Phraseological units in English

Chapter I

PHRASEOLOGY AS A BRANCH OF LINGUISTIC SYSTEM. CONTRASTIVE TYPOLOGY OF THE ENGLISH PHRASEOLOGY.

Phraseology as a complex area of the linguistic system is a developing field of research and has attracted interest from many sides. The linguistic attention has been paid to the semantic, syntactic and textual properties of phraseological units, to different approaches of their synchronic and diachronic description, and to cultural specificity.

The term ‘phraseology’ originated in Russian studies which developed from the late 1940’s to the 1960’s . In linguistics, the term ‘phraseology’ describes the context in which a word is used. This often includes idioms, phrasal verbs, and proverbs. “Phraseology is a fuzzy part of language. Although most of us would agree that it embraces the conventional rather than the productive or rule-governed side of language, involving various kinds of composite units and ‘pre-patterned’ expression such as idioms, fixed phrases, and collocations,we find it difficult to delimit the area and classify the different types involved”.

Phraseology is a branch of lexicology studying phraseological units (set expressions, praseologisms, or idioms (in foreign linguistics). Phraseological units differ from free word-groups semantically and structurally:

1) they convey a single concept and their meaning is idiomatic, i.e. it is not a mere total of the meanings of their components

2) they are characterized by structural invariability (no word can be substituted for any component of a phraseological unit without destroying its sense (to have a bee in one’s bonnet (not cap or hat).

3) they are not created in speech but used as ready-made units. Unlike a word, a phraseological unit can be divided into separately structured elements and transformed syntactically (On the instant he was thinking how natural and unaffected her manner was now that the ice between them had been broken. (Th. Dreiser, ‘An American Tragedy’). I... found this man in a kind of seizure, and went for help. This broke the ice between us, and we grew quite chatty, without either of us knowing the other's name. (H. Pollitt, ‘Serving My Time’).

Linguists have provided various definitions of phraseological units and various criteria to classify them. My working definition is that proposed by Gläser: “A ‘phraseological unit’ is a lexicalized, reproducible, bilexemic or polylexemic word group in common use, which has relative syntactic an semantic stability, may be idiomatized, may carry connotations, and may have an emphatic or intensifying function in a text” (Gläser 1998, 126). To put in other terms, phraseological units can be characterized by certain specific features, which distinguish them from free word combinations. When defining a phraseological unit, we can most often mention the following qualities: figurativeness, expressiveness, multi-word character, collocating nature, transformational defectiveness and idiomatic character.

As i metioned, in linguistics, phraseology is the study of set or fixed expressions, such as idioms, phrasal verbs, and other types of multi-word lexical units (often collectively referred to as phrasemes), in which the component parts of the expression take on a meaning more specific than or otherwise not predictable from the sum of their meanings when used independently. For example, ‘Dutch auction’ is composed of the words Dutch ‘of or pertaining to the Netherlands’ and auction ‘a public sale in which goods are sold to the highest bidder’, but its meaning is not ‘a sale in the Netherlands where goods are sold to the highest bidder’. Instead, the phrase has a conventionalized meaning referring to any auction where, instead of rising, the prices fall.

Phraseology is a scholarly approach to language which developed in the twentieth century. It took its start when Charles Bally's notion of locutions phraseologiques entered Russian lexicology and lexicography in the 1930s and 1940s and was subsequently developed in the former Soviet Union and other Eastern European countries. From the late 1960s on it established itself in (East) German linguistics but was also sporadically approached in English linguistics. The earliest English adaptations of phraseology are by Weinreich (1969) within the approach of transformational grammar), Arnold (1973), and Lipka (1992,1974). In Great Britain as well as other Western European countries, phraseology has steadily been developed over the last twenty years.

English and American linguists collect various words, word-groups, other units presenting some interest. These units are described as idioms. No attempt is made to investigate them as a separate class and lay down a reliable criterion to distinguish between word-groups and phraseological units. The first attempt to place the study of various word-groups on a scientific basis was made by the outstanding Russian linguist A.A. Schachmatov in his book "Syntax". Investigation of English vocabulary was initiated in our country by prof. A.V. Kunin whose dictionary of English idioms (1955) has valuable information in this branch of linguistics. Phraseology as a branch of linguistic science is closely connected with Semantics, Grammar and Lexicology. It has its own methods of investigation and problems for analysis.

 

The national peculiarity of phraseological units is revealed on all the linguistic levels: phonological, grammatical and lexical. On the phonological level, a phraseological unit is peculiar because the very combination of sounds, it consists of, is characteristic for the phonological system of this or that language. 

On the lexical level, the national peculiarity of a phraseological unit lies in the fact that it often consists of the words that denote specifically national notions that are determined by the extralinguistic reality: customs, traditions, legends and historic facts of the nation, e.g., the bard of Avon, Fleet Street. The translator should be aware of the cultural and social background of such phraseological units.

 

One more peculiarity of phraseological units is due to the difference in thinking and cognition of human beings. Every nation has its own way of creating images. In most cases phraseological units in different languages, having the same meaning, are different in inner form and images. Compare, the phraseological units with the meaning in English – under smb’s thumb, in Romanian –a fi sub papucul cuiva.

 

According to the degree of the national peculiarity of ph.u., all phraseological units are divided into three groups:

 

1) International phraseological units, which are based on universal images, e.g., the alpha and omega of smth, to discover America, to cross the Rubicon, the heel of Achilles (calcîiul lui Ahile), the Trojan horse (calul Troian), the tree of knowledge (copacul cunostintelor), thirty pieces of silver (trizeci piese de argint), Pandora's box, Herculian pillars, Gordian knot, between Scylla and Charybdis; I came, I saw, I conquered; the Ten Commandments, wise Solomon, prodigal son/to be in (the) seventh heaven.

2) Locally unmarked phraseological units, which are based on neutral images, not nationally peculiar, e.g., to burn one’s fingers, to break one’s heart, to snake in the grass, a fly in the ointment (ca o musca in alifie);, make haste slowly . 

3) Locally marked phraseological units with vividly expressed national and cultural component, e.g., to catch the Speaker’s eye, to set the Thames on fire, to carry coals to Newcastle, something is rotten in the state of Denmark, to dine with Duke Humphry, to cut off with a shilling.

 

These and the like idiomatic expressions, including several proverbs and sayings, have usually absolute or near equivalents in languages of one culturally and geographically common area, e.g., to kiss the post, as pale as paper – alb ca varul; grass widow, measure twice, cut once –de 7ori masoara,o data taie; to know smth. as one knows his ten fingers – a cunoaste pe cineva ca pe propriile degete.  

It must be pointed out that these and many other international idioms are alien however, to Chinese, Japanese, Aleutian, Indonesian and other languages whose peoples have been brought up in other historic, cultural and religious (Moslem, Buddhist, etc.) conditions. As a result, there exist no universally equivalent idioms of identical semantic, componential, picturesque or syntactic structure. 

WAYS OF FORMING PHRASEOLOGICAL UNITS.PRINCIPLES OF CLASSIFICATION.

The vocabulary of a language is enriched not only by words but also by phraseological units. Phraseological units are word-groups that cannot be made in the process of speech, they exist in the language as ready-made units. They are compiled in special dictionaries. The same as words phraseological units express a single notion and are used in a sentence as one part of it. American and British lexicographers call such units «idioms». We can mention such dictionaries as: L.Smith «Words and Idioms», V.Collins «A Book of English Idioms» etc. In these dictionaries we can find words, peculiar in their semantics (idiomatic), side by side with word-groups and sentences. In these dictionaries they are arranged, as a rule, into different semantic groups.

Phraseological units can be classified according to the ways they are formed, according to the degree of the motivation of their meaning, according to their structure and according to their part-of-speech meaning.

A.V. Koonin classified phraseological units according to the way they are formed. He pointed out primary and secondary ways of forming phraseological units.

Primary ways of forming phraseological units are those when a unit is formed on the basis of a free word-group :

a) Most productive in Modern English is the formation of phraseological units by means of transferring the meaning of terminological word-groups, e.g. in cosmic technique we can point out the following phrases: «launching pad» in its terminological meaning is «rampa de lansare » , in its transferred meaning - «punctul de start», «to link up» - in its transformed meaning it means -«a face cunostinta cu cineva »;

b) a large group of phraseological units was formed from free word groups bytransforming their meaning, e.g. «granny farm» - pensiune pentru batrini»,«Troyan horse» - «programa pentru computer»  .

c) phraseological units can be formed by means of alliteration , e.g. «a sad sack» - «un caz nefericit»,  «culture vulture» - «persoana care se intereseaza de arta».

d) they can be formed by means of expressiveness, especially it is characteristic for forming interjections, e.g. «My aunt!», « Hear, hear !» etc

e) they can be formed by means of distorting a word group, e.g. «odds and ends» was formed from «odd ends»,

f) they can be formed by using archaisms, e.g. «in brown study» means «in gloomy meditation» where both components preserve their archaic meanings,

g) they can be formed by using a sentence in a different sphere of life, e.g. «that cock won’t fight» can be used as a free word-group when it is used in sports (cock fighting ), it becomes a phraseological unit when it is used in everyday life, because it is used metaphorically,

h) they can be formed when we use some unreal image, e.g. «to have butterflies in the stomach» - «a avea fluturi in stomac,a avea o stare de neliniste», 

i) they can be formed by using expressions of writers or politicians in everyday life, e.g. «corridors of power» (Snow), «American dream» (Alby) «locust years» (Churchil) , «the winds of change» (Mc Millan).

Secondary ways of forming phraseological units are those when a phraseological unit is formed on the basis of another phraseological unit; they are:

a) conversion, e.g. «to vote with one’s feet»  was converted into «vote with one’s feet»;

b) changing the grammar form, e.g. «Make hay while the sun shines» is transferred into a verbal phrase - «to make hay while the sun shines»;

c) analogy, e.g. «Curiosity killed the cat»  was transferred into «Care killed the cat»;

d) contrast, e.g. «cold surgery» - «a planned before operation» was formed by contrasting it with «acute surgery»,  «thin cat» - «a poor person» was formed by contrasting it with «fat cat»;

e) shortening of proverbs or sayings e.g. from the proverb «You can’t make a silk purse out of a sow’s ear»  by means of clipping the middle of it the phraseological unit «to make a sow’s ear» was formed with the meaning «a gresi».

f) borrowing phraseological units from other languages, either as translation loans, e.g. « living space» (German), « to take the bull by the horns» ( Latin) or by means of phonetic borrowings «meche blanche» (French), «corpse d’elite»  (French), «sotto voce» (Italian) etc.

Phonetic borrowings among phraseological units refer to the bookish style and are not used very often.

PHRASEOLOGICAL UNITS AND FREE WORD GROUPS.

The term "phraseological unit" was introduced by Soviet linguists and is generally accepted in the countries of post-Soviet period. There are, however, different points of view on the essential features of ph.u. as distinguished from free word-groups. The complexity of the problem to distinguish between ph.u. and free word-groups is accounted for the fact that the border-line between them is not clearly defined. The so-called free word-groups are only relatively free as collocability of their member-words is fundamentally delimited by their lexical and grammatical valency which makes at least some of them very close to set-phrases.  

Grammatical valency is the ability of a word to appear in various grammatical structures; it is determined by the part of speech the word belongs to. The grammatical valency distinguishes individual meanings of a polysemantic word. 
 
V + N – to grow roses (wheat) = “to cultivate” 
 
V + V – to grow to like = “to begin” 
 
V + A – to grow old (tired, dark) = “to become” 
 
V + D – to grow quickly (rapidly) = “to increase” 
 
But grammatical valency of the words belonging to the same part of speech is not necessarily identical. E.g., to propose (suggest) a plan, but it is only "propose" that can be followed by the infinitive of a verb – to propose to do something. 

Lexical valency is the ability of a word to be used in different lexical contexts.  
 
V + N – to deliver letters = “to distribute letters” 
 
To deliver a blow = “to strike a blow” 
 
To deliver a lecture = “to give a lecture” 
 
The range of grammatical valency is restricted by lexical valency: 
 
A + N – blind people (+) – blind sugar (-) 
 
A smiling girl (+) – a smilimg crocodile (-) 
 
But phrases, literally absurd, may be used figuratively: 
 
Look at him! A smiling crocodile! 
 
Lexical valency may be different in different languages. In the following examples grammatical valency is the same in English and Romanian but lexical valency is different: 
 
Heavy sea – mare agitata; strong tea – ceai puternic; 
 
Heavy fog – ceata deasa; strong cheese – cascval de calitate; 
 
Heavy silence – tacere grea; strong flavour –aroma puternica; 
 
Heavy sleep – somn profund. 

All free word-groups are formed on definite lexico-grammatical patterns. The pattern is an arrangement of component elements of a collocation. The patters of free word-groups are generative, i.e. any word in a sentence may be replaced by its synonym or hyponym:  
 
Brave (courageous, valiant, fearless, bold) man (woman, boy). 

Ph.u. as distinguished from free word-groups have three main parameters (according to the theory of prof. A.V. Kunin): 

1. Ph.u. are language units, their characteristic feature is semantic complexity, i.e. full and partial transference of meaning, e.g., to burn one’s fingers is used figuratively, it is a metaphor based on the similarity of action. 

2. Structural separability and semantic cohesion, e.g., to kick the bucket – to die, Mrs. Grundy, Tom, Dick, and Harry. 

3. A ph.u. is never formed on a generative pattern of a free word-combination, one cannot predict the formation of a ph.u. The patterns in phraseology are of some other character; they are patterns of description (unpredictable). There are some grammatical patterns (noun phrases, verbal phrases), some semantic patterns (metaphoric formation, metonymic formation). 

Phraseological units are set-expressions with semantic complexity which are not formed on generative patterns of free word-combinations. The pattern of a ph.u. is that of description.

 

SYNTACTICAL CLASSIFICATION.

This classification was suggested by I.V. Arnold. Here we have the following groups:

a) noun phraseologisms denoting an object, a person, a living being, e.g: bullet train,latchkey child, redbrick university, Green Berets;

b) verb phraseologisms denoting an action, a state, a feeling, e.g: to break the log-jam,to get on somebody’s coattails, to be on the beam, to nose out , to make headlines;

c) adjective phraseologisms denoting a quality, e.g: loose as a goose, dull as lead;

d) adverb phraseological units, such as: with a bump, in the soup, like a dream , like adog with two tails;

e) preposition phraseological units, e.g: in the course of, on the stroke of ;

f) interjection phraseological units, e.g «Catch me!», «Well, I never!» etc.In I.V.Arnold’s classification there are also sentence equivalents, proverbs, sayings and quatations, e.g: «The sky is the limit», «What makes him tick», »« I am easy». Proverbsare usually metaphorical, e.g: «Too many cooks spoil the broth», while sayings are as arule non-metaphorical, e.g: «Where there is a will there is a way».

I.Set expressions functioning like nouns (noun phraseologisms):  
N+N: maiden name‘the surname of awoman before she was married’; brainstrust ‘acommittee of experts’ or ‘a number of reputedly well – informed persons chosen toanswer questions of general interest without preparation’.

N’s + N: cat’s paw ‘one who is used for the convinience of a cleverer and stronger  person’ (the expression comes from a fable in which a monkey wanting to eat somechest nuts that were on a hot stove, but not wishing to burn himself while getting them,seized a cat and holding its paw in his own used it to knock the chestnuts to the ground); Hobson’s choice, a set expression used when there is no choice at all, when a person hasto take what is offered or nothing (homas Hobson, a 17th century London stableman, madeevery person hiring horses take the next in order).

N+prep+N: the arm of the law.8N+A: knight errant (the phrase is today applied to any chivalrous man ready to help and protect oppressed and helpless people). N+and+N: lord and master  ‘husband’; all the world and his wife ‘everybody’; rank and  file ‘the ordinary working members of an organization’( the origin of this expression ismilitary life, it denotes common soldiers); ways and means‘methods of overcoming difficulties’. 
A+N:  green room ‘the general reception room of a theatre’ (it is said that formerly suchrooms had their walls coloured green to relieve the strain on the actors’eyes after the stagelights);high tea‘an evening meal which combines meat or some similar extra dish withthe usual tea’.

N+subordinate clause: ships that pass in the night ‘chance acquaintances’.

II.Set expressions functioning like verbs:

V+N: to take advantage;

V+postpositive: to give up;

V+and +V: to pick and choose;

V+(one’s)+N+(prep): to snap one’s fingers at ;

V+one+N: to give one the bird ; ‘to fire smb’.

V+subordinate clause: to see how the land lies‘ to discover the state of affairs’. 
 
III.Set expressions functioning like adjectives: 
A+and +A: high and mighty(as)+A+as+N: as old as the hills, as mad as a hatter ;

IV.Set expressions functioning like adverbs: A big group containing many different types of units, some of them with a high frequency in dex, neutral in style and devoid of expressiveness, others expressive.

N+N: tooth and nail ;

Prep+N: by heart, of course;

Adv+prep+A+N: once in a blue moon;

Prep+N+or+N: by hook or  by crook ;

Conj+clause: before one can say Jack Robinson;

V.Set expressions functioning like prepositions:

Prep+N+prep: in consequence of ;

It should be noted that the type is often but not always characterized by the absence of thearticle e.g: by reason of – on the ground of.

VI.Set expressions functioning like interjections.These are often structured as imperative sentences:  

Bless (one’s soul)! God bless me! Hang it (all)! Take your time!

There is one more type of combinations, also rigid and introduced into discourceready-made but different from all the types given above in so far as it is impossible to findits equivalent among the parts of speech. These are formulas used as complete utterancesand syntactically shaped like sentences, such as the well-known American maxim ‚’Keep smiling!’ or British’ Keep Britain tidy’.

A.I. Smirnitsky was the first among Russian scholars who paid attention to sentencesthat can be treated as complete formulas, such as

How do you do? Or I beg you pardon; It takes all kinds to make the world; Can the leopard change his spots?

They differ from allthe combinations so far discussed because they are not equivalent to words in distributionand are semantically analysable. The formulas discussed by N. N. Amosova are on thecontrary semantically specific, e.g: save your breath;‘shut up’or tell it to the marines (one of the suggested origins is tell that to the horse marines; such a corps being non-existent,as marines are sea-going force, the last expression means ‘tell it to someone who does notexist because rel people will not believe it’) very often such formulas, formally identical tosentences, are in reality used only as insertions into other sentences: