 |
АвтоАвтоматизацияАрхитектураАстрономияАудитБиологияБухгалтерияВоенное делоГенетикаГеографияГеологияГосударствоДомДругоеЖурналистика и СМИИзобретательствоИностранные языкиИнформатикаИскусствоИсторияКомпьютерыКулинарияКультураЛексикологияЛитератураЛогикаМаркетингМатематикаМашиностроениеМедицинаМенеджментМеталлы и СваркаМеханикаМузыкаНаселениеОбразованиеОхрана безопасности жизниОхрана ТрудаПедагогикаПолитикаПравоПриборостроениеПрограммированиеПроизводствоПромышленностьПсихологияРадиоРегилияСвязьСоциологияСпортСтандартизацияСтроительствоТехнологииТорговляТуризмФизикаФизиологияФилософияФинансыХимияХозяйствоЦеннообразованиеЧерчениеЭкологияЭконометрикаЭкономикаЭлектроникаЮриспунденкция
Free word groups vs/coTlocation, cliches, set expressions, idioms, phraseological units)
As has already been mentioned, there is no accepted terminology for complex conventionalized word combinations. They use various terms like complex units, collocations, fixed expressions, fixed phrases, phrasemes, phrasal lexemes, phraseolexems, phraseologisms, potylexical expressions, multiword lexemes, full and partial idioms, conventional expressions, phraseological units.
Different terminology is usually determined by different criteria that are used to distinguish between free and bound word combinations. The terms collocations, set-expressions, idioms and phraseological units are used especially often and that is why they need special attention.
Word groups differ, first of all, from the point of view of reproductivity—their ability to be readily reproduced in speech.
Some of them are created spontaneously in speech and do not need memorizing because they are organized according to regular language rules: a clever machine, a pretty girl. They may have never been used before by anybody else, and probably will never be used in the future, like the cleverest hungry man. Such word combinations make up an open class of free word groups, and are mainly studied in syntax.
Some word groups, however, are regularly reproduced in speech by all adult members of the language community and make up patterned complexes due to peculiarities in their combinability. These word groups are called collocations.
Collocations that are just word groups habitually used in speech e.g. kind to people, commit a suicide, to launch a satellite, ladies and gentlemen, Good morning! are often referred to as cliches. Some of them may include a polysemantic word in one of its minor meanings, like heavy traffic, monumental ignorance or green with envy.
Highly predictable collocations with limited lexical and grammatical valence that allow little or no change at all, like on the one hand, hand in hand, by the way, so far so good, How do you do? are usually referred to as set expressions.
Anyway, in contrast to free word combinations, the elements in collocations repeatedly co-occur and are specifically bound to each other. As well as morphemes and words they are ready-made, regularly reproducible meaningful lexical units.
Making a list of collocations characteristic of a language is a matter of extreme difficulty. One of the attempts in this field is The BBI Combinatory Dictionary of English by M. Benson, E. Benson and R. Ilson (1986, 1990) where alongside certain types of grammatical patterns (V+N; N+Prep; N+Inf; N+that clause; Prep+Noun combination; etc.) the authors single out seven major types of lexical collocations (for example, creation and/or activation verbs + N/PRN as in make an impression, compose music, fly a kite, launch a missile; eradication and/or multifwation verbs + N (demolish a house, reject an appeal, ease tension; override a veto; lexical collocations consisting of an adverb and a noun as in deeply absorbed or closely acquainted).
The word 'collocation', however, may also be used in a broader sense as any acceptable word group except idioms. Thus, according to Англо-русский словарь глагольных словосочетаний (English-Russian Dictionary of Verbal Collocations) (1986) the verb buy can form only six out of 24 grammatical models characteristic of English verbs and it enters such lexical types of collocations as to buy something (~ a hat, flowers, etc.) to buy somebody (~ a public official, a -witness), to buy somebody something (~ please, buy me a pair of new shoes), to buy something for somebody/something (~ to buy a new pair of shoes for me), to buy something in some manner (~ things cheaply/cheap), to buy something in/at/some place (I shall ~ it elsewhere), to buy something from/of/somebody (~ a book from him), to buy something at some price (~ a house at a reasonable price), to buy something by something (~ -wool by weight), to buy something with something (~ his favours with flattery), be bought for something (it cannot be bought for gold), be bought in some manner (victory was dearly bought), as well as in the expression the best that money can buy.
The borderline between free and set word groups is very vague. It is usually the degree of reproductivity that matters. Free word groups are not absolutely free in combining with other words because all words in a language have limitations and preferences in usage. Free word groups are relatively free as the words in them have restricted application determined by the language structure. For example, Russian speaking people may say земляные орехи, лесные орехи, грецкие орехи but what other words can be used with the word орехи to indicate their nature type? We may use the adjectives сырые, жареные орехи; орехи с солью, орехи с сахаром to indicate their relatedness to being processed, but what else? And set expressions may not be necessarily absolutely set, or fixed, they may allow certain variation (cf.: not to care a fig/damn).
Due to this vagueness of borderlines between free and set word groups, the term 'set-expression' or even 'collocation' can hardly be used for units of phraseology though it is very clear and self-explanatory.
Another widely used term for a unit of phraseology is an 'idiom', though in this case attention is paid to its meaning rather than to the restricted valence of words and easy reproductivity of the whole word group.
The lexical meaning of a word group may consist of the combined lexical meanings of the component words (a blind man). Such word groups are called completely motivated. The total meaning of such words-groups includes lexical, grammatical and structural meaning of their constituents.
But in some of word groups the lexical meaning may include an additional idiomatic component that cannot be found in any of the constituent parts. To lead to the altar means 'to marry'; to build castles in the air is 'to day-dream'; the hill of Achilles means 'a weak point'; to beat about the bush means 'to approach a matter in an indirect and roundabout manner'; a blue stocking means 'derog. a woman who is thought to be too highly educated' [LDCE] or 'woman having or affecting literary tastes and learning' [COED]. Word groups whose meaning cannot be deduced by examining the meaning of their constituent parts are called non-motivated, or idioms.
There are a lot of cases of homonymy between motivated and non-motivated word groups as in apple sauce 'sauce made of apples' (a completely motivated word group) and apple sauce 'nonsense' (an idiom).
Polysemantic words in a word group are used in one of their meanings, primary or secondary, central or peripheral (cf.: a left hand and a factory hand, a heavy bag and a heavy traffic). The use of a word in one of its minor meanings makes the word group partially motivated, and the problem of differentiating between a completely motivated word group (a factory hand 'a factory worker') and an idiom (with a heavy hand 'clumsily') becomes more complicated.
Idioms are very frequent in spoken English; they are less common in written English or even more formal situations. Due to their summarizing effect idioms are often used to terminate one topic in conversation and to make transition to another one. Idioms help to create a relaxed atmosphere. Someone whose English is very good but who uses no idioms, can sound formal, rather impersonal and even unfriendly. For this reason knowledge of idioms is important so that one's business meeting does not to sound "cold".
At the same time one should be quite careful with idioms. They are not always appropriate because many of them are very informal (green fingers, to have a bee in one's bonnet) or too formal (the compliments of the season, a bone of contention).
The term 'idiom' is especially widely used m English and American linguistics, though it is too polysemantic for a linguistic term. Its major meaning is 'the language peculiar to a people or to a district, community or class: DIALECT'; 'the syntactical, grammatical or structural form peculiar to a language'. It also denotes 'a style of form of artistic expression that is characteristic of an individual, a period or movement, or a medium, or instrument: the modern jazz idiom)' and 'an expression in the usage of a language that is peculiar to itself either grammatically (as no, it wasn 't me) or in having a meaning that cannot be derived from the conjoined meanings of its elements (as Monday week for 'the Monday a week after next Monday')' /WNCD/. Due to the ambiguity of the term 'idiom' many linguists are looking for a special term to denote word complexes that serve as ready-made units.
The most inclusive term used by Russian phraseologists is a 'phraseological unit'.
Phraseological units make up the 'phrasecon' of a language - the whole list of idioms (to break the ice 'to begin') and non-idiomatic set-phrases (to shrug shoulders), both word-like (as far as, side by side, at first sight) and sentence-like (as proverbs, sayings, routine formulae, slogans, maxims, and quotations: Who knows most, speaks least, Teach your child to hold his tongue, he'll learn enough to speak; Speech is the picture of the mind; It is better to say nothing than not enough).
Phraseological units are characterized, like a word, by semantic unity (to have a bee in one's bonnet 'to have a strange fixed idea about something'), grammatical invariability (to find fault (not * faults) with somebody) and structural integrity (to carry coal to Newcastle 'to do anything superfluous or unnecessary' and nothing can be changed here, for example, to carry coal *to Manchester).
Yet, the degree of word integrity and stability in phraseological units may be different. Many of them may undergo certain structural, grammatical, lexical, stylistic and pragmatic changes and variation because they may include components that allow a certain degree of variability (as black as coal/ink/midnight/soot; she built herself the (most magnificent) castle in the air, and a bull/elephant in a china shop).
Though the term 'phraseological unit' is very inclusive, the problem of determining the borderline between free word groups and phraseological units remains. Such complexes pronounced as compounds as snowman 'a figure of a man made of snow', nightmare 'an unplesant and terrible dream', fiddle-sticks 'nonsense', green belt 'a stretch of land round of town where building is not allowed, so that trees, woods, etc., remain' are often regarded as exocentric compounds and are not included in phraseological dictionaries. But such complexes as jailbird 'a habitual criminal confined in jail', night-owl 'a person who keeps late hours at night (Am.)', red tape 'bureaucracy' are usually included into phraseological dictionaries though the difference between them is very vague.
The closeness of phraseological units to compound words may be regarded as an additional argument for regarding them as ready-made lexical units and including them into the lexicon.
[Classification ot phraseological units!
There are diverse views on which conventionalized complex expressions should be the subject matter of phraseology, and that is why there are variances in categorization and classification of these units.
There are a considerable number of classifications based on different principles established by different scholars.
Classification of phraseological units may be based on their syntactical characteristics. In this case scholars distinguish between word-like (side by side) and sentence-like phraseological units (or phraseological expressions) (Life is not a bed of roses).
Etymological classification of phraseological units reveals their origin. Many of them come from the Bible (Love not in word but in deed; Man shall not live by bread alone; In much wisdom is much grief; Appearances are deceitful; A good name is better than riches; The forbidden fruit is sweetest), some of them come from farming (to call a spade a spade, to speed the plough; hold your horses), some of them originated from collocations habitually used by sailors (between wind and water; to know the ropes; to blow off steam), medical people (to take one's medicine), and lawyers (burden of proof).
The traditional and the oldest principle for classifying phraseological units is based on their content and might be called thematic.This approach is widely used in numerous English and American guides to idioms (e.g. idioms referring to confusion: slipped my mind, can't make head or tail of it, on the tip of the tongue, I haven't the clue; to meeting people: feeling a bit under the weather, talking shop, I don't feel up to; idioms of complaining or commiserating: a stab in the back, pay lip service to, fed up to the teeth with). The thematic approach has its merits but it does not take into consideration the linguistic features of phraseological units.
Russian phraseological theory is based predominantly on linguistic parameters. From the mid-1970s it has had the strongest influences on British phraseological theory /Cowie 1998:213/
Classification of phraseological units by V.V. Vinogradov is based on the semantic
approach, i.e. the different degree of semantic cohesion between the components of a
phraseological unit, semantic motivation. He singles out three classes of them:
phraseological combinations (фразеологические сочетания);
phraseological unities (фразеологические единства);
phraseological fusions (also called idioms) (фразеологические сращения).
Phraseological combinations are word groups with a partially changed meaning. They are usually made up of two open-class words and one of them is used figuratively. Phraseological combinations are clearly and fully motivated, i.e. their meaning can be easily deduced from the meanings of its constituents and common knowledge of the world (to take something for granted, a bosom friend, to meet the demand/necessity/requirement).
Phraseological unities are word groups with a completely changed meaning when the meaning of the word group does not correspond to the meanings of its constituent parts, yet the metaphor on which the shift of meaning is based is transparent (to look a gift horse in the mouth 'to examine a present too critically'; to blow off steam 'to release pent-up emotions', Arcadian life 'simple and pleasant country life').
Phraseological fusions are word groups with a completely changed, demotivated meaning, the metaphor has lost its clarity and became obscure and opaque (at sixes and sevens 'in confusion or in disagreement'; to spill the beans 'to divulge information
indiscreetly').
The weak points of this classification is that the borderline between the types of phraseological units, especially the borderline separating unities from fusion, is vague and subjective. Moreover, it does not take into account the structural characteristics of phraseological units.
Classification of phraseological units (mainly two-word collocations) by N.N. Amosova is based on contextual approach. She argued thai free word groups make up variable contexts, and substitution of one element in the word group does not change the meaning of the other (e.g. a small/large/great town/room/audience). But phraseological units make up a non-variable, fixed context, they allow no substitution of the kind (small (early) hours but not *little/big hours, red tape not *blue or *ribbon for 'bureaucracy').
She subdivides phraseological units into phrasemes in which only one word has a specialized meaning and restricted context (small in the meaning of 'early' is used only with hours, small in the meaning of 'trivial' is used only with talk) and idioms where the whole word group possesses a specialized meaning, none of the words are used literally, and all the words are mutually contextually bound (red tape, blue slocking).
The classification of phraseological units may be based on the analysis of their syntactic functions.
In the traditional functional approach to classification of phraseological units they distinguish the following their types:
verbal (or verb-equivalent) (to run for one's life);
substantive (or noun equivalent) (red tape; dog's life);
adjectival (or adjective equivalent) (safe and sound, as cool as a cucumber);
adverbial (or adverb equivalent) (by hook or by crook 'at any cost');
interjectional (or interjection-equivalent) (Good grief! Good heavens!).
A.I. Smirnitsky offered a classification which combines structural and semantic approaches. Phraseological units in this classification are grouped according to the number of significant elements. Two large groups were established: a) one-summit units with one meaningful constituent: to give up, to be lifted; and b) two- or multi-summit units with two or more meaningful parts: black art; first night, common sense.
Then, within each of these large groups of phraseological units they are further classified according to the part-of-speech meaning of the summit member into verbal-adverbial (to give up); verbal adjectival (to be tired); prepositional-substantitive (by heart), attributive-substantitive units (black art), and others.
A.I. Smirnitsky also distinguished between proper phraseological units with non-figurative meaning and idioms, which are metaphorical.
A.V. Knnin worked out the most comprehensive classification of phraseological units and combined structural-semantic principles of classification, quotient of stability of phraseological units and their functions in communication. His classification needs a special analysis, here only the most important features of this theory are mentioned.
From the point of view of the function that phraseological units perform in speech, he subdivided them into the following four major classes:
1) nominative that perform nominating function; they are utterances below the level of a sentence (to breath one's last 'to die', Hobson's choice 'no alternative; take what you are offered or none at all', off colour 'not in the usual form', safe and sound, see how the land lies, wear and fear);
2) communicative that convey the thought; they include proverbs and sayings: It is as broad as it is long 'it is the same whichever way you view it' A cheerful wife is the joy of life; A hungry man is an angry man; A fool may make money but it takes a wise man to spend it; Fingers were made before forks; He is the richest that has fewest wants; and If a man deceived me once, shame on him; if twice, shame on me;
3) nominative-communicative word groups that normally perform a nominating function but only slight transformations in grammar make them perform a communicative function (to break the ice — the ice is broken; to square the circle 'to attempt something impossible'— the circle is squared);
4) interjectional phraseological units that mainly express emotions (Well, I'll never! By George! It's a pretty kettle offish!).
He was also the first to apply m practice theoretical principles to the choice and classification of phraseological units. They helped to determine which units are to be included and how they should be presented in an entry. The first edition of his Англорусский фразеологический словарь (English-Russian Phraseological Dictionary) was in 1955. The second (1956), the third (1967), the fourth (1984) and the fifth (1998) editions are improved in selection, systematic analysis and descriptive precision.
In his dictionary A.V. Kunin is careful to limit coverage of restricted collocations to those that allow no or minimal variation (e.g. the naked truth; ask/look for trouble).
At the same time he distinguishes several types of phraseological variants: lexical (to bear/give/lend a hand; not to lift/raise/stir/turn a finger);
grammatical (in deep water/waters; Damocles' sword/the sword of Damocles); lexical-grammatical (close/shut a/the door);
positional (head over ears/over head and ears);
orthographical (hand in glove/ltand-in-glove) and some others.
In cases when variation involves fundamental structural and semantic differences they are regarded as members of the same phraseological series and are treated as distinct entries each having their own number (for example, С 179. care killed a/the cat, С 270. a cat has nine lives, С 280. a cat with nine lives, С 290. have as many lives as a cat, С 314. cat and dog existence).
A.V. Kunin's dictionary arranges phraseological units according to the pivotal word -the central and invariable component of the word group which is determined by a number of principles. To facilitate use of the dictionary, all phraseological units are also listed in alphabetical order with the index of their entry in the dictionary. Thus, in the alphabetical list of the included word groups the phraseological unit misfortunes never come alone/singly) has the index number M-811. This index number means that phraseological unit is to be found in the dictionary under the letter M in entry 811, and the letter M indicates that the pivotal word here is misfortunes.
As A.P. Cowie remarks, "despite its limitations, which arise chiefly from the difficulties experienced by the compiler in gaining access to up-to-date texts and, in particular, modern non-literary material, the English-Russian Phraseological Dictionary is a meticulous work of scholarship and a model of theory-driven lexicography" /Cowie 1998:220/.
The first (and probably the best), large-scale, theoretically grounded English phraseological dictionary compiled by native speakers is the Oxford Dictionary of Current Idiomatic English (1975, 1983) by A.P. Cowie, R. Mackin and I.R. McCaig.
Like A.V. Kunin's Dictionary it contains a theoretical section where the authors explain
how word groups - candidates for inclusion - were accessed, and which framework of categories of phraseological units (composites and functional expressions) the authors followed.
The composites and functional expressions were subdivided according to the degree of idiomaticity and called pure idioms with totatlly transferred and hardly deducible meanings (spill the beans 'to tell a secret too soon or to the wrong person'), figurative idioms in which interpretation of metaphor may restore the meaning of the phrase (a clean sheet 'a good reputation') and restricted collocations without a metaphor (a safe job). In the list of restricted collocations the authors included only the entirely invariable items (to break one's journey, a safe job) or items with limited valence (to do the necessary/needful).
Another characteristic of the dictionary is that the compilers provide lexical and grammatical information about internal and external valence and variability of phraseological units. For example, they use special conventions to signal that the figurative idiom hold water 'to be sound, valid' is usually preceded by the subjects theory, argument, explanation, reason, excuse, belief, need. This information is of great value for a non-native speaker, it helps to use phraseological units with confidence.
The most comprehensive Russian-English Dictionary of Idioms by Sophia
Lubensky, edited by Random House in 1995, is also compiled under the influence of A.V. Kunin's theory. It presents some 13,000 traditional Russian idioms and combines features of translation and learner's dictionaries. It uses the term 'idiom' in its wider sense treating it like a 'phraseological unit'.
The most common 500 proverbs and sayings used in Russian and Soviet fiction literature in the 19th - 20th centuries and in oral communication with their English equivalents are presented in the Русско-английский словарь пословиц и поговорок by S.S. Kii/.rnin and N.L. Shadrin /1996/. The dictionary is richly illustrated with quotations.
Further reading:
Амосова Н.Н. Основы английской фразеологии. - Л.: Изд-во Ленинградского университета, 1968.
Англо-русский словарь глагольных словосочетаний (English-Russian Dictionary of Verbal Collocations) /Под редакцией Э.М.Медниковой. - М.: Русский язык, 1986. Виноградов В.В. Лексикология и лексикография. Избранные труды. - М.:
Наука, 1977. Кузьмин, С. С., Шадрин Н.Л. Русско-английский словарь пословиц и поговорок. -
Спб.: МИК/Лань, 1996. Кунин А.В. Английская фразеология. - М.: Высшая школа, 1970.
Кунин А.В. Англо-русский фразеологический словарь. - М.: Советская
Энциклопедия, 1984. Кунин А.В. Курс фразеологии современного английского языка. - М.: Высшая
школа, 1986. Телия В.И. Типы языковых значений. Связанное значение слова в языке. - М.:
Наука, 1981. Шадрин Н.Л. Перевод фразеологических единиц и сопоставительная стилистика.
- Саратов, Изд-во Саратовского университета, 1991. Benson M., Benson E., Ilson R. The BBI Combinatory Dictionary of English. -
Amsterdam-Philadelphia: John Benjamin Publishing Company, 1986; М.: Русский
язык, 1990. Cowie A.P., Mackin R. Oxford Dictionary of Current Idiomatic English. - Oxford:
OUP, v.l-2, 1984. Idioms: structural and psychological perspectives (ed. by Martin Everaert, et al.) -
Hillsdale, New Jersey: LEA, 1995. Lubensky, Sophia. Russian-English Dictionary of Idioms. - New York: Random House,
1995. Phraseology (Ed. by A.P. Cowie). - Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1998.
Поиск по сайту: