Properties of phraseological units in English. The study of phraseology and the classification of phraseological units of the modern English language English phraseology and its features

Modern English is an analytical language. The increased analyticism of the English language permeates the entire English phraseology, affects the structure of phraseological units.

It should be borne in mind that along with the predominant elements of analyticism in English phraseology, there are also elements of synthetism, which include, for example, the widespread use of adjectives in a comparative degree in adjective comparisons.

In the semantic classification of English phraseological units, we proceeded from the classification proposed by A.V. Kunin Kunin A.V. English-Russian phraseological dictionary. M., 1967. S. 1433 - 1445., developed on the basis of the classification of Acad. V.V. Vinogradova V.V. Vinogradov Selected works. Lexicology and lexicography. M., 1977. S. 153 - 156., Taking into account the semantic and structural features of English phraseology.

Classification acad. V.V. Vinogradov, built on the allocation of three types of phraseological units - phraseological combinations, phraseological units and phraseological unions - is based on various types of relationships between the meaning of a phraseological unit and the components that make up its composition.

This classification combines various types of phraseological units, from phraseological combinations - the most analytical type, which is characterized by lexical divisibility, to phraseological unions - turns with unmotivated meaning at the present stage of language development.

Between the three main types of phraseological units there are a number of intermediate types.

A.V. Kunin distinguishes two intermediate categories: I) between phraseological combinations and unities and 2) between phraseological unities and fusions.

Undoubtedly, further study of the issue will help to identify other intermediate categories, for example, intermediate categories between free combinations and phraseological units and between phraseological units and compound words.

An example of a semi-free turnover, which occupies an intermediate place between a free phrase and a phraseological unit, is the turnover man and woman- "husband and wife". This turnover has not yet acquired the stability of a phraseological unit, but has moved away from a free phrase. An example of a formation that occupies an intermediate position between a phraseological unit and a compound word is turnover man of law- "lawyer, lawyer, jurist", usually written with a hyphen man of law. This formation has a sign of morphological separation, since in the plural ( men-of-law) the first component has the form of inflection, and not the whole combination as a whole. This group also includes many phrases with unstable spelling, for example, dot and carry one or dot-and-carry-one"arithmetic problems; arithmetic teacher; frantically, unevenly", hail fellow well met or hail-fellow-well-met"a person who is on friendly terms with everyone, on a friendly footing; sociable, sociable."

Phraseological combinations are motivated, the most analytical formations, with a non-free, connected value of one of the components. This means that phraseological combinations are based on the limited compatibility of words that can be used in a given meaning with only one word or with a limited number of words, and one of the components can be figurative, although this figurativeness is usually poorly felt. Among phraseological combinations there are turns that are terms. Phraseological combinations usually do not correspond to similar free combinations consisting of the same components. Thus, for example, cases of the type green cheese- "fresh cheese" (phraseological combination) and green cheese- "green (from mold) cheese" (free phrase).

The main structural and grammatical types of phrases are:

1) Verb phrases with nouns:

bear a grudge (malice or spite) (if the revolutions are unacceptable bear kindness, Jove, sympathy) - "to have a tooth".

Modern English is characterized by the formation of a significant number of verbal phraseological combinations in which the verbs of visual perception ( look), verbs denoting any effect on the subject ( take) and others expand their semantic scope to the maximum, often losing any specificity, but are combined with certain groups of nouns, for example, take a fancy(or liking) "attach, feel sympathy, be attracted; like; become addicted", take head"be careful, be careful" take pains (trouble) "take on the work, do not spare the work; try, try, make an effort", take offense(or umbrage) "to be offended, to feel offended, offended."

Sometimes a single meaning of a word is realized in this construction, for example, make face (to)[from fr. fair face a] "resist". Word face in the meaning of "resistance" is used only in this turnover.

V.V. Vinogradov writes: "The last step in the series of phraseological combinations is occupied by turns, including words with a single use" V. V. Vinogradov. The main types of lexical meanings of the word // Questions of linguistics. 1953. No. 5. S. 22..

Sometimes, based on the expansion of phraseological connections, the original phraseologically limited meaning of a word can develop into a new meaning of the word. This phenomenon, noted by Acad. V.V. Vinogradov in Russian, is also found in English, for example, face in the meaning of "grimace", originally used only in circulation make face, already found in Shakespeare in independent use.

2) Verb phrases with nouns with a preposition:

come into being(or existence) "appear, appear", go into details(or particulars) "go into details", take into account(or consideration) "to take into account, to take into account, to take into account, to take into account."

3) Verb phrases with adjectives (or adverbs):

make sure"to try; to provide; to take measures; to achieve" , set free"release, set free" , put(or set) right"correct, repair; put in order; direct, show the way; deceive; settle."

4) Phrases of nouns with adjectives (and with participles I and II as adjectives):

capital punishment"the death penalty", High Contracting Parties"High Contracting Parties", maiden attempt"first try", maiden flight"first flight", maiden speech"first speech" maiden sword"a sword not stained with blood" standing orders"order-instruction; regulation".

Often an adjective in one of its meanings is combined with only one noun: aquiline nose"Roman nose", circumstantial evidence"circumstantial evidence" , white lie"innocent lie; white lie" .

5) Prepositional phrases with nouns:

breach of arrest"arbitrary disposal of property under arrest", breach of close"violation of the boundaries of a plot that is in private ownership", breach of faith"breach of trust; breach of promise; treachery" breach of prison"Prison Break" breach of privilege"breach of privilege", breach of promise"breaking the promise to marry" flash of hope"glimmer of hope" flash of fun"flash of fun" flash of wit"brilliance of wit" flood of fear"explosion of anger" flood of light"sea of ​​fire" flood of tears"sea of ​​tears" flood of words"flow of words" flow of conversation(or talk) "smooth flow of conversation, flow of time"time flow" flow of words"smooth flow of conversation" flow of spirits"cheerfulness, fun, good mood."

An intermediate category between phraseological combinations and phraseological units. This group includes turnovers with a non-free value of one or two components. At the same time, they are motivated reverse phraseological units, i.e., they have signs of both phraseological combinations and phraseological units.

Examples of turnovers with an associated value of the first component are: beat a retreat"hang out; back down, retreat", run wild"grow rapidly; grow unattended, grow undergrowth; I won't know how to keep it, indulge in all serious things," seamy side"unsightly side, wrong side of something.", small beer

In biblical terms lines have fallen to me in pleasant places"Fate patronizes me, a happy destiny fell to my lot" word lines means "fate". In addition to this turnover, the word lines in this meaning occurs only in the expression hard lines"ordeal, misfortune, bitter fate, unfortunate fate."

In circulation go hot and cold"to blush and turn pale" verb to go used in the related meaning of "to become". In a figurative phraseological unit green hand"inexperienced person; inexperienced worker, novice" both components have a related meaning.

In phraseological units, intermediate between combinations and unities, a peculiar phenomenon is observed - " lexical unity at a distance"(According to the characteristics of Brugman, V.V. Vinogradov. Basic concepts of Russian phraseology as a linguistic discipline // Proceedings of the Anniversary Scientific Session of Leningrad State University. L., 1946. P. 59.). The essence of this phenomenon lies in the fact that some supporting semanthemes are used only in combined with certain words that wedged between them, for example, to be... off allows only five words to be inserted: to be badly off"to be poor, very needy" , to be worse off"to be in a worse position than smb." to be comfortably off"earn well, be well off" to be well off"to be secure; to be in favorable conditions" , to be better off"to be in a better position than someone; to be richer, wealthier than someone, to be better off than someone." .

Be a... hand at something allows for adjectives bad And poor in a negative sense ("not being able to do smth.; not being successful at smth.") and adjectives crack, good, great, old in a positive sense ("be skillful in smth., fill your hand and smth.").

In circulation do the... act the nature of the action is determined by the adjective before the word act(e.g. do the handsome act- "to act generously").

Phraseological units- phrases motivated in the modern language system, the components of which have no associated meaning. Phraseological units are characterized by the heterogeneity of their composition, covering numerous phraseological units, both figurative and non-figurative, different in structure, syntactic functions in a sentence and stylistic features. Many of them are based on metaphorical or metonymic transfer.

Among the turns of this type there are proverbs, turns of a euphemistic nature, comparisons, turns based on images or fiction or arising from historical events, customs and beliefs. Among them are many professional phrases that are used in a figurative sense.

Phraseological units are habitual combinations of words, as well as phrase clichés and clichés that do not have a phraseologically related meaning, for example, you know"do you know".

The same group includes terms, the meanings of which components are phraseologically not limited. Terminological phrases are used in science, politics, in everyday life, often being toponymic names. Phraseological units also include phraseological units created by syntactic specialization, euphonic and stylistic means (the use of turnover in a fixed grammatical form, rhyming consonances, alliteration, specialization of expressive meaning, paired use of synonyms, comparison of antonyms, repetition of the same word).

Figurative phraseological units.

Turnovers that have a figurative meaning in general. This group includes turns, the integrity of which is due to the unity of the general image.

Part of the phraseological units of this type coincides in sound with free phrases. In semantic terms, the relationship between phraseological unity and the phrase that formed its basis is the same as between the non-figurative and figurative meanings of a polysemantic word, with the difference that the word in its various meanings exists as a constant element of the vocabulary, and a free phrase is created every time again in speech black eye, break the ice, kick one's heels).

Often a free phrase underlies a phraseological term, which later acquires a figurative meaning. Such figurative phraseological units come from professionalisms, which are non-figurative phraseological units. These phraseological units have their source in various branches of science, technology, art, sports, etc. Examples include:

technique: Get down to bedrock"get to, get to the bottom of the matter; be stranded", in full blast"in full swing", let's steam"Give vent to your feelings" step on it"give gas, increase speed; become more active, work more energetically; accelerate events";

theater: fill the bill"to be the only object of attention, to overshadow the success of all others; to satisfy all requirements, to correspond to its purpose, to suit, to arrange", pull the strings"to be the true culprit, the boss of something, to be a hidden engine, to stand behind someone's back, to secretly influence the course of a case; to press secret springs, to resort to patronage";

jurisprudence: put out of court"to compromise; to silence, to baffle; to discard as untenable, unworthy of attention, obsolete (about the argument)";

warfare: mark time"marking time, doing nothing";

maritime business: take in sail"lower your tone, temper your ardor, reduce your arrogance."

sport: catch somebody tripping"catch by surprise, catch on a mistake, convict", from pillar to post"from one case, event to another; hither and thither; from one difficulty to another", have somebody on the hip"to hold someone in his hands, to be the master of the situation, to have someone in his power", hit bellow the belt"deal a treacherous blow; apply a forbidden technique; do not be shy in choosing means."

On the other hand, there are figurative phraseological units that go back to professionalisms and exist in parallel with them, while free phrases coinciding with them in lexical composition and sound are not used in the language, since there are no phenomena of reality that could be designated by them, e.g. mask one's batteries"hide, disguise one's hostile intentions", play first fiddle"to play first fiddle, to take a leading position", spike somebody's guns"to try to improve, decorate something already good enough; engage in useless business, waste time in vain."

Along with this, many phraseological units do not have a literal meaning, since the basis for them was an unreal, imaginary situation, for example, fool's paradise"unreal world, fantasy world; ghostly happiness" hell for leather"at full speed, with all my might, with all my might, desperately" pay the debt of nature"pay tribute to nature, die" , shuffle off this mortal coil"leave this mortal world, commit suicide" , speak daggers"to strike with words as sharp as a dagger; to speak with malice, hostility; to throw angry words."

They do not have a literal meaning and many euphemistic phrases, for example, gentleman of fortune"knight of fortune, pirate; adventurer, adventurer", gentleman's gentleman"valet, footman, servant" knight from the road"knight from the high road, robber from the high road; traveling salesman", sleep the sleep that knows no waking"sleep dead or sleep forever, sleep forever."

It is not uncommon for a free phrase to underlie figurative professionalism, which acquires additional figurative meaning, for example:

read the boards(or stage)

  • 1) walk around the stage (free phrase);
  • 2) to be an actor (phraseological unity);
  • 3) write plays (phraseological unity).

In the event that a phraseological unit and the corresponding free phrase turn into homonyms, we should talk about the formation of a phraseological fusion (for example, show the white feather"to be cowardly, to show cowardice, to be cowardly").

Sometimes phraseological fusions are rethought and become phraseological units, for example, ride the high horse is perceived as a metaphorical turn, meaning "to put on airs, arrogantly hold on, turn up your nose" like a man riding a horse and looking down on pedestrians.

turnover wear one"s heart upon one"s sleeve is perceived as a metonymic turnover, meaning "not to be distinguished by restraint, to flaunt one's feelings", as a person "wearing a heart on his sleeve."

Thus, the first revolution is no longer associated with the feudal lord, who usually fought on horseback and arrogantly treated the infantry, which consisted of mercenaries or commoners, and the second with a knight wearing the colors of his lady on his sleeve.

A similar process is observed in turnovers curry favor with somebody"to fawn, to fawn over, to fawn over, to try to flatter or obligingly win smb. benevolence, mercy, smb. location", Holy of Holies"Holy of Holies" not a bed of roses"not a heavenly life", skeleton at the feast "someone who darkens the fun; what spoils the pleasure poisons the fun."

Phraseological units are syntactically indecomposable. Two groups of phraseological units can be distinguished. Some are used in a sentence as one of its members, i.e. are equivalents of a sentence member; other phraseological units expressing a judgment are the equivalent of a sentence. They are similar in structure to a sentence. They differ from sentences only in their syntactic indecomposability, stability, and sometimes complete immutability.

Examples of unities belonging to the first group are: as the crow flies"in a straight line (line), straight ahead, the shortest way" , brave as a lion"brave as a lion" , fish in troubled waters"to fish in troubled waters" Tom, Dick and Harry"average, ordinary people; the first one you meet, everyone, everyone, everyone indiscriminately, everyone you meet and cross" , tooth and nail"with all my might, with all my might, sparing no effort; not for life, but for death; to the last drop of blood" .

An example of unities belonging to the second group are: does your mother know you are out?"Your milk hasn't dried on your lips" may your shadow never grow less"Wishing you many years of health" much water has flowed under the bridges"a lot of water has flowed under the bridge since", what will Mrs. Grundy say?"what will people say?"

Figurative proverbs also belong to this group, for example, don't count your chickens before they are hatched"do not count your chickens before they are hatched" , still waters have deep bottoms"still waters run deep" , two heads are better than one"mind is good, but two is better."

The same group includes figurative terms: the cow with the iron tail"milk adulteration machine", mother of presidents"homeland of presidents (nickname of the state of Virginia)".

Turnovers with one figurative component. This group includes a significantly smaller number of revolutions than the previous one. Examples are: be in the same boat (or box)"to be in the same position as smb.", black ship"a ship that port workers refuse to unload in solidarity with the strikers", none of your games"no tricks!", none of your lips"no audacity!", nurse a constituency"appease the voters" piratical edition"illegally reprinted edition", yellow press"yellow press, tabloid-sensational press".

This group also includes some terms, for example, Father of the House of Commons"father of the house", life of gun"military service life of the gun."

Unusual phraseological unity.

Non-figurative phraseological units are the most analytical turns among phraseological units. This group of phraseological units includes turns of various types, the isolation of which is created by the usual, traditional use.

1. Phrasal stamps, clichés: beg leave "ask for permission", don "t mention it "no thanks", see you again "see you soon", you "re welcome "welcome", yours faithfully "with perfect respect" , yours truly.

It is especially necessary to highlight the formulas of greeting and farewell, for example, good morning"Good morning", good day"Good afternoon", good afternoon"Good afternoon", good evening"good evening", as well as phraseological units used in circulation, for example, old boy, old chap, old fellow, old man"my friend, old man, my dear", old girl"old lady".

2. Proverbs: all "s well that ends well" better be envied than pitied "it is better to arouse envy than pity", better late than never "better late than never", live and learn "live a century - learn a century", no man is wise at all times

Terms: estimate of the situation"military assessment of the situation"; general election"general election", surplus value"surplus value", certificate of navigation sea sailing certificate.

An intermediate category between phraseological units and phraseological unions. This group includes turns in which the leading component is motivated, and the rest are unmotivated. In such turns of phrase, a component is singled out, which in modern language is associated with the meaning of the whole. Examples are:

paythrough the nose = pay an exorbitant price, pay a lot of money"to pay big money; to pay with interest"

talkthrough one's hat = talk foolishly"to carry on stupid conversations, to talk nonsense, to flog nonsense."

It should be noted that, like the verb to pay turnover to pay through the nose also came to mean "to pay".

This group can also include some turns with the word Dutch: dutch bargain"one sided deal" Dutch courage"drunk prowess" , Dutch treat"treat, paid equally by all participants."

The same group includes pun phrases built on the rethinking of the homonym, for example, gentle craft"angling fish", may bees don't fly this month(or this time of the year) "shouldn't say 'maybe'".

Phraseological fusion- this is a phraseological unit, indecomposable into its constituent parts, the meaning of the components of which, individually and in interconnection, does not correspond in the modern language to the content of the concepts they denote, forming a single lexical and syntactic whole. In other words, fusion should be considered as an unmotivated, i.e., semantically and syntactically indecomposable phraseological unit. In modern English, there are the following types of adhesions in terms of their lack of motivation.

1) Idiomatic turns, the lack of motivation of which is created by obsolete social practice:

baker's dozen"Baker's dozen" , blow one's own trumpet"boast, brag" , bury (or dig up) the hatchet"make peace, make peace, end hostility" , dance attendance on"wander around, run after smb." , show the white feather"to be cowardly, to show cowardice, to be cowardly" , sit above (or below) the salt"(sit) at the top end of the table; high position in society" , white elephant"burdensome or ruinous property, a burden; a gift that you do not know how to get rid of" .

This group may include tracing papers of the type under the rose secretly, secretly, surreptitiously, secretly.

Sometimes proverbs are fusions, for example, gray mare is the better horse"the wife is in charge of the house; the woman holding her husband under her shoe" (grey Flemish horses were considered better for harness than English ones).

2) Idiomatic turns, the lack of motivation of which is created by separation from the context in which they were originally used, or by forgetting the historical facts on which they are based:

bell the cat"to dare, to take the risk of the initiative in a dangerous business, a risky enterprise", cry wolf"raise a false alarm", curate "s egg" something bad, but also has some positive aspects, Darby and Joan"an old loving couple" lead apes in hell"to die an old maid" steal somebody's thunder"to borrow someone's ideas of discovery, etc., and make them public for one's own benefit; plagiarism."

This group includes some turnovers, the components of which are only proper names: Jack Johnson"heavy gun, large-caliber projectile", Jack Ketch"executioner", Joe Miller"flat witticism, old joke, hackneyed anecdote."

The idiomatic nature of some turns is the result of distortion, for example, blue Peter"blue peter", leather and prunella"something. not essential, indifferent to someone."

This group, in addition to phrases associated with literary works, various episodes and historical facts, also includes phraseological units associated with ancient mythology: the apple of discord"apple of discord", the cask from Danaides"barrel Danaid, bottomless barrel", Damocles' sword"Sword of Damocles", Herculean labor"Hercules labor; exceptionally difficult work", Pandora's box"Pandora's box; the source of all kinds of disasters", Procrustes bed"Procrustean bed", Pyrrhic victory"Pyrrhic victory", Sisyphian labor"Sisyphean labor; fruitless labor."

3) Idiomatic phrases, the lack of motivation of which is created due to expressive individualization, i.e., the predominance of expressive meaning over subjective:

the cat's pajamas"a thing (or a person) that is necessary, the first grade, you will lick your fingers", holy smoke!"Oh my God! It can't be!", my aunt!,my eye(s)!, my word!"Here you go! Like this! Just think!", a pretty kettle of fish!"Good job! Here's one for you!"

4) Idiomatic phrases containing archaic elements.

In some cases, an idiomatic phrase includes an obsolete word or a non-obsolete word in an obsolete meaning that has been preserved in only one or several expressions. Often archaism only enhances the idiom of the turnover, for example, above board"honest".

The presence of a non-free meaning brings together phrases of this type with phraseological combinations, from which they differ in this respect in that non-free meanings are archaic. Examples of such turnovers are:

board"set table"

above board"honest"

board of greencloth"green zero, card table"

Groaning board"a table breaking under the weight of food"

dint"mouth blow"

by dint of"by means of"

fine"set end"

fine"finally, in conclusion"

5) Turnovers, the idiom of which arose due to tracing, for example: by all that's blue"damn it!"

Phraseology is a scientific discipline that studies the phraseological composition of a language in its current state and historical development. Phraseological unit (PU) is the object of phraseology. The lack of common views on the object of phraseology and the disparity in terminology significantly complicates its study.

The term "phraseologism" (PU) denotes a set of semantically heterogeneous types of combinations: idioms, speech stamps, proverbs, sayings, winged words. The greatest controversy is the inclusion of proverbs, sayings and winged words in the phraseological composition.

Thanks to phraseology, one can penetrate into the distant past not only of the language, but also of the history and culture of its speakers. Phraseology reflects the vision of the world, national culture, customs and beliefs, fantasy and history of the people speaking it.

Literature is one of the main sources for studying national culture, in particular English. The English literary tale is an integral part of the national English literature. The English author's fairy tale became the basis of our research.

This work is devoted to the study of the influence of the specifics of the genre of the English author's fairy tale and the specifics of the addressee - children - on the selection and actualization of phraseological units in the author's fairy tale.

Currently, a large number of works are devoted to the study of not only the system properties of individual language units, but also their functioning in speech, as this helps to study the properties of these units in depth.

It is important to determine how the addressee of the genre and the genre itself determine the choice of means and their modification in a fairy tale text, since the main pragmatic function of the language is considered to be the ability to influence the recipient of the message (addressee). In this we see the relevance of the research topic.

Phraseology is a scientific discipline that studies the phraseological composition of a language in its current state and historical development. Phraseological unit (PU) is the object of phraseology. The essence of the object of phraseology still causes controversy among linguists, therefore, there are differences of opinion in the interpretation of phraseological units.

The definition of A.V. Kunina: “Phraseology is the science of phraseological units, i.e. about stable combinations of words with complicated semantics that are not formed according to generating structural-semantic models of variable combinations"

Thus, PU is a stable formation. The stability of phraseological units is the volume of invariance of various aspects of the phraseological level.

Indicators of minimal stability at the phraseological level are:

  • sustainability of use, i.e. the fact that phraseological units are units of the language, a public property in a given language community, and not individual phrases used only by one or another author;
  • structural-semantic stability, which is based on the stability of the lexical composition of phraseological units, on their structural-semantic non-modeling. PhUs are formed both structurally and semantically according to models characteristic of a certain stage of language development.
  • stability of a completely or partially rethought meaning and lexical composition of phraseological units.
  • syntactic stability, which manifests itself in a stable word order of phraseological units.

It should be noted that the completely or partially rethought literal meaning of the components, the stability of use, structural and semantic non-modeling are combined, depending on the type of phraseological units, with the following phenomena:

  • immutability of the lexical composition of phraseological units;
  • the presence of an identical invariant meaning in phraseological variants;
  • the presence of a semantic invariant, i.e. common meaning with possible differences in structural synonyms;
  • in variant phraseological units there is a lexical invariant, i.e. irreplaceable significant word;

An important property of phraseological units is that they are included in the language system as linguistic units with a clearly defined function of enriching the communication process in an expressive-emotional sense.

Thus, phraseological units have certain linguistic features that form the basis of their stylistic potential, and the ways of their use in speech, including artistic speech, are one of the most important stylistic means of the English language.

Phraseological research in domestic and foreign linguistics has achieved significant results in recent decades. Numerous works on the study of stable word complexes (WSC) of various types have yielded a lot of new and original ideas both for the phraseology of individual languages ​​and for the general theory of phraseology.

However, with all the positive that is available in phraseological studies, linguists have ambiguous views on some problems, including the problem of understanding and defining phraseological unit as a unit of language, the problem of the meaning of phraseological unit, reproducibility and stability of phraseological units, but there are similar opinions. moments.

The word "phraseology" (from the Greek. phrasis "expression, speech" and logos "concept, teaching") has several meanings. As a linguistic term, it is used to refer to a special branch of linguistics that studies set phrases called phraseological units (hereinafter PU) or phraseological units, as well as to denote a set of similar phrases characteristic of a given language

Phraseology is a branch of the science of language that studies the phraseological system in its current state and historical development.

The object of study of phraseology is phraseological turns and phraseological units.

In the composition of phraseological units, some scientists include all stable combinations of words, others limit the list of phraseological units only to a certain group of stable phrases. For some linguists, proverbs, sayings, proverbs, catchwords, aphorisms get into the phraseology of the language, for others they do not.

As criteria for determining a phraseological unit, various combinations are called stability, the integrity of the meaning, which is not derived from the sum of the meanings of its constituent words, separate form, the possibility of structural options, or neoplasms, reproducibility, and untranslatability into other languages. In general, phraseology is characterized as a combination of words with a "figurative meaning", as a stable phrase with an "idiomatic meaning", as a "stable phrase"

In particular, Chernysheva I.I. phraseological units refers to stable verbal complexes of various structural types with a single linkage of components, the meaning of which arises as a result of a complete or partial semantic transformation of the component composition

I. V. Arnold distinguishes free (a free combination) and stable (a set expression) phrases. The former are studied in syntax. And the second - in lexicology. IV Arnold explains the difference between them with the help of the following examples;

She took several books

She was taken aback

In the first example, the verb to take appears in a free combination with its object, in the second it significantly changed its semantics under the influence of the second element aback firmly connected with it, and both words together convey a single meaning. Set phrases are used, as a rule, in the same composition, they are not constructed in a sentence, but are introduced into it in finished form, just like words. The verb to take forms a number of similar combinations, for example,

To take into account

That take part in

That take notice of notice

To take one by surprise

To take advantage of

“As Arnold I.V. in all these stable combinations, the semantic connection between the elements becomes so close that their meaning changes, becomes phraseologically connected.

There are other opinions on this issue. For example, according to Zhukov V.P., a phraseological unit should be understood as a stable and reproducible separately designed language unit, consisting of components, endowed with a holistic (or less often partially holistic) meaning and combined with other words.

Another researcher Azarkh N.A. interprets phraseological units as combinations of words that exist in the language in a finished form, reproduced, and not newly organized in the process of speech. . He singles out the semantic unity of phraseological units among other features. If we compare units such as to paint the lily. To pay through the nose. Dutch comfort. Baker's dosen with ordinary or as they are called as opposed to stable, free phrases, then we will see that the values ​​​​of the formations in question are not equal to the sum of the values ​​\u200b\u200bof their components: pain- paint, the lily- lily, to paint the lily means not to paint the lily, but to engage in ~ a fruitless affair.This quite clearly distinguishes phraseological units from free phrases.

PhUs with a high degree of idiomaticity also have syntactic integrity: their components usually cannot enter into syntactic relationships with other words, i.e. it is impossible to arbitrarily insert another word into these phraseological units, it is impossible to change the order of the components, the grammatical structure. For example, in the Black Friday combination, the adjective Black cannot be used in the predicative - Friday is black. However, it must be taken into account that a number of phraseological units exist in two or more versions: the possibility of using different options should not be confused with the distribution of phraseological units in other words:

That hit the nail on the head

To hit the right nail on the head

In fine feather

According to Shansky N.M. believes that phraseological turnover is a unit of language reproduced in finished form from two or more stressed components of a verbal nature, fixed (i.e., unchanging) in its meaning, composition and structure. Phraseological turns are significant units, which are characterized by their own semantics, which exist on their own, regardless of the meanings of their constituent components, even when this semantics corresponds to the sum of the meanings of the components.

Akhmanova O.S. defines a phraseological unit as a phrase in which the semantic solidity (the integrity of the nomination) prevails over the structure of the separateness of its constituent elements, as a result of which it functions as part of a sentence as the equivalent of a single word

Kunin A.V. Phraseological units are stable combinations of lexemes with a fully or partially rethought meaning.

Academician Vinogradov V.V. by phraseological units he understands "stable" verbal complexes, opposed to "free" syntactic phrases as ready-made language formations, not created, but only reproduced in the process of speech.

Nazaryan A.G. considers a phraseological unit as a separate unit of language, characterized by a complete or partial semantic transformation of the components.

A.I. Smirnitsky characterizes phraseological units through likening, comparing it with a word. “A typical phraseological unit is likened to one whole word in that the relationship between its parts is idiomatic, due to which it has significant semantic integrity and is included in speech precisely as a unit. At the same time, it is important to emphasize that its parts relate to each other as components of a compound word, and in general, a phraseological unit is similar to a word as a lexeme, and not a separate form of a word. A phraseological unit equivalent to a grammatically inflected word, being included in speech, grammatically changes only in one of its components, although both components of a phraseological unit are grammatically formed: cf. Take care, takes care, took care, taking care, taken care, etc. with a change in the first component of a phraseological unit "

In their structure, phraseological units are similar to ordinary combinations of words in a sentence, i.e. are separate formations. For example, such a phraseological unit as (to) take the chair - to open a meeting, to preside is clearly distinguished as a special unit of the language, which, due to its idiomatic nature, has great semantic value. The meaning of the expression (to) take the chair - to take a chair - directly follows from the totality of the meanings of the words included in it. Thus, according to A.I. Smirnitsky, phraseologism - a unit that has the structure of a free, actually grammatical combination of words in a sentence, differs from the latter in its idiomatic nature and is included in speech as one unit.

In our opinion, the most complete definition of a phraseological unit is given by Yartseva V.N. She writes that a phraseological unit (phraseological unit) is a common name for semantically related combinations of words and sentences, which, unlike syntactic structures similar to them in form, are not reproduced in accordance with the general patterns of choice and combination of words when organizing an utterance, but are reproduced in speech in a fixed ratio of the semantic structure and a certain lexical and grammatical composition.

The term "phraseologism" denotes several semantically heterogeneous types of combinations; idioms characterized by a rethinking of their lexical and grammatical composition and having a holistic nominative function, they are adjoined by phrase schemes in which the syntactic structure and a certain part of the lexical composition are rethought, and the rest is filled in the context; combinations in which only one word is lexically rethought, while maintaining a separate nominative function for each of the component words, speech cliches, proverbs and sayings that have formed in folklore and winged dictionaries of an aphoristic nature, dating back to a specific author or an anonymous literary source, are close to them. Rethinking or semantic transposition of the lexical and grammatical composition, stability and reproducibility are the main universal features of a phraseological unit.

The formation of a phraseological unit is based on semantic simplification, i.e. limiting the meanings of a word that has become a component of a phraseological unit that has its own single phraseological meaning.

The meaning of a phraseological unit, based on the meanings of its components, is often motivated differently in different languages.

In each language phraseologisation has its own special forms of expression. This is explained by the fact that phraseologisms, being separately formed language formations, in comparison with units of lower levels - a phoneme, a morpheme, a word - have a more complex lexical and grammatical, and, especially, semantic structure, in the formation of which extralinguistic and ethnolinguistic factors. These factors play an important role in the formation and development of phraseological units, determine their national character.

Phraseologisms do not allow literal (word by word) translation: they require the search for a phraseological equivalent of another language, since phraseological meaning is accompanied by emotional, semantic and stylistic expression.

Phraseologism is a phraseological unit, an idiom, a stable combination of words, which is characterized by a constant lexical composition, grammatical structure and a meaning known to native speakers of a given language (in most cases, figuratively), not derived from the meaning of the constituent phraseological components. This meaning is reproduced in speech in accordance with historically established norms of use.

All textbooks on lexicology have a section “Phraseology, idioms, or stable combinations of words. Such a section is now included in the lexicology by tradition. This is due to the fact that phraseology is not officially formalized as a linguistic discipline. In addition, it should be borne in mind that phraseology in our country was for a long time part of the doctrine of the word, and a purely lexicological approach to phraseological units is not so rare. Some researchers include phraseological units in the vocabulary of the language, and phraseology in the composition of lexicology, mainly for the reason that phraseological units are considered as equivalents of words, and lexicology is considered as a linguistic discipline that studies the vocabulary of the language, i.e. words and their equivalents.

As a result, the theory of complete equivalence of phraseological units to a word deserves special consideration. It goes back to the theory of identification of expressive facts developed by S. Bally, who pointed out that the most common feature of a phraseological turnover, replacing all the others, is the possibility or impossibility to substitute one simple word instead of this turnover. Sh. Bally called such a word an identifier word. Balli considers the presence of such a synonym as an internal sign of the integrity of phraseological units.

The semantic integrity of phraseological units can be established by comparing its meaning with the meaning of its components as separate words, as well as by identifying the features of its use in the context.

The term equivalent of the word was created by L.V. Shcherba. He emphasized that such a group of words denotes one concept and is a potential equivalent of the word. Indeed, a close group of words, if it is a phrase, can denote one concept.

The vast majority of phraseological units do not have identifying words, i.e. lexical synonyms.

There is reason to believe that a similar phenomenon is observed in the English language.

Some supporters of the theory of complete equivalence consider phraseological units as lexical units that do not need a special, specific, unique classification, and which should be classified in the same way as words are classified. Thus, all the specifics of phraseological units are reduced to nothing. The word, no matter how complex it may be in terms of semantic structure, does not belong to the field of phraseology, it is an object of lexicography and lexicology.

Words and phraseological units are introduced into speech in finished form. This fact is presented as one of the arguments in favor of the theory of complete equivalence. Introduction into speech in finished form is a shaky basis for the equivalence of a phraseological unit to a word, since reproduction in finished form is a characteristic feature of all units of the language, and it is inappropriate to consider them as equivalents of words. It is only important to take into account the characteristic features of reproducibility in the finished form, depending on the structural and semantic features of various units of the language. And in the structural and semantic sense, phraseology is a separately designed unit of language, much more complex than a word, and this affects its actualization in a written or oral context.

The commonality of grammatical functions should not be understood as their obligatory coincidence. So, in English, functions in a sentence of adjectival comparisons of the type

  • (as) dark as pitch,
  • (as) white as snow

and so on. only partially coincide with the syntactic functions of the compound words associated with them

since adjectival comparisons, unlike complex adjectives, are not usually used as attribute definitions, but only as predicative definitions.

His meat "s as white as snow and makes a good fry (M. Twain).

Camphoric acid thus obtained is in snow-white crystals.

It has a body like a gnat, snow-white.

The approach to phraseological units as equivalents of words does not allow the inclusion of whole predicative phrases in the phraseology. Undoubtedly, the meaning of an integrally predicative turnover, which is the main clause or the main and subordinate clause and is less often used as a member of the sentence, belongs to a different plane of content than the meaning of a word or phrase. Despite this, phrases are objects of study of syntax, which in no way deprives it of scientific character. The subject of syntax as a department of grammar is the study of ways to combine words into phrases and sentences, as well as the study of the types of sentences, their structure, functions and conditions of use.

It is just as legitimate to study sentences of all types as objects of phraseology, if these sentences are not variable sentences or individual author's phrases that are used only as quotations and are not units of the language. The subject of syntax is variables, not fixed sentences. The study of the semantic and stylistic features of stable sentences is one of the important tasks of phraseology.

Along with the traditional terms - phraseological unit, phraseological unit (PU), phraseological turnover - in this work is used as a synonym - the term is a stable verbal complex (USC), which in many respects has the advantage over the above terms that it is not associated with any which of the existing concepts, and, thus, can serve as a general designation for any sustainable expression, regardless of what specific content we put into the very concept of sustainability.

The features of phraseological units are closely related to their use in speech, and the features of the use of phraseological units in speech affect their status in the language. Such interdependence, a kind of interweaving of linguistic and speech features of phraseological units are the key to understanding the nature of phraseological units.

Consider some issues related to the speech use of phraseological units.

context and situation.

There are different points of view on the term "context". G.V. Kolshansky understands the context as a set of “formally fixed conditions under which the content of any linguistic unit is unambiguously revealed.

N. N. Amosova understands the phraseological unit itself as a constant context.

A.V. Kunin believes that in the study of phraseology, the external phraseological context is the speech conditions for the implementation of a phraseological unit, starting from its compatibility with one word to its implementation in a wide context. Considering a phraseological unit as a "permanent context" makes it possible to highlight the internal phraseological context.

The phraseological unit is implemented in the following types of external context:

Narrow context, i.e. sentence.

For a little while the conversation hung fire. (H. Wells, "The Secret Places of the Heart", ch. III, § I).

Broad context, i.e. paragraph, chapter, work as a whole.

“Answer the gentleman, Thomas - don't be afraid”, Tom still hung fire.

(M. Twain, "Tom Sawyer", ch. IV).

The context of the phraseological unit can also serve as the head of the work, for example, James Crawley's pipe is put out (W. Thackeray, “Vanity Fair”, ch. XXXIV), Soames puts it to the touch (J. Galsworthy, “In Chancery” , part II, ch. II).

D. Brein's novel "Room at the Top" is a broad context in which the meaning of the phraseological unit room at the top is realized.

Situation, i.e., extralinguistic conditions for the implementation of a phraseological unit.

The holy of holies swung stately open and Mr. Baker took the salute of the money assembled (J. Steinbeck, “The Winter of our Discontent”, ch. XIII).

To understand this example, you need to know that we are talking about a safe, i.e. the subject correlation of the phraseological unit is established by attracting non-linguistic data.

The following features of the implementation of single phraseological units in these types of contexts are distinguished:

1) Isolation of one of the meanings of a two-valued or multi-valued phraseological unit.

Narrow context:

“And you"ll miss me when I"ve gone, won't you, old boy?" he asked of Ponto who quivered his tail and thrust his brown nose into his master's fist (W. Thackeray, “Pendennis”, vol. I, ch. XXVII).

“Old boy” refers to a dog and translates to “old man”.

The “old boy” had behaved so decently in pulling up his roots and going round the world with Fleur, that every consideration was due to him (J. Galsworthy, “Swan Song”, part III, ch. 2).

In this example, Soma Forsyth is meant and the phraseological unit is translated "old man".

Broad context:

“Come on, old boy!” The dog came slowly all black foursquare on his feathered legs (J. Galsworthy, “Flowering Wilderness”, ch. XVII).

The old dog looked up and wagged his tail. `Poor old boy!" thought Jolyon shifting back to the other window (J. Galsworthy, "In Chancery", part I. ch. XIII).

In the first example, the second sentence, and in the second - the first one act as a kind of demonstrative context that implements the meaning of "old man, old dog" in speech.

In the quotation from Steinbeck, the meaning of "ancestors" is realized:

Father used to give me what he called “heritage lessons”. That's why I know so much about the old boys. (J. Steinbeck, “The Winter of Our Discontent”, ch. III).

2) Delimitation of a phraseological unit from its corresponding variable combination of words.

In many cases, only the context makes it possible to decide whether a given turnover is a phraseological unit or a variable combination of words corresponding to it.

Narrow context:

A red herring "distracting maneuver, something that knocks you off the trail" is a phraseological unit:

Ford's management are trying to hide the cause of the trouble by dragging a lot of red herrings about the Communists into the inquiry. (“Daily Worker”, March 5, 2009).

A red herring "smoked herring" - a variable phrase:

The dinner had been at a marvelous place on West Tenth Street - very foreign, every one drinking wine and eating spaghetti and little red herrings... (S. Lewis, “The Trail of the Hawk”, part III, ch. 25) .

Commenting on a B.M.C. advertisement suggesting that the sacked men left with amounts varying between £40 and £60 Les Ambrose, executive Council Member of the Amalgamated Engineering Union, last night said: “This is a red herring - a big one” (“Daily Worker”, L., July 23, 2009).

In this case, consideration of the turnover a red herring only in a narrow context does not make it possible to establish whether a red herring is a variable phrase or phraseological unit, which in turn makes it impossible to translate this turnover into a foreign language. Only due to the presence of the first sentence it becomes clear that in this context a variable phrase is impossible. A similar example is the phrase pour down the drain.

Pour down the drain is a phraseological unit: Millions of dollars have been poured down the drain into this Un-American Activities Committee (“The Worker”, Febr. 4, 2010).

Pour down the drain "down the drainpipe" - a variable phrase:

Beside it stood the orange juice, a brown feather floating in it. I poured it down the drain. (S. Bellow, "Dangling Man", Dec. 17).

Only a broad context makes it possible to establish that in the second sentence it is not a phraseological unit, but a variable combination of words.

One type of wide context is an optional wide context.

This context is present when the situation is told:

“Don"t give a worry, it"s in the cards".

“No joke, I'm going to make a fortune” (J. Steinbeck, “The Winter of Our Discontent”, ch. XXX).

This broad context makes it impossible to define what constitutes turnover in the cards. If we are talking about fortune telling on cards, then this is a variable phrase, but if it means “for sure, it’s true” and is not related to fortune telling on cards, then we have an American version of a phraseological unit. The situation of a direct speech act does not provide an answer to this question. In chapter II, the author points out that the wife of a grocery store clerk used cards and that a fortune-teller predicted he would become rich. The wife told her husband about it.

The additional broad context indicates that the turnover in the cards is a variable phrase.

The above also applies to phraseological units - sentences. So, the phrase a cat may look at a king is usually a phraseological unit, but in the example below, the author dephraseologises it for stylistic purposes. The comedy of the situation is achieved by the use of turnover in the literal sense, realized in a broad context.

“It"s a friend of mine - a Cheshire Cat", said Alice: "allow me to introduce it".

“I don't like the look of it at all”, said the King: “however, it may kiss my hand if it likes”.

“I"d rather not”, the Cat remarked.

“Don"t be impertinent", said the King, "and don"t look at me like that!" He got behind Alice as he spoke. “A cat may look at a king”, said Alice, “I"ve read that in some book, but I don't remember where” (L. Carroll, “Alice In Wonderland”, ch. VIII).

3) Stylistic distribution associated with a change in the subject correlation of a phraseological unit.

Narrow context:

The phraseological unit turn one "s back on somebody (or something) "turn your back on someone, turn away from someone (or something)" is used in relation to people performing this action, for example:

Sometimes she wondered if she had not turned her back on fulfillment of any kind. (A. Saxton, "The Great Midland", part V, ch. 19).

G. Green uses this phrase when talking about houses:

Shutters were closed behind the iron grills, and as in an occupied city the houses turned their backs on the passerby (G. Greene, “Our Man in Havana”, ch. II, § 3).

The phraseological unit to lie in wait is used only in relation to people and animals. I. Shaw refers to buildings:

A new enemy, Noah thought, looking at the plain old building, crouched behind its oak trees, another antagonist lying in wait for twenty-five years (I. Shaw, “The Young Lions”, ch. XI).

Broad context:

The play one "s last card turnover denotes an action carried out only by people, for example:

Magnus. ...I ask you before you play your last card and destroy me, to consider where you will be without me. (B. Shaw, “The Apple Cart,” act I).

In Seton-Thompson, the mustang performs this action:

Then the mustang plays his last card. He jams his ribs up against a corral wall, hopin" to crush Tom"s leg... (E. Seton-Thompson, Lobe the King of Currumpaw and other stories, “The Pacing Mustang”).

The phraseological unit give up the ghost “to give up the spirit, to die” refers to living beings, usually people, for example:

And so saying he turned his face to the wall and gave up the ghost.

(M. Twain, “About Magnanimous Incident in Literature”).

O "Casey uses this phraseological unit when talking about a tree:

A tremendous and lovely ilex, the pride of the place, had fallen, given up the ghost, and was no more (S. O "Casey, “Inishfallen, Fare Thee Well”, Where Wild Swans Nest).

Thus, the above examples compare the normative use of phraseological units and their stylistic use in narrow and wide contexts. Their use by the authors in relation to unusual objects revives a faded image, makes it more vivid and emotionally saturated, which is extremely important to take into account when translating as well.

Compatibility of phraseological units associated with their formation.

A change in the compatibility of phraseological units can be called redistributive compatibility.

There are three types of redistributive compatibility:

  • 1) Distinguishing compatibility, i.e., the selection of some components of a phraseological unit from its composition and their transformation into an independent phraseological unit. This process is due to the fact that initially these components existed only in combination with one word. The disintegration of singular compatibility led to the emergence of a new phraseological unit. So, the combination with flying colors was originally (at the end of the 17th century) used only with the verb to bring. Later it began to be used with the verbs to come off and to come through. Gradually, the turnover stood out as an independent adverbial phraseological unit and in modern English is combined with a wide range of verbs.
  • 2) Preferential compatibility, i.e., the compatibility of a phraseological unit with any word or with a narrow circle of words, with which, due to frequent use, it forms a new phraseological unit without losing its independence. An example is the as the day is long intensifier. This phraseological unit can be used with a variety of adjectives (cheerful, harmless, honest, etc.). With none of the adjectives that the intensifier as the day is long is combined with, it forms a stable comparative phrase. The only stable combination is the comparison as happy as the day is long, which is confirmed both by fixing it in dictionaries and by the examples below:

Mrs. Ilam must have been as happy as the day is long especially as her own boy was growing up strong and well. (A. Bennett, "The City of Pleasure", part III, ch. XXIX).

Mrs. Culver. But haven't you been getting on with John? I always thought you two were as happy as the day is long. (W. Maugham, “The Constant Wife”, act III).

You will be happy there as the day is long. (D. Cusack and F. James, “Come in Spinner”, Monday, V).

The formation of the phraseological unit as happy as the day is long is easily traced in the analysis of predominant compatibility.

A phraseological unit is often characterized by preferential compatibility not with one word, but with a narrow circle of words, for example, the turnover like hot cakes is mainly combined with the verbs go off and sell, the turnover bad (or ill) blood - with the verbs breed, make or stir up.

  • 3) Single compatibility, i.e. narrowing the compatibility to a combination with any one word. For example, the obsolete phraseological unit in the lurch "at a disadvantage" survived only in combination with the verb to leave. According to the Great Oxford Dictionary in the 17th century. the turn in the lurch was also combined with other verbs, for example, have and take in the sense of "to take someone by surprise." The meaning was later rethought.
  • 3. Interchangeability and irreplaceability of phraseological units.

Considering the question of the substitution or non-replaceability of one phraseological unit by another, three types of relationships can be distinguished:

complete interchangeability of phraseological variants, for example,

carry (or win) the day,

close (or shut) one "s eyes to something,

give a (or the) green light, etc.

2) limited interchangeability of phraseological units that replace each other only in one meaning (or in several meanings) in the presence of another meaning (or other meanings) for one or both phraseological units.

Limited interchangeability can be observed in phraseological units

give somebody (or something) the air,

give somebody his walking papers and

give somebody the bird.

The turnover give somebody (or something) the air has the following three meanings:

  • a) fire someone from work (give somebody his walking papers and give somebody the bird);
  • b) refuse the groom; resign (to a lover, a wooer, etc.), (give somebody the bird);
  • c) Amer. give up something, stop doing something. Of these, one matches the turnover value of give somebody his walking papers, and two match the turnover value of give somebody the bird. The third meaning, give something the air, is peculiar only to this turnover and shows its broader subject correlation. The semantic relationships between the members of this group is one of the possible options within the bounds of limited interchangeability.
  • 3) the irreplaceability of phraseological units close in meaning. Such compatibility is observed, for example, in the turns back the wrong horse “to put on the wrong horse”, that is, to miscalculate, to make a mistake in the calculations and bark up the wrong tree “to bark at a tree on which there is no game”, i.e. .to fall on a false trail, turn to the wrong address, draw an erroneous conclusion. Both phraseological units have the meaning "to make a mistake" and this brings them closer, but they denote various kinds of errors, which completely excludes the interchangeability of revolutions.

There is another type of irreplaceability, namely the irreplaceability of phraseological synonyms, in which the replacement of one phraseological unit by another causes a change in the stylistic coloring of the statement.

Compare, for example, the synonyms go to one "s long rest and kick the bucket. Both synonyms mean "to die", but the first synonym is a solemn book turnover, and the second is rude slang, as can be seen from the examples below:

One more old Forsyte going to his long rest... Wonderful how he held out. (J. Galsworthy, “In Chancery”, part III, ch. XIII).

He did not talk to them; they had already been told exactly what each of them was to do, and who was to do what in case the first choice man kicked the bucket or was otherwise out (S. Heym, “The Crusaders”, book III, ch. 8) .

The semantic features of these synonyms are also reflected in their translation into Russian:

"Another old Forsyte is retiring... It's amazing how tenacious he was."

“He didn't talk to them; they have already been told what to do and who should do what if a neighbor is slapped or injured.

The above synonyms are not interchangeable, since replacing one with another changes the stylistic orientation of the context.

It is interesting that the basis of the phraseological concept of A.V. Kunin is the concept of sustainability. According to A.V. Kunin, phraseological stability should be distinguished from other types of stability.

A.V.Kunin believes that sustainability cannot be defined by any single feature, but requires an integrated approach, because phraseology is a complex language phenomenon.

According to the scientist, phraseological stability “is based on the various types of invariance inherent in it, i.e. the immutability of certain elements with all regulatory changes.

A.V. Kunin indicates the following features of phraseological stability, or invariance:

  • 1. Invariance of use, i.e. "the fact that phraseologism is a unit of language, and not an individual formation". This type of stability (the author calls it differently - microstability) consists in the fact that a unit of language (PU) is reproduced in finished form.
  • 2. Structural and semantic stability. The meaning of this type of microstability lies in the fact that phraseological units should consist of at least two words, act as a separate unit and not have a typical meaning, i.e. PhU "cannot serve as a model for creating similar models of phraseological units according to the structural-semantic model" .
  • 3. Semantic stability. This type of microstability relies on:
    • a) the stability of rethinking values ​​(PU must be completely or partially rethought);
    • b) the presence of an identical meaning and a lexical invariant in all variants of a given phraseological unit;
    • c) the presence of a semantic invariant for all normative occasional changes in phraseological units.
  • 4. Lexical stability. This type of microstability of phraseological units consists in the complete irreplaceability of the components of a phraseological unit or in the possibility of normative replacement of components only within the framework of phraseological variance as a structural synonymy with the obligatory preservation of semantic and lexical invariants.
  • 5. Syntactic stability. The essence of this phraseological unit invariant lies in the complete immutability of the order of components within the framework of the variance of grammatical inversion.

So, the phraseological essence of any language formation is determined in the concept of A.V. Kunin by the presence or absence of a sign of phraseological stability. The latter is characterized by five types of microstability.

Phraseologism is defined by A.V. Kunin as follows: "A phraseological unit is a stable combination of lexemes with a completely or partially rethought meaning." This definition of phraseological units does not include the concept of phraseological stability. A.V. Kunin does not recognize reproducibility as the main feature of any phraseological formation.

Reproducibility in his doctrine of phraseological units is only one of the features of phraseology - a sign of one of the five pillars of his theory - "Sustainability of use".

At the same time, A.V. Kunin, on the one hand, believes that reproducibility in finished form refers not only to phraseological units, but also to words of any structure, as well as to some types of formations intermediate between a variable combination of words and phraseological units, or compound words that are ready-made signs, and on the other hand, he notes that “the reproducibility of phraseological units is a much more complex phenomenon than the reproducibility of a word.”

Based on the foregoing, we can draw a general conclusion from the entire phraseological concept of A.V. Kunin: phraseologism in its relevant features does not differ from the word, the only difference is that in one case these features are found inside the word, and in the other within a combination of words.

So, a comprehensive definition of phraseological units on the basis of phraseological stability does nothing to distinguish phraseological units from other types of language formations.

A.V. Kunin believes that "a phraseological unit is stable not because it is reproduced in finished form, but on the contrary, a phraseological unit is reproduced in finished form because it has stability at the phraseological level" .

A.V. Kunin unites all invariant stability under the general term “minimal stability at the phraseological level”. Indicators of minimal stability at the phraseological level, which A.V. Kunin considers the most important concept of the theory of phraseology.

So, introduced by A.V. Kunin into the theory of phraseology, the concept of the coefficient of minimal stability at the phraseological level as a phraseological parameter, in essence, does nothing to clarify the linguistic status of phraseological units.

The basis of the phraseological concept of N.N. Amosova is the context. The context in the teachings of N.N. Amosova is the combination of a demonstrative minimum (that is, that word or those words that are necessary to realize a certain meaning of another word - a component of turnover) with a semantically realizable word. N.N. Amosova distinguishes two main types of context: constant and variable.

If the lexical composition of the index minimum allows variation of the index minimum, then we are dealing with a variable context.

“A constant context is, according to N.N. Amosova, a context marked by an exclusive and unchanging connection of pre-established lexical components and a special originality of the semantheme expressed by it. It has two forms, differing in the nature of the distribution and interaction of its elements.

So, only the formations of a permanent context are, according to the views of N.N. Amosova, phraseological units, as for the expressions of a variable context, they should entirely be the object of the area that studies free phrases, i.e. the object of syntax.

The phraseological composition of the language consists of phrases and idioms. A phrase (non-serial phraseological combination) is a unit of constant context, in other words, it is an expression with a phraseologically related meaning, i.e. such a value in which the semantically realizable word depends on a constant, the only possible demonstrative minimum (cf., white day is a happy day).

It should be emphasized that in the concept of N.N. Amosova the concept of “phraseologically related meaning of a word” does not coincide with the definition of this term by V.V. Vinogradov.

N.N. Amosova refers to stable turns of the type “downward gaze” (that is, expressions with serial compatibility of one of its components). She considers the last type of set expressions to belong to an ordinary limited context and takes these formations beyond the boundaries of phraseology.

In those cases when it is impossible to select a semantically realizable word and a demonstrative minimum in an expression, i.e. when the entire composition of the expression is both an indicative minimum and a semantically realizable element of a constant context, phraseological units are formed in the language, which N.N. Amosova calls idioms.

While in phrasemes there is a word with a phraseologically related meaning, in idioms there are no such words.

Not all types of set expressions fit into the framework of the two main types of context - constant and variable. Therefore, N.N. Amosova is forced to compromise with her own concept and single out into a special group phrases like to pay addresses, which she calls “usually limited context”, i.e. such a context in which the meaning of a semantically realized word has a conventionally related meaning ) .

N.N. Amosova refuses to include the expression of the usually limited context in the phraseology. N.N. Amosova calls these expressions "phraseologisoids" and places them between "phraseology and non-phraseology".

Among the essential features of idioms, N.N. Amosova singles out a sign of integral meaning. N.N. Amosova also considers the sign of repetition and stability of the context to be important for phraseological units, however, she emphasizes that only repetition or only stability without semantic transformations of components characteristic of units of a constant context cannot turn a combination of words into a phraseological unit (including a stable one) . It is for this reason that N.N. Amosova takes out regularly repeating expressions with a constant lexical composition such as “the struggle for existence”, descriptive names like “book of reference”, periphrastic phrases like “to make an arearence = to appear”, as well as terminological expressions, politeness formulas, address formulas, etc. .

N.N. Amosova considers all these types of expressions as reproducible in speech as ready-made units (phrasal stamps), but refuses to recognize them as phraseological units. Drop out of her phraseology and all expressions that have the form of a complete sentence. N.N. Amosova does not consider phraseological units such stable combinations (in other words, “stable contexts”) in which there is a component that has a single compatibility (cf., artesian well, etc.) on the grounds that the given word in language in other meanings is generally unknown and, therefore, it does not undergo any semantic transformations as part of phrases.

Thus, the basis of the phraseological concept of N.N. Amosova is the contextual analysis put forward and substantiated by her. Obviously, those two phraseological types that she singles out on the basis of this analysis (phrase and idiom) are completely objectively singled out.

At the same time, a number of types of stable verbal complexes do not fit into the framework of a permanent context.

Consideration of the scientific concepts of phraseological units of leading linguists - phraseologists allows us to conclude that the definition of phraseological units in modern linguistics is based on the following features, criteria and aspects:

  • 1) the communicative aspect (fame to a certain language community, reproducibility in speech, stable nationwide meaning, stability of rethinking meanings, etc.);
  • 2) grammatical aspect (frozen grammatical structure, morphological and grammatical stability, stable syntactic role, or syntactic structure determined by the method of formation of phraseological units, modeling of the formation of phraseological units, etc.);
  • 3) structural and semantic aspect (stable semantic composition, invariance of use as a language unit, structural and semantic stability, semantic stability, idiomatization of meaning, the presence of synonymy, homonymy of phraseological units, stability of meaning rethinking, etc.);
  • 4) stylistic aspect (belonging to a certain functional style of speech, the presence of connotations: emotionality, expressiveness, figurativeness, evaluation, etc.);
  • 5) culturological aspect (connection with the history of an ethnic group, country, national and cultural specifics of phraseological units, etc.);
  • 6) anthropological aspect (author's phraseological units, idiostyle features of phraseological units, etc.);
  • 7) contextual aspect (origin, functioning, transformation of phraseological units within the linguistic (speech context and cultural / national / historical meta-context).

Thus, phraseological units as a nominative unit of language and speech have the following constitutive features:

belonging to the nominative inventory of language and speech;

the presence of full or partial idiomaticity;

3) absolute or partial reproducibility of a combination of words in a stable, typical form (morphological-grammatical, syntactic, lexical-semantic, semantic indecomposable whole);

the presence of the lexical meaning of phraseological units, as well as figurative meanings;

paradigmatic, syntagmatic and derivational connectedness of phraseological units;

6) the connotative nature of phraseological units (emotionality, expressiveness, evaluativeness, figurativeness of phraseological units).

The description of the functioning of phraseological units in language, in speech, as well as in a literary text is impossible without comprehending the nature of various morphological-grammatical, structural-semantic, morphological-syntactic, stylistic and cultural types of phraseological units. For this study of the thesis, the stylistic classification is important, which will be discussed in the next paragraph as part of the general classification of phraseological units.

Thus, a phraseological unit is a phrase that, once having arisen, lingers in use for a long time. Moreover, over time, the meaning of each word in phraseological turnover may be lost, but the phraseological unit itself will remain in its semantic purpose. The signs of a phraseological unit are: 1) the constancy of the lexical composition, 2) the grammatical structure and 3) the meaning known to the native speakers of a certain language (in most cases figuratively).

UDC 811.162.1:811.111:81’25

M.V. ANDREICHIK

COMPARATIVE CHARACTERISTICS OF PHRASEOLOGICAL UNITS WITH AGENTIVE MEANING IN THE ENGLISH AND RUSSIAN LANGUAGES

The article is devoted to one of the most urgent problems of translation - the ways of transferring phraseological units with agentive meaning from English into Russian. The author describes and analyzes the ways of transferring the name of a person by profession in the field of physical labor, identifies the most used options for transferring proper names in English and Russian.

The phraseological system of any language as a whole has its own national characteristics. What exactly is the difference between the phraseological system of two or more languages, can only be established by their comparative study. It goes without saying that this difference will be the deeper, the more distant the genetic connection of the compared languages. And vice versa. The closer the languages ​​are, the more similarities they will find in the field of phraseology.

The contrastive analysis of phraseological units of related and unrelated languages ​​enriches the theory of phraseology not only quantitatively, but also qualitatively, revealing the originality of each of the compared languages.

An extensive group of phraseological units of modern English and Russian languages ​​is united by the presence of a common component - the name of a person by profession in the field of physical labor (NLP).

The object of this study is a group of phraseological units of the English language, which includes components - the names of some common professions in the field of physical labor: baker, cobbler, cook, driver, fisher, hunter, nurse, tailor, shepherd in comparison with phraseological units of the Russian language containing data components: a pie-maker, a shoemaker, a cook, a cab driver, a fisherman, a hunter, a nanny, a Swiss, a shepherd.

How does its productivity at the phraseological level depend on the origin of the noun - NLP? The analysis of the material indicates that the most active in the formation of phraseological units are native English and Russian words.

A comparative study of phraseological units with the component - NLP (in the field of physical labor) indicates that similar nouns in English and Russian are characterized by different phraseological productivity.

Table 1 - Phraseological productivity of correlates

Phraseologism

1. Baker's dozen

2. The butcher, the baker, the candlestick maker

3. To spell the baker

4. Pull devil, pull baker

Pieman

As the data of Table 1 show, LE baker is more productive at the phraseological level compared to the Russian “pirozhnik” 4 English phraseological units include this component.

In idioms the baker's dozen; the butcher, the baker, the candlestick maker, the studied lexical unit is used in its direct meaning, in other phraseological units - in a reinterpreted one. In the phraseological unit to spell the baker, there is a metaphorical transfer of the NLP meaning based on the similarity of the action - to face difficulties, like a student who first began to write two-syllable words like “baker”. All phraseological units with the “baker” component are native English, some of them reflect the realities of English life, for example: the baker’s dozen is a devil’s dozen. According to an old English custom, bread merchants received 13 loaves from bakers instead of 12, with the thirteenth going towards the merchants' income. The expression is associated with a medieval belief about the number of witches at the Sabbath.

Pull devil, pull baker - an expression associated with puppet shows, which featured a fight scene between the devil and the baker. Phraseological parallels are not observed.

In the Russian phraseological unit “The trouble is, if the shoemaker starts the pies, and the pieman makes the boots,” the words “shoemaker” and “pieman” are used in the direct meaning.

Table 2 - Phraseological productivity of correlates

Component - NLP (in the field of physical labor)

Phraseologism

Cobbler, Shoemaker

1. A cobbler must stick to his last.

2. The shoemaker's wife is the worst shod.

3. Shoemaker's stock

Shoemaker

1. The trouble is, if the cobbler starts the pies, and the pieman makes the boots.

2. Drunk like a shoemaker

3. Let the shoemaker not be taller than his boots

4. Shoemaker without boots

5. Cold shoemaker

6. Swear like a shoemaker

The Russian name of a person by profession in this trio - "shoemaker" - is characterized by greater phrase-forming productivity compared to the English counterpart, "shoemaker" is a component of six phraseological units. The English noun cobbler forms a common phraseological unit the cobbler must stick to his last. In Russian, its equivalent is the phraseological unit “let the shoemaker not be higher than the boot”, the semantics and figurative basis of these phraseological units are identical, which is due to a common source of origin.

The figurative basis of the phraseological units “The shoemaker’s wife is the worst shod” and “the shoemaker without boots” is the same.

Table 3 - Phraseological productivity of correlates

Component - NLP (in the field of physical labor)

Phraseologism

1. Head cook and bottle washer

2. Son of the sea cook

3. Too many cooks spoil the broth.

4. Every cook praises his own broth.

5. God sends meat and the devil sends cooks

Cook

1. Cook's children

The words "cook" and "cook" are characterized by different phraseological productivity. Cook is a component of six phraseological units, "cook" - one. The expression "cook's children" arose from a circular of 1887 by the Minister of Public Education M.D. Delyanova, which ordered "not to allow the children of coachmen, lackeys, cooks, laundresses, petty shopkeepers and similar people in the gymnasium."

The components "cook - cooks", "son - children" of phraseological units "son of a sea cook" and "kukharkin's children" belong to the same semantic sphere, which determines the same figurative basis, a common negative evaluative meaning of phraseological units, but phraseological units differ in semantics. Russian phraseology in this case consolidates in its content the reactionary characteristics of some social strata in pre-revolutionary Russia.

The semantics of the communicative phraseological units “too many cooks spoil the broth”, “every cook praises his own broth”, substantive phraseological unit “head cook and bottle washer” is based on the metaphorical rethinking of the components (according to the similarity of situations from professional activities). The cook component is the semantic center in creating the figurative basis of phraseological units.

In the phraseological unit “God sends us meat and the devil sends cooks”, the “cooks” component is also included in the semantic center of the phraseological unit, but in its direct meaning.

Table 4 - Phraseological productivity of correlates

Component - NLP (in the field of physical labor)

Phraseologism

1. Back-seat driver

2. To wear like a truck driver

3. To be in the driver's seat

Cab

1. I am not me and the horse is not mine, and I myself am not a cabman.

As Table 4 shows, NLP (in the field of physical labor) “driver” is a component of three phraseological units, and “cabman” is a component of one phraseological unit. The studied LUs are phraseologized by means of metaphorical transfer of meaning. There are no phraseological parallels.

Table 5 - Phraseological productivity of correlates

Component - NLP (in the field of physical labor)

Phraseologism

2. Fortune hunter

3. Bounty hunter

Hunter

1. The hunter is a catcher, and the hunter and the beast run.

The noun hunter reveals a greater phraseological activity compared to the Russian "hunter" and is included in the four common phraseological units of the modern English language as a rethought component.

Phraseological correlate is not noted.

Table 6 - Phraseological productivity of correlates

As can be seen from Table 6, "fisher" and "fisherman" are components of the same phraseological unit, they are phraseologicalized by means of meaning transfer.

Table 7 - Phraseological productivity of correlates

The English noun "nurse" is the semantic center of two phraseological units. The Russian noun "nanny" forms a common Russian phraseological unit - "seven nannies have a child without an eye" - with a completely rethought meaning. The semantics of the compared phraseological units - "a person, a characteristic of a person" - is predetermined by the semantics of the components - NLP.

Table 8 - phraseological productivity of correlates

The English LE "shepherd", being a component of three completely rethought phraseological units, loses its specific meaning.

The phraseological unit “seven shepherds do not have a flock” is close in semantics to the English phraseological unit “too many cooks spoil the broth”, the figurative basis of these phraseological units is different, because component composition is different.

Components - NLP (in the field of physical labor) as part of the considered phraseological units are phraseologized by means of a metaphorical understanding of the meaning.

Table 9 - Phraseological productivity of correlates

Component - NLP (in the field of physical labor)

Phraseologism

1. The tailor makes the man

2. Tailor's dummy

3. The devil among the tailors

4. The three tailors of Tooley Street.

6. Merchant tailor

7. Tinker, tailor, soldier, sailor.

Shvets

1. And the Swiss, and the reaper, and the player on the pipe.

As Table 9 shows, the English noun tailor shows significant phraseological productivity in comparison with the similar Russian noun "shvets" and is included in seven phraseological units.

In the choice of components, the figurative basis of phraseological units of the compared languages, national specificity is manifested. Thus, in Russian the lexical unit "shvets" is characterized by stylistic markedness, the dictionary gives the mark "obsolete, vernacular", while its English counterpart "tailor" is stylistically neutral.

The semantics of the phraseological unit “and the Swiss, and the reaper, and the gambler on the pipe” is equivalent to the semantics of the English phraseological unit “head cook and bottle washer” and the French “Bonne à tout faire”. The component composition and figurative basis differ.

In the phraseological units “tinker, tailor, soldier, sailor” and “the three tailors of Tooley Street”, the studied lexical unit participates in the creation of a figurative basis through the metonymization of its meaning. In its direct meaning, “tailor” is included in the phraseological units “merchant tailor” and “Tom tailor” as a semantic center, the semantics of the components predetermine the semantics of the phraseological unit.

As a result of the analysis, it seems possible for us to conclude that a comparative study of phraseological units with the NLP component (in the field of physical labor) allows us to distinguish the following groups in terms of semantics, component composition, figurative basis:

1. Phraseologisms that have semantic correspondences in another language, but differ in component composition, and, consequently, in the figurative basis: “head cook and bottle washer” - “both a swede, a reaper and a player on the pipe”; “too many cooks spoil the broth” - “seven nannies have a child without an eye”; “the shoemaker’s wife is the worst shod” - “a shoemaker without boots.”

2. Phraseologisms that do not have correspondences in the compared languages ​​from the point of view of semantics. This group includes native English and native Russian phraseological units, for example, English. "baker's dozen" - Russian. “I am not me, and the horse is not mine, and I myself am not a cabman.”

The problem of translation of specific, culturally colored lexical units from English into Russian, which is very important for the theory and practice of translation. The specifics of translating proper names are discussed. The article considers such concepts as language and culture, linguistic world image, connotation of names of famous historical heroes and place-names in fiction, peculiarities of translating realia: proper names on the material of Greek Myths. Proper Names translation is one of the most complicated and urgent issues in translation theory. When researching methods of translation of mythic proper names it is necessary to take into account the overlapping of two linguistic world images: of English and Russian, as well as their time co-relation. The article presents the results of the analysis offer the possibilities for adequate translation of the language units.

Bibliography

  1. Aleinikova T.V., Nikulina L.I. Phraseological units with components - anthroponyms in modern Russian. Dynamics of the phraseological composition of the language. / T.V. Aleinikova, L.I. Nikulina-Kurgan, 1999. - p.4-5
  2. Akhmatyanova Z. S. Nouns nomina agentis in modern Russian: dis. cand. philol.nauk: 10.02.01 / Z. S. Akhmatyanova - Ufa, 2000. - 224 p.
  3. Birich A.K. Russian Phraseology: Historical and Etymological Dictionary / A.K. Birich, V.M. Mokienko, L.I. Stepanova; ed. V.M. Mokienko. - M.: AST: Astrel: Lux, 2005. - 926 p.
  4. Geiger R. M. Lexico-semantic structure of names in -tel and their generators in Russian (XI–XX centuries) / R. M. Geiger. - Alma-Ata, 1969.
  5. Golovanova E. I. Category of a professional figure: Formation. Development. Status in the language / E. I. Golovanova. - Chelyabinsk: Chelyab. state un-t, 2004. - 330 p.
  6. Zhitnikova L. V. English-language borrowings of the names of persons by profession in modern Russian: dis. … cand. philol. Sciences: 10.02.01 / L. V. Zhitnikova. - Chelyabinsk, 1998. - 213 p.
  7. Kunin A.V. English phraseology (theoretical course)./ A.V. Kunin - M., 1970. - 324 p.
  8. Lebedinskaya V.A. Phraseological meaning as a linguistic phenomenon // Sergeev readings, issue 2. / V.A. Lebedinskaya - Kurgan, 1999 - p. 6-8
  9. Moiseev A. I. Names of persons by profession in modern Russian. Structural and semantic characteristics: author. dis. … dr. philol. sciences: spec. 10.02.01 "Russian language" / A. I. Moiseev. - L., 1963. - 32 p.
  10. Pozdnyakova, E.M. The category of the figure's name and the ways of its synchronous development in the cognitive nominative aspect (on the material of the English language): dis. … Dr. Philol. Sciences: 10.02.04 / E. M. Pozdnyakova. - M., 1999. - 318 p. 5.
  11. Dictionary of foreign words. - 13th ed., stereotype. / [ed. I. V. Lekhina and others]. – M. : Rus. yaz., 1986.
  12. Smith, Logan P. Phraseology of the modern English language. / Smith - M., 1987.
  13. Phraseological dictionary of the Russian language / Comp. L.A. Voinova and others; Ed. and with preface. A.I. Molotkov. – M.: Sov. encyclopedia, 1986.
  14. Phraseological dictionary of the modern Russian language: in 2 vols. / Comp. A.V. Korolkova, A.G. Lomov, A.N. Tikhonov; ed. A.N. Tikhonov. – M.: Flinta; Science, 2004.
  15. Shkatova L. A. Names of persons by profession of the modern Russian language: author. dis. … cand. philol. sciences: spec. 10.02.01 "Russian language" / L. A. Shkatova. - M., 1967. - 17 p.

Scientific adviser -E.O. Mochalova, Candidate of Philological Sciences, Associate Professor of the Department of English Philology.

Fitting © 2023 CatMania - Information portal