Ways of Classifying Phraseological Units
There is no identity of opinion as to the terms used in this theme. For example the term “phraseology” has very different meanings in this country and in Great Britain or the United States. In the Russian linguistic literature the term is used for the whole ensemble of expressions where the meaning of one element is dependent on the other irrespective of the structure and properties of the unit. (V.Vinogradov).
N.Amosova insists on the term being applicable only to what she calls fixed contexts, i.e. units in which it is impossible to substitute any of the components without changing the meaning not only of the whole unit but also of the elements that remain intact.
In English and American linguistics the term “phraseology” is a stylistic one, meaning “mode of expression, peculiarities of diction, i.e. choice and arrangement of words and phrases characteristic of some literary work or of some author.
The complexity of the problem is accounted for by the fact that the borderline between free word-groups and phraseological units is not clearly defined.
The classification of phraseological units suggested by acad. V.V.Vinogradov is based on inner structure of word-combinations, the degree of motivation, the degree of cohesion of their elements.
According to this classification phraseology includes:
1. The so-called standardized word-combinations, i.e. phrases characterized by the limited combinative power of their components which retain their semantic independence.
2. Phraseological unities, in which the meaning of the whole is not the sum of the meanings of its components, but is based on them and motivation is apparent.
3. Phraseological fusions, i.e. phrases in which the meaning cannot be derived as a whole from the conjoined meanings of its components.
It should be noted that including in phraseology standardized word-combinations in which words retain their semantic independence seems hardly justified.
We therefore limit our attention to discussing phraseological unities and fusions.
Phraseological fusions are completely non-motivated word-groups, such as “red tape”, “to pull one’s leg” (to deceive).Their motivation can be unearthed by means of historic analysis.
The meaning of all components is entirely indifferent to the meaning of the expression. We hear some familiar words but the whole expression is not clear.
It should be mentioned that so far as we speak about a living language, which is developing, we should remember that there is no great Chinese Wall between these phraseological units. One and the same expression at different periods was a phraseological unity, a phraseological combination (or collocation) or a fusion.
How can it be so? – When the motivation of the expression is lost, a phraseological unity turns into a phraseological fusion.
e.g. good wine needs no bush (хороший товар сам себя хвалит) is a phraseological fusion, because for an Englishman the motivation is not clear. The same: to show the white feather - струсить
Phraseological fusions are specific for every language and do not lend themselves to literal translation into other languages.
More examples of phraseological fusions:
- to mind one’s p’s and q’s –
- a kettle of fish –
- before one can say Jack Robinson (immediately), arose in the 18-th century and it was a meaningless phrase
- to put a spoke in one’s wheel (goes back to the 15-th century. Spoke was used by carters to serve as a brake in descending the hill –
- to nourish a viper in one’s bosom
- to wash one’s dirty linen in public
- spick and span – well dressed
- dead as a doornail
Phraseological unities are often metaphoric and their metaphoric nature is easily seen.
e.g. to play the first fiddle and “He plays the first fiddle in the orchestra”.
To take the bull by the horn
Phraseological unities may vary in their semantic and grammatical structure. Not all of them are figurative. We can find here professionalisms, alliteration groups, coupled synonyms, repetition groups etc.
Among phraseological unities we find numerous verbs with postposition.
e.g. put down, give in, give up.
Their frequency value is exceedingly high for they are often colloquial counterparts of bookish and formal expressions. Verb-with postposition combinations add an idiomatic power to the language and enable it to express many fine distinctions of meaning.