Who made classification of phraseological units

Structural classification of phraseological units

Prof. A.I. Smirnitsky states that a phraseological unit may be defined as specific word groups functioning as word-equivalents, and characterized by semantic and grammatical unity. He suggested two semantic classes of phraseological units: idioms (to wash one’s dirty linen in public), which are metaphoric and stylistically marked, and phraseological combinations (to fall in love, to get up), which are trite metaphors who have lost their figurativeness, that’s why they are stylistically neutral. Only the second group of the set expressions is given a detailed analysis.

A.I. Smirnitsky worked out structural classification of phraseological combinations according the number and semantic significance of their constituent parts. He points out one-top (one-summit) units which have one semantically significant element in their structure. They are called phrasal verbs now. He compares one-top units with derived words because derived words have only one root morpheme. He points out two-top (two-summit) units which have two semantically significant elements in their structure. He compares them with compound words because in compound words we usually have two root morphemes. He also distinguishes multi-top (multi-summit) units. The number of tops (summits) is defined by the number of notional words.

Among one-top units he points out three structural types:

Semantic classification of phraseological units

This classification was suggested by acad. V.V. Vinogradov for Russian phraseological units. He developed some points first advanced by the Swiss linguist Charles Bally and gave a strong impetus to a purely lexicological treatment of the material. It means that phraseological units were defined as lexical complexes with specific semantic features and classified accordingly. Phraseological units can be classified according to the degree of motivation аnd idiomaticity of their meaning. He pointed out three types of phraseological units:

1) phraseological fusions are completely non-motivated word-groups where the meaning of the whole expression is not derived from the meaning of components, it’s highly idiomatic, e.g. show the white feather ‘to act in a cowardly manner’, to talk through one’s hat ‘to talk foolishly’, a fishy story ‘a suspicious story’, on Shank’s mare ‘on foot’;

2) phraseological unities are partially non-motivated word-groups where the meaning of the whole can be guessed from the meaning of its components, it’s less idiomatic, e.g. to show one’s teeth ‘to threaten’, to stand to one’s guns ‘to refuse to change one’s opinion’, to skate on thin ice ‘to take risks’, to be caught napping ‘be taken unawares’. Phraseological unities can vary structurally, substitutions of their components are sometimes possible, e.g. to stick to / hold / stand one’s ground, old boy / chap / fellow; against / for a rainy day ‘until a time in the future when you might need it (esp. money will be needed)’.

3) phraseological combinations (collocations) are relatively stable motivated word groups which contain one element used in its direct meaning, while the other is used metaphorically, e.g. to meet the demand / the requirements / the necessity / the needs, to break a word / a promise / an agreement / a rule, to inflict harm / injury / strike / blow / a loss / damage.These above substitutions are not synonymic as the meaning of the whole changes, while the meanings of the verbs ‘meet’, ‘break’ and ‘inflict’ are kept intact.

The shortcoming of the classification is that it’s difficult to distinguish between the phraseological fusions and phraseological unities basing on the criterion of motivation only, as the latter works differently for people of different background.

Who made classification of phraseological units

Classification principles of phraseological units

There are three classification principles of phraseological units. The most popular is the synchronic (semantic) classification of phraseological units by V.V. Vinogradov. He developed some points first advanced by the Swiss linguist Charles Bally and gave a strong impetus to a purely lexicological treatment of the material. It means that phraseological units were defined as lexical complexes with specific semantic features and classified accordingly. His classification is based upon the motivation of the unit that is the relationship between the meaning of the whole and the meanings of its component parts. The degree of motivation is correlated with the rigidity, indivisibility and semantic unity of the expression that is with the possibility of changing the form or the order of components and of substituting the whole by a single word though not in all the cases.

According to Vinogradov’s classification all phraseological units are divided into phraseological fusions, phraseological unities and phraseological combinations.

Phraseological fusion is a semantically indivisible phraseological unit which meaning is never influenced by the meanings of its components [2; 244].

It means that phraseological fusions represent the highest stage of blending together. The meaning of components is completely absorbed by the meaning of the whole, by its expressiveness and emotional properties.

Once in a blue moon – very seldom;

To cry for the moon – to demand unreal;

Under the rose – quietly.

Sometimes phraseological fusions are called idioms under which linguists understand a complete loss of the inner form. To explain the meaning of idioms is a complicated etymological problem ( tit to tat means “to revenge”, but no one can explain the meaning of the words tit and tat).

Phraseological unity is a semantically indivisible phraseological unit the whole meaning of which is motivated by the meanings of its components [2; 245].

In general, phraseological unities are the phrases where the meaning of the whole unity is not the sum of the meanings of its components but is based upon them and may be understood from the components. The meaning of the significant word is not too remote from its ordinary meanings. This meaning is formed as a result of generalized figurative meaning of a free word-combination. It is the result of figurative metaphoric reconsideration of a word-combination.

To come to one’s sense –to change one’s mind ;

To come home – to hit the mark ;

To fall into a rage – to get angry.

Phraseological unities are characterized by the semantic duality. One can’t define for sure the semantic meaning of separately taken phraseological unities isolated from the context, because these word-combinations may be used as free in the direct meaning and as phraseological in the figurative meaning.

Phraseological combination (collocation) is a construction or an expression in which every word has absolutely clear independent meaning while one of the components has a bound meaning [2; 246].

It means that phraseological combinations contain one component used in its direct meaning while the other is used figuratively.

To make an attempt – to try ;

To make haste – to hurry ;

Some linguists who stick to the general understanding of phraseology and refer to it communicational units (sentences) and winged words, define the fourth type of phraseological units.

East or West, home is best;

Marriages are made in heaven;

Still waters run deep.

Phraseological expressions are proverbs, sayings and aphorisms of famous politicians, writers, scientists and artists. They are concise sentences, expressing some truth as ascertained by experience of wisdom and familiar to all. They are often metaphoric in character and include elements of implicit information well understood without being formally present in the discourse.

Prof. A.I. Smirnitsky worked out structural classification of phraseological units, comparing them with words. He points out one-top units which he compares with derived words because derived words have only one root morpheme. He also points out two-top units which he compares with compound words because in compound words we usually have two root morphemes.

Among one-top units he points out three structural types:

a) units of the type “to give up” (verb + postposition type);

To back up – to support;

To drop out – to miss, to omit.

b) units of the type “to be tired”. Some of these units remind the Passive Voice in their structure but they have different prepositions with them, while in the Passive Voice we can have only prepositions «by» or «with»:

To be surprised at.

There are also units in this type which remind free word-groups of the type “to be young”:

The difference between them is that the adjective “young” can be used as an attribute and as a predicative in a sentence, while the nominal component in such units can act only as a predicative. In these units the verb is the grammar centre and the second component is the semantic centre:

c) prepositional-nominal phraseological units:

On the nose – exactly.

These units are equivalents of unchangeable words: prepositions, conjunctions, adverbs, that is why they have no grammar centre, their semantic centre is the nominal part.

Among two-top units A.I. Smirnitsky points out the following structural types:

a) attributive-nominal such as:

A month of Sundays;

A millstone round one’s neck.

Units of this type are noun equivalents and can be partly or perfectly idiomatic (if the expression is idiomatic, then we must consider its components in the aggregate, not separately). In partly idiomatic units (phrasisms) sometimes the first component is idiomatic: high road; in other cases the second component is idiomatic: first night.

In many cases both components are idiomatic: red tape, blind alley, bed of nail, shot in the arm and many others.

b) verb-nominal phraseological units:

To read between the lines;

To sweep under the carpet.

The grammar centre of such units is the verb, the semantic centre in many cases is the nominal component: to fall in love. In some units the verb is both the grammar and the semantic centre: not to know the ropes. These units can be perfectly idiomatic as well: to burn one’s boats, to vote with one’s feet, to take to the cleaners’ etc.

c) phraseological repetitions, such as:

Part and parcel (integral part).

Such units can be built on antonyms: ups and downs, back and forth; often they are formed by means of alliteration: cakes and ale, as busy as a bee. Components in repetitions are joined by means of conjunctions. These units are equivalents of adverbs or adjectives and have no grammar centre. They can also be partly or perfectly idiomatic: cool as a cucumber (partly), bread and butter (perfectly).

Phraseological units the same as compound words can have more than two tops (stems in compound words):

To be a shadow of one’s own self,

At one’s own sweet will.

Phraseological units can be classified as parts of speech. This classification was suggested by I.V. Arnold. Here we have the following groups:

a) nominal phrases or noun phraseologisms denoting an object, a person or a living being :

The root of the trouble.

b) verbal phrases or verb phraseologisms denoting an action, a state or a feeling:

To sing like a lark;

To put one’s best foot forward.

c) adjectival phrases or adjective phraseologisms denoting a quality:

Red as a cherry.

d) adverbial phrases or adverb phraseological units, such as:

From head to foot;

e) prepositional phrases or preposition phraseological units:

In the course of;

f) conjunctional phrases or conjunction phraseological units:

On the other hand.

g) interjectional phrases or interjection phraseological units:

2. Кочерган М.П. Вступ до мовознавства: Підручник для студентів філологічних спеціальностей вищих навчальних закладів освіти. – К.: Видавничий центр «Академія», 2002. – 368с.

Who made classification of phraseological units?

Asked by: Leon Gleichner

The most popular is the synchronic (semantic) classification of phraseological units by V.V. Vinogradov. He developed some points first advanced by the Swiss linguist Charles Bally and gave a strong impetus to a purely lexicological treatment of the material.

What are phraseological units?

A Phraseological unit (PU) can be defined as a non-motivated word-group that cannot be freely made up in speech, but is reproduced as a ready-made unit. It is a group of words whose meaning cannot be deduced by examining the meaning of the constituent lexemes.

What is Academician VV Vinogradov’s classification of phraseological units based on?

Russian academician V.V. Vinogradov developed his original classification in the field of Russian phraseology. The classification is based upon the motivation of the unit, i.e. the relationship existing between the meaning of the whole and the meaning of its component parts.

What is phraseological fusion?

Phraseological fusion is a combination of words whose meaning has changed completely. But unlike phraseological combinations, their meanings are not understood from the meanings of their components, and metaphor-based semantic transitions lose their clarity.

What does phraseology study?

Word-groups and phraseological units: types of transference of phraseological units

19 related questions found

What is an example of phraseology?

What is the word phraseology mean?

1 : a manner of organizing words and phrases into longer elements : style. 2 : choice of words. Synonyms Example Sentences Learn More About phraseology.

What is a phraseological unit and what types of them do you know?

Phraseological collocations include a word or words with a meaning that is both literal and figurative, as in glubokaia tishina (“profound silence”). Another type of phraseological unit is the idiomatic expression, a word group whose structure and meaning are fixed.

What is the classification of phraseological units?

According to Vinogradov’s classification all phraseological units are divided into phraseological fusions, phraseological unities and phraseological combinations. Phraseological fusion is a semantically indivisible phraseological unit which meaning is never influenced by the meanings of its components [2; 244].

What is the object of phraseology?

Phraseology, which studies phraseological units of the language, as the branch of Linguistics appeared in the 1940s. The object of Phraseology is phraseological units, their nature, and the way they function in speech.

What are the two kinds of occasional stylistic usage of phraseological units?

Phraseological units are used by them both in short exclamatory and interrogative sentences, and when they make their own value judgments about something: “Let’s take the short cut”.

What is legal phraseology?

noun. manner or style of verbal expression; characteristic language: legal phraseology.

What is of great importance in the translation of phraseological units?

In conclusion it should be mentioned that phraseological units reflect the culture and national mentality of a definite country and nationality; therefore, translation of phraseological units is one of the most important issues of a contemporary translatology.

What is the synonym of phraseological units?

What is a inadequacy?

: the condition of being not enough or not good enough Parents criticized the inadequacy of safety measures. inadequacy. noun. in·​ad·​e·​qua·​cy | \ (ˈ)in-ˈad-i-kwə-sē \ plural inadequacies.

What do you mean by ponderous?

1 : of very great weight. 2 : unwieldy or clumsy because of weight and size. 3 : oppressively or unpleasantly dull : lifeless ponderous prose.

Phraseology. Classification of Phraseological Units

Lecture VI

Phraseology is a branch of lexicology studying phraseological units (set expressions, praseologisms, or idioms (in foreign linguistics). Phraseological units differ from free word-groups semantically and structurally: 1) they convey a single concept and their meaning is idiomatic, i.e. it is not a mere total of the meanings of their components 2) they are characterized by structural invariability (no word can be substituted for any component of a phraseological unit without destroying its sense (to have a bee in one’s bonnet (not cap or hat). 3) they are not created in speech but used as ready-made units. Unlike a word, a phraseological unit can be divided into separately structured elements and transformed syntactically (On the instant he was thinking how natural and unaffected her manner was now that the ice between them had been broken. (Th. Dreiser, ‘An American Tragedy’). I. found this man in a kind of seizure, and went for help. This broke the ice between us, and we grew quite chatty, without either of us knowing the other’s name. (H. Pollitt, ‘Serving My Time’).

Phraseological units are classified in accordance with several criteria.

In the classification proposed by acad. Vinogradov phraseological units are classified according to the semantic principle, and namely to the degree of motivation of meaning, i.e. the relationship between the meaning of the whole unit and the meaning of its components. Three groups are distinguished: phraseological fusions (сращения), phraseological unities (единства), phraseological combinations (сочетания).

1. Phraseological fusions are non-motivated. The meaning of the whole is not deduced from the meanings of the components: to kiss the hare’s foot (опаздывать), to kick the bucket (сыграть в ящик), the king’s picture (фальшивая монета)

2. Phraseological unities are motivated through the image expressed in the whole construction, the metaphores on which they are based are transparent: to turn over a new leaf, to dance on a tight rope.

3. Phraseological combinations are motivated; one of their components is used in its direct meaning while the other can be used figuratively: bosom friend, to get in touch with.

Prof. Smirnitsky classifies phraseological units according to the functional principle. Two groups are distinguished: phraseological units and idioms.

Phraseological units are neutral, non-metaphorical when compared to idioms: get up, fall asleep, to take to drinking. Idioms are metaphoric, stylistically coloured: to take the bull by the horns, to beat about the bush, to bark up the wrong tree.

Structurally prof. Smirnitsky distinguishes one-summit (one-member) and many-summit (two-member, three-member, etc.) phraseological units, depending on the number of notional words: against the grain (не по душе), to carry the day (выйти победителем), to have all one’s eggs in one basket.

Prof. Amosova classifies phraseological units according to the type of context. Phraseological units are marked by fixed (permanent) context, which can’t be changed: French leave (but not Spanish or Russian). Two groups are singled out: phrasemes and idioms.

1. Prasemes consist of two components one of which is praseologically bound, the second serves as the determining context: green eye (ревнивый взгляд), green hand (неопытный работник), green years (юные годы), green wound (незажившая рана), etc.

2. Idioms are characterized by idiomaticity: their meaning is created by the whole group and is not a mere combination of the meanings of its components: red tape (бюрократическая волокита), mare’s nest (нонсенс), to pin one’s heart on one’s sleeve (не скрывать своих чувств).

Prof. Koonin’s classification is based on the function of the phraseological unit in communication. Phraseological units are classified into: nominative, nominative-communicative, interjectional, communicative.

1. Nominative phraseological units are units denoting objects, phenomena, actions, states, qualities. They can be:

a) substantive – a snake in the grass (змея подколодная), a bitter pill to swallow;

b) adjectival – long in the tooth (старый);

c) adverbial – out of a blue sky, as quick as a flash;

d) prepositional – with an eye to (с намерением), at the head of.

2. Nominative-communicative units contain a verb: to dance on a volcano, to set the Thames on fire (сделать что-то необычное), to know which side one’s bread is buttered, to make (someone) turn (over) in his grave, to put the hat on smb’s misery (в довершение всех его бед).

3. Interjectional phraseological units express the speaker’s emotions and attitude to things: A pretty kettle of fish! (хорошенькое дельце), Good God! God damn it! Like hell!

4. Communicative phraseological units are represented by provebs (An hour in the morning is worth two in the evening; Never say “never”) and sayings. Sayings, unlike provebs, are not evaluative and didactic: That’s another pair of shoes! It’s a small world.

Some linguists (N.N. Amosova, J. Casares) don’t include proverbs and sayings into their classifications. Others (I.V. Arnold, A.V. Koonin, V.V. Vinogradov) do, on the grounds that 1) like in phraseological units their components are never changed 2) phraseological units are often formed on the basis of proverbs and sayings (A drowning man will clutch at a straw → to clutch at a straw).

In dictionaries of idioms the traditional and oldest principle for classifying phraseological units – the thematic principle – is used.

Дата добавления: 2014-01-05 ; Просмотров: 75089 ; Нарушение авторских прав? ;

Нам важно ваше мнение! Был ли полезен опубликованный материал? Да | Нет