There are several noun-forming suffixes in English. Here are some examples:

1. -er: worker, teacher, writer
2. -ist: artist, scientist, cyclist
3. -tion / -sion: celebration, decision, discussion
4. -ness: happiness, kindness, darkness
5. -ment: development, agreement, improvement
6. -ity / -ty: quality, responsibility, unity
7. -hood: childhood, brotherhood, motherhood
8. -ship: friendship, leadership, citizenship
9. -age: package, storage, luggage
10. -er: reader, singer, dancer (used to create agent nouns)
11. -ism: capitalism, socialism, feminism
12. -ance / -ence: importance, difference, resistance
13. -dom: freedom, kingdom, wisdom
14. -al: arrival, denial, festival
15. -ee: employee, interviewee, trainee (used to denote the recipient or beneficiary of an action)
1. Classification of Verbs
Grammatically the verb is the most complex part of speech. This
is due to the central role it performs in the expression of the predicative functions of the sentence, i.e. the functions of establishing the
connection between the situation (situational event) named in the
«iterance and reality. The complexity of the verb is inherent not only .
the intricate structure of its grammatical categories, but also in its
tfarious subclass divisions, as well as in its falling into two sets of
jrms profoundly different from each other: the finite set and the
peon-finite set (verbals, or verbids).
The categorial semantics of the verb is process presented dynamfcally. This general processual meaning is embedded in the semantics
Ipf all the verbs. It is proved by the verb valency and the syntactic
function of the predicate.
The processual categorial meaning of the notional verb determines
fits characteristic combination with a noun expressing both the doer
Ipf the action (its subject) and, in cases of the objective verb, the reciplient of the action (its object); it also determines its combination with
fan adverb as the modifier of the action.
In the sentence the finite verb invariably performs the
functions }. of the verb-predicate, expressing the processual
categorial features I of predication, i.e. time, aspect, voice, and
mood.
From the point of view of their outward structure, verbs are chariacterized by specific forms of word-building, as well as by the
formal f features expressing the corresponding grammatical
categories.
The grammatical categories which find formal expression in the
outward structure of the verb are, first, the category of fmitude dividing the verb into finite and non-finite forms (this category has a
lexico-grammatical force); second, the categories of person, number,
tense, aspect, voice, and mood.
The class of verbs falls into a number of subclasses distinguished
by different semantic and lexico-grammatical features. On the upper
level of this division two unequal sets are identified: the set of verbs
of full nominative value (notional verbs) which are opposed to the
set of verbs of partial nominative value (semi-notional and functional
verbs). The set of notional verbs is derivationally open. The second
set is derivationally closed, it includes limited subsets of verbs
characterized by individual relational properties. On the lower level
of division each set can be subdivided into numerous subsets according to their relevant features.
Notional verbs are classified on the basis of three main principles: the relation of the subject of the verb to the process denoted by
Ɉɬɪɟɞɚɤɬɢɪɨɜɚɥɢɨɩɭɛɥɢɤɨɜɚɥɧɚɫɚɣɬɟ : PRESSI ( HERSON )
142 Seminars on Theoretical English Grammar eminar 6. Verb: General. Non-Finite Verbs 143
the verb, the aspective verbal semantics, the verbal combinability with
other language units.
According to the first criterion, all notional verbs are divided into
two sets: actional and statal. This division is grammatically relevant
since it explains the difference between the actional and statal verbs
in their attitude towards the denotation of the action in progress.
Actional verbs express the action performed by the subject, i.e. they
present the subject as an active doer. Statal verbs, unlike their subclass counterparts, denote the state of their subject, i.e. they either
give the subject the characteristic of the inactive recipient of some
outward activity, or else express the mode of its existence.
Aspective verbal semantics (the second criterion) exposes the inner character of the process denoted by the verb. It represents the
process as durative (continual), iterative (repeated), terminate (concluded), interminate (not concluded), instantaneous (momentary),
ingressive (starting), overcompleted (developed to the extent of superfluity), undercompleted (not developed to its full extent), and the
like. According to the aspective verbal semantics, two major subclasses of notional verbs are singled out: limitive and unlimitive. The
verbs of the first order present a process as potentially limited. The
verbs of the second order present a process as not limited by any
border point. The demarcation line between the two aspective verbal
subclasses is not rigidly fixed, the actual differentiation between them
being in fact rather loose. Still, the opposition between limitive and
unlimitive verbal sets does exist in English. This division of verbs has
an unquestionable grammatical relevance, which is expressed, among
other things, in peculiar correlation of these subclasses with the categorial aspective forms of the verbs (indefinite, continuous, perfect).
It also reveals the difference in the expression of aspective distinctions in English and in Russian. The English lexical aspect differs
radically from the Russian aspect. In terms of semantic properties,
the English lexical aspect expresses a potentially limited or unlimited
process, whereas the Russian aspect expresses the actual conclusion
(the perfective, or terminative aspect) or non-conclusion (the imperfective, or non-terminative aspect) of the process in question. In terms
of systemic properties, the two English lexical aspect varieties, unlike
their Russian absolutely rigid counterparts, are but loosely distinjished and easily reducible. In accord with these characteristics, both e
English limitive verbs and unlimitive verbs may correspond alter-itely
either to the Russian perfective verbs or imperfective verbs,
Depending on the contextual uses.
The syntactic valency of the verb falls into two cardinal types:
Ipbligatory and optional. The obligatory valency is such as must necssarily be realized for the sake of the grammatical completion of the
ntactic construction. The subjective and the direct objective valencies
of the verb are obligatory. The optional valency is such as is not
mecessarily realized in grammatically complete constructions: this type
lof valency may or may not be realized depending on the concrete
Imformation conveyed by the utterance. Most of the adverbial modiffiers are optional parts of the sentence, so in terms of valency
the j adverbial valency of the verb is mostly optional.
Thus, according to the third criterion - the valency of the verb -I
all notional verbs are classified into two sets: complementive (taking
obligatory adjuncts) and supplementive (taking optional adjuncts). I
Complementive and supplementive verbs fall into minor groups: com-|
plementive verbs are subdivided into predicative, objective, and adverbial verbs; supplementive verbs are subdivided into personal and |
impersonal verbs.
In connection with complementive and supplementive characteristics of verbs there arises the question of clarifying the difference
between the two notions - “objectivity” and “transitivity”. Verbal
objectivity is the ability of the verb to take any object, irrespective of
its type. Verbal transitivity is the ability of the verb to take a direct
object. The division of the verb into objective and non-objective is
more relevant for English than for Russian morphology because in
English not only transitive but also intransitive objective verbs can
be used in passive forms.
Semi-notional and functional verbs are united in the set of the
verbs characterized by partial nominative value. To this set of verbs
refer several subdivisions of verbs: auxiliary verbs, modal verbs, link
verbs, and semi-notional verbid introducer verbs. All semi-functional and purely functional verbs function as markers of predication
showing the connection between the nominative content of the sentence and reality.
Seminars on Theoretical English Grammar
2. Non-Finite Forms of the Verb
Non-finite forms of the verb (verbids) are the forms of the verb
which have features intermediary between the verb and the non-processual parts of speech. Their mixed features are revealed in their semantics, morphemic structural marking, combinability, and syntactic functions. Verbids do not denote pure processes but present them
as peculiar kinds of substances and properties; they do not express
the most specific finite verb categories - the categories of tense and
mood; they have a mixed, verbal and non-verbal, valency; they perform mixed, verbal and non-verbal, syntactic functions.
The strict division of functions clearly shows that the opposition between the finite and non-finite forms of the verb creates a special grammatical category. The differential feature of the opposition is constituted by the expression of verbal time and mood: while the time-mood
grammatical signification characterizes the finite verb in a way that it
underlies its finite predicative function, the verbid has no immediate means
of expressing time-mood categorial semantics and therefore presents the
weak member of the opposition. The category expressed by this opposition is called the category of “fmitude”. The syntactic content of the
category of fmitude is the expression of verbal predication.
The peculiar feature of the verbid verbality consists in their expressing “secondary” (“potential”) predication. They are not self-dependent in a predicative sense. The verbids normally exist only as part
of sentences built up by genuine, primary predicative constructions
that have a finite verb as their core. And it is through the reference to
the finite verb-predicate that these complexes set up the situation denoted by them in the corresponding time and mood perspectives.
The English verbids include four forms distinctly differing from
one another within the general verbid system: the infinitive, the gerund, the present participle, and the past participle. In compliance
with this difference, the verbid semi-predicative complexes are distinguished by the corresponding differential properties both in form
and in syntactic-contextual function.
The infinitive combines the properties of the verb with those of
the noun, as a result it serves as the verbal name of a process. By
virtue of its general process-naming function, the infinitive should be
considered as the head-form of the whole paradigm of the verb.
145
i Seminar 6. Verb: General. Non-Finite Verbs
The infinitive has a dual, verb-type and noun-type, valency. The
infinitive has three grammatical categories: the aspective category of
development (the opposition of Continuous and Non-Continuous
Informs), the aspective category of retrospective coordination (the opI’position of Perfect and Non-Perfect forms), the category of voice (the I
opposition of Passive and Non-Passive forms). Consequently, the
{categorial paradigm of the infinitive of the objective verb includes »
eight forms: the Indefinite Active, the Continuous Active, the Perfect I
Active, the Perfect Continuous Active; the Indefinite Passive, the i
Continuous Passive, the Perfect Passive, the Perfect Continuous Passive.
The infinitive paradigm of the non-objective verb, correspondingly,
includes four forms.
The gerund, like the infinitive, combines the properties of the verb
with those of the noun and gives the process the verbal name. In
comparison with the infinitive the gerund reveals stronger substantive properties. Namely, as different from the infinitive, and similar
to the noun, the gerund can be modified by a noun in the possessive
case or its pronominal equivalents (expressing the subject of the verbal process), and it can be used with prepositions.
The combinability of the gerund is dual: it has a mixed, verb-type
and noun-type, valency. Like the infinitive, the gerund performs the
syntactic functions of the subject, the object, the predicative, the attribute, and the adverbial modifier. The gerund has two grammatical
categories: the aspective category of retrospective coordination and
the category of voice. Consequently, the categorial paradigm of the
gerund of the objective verb includes four forms: the Simple Active,
the Perfect Active, the Simple Passive, the Perfect Passive. The gerundial paradigm of the non-objective verb, correspondingly, includes
"two forms.
The present participle serves as a qualifying-processual name. It
combines the properties of the verb with those of the adjective and
adverb.
The present participle has two categories: the category of retrospective coordination and the category of voice. The triple nature of
the present participle finds its expression in its mixed (verb-type, adjective-type, adverb-type) valency and its syntactic functions (those
of the predicative, the attribute, and the adverbial modifier).
10 - 3548
144
S
Ɉɬɪɟɞɚɤɬɢɪɨɜɚɥɢɨɩɭɛɥɢɤɨɜɚɥɧɚɫɚɣɬɟ : PRESSI ( HERSON )
146 Seminars on Theoretical English Grammar I Seminar 6. Verb: General. Non-Finite Verbs 147
The present participle, similar to the infinitive, can build up semipredicative complexes of objective and subjective types.
The past participle combines the properties of the verb with those
of the adjective. The categorial meaning of the past participle is qualifying: it gives some sort of qualification to the denoted process. The
past participle has no paradigmatic forms; by way of paradigmatic
correlation with the present participle, it conveys implicitly the categorial meanings of the perfect and the passive. Its valency is not specific; its typical syntactic functions are those of the attribute and the
predicative.
Like the present participle, the past participle is capable of making up semi-predicative constructions of complex object, complex
subject, as well as absolute complexes.
The consideration of the English verbids in their mutual comparison,
supported and supplemented by comparing them with their nonverbal
counterparts, reveals a peculiar character of their correlation. The
correlation of the infinitive, the gerund, and the verbal noun, being of
an indisputably systemic nature and covering a vast proportion of the
lexicon, makes up a special lexico-grammatical category of
processual representation. The three stages of this category represent
the referential processual entity of the lexemic series, respectively, as
dynamic (the infinitive and its phrase), semi-dynamic (the gerund and
its phrase), and static (the verbal noun and its phrase). The category
of processual representation underlies the predicative differences
between various situation-naming constructions in the sphere of
syntactic nominalization.
Another category specifically identified within the framework of
substantival verbids and relevant for syntactic analysis is the category of modal representation. This category, pointed out by L.S. Barkhudarov, marks the infinitive in contrast to the gerund, and it is
revealed in the infinitive having a modal force, in particular, in its
attributive uses, but also elsewhere.
In treating the ing-forms as constituting one integral verbid entity,
opposed, on the one hand, to the infinitive, on the other hand, to the
past participle, appeal is naturally made to the alternating use of the
possessive and the common-objective nounal element in the role of the
subject of the ing-form, the latter construction is known in linguistics
as “half-gerund”. The half-gerund is an intermediary form with double
features whose linguistic semi-status is reflected in the term itself. In
fact, the verbid under examination is rather to be interpreted as a
transferred participle, or a gerundial participle, since semantic accent
in half-gerundial construction is made on the situational content of the
! fact or event described, with the processual substance as its core (e.g.:
I / didn 't mind the children playing in the study).
Based on this information, answer the questions:
6. A general outline of the verb as a part of speech.

7. Classification of verbs.