Phraseological unit / set expression / idiom – a complex word-equivalent in which the globality of nomination reigns supreme over the formal separability of elements. It is reproduced in speech. –

Phraseological unit / set expression / idiom – a complex word-equivalent in which the globality of nomination reigns supreme over the formal separability of elements. It is reproduced in speech. – See Idiom proper

Typology of ph.us. (according to the degree of motivation):

- unities, phraseological (q.v.);

- combinations, phraseological (q.v.);

- fusions, phraseological (q.v.).

Phraseology.

Alongside with separate words speakers use larger blocks functioning as whole (consisting › 1 word). In any language there are certain restrictions imposed upon co-occurence of words.

They can be connected with linguistic factors or the ties in the extra-linguistic reality.

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.

2). Collocations.

Ex.: to commit a murder

Bread & butter

Dark night

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

Red revolution

3). 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

This classification of idioms according to their structure:

1. Fixed idioms

a) fixed regular idioms

It’s a 60-thousand dollar question = difficult question

b) fixed irregular (can be varied on the grammatical level)

to have a bee in one’s bonnet (She has.., I have...)

2. Variable (varied on the lexical level)

Ex.: to add fuel to the fire/flame

to mind one’s own business /to mind one business

to nap a cat’s nap / to have a short nap (вздремнуть)

dialectal: BrE: to have a skeleton in the cupboard

AmE: to have a skeleton on the closet

Semantic classification:

2 criteria:

The degree of semantic isolation

The degree of disinformation

1. Opaque in meaning (трудный для понимания)

the meaning of the individual words can’t be summed together to produce the meaning of the whole.

Ex.: to kick the bucket = to die

It contains no clue to the idiomatic meaning of this expression

The degree of semantic isolation is the highest. => phraseological fusions

2. Semi-opaque

one component preserves its direct meaning

Ex.: to pass the buck = to pass responsibility – свалить ответственность

=> phraseological unities

3. Transparent

both components in their direct meaning but the combination acquires figurative sense

Ex.: to see the light = to understand

=> phraseological combinations

There are lots of idioms (proverbs, saying).

Ex.: Curiosity killed the cat, but satisfaction brought it back

Idioms institutionalized formulas of politeness:

· How do you do?

· Good-bye (God be with you)

· How about a drink?

Lots of clichés, quotations.

Clichés form a notable part of he public speaking style. They use clichés because of the intellectual laziness or in the hope of appealing to emotions of smb.

A talk based on clichés is easier to produce.

Ex.: to see the light

It’s high time to do smth

(these expressions are store in our mind, ready-made)

Quotations:

To support our arguments, to add some prominence

Ex.: “I have a dream” M.L.King

“To be or not to be” Shakespeare

They may be clipped or shortened.

Ex.: To beer or not to beer (creates humorist effect)

To bomb or not to bomb

It was the last straw that broke the camels back.

Sources of idioms:

1. from our everyday life

Ex.: to be born with a silver spoon in one’s mouth

to sail under false colour (прятать истинное лицо)

to loose track of smb (потерять кого-либо из виду, давно не видеть)

a leopard can(’t) change its spots

2. from the Bible

Ex.: black sheep, lost sheep (заблудшая овца)

To cast pearls before swine (метать бисер перед свиньями)

3. World literature

Ex.: to fight against Windmills

an ugly duckling (Danish) – гадкий утенок

4. different languages

Ex.: to lose face (Chinese)

“The course of true love has never run smooth” Shakespeare “The 12th night”

“The course of true reforms has never run smooth in Russia” – “the Times”

5. from history

Ex.: to cross the Rubicon

Labours of Hercules

To bell the cat

Кунин Classification:

1. Одновершинные (with one peak)

(one peak phraseological units, one form word, one notional)

Ex.: to leave for good

By heart

At bay – быть в отчаянном положении

2. Phrasemes with the structure of subordinate or coordinate word combination.

Ex.: a bitter pill to swallow

All the world & his wife

3. Partly predicative

(a word + subordinate clause)

Ex.: It was the last straw that broke the camels back

4. Verbal with (infinitive, passive)

Ex.: to eat like a wolf

The Rubicon is crossed

5. Phrasal units with a simple or complex sentence structure

Ex.: There is a black sheep in every flock.

It was the last straw that broke the camel’s back

Koonin: “Structural-semantic classification”.

1. Nominative

A hard nut to crack

2. Nominative –communicative

The ice is broken

3. Interjectional & modal

(Emotions, feelings)

Oh, my eye! (= Oh, my God!)

As sure as eggs is eggs (просто, как 2х2)

4. Communicative (proverbs, sayings)

There is no smoke without fire.

Nominative:

Substantive: crocodile tears

Adjective: as mad as a hatter, as cool as a cucumber

Adverbial: by & by, to & fro

Verbal: to live like a lord

Conclusion

Introduction

This is probably the most discussed — and the most controversial — problem in the field of phraseology -the task of distinguishing between A phraseological unit is a complex phenomenon with a number of important features, which can therefore be approached from different points of view. Hence, there exist a considerable number of different classification systems devised by different scholars and based on different principles. [1,c.245]

I Thematic principle of classification

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. [2,c.273]

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. Here are some examples.

To be all at sea — to be unable to understand; to be in a state of ignorance or bewilderment about something (e. g. How can I be a judge in a situation in which I am all at sea? I'm afraid I'm all at sea in this problem). V. H. Collins remarks that the metaphor is that of a boat tossed about, out of control, with its occupants not knowing where they are. [3]

To sink or swim — to fail or succeed (e. g. It is a case of sink or swim. All depends on his own effort.)

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 (e. g. I don't like you much, but seeing that we're in the same boat I'll back you all I can). The

metaphor is that of passengers in the life-boat of a sunken ship.

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. The metaphor is that of an enemy ship that approaches its intended prey showing at the mast the flag ("colours") of a pretended friendly nation.

To show one's colours — to betray one's real character or intentions. The allusion is, once more, to a ship showing the flag of its country at the mast. [5]

To strike one's colours — to surrender, give in, admit one is beaten. The metaphor refers to a ship's hauling down its flag (sign of surrender).

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 (sl.) — very drunk. [2,c.278]

Half seas over (sl.) — drunk.

Though, as has been said, direct associations with seafaring in all these idioms have been severed, distant memories of the sea romance and adventure still linger in some of them.

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.

Дата добавления: 2015-11-04