`
71
THE RELATIONSHIP OF CONVERSION AND OTHER WORD-FORMATION
PROCESSES
Chulieva Shakhnoza Oybek qizi
Master’s degree student
University of Exact and Social Sciences
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.14799459
Introduction
Language is a dynamic system that continuously evolves to meet the communicative
needs of its speakers. One of the key mechanisms of linguistic change and lexical expansion is
word formation, which includes various processes such as derivation, compounding, blending,
clipping, and conversion. Among these, conversion—the process of changing a word’s
grammatical category without altering its form—plays a significant role in the development of
the English lexicon. For example, nouns like email and google have been converted into verbs
(to email, to google), demonstrating how conversion contributes to linguistic economy and
flexibility.
The study of conversion is essential for understanding how English expands its
vocabulary without relying on affixation. Unlike derivation, which involves the addition of
prefixes or suffixes (happy → happiness), conversion allows words to shift categories
seamlessly. However, conversion does not operate in isolation; it interacts with other word-
formation processes, sometimes complementing or even competing with them. For instance,
while derivation and compounding create new words through affixation and root
combination, conversion achieves the same result through category shift. Understanding
these interactions is crucial for both theoretical linguistics and practical applications, such as
language teaching and lexicography.
This research contributes to the broader understanding of English morphology and
lexical development. By analyzing the interaction between conversion and other word-
formation processes, the study provides insights into how English maintains efficiency and
adaptability in vocabulary expansion. Furthermore, the findings can be useful for English
language learners, educators, and lexicographers in understanding how words shift categories
naturally over time.
Theoretical background
Conversion can be classified based on:
1. Directionality
2. Grammatical Category Changes
Directionality of Conversion
Conversion can be analyzed in terms of whether one category is historically primary and
another is derived. There are two main perspectives:
Unidirectional Conversion: One category is clearly derived from another (e.g., to Google
is derived from the noun Google).
Bidirectional (Reciprocal) Conversion: Some words can function as either a noun or a
verb without a clear historical order (e.g., to walk ↔️ a walk).
Grammatical Category Changes
Conversion can occur between various parts of speech. The most common types include:
`
72
1. Noun → Verb (Denominal Verbs)
bottle → to bottle (He bottled the juice.)
chair → to chair (She chaired the meeting.)
2. Verb → Noun (Deverbal Nouns)
run → a run (She went for a run.)
call → a call (I received a call.)
3. Adjective → Noun (De-adjectival Nouns)
poor → the poor (Helping the poor is important.)
blind → the blind (He works with the blind.)
4. Adjective → Verb (De-adjectival Verbs)
empty → to empty (He emptied the box.)
dirty → to dirty (Don’t dirty the floor.)
5. Other Less Common Conversions
Preposition → Verb: down → to down (He downed the drink quickly.)
Interjection → Noun: woo → a woo (His woo was charming.)
Conversion is a highly productive word-formation process in English, enabling linguistic
economy by reusing existing words without morphological modification. It interacts with
other processes like derivation and compounding, sometimes complementing them and
sometimes competing with them. By classifying conversion based on directionality and
grammatical shifts, linguists can better understand its role in lexical expansion and syntactic
flexibility.
The relationship between conversion and other word-formation processes
Word formation is a fundamental aspect of linguistic evolution, allowing languages to
create new words and adapt to changing communicative needs. Among various word-
formation processes, conversion plays a unique role due to its ability to change a word’s
grammatical category without altering its form. However, conversion does not function in
isolation; it interacts with other word-formation processes such as derivation, compounding,
blending, clipping, and back-formation.
Conversion vs. Derivation
Derivation is a morphological process that creates new words by adding affixes
(prefixes, suffixes, or infixes) to a root or base word. In contrast, conversion achieves a similar
result without any morphological changes.
Similarities:
Both processes expand the vocabulary by creating new words.
Both can involve a change in grammatical category (e.g., noun → verb).
Differences:
Feature
Conversion
Derivation
Morphological change
No affixation
Affixes are added
Word form
Remains unchanged
Modified with suffixes/
prefixes
Examples
Bottle(N)- to bottle (V)
Happy(adj)-happiness (n)
Interaction Between Conversion and Derivation:
Sometimes, both processes can coexist or compete. For example:
`
73
Convert first, then derive: text (N) → to text (V) → texting (N)
Use derivation instead of conversion: Instead of to friend (converted verb), the
derived form befriend exists.
Conversion vs. Compounding
Compounding is the process of forming a new word by combining two or more words
(e.g., toothbrush, blackboard), whereas conversion involves a change in grammatical function
without altering the structure of a word.
Similarities:
Both are highly productive in English.
Both contribute to the economy of language, creating new meanings efficiently.
Differences:
Feature
Conversion
Compounding
Morphological change
Single word
Multiple words combined
Word form
Grammatical shift
without change
Combination of two lexemes
Examples
to Google
(from Google)
Toothpaste= tooth +paste
Interaction Between Conversion and Compounding:
Some compounds undergo conversion:
Noun → Verb: to spotlight (from spotlight), to mastermind (from mastermind)
Adjective → Noun: the bestsellers (from bestseller)
Conversion vs. Blending
Blending is a process where parts of two words are merged to form a new word, often
creating a mix of both meanings (e.g., smog = smoke + fog). Unlike conversion, blending
involves morphological alteration.
Similarities:
Both are used to create new vocabulary.
Both often arise from linguistic economy and the need for new terminology.
Differences:
Feature
Conversion
Blending
Morphological change
Unchanged
Parts of words combined
Word form
Grammatical shift
Phonetic blending
Examples
To butter (from butter,
N→V)
Brunch=breakfast + lunch
Interaction Between Conversion and Blending:
Some blends undergo conversion:
Blended noun → verb: to brunch (from brunch)
Conversion vs. Clipping
Clipping involves shortening a longer word while maintaining its original meaning (e.g.,
exam from examination). Conversion, on the other hand, does not modify the structure of a
word.
Similarities:
`
74
Both contribute to word economy.
Both occur frequently in informal language and slang.
Differences:
Feature
Conversion
Clipping
Morphological
change
Stay the same
Shortened
Word form
Grammatical shift
Truncation
Examples
To table (from table, N→V)
Ad (advertisement), flu
(influenza)
Interaction Between Conversion and Clipping:
Clipped words can undergo conversion:
photo (N) → to photo (V)
demo (N) → to demo (V)
Conclusion
This study has explored conversion as a fundamental word-formation process in English
and its relationship with other morphological processes, such as derivation, compounding,
blending, clipping, and back-formation. The analysis has shown that conversion is a highly
productive mechanism that allows words to shift grammatical categories without any formal
modification, contributing significantly to the flexibility and economy of the English lexicon.
One of the key findings of this study is that conversion often operates alongside other
word-formation processes rather than in isolation. While derivation creates new words
through affixation, conversion achieves similar results by shifting a word’s syntactic function.
Compounding and blending introduce new lexical units, some of which later undergo
conversion. Clipping and back-formation modify existing words structurally, but they may still
lead to conversion in certain cases. These interactions demonstrate that English word
formation is a dynamic and interconnected system rather than a set of isolated processes.
References:
1.
Abdurahmonov, X. (2023). Theory of Word Formation in English and Uzbek Linguistics.
Scientific Journal of the Fergana State University, 3(4), 87-94.
2.
Bauer, L., & Valera, S. (2005). Approaches to Conversion/Zero-Derivation. Waxmann
Verlag.
3.
Don, J. (2005). On Conversion, Relisting and Zero-Derivation: The Case of Dutch Agent
Nouns. Folia Linguistica, 39(1-2), 59-85.
4.
Ganiyeva, O. Kh., & Sattarova, A. S. (2021). Conversion as a Method of Word-Formation
in English and Uzbek Languages. Innovative Research in Modern Education, 1(1), 8-12.
5.
Plag, I. (2003). Word-Formation in English. Cambridge University Press.
6.
Sattorova, N. I. (2022). Conversion as a Type of Word Formation. Galaxy International
Interdisciplinary Research Journal, 10(2), 1362-1366.
7.
Sattorova, F. N. (2022). Word Formation in the English and Uzbek Languages. Journal of
Pedagogical Inventions and Practices, 2, 1671-1390.
8.
Sattorova, F. N. (2022). Comparative Study of Word Formation Methods in English and
Uzbek. Middle European Scientific Bulletin, 23, 1633-1640.
