunity, sparing verbal effort, to express a thought briefly and precisely, and thus to fill the language lacuna. The verb constructed by a child is not an equivalent of the real verb recognized as a literary norm. However, multiple examples of similar verbs, which children create by analogy with regular verbs, provide evidence that language economy is one of the most active processes of language development today. new transitive verb children's nomination

Keywords: infantile word creation, new transitive verbs, the principle of language economy.

Некрилова О. Л.

Реалізація принципу мовної економії в дитячому словотворенні на прикладі нових перехідних дієслів.

У статті досліджено новоперехідні дієслова в дитячому мовленні. Роботу присвячено творчому наповненню наявних у мові словотворчих моделей у дитячому мовленні, що потребує окремого аналізу й засвідчує актуальність статті. Наукова новизна дослідження полягає в характеристиці принципу економії мовних засобів у дитячих інноваціях на прикладі новоперехідних дієслів, що досі не було предметом спеціального вивчення.

Мета науковоїрозідки - виявити реалізацію принципу мовної економії в дитячому словотворенні на прикладі новоперехідних дієслів. Мета передбачає виконання таких завдань: 1) аналіз прикладів уживання дітьми неперехідних дієслів в перехідному значенні; 2) визначення особливостей уживання у дитячому мовленні новоперехідних дієслів; 3) опис продуктивних моделей творення дитячих номінацій.

Під мовною економією розуміємо передачу інформації за допомогою мінімального набору засобів, що підвищує ефективність комунікації. У сучасному інформаційному світі процеси мислення прискорюються, виникає необхідність передати інформацію великого обсягу й за короткий проміжок часу. Дитяче мовлення не є винятком. Матеріалом дослідження стали каузативні дієслова зі “Словаря детских словообразовательных инноваций”, зібрані за допомогою методу суцільної вибірки.

Установлено, що вживання дітьми неперехідних дієслів в перехідному значенні дає підстави говорити про потенційну можливість дитини показати відразу результат дії, у чому спостерігається реалізація принципу мовної економії. Утворення новоперехідних дієслів дає можливість дитині висловити думку коротко, точно й так заповнити мовну лакуну. Змодельоване дієслово не є еквівалентом унормованого. Однак численні приклади подібних одиниць, створених дітьми за аналогією з наявними, переконують, що мовна економія є сьогодні одним з найактивніших процесів розвитку мови. новоперехідне дієслово дитяча номінація

Ключові слова: дитяче словотворення, новоперехідні дієслова, принцип мовної економії.

Introduction

In a world of accelerated scientific and technological progress, with globalization and constant changes in social and economic spheres of life, one observes a tendency toward an economy of language, i. e. The transmission of information via minimal means. This tendency increases the effectiveness of communication. This cannot but have an impact on children's communication as well, in which one can trace a specific optimization of speech accompanied with the definite selection of lingual units, their correlation and shortening of expression length. The given process is observed in infantile speech that is conditioned, we believe, by the principle of the language economy. In new realities optimal means of information transfer are of particular topicality. This is a relatively new phenomenon found in infantile word creation, the creation and application of intransitive verbs as if these verbs had transitive meaning which leads to the efforts of speech economy.

The goal of this article is to investigate the realization of the principle of language means economy in infantile word creation.

The object of this current research is children's speech, contexts or separate lexemes where the principle of language economy clearly represents itself. As linguistic examples, we have taken causative verbs from «Dictiona- ry of the infantile word-creating innovations» (Цейтлин, 2006) collected with the help of the continuous sampling method.

Narrowly, the subject of the given work is the principle of the language means economy in infantile word creation.

The scientific originality results from the research into the principle of language means economy in children's innovations as evidencedby new transitive verbs, which have yet to be the subject of special studies at the current moment. The given research is concentrated on the creative content of existing word creation models in infantile speech, which has not been studied by linguists before. This fact highlights the topicality of the research.

Research Methods

The specifcity of the investigated object necessitated the use of a number of methods: the direct observation - to fix and collect the actual material; the descriptive method - to characterize and summarize the collected factual material; the method of interpretation to reveal the sense and meaning of the object under study; a component analysis method for interpreting the lexical meanings of verbs formed by non-postfixation in order to identify them as transitive.

The Main Material

Persistently developing a spoken language goes through changes, but these lingual metamorphoses do not happen spontaneously or sporadically: they are subject to particular laws. One of the most important principles influencing the development and functioning of any language is the principle of economy (or the principle of least effort).

Globalization, development of new informational technologies, dynamic processes in modern society, definitely make a significant impact on a language, directing it to the economical exploitation of its linguistic resources. Under the current-day speedy tempo of life, it is unrealistic to avoid economy. We intend to save time performing large amount of work in a shorter term. A language, being a sensitive barometer, reacts even to insignificant changes in the societal, cultural and daily life of any society.

The contemporary reality dictates that it is necessary to convey complex words and syntactic constructions more compactly and neatly: this requirement meets communicative needs of native speakers and, thus, improves the language. The principle of economy is universal and touches all levels of the lingual system: phonetics, lexis, word creation, morphology and syntax.

The question of language economy has a long history. In antiquity, Aristotle noticed that desiring to speak briefly (i. e. economically) an individual should use names instead of concepts, for example, “circle” instead of “a flat surface all points of which are equally distant from the centre” (Античные теории..., 1936: 180).

The well-known English philosopher and sociologist H. Spencer opined that a language follows “the natural laws of evolution”. Therefore, while developing, it moves from the complex to the simple, i.e. long words become shorter and multi-word sentences turn to be one-word sentences (Спенсер, 1986: 172). Simultaneously, while the external transformation of the langue is ongoing, its internal state remains unchanged. If the language itself, as Spencer supposed, strives for simplifications, its native speakers, actively influencing their language, can speed this process up.

In W. Whitney's opinion, the tendency toward economy is the natural cause for shortening words. At the same time, he believes that the basic cause of many phenomena leading to the change of a word form is «pre- disposition, or, at least, readiness to remove such parts of the word which can be lost without damage for meaning and, in this way, to elaborate such forms which will be suitable for users' needs and which, to a large degree, will correspond with their habits and preferences» (Whitney, 1887: 50).

The German linguist Th. Paul noted that for language reality the definite tendency toward thriftiness is natural, which makes economically optimal ways for expressing an idea take shape in the language. These ways contain as much information as necessary for understanding the idea. The economy of lingual means, in Paul's opinion, is not the shortening of lingual resources and, thus, unification, but is the widening of expressive abilities of the language (Пауль, 1960: 302).

Researching regularities of language formation and changes, the French linguist A. Martinet has formulated the law of language economy in the following manner: «The lingual behaviour is regulated, thus, by the so-called `principle of least effort'. We prefer, however, to replace this expression with the simple word `economy'» (Мартіне, 1963: 370). The term “economy”, in Martinet's opinion, «includes all of the following: liquidation of useless differences, appearance of new differences, and keeping actual position. The linguistic economy is a synthesis of acting forces» (Мартіне, 1963: 375).

The First to turn his attention to the phenomenon of economy in the language was I. A. Baudouin de Courtenay, for whom it became obvious that

«the cause, the mover of all language changes, is a striving for the comfort» (Бодуен де Куртене, 1963: 58). The comfort in this case means the speech comfort resulting from a verbal communication; the comfort that leads to the economy of time and shortens the process of mutual understanding.

Modern linguists' studies allow confirmation that the theme of the lingual economy is of especial topicality today (see works of N. S. Valgina (Валгина, 2001), L. O. Zimina (Зіміна, 2007), N. I. Korobkina (Коробкіна, 2013), M. N. Krylova (Крилова, 2014), E. A. Shaglanov (Шагланов, 2015) and others). Scholars correlate the economy with the system of most important internal linguistic laws confirming that the economy stimulates the development of the language and is «the selection of units which are most rational and concise for the aims of communication» (Коробкіна, 2013: 152). The fundamental rule of the language economy principle states: «If a meaning may be expressed in several ways, the shortest way will be preferred» (Крилова, 2014: 78). The principle of language economy is interpreted in modern linguistics as a phenomenon related to the rationalization of the language, the possibility for the economy of efforts and optimal organization of verbal communication. We support the given standpoint since we believe that the principle of economy is a certain agreement between communication needs and human's striving to minimize his or her efforts. Language, in fact, goes from complex constructions to simpler and more effective means for expressing the same content which is the economy in our view. Using a minimum of lingual means for conveying maximum content is the task of the language economy in modern life.

The prominent French linguist of the twentieth century E. Benveniste noted that language is composed in such a way that allows every speaker, when he or she defines himself or herself as I, to allegedly appropriate the whole language (Бенвеніст, 2002: 296). In other words, a native speaker, appropriating the language in the process of its application, is able to subject it to his or her demands and tasks, change it, adapt it to his or her abilities, to his or her desires, make the language more convenient for himself or herself and for the recipient by using the principle of economy. If a native speaker has the opportunity to choose between saying something briefly or saying a full form, in most cases, he or she will prefer the brief form, understating the comfort and simplicity of such way of expression.

In adult speech, one may often hear the expressions: Его ушли с работы, Погуляй ребенка, Они пользуют меня в антрепризе, Ты меня

улыбнул, Кто платит, тот и танцует, etc. Such grammatical forms are not normative, and are usually perceived as a joke, as a manifestation of lingual playing, an unusual deviation from traditional standards. At the same time, the adults in such cases demonstrate the desire to express ideas briefly and economically. The tendency toward laconicism, this expressiveness, is traced in children's speech as well, which is part of the infantile verbal communication.

In recent decades, the spontaneous speech of children has attracted much attention from scholars in various academic fields. Infantile word creating innovations in the Russian language are the subject of many academic works, such as the works produced by A. M. Shakhnarovich (1985), S. N. Tseitlin (2000), K. I. Chukovskiy (2001), V. K. Kharchenko (2002), A. N. Gvozdev (2007) and others.

Following the Soviet and Russian linguist, the founder of the Russian Developmental Linguistics school (Developmental Linguistics is the science studying the infantile speech) S. N. Tseitlin, we interpret the infantile word creative innovations as “the lexical units having the status of a word, independently constructed by a child and being absent in common use (in the normative, i. e. the adult language) (Цейтлін, 2006: 4). Discovering the world, a child creates his or her language individually. Children, having no idea of how to define a new concept (image, imagination) for themselves, transfer already familiar knowledge to the new object using a relevant familiar word; they accommodate for their own understanding the words spoken by adults, thus, using the most productive morphological and word creative means and producing new words.

The specific of infantile word creation, in S. N. Tseitlin's opinion, display themselves, when children create new words based on the models most typological for the word creation of the language which they are mastering (Цейтлін, 2000). The system of the language is adopted by a child much earlier than the norm itself, therefore all children's innovations are not fixed in the language. In the meanwhile, the words produced by children are understandable for people generally and are relevant enough for use in communication. The infantile word creating innovations made by analogy with familiar words add to the lingual means which a child needs to express and which are absent in his or her language.

Children, creatively using grammatical abilities of their own language, construct a large amount of these new words, which have no analogies in the adult language system, thus filling linguistic lacunas.

The research into infantile word creativity allows us to detect resources of the Russian word creative system and, to some extent, to forecast the future state of the language.

We understand the concept “new transitive verbs” given in the article as intransitive verbs used as if they had a transitive meaning and created by removing the postfix -ся. Removing the postfix means that the word without such postfix exists: it means deleting the postfix in the word which, according to the existing lingual norm, is not used without this postfix. The norms of the literary language indicate that many verbs may be used only in the reflexive form, for example, улыбаться, ухитряться, нуждаться, бояться, дожидаться, втюриваться, etc. (see in detail Некрилова, 2018). However, through removing postfix -ся transitive verbs which are actively used in speaking emerge (улыбать (to make or compel someone to laugh), ухитрять (make someone cunning), нуждать (compel someone to be in need), боять (compel someone to fear)) and so on.

In the modern Russian language, the tendency toward the new transiti- vation of Russian verbs has become clearer. M. N. Epshtein recognizes such tendency in the form of the Russian intransitive verbs, i. e. development of transitiveness, which they contain, for example, along with the intransitive гулять с кем development of the transitive гулять кого, and along with the reflexive-intransitive улыбаться development of the transitive without the postfix улыбать кого (Епштейн, 2007). M. N. Epshtein claims that “acceleration of thinking processes in the contemporary information society, striving to determine the result of the action at once: namely, this lies as the basis for changing intransitive verbs. One verb means both actionresult and action-cause, the latter of which leads to the action-result” (Епштейн, 2007). Supporting the given statement, we believe that the changes in intransitive verbs realize the principle of the language economy.

In infantile speech, the tendency toward language economy is a common enough phenomenon, and this has been noticed by researchers in many languages. Thinking about the creative potential of the Russian language, M. N. Epshtein provided enough examples of infantile word creativity, or intransitive verbs used as if they had a transitive meaning (Еп- штейн, 2007):

Гриша, что ты там делаешь? - Я хожу маленького Алешу. Он у меня уже ходит.

Папа, поплавай меня вон там, поглубже.

Мама, скажи папе, чтобы он меня отпустил. Я хочу на берег, а он меня все плавает.

Папа, полетай меня! Я люблю, когда ты меня летаешь.

Впереди канавка, срочно прыгни лошадь (велосипед).

Ой, как мы быстро бежим! Не прыгай меня так резко!

Кто лопнул мой шарик?

The researcher comes to the conclusion that «the infantile speech spontaneously, “naturally”, while the adult one jokily, “openly”, “demonstratively” displays a necessity to think action directly projecting on object. Although naive, the infantile speech and the slightly playing adult one represent style peripheries of the language, namely there, at peripheries, first of all, one identifies structural lingual shifts seeking exit to the environment around grammar norms» (Епштейн, 2007).

Supporting the standpoint given above we think that it is possible to consider the realization of the language economy principle in infantile word creativity on the example of new transitive verbs from «The Dictionary in Infantile Innovations» (Цейтлін, 2001).

The meanings of definitions are taken from the Etymological Dictionary (Ожегов, 2012). While doing component analysis we will take for the basis the term “causation” which is not used with its traditional meaning (causation [from Latin causalis, cause] - causing, cause conditioning (Словарь иностранных слов, 1989), but meaning to compel someone (to have compelled), to encourage someone (to have encouraged) to do something.

In the realization of the economy principle within infantile word creation, significant role is played by the word construction, one of the ways to expand the amount of words in infantile speech. The basis for creating and interpreting lingual facts by a child is, in our view, the grammatical analogy such as that in the examples below:

- Еще он (компьютер) может вылуплять и кормить цыплят. (Альоша Е.; 6,6). Вылуплять, i. e. to make chickens hatch from their eggs. The verb вылуплять is constructed by analogy with вылупляться and has the new lexical meaning выводить through removing postfix -ся from the intransitive verb вылупляться. In the given example the verb вылуплять is used as if it had the transitive meaning. For a child it is easier to say вылуплять than to explain that компьютер может делать так, чтобы цыплята выводились из яиц. It is more economical to say one word: вылуплять.

By analogy, the next examples of verbs have been constructed by removing postfix -ся from the intransitive verb correlate:

- Папа меня долго домогал, откуда у меня эта ручка. (Віка Р.; 8). The verb домогать constructed by a child laconically expresses the entire sentence: to do something persistently in order to receive information, get something done.

- Зачем его так издевать? (Люба Б.; 7). In this case издевать has been constructed by analogy with the verb издеваться. Издевать means to do something in order to scornfully make fun of somebody, i. e. causation of mock.

- Я её впила в него! (Віка Р.; 5). Смирнов на перемене бегал с булавкой и впил ее в Корнееву (Маша Ч., 7). The verb впить is used by analogy with the verb впиваться meaning вонзить. Впить: to make that something has stuck into.

- Зря ты меня надеяла, что покажут этот мультфильм (Маша К.; 4,4). Надеять: to give me hope of something. Instead of saying the entire sentence Зря ты мне дала надежду на то, что покажут этот мультфильм a child has said briefly, expressively and, what is more important, understandable, using only one verb надеять.

The verbs constructed by analogy in the removal of the postfix -ся such as вылуплять, домогать, издевать, впить, надеять simplify for a speaker the transition of his or her idea, while the recipient is provided with the speedy and certain information.

- Полюбуйтесь, дети, какая природа вокруг нас. - Нас сегодня природа налюбовала! (Ваня В.; 3). The verb налюбовать has been constructed by analogy with the verb налюбоваться. Налюбовала is a causation of to have admired, i. e. to have made us admire it.

- Когда дети приходят в комнату, их наслаждают конфетами. The verb наслаждать is constructed by analogy with the verb наслаждаться. Наслаждать is a causation of to enjoy, i. e. to do something for the getting of pleasure from something. Having used the newly created verb наслаждать, a child has economically expressed his or her thought: when the children come into the room, they are treated to sweets so that they get pleasure (pleasure).

In the above examples, children used the existing model of the verb and only added the needed content and necessary lexical meaning, while ensuring that they are correctly understood by the interlocutor. The recipient

understands it without difficulty because a native speaker's consciousness already contains elements similar to those contained in the utterance of the child.

Thus, the use in speech of causative new transitive verbs facilitates quick formulation of a complex idea, and allows one to economically convey significant thinking with semantic and emotional volume while avoiding the use of many words.

Changes which normally occur in the language have an influence on the weakening and even the loss of the lexical meaning of a word, meanwhile, retaining its form. Based on the formal model and similar analogies, a child can create new words.

Let us consider the structure of the creative lingual transformation in the examples following:

- Ты, мамочка, хорошая, ты меня появила. The newly created verb is появить (the formal model is родить, the analogy is появиться). По- явить is the causation of to appear, i. e. to make someone or something appear.

(Daughter calls out to her father during a game) - Появляй голову! (Жанна; 3). The verb is constructed by analogy with the verb появляться. Появлять is the causation of to appear; to make something appear.

- Ты менярасплакал? (Люба Б.; 4). The verb расплакал is constructed by the analogy with the verb расплакаться. Расплакать is the causation of to cry, i. e. to begin to cry a lot.

- Онрассмеял её (Люба Б.; 5). Рассмеять is the causation of to laugh, to make someone laugh a lot. The verb is constructed by analogy with рассмеяться.

(He or she puts on a clown nose) - Хочешь, я тебя расхохотаю? (Альоша Ш.; 5,2). Расхохотать is the causation of to burst out laughing,

i. e. to do something to make someone laugh loudly.

- Мама, зачем папа меня смеёт? (Катя К.; 3). - Меня все смеять будут (Віка Р.; 8) In this sentence, the verb смеять means to mock, i. e. to compel someone to laugh at someone else in a scornful manner, to scoff.

Reacting to an adult's question Зачем ты тут уселась? the answer is Это папа меня усел (Катя С., 3,5). The lingual form recognizes the correlative opposition усадить - усесться. A child, using in his or her speech an intransitive verb with the transitive meaning, has conveyed his or her idea economically, expressively and laconically.

If one builds up a sentence with the normative verb усесться, one will construct the sentence meaningfully enough: это папа сделал так, чтобы я уселась. As we see, the verb усесться, while losing its postfix -ся, acquires the dependent pronoun in the form of the Accusative case without a proposition (a direct object of action) and loses the indication for the subject of the action itself.

Children subconsciously express their ideas as briefly as possible. Thus, the language economy which reflects the acceleration of the tempo of life and is natural for the spoken language overall, and particularly for infantile word creativity. Is achieved by the formation of new transitive verbs, i. e. through using created correlates of the relevant nominations, which are not fixed by the literary norm. The above examples contain the reversal of the normative language process of word creation with the help of depostfixing, i. e. these verbs, which are not fixed in the normative language and which are produced by way of the removal of postfix -ся in verbs such as вылупляться, домогаться, издеваться, впиваться, надеяться, налюбоваться, допытываться, наслаждаться, плестись, появляться, расплакаться, рассмеяться, расхохотаться, смеяться thus acquire the features of transitive verbs. Such verbs, constructed by children, do not have and cannot have any equivalent in the normative language.

In the following example, we observe a reversal of the normative language process of word formation with the help of de-prefixing:

- Ну я и напахла! (about the smell of perfumes which spread around the room after she broke the flacon) (Віка Р.; 6). Напахнуть is the causation of to smell; to do something in order to create a strong smell. In this case, we see changes in the meaning of the derivative word - на- + пахну(ть).

The analysis of examples shows that when children cannot find the necessary verb for the economical and precise expression of their ideas, then create a new verb, which allows them to define at once not the process, but the result of causation. Thus, they complete the existing lingual lacuna. The verb constructed by a child is an alternative to the word existing in the normative speech. At the same time, intransitive verbs are used as if they have a transitive meaning which reflects the principle of the language economy.

It is impossible to find similar constructions in adult speech, while in infantile speech it is quite common. From the linguistic point of view, the use of new transitive verbs is perceived as a deviation from the norm, as an anomaly, as an intended or unintended error. Such errors are one of the ways for creative changes in the language since the principle of analogy acts in the language, i. e. any change in the system provokes its reconstruction. In light of this problem, interesting observations on causes of the anomaly in the language are provided by the Swiss linguist and the founder of Structuralism Ferdinand de Saussure. In “Course of General Linguistics” he pointed out that «namely the individual speech with all of its accidental deviations from the lingual norm triggers the process of changes in the norm itself: a new constructed word which is the completion of the analogy originally belongs exclusively to the sphere of speech; this constructed word is a result of the spontaneous individual creativity” (Фердинанд де Соссюр, 1977: 199). “Everything that enters the language has been previously probated in the speech: it means that all evolution phenomena derive from the activity sphere of an individual. <. .> The language contains only an insignificant part of new constructed words which emerged in the speech; but those, which remain, are so numerous that, in the course of time, they can jointly reshape the vocabulary and the grammar into another form” (Фердинанд де Соссюр, 1977: 203). Therefore, it is totally appropriate, in our view, to consider the infantile innovations as a resource for new words able to enrich the lexical content of the language. The productive error can become a new regularity and present itself as the basis for the regular creation of words. Thus, the model of the regular formation of transitive verbs from intransitive verbs by removing postfix -ся - for instance, смеять - смеять-ся, появить - появить-ся, налюбовать - налюбовать-ся, etc., - as we observe, is met often enough in infantile speech. The meaning of this model is “to cause an action”, when a new transitive verb requires the use of the direct object, expresses the meaning of an action referring to the object and obligatory expresses the meaning of influence on the object. Without doubt, a norm is changeable but before a model has become a norm, it must go through probation, secure in the practice, be actively used as a normal word.

It is well known that the cognitive development of a child goes ahead of his or her speech development. Children's lingual experience is not developed enough to master grammatical norms. Nevertheless, a child successfully constructs lingual units of various levels of difficulty. This indicates that children can analyze the speech sounding around them, systematize lingual facts extracting the lingual units and rules necessary for the speaking

activity. The oral mastering of the language is done by children spontaneously, without a direct pedagogical input. It is natural for little children to be free thinking, with spontaneous associations. Therefore a child uses the lingual system in his or her own way creatively according to his or her cognitive abilities (perception, memory, attention, etc.). Occasional words enlarge the child's vocabulary: when the normative grammar does not permit such forms, the infantile grammar, on the contrary, creates them.

A child masters the grammar on the basis of the limited material available to him or her. The speech of adult native speakers sounding around the child, and particularly the speech addressed to him or her, serves the child as the material which he or she unconsciously (on the basis of the concrete analogies and associations) processes. Children construct words on the basis of models already existing in the language which were heard by them earlier. For example, Ну я и напахла: the model is “писать - написать”. Other examples of the same type are Куда ты запропастила мои фломастеры?; Такой сон только Оле-Лукойе может приснить. In the two last sentences the action is thought as not caused (запропаститься, присниться), therefore the relevant verb is absent. Having the ability to perform the grammatical operations by analogy, a child can produce forms of the verb unknown to him or her earlier in accordance with rules existing in the language and the child can create a new verb. Children do not need a great number of words; they easily find what they need in the word creating models of adult speech, and they create the necessary verb on their own.

Examples are various and each case of the occasional postfixing requires individual explanation:

- Сережа меня просыпает (Ляля Л.; 2,2). Не просыпай меня, мама! (Марина А.; 3,6). The verb просыпать is created by analogy with просыпаться. In the given examples, просыпать is a causation of просыпаться; to make someone awake; to wake someone up. In the normative language: разбудить - проснуться.

- Мама, зачем папа меня смеёт? (Катя К.; 3) - смеять follows the model of ломаться - ломать or are created with the breach of these or those regularities (for example, напахла, усел). While creating a transitive verb from an intransitive one, children create by analogy without application of descriptive phrases.

It is important to note that the analogy in this case acts within the principle of economy and strives to make use language more comfortable in the process of their use. The action of the grammatical analogy is displayed most clearly in the speech of those children who have yet to master norms of the language. The examples considered above serve to validate this statement.

Conclusions

The results obtained from our analysis allow us to make the following conclusions:

1. Language economy today is one of the most active processes affecting the development of the Russian language and is its moving force.

2. Infantile speech is the field of the active word creation realized through the principle of economy. It displays itself when children directly call an action using in their speech new transitive verbs as if they had the meaning to cause, “to compel”, someone to do something, instead of “do this in order to get something done”. The causative new transitional verbs which are constructed through shrinking the volume of expression and are conveyed in the minimal period of time, allow for the expression of complex idea in a laconic and captivating form, providing a more economical use of linguistic means.

3. The main role in the realization of the economy principle is played by the word creativity which is provoked by the need to express a complex idea with the fewest words. The principle of economy acts, on the one hand, ruinously and, on the other hand, creatively stimulating and enriching the language.

4. Infantile nominations are constructed on the basis of the modern language productive models. At the same time, each case displays a new combination of morphemes. The model considered by us - the construction of a transitive verb from an intransitive verb by way of removing a postfix -ся - is not fixed by norms of the literary language, though it fills lingual lacunas in the process of infantile word creation, based on the model that has been heard in adult speech.

5. The models are not invented by children but are taken by them from the existing lingual system, therefore the new lingual word is recognizable; we understand its meaning, though we have not met this word before.

6. The multiple examples of new transitive verbs in the infantile speech show that children as native speakers have a creative potential for filling lingual lacunas within the grammatical system of the Russian language, and that the observed lingual processes in infantile word creativity can have an impact on the language overall.

LITERATURE

1. Бенвенист, Э. (2002). Общая лингвистика. Москва: Прогресс.

2. Бодуэн де Куртене, И. А. (1963). Избранные труды по общему языкознанию. Москва: Изд-во АН СССР.

3. Валгина, Н. С. (2001). Активные процессы в современном русском языке. Москва: Логос.

4. Гвоздев, А. Н. (2007). Вопросы изучения детской речи. Санкт-Петербург: Детство-Пресс.

5. Зимина, Л. О. (2007). Принцип экономии в современной рекламе. (Автореф. дис. ... канд. філол.). Томск: Том. гос. ун-т.

6. Коробкина, Н. И. (2013). Концептуальная интеграция как способ языковой экономии. (Дис. ... канд. філол. наук). Волгоград: ВГ СПУ

7. Крылова, М. Н. (2014). Язык как динамическая система. Модели, системы, сети в экономике, технике, природе и обществе, 1 (9), 189-194.

8. Мартине, А. (1963). Основы общей лингвистики. Новое в лингвистике, 3 (с. 366-566). Москва: Прогресс.

9. Некрилова, О. Л. (2018). Перехідність-неперехідність дієслів у російській мові: когнитивно-еволюційний та посибілістичний аспекти. (Дис. ... канд. филол. наук). Харків: ХНПУ імені Г. С. Сковороди.

10. Ожегов, С. И. (2012). Толковый словарь русского языка. Москва: Мир и Образование: ОНИКС.

11. Пауль, Г. (1960). Принципы истории языка. Москва: Иностр. лит-ра.

12. Петров. Ф. Н. (Ред.). (1989). Словарь иностранных слов. Москва: Рус. яз.

13. Соссюр, Ф. (1977). Труды по языкознанию. Москва: Прогресс.

14. Спенсер, Г. (1986). Основные начала. Киев: Вища шк..

15. Фрейденберг, О. М. (Ред.). (1936). Античные теории языка и стиля. Ленинград: Наука.

16. Харченко, В. К. (2002). Словарь современного детского языка. Белгород: Белгор. гос. ун-т.

17. Цейтлин, С. Н. (2000). Язык и ребенок: лингвистика детской речи. Москва: ВЛАДОС.

18. Цейтлин, С. Н. (2001). Детские речевые инновации: опыт анализа. Исследования по языкознанию: к 70-летию члена-корреспондента РАН Александра Владимировича Бондарко (с. 329-336). Санкт-Петербург: С.-Петерб. ун-т.

19. Цейтлин, С. Н. (2006). Словарь детских словообразовательных инноваций. Санкт-Петербург: Златоуст.

20. Чуковский, К. (2001). От двух до пяти. (Т. 2). Москва: Терра - Книжный клуб.

21. Шагланов, Е. А. (2015). Информационно-стратегический потенциал компрессии текста телерекламы. (Дис. ... канд. филол. наук). Кемерово: КГУ

22. Шахнарович, А. М. (1985). Семантика детской речи: психолингвистический анализ. (Автореф. дис. ... докт. філол. наук). Москва: ИЯЗ АН СССР.

23. Эпштейн, М. Н. (2007). О творческом потенциале русского языка. Грамматика переходности и транзитивное общество. Знамя, 3. Узято з http://magazines.russ.ru/ znamia/ 2007/3/ep18.html_2022_3_13.

24. Whitney, W. D. (1887). The Life and Growth of Language. An Outline of Linguistic Science. New York: Appleton and Company.

REFERENCES

1. Benvenist, E'. (2002). Obshhaya lingvistika [General linguistics]. Moskva: Progress. 2. Bodue'n de Kurtene, I. A. (1963). Izbrannye trudy po obshhemu yazykoznaniyu [Selected works on general linguistics]. Moskva: Izd-vo AN SSSR [in Russian]. 3. Valgina, N. S. (2001). Aktivnyeprocessy vsovremennom russkomyazyke [Activeprocesses in modern Russian]. Moskva: Logos [in Russian]. 4. Gvozdev, A. N. (2007). Voprosy izucheniya detskoj rechi [Questions of studying childrens speech]. Sankt-Peterburg: Detstvo-Press [in Russian]. 5. Zimina, L. O. (2007). Princip e'konomii v sovremennoj reklame [The principle of economy in modern advertising]. Extended abstract of candidate's thesis. Tomsk: Tom. gos. un-t [in Russian]. 6. Korobkina, N. I. (2013). Konceptual'naya integraciya kak sposob yazykovoj e'konomii [Conceptual integration as a way oflanguage economy]. Candidate's thes. Volgograd: VG SPU [in Russian]. 7. Krylova, M. N. (2014). Yazyk kak dinamicheskaya sistema [Language as a dynamic system]. Modeli, sistemy, seti v e'konomike, texnike, prirode i obshhestve - Models, systems, networks in economics, technology, nature and society, 1 (9), 189-194 [in Russian].

8. Martine, A. (1963). Osnovy obshhej lingvistiki [Fundamentals of General Linguistics]. Novoe v lingvistike - New in linguistics, 3 (рр. 366-566). Moskva: Progress [in Russian].

9. Nekrylova, O. L. (2018). Perekhidnist-neperekhidnist diiesliv u rosiiskii movi: kohny- tyvno-evoliutsiinyi ta posybilistychnyi aspekty [Transition-intransitive verbs in the Russian language: cognitive-evolutionary and possibilistic aspects]. Candidate's thesis. Kharkiv: KhNPU imeni H. S. Skovorody [in Ukrainian]. 10. Ozhegov, S. I. (2012). Tolkovyj slovar' russkogo yazyka [Explanatory dictionary of the Russian language]. Moskva: Mir i Obra- zovanie: ONIKS [in Russian]. 11. Paul', G. (1960). Principy istorii yazyka [Principles of the history of language]. Moskva: Inostr. lit-ra [in Russian]. 12. Petrov, F. N. (Red.). (1989). Slovar' inostrannyx slov [Dictionary of foreign words]. Moskva: Rus. yaz. [in Russian]. 13. Sos- syur, F. (1977). Trudypoyazykoznaniyu [Workson linguistics]. Moskva: Progress [in Russian]. 14. Spenser, G. (1986). Osnovnye nachala [Basic beginnings]. Kiev: Vishha shk. [in Russian]. 15. Frejdenberg, O. M. (Ed.). (1936). Antichnye teorii yazyka i stilya [Ancient theories of language and style]. Leningrad: Nauka [in Russian]. 16. Xarchenko, V. K. (2002). Slovar' sovremennogo detskogo yazyka [Dictionary of modern children's language]. Belgorod: Belgor. gos. un-t [in Russian]. 17. Cejtlin, S. N. (2000). Yazyk i rebenok: lingvistika detskoj rechi [Language and child: linguistics of children's speech]. Moskva: VLADOS [in Russian]. 18. Cejtlin, S. N. (2001). Detskie rechevye innovacii: opyt analiza [Children's speech innovations: experience of analysis]. Issledovaniya po yazykoznaniyu: k 70-letiyu chlena-korrespondenta RAN Aleksandra Vladimirovicha Bondarko - Research in Linguistics: on the 70th Anniversary of Corresponding Member of the Russian Academy of Sciences Alexander Vladimirovich Bondarko (рр. 329-336). Sankt-Peterburg: S.-Peterb. un-t [in Russian]. 19. Cejtlin, S. N. (2006). Slovar' detskix slovoobrazovatelnyx innovacij [Dictionary of children's word-building innovations]. Sankt-Peterburg: Zlatoust [in Russian]. 20. Chukovskij, K. (2001). Ot dvux do pyati [Two to five]. (Vol. 2). Moskva: Terra - Knizhnyj klub [in Russian]. 21. Shagla- nova, E. A. (2015). Informacionno-strategicheskij potencial kompressii teksta telereklamy [Information and strategic potential of TV advertising text compression]. Doctor's thesis. Kemerovo: KGU [in Russian]. 22. Shaxnarovich, A. M. (1985). Semantika detskoj rechi: Psix- olingvisticheskij analiz [Semantics of children's speech: psycholinguistic analysis]. Extended abstract of doctor's thesis. Moskva: IYaZ AN SSSR [in Russian]. 23. E'pshtejn, M. N. (2007). O tvorcheskom potenciale russkogo yazyka. Grammatika perexodnosti i tranzitivnoe ob- shhestvo [On the creative potential of the Russian language. Grammar of transitivity and transitive society]. Znamya - Flag, 3. Retrieved from http://magazines.russ.ru/ znamia/ 2007/3/ep18.html_2022_3_13 [in Russian]. 24. Whitney, W. D. (1887). The Life and Growth of Language. An Outline of Linguistic Science. New York: Appleton and Company [in English].

Размещено на Allbest.ru