• Svitlana Martos
Keywords: youth slang, way of creation, affixation, nouns-slengizms


The article analyzes one of the ways of youth slang creating - morphological, particularly, the affixation of nouns in slang sublanguages of the youth. The urgency of the study is due to the lack of solid works devoted to the phenomena and processes of the word-formation of the jargon-slang layers; the author points out that subprime derivation has a range of its features, not peculiar to the other components of the national language, and detects the activity of word-building processes. It is asserted that the only means of affixation in the recorded slang nouns is a suffix and the forming bases are both literary and slang.

A feature of affixation in the formation of offensive, uncodified, substandard lexicon is called a diverse repertoire of word-building tools, among them there are those that are unproductive or even nonfunctional in the literary language, as belonging to the word formation of the spoken language, argotic systems, etc., as well as affixes common to the literary language and affixation of youth slang. The frequency of models with affectionate and diminutive caressing suffixes was noted in the sublanguage of the youth of Kherson, that is the general tendency of the Ukrainian slang term. Attention is drawn to a variety of unexpected usual elements, which perform the function of word-formation in the vernacular, slang systems, in particular the formants -gan, -ban, -fan, which are phonetic and symbolic modifications of the suffix -an, the author considers them artificial, specific for youth slang. The article describes the imitation of the sounding of foreign words by means of suffixation, which is the source of the neologization of youth slang, such youth slangisms perform a metalinguistic function, reproducing the structure of foreign languages, by means of which the word-formation type is "exported", it is testified that according to the materials of Kherson youth slang the greatest number of such slengizms imitates the Italian language, as well as examples of imitation of Spanish, French, German and other languages.


1. Березовенко А. В. Некоторые способы образования неологизмов в молодежном сленге современного болгарского языка / А. В. Березовенко // Вісн. Київ. ун-ту: Літературознавство. Мовознавство. – К.: Вища шк., 1989. – Вип. 31. – С. 56–60.
2. Врублевська Г. Й. Лінгвокреативні процеси формування молодіжного жаргону / Г. Й. Врублевська // Вісн. Житомир. держ. пед. ун-ту. – 2004. – №14. – С. 186–187.
3. Дейнега В. Г. Способи словотвору молодіжного сленгу / В.Г. Дейнега // Вісн. Київ. нац. пед. ун-ту ім. М.П.Драгоманова. – К., 2002. – Вип. 2. – С. 3–5.
4. Карастойчева Ц. Българският младежки говор / Ц.Карастойчева. – София: Наука и изкуство, 1988. – 219 с.
5. Олексенко В. П. Словотвірні категорії суфіксальних іменників: Монографія / В. П. Олексенко. – Херсон: Айлант, 2001. – 240 с.
6. Ставицька Л. Арго, жаргон, сленг: Соціальна диференціація української мови / Л. Ставицька. – К.: Критика, 2005. – 464 с.
7. Ставицька Л. Національно-мовна специфіка сучасного українського сленгу / Л. Ставицька // Південний архів: Філологічні науки. – Херсон: Вид-во ХДУ, 2002. – Вип. 14. – С. 115–121.
8. Химик В.В. Поэтика низкого, или Просторечие как культурный феномен / В. В. Химик. – СПб.: Филолог. ф-т СПбГУ, 2000. – 272 с.