[173]číslo strany rukopisulexical units in respect of their meaning (zhynúti ‘vanish’, ‘leave’ > ‘die’, ‘perish’) does not miss such a peripheral co-ordinate unit belonging to another morphological type (pojíti ‘leave’ > ‘die’). Thus, the evolutionary processes restricted to changes in respect of lexical meaning have a wider range but they are less clean-cut than the processes changing the formal character of lexical units.

(35.4) These facts suggest that the centres of systematic groups of lexical units with various roots (representing also the centre of a lexical system) are richer, above all, in classificatory features on the level of morphemes and in their combinations: the whole of the lexical system (the degree of its systematic organization is, of course, assumed to be lower than, e. g., that of the sound system) is built upon the lexicosemantic relations between its units, but only in its central area these relations are signalled also by morphemic means. They will be called here ‘stem-structural’ relations (not word-formative, for even on the lexical units without a [clear] word-formative structure, like oslnouti, can be identified classificatory morphemes, which place these units into systematic relations of the types oslnouti, ochrnouti … and oslnouti : oslniti, i. e. into relations based on common features of their stem-structure and their lexical meaning). It is possible to say that the centre of the lexical system is ‘morphemicized’ and creates a system of stem-structural relations (17 and 23). In the system of the vocabulary a more central and, consequently, a more stable position is occupied by a group of units with different roots, connected by a common classificatory feature on the level of meaning and morphemic means (a stem-structural category, 17), than the group of lexical units connected only by a common feature on the level of meaning, i. e. the appurtenance to the same area of meaning (a lexico-semantic category, 23). But the stability of such lexical categories (defined in stem-structural or only lexico-semantic terms) also depends on the relations of their units with various roots to the coordinated units with equal roots but differing either in the associated meaning (see the lexico-semantic correlations of the type ochromiti ‘make lame’ : ochromiti ‘make weak’, 23. 1), or in the affixed non-root morpheme and appurtenance to some other grammatical category (see the stem-systematic correlations of the types ochromiti : ochromovati, ochromiti : ochromnouti, ochromiti : chromý, 17.2). So, the evolution of a system-forming group of lexical units is influenced by factors, by means of which these correlations of theirs (or the pairs of associated units of different roots) are fixed and created, or loosened and broken. They are the factors of lexical evolutionary processes.

(35.5) A more general character can be assigned to the psychic factors (II) of the lexical evolutionary processes; this fact has been pointed out in examples taken from other languages when the processes caused by associated connections of antonyms were discussed, see, e. g., the addition of lexical units having antonymous conterparts (25) by supplementing lexico-semantic correlations of the type levý ‘left’ → levý ‘inappropriate’ under the influence of the correlation of pravý ‘right’ : pravý ‘appropriate’ (25.2), or by supplementing stem-systematic correlations of the type nekalý → kalý (25.3 and 26). Among the psychic factors, it is necessary to mention the tension between the concepts of expressive and inexpressive character (26) and the development of thinking (27) manifesting itself in the addition of lexical units of a more abstract (27.1) and specific nature (27.2). See summary 28. — On the contrary, the lexical evolutionary processes, typical of the Czech language, are apparently concentrated in the domain of the operation of linguistic (I) and extra-linguistic (III) factors.

(35.6) The linguistic factors of lexical evolutionary processes of the Czech language can be seen in the changes of its grammatical (I A) and phonological (I B) system and in the pressure of its stem-system (I C). Also the operation of these internal factors is taken as a complex co-operation: the lexical evolution processes present themselves as a consequence of the grammatical development, in which the correlations of declining categories of the grammatical system vanish, if affected by phonological development, but the correlations of expanding systemic categories, when exposed to the same circumstances, are rebuilt from the formal point of view. At the same time the lexical units, which have become isolated, owing to the disintegration of their correlations (if they have not vanished at all), move to the periphery of the lexical system or formally assimilate to the units nearest in the stem system (e. g., the correlation of the declining category of action and resultant state svьtnǫti : svьtěti > Old Czech svetnúti : svtieti sě became disintegrated as a result of the change of ь; the isolated verb svetnúti joined the productive aspect correlation, see New Czech svitnouti : svítati, 14.23). The more conceivable is, of course, the rearrangement of correlations of