Word groups with transferred meanings

Chapter 12 phraseology: word-groups with transferred meanings

Phraseological units, or idioms, as they are called by most western scholars, represent what can probably be described as the most picturesque, colourful and expressive part of the language’s vocabulary.

If synonyms can be figuratively referred to as the tints and colours of the vocabulary, then phraseology is a kind of picture gallery in which are collected vivid and amusing sketches of the nation’s customs, traditions and prejudices, recollections of its past history, scraps of folk songs and fairy-tales. Quotations from great poets are preserved here alongside the dubious pearls of philistine wisdom and crude slang witticisms, for phraseology is not only the most colourful but probably the most democratic area of vocabulary and .draws its resources mostly from the very depths of popular speech.

And what a variety of odd and grotesque images, figures and personalities one finds in this amazing picture gallery: dark horses, white elephants, bulls in china shops and green-eyed monsters, cats escaping from bags or looking at kings, dogs barking up the wrong tree and men either wearing their hearts on their sleeves or having them in their mouths or even in their boots. Sometimes this parade of funny animals and quaint human beings looks more like a hilarious fancy-dress ball than a peaceful picture gallery and it is really a pity that the only interest some scholars seem to take in it is whether the leading component of the idiom is expressed by a verb or a noun.

The metaphor fancy-dress ball may seem far-fetched to skeptical minds, and yet it aptly reflects a very important feature of the linguistic phenomenon under discussion: most participants of the carnival, if we accept the metaphor, wear masks, are disguised as something or somebody else, or, dropping metaphors, word-groups known as phraseological units or idioms are characterized by a double sense: the current meanings of constituent words build up a certain picture, but the actual meaning of the whole unit has little or nothing to do with that picture, in itself creating an entirely new image.

So, a dark horse mentioned above is actually not a horse but a person about whom no one knows anything definite, and so one is not sure what can be expected from him. The imagery of a bull in a china shop lies very much on the surface: the idiom describes a clumsy person (cf. with the R. слон в посудной лавке). A white elephant, however, is not even a person but a valuable object which involves great expense or trouble for its owner, out of all proportion to its usefulness or value, and which is also difficult to dispose of. The green-eyed monster is jealousy, the image being drawn from Othello1. To let the cat out of the bag has actually nothing to do with cats, but means simply «to let some secret become known». In to bark up the wrong tree (Amer.), the current meanings of the constituents create a vivid and amusing picture of a foolish dog sitting under a tree and barking at it while the cat or the squirrel has long since escaped. But the actual meaning of the idiom is «to follow a false scent; to look for somebody or something in a wrong place; to expect from somebody what he is unlikely to do». The idiom is not infrequently used in detective stories: The police are barking up the wrong tree as usual (i. e. they suspect somebody who has nothing to do with the crime).

The ambiguousness of these interesting word-groups may lead to an amusing misunderstanding, especially for children who are apt to accept words at their face value.

Little Johnnie (crying): Mummy, mummy, my auntie Jane is dead.

Mother: Nonsense, child! She phoned me exactly five minutes ago.

Johnnie: But I heard Mrs. Brown say that her neighbours cut her dead.

(To cut somebody dead means «to rudely ignore somebody; to pretend not to know or recognize him».) Puns are frequently based on the ambiguousness of idioms:

«Isn’t our Kate a marvel! I wish you could have seen her at the Harrisons’ party yesterday. If I’d collected the bricks she dropped all over the place, I could build a villa.»

(To drop a brick means «to say unintentionally a quite indiscreet or tactless thing that shocks and offends people».)

So, together with synonymy and antonymy, phraseology represents expressive resources of vocabulary.

V. H. Collins writes in his Book of English Idioms: «In standard spoken and written English today idiom is an established and essential element that, used with care, ornaments and enriches the language.» [26]

Used with care is an important warning because speech overloaded with idioms loses its freshness and originality. Idioms, after all, are ready-made speech units, and their continual repetition sometimes wears them out: they lose their colours and become trite cliches. Such idioms can hardly be said to «ornament» or «enrich the language».

On the other hand, oral or written speech lacking idioms loses much in expressiveness, colour and emotional force.

In modern linguistics, there is considerable confusion about the terminology associated with these word-groups. Most Russian scholars use the term «phraseological unit» («фразеологическая единица») which was first introduced by Academician V. V. Vinogradov whose contribution to the theory of Russian phraseology cannot be overestimated. The term «idiom» widely used by western scholars has comparatively recently found its way into Russian phraseology but is applied mostly to only a certain type of phraseological unit as it will be clear from further explanations.

There are some other terms denoting more or less the same linguistic phenomenon: set-expressions, set-phrases, phrases, fixed word-groups, collocations.

The confusion in the terminology reflects insufficiency of positive or wholly reliable criteria by which phraseological units can be distinguished from «free» word-groups.

It should be pointed out at once that the «freedom» of free word-groups is relative and arbitrary. Nothing is entirely «free» in speech as its linear relationships are governed, restricted and regulated, on the one hand, by requirements of logic and common sense and, on the other, by the rules of grammar and combinability. One can speak of a black-eyed girl but not of a black-eyed table (unless in a piece of modernistic poetry where anything is possible). Also, to say the child was glad is quite correct, but a glad child is wrong because in Modern English glad is attributively used only with a very limited number of nouns (e. g. glad news), and names of persons are not among them.

Free word-groups are so called not because of any absolute freedom in using them but simply because they are each time built up anew in the speech process whereas idioms are used as ready-made units with fixed and constant structures.

How to Distinguish Phraseological Units from Free Word-Groups

This is probably the most discussed — and the most controversial — problem in the field of phraseology. The task of distinguishing between free word-groups and phraseological units is further complicated by the existence of a great number of marginal cases, the so-called semi-fixed or semi-free word-groups, also called non-phraseological word-groups which share with phraseological units their structural stability but lack their semantic unity and figurativeness (e. g. to go to school, to go by bus, to commit suicide).

There are two major criteria for distinguishing between phraseological units and free word-groups: semantic and structural.

Compare the following examples:

A. Cambridge don: I’m told they’re inviting more American professors to this university. Isn’t it rather carrying coals to Newcastle?

(To carry coals to Newcastle means «to take something to a place where it is already plentiful and not needed». Cf. with the R. В Тулу со своим самоваром.)

В. This cargo ship is carrying coal to Liverpool.

The first thing that captures the eye is the semantic difference of the two word-groups consisting of the same essential constituents. In the second sentence the free word-group is carrying coal is used in the direct sense, the word coal standing for real hard, black coal and carry for the plain process of taking something from one place to another. The first context quite obviously has nothing to do either with coal or with transporting it, and the meaning of the whole word-group is something entirely new and far removed from the current meanings of the constituents.

Academician V. V. Vinogradov spoke of the semantic change in phraseological units as «a meaning resulting from a peculiar chemical combination of words». This seems a very apt comparison because in both cases between which the parallel is drawn an entirely new quality comes into existence.

The semantic shift affecting phraseological units does not consist in a mere change of meanings of each separate constituent part of the unit. The meanings of the constituents merge to produce an entirely new meaning: e. g. to have a bee in one’s bonnet means «to have an obsession about something; to be eccentric or even a little mad». The humorous metaphoric comparison with a person who is distracted by a bee continually buzzing under his cap has become erased and half-forgotten, and the speakers using the expression hardly think of bees or bonnets but accept it in its transferred sense: «obsessed, eccentric».

That is what is meant when phraseological units are said to be characterized by semantic unity. In the traditional approach, phraseological units have been defined as word-groups conveying a single concept (whereas in free word-groups each meaningful component stands for a separate concept).

It is this feature that makes phraseological units similar to words: both words and phraseological units possess semantic unity (see Introduction). Yet, words are also characterized by structural unity which phraseological units very obviously lack being combinations of words.

Most Russian scholars today accept the semantic criterion of distinguishing phraseological units from free word-groups as the major one and base their research work in the field of phraseology on the definition of a phraseological unit offered by Professor A. V. Koonin, the leading authority on problems of English phraseology in our country:

«A phraseological unit is a stable word-group characterized by a completely or partially transferred meaning.» [12]

The definition clearly suggests that the degree of semantic change in a phraseological unit may vary («completely or partially transferred meaning»). In actual fact the semantic change may affect either the whole word-group or only one of its components. The following phraseological units represent the first case: to skate on thin ice (@ to put oneself in a dangerous position; to take risks); to wear one’s heart on one’s sleeve1 (@ to expose, so that everyone knows, one’s most intimate feelings); to have one’s heart in one’s boots (@ to be deeply depressed, anxious about something); to have one’s heart in one’s mouth (@ to be greatly alarmed by what is expected to happen); to have one’s heart in the right place (@ to be a good, honest and generous fellow); a crow in borrowed plumes (@ a person pretentiously and unsuitably dressed; cf. with the R. ворона в павлиньих перьях); a wolf in a sheep’s clothing1 (@ а dangerous enemy who plausibly poses as a friend).

The second type is represented by phraseological units in which one of the components preserves its current meaning and the other is used in a transferred meaning: to lose (keep) one’s temper, to fly into a temper, to fall ill, to fall in love (out of love), to stick to one’s word (promise), to arrive at a conclusion, bosom friends, shop talk (also: to talk shop), small talk.

Here, though, we are on dangerous ground because the border-line dividing phraseological units with partially changed meanings from the so-called semi-fixed or non-phraseological word-groups (marginal cases) is uncertain and confusing.

The term «idiom», both in this country and abroad, is mostly applied to phraseological units with completely transferred meanings, that is, to the ones in which the meaning of the whole unit does not correspond to the current meanings of the components. There are many scholars who regard idioms as the essence of phraseology and the major focus of interest in phraseology research.

The structural criterion also brings forth pronounced distinctive features characterizing phraseological units and contrasting them to free word-groups.

Structural invariability is an essential feature of phraseological units, though, as we shall see, some of them possess it to a lesser degree than others. Structural invariability of phraseological units finds expression in a number of restrictions.

First of all, restriction in substitution. As a rule, no word can be substituted for any meaningful component of a phraseological unit without destroying its sense. To carry coals to Manchester makes as little sense as Б Харьков со своим самоваром.

The idiom to give somebody the cold shoulder means «to treat somebody coldly, to ignore or cut him», but a warm shoulder or a cold elbow make no sense at all. The meaning of a bee in smb’s bonnet was explained above, but a bee in his hat or cap would sound a silly error in choice of words, one of those absurd slips that people are apt to make when speaking a foreign language.

At the same time, in free word-groups substitution does not present any dangers and does not lead to any serious consequences. In The cargo ship is carrying coal to Liverpool all the components can be changed: The ship/vessel/boat carries/transports/takes/brings coal to (any port).

The second type of restriction is the restriction in introducing any additional components into the structure of a phraseological unit.

In a free word-group such changes can be made without affecting the general meaning of the utterance: This big ship is carrying a large cargo of coal to the port of Liverpool.

In the phraseological unit to carry coals to Newcastle no additional components can be introduced. Nor can one speak about the big white elephant (when using the white elephant in its phraseological sense) or about somebody having his heart in his brown boots.

Yet, such restrictions are less regular. In Vanity Fair by W. M. Thackeray the idiom to build a castle in the air is used in this way:

«While dressing for dinner, she built for herself a most magnificent castle in the air of which she was the mistress …»

In fiction such variations of idioms created for stylistic purposes are not a rare thing. In oral speech phraseological units mostly preserve their traditional structures and resist the introduction of additional components.

The third type of structural restrictions in phraseological units is grammatical invariability. A typical mistake with students of English is to use the plural form of fault in the phraseological unit to find fault with somebody (e. g. The teacher always found faults with the boy). Though the plural form in this context is logically well-founded, it is a mistake in terms of the grammatical invariability of phraseological units. A similar typical mistake often occurs in the unit from head to foot (e. g. From head to foot he was immaculately dressed). Students are apt to use the plural form of foot in this phrase thus erring once more against the rigidity of structure which is so characteristic of phraseological units.

Yet again, as in the case of restriction in introducing additional components, there are exceptions to the rule, and these are probably even more numerous.

One can build a castle in the air, but also castles. A shameful or dangerous family secret is picturesquely described as a skeleton in the cupboard, the first substantive component being frequently and easily used in the plural form, as in: I’m sure they have skeletons in every cupboard! A black sheep is a disreputable member of a family who, in especially serious cases, may be described as the blackest sheep of the family.

Proverbs

Consider the following examples of proverbs:

We never know the value of water till the well is dry.

You can take the horse to the water, but you cannot make him drink.

Those who live in glass houses shouldn’t throw stones.

Even these few examples clearly show that proverbs are different from those phraseological units which have been discussed above. The first distinctive feature that strikes one is the obvious structural dissimilarity. Phraseological units, as we have seen, are a kind of ready-made blocks which fit into the structure of a sentence performing a certain syntactical function, more or less as words do. E. g. George liked her for she never put on airs (predicate). Big bugs like him care nothing about small fry like ourselves, (a) subject, b) prepositional object).

Proverbs, if viewed in their structural aspect, are sentences, and so cannot be used in the way in which phraseological units are used in the above examples.

If one compares proverbs and phraseological units in the semantic aspect, the difference seems to become even more obvious. Proverbs could be best compared with minute fables for, like the latter, they sum up the collective experience of the community. They moralize (Hell is paved with good intentions), give advice (Don’t judge a tree by its bark}, give warning (If you sing before breakfast, you will cry before night), admonish (Liars should have good memories), criticize (Everyone calls his own geese swans).

No phraseological unit ever does any of these things. They do not stand for whole statements as proverbs do but for a single concept. Their function in speech is purely nominative (i. e. they denote an object, an act, etc.). The function of proverbs in speech, though, is communicative (i. e. they impart certain information).

The question of whether or not proverbs should be regarded as a subtype of phraseological units and studied together with the phraseology of a language is a controversial one.

Professor A. V. Koonin includes proverbs in his classification of phraseological units and labels them communicative phraseological units (see Ch. 13). From his point of view, one of the main criteria of a phraseological unit is its stability. If the quotient of phraseological stability in a word-group is not below the minimum, it means that we are dealing with a phraseological unit. The structural type — that is, whether the unit is a combination of words or a sentence — is irrelevant.

The criterion of nomination and communication cannot be applied here either, says Professor A. V. Koonin, because there are a considerable number of verbal phraseological units which are word-groups (i. e. nominative units) when the verb is used in the Active Voice, and sentences (i. e. communicative units) when the verb is used in the Passive Voice. E. g. to cross (pass) the Rubicon — the Rubicon is crossed (passed); to shed crocodile tears — crocodile tears are shed. Hence, if one accepts nomination as a criterion of referring or not referring this or that unit to phraseology, one is faced with the absurd conclusion that such word-groups, when with verbs in the Active Voice, are phraseological units and belong to the system of the language, and when with verbs in the Passive Voice, are non-phraseological word-groups and do not belong to the system of the language. [12]

It may be added, as one more argument in support of this concept, that there does not seem to exist any rigid or permanent border-line between proverbs and phraseological units as the latter rather frequently originate from the former.

So, the phraseological unit the last straw originated from the proverb The last straw breaks the camel’s back, the phraseological unit birds o/ a feather from the proverb Birds of a feather flock together, the phraseological unit to catch at a straw (straws) from A drowning man catches at straws.

What is more, some of the proverbs are easily transformed into phraseological units. E. g. Don’t put all your eggs in one basket > to put all one’s eggs in one basket; don’t cast pearls before swine > to cast pearls before swine.

Exercises

I. Consider your answers to the following.

1. What do v/e mean when we say that an idiom has a «double» meaning?

2. Why is it very important to use idioms with care? Should foreign-language students use them? Give reasons for your answer.

3. The term «phraseological unit» is used by most Russian scholars. What other terms are used to describe the same word-groups?

4. How can you show that the «freedom» of free word-groups is relative and arbitrary?

5. What are the two major criteria for distinguishing between phraseological units and free word-groups?

6. How would you explain the term «grammatical invariability» of phraseological units?

7. How do proverbs differ from phraseological units?

8. Can proverbs be regarded as a subdivision of phraseological units? Give reasons for your answer.

II. What is the source of the following idioms? If in doubt consult your reference books.

The Trojan horse, Achilles heel, a labour of Hercules, an apple of discord, forbidden fruit, the serpent in the tree, an ugly duckling, the fifth column, to hide one’s head in the sand.

III. Substitute phraseological units with the noun «heart» for the italicized words. What is the difference between the two sentences?

1. He is not a man who shows his feelings openly. 2. She may seem cold but she has true, kind feelings. 3.1 learned that piece of poetry by memory. 4. When I think about my examination tomorrow I feel in despair. 5. When I heard that strange cry in the darkness I was terribly afraid. 6. It was the job I liked very much. 7.1 didn’t win the prize but I’m not discouraged.

IV. Show that you understand the meaning of the following phraseological units by using each of them in a sentence.

1. Between the devil and the deep sea; 2. to have one’s heart in one’s boots; 3. to have one’s heart in the right place; 4. to wear one’s heart on one’s sleeve; 5. in the blues; 6. once in a blue moon; 7. to swear black is white; 8. out of the blue; 9. to talk till all is blue; 10. to talk oneself blue in the face.

V. Substitute phraseological units incorporating the names of colours for the italicized words.

1. I’m feeling rather miserable today. 2. He spends all his time on bureaucratic routine. 3. A thing like that happens very rarely. 4. You can talk till you are tired of it but I shan’t believe you. 5. The news was a great shock to me. It саше quite unexpectedly. 6.1 won’t believe it unless I see it in writing. 7. You can never believe what he says, he will swear anything if it suits his purpose.

VI. Read the following jokes. Why do little children often misunderstand phraseological units? Explain how the misunderstanding arises in each case.

1. «Now, my little boys and girls,» said the teacher. «I want you to be very still — so still that you can hear a pin drop.» For a minute all was still, and then a little boy shrieked out; «Let her drop.»

2. «You must be pretty strong,» said Willie, aged six to the young widow who had come to call on his mother.

«Strong? What makes you think so?»

«Daddy said you can wrap any man in town around your little finger.»

3. Т о m: What would you do if you were in my shoes?

Tim: Polish them!

4. Little Girl: Oh, Mr. Sprawler, do put on your skates and show me the funny figures you can make.

Mr. Sprawler: My dear child, I’m only a beginner. I can’t make any figures.

Little Girl: But Mother said you were skating yesterday and cut a ridiculous figure.

VII. Read the following jokes. Explain why the italicized groups of words are not phraseological units.

Warning

The little boy whose father was absorbed in reading a newspaper on the bench in the city park, exclaimed:

«Daddy, look, a plane!»

His father, still reading the paper, said: «All right, but don’t touch it.»

Great Discovery

A scientist rushed into the ops room of the space mission control centre: «You know that new gigantic computer which was to be the brain of the project? We have just made a great discovery!»

«What discovery?»

«It doesn’t work!»

VIII. Explain whether the semantic changes in the following phraseological units are complete or partial. Paraphrase them.

To wear one’s heart on one’s sleeve; a wolf in a sheep’s clothing; to fly into a temper; to stick to one’s word; bosom friend; small talk; to cast pearls before swine; to beat about the bush; to add fuel to the fire; to fall ill; to fall in love; to sail under false colours; to be at sea.

IX. Say what structural variations are possible in the following phraseological units. If in doubt, consult the dictionaries.

To catch at a straw; a big bug; the last drop; to build a castle in the air; to weather the storm; to get the upper hand; to run for one’s life; to do wonders; to run a risk; just the other way about.

X. Read the following jokes. Identify the phraseological units using the two major criteria: structural and semantic. What are the jokes based on?

1. He: Don’t you hate people who talk behind your back?

She: Yes, especially at the movies.

2. «I’d hate to be in your shoes,» said a woman yesterday, as she was quarrelling with a neighbour.

«You couldn’t get in them,» sarcastically remarked the neighbour.

3. Herbert: Arthur hasn’t been out one night for three weeks.

Flora: Has he turned over a new leaf?

Herbert: No, he’s turned over a new car.

4. Motorist: How far is it to the next town? Native: Nigh to five miles as the crow flies. Motorist: Well, how far is it if a damned crow has to walk and carry an empty gasoline can?

5. «So, she turned you down, eh?»

«Yes, I made the mistake of confessing that my heart was in my mouth when I proposed.»

«What has it to do with it?»

«Oh, she said she couldn’t think of marrying a man whose heart wasn’t in the right place.»

XI. Read the following proverbs. Give their Russian equivalents or explain their meanings.

A bargain is a bargain. A cat in gloves catches no mice. Those who live in glass houses shouldn’t throw stones. A good beginning is half the battle. A new broom sweeps clean. An hour in the morning is worth two in the evening. It never rains but it pours. Don’t look a gift horse in the mouth. Make hay while the sun shines.

XII. Give the English equivalents for the following Russian proverbs.

Нет худа без добра. В гостях хорошо, а дома лучше. С глаз долой, из сердца вон. Дуракам закон не писан. Он пороху не выдумает. Слезами горю не поможешь. Поспешишь — людей насмешишь. Взялся за гуж, не говори, что не дюж.

XIII. Give the proverbs from which the following phraseological units have developed.

Birds of a feather; to catch at a straw; to put all one’s eggs in one basket; to cast pearls before swine; the first blow; a bird in the bush; to cry over spilt milk; the last straw.

XIV. Read the following joke. What proverb is paraphrased in it?

Dull and morose people, says a medical writer, seldom resist disease as easily as those with cheerful disposition. The surly bird catches the germ.

Phraseology:
word-groups with transferred meanings.

Phraseological
units, or idioms,
represent the most expressive part of the language’s vocabulary,
because amusing sketches of the nation’s customs, traditions and
prejudices, recollections of its past history, fairy-tales are
collected here. In modern linguistic there is a certain confusion
about the terminology connected with these word-groups. The term
«phraseological unit» («фразеологическая
едини­ца»)
was introduced by academician V.V. Vinogradov. The theory of English
phraseology was also worked out by our scientists. Western scholars
prefer the term «idioms». There are some other terms used
to denote this phenomenon: set-expressions, set-phi ses, fixed
word-groups.

It’s rather
difficult to differenciate between a set-expression and a free
word-group. The terms given above show that the basic criteria of
differenciation stability of the lexical components and grammatical
structure. Phraseological units (ph.u.) are habitually defined as
non-motivated
word-groups, that cannot be freely made up in speech but are
reproduced as ready-made units, they are not created at the very
moment of speeking, unlike free word-groups which components can
change according to the needs of speakers. Ex.: a blue flower (a free
word-group) vs. a blue-stocking (a ph. u.).

The
traditional and oldest principle of classification ph.u-s. is based
on their original content (‘thematic
principle),
i.e. particular sphere of human activity or natural phenomena. So
L.Smith gives groups of idioms either used by sailors, hunters, etc.
or associated with domestic and wild animals, agriculture, cooking,
sports, arts, etc. Smith points out that ph.u-s associated with the
sea and the life of seamen are especially numerous in English: to be
all at sea (to be unable to understand), to sink or swim (to fail or
succeed), in deep waters (in trouble or danger), in low water, on the
rocks (in strained financial circumstances).

By origin
the greatest number of ph.u. is connected with traditions and customs
of England: to cut with a shilling (лишить
наследства),
night cup (a drink before going to sleep); the next source is
Shakespeare’s works : to give the devil his due (отдать
должное),
the green-eyed monster (ревность),
smth. is wrong in the state of Danmark, etc.

Due to the
structural
principle,
i.e. their semantic and gramma­tical inseparability
phraseological units can be classified into nominal
and
communicative.
This structural principle is based on the ability of a ph.u. to
perform the same syntactical functions as words. To nomi­nal
belong substantive
(noun), verbal
, attributive
and adverbial
ph.u-s.

Substantive
ph.u. denote ‘thingness’ and are used to denote eve­ryday
activities of people, their meaning can be easily deduced or be
wholly idiomatic: dog’s life, cat-and-dog life, call love, white lie,
red tape (бюрократия),
backnumber (ретроград,
отсталый
человек),
babies in the wood (простаки,
наивные
люди),
Fleet street (английская
пресса),
hot dogs (сосиски),
a hearty oak (каменное
сердце),
mamma’s darling (маменькин
сынок).
Some linguists admit some structural change in a ph.u.: ‘the promised
land’ = »the land of promise’.

Verbal
ph.u. fulfil the functions of verbs in sentence: to smell the rat
(чувствовать
что-то
недоброе),
tо
run for one’s life (спасать
жизнь),
to talk through one’s hat (мямлить).

Attribute
ph.u. describe qualities of objects: high and mighty, safe and sound,
brand new, etc. In this group the so called comparative word-groups
are particularly expressive and amusing in their unexpected
associations: (as) cool as a cucumber, (as) nervous as a cat, (as)
weak as a kitten, (as) good as gold (usu. about children), (as) large
as life, (as) slippery as an eel, (as) drunk as ah owl, (as) mad as a
hare in March, etc.

Adverbial
ph.u. perform the function of an adverb in a sentence and have firm
stability: between the devil and the deep sea (меж
двух
огней),
neither here nor there (ни
к
месту),
by heart (наизусть),
by hook or by crook (ни
шитьем,
так
катаньем),
in cold blood (хлад­нокровно).

Interjeclional
ph.u.:
my god! Goodnew gracious! Good heavens!

Communicative
ph.u-s make sentence themselves. These are various sayings and
proverbs. They mау
bе
classified according to the type of sentence they form: declarative
(It’s all Greek to me — китай­ская
грамота).
Queen Ann is dead — (это
не
новость),
interrogative (Can the lapper change his spots? How do you do?),
imperative -(Hold your horses — Осторожно
на
повороте).

Academician
Vinogradov’s classification is based on the degree of semantic
cohesion (связность)
betweeh the components of ph.u-s:

-phraseological
combinations
with a partially changed meaning which can be deduced: to take smth
for granted to be good at smth, bosom friends, to have a bite, to
stick to one’s word, etc.;

—
phraseological
unities
with a completely changed meaning which can be deduced from the
meaning of the constituent parts: to catch at a straw, to lose one’s
head, to lose one’s heart to smb, the last drop, etc.

—
phraseological
fusions
with completely changed meaning which cannot be deduced from the
meaning of the constituent parts (denominated units): to come a
cropper ( ~ to come to disaster), at sixes and sevens (~ in
confusion), to set one’s cap at smb.(~ to try and attract a man), to
show the white feather (~ to show one’s cowardice).

The
classificaiton of ph.u-s suggested by prof.
A.Kunin is based on the combined structural-semantic
principle and also considers the degree of
stability of ph.u.
Acc. to Kunin there are 4 classes of ph.u:

— nominative, including one
meaningful word: well and good, wear and tear, as the crow flies,
etc;

— nominative-communicative: to
break the ice — the ice is broken;

— ph.u. which are neither
nominative nor communicative and include interjectional word-groups;

— communicative ph.u.
represented by proverbs and sayings.

Thus phraseological units
differ from word-groups in the lack of motivation, structural
stability, word-equivalent function, idiomaticity.

Соседние файлы в предмете [НЕСОРТИРОВАННОЕ]

• #
• #
• #
• #
• #
• #
• #
• #
• #
• #
• #

1. PHRASEOLOGY Lecture 13

2. 1. PHRASEOLOGY AND PHRASEOLOGICAL UNITS

Phraseology is a branch of linguistics which
studies different types of set expressions,
which like words name various objects
and phenomena.
They exist in the language as ready-made
units.

3.

A Phraseological unit (PU) can be defined as a
non-motivated word-group that cannot be
freely made up in speech, but is reproduced as
a ready-made unit.
It is a group of words whose meaning cannot be
deduced by examining the meaning of the
constituent lexemes.
The essential features of PU are:
1) lack of motivation;
2) stability of the lexical components.

4.

A dark horse — is actually not a horse but a
person about whom no one knows anything
definite.
A bull in a china shop — a clumsy person.
A white elephant – it is a waste of money
because it is completely useless.
The green-eyed monster is jealousy, the image
being drawn from Othello.
To let the cat out of the bag — to let some secret
become known.

5.

To bark up the wrong tree (Am) means ‘to follow a
false scent; to look for somebody or something in a
wrong place; to expect from somebody what he is
unlikely to do’.
The idiom is not infrequently used in detective stories:
The police are barking up the wrong tree as
usual, i.e. they suspect somebody who has nothing
to do with the crime.
The ambiguity of these interesting word-groups may
lead to an amusing misunderstanding, especially for
children who are apt to accept words at their face
value.

6.

— Little Johnnie (crying): Mummy, mummy, my
auntie Jane is dead.
— Mother: Nonsense, child! She phoned me 5
minutes ago.
— Little Johnnie: But I heard Mrs. Brown say
that her neighbours cut her dead.
To cut somebody dead means ‘to rudely ignore
somebody; to pretend not to know or
recognize him’.

7. Puns are frequently based on the ambiguousness of idioms:

— Isn’t our Kate a marvel! I wish you could have seen
her at the Harrisons’ party yesterday. If I’d collected
the bricks she dropped all over the place, I could
built a villa’.
To drop a brick means ‘to say unintentionally a quite
indiscreet or tactless thing that shocks and offended
people’.

8.

The author of the “Book of English Idioms”
Collins writes: “In standard spoken and
written English today idioms is an established
and essential element that, used with care,
ornaments and enriches the language.”
Used with care is an important warning because
speech overloaded with idioms loses its
freshness and originality. Idioms, after all, are
ready-made speech units, and their continual
repetition sometimes wears them out: they
lose their colours and become trite clichés.

9. In modern linguistics, there is considerable confusion about the terminology associated with these word-groups

In modern linguistics, there is considerable confusion
about the terminology associated with these wordgroups
Most Russian scholars use the term “phraseological
units” introduced by academician V.V. Vinogradov.
The term “idiom” used by western scholars has
comparatively recently found its way into Russian
phraseology but is applied mostly to only a certain
type of phraseological unit.
There are some other terms: set-expressions, setphrases, phrases, fixed word-groups, collocations.

10. The ‘freedom’ of free word-groups is relative and arbitrary.

Nothing is entirely ‘free’ in speech as its linear
relationships are governed, restricted and
regulated, on the one hand, by requirements of
logic and common sense and, on the other, by
the rules of grammar and combinability.
A black-eyed girl but not of a black-eyed table.
The child was glad is quite correct, but a glad
child is wrong.

11.

Free word-groups are so called not because of
any absolute freedom in using them but
simply because they are each time built up
anew in the speech process whereas idioms
are used as ready-made units with fixed and
constant structures.

12. FREE-WORD GROUPS vs PHRASEOLOGICAL UNITS

The border-line between free or variable word-groups and
phraseological units is not clearly defined.
The free word-groups are only relatively free as collocability
of their member-words is fundamentally delimited by
their lexical and syntactic valency.
Phraseological units are comparatively stable and
semantically inseparable.
Between the extremes of complete motivation and
variability of member-words and lack of motivation
combined with complete stability of the lexical
components and grammatical structure there are
innumerable border-line cases.

13. There are differences between word-groups and phraseological units

The difference often is in the interrelation of lexical components,
e.g.: Blue ribbon (or red, brown, etc.), but blue ribbon – an
honour given to the winner of the first prize in a competition
– no substitution is possible in a phraseological unit;
Stretch one’s legs – размять ноги, прогуляться (а не
«протянуть ноги»),
See eye to eye – быть полностью согласным (а не «видеться с
глазу на глаз»),
Under one’s hand – за собственной подписью (а не «под
рукой»),
Stew in one’s own juice – страдать по своей собственной
глупости (а не «вариться в собственном соку»).

14.

In free word-groups each of its constituents
preserves its denotational meaning.
In the case of phraseological units however the
denotational meaning belongs to the wordgroup as a single semantically inseparable
unit. For example, compare a free word-group
a white elephant (белый слон) and a
phraseological unit white elephant (обуза,
подарок, от которого не знаешь как
избавиться).

15. Distinctive features of free-word groups and phraseological units

Free word-groups
1.
2.
are formed in the
process of speech
according to the
standards of the
language;
are constructed in the
process of
communication by
joining together words
into a phrase;
Phraseological units
1.
exist in the language
side-by-side with
separate words;
2.
are reproduced in
speech as ready-made
units;

16.

Free word-groups
Phraseological units
3.
substitution is possible;
3.
no substitution is
possible;
4.
each of its components
preserves its
denotational meaning;
4.
the denotational
meaning belongs to the
word group as a single
semantically
inseparable unit;

17.

Free word-groups
Phraseological units
5.
less structural unity;
5.
greater structural unity;
6.
components may have
any of the forms of
their paradigm.
6.
components often have
just one form of all the
forms of their
paradigm.

18.

Free word-groups are but relatively free: they
may possess some of the features
characteristic of phraseological units.
On the other hand, phraseological units are
heterogeneous. Alongside absolutely
unchangeable phraseological units, there are
expressions that allow some degree of
substitution. Phraseology is concerned with
all types of set expressions including those
that stand for certain sentences.

19. 3. CLASSIFICATIONS OF PHRASEOLOGICAL UNITS

3.1. SEMANTIC CLASSIFICATION OF
PHRASEOLOGICAL UNITS (V.V. Vinogradov)
is based on the motivation of the unit
1.
Phraseological fusions are units whose meaning
cannot be deduced from the meanings of their
component parts. The meaning of PFs is
unmotivated at the present stage of language
development, e.g.
red tape (бюрократизм, волокита),
a mare’s nest (иллюзия, нечто несуществующее),
My aunt! (вот те на!, вот так штука!, ну и ну!).
The meaning of the components is completely
absorbed by the meaning of the whole;

20.

2.
Phrasological unities are expressions the
meaning of which can be deduced from the
meanings of their components; the meaning
of the whole is based on the transferred
meanings of the components, e.g.
to show one’s teeth (to be unfriendly),
to stand to one’s guns (to refuse to change
one’s opinion), etc.
They are motivated expressions.

21.

Phraseological collocations are not only motivated
but contain one component used in its direct
meaning, while the other is used metaphorically,
e.g. to meet requirements, to attain success.
In this group of PUs some substitutions are possible
which do not destroy the meaning of the metaphoric
element, e.g. to meet the needs, to meet the
demand, to meet the necessity; to have success,
to lose success.
These substitutions are not synonymical and the
meaning of the whole changes, while the meaning
of the verb meet and the noun success are kept
intact.
3.

22. 3.2. STRUCTURAL CLASSIFICATION OF PHRASEOLOGICAL UNITS (A.I. SMIRNITSKY)

Prof. A.I. Smirnitsky classified PUs as highly idiomatic
set expressions functioning as word equivalents, and
characterized by their semantic and grammatical
unity. He suggested three classes of stereotyped
phrases:
1. traditional phrases (nice distinction, rough sketch);
2. phraseological combinations (to fall in love, to get
up);
3. idioms (to wash one’s dirty linen in public);

23.

The second group (phraseological combinations)
fall into two subgroups:
1.
one-top phraseological units, which were
compared with derived words;
1.
2.
3.
verb-adverb PUs of the type to give up, e.g. to
bring up, to try out, to look up, to drop in, etc.
PUs of the type to be tired, e.g. to be surprised,
to be up to, etc.
Prepositional substantative units, e.g. by heart.

24.

2. two-top phraseological units, which were
compared with compound words.
1.
2.
3.
4.
attributive-nominal, e.g. brains trust, white
elephant, blind alley. Units of this type function
as noun equivalents;
verb-nominal phrases, e.g. to know the ropes,
to take place, etc.
phraseological repetitions, e.g. ups and downs ,
rough and ready, flat as a pancake. They
function as adverbs or adjectives equivalents;
adverbial multi-top units, e.g. every other day.

25. STRUCTURAL-SEMANTIC CLASSIFICATION OF PHRASEOLOGICAL UNITS (A.V. Koonin)

Prof. Koonin distinguishes: phraseological units,
phraseomatic units and borderline (mixed)
cases. phraseological units have fully or partly
transferred meaning, while phraseomatic units
are used in their literal meaning.
Phraseological and phraseomatic units are
characterized by phraseological stability that
distinguishes them from free phrases and
compound words.

26. Prof. A.V. Koonin develops the theory of stability which consists of the following aspects:

Prof. A.V. Koonin develops the theory of
stability which consists of the following aspects:
1.
2.
stability of usage, i.e. phraseological units
are reproduced ready-made, not created in
speech;
lexical stability, i.e. the components of
phraseological units are either irreplaceable or
partially replaceable within the bounds of
phraseological variance:

27.

Lexical: a skeleton in the cupboard / closet (family’s secret), a
blind pig / tiger (to sell alcohol illegally);
Grammatical: to be in deep water / waters (to be in a dificult
situation), a stony heart – a heart of stone (a stern or cruel
nature);
Positional: a square peg in a round hole – a round peg in a
square hole (a person in a situation unsuited to their abilities or
character), to dot the i’s and cross the t’s – to cross one’s t’s
and dot one’s i’s (ensure that all details are correct);
Quantitative: Tom, Dick and Harry – every Tom, Dick and
Harry (anybody and everybody);
Mixed variants: raise/stir up the nest of hornets’ nest about
one’s ears – to arouse/stir up the nest of hornets (to destroy
the nest of wasps).

28.

3.
4.
Semantic stability is based on lexical
stability of phraseological units. In spite of
occasional changes the meaning of a
phraseological unit is preserved. It may only
be specified, made more precise, weakened or
strengthened.
Syntactic stability.

29. The characteristic features of phraseological units are:

1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
ready-made reproduction,
structural divisibility,
morphological stability,
permanence of lexical composition,
semantic unity,
syntactic fixity.

30. Prof. A.V. Koonin’s definition: ‘a phraseplogical unit is a stable word-group with wholly or partially transferred meaning.’

Phraseological units are subdivided into 4
classes according to the function in
communication determined by structuralsemantic characteristics.

31. Functional classification

1.
2.
3.
4.
nominative phraseplogical units, standing for certain
notions: a bull in a china shop;
nominative-communicative phraseplogical units,
standing for certain notions in the Active voice, and may
be used in Passive constructions: to cross the Rubicon –
the Rubicon is crossed!
interjectional phraseplogical units, standing for certain
notions: a pretty (nice) kettle of fish! For crying out
loud!
communicative phraseological units standing for
sentences (proverbs and sayings): Still waters run deep.
The world is a nice place.

32. Communicative phraseological units, expressing statement:

1.
A proverb is a collection of words (phrase or
sentence that states a general truth or gives
advice:
Idleness is the root of all evil.
A penny saved is a penny gained.
The pen is mightier than the sword.
Ask no questions, hear no lies.
Silence is something an answer.

33. Distinctive features of proverbs:

1.
Structural dissimilarity
(cf: George liked her for she never put on
airs (predicate).
Big bugs like him care nothing about small
fry like ourselves (a) subject, b) prepositional
object).
Proverbs, if viewed in their structural aspect,
are sentences, and so cannot be used in the
way in which phraseological units are used in
the above examples.

34. 2. Semantic aspect:

Proverbs could be best compared with minute fables for,
like the latter, they sum up the collective experience
of the community. Proverbs:
1. moralize: Hell is paved with good intentions.
2. give advice: Don’t judge a tree by its bark .
3. give warning: If you sing before breakfast, you
will cry before night.
4. admonish: Liars should have good memories.
5. criticize: Everyone calls his own geese swans.

35. A saying is any common, colloquial expression, or a remark often made, e.g.

1.
2.
3.
4.
That cat won’t jump.
Woe betide you!
The fat is in the fire .
What will Mrs. Grundy say?

36. Proverbs and sayings are introduced in speech ready-made, their components are constant, and their meaning is traditional and mostly figurative.

Proverbs often form the basis for phraseological
units:
It’s the last straw that breaks the camel’s back:
the last straw.
There no use crying over spilt milk: cry over
spilt milk, spilt milk.
Generally proverbs and sayings are emotionally
coloured.

37. Proverbs are short sayings that express popular wisdom, a truth or a moral lesson in a concise and imaginative way:

It never rains, but it pours.
Easy come, easy go.
A miss is as good as a mile.
Too many chiefs and not enough Indians.
Least said, soonest mended.
Practice what one peaches.
You can’t teach an old dog new tricks.
Charity begins at home.

38. Many proverbs and sayings are metaphorical:

Time is money.
Little drops make the mighty ocean (little
drops).
Rome wasn’t built in a day. (a day);
Make the mighty ocean, building Rome (a
large task).
It takes two to tango (both parties involved in a
situation or argument are equally responsible
for it).

39. 3.3. SEMANTIC STRUCTURE OF PHRASEOLOGICAL UNITS BY PROF. V.N.TELIYA

The semantic structure of PUs is formed by
semantic ultimate constituents called
macrocomponents of meaning:
1. Denotational (descriptive) macrocomponent
contains the information about the objective
reality, it is the procedure connected with
categorization, i.e. the classification of
phenomena of the reality, based on the typical
idea about what is denoted by a PU.

40.

2. Evaluation macrocomponent contains
1.
2.
3.
the information about the value of what is
denoted by a PU.
The rational evaluation may be:
positive, e.g. a home from home – ‘a
place or situation where one feels
completely happy and at ease’;
negative, e.g. the lion’s den – ‘a place of
great danger’;
neutral, e.g., in the flesh – ‘in bodily
form’.

41.

3. Motivational macrocomponent correlates
with the notion of the inner form of PU.
Motivation of a PU can be defined as the
aptness of ‘the literal reading’ of a unit to be
associated with the denotational and
evaluation aspects of meaning.
E.g., the literal reading of the PU to have broad
shoulders is physical strength of a person.
The idea is indicative of a person’s strength
becomes the base for transference and forms
the meaning of: ‘being able to bear the full
weight of one’s responsibilities’.

42.

4. Emotive macrocomponent is the contents
of subjective modality expressing feelingrelation to what is denoted by a PU within the
range of approval/disapproval, e.g.
a leading light in something – ‘a person who is
important in a particular group’ (approval),
to lead a cat and dog life – ‘used to describe a
husband and wife who quarrel furiously with
each other most of the time’ (disapproval).

43.

5. Stylistic macrocomponent points to the
communicative register in which a PU is used
and to the social-role relationships between
the participants of communication:
1. formal, e.g. sick at heart – ‘very sad’;
2. informal, e.g. be sick to death – ‘to be
angry and bored because something
unpleasant has been happening for too
long’;
3. neutral, e.g. pass by on the other side – ‘to
ignore a person who needs help’.

44.

6. Grammatical macrocomponent contains the
information about all possible morphological
and syntactic changes of a PU, e.g. to be in
deep water = to be in deep waters;
to take away smb’s breath = to take smb’s
breath away;
Achilles’s heel = the heel of Achilles.

45.

7. Gender macrocomponent may be expressed
explicitly, i.e. determined by the structure
and/or semantics of a PU, and in that case it
points out to the class of objects denoted by
the PU: men, women, people (both men and
women).
E.g., compare the PUs every Tom, Dick and
Harry meaning ‘every or any man” and
every Tom, Dick and Sheila which denotes
‘every or any man and woman’.

46.

Gender macrocomponent may be expressed implicitly and
then it denotes the historical reference of a
phraseological unit: to wash one’s dirty linen in public.
The implicit idea about traditional women’s work (cf.
with Russian: выносить сор из избы).
The implicit gender macrocomponent is defined within
the range of three conceptual spheres: masculine,
feminine, intergender.
Cf. the implicitly expressed intergender
macrocomponent in to feel like royalty meaning ‘to feel
like a member of the Royal Family, to feel majestic’ and
its counterparts, i.e. phraseological units with explicitly
expressed gender macrocomponent, to feel like a queen
and to feel like a king.

47. 5. TYPES OF TRANSFERENCE OF PHRASEOLOGICAL UNITS

Phraseological transference is a complete or
partial change of meaning of an initial wordcombination (WC) or a sentence as a result of
which the WC (or the sentence) acquires a
new meaning and turns into a PU.

48.

1. Transference based on simile, is the
intensification of some features of an object
(phenomenon, thing) denoted by a PU by
means of bringing it into contact with another
object (phenomenon, thing) belonging to an
entirely different class. Compare:
(as) pretty as a picture
(as) fat as a pig
to fight like a lion
to swim like a fish

49.

2. Transference based on metaphor is a likening
of the object (phenomenon, action) of reality
to another, which is associated with it on the
basis of real or imaginable resemblance.
E.g., in the PU to bend somebody to one’s bow
meaning ‘to submit someone’ transference is
based on metaphor, i.e. on the likening of a
subordinated, submitted person to a thing
(bow) a good command of which allows its
owner to do with it everything he wants to.

50.

Metaphors can bear a hyperbolic character:
flog a dead horse .
Metaphors may also have a euphemistic
character which serves to soften unpleasant
facts: go to one’s long rest, join the majority
– ‘to die’.

51.

3. Transference based on metonymy is a
transfer of name from one object
(phenomenon, thing, etc.) to another based on
the contiguity of their properties, relations,
etc. It is conditioned by close ties between the
two objects, e.g., the metonymical
transference in the PU a silk stocking
meaning ‘a rich, well-dressed man’ is based
on the replacement of the genuine object (a
man) by the article of clothing which was
very fashionable and popular among men in
the past.

52.

4. Transference based on synecdoche is naming
the whole by its part, the replacement of the
common by the private, of the plural by the
singular and vice versa. E.g., the components
flesh and blood in the PU in the flesh and
blood meaning ‘in a material form’ as the
integral parts of the real existence replace a
person himself or any living being.
Synecdoche is usually used in combination
with other types of transference, e.g.
metaphor: to hold one’s tongue – ‘to say
nothing, to be discreet’.

53. References:

1.
2.
3.
Babich G.N. Lexicology: a Current Guide.
Екатеринбург – Москва: изд-во «Белая
медведица», 2006. С. – 101-112.
Zykova I.V. Practical Course in English
Lexicology. M.: Academy, 2006. Pp. -128134.
Антрушина Г.Б. Лексикология
английского языка. М.: Дрофа, 2006.
С.225-259.

Lecture №4. Different Approaches to the Classification of Phraseological Units.

Semantic, Functional, Contextual

PHRASEOLOGY

The vocabulary of a language is enriched not only by words but also by phraseological units. Phraseological units are word-groups that cannot be made in the process of speech, they exist in the language as ready-made units. They are compiled in special dictionaries. The same as words phraseological units express a single notion and are used in a sentence as one part of it. American and British lexicographers call such units «idioms». We can mention such dictionaries as: L. Smith «Words and Idioms», V. Collins «A Book of English Idioms» etc. In these dictionaries we can find words, peculiar in their semantics (idiomatic), side by side with word-groups and sentences. In these dictionaries they are arranged, as a rule, into different semantic groups. Phraseological units can be classified according to the ways they are formed, according to the degree of the motivation of their meaning, according to their structure and according to their part-of-speech meaning.

WAYS OF FORMING PHRASEOLOGICAL UNITS

A.V. Koonin classified phraseological units according to the way they are formed. He pointed out primary and secondary ways of forming phraseological units. Primary ways of forming phraseological units are those when a unit is formed on the basis of a free word-group:

a) Most productive in Modern English is the formation of phraseological units by means of transferring the meaning of terminological word-groups, e.g. in cosmic technique we can point out the following phrases: «launching pad» in its terminological meaning is «стартовая площадка», in its transferred meaning – «отправной пункт», «to link up» – «cтыковаться, стыковать космические корабли» in its transformed meaning it means – «знакомиться»;

b) a large group of phraseological units was formed from free word groups by transforming their meaning, e.g. «granny farm» – «пансионат для престарелых», «Troyan horse» – «компьюторная программа, преднамеренно составленная для повреждения компьютера»;

c) phraseological units can be formed by means of alliteration , e.g. «a sad sack» – «несчастный случай», «culture vulture» – «человек, интересующийся искусством», «fudge and nudge» – «уклончивость».

d) they can be formed by means of expressiveness, especially it is characteristic for forming interjections, e.g. «My aunt!», «Hear, hear!» etc

e) they can be formed by means of distorting a word group, e.g. «odds and ends» was formed from «odd ends»,

f) they can be formed by using archaisms, e.g. «in brown study» means «in gloomy meditation» where both components preserve their archaic meanings,

g) they can be formed by using a sentence in a different sphere of life, e.g. «that cock won’t fight» can be used as a free word-group when it is used in sports (cock fighting), it becomes a phraseological unit when it is used in everyday life, because it is used metaphorically,

h) they can be formed when we use some unreal image, e.g. «to have butterflies in the stomach» – «испытывать волнение», «to have green fingers» – «преуспевать как садовод—любитель» etc.

i) they can be formed by using expressions of writers or politicians in everyday life, e.g. «corridors of power» (Snow), «American dream» (Alby) «locust years» (Churchil) , «the winds of change» (Mc Millan).

Secondary ways of forming phraseological units are those when a phraseological unit is formed on the basis of another phraseological unit; they are:

a) conversion, e.g. «to vote with one’s feet» was converted into «vote with one’s feet»;

b) changing the grammar form, e.g. «Make hay while the sun shines» is transferred into a verbal phrase – «to make hay while the sun shines»;

c) analogy, e.g. «Curiosity killed the cat» was transferred into «Care killed the cat»;

d) contrast, e.g. «cold surgery» – «a planned before operation» was formed by contrasting it with «acute surgery», «thin cat» – «a poor person» was formed by contrasting it with «fat cat»;

e) shortening of proverbs or sayings e.g. from the proverb «You can’t make a silk purse out of a sow’s ear» by means of clipping the middle of it the phraseological unit «to make a sow’s ear» was formed with the meaning «ошибаться».

f) borrowing phraseological units from other languages, either as translation loans, e.g. «living space» (German), «to take the bull by the horns» ( Latin) or by means of phonetic borrowings «meche blanche» (French), «sotto voce» (Italian) etc.

Phonetic borrowings among phraseological units refer to the bookish style and are not used very often.

L. P. SMITH’S THEMATIC (ETYMOLOGICAL) CLASSIFICATION OF PHRASEOLOGICAL UNITS

The traditional and oldest principle for classifying phraseological units is based on their original content and might be alluded to as thematic (although the term is not universally accepted). The approach is widely used in numerous English and American guides to idiom, phrase books, etc. On this principle, idioms are classified according to their sources of origin, source referring to the particular sphere of human activity, of life of nature, of natural phenomena, etc. So, L. P. Smith gives in his classification groups of idioms used by sailors, fishermen, soldiers, hunters and associated with the realia, phenomena and conditions of their occupations. In Smith’s classification we also find groups of idioms associated with domestic and wild animals and birds, agriculture and cooking. There are also numerous idioms drawn from sports, arts, etc.

This principle of classification is sometimes called etymological. The term does not seem appropriate since we usually mean something different when we speak of the etymology of a word or word-group: whether the word (or word-group) is native or borrowed, and, if the latter, what is the source of borrowing. It is true that Smith makes a special study of idioms borrowed from other languages, but that is only a relatively small part of his classification system. The general principle is not etymological.

Smith points out that word-groups associated with the sea and the life of seamen are especially numerous in English vocabulary. Most of them have long since developed metaphorical meanings which have no longer any association with the sea or sailors, cf.:

to be all at sea – to be unable to understand; to be in a state of ignorance about something;

to sink or swim – to fail or succeed;

in deep water – in trouble or danger;

in low water, on the rocks – in strained financial circumstances;

to be in the same boat with somebody – to be in a situation in which people share the same difficulties and dangers;

to sail under false colours – to pretend to be what one is not; sometimes, to pose as a friend and, at the same time, have hostile intentions;

to show one’s colours – to betray one’s real character or intentions;

to strike one’s colours – to surrender, give in, admit one is beaten;

to weather (to ride out) the storm – to overcome difficulties; to have courageously stood against misfortunes;

to bow to the storm – to give in, to acknowledge one’s defeat;

three sheets in(to) the wind (si.) – very drunk;

half seas over – drunk.

The thematic principle of classifying phraseological units has real merit but it does not take into consideration the linguistic characteristic features of the phraseological units.

V.V.VINOGRADOV’S CLASSIFICATION OF PHRASEOLOGICAL UNITS

The classification system of phraseological units devised by this prominent scholar is considered by some linguists of today to be outdated, and yet its value is beyond doubt because it was the first classification system which was based on the semantic principle. In his classification V. V. Vinogradov developed some points first advanced by the Swiss linguist Charles Bally. The classification is based upon the motivation of the unit, i.e. the relationship existing between the meaning of the whole and the meaning of its component parts. The degree of motivation is correlated with the rigidity, indivisibility and semantic unity of the expression, i.e. with the possibility of changing the form or the order of components, and of substituting the whole by a single word. Units with a partially transferred meaning show the weakest cohesion between their components. The more distant the meaning of a phraseological unit from the current meaning of its constituent parts, the greater is its degree of semantic cohesion. Accordingly, Vinogradov classifies phraseological units into three classes: phraseological combinations, unities and fusions (Rus. фразеологические сочетания, единства и сращения).

Phraseological collocations (combinations) are partially motivated; they contain one component used in its direct meaning while the other is used figuratively: meet the demand, meet the necessity, meet the requirements, to be at one’s wits’ end, to be good at something, to be a good hand at something, to have a bite, to come to a sticky end (coll.), to take something for granted, to stick to one’s word, to stick at nothing, gospel truth.

Phraseological unities, are much more numerous. They are clearly motivated. The emotional quality is based upon the image created by the whole, cf.:

to stick (to stand) to one’s guns – refuse to change one’s statements or opinions in the face of opposition, implying courage and integrity.

to sit on the fence — in discussion, politics, etc. refrain from committing oneself to either side;

to catch/clutch at a straw/straws — when in extreme danger, avail oneself of even the slightest chance of rescue;

to lose one’s head – to be at a loss what to do; to be out of one’s mind;

to lose one’s heart to smb. – to fall in love;

to lock the stable door after the horse is stolen – to take precautions too late, when the mischief is done;

to look a gift horse in the mouth – to examine a present too critically; to find fault with something one gained without effort;

to ride the high horse – to behave in a superior, overbearing way. The image is that of a person mounted on a horse so high that he looks down on others;

a big bug/pot – a person of importance;

a fish out of water – a person situated uncomfortably outside his usual or proper environment.

Phraseological fusions are completely non-motivated word-groups, represent as their name suggests the highest stage of blending together. The meaning of components is completely absorbed by the meaning of the whole, by its expressiveness and emotional properties. Phraseological fusions are specific for every language and do not lend themselves to literal translation into other languages, cf:

to come a cropper — to come to disaster;

neck and crop – entirely, altogether, thoroughly;

at sixes and sevens — in confusion or in disagreement;

to set one’s cap at smb. – to try and attract a man; spoken about girls and women;

to leave smb. in the lurch – to abandon a friend when he is in trouble;

to show the white feather – to betray one’s cowardice;

to dance attendance on smb. – to try and please or attract smb.; to show exaggerated attention to smb.

It is obvious that this classification system does not take into account the structural characteristics of phraseological units. On the other hand, the border-line separating unities from fusions is vague and even subjective. One and the same phraseological unit may appear motivated to one person (and therefore be labelled as a unity) and demotivated to another (and be regarded as a fusion). The more profound one’s command of the language and one’s knowledge of its history, the fewer fusions one is likely to discover in it.

THE STRUCTURAL PRINCIPLE OF CLASSIFYING PHRASEOLOGICAL UNITS

The structural principle of classifying phraseological units is based on their ability to perform the same syntactical functions as words. In the traditional structural approach, the following principal groups of phraseological units are distinguishable: Verbal: to run for one’s (dear) life, to get (win) the upper hand, to make a song and dance about something, to sit pretty;

Substantive: dog’s life, cat-and-dog life, calf love, white lie, tall order, birds of passage, red tape, brown study;

Adjectival: high and mighty, spick and span, brand new, safe and sound, (as) cool as a cucumber, (as) weak as a kitten, (as) good as gold (usu. spoken about children), (as) pretty as a picture, (as) mad as a hatter/a hare in March;

Adverbial: high and low — They searched for him high and low;

by hook or by crook — She decided that, by hook or by crook, she must marry him; for love or money — He came to the conclusion that a really good job couldn’t be found for love or money;

in cold blood — The crime was said to have been committed in cold blood;

to the bitter end- to fight to the bitter end;

by a long chalk — It is not the same thing, by a long chalk.

Interjectional: my God! by George! goodness gracious! good Heavens!

A.I. SMIRNITSKY’S CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM FOR ENGLISH PHRASEOLOGICAL UNITS

Professor A.I. Smirnitsky offered a classification system for English phraseological units which is interesting as an attempt to combine the structural and the semantic principles. Phraseological units in this classification system are grouped according to the number and semantic significance of their constituent parts. Accordingly two large groups are established:

A. one-summit units, which have one meaningful constituent: to give up, to make out, to be tired, to be surprised;

B. two-summit and multi-summit units which have two or more meaningful constitu­ents: black art, first night, common sense, to fish in troubled waters.

Within each of these large groups the phraseological units are classified according to the category of parts of speech of the summit constituent. So, one-summit units are subdi­vided into: a) verbal-adverbial units equivalent to verbs in which the semantic and the grammati­cal centres coincide in the first constituent (to give up);

b) units equivalent to verbs which have their semantic centre in the second constituent and their grammatical centre in the first (to be tired);

c) prepositional-substantive units equivalent either to adverbs or to copulas and having their semantic centre in the substantive constituent and no grammatical centre (by /wait by means of).

Two-summit and multi-summit phraseological units are classified into: a) attributive-substantive two-summit units equivalent to nouns (black art),

b) verbal-substantive two-summit units equivalent to verbs (to take the floor),

c) phraseological repetitions equivalent to adverbs (now or never);

d) adverbial multi-summit units (e. g. every other day).

Professor Smirnitsky also distinguishes proper phraseological units which, in his classification system, are units with non-figurative meanings, and idioms, that is, units with transferred meanings based on a metaphor.

Professor Kunin, the leading Russian authority on English phraseology, pointed out certain inconsistencies in this classification system. First of all, the subdivision into phra­seological units (as non-idiomatic units) and idioms contradicts the leading criterion of a phraseological unit suggested by Professor Smirnitsky: it should be idiomatic.

Professor Kunin also objects to the inclusion of such word-groups as black art, best man, first night in phraseology (in Professor Smiraitsky’s classification system, the two-summit phraseological units) as all these word-groups are not characterised by a transferred meaning. It is also pointed out that verbs with post-positions (e. g. give up) are included in the classification but their status as phraseological units is not supported by any convincing argument.

N.N.AMOSOVA’S CONCEPT OF CONTEXTUAL ANALYSIS

N. N. Amosova’s approach is contextological. She defines phraseological units as units of fixed context. Fixed context is defined as a context characterized by a specific and unchanging sequence of definite lexical components and a peculiar semantic relationship between them. Units of fixed context are subdivided into phrasemes and idioms. Phrasemes are always binary: one component has a phraseologically bound mean­ing, the other serves as the determining context (small talk, small hours, small change). In idioms the new meaning is created by the whole, though every element may have its original meaning weakened or even completely lost: in the nick of time (at the exact moment). Idioms may be motivated or demotivated. A motivated idiom is homonymous to a free phrase, but this phrase is used figuratively: take the bull by the horns (to face dangers without fear). In the nick of time is demotivated, because the word nick is obsolete. Both phrasemes and idioms may be movable (changeable) or immovable.

S.V.KUNIN’S CONCEPT OF PHRASEOLOGICAL UNITS

A.V. Kunin’s classification is based on the functions the units fulfil in speech. The classification is based on the combined structural-semantic principle and it also considers the quotient of stability of phraseological units. Phraseological units are subdivided into the following four classes according to their function in communication determined by their structural-semantic characteristics. Nominative phraseological units are represented by word-groups, including the ones with one meaningful word, and coordinative phrases of the type wear and tear, well and good. The first class also includes word-groups with a predicative structure, such as as the crow flies, and, also, predicative phrases of the type see how the land lies, ships that pass in the night. Nominative-communicative phraseological units include word-groups of the type to break the ice — the ice is broken, that is, verbal word-groups which are transformed into a sentence when the verb is used in the Passive Voice. Phraseological units which are neither nominative nor communicative include interjectional word-groups, (a pretty kettle of fish!). Communicative phraseological units are represented by proverbs and sayings. These four classes are divided into sub-groups according to the type of structure of the phraseological unit. The sub-groups include further rubrics representing types of structural-semantic meanings according to the kind of relations between the constituents and to either full or partial transference of meaning. The classification system includes a considerable number of subtypes and gradations and objectively reflects the wealth of types of phraseological units existing in the language

FORMAL AND FUNCTIONAL CLASSIFICATION

Formal classification distinguishes the following set expressions: nominal phrases: the root of the trouble; verbal phrases: put one’s best foot forward; adjectival phrases: as good as gold; red as a cherry; adverbial phrases: from head to foot; prepositional phrases: in the course of; conjunctional phrases: as long as, on the other hand; interjectional phrases: Well, I never!

A stereotyped sentence also introduced into speech as a ready-made formula may be illustrated by Never say die! – never give up, hope, take your time – do not hurry. This classification takes into consideration not only the type of component parts but also the functioning of the whole, thus, tooth and nail is not a nominal but an adverbial unit, because it serves to modify a verb (e.g. fight tooth and nail).

Within each of these classes a further subdivision is as follows:

a) Set expressions functioning like nouns:

N+N: maiden name – the surname of a woman before she was married; brains trust – a committee of experts;

N’s+N: cat’s paw – one who is used for the convenience of a cleverer and stronger person;

Ns’ N: ladies’ man – one who makes special effort to charm or please women; N+prp+N: the arm of the law; skeleton in the cupboard;

N+A: knight errant – the phrase is today applied to any chivalrous man ready to help and protect oppressed and helpless people

N+and+N: lord and master – husband; all the world and his wife;

A+N: high tea – an evening meal which combines meat or some similar extra dish with the usual tea;

N+subordinate clause: ships that pass in the night – chance acquaintances;

b) Set expressions functioning like verbs:

V+N: take advantage;

V+and+V: pick and choose,

V + (one’s)+N+(prp): snap one’s fingers at;

V + one+N: give one the bird — to fire sb;

V + subordinate clause: see how the land lies – to discover the state of affairs;.

c) Set expressions functioning like adjectives: A+and+A: high and mighty;

(as)+A+as+N: as old as the hills, as mad as a hatter;

d) Set expressions functioning like adverbs: N+N: tooth and nail;

prp + N: by heart, of course; adv + prp + N: once in a blue moon; prp+N+or+N: by hook or by crook; cj+clause: before one can say Jack Robinson.

e) Set expressions functioning like prepositions: prp+N+prp: in consequence of;

f) Set expressions functioning like interjections: These are often structured as imperative sentences: Bless (one’s) soul! God bless me! Hang it (all)!

STYLISTIC ASPECT OF PHRASEOLOGY. POLYSEMY AND SYNONYMY OF PHRASEOLOGICAL UNITS

Semantic stylistic features contracting set expressions into units of fixed context are simile, contrast, metaphor and synonymy, cf: as old as the hills and older than the hills (simile); from beginning to end, for love or money, more or less, sooner or later (contrast); a lame duck, a pack of lies, arms race, to swallow the pill, in a nutshell (metaphor); by leaps and bounds, proud and haughty (synonymy). A few more combinations of different features in the same phrase are: as good as gold, as pleased as Punch, as fit as a fiddle (alliteration, simile); now or never (alliteration and contrast). More rarely there is an intentional pun: as cross as two sticks (very angry). This play upon words makes the phrase jocular. There are, of course, other cases when set expressions lose their metaphorical picturesqueness, having preserved some fossilized words and phrases, the meaning of which is no longer correctly understood. For instance, the expression buy a pig in a poke may be still used, although poke “bag” (cf. pouch, pocket) does not occur in other contexts. Expressions taken from obsolete sports and occupations may survive in their new figurative meaning. In these cases the euphonic qualities of the expression are even more important. A muscular and irreducible phrase is also memorable. The muscular feeling is of special importance in slogans and battle cries. Saint George and the Dragon for Merrie England, the medieval battle cry, was a rhythmic unit to which a man on a horse could swing his sword. The modern Scholarships not battleships! can be conveniently scanned by a marching crowd.

PROVERBS, SAYINGS, FAMILIAR QUOTATIONS AND CLICHES

The place of proverbs, sayings and familiar quotations with respect to set expressions is a controversial issue. A proverb is a short familiar epigrammatic saying expressing popular wisdom, a truth or a moral lesson in a concise and imaginative way. Proverbs have much in common with set expressions, because their lexical components are also constant, their meaning is traditional and mostly figurative, and they are introduced into speech ready-made. Consider the following examples of proverbs:

We never know the value of water till the well is dry.

You can take the horse to the water, but you cannot make him drink.

Those who live in glass houses shouldn’t throw stones.

Even these few examples clearly show that proverbs are different from those phraseological units which have been discussed above. The first distinctive feature that strikes one is the obvious structural dissimilarity. Phraseological units, as we have seen, are a kind of ready-made blocks which fit into the structure of a sentence performing a certain syntactical function, more or less as words do. E. g. George liked her for she never put on airs (predicate). Big bugs like him care nothing about small fry like ourselves, (a) subject, b) prepositional object).

Proverbs, if viewed in their structural aspect, are sentences, and so cannot be used in the way in which phraseological units are used in the above examples. If one compares proverbs and phraseological units in the semantic aspect, the difference seems to become even more obvious. Proverbs could be best compared with minute fables for, like the latter, they sum up the collective experience of the community. They moralise (Hell is paved with good intentions), give advice (Don’t judge a tree by its bark) give warning (If you sing before breakfast, you will cry before night), admonish (Liars should have good memories), criticise (Everyone calls his own geese swans).

No phraseological unit ever does any of these things. They do not stand for whole statements as proverbs do but for a single concept. Their function in speech is purely nominative (i.e. they denote an object, an act, etc.). The function of proverbs in speech, though, is communicative (i.e. they impart certain information). Professor A. V. Koonin includes proverbs in his classification of phraseological units and labels them communicative phraseological units. From his point of view, one of the main criteria of a phraseological unit is its stability. If the quotient of phraseological stability in a word-group is not below the minimum, it means that we are dealing with a phraseological unit. The structural type – that is, whether the unit is a combination of words or a sentence-is irrelevant. The criterion of nomination and communication cannot be applied here either, says Professor A. V. Koonin, because there are a considerable number of verbal phraseological units which are word-groups (i.e. nominative units) when the verb is used in the Active Voice, and sentences (i.e. communicative units) when the verb is used in the Passive Voice, cf.: to cross (pass) the Rubicon – the Rubicon is crossed (passed); to shed crocodile tears – crocodile tears are shed.

Hence, if one accepts nomination as a criterion of referring or not referring this or that unit to phraseology, one is faced with the absurd conclusion that such word-groups, when with verbs in the Active Voice, are phraseological units and belong to the system of the language, and when with verbs in the Passive Voice, are non-phraseological word-groups and do not belong to the system of the language.

There does not seem to exist any rigid or permanent border-line between proverbs and phraseological units as the latter rather frequently originate from the former, cf.: The last straw breaks the camel’s back — the last straw; Birds of a feather flock together – birds of a feather; A drowning man catches at straws — to catch at a straw (straws). What is more, some of the proverbs are easily transformed into phraseological units: Don’t put all your eggs in one basket — to put all one’s eggs in one basket; Don’t cast pearls before swine — to cast pearls before swine. As to familiar quotations, they are different from proverbs in their origin. They come from literature but by and by they become part of the language, so that many people using them do not even know that they are quoting, and very few could accurately name the play or passage on which they are drawing even when they are aware of using a quotation from W. Shakespeare. The Shakespearian quotations have become and remain extremely numerous – they have contributed enormously to the store of the language. Very many come from Hamlet, cf.: Something is rotten in the stale of Denmark; Brevity is the soul of wit; The rest is silence. Some quotations are so often used that they come to be considered cliches, hackneyed and stale phrases. Being constantly and mechanically repeated they have lost their original expressiveness, cf.: ample opportunities, astronomical figures, the arms of Morpheus, to break the ice, the Irony of fate, etc.

32

Скачать материал

Скачать материал

Описание презентации по отдельным слайдам:

• 

  1 слайд

  PHRASEOLOGICAL UNITS IN ENGLISH

• 

  2 слайд

  Phraseology as the branch of Linguistics. The problem of terminology
  Definition of phraseological units. Criteria for phraseologacal units
  Three approaches towards the study of phraseological units
  Classification of phraseological units

• 

  3 слайд

  Phraseology as the branch of Linguistics
  appeared in the 1940s

  studies phraseological units of the language

• 

  4 слайд

  Object of Phraseology
  phraseological units, their nature, the way they function in speech

• 

  5 слайд

  Problem of terminology
  set expression
  idiom
  set phrase
  fixed word-groups
  word-equivalent
  phraseological unit

• 

  6 слайд

  Problem of terminology
  set phrase – implies that the basic criterion of differentiation is stability of the lexical components and grammatical structure of word-groups (I.V. Arnold)

• 

  7 слайд

  Problem of terminology
  idiom – implies that the essential feature of the linguistic units is idiomacity or lack of motivation (English and American linguists)

• 

  8 слайд

  Problem of terminology
  word-equivalent – stresses semantic and functional inseparability of certain word-groups, their aptness to function in speech as single words (A.I.Smirnitstky)

• 

  9 слайд

  Problem of terminology
  phraseological unit – the most acceptable by Russian linguists
  phraseological units
  are not always stable (like set expressions)
  not always equivalent to one word (like word-equivalents)
  not always idiomatic (like idioms), may be only partially motivated

• 

  10 слайд

  Phraseological Units
  non-motivated word-groups
  cannot be freely made up in speech
  reproduced as ready-made units
  structurally stable
  possess stability of lexical components
  reproduced as single unchangeable collocations

• 

  11 слайд

  Phraseological Units
  e.g. red (blue, white, etc) flower
  BUT red tape ≠ blue tape
  red flower – red flowers
  BUT red tape ≠ red tapes

• 

  12 слайд

  Phraseological Units
  Denotational meaning belongs to a whole phrase as a single inseparable unit
  e.g. apple sauce — nonsense
  Connotational meaning belongs to the whole word-group
  e.g. old boy

• 

  13 слайд

  Phraseological Unit
  a stable word-group characterized by a completely or partially transferred meaning (A.V. Koonin)

• 

  14 слайд

  Criteria to distinguish free-word groups from phraseological units
  semantic criterion
  structural criterion

• 

  15 слайд

  Semantic criterion
  free word-groups- each meaningful component stands for a separate concept
  e.g. a red flower
  phraseological units – convey a single concept
  e.g. red tape

• 

  16 слайд

  Semantic criterion
  Phraseological units are characterized by different degrees of semantic change:
  semantic change may affect the whole word-group (“complete transferred meaning”) e.g. to skate on thin ice (to take risks), to have one’s heart in one’s boots (to be anxious about smth.)

• 

  17 слайд

  Semantic criterion
  2. semantic change may affect only one of the components of a word-group (“partially transferred meaning”)
  e.g. to fall in love, small talk, to talk shop

• 

  18 слайд

  Structural Criterion: restriction in substitution
  free word-groups – components may be changed
  e.g. The cargo ship/vessel is carrying coal to Liverpool/ Manchester
  phraseological units – no word can be replaced without destroying the sense
  e.g. to carry coals to Newcastle

• 

  19 слайд

  Structural Criterion: introducing additional components
  free word-groups – change can be made without affecting the general meaning
  e.g. The big ship is carrying a large cargo of coal to the port of Liverpool
  phraseological units – no additional components can be introduced
  e.g. the white elephant – NOT the big white elephant

• 

  20 слайд

  Structural Criterion: grammatical invariability
  free word-groups –
  e.g. red flower – red flowers
  phraseological units
  e.g. to find fault with smb. NOT to find faults with smb.

• 

  21 слайд

  Features of Phraseological Units
  semantic and structural stability
  idiomacity (lack of motivation)
  ready-madeness
  the most common structure: verb +object
  formed from free word combinations

• 

  22 слайд

  Approaches to the Study of Phraseological Units
  semantic
  functional
  contextual

• 

  23 слайд

  Semantic Approach
  phraseological units are non-motivated (idiomacity)
  phraseological units are opposed to free-word combinations which are completely motivated

• 

  24 слайд

  Functional Approach
  phraseological units are specific word-groups functioning like word-equivalents
  like words they possess structural and semantic inseparability

• 

  25 слайд

  Contextual Approach
  phraseological units are used in specific contexts – non-variable, or “fixed”
  non-variability is a stability of the lexical components within the semantic structure

• 

  26 слайд

  Classifications of Phraseological Units
  Classifications based on a semantic approach
  semantic classification — according to the degree of motivation (V.V. Vinogradov)
  structural classification – based on the ability to perform the same syntactical functions as words
  structural-semantical classification by A.I. Smirnitsky

• 

  27 слайд

  Classifications of Phraseological Units
  2. Classification based on a functional approach
  structural-semantic classification (A.V. Koonin)
  3. Classification based on a contexual approach
  classification by N.N. Amosova

• 

  28 слайд

  V.V. Vinogradov’s Classification
  phraseological combinations (фразеологические сочетания) – word-groups with partially changed meaning
  e.g. to be good at smth., to have a bite, bosom friends
  phraseological unities (фразеологические единства) – word-groups with completely changed meaning, the meaning of the unit does not correspond to the meanings of its constituent parts, but deducible as it is based on metaphor

• 

  29 слайд

  V.V. Vinogradov’s Classification
  phraseological unities (фразеологические единства) – word-groups with completely changed meaning, the meaning of the unit does not correspond to the meanings of its constituent parts, but deducible as it is based on metaphor

• 

  30 слайд

  V.V. Vinogradov’s Classification
  phraseological unities
  e.g. to lock the stable door after the horse is stolen (“to take precautions too late”),
  a fish out of water (‘a person situated uncomfortably outside its usual environment’)
  phraseological fusions (фразеологические сращения) – word-groups with completely changed meaning, their meaning cannot be deduced from the meanings of its constituent parts

• 

  31 слайд

  V.V. Vinogradov’s Classification
  phraseological fusions (фразеологические сращения) – word-groups with completely changed meaning, their meaning cannot be deduced from the meanings of its constituent parts

• 

  32 слайд

  V.V. Vinogradov’s Classification
  phraseological fusions
  e.g. at sixes and sevens (‘in confusion or in disagreement’)
  to set one’s cap at smb. (‘to try and attract smb.)

• 

  33 слайд

  R.S.Ginzburg’s Classification
  phraseological fusions – completely non-motivated word-groups, characterized by the complete stability of the lexical components and the grammatical structure
  e.g. to kick the bucket, red tape

• 

  34 слайд

  R.S.Ginzburg’s Classification
  phraseological unities – partially non-motivated, the meaning is perceived through the metaphoric meaning of the unit, characterized by high degree of stability of the lexical components
  e.g. to show one’s teeth, to wash one’s dirty linen in the public

• 

  35 слайд

  R.S.Ginzburg’s Classification
  phraseological collocations – motivated word-groups, have specific lexical valency which results in their stability
  e.g. to take a liking/ fancy, to bear a grudge/ malice

• 

  36 слайд

  Structural Classification
  verbal (verb equivalent)
  e.g. to catch at a straw
  substantive (noun equivalent)
  e.g. dog’s life, white elephant
  adjectival (adjective equivalent)
  e.g. safe and sound
  adverbial (adverb equivalent)
  e.g. in the twinkle of an eye
  interjectional
  e.g. goodness gracious! Dear me!

• 

  37 слайд

  Structural Classification
  adverbial (adverb equivalent)
  e.g. in the twinkle of an eye
  interjectional
  e.g. goodness gracious! Dear me!

• 

  38 слайд

  Classification by A.I. Smirnitsky
  tried to combine structural and semantic principles
  compared phraseological units with words

• 

  39 слайд

  Classification by A.I. Smirnitsky
  one-summit (one-top) units – have one meaningful constituent (compared with affixed words)
  verbal-adverbial units – equivalent to verbs in which grammatical and semantic centers coincide in the first component
  e.g. to back up – поддерживать
  to nose out — разузнавать

• 

  40 слайд

  Classification by A.I. Smirnitsky
  2. units equivalent to verbs in which semantic centre is in the second element and grammatical centre is in the first element
  e.g. to be tired

• 

  41 слайд

  Classification by A.I. Smirnitsky
  3. prepositional-nominal units – equivalent to unchangeable words: prepositions, conjunctions, adverbs. Semantic center is in the nominal constituent, there is no grammatical center
  e.g. in the course of – during, o the nose — exactly

• 

  42 слайд

  Classification by A.I. Smirnitsky
  two-summit (two-top) units — have two or more meaningful constituents (compared with compound words)
  attributive-nominal units — equivalent to nouns
  e.g. millstone round one’s neck – камень на шее
  high road — шоссе

• 

  43 слайд

  Classification by A.I. Smirnitsky
  2. verbal-nominal units – equivalent to verbs
  e.g. to read between the lines – понимать скрытый смысл
  to speak BBC — говорить на правильном английском языке

• 

  44 слайд

  Classification by A.I. Smirnitsky
  3. phraseological repetitions – equivalents of adverbs or adjectives, components are joined by a conjunction
  e.g. back and forth – взад и вперед
  ups and downs – взлеты и падения
  multi-summit units
  e.g. to be a shadow of one’s own self – быть тенью самого себя

• 

  45 слайд

  A.V. Koonin’s Classification
  based on structural-semantic principle
  based on the functions units fulfil in speech

• 

  46 слайд

  A.V. Koonin’s Classification according to the function in communication
  1. nominative
  e.g. a bull in a china shop
  2. interjectional
  e.g. a pretty kettle of fish!

• 

  47 слайд

  A.V. Koonin’s Classification according to the function in communication
  3. nominative-communicative – verbal word-groups which are transformed into a sentence when the verb is used in the Passive Voice
  e.g. to break the ice – the ice is broken
  4. communicative – proverbs and sayings
  e.g. spare a rod and spoil a child — пожалеешь розгу, испортишь ребенка; баловством портить ребенка

• 

  48 слайд

  A.V. Koonin’s Classification according to the structure
  changeable/ unchangeable
  may have synonyms
  e.g. to lift a finger – not to raise a finger
  2. with a variable pronoun
  e.g. to pull one’s leg
  3. with both types of variability
  e.g. to give smb a piece/ a bit of one’s mind

• 

  49 слайд

  Classification by N.N. Amosova
  phraseological units are units of a fixed context
  fixed context – specific and unchanging sequence of lexical components and specific relations between them

• 

  50 слайд

  Classification by N.N. Amosova
  phrasemes – always binory, one component has a phraseologically bound meaning, the other serves as a determining context
  e.g. small talk, small hours

• 

  51 слайд

  Classification by N.N. Amosova
  idioms – the new meaning is crated by the whole, every element may have its original meaning weakened or completely lost
  e.g. in the nick of the time – ‘at the exact moment’
  movable (changeable)/immovable
  e.g. apple sauce/ the apple of one’s eye

• 

  52 слайд

  Proverbs (пословица)
  sum up the collective wisdom of the community, a popular truth or a moral lesson in a concise and imaginative way
  are metaphorical
  they moralize
  e.g. Hell is paved with good intentions

• 

  53 слайд

  Proverbs
  they admonish
  e.g. If you sing before breakfast, you will cry before night
  they criticize
  e.g. Everyone calls his own geese swans
  they give advice
  e.g. Don’t judge a tree by its bark

• 

  54 слайд

  Proverbs
  lexical components are stable
  meaning is figurative
  are ready-made units
  are easily transformed into phraseological units
  e.g. don’t cast pearls before swine – to cast pearls before swine

• 

  55 слайд

  Sayings (поговорка)
  are non-metaphorical, not figurative
  grammatically they are finished sentences
  e.g. Where there is a way, there is a will

• 

  56 слайд

  Familiar Quotations (крылатые выражения)
  come from literature
  in contrast to proverbs, they do not express finished judgment
  e.g. To err is human.

Найдите материал к любому уроку, указав свой предмет (категорию), класс, учебник и тему:

6 210 144 материала в базе

• Выберите категорию:

• Выберите учебник и тему

• Выберите класс:

• Тип материала:

  • Все материалы

  • Статьи

  • Научные работы

  • Видеоуроки

  • Презентации

  • Конспекты

  • Тесты

  • Рабочие программы

  • Другие методич. материалы

Найти материалы

Вам будут интересны эти курсы:

• Курс профессиональной переподготовки «Маркетинг: теория и методика обучения в образовательной организации»

• Курс повышения квалификации «Основы управления проектами в условиях реализации ФГОС»

• Курс повышения квалификации «Экономика предприятия: оценка эффективности деятельности»

• Курс повышения квалификации «Специфика преподавания конституционного права с учетом реализации ФГОС»

• Курс повышения квалификации «Управление финансами: как уйти от банкротства»

• Курс профессиональной переподготовки «Организация деятельности по подбору и оценке персонала (рекрутинг)»

• Курс повышения квалификации «Применение MS Word, Excel в финансовых расчетах»

• Курс повышения квалификации «Правовое регулирование рекламной и PR-деятельности»

• Курс повышения квалификации «Финансы: управление структурой капитала»

• Курс повышения квалификации «Страхование и актуарные расчеты»

• Курс профессиональной переподготовки «Риск-менеджмент организации: организация эффективной работы системы управления рисками»

• Курс профессиональной переподготовки «Политология: взаимодействие с органами государственной власти и управления, негосударственными и международными организациями»

• Курс профессиональной переподготовки «Уголовно-правовые дисциплины: теория и методика преподавания в образовательной организации»

• Курс профессиональной переподготовки «Организация и управление службой рекламы и PR»

• Курс профессиональной переподготовки «Технический контроль и техническая подготовка сварочного процесса»