Lecture 10 Phraseological Units and their classification. Proverbs, sayings and cliche.

It has been repeatedly pointed out that word-groups viewed as functionally and semantically inseparable units are traditionally regarded as the subject matter of phraseology. It should be noted, however, that no proper scientific investigation of English Phraseology has been attempted until quite recently. English and American linguists as a rule confine themselves to collecting various words, word-groups and sentences presenting some interest either from the point of view of origin style, usage, or some other feature peculiar to them. These units are habitually described as idioms but no attempt has been made to investigate these idioms as a separate class of linguistic units or a specific class of word-groups. The term itself phraseological units to denote a specific group of phrases was introduced by Soviet linguists and is generally accepted in our country.

Classification

Taking into account mainly the degree of idiomatically phraseological units may be classified into 3 big groups.

1. Phraseological fusions.

2. Phraseological. unities.

3. Phraseological collocations.

1. Phraseological fusions are completely non-motivated word-groups, such as red tape –“ bureaucratic methods”; heavy father – “serious or solemn part in a theatrical play”; kick the bucket – “die”; and the like.

The meaning of the components has no connections whatsoever, at least synchronically, with the meaning of the whole group. Idiomaticity is, as a rule, combined with complete stability of the lexical components and the grammatical structure of the fusion.

2. Phraseological unities are partially non-motivated as their meaning can usually be perceived through the metaphoric meaning of the whole phraseological unit. For example, to show one’s teeth, to wash one’s dirty linen in public if interpreted as semantically motivated through the combined lexical meaning of the component words would naturally lead one to understand these in their literal meaning the metaphoric meaning of the whole unit, however, readily suggests “take a threatening tone” or show an intention to injure for show one’s teeth and discuss or make public one’s quarrels, for wash one’s dirty linen in public. Phr. units are as a rule marked by a comparatively high degree of stability of the lexical components.

3. Phraseological collocations are motivated but they are made up of words possessing specific lexical valency, which accounts for a certain degree of stability in such word-groups. In phr. collocations variability of member-words is strictly limited. For instance, bear a grudge may be changed into bear malice, but not into bear a fancy or liking. We can say take a liking (fancy), but not take hatred (disgust). These habitual collocations tend to become kind of cliches. Where the meaning of member words is to some extent dominated by the meaning of the whole group.