LEXICAL FUNCTIONS AND THEIR ROLE IN THE

DEVELOPMENT OF COLLOCATIONS “ADJECTIVE + NOUN” IN THE

Mirzajanova R.A.2
2
Master’s student of Ferghana State
University

Abstract: This article under discussion describes lexical functions and their
role in the development of collocations “Adjective + Noun” in the English
language. Based on the results of the conducted research the authors of the article
came to conclusion that in the quantitative aspect the most common lexical
function and the easiest to identify is Magn.
Key words: collocations, lexical functions, paradigmatic relations, lexical
units, Magn, AntiMagn, Bon and AntiBon.

Introduction
In our master's thesis devoted to the analysis of collocations “Adjective +
Noun” in the English language the features of the use of low-frequency
collocations in the texts of 20th-21st century fiction (J. Salinger, D. F. Wallace, J.
Grisham) were analyzed, the groups of these collocations on the basis of their
particle structure have been distinguished and their formation trends in each group
have been described.
The system of lexical functions (LF) has been continuously studied since the
1960s, the fund of lexical functions has been replenished and has been studied in
contrastive linguistics using different languages. With the development of natural
language processing, interest in lexical functions has only increased, although the
implementation of functions in code and automatic use in text generation is still a

217
difficult task [1]. LFs describe constant logical relations between lexical units in an
almost mathematical way.
The main part
The LF system includes lexical substitutions and lexical parameters. Lexical
substitutions are functions that describe paradigmatic relations, e.g., antonyms,
synonyms. In our study lexical substitutions were not considered due to the fact
that the material of the study was the linear text of works of fiction. Lexical
parameters describe syntagmatic relations, which include, for example, adjectival,
adverbial and noun functions such as Magn, AntiMagn, Bon and AntiBon.
Standard LFs are combined into more complex ones, but since the object of our
study was low-frequency collocations (combinations of two or more words),
complex LFs were not included in the research material.
Speaking about the differences between LF and collocations, we can note
that the means by which LF is expressed can be both word-formation elements and
free and non-free combinations. Nevertheless, among the free combinations, those
that are described by any LF, even though they seem to differ from collocations
due to the absence of a connected component, may also be called collocations.
According to I.A. Melchuk's observation, the classes of collocations and the
classes of LFs overlap [2].
Our study quantitatively distinguished 4 types of LF: Magn, AntiMagn, Bon,
AntiBon.
From the analyzed examples in our study, we came to the conclusion that the
most common LF is Magn. The Magn value is an amplification that can be
expressed synonymously with “very”, “to a high degree”. Magn also emphasizes
the meaning of “intensity”. LF Magn is widely represented among low-frequency
(sometimes not recorded in the corpus) authorial word combinations. LF Magn
collocations can be:

218
 1. occasionalism (you made it so unmisinterpretably clear),
2. a combination of adjacent antonymous pairs, creating an "expansion of
influence" of a feature (a really extensive intensive intro, radiantly dark),
3. even in the case where the intensifying component will be a rather frequent
"agent", such as "extremely", its use may be together with a vivid emotional
and expressive lexical unit, which does not require intensification: extremely
squalid.
Among the LF Magn collocations we can distinguish some semantic types of
reinforcing adverbs:
1) emotionally colored type: wonderfully, terribly;
2) evaluative, with a high degree of modality: undeniably, freakishly;
3) metaphorical spatial adverb type: gradually, largely;
4) indicative of degree: severely.
In nominal collocations of LF Magn, as a rule, the intensifying component
shows itself as a duplicating seme: the required pleasantries, rapt intensity.
The lexical function of AntiMagn attenuates the meaning of a feature, an
action: for example, torpid spectation, where torpid means "absent", "not
energetic", and spectation means "inclusion in a situation".
In adjectival LF AntiMagn collocations adverbs carry meanings:
 attenuation of a feature: trifle, vaguely;
evaluative words (understatement): insufficiently, oddly;
spatial (distant): remotedly;
metaphorical words denoting low temperatures: coldly.
The implementation of the LF Bon gives the sign a positive evaluation:
pleasantly high, roller-skate skinny, and AntiBon-collocations contain a
component with a negative evaluation (monstrously stressful), amplification also

219
occurs through the duplication of terms, using virtually synonyms located in the
same row of the name group: illusion-shattering disappointment.
Conclusion
As we noted in our study, lexical functions mark those meanings that are
most often expressed when a word is used in speech, therefore the development of
the lexical system must with necessity include conditions for the expression of
lexical functions. This is also evidenced by the research we have conducted.
Based on our study, we note that in the quantitative aspect the most common
LF and the easiest to identify is Magn. Quite common in all languages are the
functions Bon and AntiBon. In our study more (which is atypical for dictionaries)
examples with AntiBon were identified, here we can distinguish the influence of
D. F. Wallace and his general pessimistic tone of the work we have analyzed [6].

220
 References:
1. Iordanskaya L. Some Procedural Problems in the Implementation of
Lexical Functions for Text Generation. 1996. P. 279.
2. Melchuk, I. A. On the terms "stability" and "idiomaticity" / I. A. Melchuk //
Problems of Linguistics. - 1990. - № 4. - P. 73-80.
3. Poulsen, S. Collocation as a language resource. A functional and cognitive
study in English phraseology: PhD dissertation / S. Poulsen; Institute of
language and communication. — University of Southern Denmark, 2005.
— P. 36.
4. Tikhanovich, A. N. Lexical function of Magn in modern Russian language:
corpus and experimental study: Candidate of Philological Sciences: 10.02.01
/ Tikhanovich Angela Nikolaevna. - SPb., 2009. - 194 p.
5. Sinclar, J. Trust the text. Language, corpus and discourse / J. Sinclar.
— London ; New York : Routledge, 2004. — 212 p.
6. Wallace D.F. The Infinite Jest. URL:
https://raisuman123.files.wordpress.com/2013/05/david-foster-wallace-
infinite-jest-v2-0.pdf

221