Classification of Phraseological Units

2

Content

Introduction……………………………………………………………………….….3

Chapter 1. General Characteristics of Phraseological Units…………………………5

           1.1. Phraseology as a Science. Definition of Phraseological Unit……………5

           1.2. Criteria of phraseological units…………………………………………..7

Chapter 2. Classification of Phraseological Units…………………………………..10

            2.1. Etymological Classification of Phraseological Units…………………..10           

            2.2. Semantic Classification of Phraseological Units………………………12          

            2.3. Structural Classification of Phraseological Units…………………...…14          

            2.4. Structural-Semantic Classification of Phraseological Units ………......15

Conclusion………………………………………………………………………..…18

Resources……………………………………………………………………...……20

Introduction

Nowadays English is the chief language of international business and academic conferences, the leading language of international tourism. English is the main language of popular music, advertising, home computers and video games. Most of the scientific, technological and academic information in the world is expressed in English. International communication develops and expends very fast. The English language has become the means of international communication, the language of trade, education, politics, and economics. People have to communicate with each other, it is very important for them to understand the foreigners and be understood by them. A word comes to be a very powerful means of communication but also can be a cause of a great misunderstanding if it is not clearly understood by one of the speakers. Idioms are a very numerous part of the English language. It comprises one-third part of the colloquial speech. That is why good knowledge of the language, including English, is impossible without knowledge of its phraseology.  Competence in this area makes it easier to read both journalistic and fiction literature. The metaphorical and emotional character of the phraseology makes the speech more figurative and expressive. Therefore, for those who learn the English language, this layer of the English vocabulary is of particular interest.

Today it is difficult to find the aspect of the language study which has not be considered by the Russian or foreign scientists. Nevertheless, phraseology is a field of science where not all the questions have been resolved. The problem of classification of phraseological units, for example, still remains one of the most controversial. Therefore, the study of phraseological units in the modern English language is relevant in the present circumstances.

The purpose of this research is to study the general characteristics of phraseological units as a constituent part of the English vocabulary and to examine different classifications of phraseological units.

In order to achieve the set aim we are to determine the following tasks:

1. To consider the phraseology as a linguistic discipline and to conclude the definition of phraseological unit.

2. To investigate the criteria for distinguishing phraseological units from free word-groups.

3. To explore classifications of phraseological units made on the basis of different principles of classification.

The object of the present work is the phraseological units of the English language. The subject is the phraseology in English and the problem of classification of phraseological units.

Methodological bases of research the works of Russian and foreign experts in the field of phraseology as well as dictionaries’ data served as methodological bases of research.

1. General Characteristics of Phraseological Units

1.1. Phraseology as a Science. Definition of Phraseological Unit

Phraseology is a relatively new branch of linguistics which attracts the attention of an increasing number of scholars [15, 484]. The vocabulary of any developed language is enriched not only by words but also by phraseological units which are not created by the speaker in the process of speech but used as ready-made units [11]. It was a long time ago that linguists became aware of the existence in the language of special larger-than-word units: word-groups consisting of two or more words whose combination is integrated as a unit with a specialized meaning of the whole. The term phraseology was first used by the Swiss linguist Charles Bally when he wrote about different types of word-groups that vary in the degree of stability from free word-groups to phraseological unities. He compared the latter with chemical substances which have a set of properties different from the properties of the elements that make them up.

As for our country, the first attempt to study various word-groups on a scientific basis was made by the outstanding Russian linguist A. A. Shakhmatov (1925) and a few years later another linguist, Professor E. D. Polivanov (1931), pointed out the need to establish a branch of linguistics that would study the peculiarities of word-groups. However, it was not until the 1940s that Academician V. V. Vinogradov (1947) actually understood such an investigation and suggested the first classification of phraseological units in the Russian language. Later years saw a remarkable rise in the interest in this new branch of linguistics and a further development of its theory.

The Soviet school of English phraseology is connected with the names of N. N. Amosova (1963) and A. V. Kunin who is the author of several books on the theory of English phraseology (1970, 1972, 1986) and the English-Russian phraseological dictionary (1984). A. V. Kunin is a founder of a phraseological school as the advisor for about 80 doctoral dissertations on the subject. Some other linguists contributed greatly to investigations in phraseology are B. A. Larin, V. L. Arkhangelsky, A. I. Smirnitsky, V. N. Telya [15, 484].

At present, phraseology is defined as a branch of linguistics the subject matter of which is study and systematic description of phraseological units, i.e. reproduced and idiomatic (non-motivated) or partially motivated units built up according to the model of free word-groups or sentences and semantically and syntactically brought into correlation with words [16, 128-129]. Opinions differ as to how this part of the vocabulary should be defined, classified, described and analysed. To make matters worse no two authors agree upon the terminology they use. The word phraseology, for instance, has different meanings in our country and in Great Britain or the United States.

In Soviet linguistic literature the term phraseology has come to be used for the whole ensemble of expressions where the meaning of one element is dependent on the other, irrespective of the structure and properties of the unit (V. V. Vinogradov); with other authors it denotes only such set expressions which do not possess expressiveness or emotional colouring (A. I. Smirnitsky), and also vice versa: only those that are imaginative, expressive and emotional (I. V. Arnold). N. N. Amosova overcomes the subjectiveness of the two last mentioned approaches when she insists on the term being applicable only to what she calls fixed context units, i.e. units in which it is impossible to substitute any of the components without changing the meaning not only of the whole unit but also of the elements that remain intact. O. S. Ahmanova has repeatedly insisted on the semantic integrity of such phrases prevailing over the structural separateness of their elements. A. V. Kunin lays stress on the structural separateness of the elements in a phraseological unit, on the change of meaning in the whole as compared with its elements taken separately [10, 165].

There are also another terms which are used by linguists besides the term phraseological unit. The existing terms reflect different views concerning the nature and essential features of phraseological units as distinguished from the so-called free word-groups. The term set-phrases implies that the basic criterion of differentiation is stability of the lexical components and grammatical structure of word-groups. The term idioms generally means that the essential feature of the linguistic units under consideration is ideomaticity or lack of motivation. This term usually used by English and American linguists is very often treated as synonymous with the term phraseological unit universally accepted in our country. The term word-equivalent stresses not only the semantic but also the functional inseparability of certain word-groups and their ability to function in speech as single words [12, 74].

Thus, as it was already mentioned, differences in terminology reflect certain differences in the main criteria used to distinguish between free word-groups and a specific type of linguistic units generally known as phraseology. These criteria are discussed below.

1.2. Criteria of Phraseological Units

One of the most important and difficult problems of phraseology is how to distinguish between free word-groups and phraseological units. It is necessary to point out the criteria of phraseological units because they have certain features in common with free word-groups and compound words.

The criteria offered by linguists are ideomaticity, stability, word-equivalency. We decided to stop on the criteria described by A. V. Kunin in his researches.

The first criterion is the structural separateness, or divisibility of phraseological units into separate structural elements. Structural separateness helps to distinguish phraseological units from compound words. In the case of compound words there is a common grammatical form for all elements of this word [14, 105]. For example, the grammatical change in the word shipwreck implies that inflections are added to both elements of the word simultaneously – ship-wreak-( ), ship-wreak-(s), while in the word-group the wreck of a ship each element can change its grammatical form independently from the other – (the) wreck-( ) of the ship-s, (the) wreck-s of the ship-s. Like in word-groups, in phraseological units any component may be changed grammatically, but these changes are rather few, limited and occasional [16, 129]. For example, a phraseological unit a hard nut to crack (a problem difficult to find an answer to) can be used in the following forms: they are hard nuts to crack, it is a harder nut to crack.

The next important criterion of phraseological units is stability. A. V. Kunin distinguishes several aspects of stability:

a) Stability of use means that phraseological units are introduced in speech ready-made and not created each time anew like free word-groups. Stability of use proves that a phraseological unit like a word is a language unit. Phraseological units are firstly the individual creations and later they become common property. For example, Shakespeare’s writings play a great role in the life of English-speaking communities, and many phraseological units, first being Shakespeare’s individual creations, became world’s value and joined the stock of phraseological units of the English language [14, 105], such as: cakes and ale (material comforts), give the devil his due (give back what you owe), neither rhyme nor reason (without logic, order, or planning), to one’s heart’s content (as much as one wants, to one's entire satisfaction, without limitation), et cetera [17].

b) Lexico-semantic stability means that components of phraseological units are either irreplaceable or can be partly replaced in some cases because the meaning of phraseological unit is understood as a whole and not related to the meaning of individual words. This type of stability is of great help in stating the semantic difference between free word-groups and phraseological units. For example, one cannot change the noun component in the phraseological unit to give the sack (to dismiss from work) without destroying its phraseological meaning. In the following examples one of the components can be replaced by its synonym: to tread/walk on air (to be delighted), a skeleton in the cupboard/closet (a family secret), not to lift/raise/stir a finger (not to help). Semantic stability is preserved in such cases.

c) Morphological stability means that the components of phraseological units are restricted as to the usage of morphological forms. For example, noun components in phraseological units are used either only in the singular (chase the wild goose (to strive for the impossible), play a lone hand (to act alone)) or in the plural (small potatoes (trifles)). Although in some cases changing is possible: to be in deep water (s), as happy as a king (kings).

d) Syntactic stability is stability of the order of the components of a phraseological unit. For example, changing of the order of the components in the following phraseological units: cakes and ale (material comforts), bread and butter (simple and wholesome) results in destruction of phraseological units. But there might be variations within syntactic stability – grammatical and stylistic inversion. To grammatical inversion belongs transformation of passivisation, i.e. conversion of a verbal phraseological unit from active into passive voice: break the ice (do or say something to remove or reduce social tension) – the ice is broken; to stylistic inversion belongs the change of the word order for the sake of expressivity: bear one’s cross (suffer from responsibility as a condition of life or for a period) – What a cross he has to bear! [14, 105-106].

So, speaking about the criterion of stability we may draw the following conclusion. Phraseological units as a rule possess a high degree of stability, although their stability is relative. There are phraseological units with the highest level of stability, allowing no changes; phraseological units with medium degree of stability, allowing minimal changes; phraseological units with low level of stability, allowing higher changes. Accordingly, the criterion of stability is criticized by many linguists as not very reliable in distinguishing phraseological units from free word-groups.

Semantically all word-groups can be classified into motivated and non-motivated. A word-group is lexically motivated if the combined lexical meaning of the group is deducible from the meanings of its components, for example, red flower, heavy weight, et cetera. If the combined lexical meaning of a word-group is not deducible from the meanings of its constituent components, such a word-group is lexically non-motivated [16, 124]. So, another criterion of phraseological units is ideomaticity, or lack of motivation. Phraseological units are partially motivated or non-motivated (idiomatic). To partially motivated phraseological units belong examples like a dog in the manger (a person who selfishly prevents others from using or enjoying something which he keeps for himself, though he cannot use or enjoy it) and a great number of others. The phraseological unit to kick the bucket, for example, is non-motivated. The lack of motivation can be explained by the fact that in the course of time the association between each particular meaning of the component lexemes and the meaning of the whole word combination was faded and lost.

There is another criterion of phraseological units, that is the criterion of function. Idiomaticity and stability of phraseological units bring them closer to words. A. I. Smirnitsky considered phraseological units to be word equivalents because phraseological units like words are introduced into speech ready-made and function in speech as single words. Phraseological units and words have identical syntactic functions and they are interchangeable in certain cases. For example, we can use the words to rejoice and the sun instead of the phraseological units to throw one’s hat in the air and the eye of the day. Phraseological units like words have synonyms. For instance, the following phraseological synonyms convey the meaning “to have not enough money for one’s needs”: to be in low waters, to be on the rocks, to be on one’s beam ends, to be as poor as a church mouse, to be hard up, to be on one’s uppers. Phraseological units like words have also antonyms: a good mixer – a bad mixer, bad (foul) language, unparliamentary language – parliamentary language. Phraseological units like words though in a much smaller degree are characterized by polysemy and homonymy [14, 106-107].

Although words and phraseological units have much in common, they are different language units, the main difference between them is structural, that is phraseological units are characterized by structural separateness, while words are marked by structural integrity.

Thus, phraseological units occupy an intermediate position between words and free word-groups. Being intermediate units, they have features of words, on the one hand, and features of free word-groups, on the other. That is why it is difficult to distinguish between them. Moreover, these difficulties are enhanced by the fact that some properties of phraseological units (such as idiomaticity, stability, word-equivalency) are expressed in different phraseological units in different degree. These difficulties are revealed in various classifications of phraseological units.

2. Classifications of Phraseological Units

Phraseological units must be sorted out and arranged in certain classes which possess identical characteristics. But a phraseological unit is a complex phenomenon with a number of important features, which can be therefore approached from different points of view.  Hence, there is diversity of opinion concerning principles and criteria of classification of phraseological units.

2.1. Etymological Classification of Phraseological Units

There are various ways and sources of the origin of phraseological units in the English language. The consideration of the origin of phraseological units contributes to a better understanding of phraseological meaning. As any lexical item they can be divided into two large groups that is they can be either native English by origin or borrowed from other languages. Let us consider the main sources of native and borrowed phraseological units in English.

The majority of phraseological units in English are native English. In most cases the creators of them are unknown. The main sources of native phraseological units are:

1) Terminological and professional lexics, for example, physics: center of gravity (центр тяжести), specific weight (удельный вес); navigation: to cut the painter (обрубить канат; to become independent), to lower one’s colours (спустить свой флаг; to yield, to give in); military sphere: to fall into line (стать в строй; to conform/agree with others), to draw one’s/the enemy’s fire (to cause somebody to concentrate attack, criticism, etc. in a particular direction); sports: to hit below the belt (нанести удар ниже пояса, предательский удар) [16, 135-136; 14, 113-115].

2)  British literature. The majority of them come from Shakespeare’s writings: the green-eyed monster (jealousy), to one’s heart’s content (as much as one wants), cakes and ale (material comforts, merry-making), the salt of youth (enjoyable living), a fool’s paradise (illusory happiness, the world of dreams), like Hamlet without the prince (the most important person at event is absent). Other writers who contributed to the stock of phraseological units are J. Milton: to fall evil days (to live in poverty after having enjoyed better times); J. Swift: all the world and his wife (many people, everyone without exception), to quarrel with one’s bread and butter (to quit the job that provides means of existence); W. M. Thackeray: a skeleton in the cupboard (something in one’s family which is kept concealed); Ch. Dickens: never say die (do not give up hope in a difficult situation); W. Scott: to catch somebody red-handed (to discover somebody while he is doing something wrong) and others.

3) British customs and traditions. Example: a baker’s dozen (a group of thirteen), in the past British merchants of bread received from bakers thirteen loaves instead of twelve and the thirteenth loaf was merchant’s profit.

4) Superstitions and legends: a black sheep (a less successful or more immoral person in a family or a group), people believed that a black ship was marked by the devil.

5) Historical facts and events, personalities. Examples: blue stocking – one admiral from Holland called the members of one literary society “the gathering of blue stockings” because one of scientists appeared there in blue stockings; to do a Thatcher (to stay in power as Prime Minister for three consecutive terms), from the former Conservative Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher; according to Cocker (according to rules), Cocker is the author of a text-book on arithmetics in the 17th century; Queen Ann is dead! (iron. It was known long ago).

6) Phenomena and facts of everyday life: carry coals to Newcastle (to take something to a place where there is plenty of it available), Newcastle is a town in Northern England where a lot of coal was produced; to get out of wood (to be saved from danger or difficulty) [16, 135-136; 14, 113-115].

  Phraseological units borrowed from other languages entered English phraseology through both literary sources and oral contacts with other nations. The main sources of borrowed phraseological units are: