5. English phraseology

The E. lang is very rich in w-combinations, ~ aren’t free. They constitute a considerable part of the voc-ry of the E. lang. In these set-expressions we have no right to change the order of the components without destroying the m-g ~ sometimes cannot be derived from the m-gs of its components. Phras-l units—w-groups, consisting of 2 / > w-s integrated as a unit with a specialized m-g of the whole (the meaning of each component is weakened or entirely lost).

to find the mare’s nest — попасть пальцем в небо;

husband’s tea — жидкий, испитой чай;

white lie — невинная ложь;

to talk 19 to the dust — заговорить к-л. до смерти.

Peculiarities of the phraseological units

~ euphony [΄jufəni] (благозвучие) — the definite rhythmical pattern, accompanied by alliteration:

safe & sound — цел и невредим;

thick as thieves — спаянные крепкой дружбой, закадычные друзья;

bright as a button — чистенький, нарядный;

~ stylistic figures—tropes having contrast, simile, metaphor → they are stylistically coloured:

fair as a lily — прекрасная как лилия;

bright as new pin — чистенький, нарядный;

a big fish in a little pond — местный туз, заправила;

great cry & little wool — шуму много, а толку мало;

ships that pass in the night — мимолётные встречи.

Due to these characteristics phras. un. are used as bright expressive linguistic means.

They aren’t created in speech but used as readymade units. The current m-gs of constituent parts / w-s build up a certain picture, but the actual m-g of the whole unit has little / nothing to do with that picture, in itself creating an entirely new image:

to drop a brick — сплоховать, сделать ляпсус, допустить бестактность;

to join the silent majority — отправиться к праотцам.

Set-expressions m.b. distinguished from free phrases. The task of distinguishing is complicated by the existence of a great № of marginal cases, the so-called semi-fixed or semi-free w-groups (called non-phraseological w-groups) ~ share with phras. un. their structural stability but lack their semantic cohesion & figurativeness - to go to school, to go by bus, to commit suicide.

2 Major criteria of their distinguishing: semantic & structural

~ semantic: phras. un. are characterized by semantic unity. They are defined as w-d-groups conveying a single concept. Free w-d-groups — each meaningful component stands for a separate concept:

to drop a brick—допустить бестактность

to take / put / paint a brick / box / any object — взять / положить / покрасить кирпич / коробку / любой предмет.

~ structural integrity (целостность)

Free phrases — substitution of any of its elements without semantic change in the other element is possible.

Semi-fixed combinations — restrictions imposed on types of w-s, ~ c.b. used in a given pattern:

to go to __ school, to go to __market, to go to __ court

the pattern:to go + prepos. + no article — only with nouns of places, where definite actions or functions are performed.

Set-expressions — no substitution / pronominal substitution / substitution restricted to a few synonyms for one of the members only.

to cut a poor (ridiculous) figure, not to cut much of a figure — играть незначительную роль, казаться жалким.

This substitution seems to justify referring it to semi-fixed set-expressions.

to make one’s (my, your, his, etc.) hair stand on end — сильно изумить, напугать к-л.

cf.: to cut bread, cheese, etc.

No substitution:

all the world & his wife—все без исключения, всё светское общество

the black market

a grass widow — not a widow but a woman temporarily living without her husband

busy as a bee

fair & square—open-hearted, frank

not only the semantic unity but also euphonic & expressive qualities of the whole are retained.

Structural stability of phras. un. m.b. displayed in the stability of morphological forms of their componenets. E.g., nouns in many phras. un. is used only in the Singular:

to chase the wild goose — гнаться за недостижимым;

to put one’s finger on smth. — выяснить, определить, попасть в точку.

or only in the Plural:

in high places — в высших сферах;

small potatoes — пустяки, мелочи;

the high seas — открытое море, море за пределами территориальных вод.

safe & sound — if substitution takes place — secure & uninjured — the same denotational meaning but sounds so dull & trivial that the phrase m.b. considered destroyed.

Classification of the phraseological units

One of the most problematic items in the classification of phras. un. — to see the borderline between their types. The classifications are numerous.

I byViktor Vladim. Vinogradov — based upon the motivation [əu] (the degree of motivation) of a unit — the relationship existing between the meaning of the whole & the meanings of its components. The degree of motivation is closely connected with the stability, integrity & semantic unity of the expressions.

1) phraseological fusions (слияния, объединения) — the highest stage of blending (сочетания) together — semantically indivisible units; the meaning can’t be directly derived from the meanings of its componenets:

to pull one’s leg, to be cut off with a shilling

king’s picture — фальшивая монетка

by hook or by crook — не мытьём, так катаньем

2) phraseological unities (единства) — > numerous, possess some degree of motivation. The emotional quality is based on the metaphorical image created by the whole. They may have synonymic substitution:

to stand / stick to one’s guns—не сдавать позиций, настоять на своём;

to make a mountain out of a mole(дамба)

to take a new leaf, to take a bull by the horns

3) phraseological combinations — not only motivated but contain one component in its direct m-g, while the other is used metaphorically: to meet the requirements — столкнуться с условиями, нуждами

its mobility is much greater than of the previous types. There are substitutions ~ don’t destroy the m-g of the metaphorical element: to meet the necessity—substitution isn’t synonymical & the m-g of the whole is changed while the m-g of the verb is kept intact (нетронутый). Still they possess a certain degree of semantic inseparability: to take the risk of; to pay compliments.

The weakness of the classification — carelessness, fuzziness (размытость) of borderlines between phras. fusions & phras. unities, on the one hand, & phras. unities & phras. combinations, on the other hand. Determination of the degree of motivation proves to be absolutely subjective & this supposes different conclusions.

II classification by Nat. Nik. Amosova — based on the contextual approach: phras. un. — units of fixed context (opposed to free context) — a context characterized by a specific & unchanging sequence of definite lexical components, & a peculiar semantic relationship b/w these. There are phrasemes & idioms.

~ phrasemes — always binary phras. un-s.: one of their components has a phraseologically bound meaning (1), the other serves as the determining context (2):

to grind one’s teeth — скрежетать зубами; small hours — первые часы после полуночи;

(1) (2)

(растирать, перемалывать) small talk — пустой, бессодержательный, светский разговор

to knit one’s brows — хмурить брови;

(1) (2)

(сращивать, срастить)

~ idioms - totally non-motivated, the mg of the whole is created by the unit as a whole though every elem keeps its usual value: a mare’s nest—иллюзия, нечто несуществующее

mare — monosemantic & doesn’t need any determining context

nest — polysemantic: 2) выводок (metonymy); 3) уютный уголок, гнёздышко(metaphor); 4) притон

None of these m-gs is connected with “mare” & they don’t occur together in a free phrase. Both w-s keep their usual m-gs while their combination possesses a special m-g.

to pay a visit / call / compliments / respects / addresses (to smb.) can’t fit into the scheme suggested by this author, because the determining minimum on ~ the m-g of “pay” depends isn’t constant. On the other hand, the combination isn’t free either, ΄cause the group of nouns possible as the 2^nd component isn’t limited by the character of the designata (обозначаемого) but by the stylistic tradition. It’s impossible to say: to pay seeing off / celebrations / greetings.