Structural classification of phraseological units

I.V.Arnold offers a structural classification of phraseological units based on their similarity in distribution to definite classes of words or to complete sentences. Therefore we can distinguish nominal phrases, e.g. the root of the trouble; verbal phrases: to take the bull by the horns; adjectival phrases: as good as gold; adverbial phrases: from head to heels; prepositional phrases: in the course of; conjunctional phrases: as long as; interjectional phrases: by George, my foot, good gracious

The above classification takes into consideration not only the type of component parts but also the functioning of the whole, thus tooth and nail is not a nominal but an adverbial unit because it serves to modify a verb, e.g. to fight tooth and nail; the identically structured lord and master is a nominal phrase.

A.I. Smitnitsky spoke about similarity of derivative words and compound words and phraseological units. Thus, to take the chair — a two-summit unit (there are 2 notional words) is like a com­pound, whereas to give up — a one-summit unit, is compared to a deriva­tive(one notional word).

A.V.Kunin divides phraseological units according to the part of speech of the head word into substantive(equivalent to nouns): red tape,rough diamond adjectival (equivalent to adjectives: fair and square, as sharp as a needle(attentive, acute), verbal: to flog a dead horse(to waste time), to keep as stiff upper lip; adverbal: out of the blue, lock, stock and barrel(on the whole), prepositional- for the sake of, at the head of, interjectional: by the lord Harry (by devil), by George, come, come( полноте, полноте).

I.V. Arnold supports the same idea, but she also distinguishes structural patterns : N+N: maiden name; N's+N: hobson's choice; Ns'+N: ladies' man; N+prep+N: the arm of the law; N+A: knight errant; N+and+N: lord and master; A+N: high tea; V+N: to make advantage; V+and+V: to pick and choose; V+one`s+N: to give one the bird; V+subordinate clause: to see how the land lies; A+and+A: high and mighty; as+A+as+N: as old as the hills; N+N: tooth and nail (function like adverbs); V prep+N+prep: in consequence of (function like a preposition).

Semantic classifications

There are many various approaches to the problem of classifying phraseological units according to their semantics.

English and American scholars treat them mostly as a prob­lem of applied linguistics, they have concentrated their efforts on compi­ling dictionaries of idiomatic phrases.

As there are no definite criteria in foreign linguistics, so that dic­tionaries of this kind (Lyell's, for instance) include among their entries not only word combinations but also separate words interesting from the point of view of their etymology, motivation or expressiveness.

More or less detailed groupings are given in the books on English idioms by L. P. Smith. Yet even the authors them­selves do not claim that their groupings should be regarded as classifica­tions, they just described them according to absolutely different principles.

The most significant theories advanced for Russian phra­seology are those by V. V. Vinogradov and B. A. Larin.

B. A. Larin's approach is diachronic. His classification reflects three consecutive stages a set expression passes in its development 1) a free combination.2) a clearly motivated stereotyped metaphorical phrase. 3) an idiom with lost motivation. The meaning of the expression is not built up by the hearer from the meaning of its separate elements (words and inflec­tions), but grasped as a whole.

The classification of V. V. Vinogradov is synchronic. He developed some points given by Charles Bally. His classifica­tion is based upon the motivation of the unit, i.e. the relationship exis­ting between the meaning of the whole and the meaning of its component parts. According to the type of motivation 3 types of phraseological units are suggested: phraseo­logical fusions, phraseologicalunities and phra­seological combinations.

1) Phraseological fusions, represent the highest stage of idiomaticity. The meaning of the components is completely absorbed by the meaning of the whole. A typical example of a fusion is the emotional colloquial expression as mad as a hatter -'utterly mad'. Its meaning is not explicable from the meaning of its component parts.

2) Phraseological unities are clearly motivated. The emotional quality is based upon the metaphorical image created by the whole as in to stand (or stick) to one's guns, i.e.'refuse to change one's statements or opinions in the face of opposition', implying courage and integrity.

3) P hraseological combinations, are partially motivated but contain one component used in its direct mean­ing, while the other is used metaphorically: to meet the requirements. The mobility of these is much greater than in the previous types. There are substitutions which do not destroy the meaning of the metaphorical element: e.g. to meet the necessity, meet the demand.

The weak points of this classification have been criticized by several authors.1) it is difficult to say whether a set expression is demotivated for the speaker or not, as there are no criteria and the speaker can have different knowledge.exist and no consistent procedures are offered. 2) the group of phraseological unities is heterogenous. It includes proverbs, two-member technical terms and stereo­typed combinations.

T. V. Stroyeva suggested a classification for the German language. She divides phraseological units into 2 classes: unities and combina­tions. Phraseological fusions are included into unities. The figurative meaning of a phraseological unity is created by the whole, the semantic transference dependent on extra-linguistic factors, i.e. the history of the people and its culture.

A.V. Kunin, N. N. Amosova, A.I.Smirnitsky worked on the problem in English.

Prof. A. I. Smirnitsky grounded his classification on lack of structural integrity. He called phraseological units “stereotyped phrases” and distinguished 3 calsses: 1) traditional phrases whose meaning does not corres­pond to one notion and can be derived from the meaning of the component parts, e.g. clenched fists, rough sketch, to shrug one's shoulders; 2) phraseological combinations: to get up, to fall in love, whose metaphorical motivation is faded 3) idioms — imaginative, emotion­ally and stylistically coloured, always having some neutral synonym: to take the bull by the horns, to wash one's dirty linen in public, as dead as a doornail.

N. N. Amosova gave a detailed analysis of phraseological units and suggested the procedure of contextual analysis as the most objective way of separating phraseological units from free phrases and traditionally stereotyped phrases. The notion of context is specially developed and specially defined.

N. N. Amosova defines phraseological units as units of fixed context, which is defined as a context characterized by a specific and unchanging sequence of definite lexical components, and a peculiar semantic relationship between these. Units of fixed context are subdivided into two types called phrasemes and idioms.

1)Phrasemes are always binary, e.g. in to grind one's teeth, one of the com­ponents (to grind) has a phraseologically bound meaning, the other (one's teeth) serves as the determining context: e.g. small hours, small talk, beef tea, husband's tea.

2)Idioms, cannot be separated into determining context and components with phraseologically bound meaning. The new meaning, the meaning of the idiom, is created by the unit as a whole, e.g. a mare's nest –“nonsense”'. A mare 'a female horse' has obviously no nest. The word mare is monosemantic, and so does not need any determining context.

N. N. Amosova thinks the specific character of the inner semantic rela­tionship between the components of the expression to be of greater impor­tance than its formal rigidity. Phra­semes aad idioms are both subdivided into movable and immovable. These qualities are very much dependent upon their structure. A phraseme may be movable due to its variable element: the apple of (his, her, mother's) eye – “smth. that which is specially precious to one”.

Phrasemes are not equivalent to what in Vinogradov's classification is denoted as phraseological combinations. N. N. Amosova divides the material covered by Vinogradov's term into two groups, and considers the first and perhaps the most bulky part to be outside the limits of phraseology.

A. V. Koonin gave a functional and semantic classification. A. V. Koonin bases his classification on a combination of functional (communicative vs nominal), semantic and structural features. Phraseological units may be nominative (a bull in a china shop), interjectional (a fine, nice, pretty kettle of fish), communicative (familiarity breeds contempt ) or nominative-communicative -verbal (pull somebody's leg).

Nominative and nominative-communiczative phraseological units are subdivided according to their semantic peculiarities and degree of idiomaticity. He develops N.N. Amosova`s classification and distinguishes idioms or idiomatic phraseological units, idio-phraseeomatic phraseological units. and phraseomatic phraseological units. Idioms are units with fully or partially transferred meaning: back-room boy -sectret scientists, quick on the trigger - impulsive; idiophraseomatic units are those which have 2 meanings, one is usually a term, the second is the result of semantic change of the first, e.g. a false alarm, a lucid interval; phraseomatic units are those whose meaning is not transferred but complicated, e.g. brown paper, Dutch comfort, black cap.

Communicative phraseological units are proverbs, sayings and clichés, e.g. birds of a feather flock together, out of sight, out of mind. In its turn each class is also subdivided.

Phrasal verbs

Phrasal verbs are vebs consisting of two parts: a verbl stem and a adverb or a preposition. The second element is called in different ways. Sometimes they are called' "preposition-like adverbs", "postpositions of adverbial origin”, postpositives or "postpositive prefixes". Phrasal verbs are usually colloquial synonyms of lexical verbs, e.g. to give in - 'to surrender; to find ot – to discover.

The origin of phraseological units.

From the point of view of their origin phraseological units are divided by A.V. Kunin into originally English and borrowed. The first class is subdivided into a) non-terminological: carry coals to Newcastle, b) terminological: hit below the belt, c) units created by Shakespeare: to one`s heart content, (Merchant of Venice) and other writers: all the world and his wife (J. Swift, “Polite conversation”). The second class consists of a) biblical units: to kill the fatted calf; b) units, borrowed from foreign languages: blood and iron (German: Blut und Eisen); c) from other variants of English (American, Canadian etc.: ships that pass in the night (H.Longfellow, “Tales of wayside Inn”)and d)units borrowed in a foreign form -crème de la crème.

Stylistic means

Many phraseological units are rhythmical, contain alliteration, rhyme, imagery, contrast, are based on puns. Tommy would come back to her safe and sound. Safe and sound sounds different from the word uninjured, which could have been used. Any substi­tution would destroy the euphonic effect. Uninjured has the same denotational meaning but sounds dull and trivial. Rhythm is combined with reiteration in the following well-known phrases: more and more, on and on, through and through.

Alliteration occurs in many cases: part and parcel – “an essential and necessary part; rack and ruin – “a state of neglect and col­lapse”; Besides, sometimes obsolete elements are used: to leave in the lurch ' – “o leave in a'helpless position”, the obsolete noun lurch means “ambush”;

Rhyme is also used very often: fair and square – “honest”; by hook or by crook - “ by any method”. Besides, simile, contrast, metaphor and synonymy can be used: as like as two peas, as old as the hills and older than the hills (simile); from beginning to end, for love or money; more or less, sooner or later (contrast); a lame duck, to swallow the pill, in a nutshell (metaphor); by leaps and bounds, proud and haughty (synonymy); pun: as cross as two sticks means “very angry”.

 

Seminar 1