Слайд 2: Outline
1. Phraseology. Free word-groups vs. set expressions. 2. Different approaches to the classification of phraseological units. 3. Ways of forming phraseological units.
Слайд 3: 1.Phraseology. Free word-groups vs. set expressions
Words put together to form lexical units make phrases or word-groups. The degree of structural and semantic cohesion of word-groups may vary.
The component members in some word-groups (e.g. man of wisdom, to take lessons ) possess semantic and structural independence. Word-groups of this type are defined as free phrases and are usually studied in syntax.
Some word-groups (e.g. by means of, to take place ) are functionally and semantically inseparable. They are set-phrases or phraseological units that are non-motivated and cannot be freely made up in speech but are reproduced as ready-made.
They are the subject-matter of phraseology. Phraseology is a branch of lexicology that studies sequence of words that are semantically and often syntactically restricted and they function as single units similar to individual words.
Phraseological units (PU), or idioms represent the most picturesque, colorful and expressive part of the language's vocabulary. Phraseology draws its resources mostly from the very depths of popular speech.
Слайд 8: confusion about the terminology
Most Ukrainian and Russian scholars use the term phraseological unit (фразеологічна одиниця). It was first introduced by V.V. Vinogradov.
The term "idiom" widely used by western scholars has comparatively recently found its way into Ukrainian/Russian phraseology.
Слайд 10: other terms
set-expressions set-phrases phrases fixed word-groups collocations
The terminology confusion reflects insufficiency of reliable criteria by which PUs can be distinguished from FWGs.
The "freedom" of free word-groups is relative and arbitrary. FWGs are so called because they are each time built up anew in the speech process.
But idioms are used as ready-made units with fixed and constant structures.
Слайд 14: Free word-groups vs. set-expressions
The criteria for distinguishing between FWGs and set-phrases.
1. Criterion of stability of the lexical components and lack of motivation. The constituents of FWG may vary according to communication needs. Member-words of PU are always reproduced as single unchangeable collocations.
E.g., the constituent red in the free word-group red flower may be substituted for by any other adj. denoting color, without essentially changing the denotational meaning of the word-group.
But in the PU red tape (“bureaucratic methods”) no substitution like this is possible, A change of the adj. would involve a complete change in the meaning of the whole group.
2. Criterion of function. PUs function as word-equivalents Their denotational meaning belongs to the word group as a single semantically inseparable unity
and grammatical meaning i.e. the part-of-speech meaning is belonging to the word-group as a whole irrespective of the part-of-speech meaning of the component words.
E.g.: the free word group a long day and the phraseological unit in the long run
3. Criterion of context. FWG make up variable contexts PU makes up a fixed context.
E. g. in FWG small town/ room the adj. small has the meaning “ not large” but in PU small hours the meaning of s mall has nothing to do with the size ( early hours from 1 to 4 a.m.)
4. Criterion of idiomaticity. PU are ready-made phrases registered in dictionaries FWG are made up spontaneously
The task of distinguishing between FWG and PU is further complicated by the existence of a great number of marginal cases, the so-called semi-fixed or semi-free word-groups,
also called nonphraseological word-groups which share with PU their structural stability but lack their semantic unity and figurativeness e. g. to go to school, to go by bus, to commit suicide
O ther major criteria for distinguishing between PU and FWG : semantic structural
E.G. 1. A C a m b r i d g e don: I'm told they're inviting more American professors to this university. Isn't it rather carrying coals to Newcastle ? "to take something to a place where it is already plentiful and not needed" E.G.2 This cargo ship is carrying coal to Liverpool.
Слайд 28: the semantic difference of the two word groups
is carrying coal is used in the direct sense in the second context The first context has nothing to do either with coal or with transporting it, and the meaning of the whole word-group is something entirely new and far removed from the current meanings of the constituents.
The meanings of the constituents merge to produce an entirely new meaning
e. g. to have a bee in one's bonnet means to have an obsession about something; to be eccentric or even a littl e mad
The humorous metaphoric comparison with a person who is distracted by a bee continually buzzing under his cap has become erased and half-forgotten, and the speakers using the expression hardly think of bees or bonnets but accept it in its transferred sense: "obsessed, eccentric".
That is what is meant when phraseological units are said to be characterized by semantic unity.
In the traditional approach, PUs have been defined as word-groups conveying a single concept. whereas in FWG each meaningful component stands for a separate concept.
T his feature makes PU similar to words: both words and PU possess semantic unity.
A. V. Koonin, "A phraseological unit is a stable word-group characterized by a completely or partially transferred meaning."
Слайд 36: The term idiom
The term idiom is mostly applied to phraseological units with completely transferred meanings, that is, to the ones in which the meaning of the whole unit does not correspond to the current meanings of the components.
Слайд 37: The structural criterion
Structural invariability is an essential feature of PU, though some of them possess it to a lesser degree than others.
Structural invariability of PU finds expression in a number of restrictions.
Слайд 39: restriction in substitution
N o word can be substituted for any meaningful component of a PU without destroying its sense.
The second type of restriction is the restriction in introducing any additional components into the structure of a PU. The third type of structural restrictions in PU is grammatical invariability.
to find fault with somebody e. g. The teacher always found f a u l t s with the boy ( is not correct)
Слайд 42: Proverbs
Proverbs are different from the PU. The first distinctive feature is the obvious structural dissimilarity.
PU are a kind of ready-made blocks which fit into the structure of a sentence performing a certain syntactical function, more or less as words do.
e.g. George liked her for she never put on airs (predicate). Big bugs like him care nothing about small fry like ourselves (subject, prepositional object).
Proverbs, in their structural aspect, are sentences, and so cannot be used in the way in which phraseological units are used.
Слайд 46: Proverbs
In the semantic aspect, proverbs sum up the collective experience of the community. They moralize (Hell is paved with good intentions), give advice (Don't judge a tree by its bark),
give warning ( Y ou sing before breakfast, you will cry before night), admonish (Liars should have good memories), criticize (Everyone calls his own geese swans).
The function of proverbs in speech is communicative (i. e. they impart certain information).
PUs do not stand for whole statements as proverbs do but for a single concept. Their function in speech is purely nominative (i. e. they denote an object, an act etc.)
The question of whether or not proverbs should be regarded as a subtype of PU and studied together with the phraseology of a language is a controversial one.
A. V. Koonin includes proverbs in his classification of PU as communicative phraseological units.
T here does not exist any rigid border-line between proverbs and PU as PUs rather frequently originate from the proverbs
E.g. the PU the last straw originated from the proverb The last straw breaks the camel's back birds of a feather < the proverb Birds of a feather flock together to catch at a straw (straws) < A drowning man catches at straws
S ome proverbs are easily transformed into PU e.g. Don't put all your eggs in one basket > to put all one's eggs in one basket D on't cast pearls before swine > to cast pearls before swine
Слайд 55: 2. Different approaches to the classification of PU
Etymological approach considers the source of PU Semantic approach stresses the importance of idiomaticity F unctional is focused on syntactic inseparability C ontextual – stability of context combined with idiomaticity.
Слайд 56: Etymological classification
The traditional and oldest principle for classifying phraseological units is based on their original content and might be called thematic or etymological.
I dioms are classified according to their sources of origin. “ S ource" refers to the particular sphere of human activity, of life of nature, of natural phenomena, etc.
Слайд 58: Typical sources are
Cultural beliefs, traditions and customs E.g. to keep one’s fingers crossed Historical events E.g. to meet one’s Waterloo Mythology, the Bible E.g. Achiles’ hill
Names of organizations and posts E.g. the White House, the House of Lords Barbarisms and translation loans E.g. persona non grata, alma mater
L. P. Smith gives in his classification groups of idioms used by sailors, fishermen, soldiers, hunters and associated with the realia, phenomena and conditions of their occupations.
In Smith's classification there are groups of idioms associated with domestic and wild animals and birds, agriculture and cooking. from sports, arts
L.P. Smith makes a special study of idioms borrowed from other languages, but that is onl y a small part of his classification system.
Smith points out that word-groups associated with the sea and the life of seamen are especially numerous in English vocabulary.
But m ost of them have developed metaphorical meanings which have no longer any association with the sea or sailors E.g. to be all at sea — to be unable to understand, be in a state of ignorance or bewilderment about s mth
to sink or swim — to fail or succeed in deep water — in trouble or danger in low water, on the rocks — in strained financial circumstances
to be in the same boat with s mb — to be in a situation in which people share the same difficulties and dangers to weather (to ride out) the storm — to overcome difficulties
Слайд 67: Conclusion
The thematic /etymological principle of classifying phraseological units has real merit but it does not take into account the linguistic characteristic features of the phraseological units.
Слайд 68: T he semantic principle
Victor Vinogradov’s classification system was based on the semantic principle. H is classification was founded on the degree of semantic cohesion between the components of a PU ( its motivation )
V.V. Vinogradov developed some points first advanced by the Swiss linguist Charles Bally. This classification was further developed by Nikolai Shanskii.
Units with a partially transferred meaning show the weakest cohesion between their components. The more distant the meaning of a PU from the current meaning of it s constituent parts, the greater is its degree of semantic cohesion.
Слайд 71: V. Vinogradov ’s classification
phraseological combinations /collocations ( сполучення) P unities (єдності) P fusions (зрощення)
N.Shanskii added one more type : P expressions. They are motivated FWGs and their stability is explained by their frequent usage, e. g. Pop music, the Department of State.
P combinations are word-groups with a partially changed meaning. They are clearly motivated, that is, the meaning of the unit can be easily deduced from the meanings of its constituents.
e.g. to be at one's wits' end, t o be good at something, to have a bite, to come to a sticky end
Слайд 75: P unities
P unities are word-groups with a completely changed meaning. T he meaning of the unit does not correspond to the meanings of its constituent parts.
They are partially motivated units. T he meaning of the whole unit can be deduced through the metaphoric meanings of the constituent parts. T he metaphor, on which the shift of meaning is based, is clear and transparent.
e.g. to stick to one's guns - to be true to one's views or convictions. The image is that of a gunner or gun crew who do not desert their guns even if a battle seems lost to sit on the fence - in discussion, politics, etc. refrain from committing oneself to either side
catch/clutch at a straw/straws -- when in extreme danger, avail oneself of even the slightest chance of rescue; to lose one's head -- to be at a loss about what to do; to be out of one's mind) to lose one's heart to smb. -- to fall in love
Слайд 79: P fusions
P fusions are word-groups with a completely changed meaning but, in contrast to the unities, they are demotivated. T heir meaning cannot be deduced from the meanings of the constituent parts.
T he metaphor, on which the shift of meaning was based, has lost its clarity and is obscure. E.g. to pull one’s leg to kick the bucket red tape
T he border-line separating unities from fusions is vague and even subjective. One and the same phraseological unit may appear motivated to one person (and therefore be labeled as a unity) and demotivated to another (and be regarded as a fusion).
e.g. to come a cropper – to come to disaster a t sixes and sevens -- in confusion or in disagreement to set one's cap at smb. - to try and attract a man ( about girls and women ).
Слайд 83: Structural Classification
The structural principle of classifying phraseological units is based on their ability to perform the same syntactical functions as words. In the traditional structural approach, the following principal groups of phraseological units are distinguis hed.
Verbal ( the head word is a verb) to run for one's ( dear) life, to get (win) the upper hand
Nominative (the head word is a N) : dog's life cat-and-dog life calf love white lie birds of a feather
Adjectival ( the head word is an Adj) : high and mighty brand new safe and sound
In this group the so-called comparative word-groups are particularly expressive : (as) cool as acucumber, (as) nervous as a cat, (as) weak as a kitten, (as) good as gold
(as) pretty as a picture, as large as life, (as) slippery as an eel, (as) drunk as an owl (sl.), (as) mad as a hatter/a hare in March;
Adverbial (the head word is an Adv or Adv. element) : by hook or by crook, in cold blood, in the dead of night, between the devil and the deep sea
Interjectional (the head word is an interjection) M y God! B y George! G oodness gracious! Good h eavens!
Слайд 91: Structural + semantic principles
A.I. Smirnitsky offered a classification system for English PU c ombin ing the structural and the semantic principles.
PU in this classification system are grouped according to the number and semantic significance of their constituent parts.
T wo large groups are established: (1) one-summit units, which have one meaningful constituent e. g. to give up, to make out, to pull out, to be tired, to be surprised
(2) two-summit and multi-summit units which have two or more meaningful constituents E. g. black art, first night, common sense, to fish in troubled waters
Within each of these large groups the phraseological units are classified accordingto the category of parts of speech of the summit constituent. So, one-summit units are subdivided into: a) verbal-adverbial units equivalent to verbs in which the semantic and the grammatical centers coincide in the first constituent (e. g. to give up);
b) units equivalent to verbs which have their semantic centre in the second constituent and their grammatical centre in the first e. g. to be tired
c ) prepositional-substantive units equivalent either to adverbs or to copulas and having their semantic centre in the substantive constituent and no grammatical centre e. g. by heart, by means of
Two-summit and multi-summit phraseological units are classified into: a ) attributive-substantive two-summit units equivalent to nouns ( e. g. black art) ;
b) verbal-substantive two-summit units equivalent to verbs (e. g. to take the floor), c) phraseological repetitions equivalent to adverbs (e. g. now or never); d ) adverbial multi-summit units (e. g. every other day).
Smirnitsky also distinguishes proper phraseological units which are units with non-figurative meanings idioms that are units with transferred meanings based on a metaphor.
A.V. Koonin, the leading Russian authority on English phraseology, pointed out certain inconsistencies in this classification system. 1. The subdivision into phraseological units (as non-idiomatic units) and idioms contradicts the leading criterion of a phraseological unit suggested by Smirnitsky:
It should be idiomatic. Koonin also objects to the inclusion of such wordgroups as black art, best man, first night in phraseology (in Smirnitsky's classification system, the two-summit phraseological units) as all these word-groups are not characterized by a transferred meaning.
It is also pointed out that verbs with post-positions (e. g. give up) are included in the classification but their status as phraseological units is not supported by any convincing argument.
Слайд 104: Koonin’s Classification
is based on the combined structural-semantic principle and it also considers the quotient of stability of phraseological units
PU are subdivided into the four classes according to their function in communication determined by their structural-semantic characteristics.
1. Nominative phraseological units are represented by word-groups, including the ones with one meaningful word, and coordinative phrases of the type wear and tear ( експлуатаційне зношення ) well and good ( used to indicate calm acceptance, as of a decision)
The first class also includes word-groups with a predicative structure, as the crow flies (as directly as possible) and predicative phrases of the type see how the land lies ( подивимося, як ідуть справи ) ships that pass in the night ( побіжні / випадкові зустрічі )
2. Nominative-communicative phraseological units include word-groups of the type to break the ice – the ice is broken that is, verbal word-groups which are transformed into a sentence when the verb is used in the Passive Voice.
3. Phraseological units which are neither nominative no r communicative. They include interjectional word- groups.
These four classes are divided into sub-groups according to the type of structure of the phraseological unit. The sub-groups include further rubrics representing types of structural-semantic meanings according to the kind of relations between the constituents and to either full or partial transference of meaning.
Слайд 112: Ways of F orming PU
A.V. Koonin classified PU according to the way they are formed : primary secondary ways
Primary ways of forming PU are those when a unit is formed on the basis of a free word-group :
a) Most productive in Mod E is the formation of phraseological units by means of transferring the meaning of terminological word-groups e.g. launching pad ( стартовий майданчик, пускова платформа ) to link up ( anchor person)
b) A large group of PU was formed from free word-groups by transforming their meaning e.g. Tro j an horse
c) PU can be formed by means of alliteration e.g. a sad sack (an inept person who makes mistakes despite good intentions) culture vulture ( a person considered to be excessively, and often pretentiously, interested in the arts)
d) They can be formed by means of expressiveness, especially it is characteristic for forming interjections e.g. My aunt! (an exclamation of surprise or amazement) Hear, hear! ( an exclamation used to show approval of something said).
f) By using archaisms e.g. in brown study (a mood of deep absorption or thoughtfulness; reverie) g) By using a sentence in a different sphere of life e.g. that cock won’t fight ( не буде діла )
h) By using some unreal image e.g. to have butterflies in the stomach, to have green fingers
i) By using expressions of writers or politicians in everyday life e.g. corridors of power, American dream ( James Truslow Adams in 1931 )
Слайд 122: the winds of change
The " Wind of Change " speech was a historically important address made by British Prime Minister Harold Macmillan to the Parliament of South Africa, on 3 February 1960 in Cape Town.
The speech signalled clearly that the British Government intended to grant independence to many of its territories, the British possessions in Africa bec a m e independent nations in the 1960s.
Secondary ways of forming PU are those when a phraseological unit is formed on the basis of another phraseological unit. They are: a) conversion : to vote with one’s feet → vote with one’s feet ;
b) changing the grammar form : make hay while the sun shines → to make hay while the sun shines; c) analogy : curiosity killed the cat → care killed the cat
d) contrast : acute surgery → cold surgery e ) shortening of proverbs and sayings : you can’t make a silk purse out of a sow’s ear → a sow’s ear
f) borrowing PU from other languages, either as translation loans, living space (German), to take the bull by the horns (Latin)