1 republic of uzbekistan ministry of higher and secondary specialised education

part of standard English. Clipping is different from back-formation; 
back-formation
may change the part of speech or the word’s meaning, 
whereas clipping creates shortened words from longer words, but does 
not change the part of speech or the meaning of the word. Back-
formation is the process of creating a new word by removing actual or 
supposed affixes.The term back-formation is given by James Murray in 

---

84 
1889. For example, the noun ‘resurrection’ was borrowed from Latin , 
and the verb ‘resurrect’ was then back-formed hundreds of years later 
from it by removing the suffix ‘-ion’.This segmentation of ‘resurrecion’
into ‘resurrect’ was possible because English had examples of Latinate 
words in the form of ‘verb’ and ‘verb +ion’ pairs, such as 
‘opine/opinion’. These became the pattern for many more such pairs, 
where a verb derived from a Latin supine stem and a noun ending in ‘–
ion’ entered the language together , such as ‘insert/insertion, 
project/projection’. 
Analysis of the structure of the English and native languages
demonstrates some similarities and distinctions in word formation
process. Similarities: productivity of affixation forming new words , 
existence of lots of derived words and productivity of affixation
which change words from one part of speech into another, word 
formation by compounding. The distinction is that in Russian
conversion is not well developed. Conversion is observed in the Uzbek 
language: tilla (noun) - rangli temir, tilla (adjective) soat , but it is not 
so productive. Word formation by conversion is productive in English: 
round (noun), round (verb), round ( adjective), smoke - to smoke, play 
– to play , gaze – to gaze. 
Self-control questions: 
1. What means of word formation do you know? 
2. What are the main types of morphological word- formation? 
3. What is the distinctive feature of the English word-formation 
concerning native languages? 
4. What is the distinctive feature of the Uzbek word- formation 
concerning English and Russian languages? 
5. Why is word- formation by conversion is productive in the 
English language. 
6. What similarities are observed in word-formation of the English 
and native languages. 
7.Why can’t we express grammatical meaning by the change of the 
place of the stress in the English and Uzbek languages? 
8. Can we form new words by the change of the place of the stress 
in the English and Uzbek languages? 
9.Why has the typological character of the English word structure 
changed in the cause of historical development? 
10.Has the typological character of the Uzbek word structure 

---

85 
changed in the cause of historical development? 
11.Why hasn’t the typological character of the Uzbek language 
changed in the cause of historical development?