Phraseology (phraseological phrase, phrase) is a stable combination in terms of composition and structure, lexically indivisible and integral in value or a sentence that performs the function of a separate lexeme (vocabulary unit). Often phraseology remains the property of only one language; an exception are the so-called phraseological pebbles. Phraseologisms are described in special phraseological dictionaries.
The concept of phraseological units (fr. unité phraséologique) as a stable phrase, the meaning of which cannot be deduced from the meanings of its words, was first formulated by Swiss linguist Charles Bally Précis de stylistique, where he contrasted them with another type of phrases - phraseological groups (fr. séries phraséologiques) with a variable combination of components. In the future, V.V. Vinogradov singled out three main types of phraseological units: phraseological union (idioms), phraseological unity and phraseological combinations. N. M. Shansky also distinguishes an additional form - phraseological expressions.
General properties
Phraseologism is used as a whole, not subject to further decomposition and usually does not allow within itself the rearrangement of its parts. The semantic integrity of phraseological units can vary within a fairly wide range: from the irreducibility of the meaning of phraseological units from its constituent words in phraseological units (idioms) to phraseological combinations with a meaning arising from the values \u200b\u200bthat make up the combination. The transformation of a phrase into a stable phraseological unit is called lexicalization.
Different scholars interpret the notion of phraseologism and its properties in different ways, however, the most consistently distinguished by various scholarly properties of phraseologism are:
reproducibility
sustainability
superword (segregated).
belonging to the nominative inventory of the language.
Phraseological adhesions (idioms)
Phraseological union, or idiom (from the Greek ἴδιος “own, peculiar”) is a semantically indivisible turn, the meaning of which is completely not deduced from the sum of the values \u200b\u200bof its components, their semantic independence is completely lost. For instance, sodom and gomorrah - "clutter, noise." In the literal translation of phraseological units, it is usually impossible for a foreigner to understand their general meaning: in English. to show the white feather “scream” (literally - “show a white feather”), none of the words hints at the meaning of the whole phrase.
Often the grammatical forms and meanings of idioms are not conditioned by norms and realities modern language, that is, such unions are lexical and grammatical archaisms. So for example idioms beat the buck - "lounging" (in its original meaning - "splitting a log into blanks for making household wooden objects") and after sleeves - “carelessly” reflect the realities of the past that are absent in the present (in the past they were inherent metaphorical). In fusion from small to large, summing up nothing archaic grammatical forms are preserved.
Phraseological Unities
Phraseological unity is a stable turn in which, nevertheless, the signs of semantic separation of components are clearly preserved. As a rule, its general meaning is motivated and derived from the meaning of the individual components.
For phraseological unity is characterized by imagery; each word of such a phrase has its own meaning, but in the aggregate they acquire a figurative meaning. Typically, phraseologisms of this type are tropic with a metaphorical meaning (for example, to study hard, to go with the flow, throw a fishing rod) The individual words included in its composition are semantically independent, and the meaning of each component is subordinated to the unity of the general figurative meaning of the entire phraseological expression as a whole. However, in a literal translation, a foreigner can guess the meaning of the phrase.
Like idioms, phraseological unity is semantically indivisible, their grammatical forms and syntactic structure are strictly defined. Replacing a word as part of a phraseological unity, including substituting a synonym, leads to the destruction of a metaphor (for example, granite science basalt science) or a change in expressive meaning: fall for a bait and get online are phraseological synonyms, but express different shades of expression.
However, unlike idioms, unities obey the realities of the modern language and can allow the insertion of other words in their speech between their parts: for example, to bring (yourself, him, someone) to white heat, pour water to the mill (something or anyone) and pour water on (mine, alien, etc.) mill.
Examples: come to a standstill, to beat, keep a stone in your bosom, drive by nose; English to know the way the cat is jumping “know where the wind blows” (literally - “know where the cat will jump”).
Phraseologisms in the form of a phrase with direct addition
Introduction
Currently, another global reform of the norms of the modern Russian literary language is taking place. The changes affected almost all linguistic levels, however, the most noticeably these modifications affected the norms of word use and word combinations. Widespread word formation, the formation of phraseological phrases from familiar or unusual combinations of words.
Currently phraseological turns are best studied in terms of their semantic cohesion and stylistic use in fiction and journalism. However, it is no less important to study phraseological units in other aspects, namely from the point of view of their specific properties in a number of other significant units of the language (primarily words and morphemes), from the point of view of the lexical composition of phraseological units and structure, the meaning of the morphological properties of their constituent words, origin , areas of use and expressive-stylistic coloring, as well as in comparative and comparative historical terms. A comprehensive study of the phraseological system of the modern Russian language allows us to penetrate deeper into the complex and diverse life of stable combinations of words, get an idea of \u200b\u200btheir basic structural-semantic and stylistic types, determine their grammatical properties, find out their origin and features of functioning.
The object of this study is the phraseological composition of the Russian language; subject - phraseological units in the form of collocations with direct addition. The study underwent 203 FE.
The purpose of the work is to comprehensively study phraseological units in the form of a phrase with direct addition.
To achieve this goal it was necessary to solve the following tasks:
- collect practical material for research (to compile a file);
- analyze the semantic and stylistic properties of phraseological units and classify them on this basis;
- to study the grammatical features of phraseological units, their syntactic functions;
- explore the paradigmatic and syntagmatic relations of phraseological units (polysemy, the difference of synonymy and variation);
The scientific novelty of the work lies in the fact that for the first time an attempt was made in it to comprehensively study phraseological units in the form of a phrase with a direct addition in the Russian language.
Practical significance is determined by the fact that this study contributes to the further development of the issue of classification of phraseological units. The materials and conclusions of this work can be used in the study of phraseology, both in a comprehensive school and in philological specialties of higher educational institutions.
Chapter I. The semantic features of phraseological units
in the form of a phrase with direct addition
1.1 Classification of phraseological turns in terms of their semantic cohesion
The classification of phraseological units from the point of view of the semantic cohesion of their components belongs to academician V.V. Vinogradov, who creatively reworked (taking into account the specific features of the Russian language phraseology) the phraseological scheme of Sh. Bally. As you know, phraseologisms arise from a free combination of words, which is used in a figurative meaning. Gradually, portability is forgotten, erased, and the combination becomes stable. Depending on how much the nominative meanings of the components of phraseological units are erased, how strong the figurative meaning is in them, V.V. Vinogradov divides them into three types: phraseological units, phraseological units and phraseological combinations.
This classification of phraseological phrases in terms of their semantic cohesion seems to be the most appropriate and, most importantly, is generally accepted.
Phraseological adhesions
Phraseological fusion is a semantically indivisible phraseological phrase in which its integral meaning is completely incompatible with the meanings of its components. The meaning of this kind of phraseological units is as unmotivated as the meaning of words with a non-derivative basis (sharpen skis, beat backworms, kill the worm, sharpen the hairs, eat the dog, raise teeth, breed antimony, set the rattleman, breed shura-mura, wash the bones, wallow a fool, put a pig, pull the gimlet, dissolve the nurse, rub the glasses, cast the bullets, take the bull by the horns).
Thus, phraseological unions are such designations of certain phenomena of reality that are similar to what we observe in words with a non-derivative basis, in which the sign underlying the name is no longer felt. This sign, both in non-derivative words and in phraseological phrases, can be revealed only by etymological searches.
In phraseological mergers of words with their independent meanings, in essence, no. The meaning of phraseological circulation is not derived here and does not follow from the meanings of its components.
So, the meaning of the phraseological union to beat backstage ‘lounging’ is completely incompatible with those values \u200b\u200bthat are inherent in the components of beat and backroom.
If the components of the phraseological union have the same sounding words with them, then this ratio is purely homonymous. For example, a combination of words to wash bones, on the one hand, can appear before us as a phraseological union, the meaning of which is “gossip” does not follow from the meanings of individual words to wash bones, and, on the other hand, can be a free combination of words used in their nominative value (Bones of a fossil animal, archaeologists had to wash several times).
Thus, phraseological conjunctions are the equivalents of words, brought under certain grammatical categories as single, absolutely indecomposable language units. The highest degree of semantic cohesion, which is characteristic of these phraseological turns, is due to the action of a number of factors:
1. The presence in the phraseological union of outdated and therefore incomprehensible words. Examples include idioms such as sharpening balusters (lyas), beating buckles that include obsolete words: balances ‘turned columns of railings’, buckles ‘chocks for making small wood chips’.
2. The absence in the phraseological union of a living syntactic connection between its components, the presence of syntactic disorder and undifferentiation. For example, in phraseological units there is no clear syntactic connection between the components, motivated from the point of view of modern grammar rules, to set the striker, to kill the worm, gulp up grief, fool around, dissolve the nurses.
Phraseological Unities
Phraseological unity is a semantically indivisible and holistic phraseological turn, the meaning of which is motivated by the meanings of its constituent words. The indecomposable meaning of phraseological unity arises as a result of the merging of the meanings of its constituent words into a single generalized-figurative meaning. The semantic indivisibility of such phraseological units brings them closer to phraseological mergers, and their semantic production, conditionality of the phraseological meaning meanings of individual words distinguishes them from phraseological mergers (take your own, chew bast, pull up your tail, close your shop, tighten your nuts, throw your fishing rod, pull the strap, bury talent in the ground, put teeth on a shelf, keep a stone in his bosom, take dirty linen out of the hut, substitute a leg, scratch his tongue, put (smb.) in his belt, make porridge, set the tone, for dig eyes, cover their tracks, to see the light).
If we take as an example phraseological unity, throw a fishing rod, pull a strap, bury talent in the ground, put teeth on a shelf, then their meanings (unlike the meanings of phraseological unions) are derivative, motivated and stemming from the meanings of the components that form them. In this regard, they are similar to words with a derivative basis. However, it should be noted that this motivation, the derivative of the meanings of phraseological units is not direct, but indirect. In the Russian language, all very numerous phraseological units are figurative expressions, an understanding of the meaning of which is necessarily associated with an understanding of the inner imagery on which they are built. The property of really existing imagery is the main property of phraseological units. This is what distinguishes them from homonymous free combinations of words. Such combinations of words as lathering your head, plugging (smb.) In your belt, tightening your nuts, closing your eyes are equally possible as phraseological units (then these are figurative expressions) and free combinations of words (then these are words used in nominative values).
Phraseological unity allows the insertion of other words: pull (service) strap. This property of phraseological units unites them not only from phraseological units, but also from the vast majority of phraseological combinations and expressions.
Phraseological fusion and unity, most often acting as equivalents of words, are often combined into one group. In such cases, they are called idioms, or idiomatic expressions. Phraseological unions and unities are opposed by phraseological combinations and expressions. They are semantically articulated phraseological phrases, the meaning of which fully corresponds to the meanings of the words that form them: frown, make a decision, keep silent.
Phraseological combinations
Phraseological combination is a phraseological phrase in which there are words with both free meaning and phraseological connection (make a decision, negotiate, put into practice, look down, look up, eyebrows, callus, pay attention, to impress, to sharpen one’s eyesight, to sharpen one’s hearing, to cut off one’s wounds, to beat off an attack, to sag, to make a difference, to win, to produce an effect, to concoct a case, to remain silent, to terrify (smb.), to seize the moment). Consider the phraseological combination of paying attention. It is made up of two words. The word attention can be combined not only with the verb to pay, but also with a number of other words that are very different in meaning, expressive-stylistic coloring, etc. As for the verb to pay, it is as if “attached” to the word attention and can used only with him.
A component with a non-free meaning is called the constant part, or the core word of phraseology, a component with a free value is the variable part. For example, in combination, downcast eyes, the first component is the constant part, the second is the variable (cf. eyes, gaze, gaze).
In contrast to phraseological units and phraseological units with integral indecomposable meaning, phraseological combinations are characterized by semantic decomposability. In this respect, they come closer to free phrases.
Phraseological combinations have almost no homonymous free combinations of words. Their peculiarity is that words with a phraseologically related meaning can be replaced by synonymous ones: sarcaste (break) the nose, swell (hurt) the wounds. The wider the circle of words with which the component of the phraseological combination can be connected, characterized by the associated use, the closer this phraseological combination to the free phrase.
1.2 Classification of phraseological units in the form of a phrase with direct addition by the meaning of the verb
Phraseological turns in the form of phrases with direct additions are quite numerous. Depending on the nature of the relationship to the object of the verb action, all verbs can be divided into the following categories:
1. Verbs of long non-transformative effect. The process is aimed at the object, but it does not make any changes, for example: to keep the stone in the bosom, make a difference, keep silent.
2. Verbs of displacement. The process is aimed at the object and leads to a change in the place of the object in space, for example: to take the bull by the horns, throw a fishing rod, put his teeth on the shelf, take the dirty linen out of the hut, take his own, bury the talent in the ground.
3. Verbs of transformative influence. The process is aimed at the object, as a result of which certain changes occur in the object (the object receives an additional feature), for example: sharpen skis, wash bones, lather head, tighten nuts, and bite the nose.
As for phraseological units to rack their brains, callused eyes, the verb in them is used in a figurative meaning, is used as a metaphor.
4. Verbs of relationship. To this category belong verbs denoting the relation to an object in the broad sense of the word:
- verbs of speech, for example: to speak teeth;
- verbs of perception, for example: to see the light.
1.3 Classification of phraseological units in the form of phrases with direct addition on the semantics of the noun.
The verb acts as a supporting component of the phraseological phrase, but it is rarely meaningful. The semantic ratio of components in the phraseological units of this model can be different:
1. The verb and the noun are semantically equal: beat the buckler, ask the striker, sharpen the hair;
2. The semantic component of phraseologism is a noun, the verb serves only to express purely grammatical meanings (cf. have a tooth and He has a tooth on me);
3. The semantic component of phraseological unit is a verb, the noun is either a semantically empty word that has a purely expressive character (cf .: foolish and foolish), or performs the function of a kind of morpheme (cf .: squint and squint your eyes).
4. A direct complement goes beyond the phraseological framework: to mislead (smb.), Put (smth.) Into life, terrify (smth.), To marry (smth.) (smb.) by the nose, plug (smb.) by the belt.
The correlation of the first type is observed in phraseological mergers and unities, the third - in phraseological combinations. As for the correlation of the second type, it is found in phraseological units of varying degrees of semantic cohesion, which are most often, according to S. Balli, periphrases of simple verbs containing a noun of the same root as the corresponding verb; Wed: cope - inquire; take a look - take a look; undertake - to make an obligation; hit - strike; to buzz - give a beep.
In phraseological units in the form of a phrase with direct addition, the noun as a direct object can be assigned, depending on the lexical meaning and morphological properties, to one of the lexical and grammatical categories.
Specific: to sharpen the skis, drive into the head, callused eyes, throw a fishing rod, tighten the nuts, keep a stone in the bosom.
Nouns of this category are most often used in phraseological units and combinations. Among the specific nouns distinguish:
- Animated: to kill a worm, eat a dog, put a pig, tease geese;
- Inanimate: to speak teeth, to wash bones, to rub glasses, to lift up a tail, to ferment a nose.
2) Abstract: keep silent, pay attention, sharpen your hearing, make a difference, set the tone, see the light, lower your gaze, produce an effect.
Nouns of this category do not have number forms. The use of abstract nouns is usually characteristic of phraseological combinations.
3) Material: do not invent gunpowder, throw beads in front of pigs, pour water on the mill, slurp jelly for seven versts, do not knit, put water in your mouth, do not stir up water, give birch porridge, hang noodles on your ears, take out (take out) litter from the hut, ask the pepper, set the heat.
Characteristic features of nouns of this category:
a) use in transitive verbs in the form of the genitive case (with the meaning of a part of the whole): for seven versts of kissel, I drank water, put water in my mouth, gave birch porridge, set pepper, set heat.
b) the use in the form of a genitive case of inflection -u / -y (instead of -a / -i) in masculine tokens of the first declension: set the pepper, set the heat.
4) Collective. This category can only include a noun weapon in the phraseological unit to lay down a weapon.
The vast majority of nouns are common nouns. The proper names in the composition of the studied phraseological units are single: discover America.
1.4 Classification of phraseological turns in terms of their expressive-stylistic properties
The classification of phraseological phrases in terms of their expressive-stylistic properties is fundamentally no different from classification from the same point of view of individual words. Therefore, regarding the stylistic differentiation of phraseological units, we should talk about those evaluative-emotional-expressive features that they acquire as a result of their preferred and even exclusive use in those and not other spheres and areas of human communication.
The differences in phraseological turnovers in terms of stylistic affiliation and expressive coloring are explained by the fact that each of the language styles has its own special language means and techniques chosen by speakers from the national speech stock to express certain content. The fixation or predominant use of one or another stable combination of words in any style of language and the various expressive properties associated with it constitute the essence of these differences.
On the one hand, the use of many phraseological phrases is more or less limited by the framework of a certain style of language. On the other hand, many phraseological turns not only call this or that phenomenon of objective reality, but also indicate a certain attitude of the speaker to this phenomenon (disapproval, irony, affection, etc.); beat the bacilli (cf. idle), swallow the tongue (cf. be silent), let go of a tear (cf. cry).
The difference between phraseological phrases from the expressive-stylistic point of view is especially evident when juxtaposing stable combinations that make up one synonymous series: fold your head (pr.) - break your neck (dec.); mislead (pr.) - drive by the nose (decomp.). Considering the scope of use and their expressive features, phraseological units of the modern Russian literary language can be divided into three large groups: interstitial, colloquial and book.
In classifying phraseological phrases in this way, it should be taken into account, of course, that the stylistic differentiation of stable combinations of words, as well as the affiliation of a particular phraseological unit to one or another group, is a historical phenomenon: in the process of development of our speech, more and more phraseological units become interstitial, intensively new groups and models among colloquial and book phraseological units, an expressive-stylistic reassessment of individual phraseological units is constantly taking place, etc.
Interstyle phraseological turns
Interstyle phraseological turns are stable combinations of words, known and used in all styles of language. Interstyle phraseologisms, as well as interstyle words, are, therefore, simple names of phenomena of objective reality without any assessment of them: to keep the word, make a decision, look down, keep silent, produce an effect. They are not expressively colored and commonly used, and therefore, in a series of synonymous words and phraseological units, they appear stylistically neutral: cf. raise your head - pull up your nose, mislead - drive by the nose.
There are many phraseological turns of interstyle character, and their number is constantly growing. However, in contrast to the interstitial words that make up the basis of vocabulary, there are still fewer of them than phraseological units limited in their use to a certain area of \u200b\u200bcommunication. This circumstance is explained by the fact that the vast majority of phraseological units equivalent to the word function in the Russian language as figurative synonyms of words and have any expressive-stylistic coloring.
Conversational household phraseological turns
Conversational-everyday phraseological turns are stable combinations of words, mainly or exclusively used in oral speech. Conversational-everyday phraseological units differ from interstitial phraseological units, on the one hand, in a narrower sphere of use, and on the other, in their “reduced” expressive-stylistic coloring (affectionate, swearing, ironic, contemptuous, humorous, familiar, etc.). These specific properties of colloquial phraseological units are especially clearly seen when comparing them with synonymous common words: to run away - to sharpen skis, to speak - to sharpen the ballet, to get rich - to fill up a pocket, to work - to bend your back, to intervene - to poke your nose.
Almost all colloquial phraseological idioms are figurative in nature. They bring into the speech a tinge of ease, simplicity, even some “liberty”: to kill a worm, put a pig, drive it into the head, callused eyes, fool around, dissolve the nurse.
The specific properties of colloquial-everyday phraseology determine its widespread use in fiction, help the writer to achieve the brightness and richness of the language, reproducing the favorite means of folk expression.
Book phraseological turns
Book phraseological turns are stable combinations of words, mainly or exclusively used in written speech. Phraseologisms of a book character differ from colloquial phraseological units, on the one hand, in a completely different sphere of use (these are phraseologisms characteristic of written speech), and on the other, with their “increased” expressive-stylistic coloring (book, solemn, pathetic, poetic, etc. .).
Thus, like book words, book phraseological phrases are used mainly in strictly normalized literary speech, journalistic and scientific works, fiction, etc. Therefore, the largest groups form book phraseologisms of a terminological, journalistic, and poetic nature.
The specific properties of book phraseological turns are most clearly manifested when they are compared with synonymous common words: occur - lead, give up - lay down arms
Phraseological archaisms and historicisms
A special place among book phraseological turns is taken by obsolete phraseological units: phraseological historicisms and archaisms.
Phraseological historicisms are phraseological turns that have gone out of active use in connection with the disappearance of the corresponding phenomenon of reality: hold the table.
Phraseological archaisms are phraseological phrases that have gone out of active use in connection with the ousting of them with other stable combinations of words, which have turned out to be more suitable for expressing the corresponding concepts: bet (cf .: argue, bet), marry, have honor.
The use of obsolete phraseological phrases with a specific artistic, expressive and pictorial purpose is to some extent similar to the use of obsolete words. They can be used to give speech solemnity and pathetics, to create a linguistic flavor of an era or a comic effect. However, the stylistic use of phraseological archaisms and historicisms can sometimes be similar to that characteristic of phraseological units that are part of an active vocabulary. In this case, they are individually processed and appear in the context as phraseological neologisms.
1.5 Classification of phraseological units by the presence or absence of options. Phraseological synonymy
As significant units, phraseological phrases are used in the language in different ways. Some always act in a constant lexico-grammatical composition, others function in the form of several (usually two) equal options.
Variants of the phraseological turn are its lexical and grammatical varieties, identical in meaning and degree of semantic cohesion. Differences between phraseological variants can be larger or smaller, however, they should not violate the identities of phraseological units as such.
Variants of the phraseological turnaround may differ from each other by individual elements in the composition and structure, as well as stylistic coloring. So, variants of phraseologisms throw a stone - throw a stone differ in the grammatical form of the dependent component. In some cases, such a change in the grammatical forms of the components of phraseological units can change its meaning (fool around 'fool around' - blame fool over 'do stupidity', close eyes (for something) 'ignore' - close eyes - 'die'), turn it into free collocation (to have a tooth - 'to experience secret malice', to have teeth - a free combination of words).
Considering the variation of phraseological turnovers, it should be borne in mind that the identity of phraseological units can only be said if, despite a certain modification, the composition and structure of phraseological units remain constant, and the internal form remains the same. Accordingly, as options can appear:
1) phraseological units that contain different but equally semantically empty components (in this case, phraseological unit can function without these members) or differing from each other as a complete and abbreviated variety (in this case, their relationship is identical to the relationship existing between the full and abbreviated words) : bury talent in the ground - bury talent; tear three skins - tear seven skins - tear the skin.
2) phaseologisms containing words that differ grammatically: throw a stone (stone).
Synonymous phraseological phrases that have in their composition common components - the same words should be delimited from the variants of the phraseological circulation. The common components in the studied phraseological units can be full-meaning words that perform the function of both a core and a dependent component: bulging eyes - eyes wide, eyes folded - breaking a head (the core component varies); ask latata - set a striker; set a bathhouse - set a pepper, grind nonsense - grind nonsense - grind nonsense, pull a gimp - pull a bagpipe (the dependent component varies). Such synonym phraseologisms can be called doublet. In terms of their lexico-semantic nature, phraseological units of this kind are similar to single-rooted lexical synonyms such as blue - blue, cunning - cunning, three-ruble-three.
The vast majority of doublet phraseological phrases are interconnected as derivatives and producing, but from the point of view of functioning in the system of the modern Russian language, they are all correlated as independent, albeit related, formations.
As a significant linguistic unit, a phraseological phrase can be equivalent not only to a word (cf .: give a blunder - make mistakes; callous eyes - annoy), but also to some other phraseological unit (cf .: soap my neck - give a scolding; powder my brains - hang noodles on cshi). This explains the existence in the language of the phenomenon of phraseological synonymy.
Phraseological synonyms are different phraseological turns, denoting the same object of objective reality. However, like lexical synonyms, phraseological synonyms differ both in the way they mean the same thing and in what semantic, lexical, grammatical and stylistic properties are inherent in them.
Phraseological synonyms can, in particular, be differentiated by shades of meaning, stylistic coloring, sphere of use, verbal connections, etc. So, phraseological synonyms with the meaning ‘die’ - give oak; stretch your legs; give up the spirit; - differ in expressive-stylistic properties and scope of use. The differences inherent to phraseological synonyms are explained by a variety of reasons, but the main one is their original imagery, internal form.
In the studied phraseological units, phraseological synonymy is represented quite richly, stylistically colored and expressive phraseological equivalents of verbs in many cases form large synonymous series:
1) the loafer to make up; elephants to elephant; beat the bacilli; chasing dogs;
2) give a scolding; soap the head; set a bath;
3) refuel arap; rub points; hang noodles on the ears, powder brains.
In the synonymous series of phraseological turns, the most frequent and stylistically neutral phraseological unit is dominant. However, since the phraseological synonymy not only coexists with the lexical, but also - within the limits of the phraseological units equivalent to the word - forms a single whole with it, the dominant (in this case, common, lexical and phraseological series of synonyms) is often the word. It is, of course, also a commonly used unit with the so-called zero stylistic characteristic.
Phraseological synonymy, as well as lexical, is a historical phenomenon. Therefore, the existing synonymous series of phraseological turns could not exist earlier. Conversely, phraseologisms that were previously in synonymous relationships can semantically differentiate. So, phraseological units with the meaning of ать talk nonsense ’carry nonsense and say that now they are synonymous, but their synonymy is not the initial one. Phraseologism to carry nonsense at the beginning meant ‘to speak around and around, without directly affecting the essence of the subject; to conduct a conversation with hints and omissions, not briefly and clearly, but very verbose ’. The word nonsense (from about) had previously had a meaning in it ‘non-relevant speeches, which from the listening position are an obstacle to understanding the essence of the matter and, therefore, superfluous, nonsense. For phraseologists, it’s not fair to say that the meaning of “talking nonsense” has developed in connection with a negative attitude towards people who talk about things that they themselves do not know for sure. At the time of its inception, this stable combination of words literally meant 'speaks about what it does not know' and had a fixed form, says no news what (the message is the form of the 3rd l.h. of the verb vedeti 'know', supplanted then by the verb to know the same meaning).
From the point of view of the semantic cohesion, phraseological units in the form of phrases with direct addition are most often phraseological units and phraseological units. As for phraseological combinations, in most cases a direct object goes beyond phraseological units.
As part of phraseological units in the form of phrases with direct additions, the most commonly used verbs are displacement and transformative influence; the use of verbs of prolonged non-transformative effect, as well as verbs of speech and perception, were not numerous.
Nouns of various lexical and grammatical categories: concrete, abstract, material, act as a direct object in phraseological units in the form of a phrase with direct addition. Collective nouns are almost never found in the studied phraseological units, as well as proper nouns (isolated cases). Among the specific nouns, the most widespread were the inanimate.
Phraseologisms of the modern Russian literary language, taking into account the scope of use and their inherent expressive features, are divided into three groups: inter-style, colloquial and book. Among the book phraseological turns, phraseological historicisms and archaisms occupy a special place.
Classifying phraseological units by the presence or absence of variants, we determined the criteria for distinguishing between variants and synonymous phraseological turns. Among the studied phraseological units, many synonymous series were identified, including those including doublet phraseological units (containing common components). It has been found that phraseological synonymy is a historical phenomenon requiring an appeal to etymology.
Chapter II Structural and grammatical properties of phraseological units
2.1 The grammatical properties of phraseological units in the form of phrases with direct addition
Almost all phraseological units in the form of collocations with direct additions are verb-predicative and in the sentence act as predicates: to prick up ears, throw a fishing rod, pull a webbing, make porridge, set pepper. Phraseologisms such as at least take out the eyes, at least take out the saints, slurp for seven versts of jelly, equivalent to the adverb and performing the function of the circumstances, are rare.
In verbal-named phraseological units, the arrangement of components can be different, in most cases phraseological unit permits rearrangement of components: powder brains - powder brains, similarly open America, speak up teeth, don’t see the end-to-end, soap your neck, make eyebrows, give off a spirit. In phraseological units with a fixed order of words, verbs are used prepossessively more often, for example: to take a bull by the horns, to pull himself together, to negotiate, to set a striker. The noun before the verb in such phraseological units is less common: I’ve got water in my mouth, don’t take drops in my mouth, I ate the dog, I won’t invent gunpowder.
In a few verbal-nominal phraseological phrases equivalent to an adverb, the words of their grammatical forms do not change. For example, a noun in phraseologism, even though the eye is not capable of changing the form of the number and is used only in the singular, the verb also cannot be used in any other grammatical form.
In the bulk of phraseological units equivalent to a verb, supporting components change grammatical forms. The verb as a supporting component of phraseological units can take the form of a person, tense, look, mood, in the past tense - gender, form correlative participles and participles, etc. The grammatical forms of the verb in free use in different phraseological units are manifested in different ways, which depends on the degree of semantic cohesion of the phraseological unit, as well as on its meaning and structure. The verb in phraseological combinations and expressions has the most grammatical forms, the least in phraseological unions. So, in phraseologism, the verb has all the grammatical forms possible for it to make a decision, and in phraseology the dog ate the verb retains only the ability to form gender and number forms.
In the formation of grammatical forms of words within verbal phraseological turns, restrictions are most often manifested in the absence of a species pair in many verbs. First of all, it depends on the degree of semantic cohesion of phraseological units: there is minimal variability in phraseological units and maximum in combinations and expressions. For example, take / pull yourself together, invest / invest in the soul, find / find a common language, raise / raise voice; but swallow the tongue, win, keep the word, count the raven. An important role is also played by the concrete meaning that is characteristic of phraseological units as a significant linguistic unit; Wed single-verb phrases in verbiage smack nonsense, sharpen his hair, pull his nose, on the one hand, and cast (cast) a shadow, callus (prayer) eyes, close (close) his eyes - on the other.
The absence or, on the contrary, the presence of correlative forms of the form (in verbal phraseological units) often differentiates phraseological phrases or phraseological circulation and free combination of words. For example: fool around ‘do stupid’ and fool around ‘fool around’; close your eyes ‘die’ and close your eyes ‘ignore’; staring eyes ‘goggle’ and bulging eyes ‘open wide eyes from strong surprise’; stable combinations of words sharpen a knife and wipe your nose are phraseological units, and sharpen a knife and wipe your nose - free phrases.
As for the dependent component, in certain phraseological units of this model, the noun can only change the form of the number: open your mouth (s), strike (blow), let your stomach (belly), capture a kiss - capture kisses.
The value of a direct object in the studied phraseological units usually expresses a noun, and this can also be substantive pronouns: take your own, you will not miss yours (they will not miss), know ours. In just a few phraseologisms, the function of a direct object is performed by a reflexive or negative pronoun: to feel, to pull yourself together, it costs nothing, you won’t write anything, you won’t say anything.
2.2 Classification of phraseological units in the form of a phrase with direct addition by the number of components and the method of distribution
The vast majority of phraseological units in the form of phrases with direct additions are simple phrases (phrases of minimal structure) and consist of two components: beat the bacilli, scratch the tongue, seize the moment, tighten the screws, terrify. Simple phrases are formed on the basis of one connection coming from the main word (transitive verb) to one dependent component.
Complex phrases arise through the distribution of simple phrases and are built on the basis of two (or more) links coming from the main word to the dependent ones, or links coming from different core words.
In addition to the verb and noun, phraseological units in the form of phrases with direct additions may include:
- adjective, acting as a definition of a noun: enter a new page, find a common language, make big eyes, build castles in the air;
- a pronoun, acting as a definition of a noun: to know your place, to saddle your favorite skate; make a contribution, cry out all eyes, look out for all eyes;
- the numeral name in the role of definition: kill two birds with one stone,
- a pronoun in the meaning of an indirect object: bite your elbows;
- another noun (with and without a preposition): pour water into the mill,
The study of the use of sustainable speech in Russian. Classification of phraseological units characterizing the social status of a person according to the degree of cohesion. Structural and semantic analysis of phraseological phrases selected from the dictionary.
Types of phraseological units in terms of semantic stability (cohesion) of their components. The origin of phraseological units of modern English. Analysis of phraseological units with the semantics of "study, work." Phraseologisms from America.
The study of the concept and properties (expressiveness, imagery, emotionality, evaluativeness) of phraseological units. Consideration of lexical and grammatical characteristics (verb, adjective, interjective, nominal) and a component of emotive phraseological nominations.
Accumulation of phraseological material: phrase-formation rules, phrase combination semantics. The concept of phraseological units and its signs. Phraseological union, unity, combination, expression. Structural and grammatical composition of phraseological units.
The concept of "language of the newspaper." Phraseology as a linguistic discipline. The nature of the components of phraseological units (phraseological units). Features of the use of phraseological units in the newspaper. Actualization and transformation of phraseological units on the pages of the newspaper "Third Capital".
Analysis of the peculiarities of phraseological units as nominative complementary units of the language of the indirect and characterizing names. The concepts of "phraseology", "phraseology", "idiom". Classification of phraseological units by the semantic cohesion of components.
The connection of phraseological units of the English language containing proper names with the history, culture, traditions and literature of the people who speak this language. Examples of phraseological units, which include biblical proper names.
Phraseologisms, concept, essence, features and their classification. Phraseologisms with the somatic component of the “body part” in Russian and English. Classification of phraseological units of the Russian and English languages \u200b\u200bwith the component "body parts".
Different views of philologists on the problems of phraseology. The main types of phraseological units: phraseological union, unity and combination. Biblical phraseological units in the Russian language system, their representation in the phraseological dictionary A.M. Molotkova.
Modern approaches to the study of phraseological units. Classification of phraseological units of the Russian and English languages. Morphological features of phraseological units. Morphological models of verbal phraseological units with varying and unchanging word forms.
Phraseological turns are a scourge of everyone who studies a foreign language, because, having encountered them, a person often cannot understand what is at stake. Often, to understand this or that statement, you have to use a dictionary of phraseological combinations, which is not always at hand. However, there is a solution - you can develop the ability to recognize phraseological units, then it will be easier to understand their meaning. True, for this you need to know what types of them are and how they differ. Particular attention in this matter should be paid to phraseological combinations, since they (due to the different methods of their classification) create the most problems. So, what is it, what are their distinguishing features and in what dictionaries can you find clues?
Phraseology and the subject of its study
The science of phraseology, which specializes in the study of a variety of stable combinations, is relatively young. In Russian linguistics, it began to stand out as a separate section only in the 18th century, and even then at the end of this century, thanks to Mikhail Lomonosov.
Its most famous researchers are linguists Victor Vinogradov and Nikolai Shansky, and in English - A. Mackay, W. Weinreich and L.P. Smith. By the way, it is worth noting that English-speaking linguists, unlike Slavic specialists, pay much less attention to phraseological units, and their supply in this language is inferior to Russian, Ukrainian or even Polish.
The main subject on the study of which this discipline focuses is phraseological unit or phraseological unit. What is it? This is a combination of several words, which is stable in structure and composition (not compiled anew each time, but used in a ready-made form). For this reason, with phraseology, regardless of its type and length of its constituent words, it always appears as a single member of a sentence.
In each language is a unique thing related to its history and culture. It cannot be fully translated without losing its meaning. Therefore, when translating most often, phraseological units that are similar in meaning and exist in another language are selected.
For example, the famous English phraseological combination: "Keep your fingers on the pulse", which literally means "keep your fingers on the pulse", but it makes sense to "keep abreast of events." However, since there is no one hundred percent analogue in Russian, it is replaced by a very similar one: "Keep your finger on the pulse."
Sometimes, due to the close proximity of countries, similar phraseological phrases arise in their languages, and then there are no problems with translation. So, the Russian expression “beat the buck” (lounging) has its own twin brother in the Ukrainian language - “everyday life baydyk”.
Often, such expressions come simultaneously in several languages \u200b\u200bdue to some important event, for example, such as Christianization. Despite belonging to different Christian denominations, the phraseology “alpha and omega” taken from the Bible and meaning “from beginning to end” (completely, thoroughly) is widespread in Ukrainian, French, Spanish, German, Slovak, Russian and Polish.
Types of phraseological turns
On the classification of phraseological units, linguists have not yet come to the same opinion. Some additionally refer to them proverbs (“You cannot stay without the sun, you cannot live without a sweetheart”), sayings (“God will not betray — the pig will not eat”) and language cliches (“hot support”, “working environment”). But while they are in the minority.
At the moment, the classification of linguist Viktor Vinogradov, who distributed all stable phrases into three key categories, is most popular in East Slavic languages:
- Phraseological adhesions.
- Phraseological unity.
- Phraseological combinations.
Many linguists correlate fusion and unity with the term “idiom” (by the way, this word is cognate with the noun “idiot”) which is actually a synonym for the noun “phraseologism”. This is due to the fact that sometimes it is very difficult to draw a line between them. This name is worth remembering, because in English phraseological mergers, unity, combinations are translated precisely with its help - idioms.
Question about phraseological expressions
Vinogradov’s colleague Nikolai Shansky insisted on the existence of a fourth kind - expressions. In fact, he divided the phraseological combinations of Vinogradov into two categories: combinations and expressions proper.
Although Shansky's classification leads to confusion in the practical distribution of stable phrases, it allows a deeper look at this linguistic phenomenon.
What is the difference between phraseological mergers, phraseological unity, phraseological combinations
First of all, it is worthwhile to understand that these stable units were divided into these types according to the level of lexical independence of their components.
Turnovers, which are absolutely inseparable, the meaning of which is not connected with the meaning of their components, were called phraseological mergers. For example: “sharpen the baldness” (lead a silly conversation), to wear one "s heart on one" s sleeve (to be frank, literally means "wear a heart on the sleeve"). By the way, figurativeness is characteristic of fusion, most often they arise from folk speech, especially outdated expressions or from ancient books.
Phraseological unity is a more independent species, in relation to its components. Unlike mergers, their semantics are determined by the meaning of their components. For this reason, puns are included here. For example: “young and old” (a person doing something good, despite their not impressive external data) or Ukrainian phraseology: “just like that” (the guilty received a punishment corresponding to his own misconduct). By the way, both examples illustrate a unique feature of unity: rhymed harmonies. Perhaps that is why Victor Vinogradov ranked them with sayings and proverbs, although their affiliation with phraseological units is still disputed by many linguists.
The third type: free phraseological combinations of words. They are quite noticeably different from the two above. The fact is that the value of their components directly affects the meaning of the entire turnover. For example: "hard drinking", "raise the question."
Phraseological combinations in Russian (as well as in Ukrainian and English) have a special property: their components can be replaced with synonyms without losing their meaning: “hurt honor” - “hurt pride”, “raspberry tinkle” - “melodic tinkle”. An example from the language of proud British is the idiom to show one’s teeth, which can be adapted for any person: to show my (your, his, her, our) teeth.
Phraseological expressions and combinations: distinctive features
The classification of Victor Vinogradov, in which only one analytical form (phraseological combinations) stood out in composition, was gradually supplemented by Nikolai Shansky. To distinguish between idioms and combinations was quite simple (due to their differences in structure). But the new unit of Shansky - the expression (“to be afraid of wolves - do not go to the forest”) was more difficult to distinguish from combinations.
But, if you delve into the question, you can notice a clear difference, which is based on the meaning of phraseological combinations. So, expressions consist of absolutely free words, fully possessing independent semantics (“not all gold is glittering”). However, they differ from ordinary phrases and sentences in that they are stable expressions that are not compiled in a new way, but are used in finished form as a template: "horseradish is not sweeter" (Ukrainian version of "horseradish is not malted").
Phraseological combinations (“give a head for clipping” - “give a hand for clipping”) always have several words with an unmotivated meaning, while all components of expressions are absolutely semantically independent (“Man - it sounds proud”). By the way, this feature of them makes some linguists doubt the belonging of expressions to phraseological turns.
What combination of words is not a phraseological phrase
Phraseologisms, from a lexical point of view, are a unique phenomenon: on the one hand, they have all the signs of phrases, but are closer in terms of properties to words. Knowing these features, one can easily learn to distinguish stable phraseological combinations, unity, fusion or expression from ordinary phrases.
- Phraseologisms, as well as phrases, consist of several related lexemes, but most often their meaning is unable to go beyond the sum of the values \u200b\u200bof their components. For example: “lose your head” (stop thinking sane) and “lose your wallet”. The words that make up phraseologism are most often used in a figurative sense.
- When used in oral and written speech, the composition of phrases is formed anew each time. But unity and fusion are constantly reproduced in finished form (which makes them similar to speech cliches). The phraseological combination of words and phraseological expression in this matter is sometimes confusing. For example: “hang your head” (grieve), although it is phraseological unit, but each of its components can freely appear in ordinary phrases: “hang a frock coat” and “lower your head”.
- Phraseological circulation (due to the integrity of the meaning of its components) in most cases can be safely replaced with a synonymous word, which cannot be done with a phrase. For example: the expression “minister of Melpomene” can easily be changed to the simple word “artist” or “actor”.
- Phraseologisms never act as names. For example, the hydronym "Dead Sea" and phraseological combinations "dead season" (unpopular season), "lie dead weight" (lie unused load).
Classification of phraseological units by origin
Considering the origin of phraseological combinations, expressions, unity and mergers, they can be divided into several groups.
Other classifications: version of Peter Dudik
- In addition to Vinogradov and Shansky, other linguists tried to separate phraseological units, guided by their own principles. So, the linguist Dudik identified not four, but five whole types of phraseological units:
- Semantically inseparable idioms: “to be on a short leg” (to get to know someone close).
- Phraseological unity with a looser semantics of the constituent elements: “soap the neck” (punish someone).
- Phraseological expressions, completely consisting of independent words, to the total meaning of which it is impossible to choose a synonym. To them, Dudik mainly refers to sayings and proverbs: "A goose is not a pig, comrade."
- Phraseological combinations - phrases based on a metaphorical meaning: "blue blood", "falcon eye".
- Phraseological collocations. Characterized by the lack of metaphor and syntactic unity of the components: "big swell."
Classification of Igor Melchuk
Apart from all of the above is the classification of phraseological units of Melchuk. According to it, significantly more species are distinguished, which are divided into four categories.
- Degree: full, half-phrasem, quasi-phrasem.
- The role of pragmatic factors in the process of forming phraseological units: semantic and pragmatics.
- Which includes: token, phrase, syntactic phrase.
- A component of a linguistic sign that has undergone phraseologization: the syntax of the sign, the signifier and the signified.
Classification of Boris Larin
This linguist distributed stable combinations of words by stages of their evolution, from ordinary phrases to phraseological units:
- Variable phrases (analogue of combinations and phraseological expressions): "velvet season".
- Those who partially lost their primary meaning, but were able to find metaphorical and stereotypical: "keep a stone in the bosom."
- Idioms that are completely devoid of the semantic independence of their components, as well as having lost their connection with their original lexical meaning and grammatical role (analogue of phraseological mergers and unity): "out of the ordinary" (bad).
Common phraseological combinations
The following are some fairly well-known persistent phrases.
Although the classification of Vinogradov and Shansky is not applied to the idioms of the English language, it is possible to choose stable phrases that can be classified as phraseological combinations.
Examples:
- Bosom friend - bosom buddy (bosom friend - bosom buddy).
- A Sisyfean labor.
- A pitched battle - a fierce battle (fierce battle - a fierce battle).
Phraseological Dictionaries
The presence of a large number of classifications of phraseological units is due to the fact that none of them gives a 100% guarantee of the absence of error. Therefore, it is still worth knowing in which dictionaries you can find a hint if you cannot accurately determine the type of phraseology. All dictionaries of this type are divided into monolingual and multilingual. Below are the most famous books of this kind, in which you can find examples of stable expressions, the most common in the Russian language.
- Monolingual: “Educational phraseological dictionary” by E. Bystrovoy; “The burning verb is a dictionary of folk phraseology” by V. Kuzmich; “Phraseological Dictionary of the Russian Language” by A. Fedoseyev; "Phraseological Dictionary of the Russian Literary Language" by I. Fedoseyev and "The Big Explanatory Phraseological Dictionary" by M. Michelson.
- Multilingual: “The Big English-Russian Phraseological Dictionary” (twenty thousand phraseological turns) by A. Kunin, “The Big Polish-Russian, Russian-Polish Phraseological Dictionary” by Yu. Lukshin and Random House Russian-English Dictionary of Idioms by Sofia Lyubenskaya.
Perhaps, having learned that it is sometimes difficult to immediately distinguish between what kind of phraseological unit belongs to, this topic may seem incredibly complex. However, the devil is not so terrible as he is painted. The main way to develop the ability to correctly find the phraseological combination of words among other phraseological units is to train regularly. And in the case of foreign languages \u200b\u200b- to study the history of the occurrence of such phrases and memorize them. This will not only help in the future not to get into awkward situations, but also make the speech very beautiful and imaginative.
Phraseology. Basic concepts
Phraseology is a special section of the science of language, which studies the semantic and structural properties of phraseological units, studies the causes of their occurrence in the language system and the peculiarities of use in speech.
The term "phraseology" is derived from two Greek words: phrasis - "expression, speech turnover" and logos - “doctrine”.
Just as lexicology studies the vocabulary of a language, phraseology studies its phraseological composition. If the unit of a language in its lexical system is a word, then in a phraseological system such a language unit is phraseological unit, or phraseological unit.
Phraseological units - it is stable, constant in its composition, reproducible units of the language, with a holistic single meaning.
Phraseological units, like words, denote the most diverse concepts: guiding thread - “that which helps to find the right path under certain conditions and circumstances”: But from the instinctive feeling with which one person guesses the thoughts of another and which serves as a guideline, a thread of conversation, Katya realized that her indifference hurts me (L. Tolstoy); born in a shirt - “to be lucky, happy, lucky in everything”: He almost shouted to the whole house that Vera Pavlovna was born in a shirt ... (Pisemsky); on a live thread - “quickly, for a short time, and therefore fragile”: The water in Chusovoy was very low, and our little boat sewn on a living thread constantly touched pitfalls (Mother's Siberian).
Tens of thousands of phraseological units, such as those listed above, form the phraseological composition of the language, which is the object of study of phraseology.
Classification of phraseological units according to the semantic indivisibility of componentsPhraseological units of a language are very diverse and multidimensional in terms of the meanings expressed by them, structure, degree of semantic non-division, functions in speech, etc. In this regard, the question of the classification of phraseological units is quite difficult and sometimes causes conflicting opinions.
So, the founder of the doctrine of phraseological units is considered to be the Swiss linguist Charles Balli, who for the first time in the history of linguistics described the specific features of phraseological units and outlined their classification, identifying free combinations, phraseological groups and phraseological units as part of phraseology.
There are other principles for the systematization of phraseological units.
A major role in the study of phraseology was played by the work of V.V. Vinogradov, in which he formulated the subject and tasks of phraseology, gave a lexical-semantic characteristic of phraseological units and proposed their classification .
V.V. Vinogradov defines three varieties of phraseological units, based on their distinction the degree of semantic indivisibility of the components. On this basis, he identified three types of phraseological units: phraseological units, phraseological units and phraseological combinations.
Phraseological adhesions - these are such semantically indivisible and grammatically indecomposable stable combinations, the general meaning of which completely does not correspond to the sum of the meanings of the words that make them up.
Compare the meaning of the expression callousing eyes - "annoying, annoying someone" with the meanings of the words calluses - "rub calluses with long walking or work" and the eye is the "organ of vision." Words in the phraseological union, in fact, have lost their independent meanings.
The loss of the independent meanings of words as part of phraseological units is reflected in the fact that they often contain obsolete, sometimes completely incomprehensible words and grammatical forms, for example: get into trouble (get into an awkward position), sharpen balances (idle talk), beat bacilli (laze around), doing nothing a bit (without a doubt, without thinking); in expression parable of the town (subject of constant talk) the old form of the local case of the noun, etc.
Among the phraseological accretions include such expressions, all of whose components are understandable, correspond to the morphological structure of the modern language, but the syntactic relations between these components are unusual. For example: words in the composition of expressions are not syntactically split joke to say (expression of surprise), how to drink to give (required), a little light (early)and etc.
Phraseological accretions are likened by function to non-derivative words, in which the basis is not motivated by anything.
Mergers are sometimes called idioms (Greek. idioma - a kind of expression), they have a large idiomatic coefficient and are difficult to translate into another language.
Phraseological Unities - these are such semantically indivisible stable combinations, the general meaning of which is the result of a figurative rethinking of the whole phrase and can be partially motivated by the semantics of the component components, i.e. the general meaning of phraseological unities to some extent follows from the totality of the meanings of the words that make them up. So, the expression callus tongue (chatting) has the character of transfer to the direct meanings of the words enclosed in them callous and tongue, and these values \u200b\u200bare to some extent still perceived as part of the phraseological unit (cf. with the expression considered above callous eyesin which the words that make up it are practically devoid of independent meanings).
The peculiarity of phraseological unity in their figurativeness, metaphor, which, for example, is clearly perceived in expressions to speak teeth (to distract attention), worthless (cost nothing), suck out of one’s finger (invent, say without any reason), go with the flow (act passively, obeying prevailing views, opinions, etc.).
Many phraseological units, in contrast to phraseological units, are not completely frozen in their composition: expressions can contain parts that can be replaced with other words: flip sideand the other side of the coin; the bear has stepped on the ear and an elephant in his ear stepped and etc.
Phraseological combinations - these are such semantically indivisible stable combinations, the general meaning of which is motivated by the semantics of the constituent components, i.e. phraseological combinations in the sense of segmentation, their common meanings consist of the sum of the meanings of the words that make up their composition. These phraseological units differ from conjunctions and unity primarily in that they contain words that have both free and non-free (phraseologically connected) meanings, which are realized only in conditions of a certain lexical environment. For example, only in combination with the words case, question circumstance, position the meaning of the word becomes clear sensitive (requiring great care, careful and tactful surroundings; delicate); with words boil, burn, torment, the meaning of the word is revealed annoyance (especially discontent, angry, tormented and etc.).
Phraseological combinations have almost no free combinations that are homonymous with them, but individual components can be replaced by synonyms. For instance: sudden death - sudden death, squirting nose - breaking nose, crackling frost - severe frost, zero attention - no attentionand etc.
Along with the considered types of phraseological units proper, the so-called phraseological expressions, "Which are not only semantically articulated, but also consist entirely of words with free meanings" 1 . For instance, Love for all ages; You will pass the light in truth, but you will not return back; Seven times measure cut once; Like a squirrel in a wheel; The man in the case and others. As can be seen from the examples, to the number of phraseological expressions are assigned both whole sentences and combinations of words.
Phraseological expressions differ from the units considered above in that they perform not a nominative, but a communicative function, i.e. are complete units of communication - sentences, for example: Everything will pass like smoke from white apple trees. (S. Yesenin); Yes, the one in whom conscience is unclean is miserable. (A. Pushkin); Signed, so off your shoulders! (A. Griboedov)
Phraseological expressions are usually phrases of aphoristic type or moral and ethical edifications taken from fiction or folklore, for example: There is gunpowder in the flasks. (N. Gogol); Yes, only things are there. (I. Krylov); Do you like to ride - love and carry the sleigh (Proverb).
In syntactic terms, they represent ordinary sentences of various types and are subjected to parsing according to the general rules for identifying and evaluating their typological features and structural parts.
The linguists do not have a single opinion on the question of whether such combinations are included or not included in phraseology. A number of scientists - S.I.Ozhegov, N.N. Amosova, A.V. Kalinin and others, based on the fact that proverbs, sayings and many popular expressions are communicative units equal to the sentence, suggest not to include them in phraseology. Others, for example, N.M. Shansky, consider it possible to include these units in the phraseology. The basis for the attribution of proverbs and sayings to phraseology is the commonality of their characteristics: stability of component composition, structure and meaning, reproducibility in speech in a finished form, general use.
The considered classification of phraseological units is not exhaustive, it does not cover the whole variety of phenomena of phraseology. Quite often it is not easy to establish which of the considered types of phraseological units one or another stable expression refers to.
Nevertheless, this classification of phraseological units, proceeding from their structural and semantic features and taking into account the degree of grammatical and semantic cohesion of words that make up stable expressions, is of most interest. The establishment of the main types of phraseological units in accordance with the classification of V.V. Vinogradova is currently the most scientifically sound.
Classification of phraseological units in terms of their grammatical structure.The semantic cohesion of words in the composition of stable combinations leads to the fact that phraseological units are syntactically indistinguishable in the composition of the sentence, in which they act as one member of the sentence. So, in the sentences He arrived at the sceneto cap analysis idiom to cap analysisis a circumstance of time (cf. late) As part of sentences, phraseological units can fulfill the role of any member of a sentence.
According to the correlation with one or another part of speech and the similarity of syntactic functions in a sentence, one can distinguish the following lexical and grammatical categories of phraseological units:
1. Registeredphraseological units. The main component is the noun. Registered phraseological units denote a person: blue stocking (dry pedantry devoid of femininity) kazan orphan (about who pretends to be miserable, miserable) grated kalach (about an experienced, who has seen a lot of people), ink soul (about the clerical official) erratic goal (about the poor); subject: achilles' heel(books: the most vulnerable spot), the Forbidden fruit (about something tempting, but forbidden), sword of Damocles (books .: about constantly threatening danger), etc. In the sentence, the named phraseological units are used in the syntactic function of the subject, complement, nominal part of the compound predicate.
2. Verb phraseological units – the most productive and numerous. The main component is the verb, participle. Verbal phraseological units are united by a common meaning of the action. For instance: get stuck (find yourself in a quandary) lose one’s head (lose self-control) to twist somebody around one's finger (deftly deceive anyone) get into a bottle (annoyed by trifles), etc. In a sentence, the named phraseological units are usually used in the function of the predicate.
3. Adjective(from lat. adjectivum - adjective) phraseological units denote the qualitative characteristics of the face ( ate little porridge - young, inexperienced or not strong enough; canny - secretive, cunning; not of this world - about a person who is not adapted to life) and the qualitative characteristics of the subject ( from the needle - new, elegant, just sewn; real jam - about something tasty, pleasant). In a sentence, these phraseological units can be used in the syntactic function of an inconsistent definition.
4. Adverbial (from lat. adverbium - adverb) phraseological units have the meaning of a qualitative characteristic of the action ( tirelessly - diligently, tirelessly, not thinking about the consequences; with sin in half - with great difficulty, barely, somehow; what is spirit - very fast; through the stump deck - bad, careless) or degree of quality characteristic ( to the core - the whole being, in its entirety, completely; one hundred percent - complete, finished). In the sentence, the named phraseological units play the role of various circumstances.
5. Interjection phraseological units serve to express various feelings, emotions, volitional impulses. For instance: well well! - decomp., used in the expression of surprise; hell!- dec., Exclamation of surprise, annoyance or resentment; know ours! - decomp. jokes about praising oneself; good afternoon! - wish good luck; welcome - the expression of a polite invitation, etc.
A number of phraseological units of the Russian language are used in the sentence as references or introductory words, i.e. without contact with members of these offers. Phraseologism appeals always have a pronounced estimated coloring. For instance: You understandoak head , what have you done? (stupid, stupid person); You understandcrazy head , what have you done? (extravagant, eccentric man)
Examples of phraseological units – introductory words can be stable combinations: no matter how! (expression of disagreement, objection, refusal); joke to say (expression of surprise at the significance of something).
Lexicology (from the Greek. lexikós ‘referring to the word’ (lexis - ‘word’) and logos ‘word, teaching’) - a section of linguistics that studies the vocabulary (vocabulary) of the language and the word as a unit of vocabulary. One of the main tasks of lexicology is the study of the meanings of words and phraseological units, the study of polysemy, homonymy, synonymy, anthony and other relationships between the meanings of words. Lexicology also includes changes in the vocabulary of the language, reflection in the vocabulary of the social, territorial, and professional characteristics of people who speak the language (they are usually called native speakers). In the framework of lexicology, the word strata are studied, distinguished for various reasons: by origin (original and borrowed vocabulary), by historical perspective (obsolete words and neologisms), by field of use (popular, special, vernacular, etc.), by stylistic coloring (interstitial and stylistically colored vocabulary).
Types of dictionaries:
1) dictionaries that include all the words of a given language (the so-called dictionaries thesaurus (gr.) - a treasury, a repository); 2) dictionaries of the modern literary language (the most common type of explanatory dictionary, see below); 3) dictionaries of individual dialects or their groups (regional dictionaries, for example, the Don dictionary); 4) dictionaries of the language of a writer; 5) dictionaries of the language of a particular work; 6) historical dictionaries, including words of a certain period in the history of the language; 7) etymological dictionaries explaining the origin of individual words; 8) dictionaries of synonyms; 9) phraseological dictionaries; 10) dictionaries of irregularities, including words, in the use, pronunciation or spelling of which deviations from the literary norm are often observed; 11) dictionaries of foreign words; 12) spelling dictionaries; 13) orthoepic dictionaries (dictionaries of literary pronunciation and stress); 14) word-building dictionaries; 15) reverse dictionaries; 16) frequency dictionaries; 17) dictionaries of abbreviations; 18) slang dictionaries, etc.
Phraseological combinations
Glossary of Terms
Plan
Intercultural communication
Russian phraseology and problems
Lecture 8
1. Types of phraseological units.
1.1. Phraseological adhesions .
1.2. Phraseological unity.
1.3. Phraseological combinations.
1.4. Syntactic phraseological units.
2. Phraseology and the national image of the world.
3. Case statements.
Aphorism is a phrase that is well known and therefore does not re-create in speech, but is extracted from memory.
Motto is a short phrase, usually expressing the guiding idea of \u200b\u200bbehavior or activity (Our motto is forward!).
Idiomatic - peculiar only to this language, peculiar.
Canonical - accepted as a sample, firmly established.
Cliche - common speech revolution, stamp.
A slogan is an appeal in a laconic form expressing a political idea, a demand (for example, a slogan of the era of socialism: Party - the mind, honor and conscience of our era).
Paremia is a language cliché (phraseological unit, proverb, proverb, precedent statement).
A call is an appeal in a concise form expressing a guiding idea, a political demand, a slogan ( All to the polls!).
A prototype situation is a situation corresponding to the literal meaning of phraseologism.
Syntactic phraseology is a non-standard, specific construction, the structural properties and semantics of which go beyond regular syntactic relationships and patterns (for example: Wouldn’t have come in the summer!); official and pronoun words, particles and interjections do not function according to the valid syntactic rules. Unlike lexical phraseological units, syntactical phraseological units are not reproduced, but built.
Phraseologism is a phrase whose general meaning is not inferred from the independent meanings of each word entering it ( roll on an inclined plane -‘Morally fall’). The main features of phraseologism are stability and reproducibility.
The standard is a sample.
This lecture is devoted to the consideration of the problems of paremia, i.e., the features of the semantics and functioning of language cliches of different types and the consideration of these features when teaching the IWC. We call a cliche any ready-made speech form, the criterion for which is the regularity of its appearance in certain repeating speech situations [Dridze, 1972, p. 43]. We focus on phraseological units - units that are especially relevant when teaching the IWC.
1. The concept of phraseology
In Russian, as in a number of other languages, words are connected to each other, forming phrases. Some of them are free, others are not free. Free combinations of words are constantly formed during speech: the speaker selects the words that are necessary in meaning based on knowledge of their meanings and grammatically builds combinations from them in accordance with the purpose and structure of the statement: drink tea, write with a pen, participate in a play, organize a conference etc.
Each word in such free combinations of words retains its independent meaning and performs a certain syntactic function. Such combinations are created in the process of speech for the implementation of a communicative goal (to inform, ask, etc.) in accordance with personal perception, impression in a certain situation. Such combinations are not stored in memory: circumstances will change - new free combinations will arise.
In the language there are related combinations, for example, cross the road to someone‘Interfere with achieving your’: I know why he acts like that. Once I crossed the road for him - I won the competition for the position for which he applied.The independent meaning of the component words in the phrase cross the roadweakened, since the nominative properties of words have disappeared, in connection with this the meaning of the whole turn is no longer associated with the semantics of each word individually. Lexically, such a combination is indivisible and in speech is reproduced as a finished speech unit. The role of the phrase as a whole is syntactically considered, and not of each word separately. Such semantically indivisible phrases, which are characterized by the constancy of integral meaning, are called phraseological units of the language (or phraseological units, phraseological turns).
The main semantic feature of phraseologism is semantic cohesion, cohesion, the essence of which consists essentially in the fact that the general meaning of phraseologism is not derived from the independent meanings of each word included in it (cf., for example, phraseologisms small fry - about a person insignificant in terms of social status, shot sparrow - about an experienced, experienced person, fool anyone - not allowing to concentrate on the main thing, basically, to confuse, fool anyone).
The meaning of phraseology is specific. First of all, the meaning of a phraseological unit (phraseological unit) is always richer than the meaning of a synonymous word (or words). It is never equivalent to the volume of the meaning of a synonym word. So, beat the buck - ϶ᴛᴏ not just ‘messing around’, but trivializing; put a spoke in wheel - not only ‘interfere or obstruct’, but do it at the time when someone is engaged in some kind of business, as if in his course; make dirty linen in public - ϶ᴛᴏ when someone else’s secrets are gossiped or divulged by someone they are confidentially told. And this means that the meaning of phraseological units is always more equipped with details than the meaning of words.
Secondly, the meaning of most phraseological units is situational. This feature of phraseological units requires not only knowledge of their meaning, but also those situations in which they can be used. So in FE turn up one's nose, besides the meaning of ‘to be important’, information is provided that the former speaker and the one in question were on equal terms, and at present this latter prides himself on his higher social or material position.
The next feature of phraseological units is the evaluative nature of the meaning. Most phraseologisms, thanks to the image that underlies them, not only indicate a fragment of reality, but also express a positive or negative opinion of the speaker about what is indicated. In this case, the speaker evaluates whether it is good or bad, good or evil, useful or harmful. For example, phraseology turn up one's nose, along with the content indicated above, expresses the negative opinion of the person using this phraseological unit: importance is a bad human trait.
The images on the basis of which phraseological units are formed can themselves give an assessment of the signified. So, to put sticks in the wheels of someone -bad and give the green street - well.
Most phraseological units, in addition to the speaker’s evaluative attitude, also express an emotional attitude. It is also prompted in a manner. When they say: We are forced to work to exhaustion they describe and evaluate only the indicated situation. But if they say: All juices are squeezed out of us, then they also count on the sympathy and empathy of the listener, since in the meaning of phraseological unit there is also a signification - an emotional disapproval of what is indicated (cf.
Posted on ref.rf
in saying You drive me by the nosethe speaker expresses the interlocutor a charge of neglect).
It can be seen from the above examples that phraseological units are a kind of microtexts, in which, in addition to a figurative description of the actually designated fragment of reality, there are also signs (connotations) that express the evaluative or emotional attitude of the speaker to the signified. The addition of these meanings creates the effect of expressiveness, or expressiveness of phraseological units.
Phraseologism has a number of essential features:
1) stability
2) reproducibility
3) the integrity of the value
4) separation.
Sustainability (constancy, stability) and reproducibility - ϶ᴛᴏ regular repeatability of phraseological units in the finished form. Phraseological units are reproduced rather than constructed in speech each time anew based on a communicative situation.
The integrity of the meaning of phraseologism is connected with the fact that the meaning of phraseologism is difficult or impossible to deduce from the meaning of its constituent parts. The integrity of the meaning of phraseologism is achieved by complete or partial rethinking of the components. As a result, they, as a rule, diverge in meaning with the corresponding words of free use. So, for example, phraseologism is impossible smash into a cake‘Try, exhausted, to do everything possible’ to interpret through the interpretation of the meanings of words smash cake(cf.
Posted on ref.rf
count a raven, keep a stone in his bosom, seven spans in his forehead, a stone's throw).
Separate structure - an important feature that characterizes the appearance of phraseological units (expression plan). All phraseological units have a separately structured structure, that is, they are constructed on the model of various combinations of words.
Following V.V. Vinogradov, on the basis of the criterion of syntactic and semantic indecomposability of a word combination, freedom / lack of freedom of the words included in it, it is customary to distinguish several types of phraseological units - phraseological units, phraseological unity and phraseological combinations.
1.1.F razeologicheskie fusion
Phraseological conjunctions are such lexically indivisible phrases whose meanings are not determined by the meaning of the individual words included in them (for example, beat the buck'sit back', from floundering bay‘Thoughtlessly’, Sodom and Gomorrah‘Clutter, noise", after sleeves‘Careless’, how to drink give‘Certainly’. The meaning of these revolutions is not motivated by the value of the constituent elements. The main feature of phraseological units is its indivisibility, absolute semantic cohesion, in which the meaning of the whole revolution should not be inferred from the meaning of the words that make it up. (Wed
Posted on ref.rf
also topsy-turvy, honestly, badly, from small to large, no big deal, in broad daylight, on my mind, a joke to say, marvel at).
1.2. F raseological unity
Phraseological unity - such lexical turns, the general meaning of which is to some extent motivated by the figurative meaning of the words that make up this turn. For example, the general meaning of such unities as dust in the eyes, go with the flow, keep a stone in your bosom, go into your shell, suck out your finger, blood with milkand etc.
Posted on ref.rf
depends on the meaning of the individual elements that make up the figurative “core” of the entire revolution. Unlike mergers, the imagery of which is extinct, already unmotivated and completely independent of the meaning of the constituent elements, phraseological unity “possesses the property of potential imagery” [Vinogradov, 1972, p. 26]. This allows some scientists to call this type of momentum metaphorical combinations. Unlike splices, parts of phraseological units are separated from each other by the insertion of some words: pour water to (mine, mine, your) mill;
Phraseological combinations - such steady turns, the general meaning of which completely depends on the meaning of the constituent words. Words in a phraseological combination retain relative semantic independence, however, they are not free and show their meaning only in combination with a definite, closed circle of words, for example: a word tearfullyonly matches words to beg. Consequently, one of the members of the phraseological combination is more stable and even constant, the other is variable. The meaning of constant words (components) is phraseologically related. For example: in combinations burn with shameand longing takes will be permanent to burnand beret, since it is these words that will turn out to be the main (core) elements in other phraseological combinations: to burn - from shame, from shame, from shame; to burn - from love; to burn - from impatience, envy; beret - annoyance, anger; takes - fear, horror; beret- laughter.The use of other components is not possible (cf .: * burn with joy, * takes a smile) The meanings of such words in the revolutions data system are phraseologically connected, that is, they are realized only with a certain circle of words. Despite the phraseological closure of this type of phrase, even lexically unfree components are (without prejudice to the general phraseological meaning) replaced by a synonym (cf .: to lower your head - lower your head; to sit in a puddle - to sit in a galosh; make eyebrows - frown) This creates the conditions for the emergence of phraseological units, and often synonyms [Vinogradov, 1977]. Phraseologisms possess the idiom of semantics, reproducibility, and syntactic segmenting, which does not prevent them from performing functions similar to the functions of individual word forms in a phrase, the phraseological units are almost equal to the word in their nominative nature [Vereshchagin, Kostomarov, 1990, p. 81–82].
2. Syntactic phraseological units
Today, it is also customary to single out a special group of phraseological units, which are called syntactic phraseological units. These are such non-standard, specific constructions, the structural properties and semantics of which go beyond the framework of regular syntactic relations and patterns. For example: No need to come in the summer !; What a rest there !; So when he is late! ʼʼ[Velichko, 1996, p. 5]. “Russian grammar” calls syntactic phraseological units “such constructions in which the connections and relations of components from the point of view of living grammatical rules are inexplicable” [Russian grammar, 1980, p. 217]. Syntactic phraseological units in Russian grammar include sentences in which “word forms are connected idiomatically” and where “official and pronoun words, particles and interjections function according to the current syntactic rules” [Ibid., P. 383]. Syntactic phraseologism differs from lexical one in that it is “not reproduced, but built” [Velichko, 1996, p. 10]. Syntactic and lexical phraseological units differ, as a rule, in stylistic and emotional expressiveness.
Syntactical phraseological units, unlike lexical ones, are not among the nominative means of the language, they play a slightly smaller role in the storage and translation of cultural information, but the consideration of these units in the sociocultural aspect allows us to identify the characteristic features of the reflection in the language of the specifics of national perception and categorization of the surrounding reality. A.V. Velichko rightly points out: ʼʼWhen considering syntactic phraseological units (SF) in the sociocultural aspect, their dual nature is traced. On the one hand, SFs in their semantics reflect the properties of the human person, a person outside his nationality. (...) On the other hand, SFs are specific Russian constructions, since they reflect the peculiarities of the Russian national mentality͵ the nature of realizing the real world by Russian people. (...) This explains, for example, the extreme detail of the assessment, represented by a large number of evaluative syntactic phraseological units (These are flowers! Roses are flowers / All flowers are flowers! Than not flowers! Also flowers to me!) ʼʼ[Cit. by: Gudkov, p. 82, p. 108].
3. Phraseology and the national image of the world
Since the peculiarity of phraseologism is the irreducibility of its value to the sum of the values \u200b\u200bof its constituent units, it is obvious that phraseologisms present special difficulties for foreigners studying the Russian language. So, for example, in Korean there is a phraseological expression eat kuksu.Even knowing what kuksu, you can’t guess that this is a wedding. The fact is that the etymology of this expression is associated with the old Korean custom for a wedding is kuksu. For this reason, the question ʼʼWhen will we eat kuksu? ʼʼ must be understood as ʼʼWhen will you get married? ʼʼ.
Phraseologisms arise on the basis of a prototype situation, that is, a situation corresponding to the literal meaning of phraseological units. Prototypes reflect national (in our case, Russian) culture, since “genetically free phrases describe certain customs, traditions, details of life and culture, historical events, and much more” [Vereshchagin, Kostomarov, 1990, p. 60]. (For example, phraseological prototypes can tell about a typical Russian flora: from the forest and from the pine forest, some to the forest, some to the wood, like in a dark forest). The situation is assigned a certain content - the result of rethinking this situation in this particular cultural code. This situation is of a symbolic nature, because it is allocated and fixed in collective memory. Its rethinking is born on the basis of some stereotypes, standards, myths, which are the implementation of the cultural concepts of this society. Due to the fact that the stereotypes and standards that the images forming the phraseological units are oriented to have a certain value, any phraseological unit that fits into the cultural code system of a given community takes on a meaningful meaning. It automatically accepts a general assessment of the concept͵ on the basis (or within) of which this phraseological unit is formed.
Patterns of rethinking the prototype situation arise within the framework of a definite, formed on the basis of religious, mythological, ideological views, range. For this reason, for example, in languages \u200b\u200bthat are common in the area of \u200b\u200bChristian civilization, common conceptual metaphors are found that have their origins in common customs, traditions and cultural attitudes for Slavic peoples. Nevertheless, each linguistic-cultural ethnic community has its own, nationally-specific rethinking.
One of the significant contrasts for the Slavic (including Russian) culture is the opposition of the top and the bottom. In mythological (and later - religious) consciousness, the top was associated with the location of the divine principle, the bottom - the location of hell, the Underworld - the symbolic space of the fall. In the XVII – early XIX centuries. there was a miniature depicting a sinner and a sinner, drawn by a demon down a hill to hell. Proceeding from these ideas, ascent, spiritual ascent was associated with the approach to God, the divine beginning, with moral perfection, moving the object down was associated with moral decline, immoral behavior. Thanks to these ideas, it is likely that the phrases roll down, roll along a slippery slope, a drop in morals, fail in shame, fall through the ground, fall in the eyes of someone got stability and reproducibility in the Russian language.
FE to become / become across the road to someone 'to stand in someone’s life path, to hinder someone from achieving the goal, to create obstacles in life' is connected with the superstitious prohibition to cross the road - otherwise he will not be lucky (then the phraseological units run across / cross the road, cross / cross the road to someone else). In general, a number of phraseological units and metaphors are based on the language metaphors ʼʼ life ϶ᴛᴏ movement ʼʼ ʼʼ movement ϶ᴛᴏ development ’, for example, punching one’s own path with the forehead“ persistently, persistently, with great efforts to achieve success in one’s life ”, paving one’s own chest with one’s“ achieve success, overcoming all obstacles ', climb the mountain' achieve a high position in society ', put someone on the road' help someone find their job and place in life, creating the necessary conditions ', turn to the path of truth' under exposure to -or to change their behavior for the better ", have gone far ahead 'significant change', not advance a single step 'at all, not at all'; Wed
Posted on ref.rf
also a ticket to life, on the road to success, to stand at a crossroads. The image has high productivity due to the fact that the perception of life as a way is fixed in the ordinary consciousness of Russians (cf.
Posted on ref.rf
he also went all the way to the end, and in Korean, He went the round of life; On my way I met a lot of good and kind people; Wed
Posted on ref.rf
in jargon advanced, slow down). In Russian culture, the image of the path is one of the central ones due to the richness of the semantic structure of the concept underlying it, which provides unlimited possibilities for a wide variety of metaphorical constructions when creating images.
Many phraseological units are, according to V. N. Telia, figuratively motivated secondary names [Telia, 1996, p. 82], revealing associative connections, culturally significant frames and concrete images of abstract concepts. So, using the example of the cited author, one can describe the image of “conscience” in the national consciousness of Russians: “Conscience is a good and at the same time punishing messenger of God in the soul,“ channel of God’s control over the soul of a person who has his own voice - the voice of conscience, says - conscience spoke, clears - a clear conscience, an unclean conscience is a sick one, it torments, torments a subject͵ to act according to conscience means divine, fair, and when there is no conscience, the soul is open to spiritual permissiveness, etc. All these connotations say that the conscience and consciousness of Russian - a regulator of behavior according to the laws of higher nravstvennosti'' [Ibid, p. 84].
Phraseologisms probably most clearly reflect the national image of the world imprinted in the language, determined by it and fixed in it. They embody “noting” of general concepts, whose names, speaking in free combinations, are metaphorically and metonymically associated with specific persons or things. These concepts are “materialized” in the language, which is revealed in cliched phrases, which include phraseological units, non-rational compatibility of the name allows revealing the language archetypes behind the name [Cherneyko, 1997], and reconstructing the linguistic picture of the world. It is no coincidence that the scientists involved in conceptual analysis, in their studies, pay special attention to unfree combinations of the name, behind which the concept they are interested in stands. So, for example, the hope appears to the Russian as something fragile, a kind of shell, hollow inside - broken hopes, empty hope;authority - something massive, columnar and at the same time devoid of stability - crush your authority, shaken authority,knowledge, wisdom is something liquid, for it can be drunk (cf.
Posted on ref.rf
thirst for knowledge) etc.
We agree that the study of such combinations, most fully revealing the associative and connotative connections of names that designate key concepts of national culture, allows us to describe such concepts.
4. Case statements
Let us now turn to another type of clichéd combinations, which E. M. Vereshchagin and V. G. Kostomarov call linguistic aphorisms and which, in their opinion, have the syntactic form of a phrase, while phraseological units - the syntactic form of a phrase [Vereshchagin, Kostomarov, 1990 , p. 71-76]. Understanding by linguistic aphorism ʼʼ phrase, which is completely known and therefore does not re-create in speech, but is extracted from memory ʼʼ [Ibid., P. 71], these scientists distinguish the following types of similar units:
1) proverbs and sayings - oral short sayings dating back to folklore: The chickens, as they fall, believe, Don’t say a gop until you jump over, Cause time, fun hour;
2) winged words, i.e., short quotes, figurative expressions, sayings of historical persons included in our speech from literary sources: To be or not to be. That's the question; And nothing has changed; We wanted the best, but it turned out as always;
3) appeals, slogans, slogans and other catchphrases that express certain philosophical, social, political views (To study, study, and study again ...; Freedom, equality, fraternity);
4) socio-scientific formulas ( Being determines consciousness) and natural science formulations [Ibid., p. 71–72].
The authors indicate that ʼʼphraseologisms act as signs of concepts, and in this regard they are meaningfully equivalent to words; aphorisms are ϶ᴛᴏ signs of situations or relations between things, and they are semantically equivalent to sentences ʼʼ [Ibid., p. 92].
As you can easily see, the above classification is based on the origin of those units that Vereshchagin and Kostomarov call linguistic aphorisms. DB Gudkov uses the term precedent statement (PV), the definition of which has already been given above (see lecture 6).
The semantics and functioning of PV are determined not so much by their origin as by other factors. As observations of the modern Russian language (first of all, oral speech and the language of the media) show, it is very difficult to distinguish between the use of, for example, “folklore” precedent statements and precedent quotes from classical works [see, for example, Zakharenko, 1997 ]. It seems justified to distinguish between precedent statements: 1) strictly connected with any precedent text (Tell me, uncle ...; According to the pike commandment, according to my desire ...); 2) ʼʼ autonomous ʼʼ a) that have lost contact with the PT that generated them (How nice, how fresh the roses were)b) never having such (You go quietly- you will continue).
The generation and perception of PV related to the first and second type will differ from each other. As already indicated, to form the meaning of the text in which the PV appears, the greatest value is played, as a rule, not by the surface, but by the deep meaning of the latter. So, the surface value of PV Was there a boy?(doubt about the existence of a certain boy, expressed in the form of a question) turns out to be “transparent”, its deeper meaning comes to the fore, and this statement is used to express doubt about the existence of anything / anyone at all. Precedent statements are almost always connected with the precedent text and / or with the precedent situation (Cf.
Posted on ref.rf
But this is another story altogether).Accordingly, when using and perceiving PV, a certain case-law situation and / or some case-law text is updated in the minds of the speakers.
When “autonomous” precedent statements are generated in the speaker’s mind, the real situation of speech reproduces some precedent situation, which acts as a standard for situations of this type in general. Accordingly, in the perception of such a use-case statement, the recipient understands it as a signifier, the signifier of which is a certain case-law situation, and this last is associated with the speech situation by the recipient (cf.
Posted on ref.rf
use of statements such as Eureka!; Great Russia, but nowhere to retreat!).
A somewhat different picture is observed when the communicants operate with PV, which is tightly connected with the case text. In this case, when common action of the mechanism described above, the picture is somewhat different, because in the linguistic consciousness of the bearer of a certain national cultural code, the case-finding situation finds its reference expression in one or another PT and is updated through updating the PT in which it is presented (I gave birth to you, and I will kill you! - about a strict father punishing his son, and not necessarily as radically as in the corresponding PT; Manuscripts do not burn!- about the imperishability of the results of human creativity, and not necessarily literary).
In accordance with the three levels of utterance value (superficial, deep and systemic meaning), one can distinguish PV, when used, various of these levels are actualized:
1) PV having only surface value:
Frost and sun– wonderful day!
There are two troubles in Russia– roads and fools!
The functional meaning of the statement (that is, who, when and where uses the precedent statement, what, why, and why the author of the text “containing this statement” wants to be said, should be understood without knowledge of the corresponding PF;
2) PV with surface and deep values:
The people are silent ...- a superficial meaning (universal silence) is present, but it turns out to be “transparent”, and this PV begins to be used to express “humble rebellion”, acquiring an additional symbolic meaning of the relationship between the government and the people;
3) PV, the surface value of which is practically absent, and through the deep, the systemic meaning is actualized:
Are you heavy Monomakh hat ...–The speech, naturally, is not about the cap and even not only about the burden of power, but about the burden of the cares taken by someone else.
The use of PV of all three of these types turns out to be quite frequent in the speech of modern native speakers of the Russian language (especially in the language of the media of various directions), while understanding the texts in which the precedent statements of the last two types appear are very difficult for foreigners Good command of Russian. (for more details, see Zakharenko, Krasnykh, 1997; Krasnykh, 2001].
When analyzing the use of PV, another classification of these units, which can be divided into two groups, is extremely important.
1) "canonical" PV; they appear as a strict quote͵ not subject to change: For what? - Just; Here the birds do not sing ...;
2) transformed PV; they undergo certain changes. Despite this, the full text of the PV is easily recognized and restored:
When the actors were big;
Our proud неVaryagʼʼ does not give up to Kuchma.
What is eternity - ϶ᴛᴏ bathhouse,
Eternity - ϶ᴛᴏ bathhouse with spiders.
In case this bathhouse
Forget Manka,
What will happen to the motherland and to us?
(V. Peloevin. ʼʼGeneration ʼʼ Pʼʼ).
The difference in the functioning of these two types of utterances consists essentially in the fact that the transformed precedent utterance is first compared with the “canonical”, and then the mechanism discussed above already begins to work. At the same time, the superficial meaning of the transformed PV is never “transparent”, it is always actively involved in the formation of the meaning of the statement. The main emphasis in this case falls precisely on that word or phrase, ĸᴏᴛᴏᴩᴏᴇ replaces ʼʼclassicalʼʼ in ʼʼcanonicalʼʼ PV, that is, the technique, which should be called ʼʼ deceived expectation ’, is actively used. Consider the example we borrowed from I.V. Zakharenko and V.V. Reds.
"East– dead matter ”–– The subtitle of the section on the collapse of the USSR, which deals with the Central Asian republics. The deeper meaning of the statement is to emphasize that the situation is delicate, requiring knowledge and careful handling; This is emphasized by the exact PV: East is a delicate matter. The indicated value is “removed” due to the use of the “low” word in the transformed PV, the main semantic load falls on ĸᴏᴛᴏᴩᴏᴇ. In this way, the author expresses his skepticism about the possibilities of any serious transformations in the Central Asian republics.
Let's repeat the main provisions of the lecture. At the ICC, it is extremely important to pay attention to the phenomena of paremia, namely, the ways of storing and presenting cultural information in linguistic and speech cliches of various types.
Among the latter, we single out, firstly, phraseological units, which are divided into lexical and syntactic ones. The main feature of both is the irreducibility of their values \u200b\u200bto the sum of the values \u200b\u200bof their units. Lexical phraseological units vividly and clearly reflect the national “image of the world”, the specifics of worldview and world understanding of the surrounding reality, inherent in a particular linguistic and cultural community. In these units ʼʼ materialize ’, ʼʼ materialize’ key concepts of national culture and national consciousness.
In addition to phraseologisms, precedent statements are highlighted. Οʜᴎ enter the design bureau of the linguistic and cultural community, find themselves in close interconnection with other case-studies, are actively used by native speakers and present serious difficulties for foreign phones.
PVs are classified: a) on the basis of a connection with a case-law (related to PT / “autonomous”); b) based on communication with three levels of the meaning of the utterance (superficial, deep, systemic meaning); c) based on the method of reproduction (transformed / non-transformed). Texts in which PV is present, as a rule, are distinguished by pronounced expressiveness.
Questions and Tasks
1. What types of phraseological units are divided?
2. What is expressed the national-cultural specificity of phraseological units?
3. Give examples of syntactic phraseological units. Do such phraseological units exist in other languages?
4. What is meant by linguistic aphorism? How do linguistic aphorisms relate to phraseological units? Illustrate with examples.
5. What proverbs are used in the title, explain their meaning:
a) Economic reform in the PRC. Is it possible to catch two birds with one stone?
b) With the world on a thread - cheated on a caftan?
c) Undress and conquer.
d) Is it worth it to take SORM out of the hut? (SORM - a system of technical means to facilitate operational-search measures).
e) ʼʼ A thin mayor ’is better than a good quarrel.
f) Khristenko will now have the Far East in his bosom.
5. What is the mechanism for using case statements?
6. Select the newspaper text that would use the PS. Classify it.
7. State the classification of the PS based on the levels of representation of the value.
8. What are “canonical” PVs and transformed PVs? Give examples. Identify the source and authorship (if possible) of the IP used in the headers:
A) ʼʼRussia is cutting a new window to Europeʼʼ?
B) Sow insane, evil, instant ...
B) And tomorrow, your money will go there ...
D) Mice are different important ... (about computer mice).
E) Who lives on the fragments of an empire well.
E) The splendor and poverty of Russian governors.
G) Mullet, you always think of us.
H) The body of Lenin lives and conquers.
I) President’s mistake.
9. Read a fragment of a study of the national specificity of Russian phraseological units. Try to correlate Russian phraseological units with phraseological units (in the same meanings or with the same figurative grounds) in another language. Prove that phraseological units and metaphors reflect the national image of the world.
Phraseological combinations - concept and types. Classification and features of the category "Phraseological combinations" 2014, 2015.
