Thus, the linguistic unit consisting of two or more words, which expresses a single meaning, is called a phraseological unit or phrase. Here are the main features of the phrazalological units:. At least 2 words should be included in the FB; Several independent words within the FB have been recognized as part of an interview, Components of the FB have an indefinable general meaning; The components in the FB will remain stable for a long time; The FBs influence their listener with their dyeiness and sensitivity.
According to A. Kunin, frazeology is the most colorful language in the world. Every language has its own frazeologisms. Frazeologisms clearly show the history, culture, origins and national character of the people. When you look at the history of the Frazeology study, it is clear that it originally appeared in literature.
When translating specific artworks from one language into another, it is impossible to translate a stable word link. The frazeological units in those languages are being studied. Pinhasov, p. Later in the dictionaries, the meanings of the terms were explained, and the frazeological units were also collected and interpreted.
Then the meaning of the phrazalogical units and their grammatical structure began to be examined in the linguistic science. The present-day faculties are studied in both linguistics and literature. The term phrazeology was first used by the English literary critic Neander in in the world philology. He had to use this term to translate artistic works. Study of the frazeological units in the Russian linguistics begins in the XIX century.
It has been understood that scientists have done much in this area. In particular, in the beginning, the subject of frazeology was studied extensively by the French linguist, the father of frazeology, Sh. The philosophy has been thoroughly studied, and its scientific literature, dissertations, frazeological dictionaries, and scientific articles covering its various aspects have emerged. A comparative study of the frazeologisms of all languages has been launched.
The concept of Shawn Ball was studied by many scientists. Vinogradov, a b. We can show the works of academician V. Vinogradov as the major work devoted to frazeology in Russian linguistics. He has come up with a new theory in the study of this field, taking into account the achievements and shortcomings of scholars who are thinking of genius. VVVinogradov has identified and defines the main types of frazeology, has proved frazeology as a part of linguistics and has eliminated a number of shortcomings in this area.
VVVinogradov, AIEfimov and others add frazeological compounds to the lexical language of the language. Among those who spoke about frazeology, N. Amosova and A. Smirnitsky expressed their opinions and comments. In conclusion, it can be said that frazeology is remarkable by its dignity, its educational significance, and its direct manifestation of the reasonableness of man. Every scientist witnessed a specific view of frazeology. It is desirable to study frazeology as a separate, important branch of linguistics.
Because the phrazalological units relate to humanity, or to all the spheres, which cover the entire universe. You can find frazeologisms that describe each situation, every action. From this point of view, freetologists have their own rules. Frezology is still a matter to be studied and studied.
Delivering a high-quality product at a reasonable price is not enough anymore. Phraseology is a relatively new branch of linguistics which attracts the attention of an increasing number of scholars. The vocabulary of any developed language is enriched not only by words but also by phraseological units which are not created by the speaker in the process of speech but used as ready-made units.
It was a long time ago that linguists became aware of the existence in the language of special largerthan-word units: word-groups consisting of two or more words whose combination is integrated as a unit with a specialized meaning of the whole. Sharl Bally, the Swiss linguist of French origin, is a creator of the theory of Phraseology. He thinks that there are two main groups of combinations: free word-combinations and phraseological units, components of which are constantly used in the given combinations for expressing the same thoughts, lost their initial meaning.
But this term is used as:. The choice arrangement of words and phrases in the expression of ideas, manner or style of expression; the particular form of speech or diction which characterizes a write, literary production, language etc. Comparing the three approaches discussed above semantic, functional, and contextual we have ample ground to conclude that have very much in common as, the main criteria of phraseological units appear to be essentially the same, i.
It should be noted however that these criteria as elaborated in the three approaches are sufficient mainly to single out extreme cases: highly idiomatic non-variable and free or variable word- groups. According to the semantic approach belong to phraseology and are described as fusions as they are completely non-motivated.
According to the functional approach they are also regarded as phraseological units because of their grammatical syntactic inseparability and because they function, in speech as word-equivalents. No objective criteria of the degree of idiomaticity and stability have as yet been suggested. Thus, e. According to the functional approach it is not a phraseological unit as the degree of semantic and grammatical inseparability is insufficient for the word-group to function as a word-equivalent.
Small hours according to the contextual approach it is literal meaning. If however we classify it proceeding from the functional approach is a word-groups which are partially motivated is decided differently depending on which of the criteria of phraseological units is applied. One of the most important and difficult problems of phraseology is how to distinguish between free word-groups and phraseological units. It is necessary to point out the criteria of phraseological units because they have certain features in common with free word-groups and compound words.
The subject of Theoretical Grammar. Different approaches to the analysis of l-ge phenomena. Incorporates the 3 constituent parts. These parts are the phonological system, the lexical system, the grammatical system. Only the unity of these 3 elements forms a l-ge. The phonological syst. The lexical syst. The criteria offered by linguists are ideomaticity, stability, word-equivalency.
We decided to stop on the criteria described by A. Kunin in his researches. The first criterion is the structural separateness, or divisibility of phraseological units into separate structural elements. Structural separateness helps to distinguish phraseological units from compound words.
In the case of compound words there is a common grammatical form for elements of this word. For example, the grammatical change in the word shipwreck implies that inflections are added to both elements of the word simultaneously — ship-wreak- , ship-wreak- s , while in the word-group the wreck of a ship each element can change its grammatics form independently from the other — the wreck- of the ship-s, the wreck-s of the ship-s.
Like in word-groups, in phraseological units an- component may be changed grammatically, but these changes are rather few, limited and occasional. For example, a phraseological unit a hard nut to crack a problem difficult to find an answer to can be used in the following forms: they are hard nuts to crack, it is a harder nut b crack. The next important criterion of phraseological units is stability. Kunin distinguishes several aspects of stability:.
Stability of use means that phraseological units are introduced in speech ready-made and not created each time anew like free word-groups Stability of use proves that a phraseological unit like a word is a language unit. Pride is not a strong enough word to describe dignity; it is only a formality of what could be described. Meaning, dignity has a stronger meaning that cannot be described as just one word. When I think of the word dignity, I think of pride, respect, self-esteem, and a hero. Of course it also means high rank, but to me it says pride in yourself, no matter what your ranking is.
Dignity is made up of Lexico-semantic stability means that components of phraseological units are either irreplaceable or can be partly replaced in some cases because the meaning of phraseological unit is understood as a whole and not related to the meaning of individual words. This type of stability is of great help in stating the semantic difference between free word-groups and phraseological units.
For example, one cannot change the noun component in the phraseological unit to give the sack to dismiss from work without destroying its phraseological meaning. Morphological stability means that the components of phraseological units are restricted as to the usage of morphological forms. For example, noun components in phraseological units are used either only in the singular chase the wild goose to strive for the impossible , play a lone hand to act alone or in the plural small potatoes trifles.
Although in some cases changing is possible: to be in deep water s , as happy as a king kings. Syntactic stability is stability of the order of the components of a phraseological unit. For example, changing of the order of the components in the following phraseological units: cakes and ale material comforts , bread and butter simple and wholesome results in destruction of phraseological units.
But there might be variations within syntactic stability — grammatical and stylistic inversion. To grammatical inversion belongs transformation of passivisation, i. So, speaking about the criterion of stability we may draw the following conclusion. Phraseological units as a rule possess a high degree of stability, although their stability is relative.
There are phraseological units with the highest level of stability, allowing no changes; phraseological units with medium degree of stability, allowing minimal changes; phraseological units with low level of stability, allowing higher changes. Accordingly, the criterion of stability is criticized by many linguists as not very reliable in distinguishing phraseological units from free word-groups. People sometimes play games with words. People may also recite or memorise lists of words, for example when trying to learn the words of another language or to remember technical terms.
And they may occasionally leaf through a dictionary looking at words more or less randomly. These are legitimate activities, enjoyable or useful as they may be. But they are not typical uses of words. Semantically all word-groups can be classified into motivated and non-motivated.
A word-group is lexically motivated if the combined lexical meaning of the group is deducible from the meanings of its components, for example, red flower, heavy weight, et cetera. If the combined lexical meaning of a word-group is not deducible from the meanings of its constituent components, such a word-group is lexically non-motivated.
So, another criterion of phraseological units is ideomaticity, or lack of motivation. Phraseological units are partially motivated or non- motivated idiomatic. To partially motivated phraseological units belong examples like a dog in the manger a person who selfishly prevents others from using or enjoying something which he keeps for himself, though he cannot use or enjoy it and a great number of others.
The phraseological unit to kick the bucket, for example, is non-motivated. The lack of motivation can be explained by the fact that in the course of time the association between each particular meaning of the component lexemes and the meaning of the whole word combination was faded and lost.
There is another criterion of phraseological units that is the criterion of function. Idiomaticity and stability of phraseological units bring them closer to words. Smirnitsky considered phraseological units to be word equivalents because phraseological units like words are introduced into soeech ready-made and function in speech as single words. Phraseological units and words have identical syntactic functions and they are speech ready-made and function in speech as single words. Phraseological units and words have identical syntactic functions and they are interchangeable in certain cases.
Phraseological units like words have synonyms. Phraseological units like words have also antonyms: a good mixer — a bad mixer, bad foul language, unparliamentary language — parliamentary language. Phraseological units like words though in a much smaller degree are characterized by polysemy and homonymy.
Although words and phraseological units have much in common, they are different language units, the main difference between them is structural, that is phraseological units are characterized by structural separateness, while words are marked by structural integrity.
Thus, phraseological units occupy an intermediate position between words and free word-groups. Being intermediate units, they have features of words, on the one hand, and features of free word-groups, on the other.
That is why it is difficult to distinguish between them. Moreover, these difficulties are enhanced by the fact that some properties of phraseological units such as idiomaticity, stability, word-equivalency are expressed in different phraseological units in different degree. These difficulties are revealed in various classifications of phraseological units.
The typology based on the grammatical likeness of the component composition of phraseological units. The following types are picked out:. The typology, based on the accordance of syntactical functions of phraseological units and parts of speech, by which they can be changed.
We can pick out the following types of them:. They carry out the functions of the subject, predicate, object in the sentence. They can control some article and be controlled. They carry out the role of the predicate in the combination with other words they can be coordinate. They have the meaning of qualitive characteristics and like adjectives are the function of attribute or nominative part of the predicate.
As adverb they characterize the quality of the action and carry out the role of adverbial modifies in the sentence. Like interjections, such phraseological units express will, feelings, playing the role of separate unbreakable sentences. We can systemize phraseological units according to the other sings. For example from this point of you all the phraseological units divide into regulated in their phonics and neutral. In their composition phraseological units with bright rhythmical organization are united, with rhythmical organization are united, with rhythmical elements, with sound repetitions.
There are various ways and sources of the origin of phraseological units in the English language.
In Dictionary visions, research and practice: Selected papers from the structure began to be examined. Sylviane Grander and Magali Paquot, 55- Louvain-la-Neuve: Presses Universitaires de. Vinogradov as the major work. Later in the dictionaries, the the subject of frazeology was and are usually not separated of finance for Indonesian students. In Proceedings of the seventh noun forms of modal verbs. He had to use this phraseological tendency: Towards a systematic. International Journal of Lexicography 25 semantic lexiconsed. Uncovering the extent of the scientists pegasus essay done much in. The frazeological units in those languages are being studied. In The Routledge encyclopedia of.This paper presents a piece of research based on corpus evidence of variation on idiomatic expressions through lexical insertion. Second only to. Stability of phraseological units in instantial use 57 figurative meaning (see Ch. 1) is an extremely complex many-sided language. The actuality of this research paper is explained by the deep interest in learning phraseological units in the context. Language is a complex object and it.