Жанр: Учеба
Лексикология английского языка
...ological
units, though, as we shall see, some of them possess it to a lesser degree
than others. Structural invariability of phraseological units finds
expression in a number of restrictions.
First of all, restriction in substitution. As a rule, no word can be
substituted for any meaningful component of a phraseological unit
without destroying its sense. To carry coals to Manchester makes as
little sense as Б Харьков со своим самоваром.
The idiom to give somebody the cold shoulder means "to treat
somebody coldly, to ignore or cut him", but a warm shoulder or a
cold elbow make no sense at all. The meaning of a bee in smb's bonnet
was explained above, but a bee in his hat or cap would sound a
silly error in choice of words, one of those absurd slips that people
are apt to make when speaking a foreign language.
At the same time, in free word-groups substitution does not present
any dangers and does not lead to any serious consequences. In
The cargo ship is carrying coal to Liverpool all the components can
be changed:
232
The ship/vessel/boat carries/transports/takes/brings coal to (any
port).
The second type of restriction is the restriction in introducing any
additional components into the structure of a phraseological unit.
In a free word-group such changes can be made without affecting
the general meaning of the utterance: This big ship is carrying a large
cargo of coal to the port of Liverpool.
In the phraseological unit to carry coals to Newcastle no additional
components can be introduced. Nor can one speak about the
big white elephant (when using the white elephant in its phraseological
sense) or about somebody having his heart in his brown boots.
Yet, such restrictions are less regular. In Vanity Fair by W. M.
Thackeray the idiom to build a castle in the air is used in this way:
"While dressing for dinner, she built for herself a most magnificent
castle in the air of which she was the mistress ..."
In fiction such variations of idioms created for stylistic purposes
are not a rare thing. In oral speech phraseological units mostly preserve
their traditional structures and resist the introduction of additional
components.
The third type of structural restrictions in phraseological units is
grammatical invariability. A typical mistake with students of English
is to use the plural form of fault in the phraseological unit to find fault
with somebody (e. g. The teacher always found faults with the boy).
Though the plural form in this context is logically well-founded, it is
a mistake in terms of the grammatical invariability of phraseological
units ". A similar typical mistake often occurs in the unit from head
to foot (e. g. From head to foot he was immaculately dressed). Students
are apt to use the plural form of foot
in this phrase thus erring once more against the rigidity of structure
which is so characteristic of phraseological units.
Yet again, as in the case of restriction in introducing additional
components, there are exceptions to the rule, and these are probably
even more numerous.
One can build a castle in the air, but also castles. A shameful or
dangerous family secret is picturesquely described as a skeleton in
the cupboard, the first substantive component being frequently and
easily used in the plural form, as in: I'm sure they have skeletons in
every cupboard! A black sheep is a disreputable member of a family
who, in especially serious cases, may be described as the blackest
sheep of the family.
Proverbs
Consider the following examples of proverbs:
We never know the value of water till the well is dry.
You can take the horse to the water, but you cannot make him
drink.
Those who live in glass houses shouldn't throw stones.
Even these few examples clearly show that proverbs are different
from those phraseological units which have been discussed above.
The first distinctive feature that strikes one is the obvious structural
dissimilarity. Phraseological units, as we have seen, are a kind of
ready-made blocks which fit into the structure of a sentence performing
a certain syntactical function, more or less as words do. E. g.
George liked her for she never put on airs (predicate). Big bugs like
him care nothing about small fry like ourselves, (a) subject, b) prepositional
object).
Proverbs, if viewed in their structural aspect, are sentences, and so
cannot be used in the way in which phraseological units are used in
the above examples.
If one compares proverbs and phraseological units in the semantic
aspect, the difference seems to become even more obvious. Proverbs
could be best compared with minute fables for, like the latter, they
sum up the collective experience of the community. They moralise
(Hell is paved with good intentions), give advice (Don't judge a tree
by its bark), give warning (If you sing before breakfast, you will cry
before night), admonish (Liars should have good memories), criticise
(Everyone calls his own geese swans).
No phraseological unit ever does any of these things. They do not
stand for whole statements as proverbs do but for a single concept.
Their function in speech is purely nominative (i. e. they denote an
object, an act, etc.). The function of proverbs in speech, though, is
communicative (i. e. they impart certain information).
The question of whether or not proverbs should be regarded as a
subtype of phraseological units and studied together with the phraseology
of a language is a controversial one.
Professor A. V. Koonin includes proverbs in his classification of
phraseological units and labels them communicative phraseological
units (see Ch. 13). From his point of view, one of the main criteria of
a phraseological unit is its stability. If the quotient of phraseological
stability in a word-group is not below the minimum, it means that we
are dealing with a phraseological unit. The structural type - that is,
whether the unit is a combination of words or a sentence - is irrelevant.
The criterion of nomination and communication cannot be applied
here either, says Professor A. V. Koonin, because there are a considerable
number of verbal phraseological units which are word-groups
(i. e. nominative units) when the verb is used in the Active Voice,
and sentences (i. e. communicative units) when the verb is used in the
Passive Voice. E. g. to cross (pass)
the Rubicon - the Rubicon is crossed (passed); to shed crocodile
tears - crocodile tears are shed. Hence, if one accepts nomination
as a criterion of referring or not referring this or that unit to phraseology,
one is faced with the absurd conclusion that such word-groups,
when with verbs in the Active Voice, are phraseological units and
belong to the system of the language, and when with verbs in the Passive
Voice, are non-phraseological word-groups and do not belong to
the system of the language. [12]
It may be added, as one more argument in support of this concept,
that there does not seem to exist any rigid or permanent border-line
between proverbs and phraseological units as the latter rather frequently
originate from the former.
So, the phraseological unit the last straw originated from the
proverb The last straw breaks the camel's back, the phraseological
unit birds of a feather from the proverb Birds of a feather flock together,
the phraseological unit to catch at a straw (straws) from A
drowning man catches at straws.
What is more, some of the proverbs are easily transformed into
phraseological units. E. g. Don't put all your eggs in one basket " to
put all one's eggs in one basket; don't cast pearls before swine " to
cast pearls before swine.
Exercises
I. Consider your answers to the following.
1. What do we mean when we say that an idiom has a "double"
meaning?
2. Why is it very important to use idioms with care? Should foreign-language
students use them? Give reasons for your answer.
3. The term "phraseological unit" is used by most Russian scholars.
What other terms are used to de scribe the same word-groups?
4. How can you show that the "freedom" of free word-groups is
relative and arbitrary?
5. What are the two major criteria for distinguishing between
phraseological units and free word-groups?
6. How would you explain the term "grammatical in variability"
of phraseological units?
7. How do proverbs differ from phraseological units?
8. Can proverbs be regarded as a subdivision of phraseological
units? Give reasons for your answer.
II., What is the source of the following idioms? If in doubt consult
your reference books.
The Trojan horse, Achilles heel, a labour of Hercules, an apple of
discord, forbidden fruit, the serpent in the tree, an ugly duckling, the
fifth column, to hide one's head in the sand.
III. Substitute phraseological units with the noun "heart"
for the italicised words. What is the difference between the
two sentences?
1. He is not a man who shows his feelings openly. 2. She may
seem cold but she has true, kind feelings. 3. I learned that piece of
poetry by memory. 4. When I think about my examination tomorrow I
feel in despair. 5. When I heard that strange cry in the darkness I was
terribly afraid. 6. It was the job I liked very much. 7. I didn't win the
prize but I'm not discouraged.
IV. Show that you understand the meaning of the following
phraseological units by using each of them in a sentence.
1. Between the devil and the deep sea; 2. to have one's heart in
one's boots; 3. to have one's heart in the
right place; 4. to wear one's heart on one's sleeve; 5. in the blues; 6.
once in a blue moon; 7. to swear black is white; 8. out of the blue; 9.
to talk till all is blue; 10. to talk oneself blue in the face.
V. Substitute phraseological units incorporating the
names of colours for the italicised words.
1. I'm feeling rather miserable today. 2. He spends all his time on
bureaucratic routine. 3. A thing like that happens very rarely. 4. You
can talk till you are tired of it but I shan't believe you. 5. The news
was a great shock to me. It came quite unexpectedly. 6. I won't believe
it unless I see it in writing. 7. You can never believe what he
says, he will swear anything if it suits his purpose.
VI. Read the following jokes. Why do little children often misunderstand
phraseological units? Explain how the misunderstanding
arises in each case.
1. "Now, my little boys and girls," said the teacher. "I want you
to be very still - so still that you can hear a pin drop." For a minute
all was still, and then a little boy shrieked out: "Let her drop."
2. "You must be pretty strong," said Willie, aged six to the young
widow who had come to call on his mother.
"Strong? What makes you think so?"
"Daddy said you can wrap any man in town around your little
finger."
S.Tom: What would you do if you were in my shoes?
Tim: Polish them!
4. Little Girl: Oh, Mr. Sprawler, do put on your skates and show
me the funny figures you can make.
Mr. Sprawler: My dear child, I'm only a beginner. I can't make
any figures.
Little Girl: But Mother said you were skating yesterday and cut a
ridiculous figure.
VII. Read the following jokes. Explain why the italicised
groups of words are not phraseological units.
Warning
The little boy whose father was absorbed in reading a newspaper
on the bench in the city park, exclaimed:
"Daddy, look, a plane!"
His father, still reading the paper, said: "All right, but don't touch
it."
Great Discovery
A scientist rushed into the ops room of the space mission control
centre: "You know that new gigantic computer which was to be the
brain of the project? We have just made a great discovery!"
"What discovery?"
"It doesn't work!"
VIII. Explain whether the semantic changes in the following
phraseological units are complete or partial. Paraphrase them.
To wear one's heart on one's sleeve; a wolf in a sheep's clothing;
to fly into a temper; to stick to one's word; bosom friend; small talk;
to cast pearls before swine; to beat about the bush; to add fuel to the
fire; to fall ill; to fall in love; to sail under false colours; to be at sea.
IX. Say what structural variations are possible in the following
phraseological units. If in doubt, consult the dictionaries.
To catch at a straw; a big bug; the last drop; to build a castle in
the air; to weather the storm; to get the upper hand; to run for one's
life; to do wonders; to run a risk; just the other way about.
CHAPTER 1 3
Phraseology: Principles of Classification
It would be interesting now to look at phraseological units from a
different angle, namely: how are all these treasures of the language
approached by the linguistic science? The very miscellaneous nature
of these units suggests the first course of action: they must be sorted
out and arranged in certain classes which possess identical characteristics.
But which characteristics should be chosen as the main criteria for
such a classification system? The structural? The semantic? Those of
degree of stability? Of origin?
It should be clear from the previous description that a phraseological
unit is a complex phenomenon with a number of important features,
which can therefore be approached from different points of
view. Hence, there exist a considerable number of different classification
systems devised by different scholars and based on different principles.
The traditional and oldest principle for classifying phraseological
units is based on their original content and might be alluded to as
"thematic" (although the term is not universally accepted). The approach
is widely used in numerous English and American guides to
idiom, phrase books, etc. On this principle, idioms are classified according
to their sources of origin, "source" referring to the particular
sphere of human activity, of life of nature, of natural phenomena, etc.
So, L. P. Smith gives in his classification groups of idioms used by
sailors, fishermen, soldiers, hunters and associated with the realia,
phenomena and conditions of their occupations. In Smith's classification
we also find groups of idioms associated with domestic and wild
animals and birds, agriculture and cooking. There are also numerous
idioms drawn from sports, arts, etc.
This principle of classification is sometimes called "etymological".
The term does not seem appropriate since we usually mean
something different when we speak of the etymology of a word or
word-group: whether the word (or word-group) is native or borrowed,
and, if the latter, what is the source of borrowing. It is true that Smith
makes a special study of idioms borrowed from other languages, but
that is only a relatively small part of his classification system. The
general principle is not etymological.
Smith points out that word-groups associated with the sea and the
life of seamen are especially numerous in English vocabulary. Most
of them have long since developed metaphorical meanings which
have no longer any association with the sea or sailors. Here are some
examples.
To be all at sea - to be unable to understand; to be in a state of
ignorance or bewilderment about something (e. g. How can I be a
judge in a situation in which I am all at sea? I'm afraid I'm all at sea
in this problem). V. H. Collins remarks that the metaphor is that of a
boat tossed about, out of control, with its occupants not knowing
where they are. [26]
To sink or swim - to fail or succeed (e. g. It is a case of sink or
swim. All depends on his own effort.)
In deep water - in trouble or danger.
In low water, on the rocks - in strained financial circumstances.
To be in the same boat with somebody - to be in a situation in
which people share the same difficulties and dangers (e. g. I don't like
you much, but seeing that we're in the same boat I'll back you all I
can). The
metaphor is that of passengers in the life-boat of a sunken ship.
To sail under false colours - to pretend to be what one is not;
sometimes, to pose as a friend and, at the same time, have hostile intentions.
The metaphor is that of an enemy ship that approaches its
intended prey showing at the mast the flag ("colours") of a pretended
friendly nation.
To show one's colours - to betray one's real character or intentions.
The allusion is, once more, to a ship showing the flag of its
country at the mast.
To strike one's colours - to surrender, give in, admit one is
beaten. The metaphor refers to a ship's hauling down its flag (sign of
surrender).
To weather (to ride out) the storm - to overcome difficulties; to
have courageously stood against misfortunes.
To bow to the storm - to give in, to acknowledge one's defeat.
Three sheets in(to) the wind (sl.) - very drunk.
Half seas over (sl.) - drunk.
Though, as has been said, direct associations with seafaring in all
these idioms have been severed, distant memories of the sea romance
and adventure still linger in some of them. The faint sound of the surf
can still be heard in such phrases as to ride out the storm or breakers
ahead! (= Take care! Danger!). Such idioms as to sail under false
colours, to nail one's colours to the mast (~ to be true to one's convictions,
to fight for them openly) bring to mind the distant past of
pirate brigs, sea battles and great discoveries of new lands.
It is true, though, that a foreigner is more apt to be struck by the
colourfulness of the direct meaning of an idiom where a native
speaker sees only its transferred meaning, the original associations
being almost fully forgotten. And yet, when we Russians use or hear
the idiom первая ласточка, doesn't a dim image of the little bird
flash before our mind, though, of course, we re244
ally mean something quite different? When we say на воре и шапка
горит, are we entirely free from the picture built up by the direct
meanings of the words? If it were really so and all the direct associations
of the idioms had been entirely erased, phraseology would not
constitute one of the language's main expressive resources. Its expressiveness
and wealth of colour largely - if not solely - depend on
the ability of an idiom to create two images at once: that of a ship
safely coming out of the storm - and that of a man overcoming his
troubles and difficulties (to weather/ride out the storm); that of a
ship's crew desperately fighting against a pirate brig - and that of a
man courageously standing for his views and convictions (to nail
one's colours to the mast),
The thematic principle of classifying phraseological units has real
merit but it does not take into consideration the linguistic characteristic
features of the phraseological units.
The considerable contribution made by Russian scholars in phraseological
research cannot be exaggerated. We have already mentioned
the great contribution made by Academician V. V. Vinogradov
to this branch of linguistic science.
The classification system of phraseological units devised by this
prominent scholar is considered by some linguists of today to be outdated,
and yet its value is beyond doubt because it was the first classification
system which was based on the semantic principle. It goes
without saying that semantic characteristics are of immense importance
in phraseological units. It is also well known that in modern
research they are often sadly ignored. That is why any attempt at
studying the semantic aspect of phraseological units should be appreciated.
Vinogradov's classification system is founded on the degree of
semantic cohesion between the components of a phraseological unit.
Units with a partially trans245
ferred meaning show the weakest cohesion between their components.
The more distant the meaning of a phraseological unit from the
current meaning of its constituent parts, the greater is its degree of
semantic cohesion. Accordingly, Vinogradov classifies phraseological
units into three classes: phraseological combinations, unities and
fusions (R. фразеологические сочетания, единства и сращения).
[9]
Phraseological combinations are word-groups with a partially
changed meaning. They may be said to be clearly motivated, that is,
the meaning of the unit can be easily deduced from the meanings of
its constituents.
E. g. to be at one's wits' end, to be good at something, to be a
good hand at something, to have a bite, to come off a poor second, to
come to a sticky end (coll.), to look a sight (coll.), to take something
for granted, to stick to one's word, to stick at nothing, gospel truth,
bosom friends.
Phraseological unities are word-groups with a completely
changed meaning, that is, the meaning of the unit does not correspond
to the meanings of its constituent parts. They are motivated units or,
putting it another way, the meaning of the whole unit can be deduced
from the meanings of the constituent parts; the metaphor, on which
the shift of meaning is based, is clear and transparent.
E. g. to stick to one's guns (~ to be true to one's views or convictions.
The image is that of a gunner or guncrew who do not desert
their guns even if a battle seems lost); to sit on the fence (~ in discussion,
politics, etc. refrain from committing oneself to either side); to
catch/clutch at a straw/straws (~ when in extreme danger, avail oneself
of even the slightest chance of rescue); to lose one's head (~ to be
at a loss what to do; to be out of one's mind); to lose one's heart to
smb. (~ to fall in love); to lock the stable door after the horse is stolen
(~ to take precautions too late, when
the mischief is done); to look a gift horse in the mouth (= to examine
a present too critically; to find fault with something one gained without
effort); to ride the high horse (~ to behave in a superior, haughty,
overbearing way. The image is that of a person mounted on a horse so
high that he looks down on others); the last drop/straw (the final
culminating circumstance that makes a situation unendurable); a big
bug/pot, sl. (a person of importance); a fish out of water (a person
situated uncomfortably outside his usual or proper environment).
Phraseological fusions are word-groups with a completely
changed meaning but, in contrast to the unities, they are demotivated,
that is, their meaning cannot be deduced from the meanings of the
constituent parts; the metaphor, on which the shift of meaning was
based, has lost its clarity and is obscure.
E. g. to come a cropper (to come to disaster); neck and crop (entirely,
altogether, thoroughly, as in: He was thrown out neck and
crop. She severed all relations with them neck and crop.); at sixes
and sevens (in confusion or in disagreement); to set one's cap at smb.
(to try and attract a man; spoken about girls and women. The image,
which is now obscure, may have been either that of a child trying to
catch a butterfly with his cap or of a girl putting on a pretty cap so as
to attract a certain person. In Vanity Fair: "Be careful, Joe, that girl is
setting her cap at you."); to leave smb. in the lurch (to abandon a
friend when he is in trouble); to show the white feather (to betray
one's cowardice. The allusion was originally to cock fighting. A white
feather in a cock's plumage denoted a bad fighter); to dance attendance
on smb. (to try and please or attract smb.; to show exaggerated
attention to smb.).
It is obvious that this classification system does not take into account
the structural characteristics of phraseological units. On the
other hand, the border-line
separating unities from fusions is vague and even subjective. One and
the same phraseological unit may appear motivated to one person
(and therefore be labelled as a unity) and demotivated to another (and
be regarded as a fusion). The more profound one's command of the
language and one's knowledge of its history, the fewer fusions one is
likely to discover in it.
The structural principle of classifying phraseological units is
based on their ability to perform the same syntactical functions as
words. In the traditional structural approach, the following principal
groups of phraseological units are distinguishable.
A. Verbal. E. g. to run for one's (dear) life, to get (win) the upper
hand, to talk through one's hat, to make a song and dance about
something, to sit pretty (Amer. sl.).
B. Substantive. E. g. dog's life, cat-and-dog life, calf love, white
lie, tall order, birds of a feather, birds of passage, red tape, brown
study.
C. Adjectival. E. g. high and mighty, spick and span, brand new,
safe and sound. In this group the so-called comparative word-groups
are particularly expressive and sometimes amusing in their unanticipated
and capricious associations: (as) cool as a cucumber, (as) nervous
as a cat, (as) weak as a kitten, (as) good as gold (usu. spoken
about children), (as) pretty as a picture, as large as life, (as) slippery
as an eel, (as) thick as thieves, (as) drunk as an owl (sl.), (as) mad as
a hatter/a hare in March.
D. Adverbial. E. g. high and low (as in They searched for him
high and low), by hook or by crook (as in She decided that, by hook or
by crook, she must marry him), for love or money (as in He came to
the conclusion that a really good job couldn't be found for love or
money), in cold blood (as in The crime was said to have been committed
in cold blood), in the dead of night, between the devil and the
deep sea (in a situation in which danger threatens whatever course of
action
one takes), to the bitter end (as in to fight to the bitter end), by a long
chalk (as in It is not the same thing, by a long chalk).
E. Interject
Закладка в соц.сетях
