PHRASEOLOGY

Yuklangan vaqt

2024-07-16

Yuklab olishlar soni

1

Sahifalar soni

8

Faytl hajmi

20,4 KB


 
 
 
 
 
PHRASEOLOGY 
 
The lexical units which these linguists were studying have been the words, 
the basic lexical unit, and word-forming morphemes, the smallest units within the 
words. Words put together make phrases or word-groups. Word-groups viewed as 
functionally and semantically inseparable units are traditionally regarded as the 
subject matter of the branch of lexicological science named Phraseology. 
But a lot of disagreements concerning this branch of lexicology exist. For 
example, English and American linguists treat phraseology mostly as a problem of 
applied linguistics. Many attempts have been made to approach the problem of 
phraseology in different ways. Up till now, however, no unanimity has been 
achieved concerning the problem of English phraseology and the habitual terms: set-
phrase, idiom, collocation, word-equivalent and many others. Even today 
phraseological units are treated differently by different linguists. G. Salapina states 
that the number of opinions concerning phraseology is as great as the number of 
linguists dealing with this problem. The Englishmen mostly use the term idiom to 
denote the mode of expression peculiar language (that is as a synonym to a language 
or a dialect) – a form of expression peculiar to a country, a district, and an individual. 
The complexity of the problem is to a great extent caused by the fact that the 
borderline between free word-groups and phraseological units (the combination 
of words, which are fixed) is not clearly defined. 
Still important and unsolved question of phraseology is the problem of 
classification of phraseological units. More or less detailed groupings are given in 
the books on English Idiom by L.P. Smith and W. Ball. Yet even the authors 
themselves do not claim that their groupings should be regarded as classifications. 
They just collect set expressions, explain them, and describe some of their 
peculiarities, such as alternation, rhyme, contrast, semantic, syntactic, structural 
PHRASEOLOGY The lexical units which these linguists were studying have been the words, the basic lexical unit, and word-forming morphemes, the smallest units within the words. Words put together make phrases or word-groups. Word-groups viewed as functionally and semantically inseparable units are traditionally regarded as the subject matter of the branch of lexicological science named Phraseology. But a lot of disagreements concerning this branch of lexicology exist. For example, English and American linguists treat phraseology mostly as a problem of applied linguistics. Many attempts have been made to approach the problem of phraseology in different ways. Up till now, however, no unanimity has been achieved concerning the problem of English phraseology and the habitual terms: set- phrase, idiom, collocation, word-equivalent and many others. Even today phraseological units are treated differently by different linguists. G. Salapina states that the number of opinions concerning phraseology is as great as the number of linguists dealing with this problem. The Englishmen mostly use the term idiom to denote the mode of expression peculiar language (that is as a synonym to a language or a dialect) – a form of expression peculiar to a country, a district, and an individual. The complexity of the problem is to a great extent caused by the fact that the borderline between free word-groups and phraseological units (the combination of words, which are fixed) is not clearly defined. Still important and unsolved question of phraseology is the problem of classification of phraseological units. More or less detailed groupings are given in the books on English Idiom by L.P. Smith and W. Ball. Yet even the authors themselves do not claim that their groupings should be regarded as classifications. They just collect set expressions, explain them, and describe some of their peculiarities, such as alternation, rhyme, contrast, semantic, syntactic, structural  
 
peculiarities, and so on treating these as devices assuring expressiveness. They also 
show interest in the origin and etymology of English phrases and arrange them 
according to their peculiarities. For example, L.P. Smith groups set expressions into 
phrases from sea life, agriculture, hunting, sports, and so on. 
Russian linguists, Academician F.F. Fortunatov, A.A. Shachmatov and others 
paved the way for serious syntactical analysis of set expressions. 
A special branch of linguistics termed Phraseology came into being in post-
Soviet countries. The most significant theories advanced for Russian phraseology 
are those by V.V. Vinogradov and B.V. Larin. Together with theories advanced on 
classification of phraseological units of the Russian language appeared a great 
number of  linguists’ works devoted to phraseology of the English language. For 
example, A.V. Koonin prompted by V.V. Vinogradov’s theory applied the linguist’s 
theoretic analysis to the realities of the English language and attempted to group 
English phraseological units into semantic-structural classification. 
We shall stop in details on A.V. Koonin’s classification as it seems more 
precise and more applicable to the English language. A.V. Koonin distinguishes the 
following groups of phraseological units: 
1.     Phraseological fusions 
Phraseological fusions (sometimes called idioms) are indivisible phrases in whose 
general meaning one cannot detect any connection with the words of which the 
phrase is made up e.g. can’t make head or tail of it. The lexical (semantic) 
connection between the components of this type of phrases is not always justifiable 
from the standpoint of the contemporary English language. Phraseological fusions 
sometimes contain unintelligible words, old grammatical forms, and dialectal 
peculiarities. 
2.     Phraseological unities 
Phraseological unities are stable phrases which, like idioms, have a meaning of their 
own, distinct from the meaning of the component elements, although these are 
connected logically. Phraseological unities are often considered to be figurative 
phrases, as fresh as daisy, neither here nor there. According to A.V. Koonin 
peculiarities, and so on treating these as devices assuring expressiveness. They also show interest in the origin and etymology of English phrases and arrange them according to their peculiarities. For example, L.P. Smith groups set expressions into phrases from sea life, agriculture, hunting, sports, and so on. Russian linguists, Academician F.F. Fortunatov, A.A. Shachmatov and others paved the way for serious syntactical analysis of set expressions. A special branch of linguistics termed Phraseology came into being in post- Soviet countries. The most significant theories advanced for Russian phraseology are those by V.V. Vinogradov and B.V. Larin. Together with theories advanced on classification of phraseological units of the Russian language appeared a great number of linguists’ works devoted to phraseology of the English language. For example, A.V. Koonin prompted by V.V. Vinogradov’s theory applied the linguist’s theoretic analysis to the realities of the English language and attempted to group English phraseological units into semantic-structural classification. We shall stop in details on A.V. Koonin’s classification as it seems more precise and more applicable to the English language. A.V. Koonin distinguishes the following groups of phraseological units: 1. Phraseological fusions Phraseological fusions (sometimes called idioms) are indivisible phrases in whose general meaning one cannot detect any connection with the words of which the phrase is made up e.g. can’t make head or tail of it. The lexical (semantic) connection between the components of this type of phrases is not always justifiable from the standpoint of the contemporary English language. Phraseological fusions sometimes contain unintelligible words, old grammatical forms, and dialectal peculiarities. 2. Phraseological unities Phraseological unities are stable phrases which, like idioms, have a meaning of their own, distinct from the meaning of the component elements, although these are connected logically. Phraseological unities are often considered to be figurative phrases, as fresh as daisy, neither here nor there. According to A.V. Koonin  
 
phraseological unities are also represented by proverbs (e.g. diamond cut diamond) 
and sayings (e.g. to die a dog’s death). 
3.     Traditional combinations 
Traditional combinations are made up of such words as may combine only with 
certain other words. Sometimes the constituent elements of the phrase may be 
replaced by synonyms. In a traditional combination one or more words are used in 
their direct, non-figurative senses, e.g. to pay a visit to someone; to give (lend) 
assistance to someone; to strike (deal, inflict) a blow to someone. 
A.V. Koonin bases his classification on a combination of functional 
(communicative), semantic and structural features. The main classes are based on 
the function the units fulfill in speech. They may be nominating (a bull in a china 
shop), interjectional (a fine, nice, pretty kettle of fish), communicative (familiarity 
breeds contempt) or nominating-communicative (to pull somebody’s leg).        A.V. 
Koonin distinguishes nominative and communicative phraseological units, and those 
in which these functions are combined, unchangeable expressions from changeable 
expressions, such as: 
a) not to lift (raise, stir, turn) a finger; below (beneath, under) the mark, where 
synonymic variations are possible; 
b) expressions, containing variable pronominal elements: to give somebody a run 
for his money; to pull somebody’s leg; to take one’s time; 
c) expressions, combining these two types of variability: to give somebody a bit (a 
piece) of one’s mind.   
And now we shall apply some practical examples taken from fiction to the A.V. 
Koonin’s classification. 
The following examples are practical presentation of the first subgroup of A.V. 
Koonin’s classification - phraseological fusions: 
e.g. He ought perhaps to have put a spoke in the wheel of their marriage. 
Может быть, следовало помешать этому браку. 
e.g. I shouldn’t be surprised if Irene had put her oar in. 
Уж, наверное, дело не обошлось без вмешательства Ирин. 
phraseological unities are also represented by proverbs (e.g. diamond cut diamond) and sayings (e.g. to die a dog’s death). 3. Traditional combinations Traditional combinations are made up of such words as may combine only with certain other words. Sometimes the constituent elements of the phrase may be replaced by synonyms. In a traditional combination one or more words are used in their direct, non-figurative senses, e.g. to pay a visit to someone; to give (lend) assistance to someone; to strike (deal, inflict) a blow to someone. A.V. Koonin bases his classification on a combination of functional (communicative), semantic and structural features. The main classes are based on the function the units fulfill in speech. They may be nominating (a bull in a china shop), interjectional (a fine, nice, pretty kettle of fish), communicative (familiarity breeds contempt) or nominating-communicative (to pull somebody’s leg). A.V. Koonin distinguishes nominative and communicative phraseological units, and those in which these functions are combined, unchangeable expressions from changeable expressions, such as: a) not to lift (raise, stir, turn) a finger; below (beneath, under) the mark, where synonymic variations are possible; b) expressions, containing variable pronominal elements: to give somebody a run for his money; to pull somebody’s leg; to take one’s time; c) expressions, combining these two types of variability: to give somebody a bit (a piece) of one’s mind. And now we shall apply some practical examples taken from fiction to the A.V. Koonin’s classification. The following examples are practical presentation of the first subgroup of A.V. Koonin’s classification - phraseological fusions: e.g. He ought perhaps to have put a spoke in the wheel of their marriage. Может быть, следовало помешать этому браку. e.g. I shouldn’t be surprised if Irene had put her oar in. Уж, наверное, дело не обошлось без вмешательства Ирин.  
 
e.g. The equipage dashed forward, and before you could say Jack Robinson, with a 
rattle and flourish drew up at Soame’s door. 
Экипаж рванулся вперед и в мгновение ока с грохотом подкатился к дому 
Сомса. 
The following examples can be referred to the second subgroup of the       A.V. 
Koonin’s classification - phraseological unities: 
e.g. She was rather thin, but young, and fresh complexioned, and her eyes 
sparkled as bright as diamonds. 
        Она была тоненькая, молодая, со свежим цветом лица, и глаза у нее 
сверкали ярко, как бриллианты. 
e.g. They must cut their coat according to their cloth. 
По одежке протягивай ножки. 
e.g. He could not run with the hare and hunt with the hounds, and so to his son he 
said good-bye. 
Он не мог служить двум богам и простился со своим сыном. 
As for the last subgroup of A.V. Koonin’s classification we can say that they present 
less difficulty for translation and from the theoretical point of view they can easily 
be referred to the appropriate category of phraseological phrases given by V.V. 
Vinogradov. The last subgroup of A.V. Koonin’s classification is called traditional 
combinations. 
e.g. He fixed his eye on me longer than I cared to return the stare, for fear I might be 
tempted either to box his ears, or render my hilarity audible. 
Он глядел на меня слишком долго, я не счел нужным выдерживать его взгляд, 
боясь, что уступлю искушению, отпустить ему пощечину или же громко 
рассеяться. 
e.g. I’ll demolish the first who puts me out of temper! I insist on perfect sobriety and 
silence. 
Я сотру в порошок первого, кто выведет меня из терпения! Я требую тишины 
и приличия. 
e.g. The equipage dashed forward, and before you could say Jack Robinson, with a rattle and flourish drew up at Soame’s door. Экипаж рванулся вперед и в мгновение ока с грохотом подкатился к дому Сомса. The following examples can be referred to the second subgroup of the A.V. Koonin’s classification - phraseological unities: e.g. She was rather thin, but young, and fresh complexioned, and her eyes sparkled as bright as diamonds. Она была тоненькая, молодая, со свежим цветом лица, и глаза у нее сверкали ярко, как бриллианты. e.g. They must cut their coat according to their cloth. По одежке протягивай ножки. e.g. He could not run with the hare and hunt with the hounds, and so to his son he said good-bye. Он не мог служить двум богам и простился со своим сыном. As for the last subgroup of A.V. Koonin’s classification we can say that they present less difficulty for translation and from the theoretical point of view they can easily be referred to the appropriate category of phraseological phrases given by V.V. Vinogradov. The last subgroup of A.V. Koonin’s classification is called traditional combinations. e.g. He fixed his eye on me longer than I cared to return the stare, for fear I might be tempted either to box his ears, or render my hilarity audible. Он глядел на меня слишком долго, я не счел нужным выдерживать его взгляд, боясь, что уступлю искушению, отпустить ему пощечину или же громко рассеяться. e.g. I’ll demolish the first who puts me out of temper! I insist on perfect sobriety and silence. Я сотру в порошок первого, кто выведет меня из терпения! Я требую тишины и приличия.  
 
Phraseologydescribes the context in which a word is used. This often includes 
typical usages/sequences, such as idioms, phrasal verbs, and multi-word units. 
Phraseological units are (according to Prof. Kunin A.V.) stable word-groups with 
partially or fully transferred meanings (e.g., "to kick the bucket"). 
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. Like words, phraseologocal units express a single notion and 
are used in a sentence as one part of it. American and British lexicographers call 
such units idioms. 
3 types of lexical combinability of words: 
1). 
Free 
combination 
Grammatical properties of words are the main factor of their combinability. 
Ex.: I'm talking to you. You are writing. 
Free combinations permit substitution of any of its elements without semantic 
change of the other element. 
Collocations. 
Ex.: to commit a murder 
Blue sky 
Bright day 
They are the habitual associations of a word in a language with other particular 
words. Speakers become accustomed to such collocations. 
Very often they are related to the referential & situational meaning of words. 
Sometimes there are collocations, which are removed from the reference to extra-
linguistic 
reality. 
(collocations involving, colour words) 
Ex.: to be green with jealousy 
Phraseologydescribes the context in which a word is used. This often includes typical usages/sequences, such as idioms, phrasal verbs, and multi-word units. Phraseological units are (according to Prof. Kunin A.V.) stable word-groups with partially or fully transferred meanings (e.g., "to kick the bucket"). 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. Like words, phraseologocal units express a single notion and are used in a sentence as one part of it. American and British lexicographers call such units idioms. 3 types of lexical combinability of words: 1). Free combination Grammatical properties of words are the main factor of their combinability. Ex.: I'm talking to you. You are writing. Free combinations permit substitution of any of its elements without semantic change of the other element. Collocations. Ex.: to commit a murder Blue sky Bright day They are the habitual associations of a word in a language with other particular words. Speakers become accustomed to such collocations. Very often they are related to the referential & situational meaning of words. Sometimes there are collocations, which are removed from the reference to extra- linguistic reality. (collocations involving, colour words) Ex.: to be green with jealousy  
 
Idioms 
Idioms are also collocations, because they consist of several words that tend to be 
used together, but the difference - we can't guess the meaning of the whole idiom 
from the meanings of its parts. 
This 
criterion 
is 
called 
the 
degree 
of 
semantic 
isolation. 
In different types of idioms - it is different. 
Ex.: to cry a blue murder = to complain loudly 
Semantic classification of phraseological units 
Phraseological units can be classified according to the degree of motivation of 
their meaning. This classification was suggested by acad. V.V. Vinogradov for 
Russian phraseological units. He pointed out three types of phraseological units: 
a) fusions where the degree of motivation is very low, we cannot guess the 
meaning of the whole from the meanings of its components, e.g. on Shank`s mare 
(on foot); in Russian: бить баклуши; 
b) unities where the meaning of the whole can be guessed from the meanings of 
its components, but it is transferred (metaphorically or metonimically), e.g. to 
play the first fiddle (to be a leader in something), old salt (experienced sailor); 
c) collocations where words are combined in their original meaning but their 
combinations are different in different languages, e.g. cash and carry - self-service 
shop, in a big way (in great degree). 
Structural classification of phraseological units 
Prof. A.I. Smirnitsky worked out a detaiked structural classification of 
phraseological units, comparing them with words. He points out one-top 
units which he compares with affixed words because affixed words have only one 
root morpheme. And he points out two-top units which he compares with 
compound words because in compound words we usually have two root 
morphemes. 
Idioms Idioms are also collocations, because they consist of several words that tend to be used together, but the difference - we can't guess the meaning of the whole idiom from the meanings of its parts. This criterion is called the degree of semantic isolation. In different types of idioms - it is different. Ex.: to cry a blue murder = to complain loudly Semantic classification of phraseological units Phraseological units can be classified according to the degree of motivation of their meaning. This classification was suggested by acad. V.V. Vinogradov for Russian phraseological units. He pointed out three types of phraseological units: a) fusions where the degree of motivation is very low, we cannot guess the meaning of the whole from the meanings of its components, e.g. on Shank`s mare (on foot); in Russian: бить баклуши; b) unities where the meaning of the whole can be guessed from the meanings of its components, but it is transferred (metaphorically or metonimically), e.g. to play the first fiddle (to be a leader in something), old salt (experienced sailor); c) collocations where words are combined in their original meaning but their combinations are different in different languages, e.g. cash and carry - self-service shop, in a big way (in great degree). Structural classification of phraseological units Prof. A.I. Smirnitsky worked out a detaiked structural classification of phraseological units, comparing them with words. He points out one-top units which he compares with affixed words because affixed words have only one root morpheme. And he points out two-top units which he compares with compound words because in compound words we usually have two root morphemes.  
 
Among one-top units he points out three structural types: 
a) units of the type to give up (verb + postposition type); 
b) units of the type to be tired; 
c) prepositional-nominal phraseological units. These units are equivalents of 
unchangeable words: prepositions, conjunctions, adverbs, e.g. on the doorstep - 
quite near, in the course of - during. 
Among two-top units A.I. Smirnitsky points out the following structural types: 
a) attributive-nominal, e.g. a month of Sundays, grey matter; 
b) verbal-nominal, e.g. to read between the lines; to speak BBC; 
c) phraseological repetitions, e.g. now or never, part and parcel 
Syntactical classification of Structural classification of phraseological units 
Phraseological units can be classified as parts of speech. This classification was 
suggested by I.V. Arnold. Here we have the following groups: 
a) noun phraseological units denoting an object, a person, a living being, 
e.g. bullet train, a latchkey child; 
b) verb phraseological units denoting an action, a state, a feeling, 
e.g. to break the log-jam, to get on somebody`s coattails, to be on the beam; 
c) adjective phraseological units denoting a quality, 
e.g. loose as a goose, dull as lead; 
d) adverb phraseological units, e.g. with a bump, in the soup; 
e) preposition phraseological units, e.g. in the course of, on the stroke of; 
f) interjection phraseological units, e.g. Catch me! Well, I never! 
In I.V. Arnold classification there are also sentence equivalents: proverbs, sayings 
and quotations, e.g. The sky is the limit, What makes him tick, I am easy. 
Among one-top units he points out three structural types: a) units of the type to give up (verb + postposition type); b) units of the type to be tired; c) prepositional-nominal phraseological units. These units are equivalents of unchangeable words: prepositions, conjunctions, adverbs, e.g. on the doorstep - quite near, in the course of - during. Among two-top units A.I. Smirnitsky points out the following structural types: a) attributive-nominal, e.g. a month of Sundays, grey matter; b) verbal-nominal, e.g. to read between the lines; to speak BBC; c) phraseological repetitions, e.g. now or never, part and parcel Syntactical classification of Structural classification of phraseological units Phraseological units can be classified as parts of speech. This classification was suggested by I.V. Arnold. Here we have the following groups: a) noun phraseological units denoting an object, a person, a living being, e.g. bullet train, a latchkey child; b) verb phraseological units denoting an action, a state, a feeling, e.g. to break the log-jam, to get on somebody`s coattails, to be on the beam; c) adjective phraseological units denoting a quality, e.g. loose as a goose, dull as lead; d) adverb phraseological units, e.g. with a bump, in the soup; e) preposition phraseological units, e.g. in the course of, on the stroke of; f) interjection phraseological units, e.g. Catch me! Well, I never! In I.V. Arnold classification there are also sentence equivalents: proverbs, sayings and quotations, e.g. The sky is the limit, What makes him tick, I am easy.  
 
Proverbs are usually metaphorical, e.g. Too many cooks spoil the broth, 
while sayings are, as a rule, non-metaphorical, e.g. Where there is a will, there is 
a way - 
Кто хочет, тот добьется. 
  
Proverbs are usually metaphorical, e.g. Too many cooks spoil the broth, while sayings are, as a rule, non-metaphorical, e.g. Where there is a will, there is a way - Кто хочет, тот добьется.