Part VIII: Word Groups and Phraseological Units

Words do not randomly build sentences. They are first grouped into word groups or phrases that function as a unit within the sentence. “A typical phrase can be broken down into three parts— a head, a specifier, and a complement” (O’Grady & Archibald, 2012, p.144), and a head, or a headword, is the nucleus around which a phrase is built (Ibid, p.144). According to the type of the head, the following phrases are identified: noun phrase (NP) (a picture of a city, the city, and Anna’s boyfriend); verb phrase (VP) (believe anyone, laugh loudly, and occupy the building); prepositional phrase (PP) (of the cats, across the street, and on the table); adjective phrase (extremely happy), and adverb phrase (very quickly and rather quickly). Complement is “the element or elements for which a head is subcategorized and which provides information about entities and locations implied by the meaning of the head” (Ibid, p. 508); for example, in the PP in the house, the head is in, the specifier is determiner the, and the complement is the location implied by the meaning of the head.

Specifier the “helps to make more precise the meaning of the head of the phrase” (Ibid, p. 526).

8.1 Basic Features of Word-groups

Valency is a lexico-syntactic property which ‘‘involves the relationship between, on the one hand, the different subclasses of a word-class (such as a verb) and, on the other, the different structural environments required by the subclasses, these environments varying both in the number and in the type of elements” (Allerton, 2005, p. 4878). The term “valency” was borrowed from chemistry, and in linguistics, it means the ability of words to attach other words. Ginzburg et al. (1978) believes that in combining words, two main linguistic factors should be considered: the lexical and the grammatical valency (a.k.a ‘valence’) of words. “The aptness of a word to appear in various combinations is described as its lexical valency or collocability” (Ibid, p. 64). The collocability of words is restricted by internal structure of the words. Although synonyms are words with similar meanings, they do not collocate with the same words. The synonyms strong, hardy, powerful, and tough have similar meanings; however, they do not always collocate with the same words. We can have strong, powerful, and tough arguments; however, hardy does not collocate with arguments.We drink strong tea rather than powerful, hardy, or tough. We have a powerful or tough car rather than strong. There is a strong body, a strong government, a strong headwind, and strong colors. Powerful collocates with turbine, nuclear bomb, fighter, and army. Hardy empathizes the ability to withstand force and adversity: hardy plants, hardy cattle, and hardy outdoor furniture. We have a tough question or problem.

The grammatical valency is “the aptness of a word to appear in specific grammatical (or rather syntactic) structures” (Ibid, p.66). The grammatical valency of a lexeme is the set of operations that are required to form an appropriate word-group. For example, we take the verb see and create a word-group: see Ann, see someone, and see closely Pete. Each example shows that a word depends on the grammatical structure of the language. If we compare the valency of two words that belong to the same word class, we will find that they have different grammatical valency. Some examples are explain to somebody something and teach somebody something. Although explain and teach are verbs and they follow by indirect object, explain requires a preposition to before the indirect object. Another example shows that even synonymous verbs that coin V+N word-groups, they require different nouns, thus proving that they have different valency: propose/present a plan, solution, resolution; propose marriage; offer a help; present (one’s) apologies; offer (one’s) condolences; proffer (one’s) regrets; and tender (one’s) resignation.

8.2 Phraseology

Phraseology has been traditionally presented as a subfield of lexicology, but in recent decades it has developed into a separate discipline taught at universities. “From the mid-1970s, and increasingly throughout the 1980s, one of the strongest influences on British phraseological theory was the work of a group leading Russian scholars who had been active about thirty years earlier” (Cowie, p. 213). British scholars mention in their works Russian scholars such as V.V. Vinogradov, who is regarded as “the father of Russian phraseology” (Cowie, 2001, p.213) and N.N. Amosova, because of a “formulation of phraseologically bound meaning” (p.213). Although the views of these two scholars differ, the differences are in terminology rather than in substance.

There is no agreement among the scholars in regards to terming set-expressions with transferred meaning. Although most scholars use the term phraseological units or phraseologisms (Chernyisheva, 1964; Kunin, 1963; Vinogradov, 1947; Ginzburg, 1979), others name them differently. Irina Arnold (1973) speaks of set-expressions; Zgusta (1971), set combinations; and Mel’čuk (1988b), phrasemes, or set phrases. Cowie and Howarth, who were influenced by Russian models, name them word-combinations. Palmer uses the term an ‘idiom.’

8.3 Definition of a Phraseological Unit

There is no agreement on the definition of a phraseological unit, either. Phraseology can be “loosely defined as the study of conventional phrases, where a phrase means a multi-word expression up to sentence level” (Pawley, 2001). A.V. Kunin defines it as “a stable combination of words with complete or partial transferred meaning” (1970, p. 210). Ginzburg et al speaks of “non-motivated word-groups that cannot be freely made up in speech but are reproduced as ready-made units” (1979, p. 74). Rosemarie Gläser defines a phraseological unit as a “lexicalized, reproducible bilexemic or polylexemic word group in common use, which has relative syntactic and semantic stability, may be idiomatized, may carry connotations, and may have an emphatic or intensifying function in a text” (2001, p.125). It should be noted that in early 1930s, H. E. Palmer set up a project to collect collocations-- words which “have more specific meanings” (1933). He states that idioms involve collocation of a special kind, and their meanings are not “related to the meaning of the individual words” (p.80), e.g., kick the bucket. He concludes that the meaning of idioms “cannot be predicted from the meanings of the words themselves” (p.80). David Crystal uses the term ‘idiom,’ or ‘idiomatic expression,’ and notes that its meaning “cannot be deduced by examining the meanings of the constituent lexemes” (1996, p.163). Rosalia Ginzburg sums up that the term ‘idioms’ generally implies that the essential feature of the linguistic units under consideration is idiomaticity, or lack of motivation. This term is habitually used by English and American linguists, and it is very often treated as synonymous with the term phraseological unit” (1979, p. 74). After analyzing the proposed definitions, we believe Kunin’s definition of a phraseological unit, as a stable combination of words with partially and fully figurative meaning, is more effective because the main feature of a phraseological unit is its transferred meaning, and it is characterized by the stability of its components.

8.4 The Criteria of Phraseological Units

Scholars recognize the following characteristics of PUs: motivatability/ integrity/ transference of meaning (all three terms cover figurativeness of meaning), stability, separability, variability, and expressivity and emotiveness. In regards to motivatability, PUs can be divided into unmotivated and partially motivated (or partially non-motivated) phraseological units. The meaning of a PU is metaphorical; it cannot be deduced from the meanings of its components. “The meaning of the resultant combination [a phraseological unit] is opaque; it is not related to the meaning of the individual words” (Palmer, 1990, p. 78). Unmotivated phraseological units occur when “there is no relation whatsoever between the meaning of the whole combination and those of its components” (Cowie, 2001, p. 214), and partially motivated, or partially non-motivated, phraseological units are the ones “whose sense could be perceived as a metaphorical or metonymic extension of the whole expression” (Ginzburg et al., 1979, p.75). Examples of unmotivated PUs are a skeleton in the cupboard/closet and smell a rat.

The stability of phraseological units can be observed when the structure of some phraseological units is stable lexically and grammatically. Words within some PUs cannot be changed or replaced. Most of the scholars agree that phraseological units are grammatically and lexically fixed. If the word-combination kick the bucket is used in its direct meaning, gathered from the meanings of its constituents, the word bucket may be changed, if necessary, or may be substituted for/by any other object, e.g., ball, stool, or whatever is kicked at the moment; however, when kick the bucket is used in its transferred meaning, we cannot make such substitutions. Any change within a PU will destroy its meaning because the meaning of a PU cannot be gathered from the meanings of its components.

There are some grammatical restrictions as well; for example, the components of PUs cannot be changed, e.g., kick the bucket cannot be changed to kick the buckets. We have an ear for something, but not have ears for something, and equally there is no play the fields, put on good faces, and blow one's tops. Adjectives do not have comparative and superlative degrees in phraseological units, e.g., a high roller cannot have the forms higher roller or the highest roller; equally a new broom cannot be newer broom or the newest broom.

Phraseological units may have syntactic restrictions; for example, some of them cannot employ the passive voice. The PU meet/see somebody in the flesh does not have passive voice; somebody is met/seen in the flesh sounds strange. The order of words stays stable within a PU, and it has grammatical restrictions, as we discussed earlier. Some examples are clear sailing, dead to the world, in mint condition, and in cold blood.

The next characteristic is separability. Some phraseological units are separable, which means words may be placed between their components. Some dictionaries of idioms mark separable idioms. The symbol (S) indicates that an idiom is separable. A few examples are spring something on someone and squirrel something away.

Some phraseological units may be characterized by lexical and grammatical variability. They may have variable components within their structure. Some examples are (as) hungry as a bear, (as) hungry as a hunter, and (as) hungry as a hawk; steal the spotlight and steal the show; stick by someone or something and stick with someone or something; strike a happy medium, hit a happy medium, and find a happy medium; sweep something under the carpet and sweep something under the rug; swim against the tide and swim against the current; make hamburger out of someone or something and make mincemeat out of someone or something; take a tryat something, take a shot at something, take a stab at something, and take a whack at something, and other PUs. Richard Spears believes that “the number of idiomatic expressions that are totally invariant is really quite small, even when the English proverbs are included in this category” (2000).

As for expressivity and emotiveness, Arsentieva believes that “[Phraseological units] are characterized by stylistic coloring. In other words, they evoke emotions or add expressiveness” (2004, p.4). The following PUs expressing the meaning of ‘die’ may evoke different feelings: buy the farm/lot/ plot is an ironic use for ‘die’ which means to die in battle or in a plane crash. Cash in one’s chips and meet one’s maker is used in a neutral meaning, while join the angels, go to glory, go to one's reward may be used in a poetic style. The following PUs are used to express negative emotions: lick /bite the dust and kick the bucket, e.g., They that dwell in the wilderness shall bow before him and his enemies shall lick the dust (Psalms 72, King James Version, 1611). Eighteenth-century Scottish author Tobias Smollett uses bite the dust in its negative meaning in his Adventures of Gil Blas of Santillane: “We made two of them bite the dust, and the others betake themselves to flight.” Even the PUs which have neutral meanings are still expressive idioms.

8.5 Classification of phraseologisms

V.V. Vinogradov proposes a semantic approach to the classification of phraseological units, which is also supported by R. Ginzburg:

Ø phraseological fusions (also called idioms)

Ø phraseological unities

Ø phraseological combinations.

This classification is based on the degree of motivation. The first subcategory, phraseological fusions, is made up of unmotivated units whose meanings cannot be drawn from the meanings of their individual components. This definition can be attributed to the definition of idioms, given by scholars in Europe and the United States (Cowie, 1988, 1994; Crystal, 1995, 1996, 2003; Lipka, 2002; Jackson & Zé Amvela, 2007). Some examples of phraseological fusions are add fuel to the fire/flames, a skeleton in the cupboard/closet, skid row, knock somebody for six, cut somebody down to size, turn on the waterworks, catch the wave, cut somebody some slack, chase rainbows, smell a rat, and go into raptures. They are both grammatically and lexically fixed. The second subcategory is made up of phraseological unities that are partially motivated, whose sense can be perceived as metaphoric and metonymic extension of the whole phrase. Phraseological unities are marked by a comparatively high degree of stability of the lexical components (Ginzburg, Khidekel, Knyazeva, & Sankin, 1979, p.75). Some examples of phraseological unities would include under lock and key, a lone wolf, living on borrowed time, a law into oneself, take the law unto/into one’s own hands, shake like a leaf, bury the hatchet, make hay while the sun shines, and foaming at the mouth. Cowie notes that the “boundary between ‘fusions’ and ‘unities’ is not clear-cut” (2001, p.214). He calls this category “a figurative idiom” to this category and states that such expressions as to do a U-turn and to blow off steam have undergone metaphorical changes from a still active technical sense (p. 214). We agree that some may not see the phrase, wash one’s dirty linen in public, as a unity and a metaphoric extension of the phrase; however, if we combine the lexical meanings of the components, we can perceive the metaphoric meaning of the phrase, which is to ‘make public one’s quarrels.’ The third subcategory is phraseological combinations (or collocations). They are motivated and “reveal a change of meaning only in one of the components, and this semantic shift does not result in enhancing expressiveness” (Arnold, 1986, p.171). Some examples of this category are meet/see somebody in the flesh, drink like a fish, watch somebody or something with eagle eyes, be as dull as dishwater/ditchwater, be quick on the draw, a double entendre, fish for compliments, live in cloud-cuckoo land, and many others. Arnold clarifies that “phraseological combinations are not only motivated but contain one component used in its direct meaning while the other is used figuratively: meet the demand, meet the necessity, and meet the requirements” (1986, p. 170). The verb meet is used in its transferred meaning, and the direct objects demand, necessity, and requirements are used in their direct meanings.

For Amosova, phraseological units are units of fixed context. “Fixed context is defined as a context characterized by a specific and unchanging sequence of definite lexical components and a peculiar semantic relationship between them” (Arnold, 1986, p. 171). Amosova divides units of fixed context into phrasemes and idioms. She believes that a word is a “system of free, socially established semantic forces, and only contextual and situational indications actualize one of its meanings” (1963). Phrasemes are always binary: “one component has a phraseologically bound meaning, and the other serves as the determining context” (Arnold, p. 171). In the examples of a black eye, a black market, the black sheep (of a family), a black box, a black day, and a black mark, the words eye, market, sheep, box, day, and mark actualize the specific meanings of the word black.

Idioms are distinguished from phrasemes by the “idiomaticity of the whole word-group” (Ginzburg et al., 1979, p. 83). In idioms “the new meaning is created by the whole, though every element may have its original meaning weakened or even completely lost” (Arnold, p. 171). Some examples of idioms are clip someone’s wings, clutch at straws, climb on the bandwagon, behind the eight ball, and some other PUs. Like Vinogradov, Amosova also recognizes that idioms may be motivated or unmotivated. However, unlike Kunin and Arnold, Amosova believes that proverbs should not be included in phraseology because “they are independent units of communication” (as cited in Arnold, p. 179). Nevertheless, proverbs are included in phraseology because they are not seen as regular sentences, and their meanings cannot be deduced from the meanings of their components.

A.V. Kunin (1996) applies a functional approach to the classification of PUs. He divides them into the following four classes according to their function in the communication determined by their structural-semantic characteristics:

· Nominative phraseological units are represented by word-groups, including the ones with one meaningful word, and coordinative phrases of the type wear and tear and well and good. This type can be subdivided into substantive, or nominal (ways and means, warts and all, the salt of the earth, and skeleton in the closet/cupboard), adjectival (weak as a kitten, sadder but wiser, safe and sound, and red in the face), adverbial (to and fro, all at once, and all over the place), and verbal (wash dirty linen in public, screw up one’s courage, and walk the plank).

· Nominative-communicative phraseological units include word-groups of the type to break the law– the law is broken, i.e., verbal word-groups which are transformed into a sentence when the verb is used in the passive voice.

· Phraseological units which are neither nominative nor communicative include interjectional word-groups. Some examples are Alas, poor souls! Holy mackerel! My word!

· Communicative phraseological units are represented by proverbs and sayings. Some examples of proverbs are the following: Absence makes the heart grow fonder. After the feast comes the reckoning. Beauty is in the eyes of the beholder. Clothes do not make the man. Familiarity breeds contempt. Haste makes waste.

Irina Arnold agrees with Kunin’s classification; however, she believes “within each of these classes a further subdivision is necessary” (1986, p. 172); therefore, she offers a part-of-speech classification:

· Set expressions functioning like nouns: ways and means (N + N), clear sailing (A + N), the sky’s limit (N’s + N), (N + prep + N + N), (N + sub. clause).

· Set expressions functioning like verbs: blow off steam (V + Prep + N) and chase rainbows (V + N).

· Set expressions functioning like adjectives: fine and dandy (Adj +conj +Adj),

· Set expressions functioning like adverbs: at a (single) glance (Prp + [Adj] + N), by degrees (Prp + N), year after year (N + Prp +N), and on balance (Prep + N).

· Set expressions functioning like interjections: Alas, poor souls! Holy mackerel! My word! (pp.172-173)

8.6 The Origin of Phraseological Units

Phraseological units have many peculiarities of their own. They are considered anomalies of language by some. Their meanings cannot be predicted from the meaning of their constituents, and they have either partially or fully transferred meanings. The origin of PU is different. Some are related to memorable events; some are political; still others are religious. Kunin identifies native and borrowed phraseological units (1996).

8.6.1 Native Phraseological Units

The origin of the majority of phraseological units is unknown, but they may reflect traditions, memorable events, customs, and beliefs of English-speaking people. They have come from the beggars’ hovels and from courts of kings. Among native phraseological units, we find the following:

· Phraseological units alluding to memorable events: to set the Thames on fire seems to refer to the Great Fire of London.

· Phraseological units coming from the sea or maritime trade: to go by the board means to be cast aside; to be ruined or irretrievable lost. A ‘board’ is the side of the ship, and everything which goes by the board falls over the side and is lost. This phraseological unit applies to ideas, projects, and values which are discarded for any reason (Flavell & Flavell, 2003, p. 37). To nail one’s colours to the mast (to be resolute, unwavering in one’s opinions and principles; to declare one’s allegiance publicly) refers to battleships, which always fly their colors—their national ensign. If the flag was taken down, that meant “surrender”; however, if a flag was literally nailed to the mast, it showed the crew’s desire to fight on (p.61). In the phrase to sail under false colors, “colors” are the ship’s national flag which every vessel was obligated to fly. However, pirates would hoist the ensign of a friendly nation to approach closer, without exciting suspicion, and then attack. To show oneself in one’s true colors (to make one’s true opinion known, to show one’s true self) may refer to the same situation when the pirates would unfurl their own flag, the skull and the crossbones, revealing their true identity (p.61).

· Phraseological units referring to the battlefield or arts of warfare: to beat a (hasty) retreat (to leave, unusually in a hurry; to abandon an undertaking). Drums were a part of the war machine, and soldiers took their orders from their beats. Retreat was one of orders which would sound every evening to signal soldiers to get behind the lines when darkness fell, and this was the signal for the guards to present themselves for duty (Flavell & Flavell, 2003, p. 18). To bite the bullet means to show courage in facing a difficult or unpleasant situation. On the battlefields of the last century, the wounded men were encouraged to bite on a bullet to help them forget the pain in the absence of pain-killers and anesthetics (p. 27).

· Biblical phraseological units: the phrase to turn the other cheek originated from the Bible, meaning ‘to ignore abuse or insult; to have an attitude of patience and forgiveness.’ In Matthew 5:39 Jesus exhorts his followers with these words: “But I say unto you, that ye resist not evil; but whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also” (p.49. The phrase “to kill the fatted calf” in the story of the prodigal son is used in the direct meaning. Later, to kill the fatted calf acquired a new meaning; ‘to prepare an elaborate banquet (in someone’s honor); to provide plenty of the best food, drink, or other comfort.’ Some phraseological units originated from a plot recorded in the Bible. A doubting Thomas originated when one of Christ’s apostles, Thomas by name, expressed disbelief when he was confronted by the resurrected Jesus Christ after the crucifixion. Some phraseological units have been created by the use of puns. The phraseological unit, the land of Nod, appeared as the result of the humorous play on words based on the same sounding of two English word ‘nod’ meaning sleepiness and ‘Nod’ the name of the Biblical land Nod, where Cain was banished after he had murdered his brother Abel. The phraseologism was created by J. Swift, “Go into the land of Nod,” meaning ‘to enter a polite conversation.’

· Occupational phraseological units: Let the cat out of the bag (to reveal a secret or surprise by accident) originated from trade. Unscrupulous vendors in medieval markets displayed their sample products openly for everyone to see; however, when a customer decided to buy something, he or she was given a already packed and tied bag. If a pig was shown for a sale, the bag might contain a cat, so if a wary customer decided to check the bag, he or she might let the cat out of the bag, therefore revealing the deception (Flavell & Flavell, 2003, p. 49).

· Phraseological units illustrating sports and games: to pass the buck (to pass the responsibility on to someone else or to pass the blame to someone else) is a poker term which refers to the marker (buck) that was placed in front of a player to show that it was his or her turn to deal (p. 41). In gambling, the chips are down means ‘to be close to failure or defeat; to be at the final, critical moment; to have had one’s last chance’ when all the bets have been placed, but the outcome is not known yet (p.52).

· Phraseological units referring to everyday life: to be taken to the cleaners means ‘to lose all one’s money, to be ruined.’ A person is stripped clean of everything of value (p.54). I could sleep on a clothes line means ‘I am so tired that I can sleep anywhere.’ It refers to poverty of the nineteenth century when poor people would buy for two pence a night’s lodging on the two-penny rope. These people could sit on a bench and put their bodies on the rope stretched in front of them. In the morning the landlord would cut the rope to wake his or her guests (p.55). To have a finger in the (every) pie means ‘to have a role in something; to be involved in something.’ There is an implication of meddling in other people’s business (p.86).

· Phraseological units reflecting English traditions and customs: to ride a high horse and on one’s high horse. In the fourteenth century John Wyclif recorded that in a royal pageant, persons of high ranks were mounted on ‘high’ horses. The tradition died; however, the phrase remained meaning the person considered himself or herself very important and superior to others. It relates to an arrogant person (Funk, 1993). The Blue Ribbon, the highest distinction, the pick of the bunch, is the most desired Order of Knighthood in Britain. It is used in conjunction with something outstanding (Flavell & Flavell, 2003, p. 34). To carry coals to Newcastle means expressing the futility of taking something to a place where it already exists in great quantity. Put somebody in the cart means ‘to put somebody in reduced circumstances, in a difficult position in which one is likely to be scolded; to put in trouble.’ A cart is a wagon which carried criminals to the place of execution.

· Phraseological units connected with beliefs: to have an itching palm (or palms) or to have an itchy palm means ‘to have a great desire for money and wealth’ or ‘to be in need of a tip.’ This phraseological unit refers to an old belief that an itching palm indicated that a person is about to receive money.

· Phraseological units connected with some superstitions: to get out of bed in the wrong side (to be bad tempered, grumpy). The wrong side of the bed is left. According to a superstition, it is unlucky to get out of bed on the left side because that is where devils dwell, and they will be with that person the whole day (Flavell & Flavell, 2003, p.20).

· Phraseological units coming from fables, parables, stories, legends, novels, plays, and poems: A chip off the old block, meaning ‘a child who is like his or her father in appearance and character, or both,’ was used by John Milton in 1642: “How well dost thou appear to be a chip of the old block?” (p.51). To kiss the Blarney stone means ‘to have the ability to persuade, praise, or deceive with charming talk.’ According to the legend, a person who has kissed the stone at Blarney Castle near Cork, Ireland, is given the gift of flattery. Pope gave many phraseological units to the common vocabulary of the English-speaking world. The following are only a few of the best known quotations: a little learning is a dangerous thing; to err is human; for fools rush in where angels fear to tread; and at every word a reputation dies (Kunin, 1996). Many phraseological units come from William Shakespeare: brevity is the soul of wit (Hamlet, 2.2.90); breathe life into a stone (All’s Well That Ends Well, 2.1.73); heart on my sleeve (Othello, 1.1. 64); in my mind's eye (Hamlet, 1.1.186); and the milk of human kindness (Macbeth, 1.5.17).

Phraseological units containing certain names: according to Cocker refers to Mr. Cocker who wrote a mathematics textbook that was popular in British schools. Anything described as according to Cocker means ‘right and correct in all areas.’

· Phraseological units referring to rivalries: Most nations have love-and-hate relationships, and it is marked in the phraseological units. When the British use ‘Dutch’ in the phrases, the tone is either critical or sneering. A Dutch nightingale refers to a frog. To talk to someone like a Dutch uncle means ‘to reprimand and denigrate someone like a stern relative.’ A Dutch treat means ‘to pay for oneself,’ as one does when he or she goes Dutch. The exclamation I am a Dutchman shows a strong disbelief. The phraseological unit, Pardon my French, is used after some swearing or using offensive language which alludes to the fact that the British do not use bad language, but it is characteristic of the French. Another example is to take French leave which means ‘to go absent without leave or permission’ (Flavell & Flavell, 2003, pp.76-77).

8.6.2 Borrowed Phraseological Units

Many English idioms are connected with ancient mythology. Achilles’ heel or the heel of Achilles (a weak point or a small fault in a person or a system that might cause a failure) refers to Achilles in Homer’s Iliad. As a child, Achilles’ mother, the goddess Thetis, dipped him in the magic waters of the river Styx to coat his body so that no weapon could penetrate; however, she was holding him by the heel, and this part became vulnerable. During the Trojan War, Achilles was killed in a battle after being wounded in the heel (Hendrickson, 2008, p. 6). The phraseological unit between Scylla and Charybdis (between two equally dangerous perils) originates from the Greek myth of two monsters that lived on either side of the sea between Italy and Sicily. Scylla was also believed to be a rock, and Charybdis was a whirlpool. Sailors who tried to avoid one danger ran afoul of the other (Hendrickson, 2008, p. 79).

Some English phraseological units are borrowed from ancient Rome. A bed of roses (a period or situation of peace, pleasure, or happiness) is often used with negation; for example, life is not a bed of roses, but it can also be used in the sentence, “Her job is a bed of roses.” This phraseological unit appeared in connection with the custom of rich people of ancient Rome to cover their beds with petals of roses. The phraseological unit to burn one’s bridges behind one (to make decisions that cannot be changed in the future) may have originally been burn one’s boats behind one. Roman generals, including Caesar, did burn their boats after invading a land. It was done to impress upon their legions that there could be no retreat. Later bridges were burned for the same reason (Hendrickson, 2008, p. 136).

The British borrowed phraseological units from French as well. The phraseological unit to burn the candle at both ends (to lead a busy life during the day and also to go to bed late at night, especially to have a full social life) is the translation of the French Bruloient la chandelle par less deux bouts. Originally the phrase meant ‘to waste material wealth,’ but then it acquired a more common meaning of wasting of one’s strength (p.135). If someone daydreams or makes plans that will never come true, we can say that he or she builds castles in the air or builds castles in Spain. The phrase came to English from French un chateau en Espagne (a castle in Spain). The French dreamers were building their castles in far off Spain (p. 158). Many English phraseological units borrowed from French are calques, but these phrases came to French from Latin: familiarity breeds contempt (English) < la familiarité engendre le mépris (French) < Nimia familiaritas contemptum parit (Latin).

Phraseological units borrowed from German are not numerous. The unit a place under the sun (a position that is favorable to a person’s future or in which he or she receives proper recognition for his or her work or abilities) was made popular by its use in a speech delivered in Hamburg by Kaiser Wilhelm II in 1911. This expression was translated from French la place au soleil to English but soon forgotten, and again it was translated from German Ein Platz an der Sonne into English a place under the sun. The etymology of this unit is doubtless, but the coincidence between German and English idioms does not mean that it was loaned from German into English. On the contrary, the influence of English upon German has been greater .

Many American phraseological units have penetrated the British language, but some of them are intralingual borrowings. The American phraseological unit climb a sour tree (go to blazes; go to hell) was first recorded in the early 1900 but is probably older (Hendrickson, 2008, p. 185). Some authorities say that an eager beaver (an overly zealous person, one who tries to impress others with enthusiasm and hard work) originated during World War II. It applied to recruits who volunteered for absolutely everything (Flavell & Flavell, 2003, p.79).

8.7 Semantic Structure of Phraseological Units

Elena Arsentyeva argues that semantic structure of a phraseological unit is wider than its meaning as it not only includes the denotative and connotative components, but is also characterized by the type of grammatical meaning as well as its systematic linguistic and speech relations (p. 12). Although phraseological units share figurativeness and relative stability, they may also be motivated and unmotivated/non-motivated, as we discussed earlier. Unmotivated phraseological units are those in which “there [is] no relation whatsoever between the meaning of the whole combination and those of its components” (as cited in Cowie, 2001, p. 214). A motivated phrase is the one whose meaning can be deduced from the meanings of its components, and partially motivated are phraseological units “whose sense could be perceived as a metaphorical and metonymical extension of the whole expression” (Ginzburg et al., 1979, p. 75).

8.8 Phraseological Meaning

The term phraseological meaning was suggested by two linguists, V. L. Arhangelsky and A. V. Kunin, in 1964. Like lexical meaning, phraseological meaning may also be considered as the realization of the notion by means of a definite language system. It may have several components. Arsentyeva further subdivides phraseological units into two components: a denotative component (or significational-denotational component) and a connotative component. A denotative component is “the content and the volume of the notion realized in the meaning and, consequently, in the vocabulary definition of the unit” (p. 12), e.g., to put on the feed bag (to eat a meal). Connotation “reveals the emotive-evaluative and stylistically marked attitude of the speaker towards reality” (p.12). The connotational component is more significant in phraseological meaning than in lexical meaning. Connotation is a semantic value; it reveals the emotive-evaluative and stylistically marked attitude of the speaker towards reality. Most linguists distinguish four subcomponents of connotation: emotive, evaluative, expressive and stylistic (or stylistic reference). Phraseological meaning may have all the above mentioned subcomponents or only some of them in different combinations. Here are some examples:

Emotive: God bless me (my soul)! (an expression of surprise);

God bless his soul (heart)! (an expression of fondness, gratefulness, and kind feelings);

positive emotive charge: a sight for sore eyes;

negative emotive charge: damn your eyes!

Expressive: beat someone to a pulp (beat and hit someone with hard blows; “work like a horse;

work one’s fingers to the bone (work very hard).

Evaluative: positive: a clever dog (a very clever guy);

Negative: (as) bold as brass (impudent).

Stylistically phraseological units may be subdivided into literary and non-literary (labels in dictionaries: coll., lit., euph., poet., etc.);

Neutral: be (stand) at the crossroads;

Jargon: balmy (barmy) on (off) the crumpet.

As a rule, the majority of phraseological units are monosemantic, but polysemy is also typical of English phraseology:

be on the go (1. be busy, not to have even one minute to have a rest; 2. to be going to leave; right and left (1. everywhere, 2. recklessly).

8.9 Semantic Relations of Phraseological Units

Like lexemes, phraseological units can enter into a variety of semantic, or sense, relations with other words and phrases in the language. They may have similar and opposite meanings, and they may also have related meanings as well.

8.9.1 Similarity of Sense

Some phraseological units may be synonymic which means they can express identical or similar meaning but differ in the shades of meaning or the style of use. They share similarity of sense. The following phraseological units are synonymous: fly into a rage, fly into a passion, fly off the handle, and lose one’s temper. Although they all have the same sense to ‘become angry’-- the intensity of anger is different; therefore, the context of their realization would be different. The phraseological unit lose one’s temper expresses a lesser degree of anger than other units. Arsentyeva proposes the following classification of phraseological synonyms: ideographic, stylistic, and stylistic-ideographic. Ideographic synonyms differ in the shades of meaning, gradation, and intensity. The phraseological synonyms ruffle someone’s feathers (upset or anger someone) and make someone’s blood boil (make someone very angry) differ in the intensity of anger. If ruffle someone’s feathers paints the image of a person who became angry, make someone’s blood boil portrays an individual who is outraged by some grave offense. Phraseological units give an ear and be all ears are synonymous; however, they have different semes. The phraseological unit give an ear to someone or something means ‘to listen to someone or something,’ while be all ears means not only to ‘listen’ but ‘listen eagerly and carefully.’ The latter phraseological unit has an additional seme (eagerly and carefully) that the phrase give an ear to someone or something lacks.

Stylistic phraseological synonyms may have the same sense but differ in connotation and stylistic use, e.g., shuffle off this mortal coil (literary), kick the bucket (slang), give up the ghost (biblical), and sink into the grave (colloquial).

Stylistic-ideographic synonyms have the same sense but differ in the images, in the shades of meaning, and style. One member of the pair of synonyms may have connotations not shared by the other member. Some may have emotional coloring (emotionally charged) and belong to different styles. Be born with a silver spoon in one’s mouth (literary) has an additional meaning ‘to a wealthy family’; be born under a lucky star (conversational) and be born with a caul on one’s head (archaic) have an additional seme ‘fortunate’; be born on the wrong side of the blanket (colloquial) and born out of wedlock (neutral) allude to being born to an unmarried mother, and be born on the wrong side of the tracks (colloquial) has an additional meaning ‘be born to a poor family.’

8.9.2 Oppositeness of Sense

Phraseological antonyms are phraseological units which share oppositeness of meaning. They should share not only the oppositeness of meaning but also common features, which will be the basis for the comparison and contrast; for example, the following phraseological units quick on the uptake and slow on the uptake are antonymic because they share the common feature—mental ability—and oppositeness of their meanings—‘quick to understand’ and ‘slow to figure something out.’ To better understand phraseological antonyms, we should introduce the term antonymic differentiator. An antonymic differentiator is a formal indicator which signals the oppositeness of senses. Antonymic differentiators could be antonyms as in the earlier example of phraseological antonyms, quick on the uptake and slow on the uptake, where the antonyms slow and quick within the phraseological units signal that we have a pair of antonyms. In the following example, the contextual antonyms create antonymic units: a bed of roses and a bed of thorns; a bird in the hand and a bird in the bush. Roses and thorns or hand and bush are not antonyms in their denotation but rather in the context; therefore, they are contextual antonyms. Some phraseological antonyms do not have a formal indicator. They represent complimentary phraseological antonyms. Complementary means that “the denial one unit implies the assertion of the other unit” (Jackson, 1991, p.75), e.g., a child’s play (something easy) and a hard nut to crack (something difficult).

Date: 2015-12-18; view: 2551