hin.qxd


Lexical Syntagms 
in Publicistic Prose

Under the functional-stylistic system of speech, thesame morphological and syntactical categories
and forms are represented differently in different styles. A
type of syntagmatic sequence can characterize a
functional style and conversely - a functional style can be
differentiated on the basis of types of syntagms. Certain
syntagmatic categories are either fully expressed or only
partially realized in a particular functional style, and
sometimes are even completely  excluded,  thus
becoming stylistically unmarked for that particular
variety of speech. Such correlation, particularly between
types (categories) of lexical syntagms and functional
motivation, is specifically expressed in the functional
style of publicistic prose, which represents an ontological

juxtaposition of the scientific (intellective, informative) and the fictional, of fact and
fiction, of message and emotive impact. 

The formation of new words through stylistic connotations (a frequent observation in
the categorial forms) seems non-typical of the publicistic variety of speech. It is
determined by a certain prevalence of the informative function, whose aim is not only to
give a fully  precise and objective description of historical, social, cultural, political
events, developments and processes taking place in the society (fact), but also to analyse
and evaluate them (fiction).

Correspondingly, the specific speech organization has its own norms in the choice of
language means at both semantic and metasemiotic levels to meet the needs of
communication in this sphere. However, certain syntagms of different lexico-morphological
categories are an obvious means of expressing functional motivation in publicistic prose as
they represent not only lexico-morphological, but syntactic relations as well.1

The lexico-morphological categories are productive, thus expressing different
connotative meanings and realizing the function of emotive impact. At first sight, this
quality seems to contradict  the informative bias of publicistic style but, in fact, the
selection of categorial forms is carried out so carefully that in any publicistic context the
juxtaposition of fact and fiction becomes quite obvious in all these forms.

In order to illustrate this, we will discuss two contexts, from fictional and publicistic
sources respectively.

The light faded; the hills died away into featureless flat shapes
against the sky. Under the chestnut trees what utter darkness! John
still waited, but his wife did not come. “All right then,” he said to

62

Armenian Folia Anglistika                                                                                  Linguistics 

Gayane Muradyan 



himself, with a spiteful little anger that disguised itself as a god-
like and impersonal serenity of justice; “Let her sulk if she wants
to. She only punishes herself.” Next morning he left for Rome and
the Cytological Congress without saying good bye; that would
teach her. But “Thank Goodness!” was Moira’s first reflection
when she heard that he had gone.  And then, suddenly, she felt
rather sorry for him. Poor John! He was pathetic really. She was
so rich in happiness that she could afford to be sorry for him. And
in a way she was even grateful to him. If he hadn’t come, if he
hadn’t behaved so unforgivably, nothing would have happened
between Tonino and herself. Poor John! But all the same he was
hopeless. Her life was turbulent now, there were depths and
darknesses. And love was no longer a game; it was violent, all-
absorbing, even rather terrible.  She wanted to be with him, to feel
his nearness, to touch him. Her solitudes were endless meditations
on the theme of him. Sometimes the longing for his tangible
presence was too achingly painful to be borne. Coming like this in
the middle of the night! It was madness, it was scandalous.

(Aldous Huxley. “Brief Candles”  p. 74)

As a general rule, the market is divided into rows of covered stalls,

ranging from perishable foods to household electric appliances.

Nearly everything is available, either wholesale or retail.  Diversity

refers not only to the wide range of goods and services available but

also to the size, relative importance and modernness of the market

compared to others in the area. The diversity of the Nigerian culture

is one of its hallmarks. The country is comparable in size to Texas and

New Mexico combined and has 300 ethnic and subethnic groups with

as many distinct languages and dialects. Often a dialect is clearly

understandable only to the inhabitants of a town and its immediate

environs. Collectivism and uncertainty avoidance are more evenly

applicable to the bulk of Nigerian society regardless of tribal

affiliation. These qualities are readily observable at the market place,

which bustles with activity. The smart shopper must come to the

market fully armed with a knowledge of the latest fair prices for the

commodities of interest. The typical seller, in turn, has perfected the

art of keeping a poker face in order to extract as much profit from the

sale as possible without antagonizing the customer, with the

minimum of negotiating necessary to arrive at a mutually acceptable

price�. Bystanders eagerly offer their own loud opinions about the

ongoing bargain. 

(Martin J.Gannon. 
“Understanding Global Cultures” p.235)

63

Linguistics Armenian Folia Anglistika



Each of these contexts represents a different functional-stylistic variety of speech,
even though the category units used in both of them are structurally the same. The
stylistically highly charged categorial forms in the first context (featureless, darkness,
spiteful, god-like, happiness, hopeless, darknesses, nearness, endless, painful) have
created a distinct aesthetic atmosphere by describing human emotions. Similar structures
which describe the diversity of Nigerian society in the second context (perishable,
available, modernness, comparable, understandable, applicable, regardless,
observable, shopper, seller, customer, bystanders, acceptable) aim at giving certain
information through connotations imposed on them by the lexico-morphological
categorial forms, so that their publicistic function (emotive + informative) is fully
realized. 

As has already been observed, each style makes use of certain categorial forms
according to its function. The study of the words on the basis of the five lexico-
morphological categories [the category  of action agent (-er), the  category  of  quality
(-ness, -ful), the category of caritivity (-less), the  category  of  possibility  of an action
(-able), the category of simulation (-like)],2 reveals the stylistically marked elements of
the category of possibility of an action (-able) to be the most common choice of
contemporary English publicistic prose.

The adjectives with the suffix -able in this style are prevalent and numerous as
compared with scientific and fictional styles of writing. A certain limited number of
informative terms such as amendable, applicable, adaptable, dutiable, heritable,
(un)impeachable, transferable, ratable, manoeuvrable, (un)alterable, (in)violable are
also relevant in  publicistic  prose writing. There is a noticeable decrease in stylistically
marked units of other categories in this style as opposed to fictional style.  However, the
derivative adjectives of the category of possibility of action are quite common
occurrences and are indeed most widely used, especially the forms with negative
prefixes in-, im-, dis-, un-, ir- (appreciable, collapsible, considerable, deplorable,
inexorable, objectionable, presentable, regrettable, surmountable, supplantable,
vulnerable, comeatable, getatable, (in)consolable, (in)dubitable, (in)alienable,
(in)eradicable, (in)excusable, (in)disputable, (im)measurable, (im)perishable,
(im)practicable, (im)probable, (dis)reputable, (dis)soluble, (un)matchable,
(un)endurable, (un)exceptionable, (ir)replaceable, (ir)refutable, (ir)reparable). 

Of particular interest is the fact that this choice is so important that most of the
syntagms with the suffix -able, are perceived as “publicistic” due to a high degree of
occurrence and wide variety, thus becoming stylistically marked. The reason for the
acquisition of this new quality probably lies in the semantic peculiarity of the above
syntagms, none of which realizes completion of action. The consideration of a number
of extra-linguistic factors makes it clear that possible actions cannot actually be meant
to be realized. Such a realization is always relative. Social, public and historical
phenomena are never generally accepted rules or truths either. This quality of social
relativity corresponds to the same quality of the adjectives realizing the category of
possibility of action, thus making them appropriate to the general stylistic characteristics
of the above speech variety. 

64

Armenian Folia Anglistika                                                                                  Linguistics 



It should be noted that the functionally and stylistically meaningful or style-forming
characteristics of the adjectives functioning in the category of possibility of an action are
acceptable in contemporary English publicistic style not only due to their dynamic
nature and semantic capacity but also to their condensed form. This style on the whole
tends to syntagmatic condensation, of course, not to such an extent as the scientific and
newspaper styles. 

The above observations allow us to conclude that the style-forming property of the
adjectives with the suffix -able is fully actualized and finds its realization in the
functional style of publicistic prose, where it becomes stylistically marked. The
functional meaning is so definite and expresses the core of the style with such peculiarity
that on the basis of this feature this style could possibly be regarded not as a
juxtaposition of the two basic styles of speech, fictional and scientific speech varieties,
but as a third style, enjoying the same independence as the above mentioned major
functional styles.

References:

1. æ³ÑáõÏÛ³Ý ¶.´. Þ³ñ³ÑÛáõë³Ï³Ý áõëáõÙݳëÇñáõÃÛáõÝÝ»ñ, ºñ¨³Ý,
2003; Òåð-Ìèíàñîâà Ñ.Ã. Ñèíòàãìàòèêà ôóíêöèîíàëüíûõ ñòèëåé.
Ì., 1986. 

2. Alexandrova O.V., Ter-Minasova S.G. English Syntax. Collocation, Colligation
and Discourse. M., 1987.

´³é³ÛÇÝ ß³ñáõÛÃÝ»ñÁ 
Ññ³å³ñ³Ï³Ëáë³Ï³Ý ³ñÓ³ÏáõÙ

´³é³ÛÇÝ ß³ñáõÛÃÝ»ñÇ ¨ ·áñͳé³Ï³Ý-á×³Ï³Ý Ýå³ï³Ï³áõÕÕí³-Íáõ-
ÃÛ³Ý Ï³åÁ Ññ³å³ñ³Ï³Ëáë³Ï³Ý ³ñÓ³ÏáõÙ ³é³í»É ³ÏÝѳÛï »Ý ³ñï³-
óáÉáõÙ  –able í»ñç³Í³Ýóáí ³Í³Ï³ÝÝ»ñÁ, áñáÝù, Áëï ¿áõÃÛ³Ý, Çñ³óÝáõÙ »Ý
·áñÍáÕáõÃÛ³Ý Ï³ï³ñÙ³Ý Ñݳñ³íáñáõÃÛ³Ý Ï³ñ·Á: Ðñ³å³ñ³Ï³Ëáë³Ï³Ý
³ñÓ³ÏáõÙ ³Ûë μ³é³ÛÇÝ ß³ñáõÛÃÝ»ñÇ É³ÛÝ ·áñͳÍáõÃÛáõÝÁ μ»ñáõÙ ¿ á׳ϳÝ
ÝßáõÛóíáñÙ³Ý ¨ ûÅïáõÙ ³Û¹ ÙdzíáñÝ»ñÁ á׳ï³ñμ»ñ³ÏÇã ѳïϳÝÇßáí: 

65

Linguistics Armenian Folia Anglistika