Clearly separate phraseological units from one another. About phraseological units (Fesenko). Behind seven seals

AGAIN ABOUT PHRASEOLOGISTS

Phraseology is a relatively young linguistic discipline. On the one hand, it is rapidly developing in line with the main linguistic trends. On the other hand, many questions of phraseology still do not have a clear solution. First of all, this concerns the interpretation of the term “phraseologism” itself. The lack of a common point of view gives rise to different approaches to the analysis of the structure of phraseological units and types of variation; polysemy, homonymy and synonymy in phraseology. The term “phraseologism” today does not have a single name in science, nor a clear understanding of the criteria for its identification, which leads to the absence of clear boundaries of phraseology.

Modern researchers interpret the phraseological unit differently, highlighting as criteria for determining a phraseological unit reproducibility, stability, integrity of meaning (idiomaticity), separate formatting (N.M. Shansky), correspondence of the structure to coordinating and subordinating combinations of a predicative and non-predicative nature (V.P. Zhukov ), the ability to be combined with a word (V.P. Zhukov), belonging to the nominative inventory of the language and the absence of objective modality outside the text (V.N. Teliya), correlation with a certain part of speech (A.M. Chepasova), asymmetry of the content plan and level of expression, the ability to express cultural and historical meaning (N.F. Alefirenko), metaphorical nature, untranslatability into other languages, etc. Depending on what criteria are considered as defining (categorical), the composition of phraseology is either sharply narrowed to idioms (phraseological adhesions and unities - according to the classification of V.V. Vinogradov), or expanded to collocations (weakly ideomatic phraseological units with a phrase structure in which semantically, the main component is used in its direct meaning [see about this: Baranov, 2008, p. 67; Telia, 1996, p. 70]), proverbs and sayings (communicative phraseological units - the term of A.V. Kunin), popular expressions, phraseological schemes (syntactic phraseological units - the term of A.N. Baranov and D.O. Dobrovolsky) and cliches (the criteria for identifying the latter are not entirely clear). The formulated criteria are intended to determine the essence of a phraseological unit, to distinguish between phraseological units, free phrases and words.

In order to resolve issues related to determining the boundaries of the phraseology considered in our study, let us turn to the main, traditionally identified criteria for determining phraseological units.

Reproducibility is a basic property of a phraseological unit, which consists in its ability not to be created in the process of speech, but to be retrieved from the memory of a native speaker in finished form. However, recently, works have appeared in which reproducibility is considered not as a property inherent exclusively in phraseological units, but as a property of all elements of the language system. “In this aspect, words, phraseological units, phrases, and sentences of various types are reproducible” [Burmistrovich, 2006, p. 33]. That is why reproducibility cannot be the main categorical feature of a phraseological unit.

Idiomaticity is “the semantic indecomposability of phraseology in general” [Zhukov 2006, p. 6], “integrity of meaning” [Pavlova, 1991, p. 14], “integrity of meaning” [Kunin, 2006, p. 9]. As noted by A.N. Baranov, “all definitions of idiomaticity come down to three basic ideas - reinterpretation (the presence of a figurative meaning, partial or complete de-actualization of the components of a phraseological unit), opacity (the absence of rules to identify the meaning; the absence of one or more components of an expression in the dictionary) and the complication of the method of indicating denotation ( existence in the language of expression along with a simpler and more standard name)" [Baranov, 2008, p. 30-31]. Idiomaticity, to one degree or another, is inherent in all phraseological units, but it can manifest itself in various forms: integrity, indecomposability of meaning, the inability to motivate it, the presence in the language of a simple name for the phenomenon designated in the phraseological unit. “Idiomaticity arises in phrase combinations, the meaning of which is irreducible to the sum of the values ​​of the components” [Kopylenko, 1989, p. 33]. It is this feature that can be one of the leading ones in determining a phraseological unit, since it helps to distinguish between a phraseological unit and a free phrase.

A holistic phraseological meaning is a complex structure containing the semantic elements of the components of phraseological units. In addition, phraseological units, like words, have individual, group and categorical meanings that are closely related to each other. “The type of semantics, or the type of categorical meaning, is the same for one class of phraseological units and for words of one part of speech” [Pavlova, 1991, p. 16]. Due to the presence of integral phraseological meanings with a common categorical seme, phraseological units can be correlated with a word of a certain part of speech [Chepasova, 1983, 2006].

Stability as one of the leading features of a phraseological unit has the largest number of discrepancies in the interpretation of the term. According to A.N. Baranov, stability “manifests itself in the regular reproduction of a certain phrase by native speakers” [Baranov, 2008, p. 51].

V.P. Zhukov considers stability as “a form of manifestation of idiomaticity in relation to a specific phraseological unit”, as “a measure of the semantic indecomposability of components within a particular phraseological unit” [Zhukov, 1978, p. 9].

A.V. Kunin considers the main indicators of stability to be stability of use, semantic complexity, separate formatting and the impossibility of forming a variable combination of words according to the generative structural-semantic model [see. about this: Kunin, 2005, p. 56]. Thus, stability becomes the only property of a phraseological unit, within the framework of which all other features of a phraseological unit are realized.

Due to different understandings of phraseological stability, research sometimes shows mutually exclusive opinions: “stability and idiomaticity are not directly related to each other” [Baranov, 2008, p. 54]; “stability is inextricably linked with idiomaticity” (the higher the measure of semantic discrepancy between words of free use and the corresponding components of a phraseological unit, the higher the stability, the more idiomatic this turn of phrase) [Zhukov, 2006, p. 7].

Understanding by stability, first of all, the constancy of the composition of a phraseological unit, most researchers are faced with the problem of qualifying phraseological units that have structural variants. Then stability, as a criterion for identifying phraseological units, becomes relative. That is why “the provision on the stability of a phraseological unit cannot be included in its definition as a leading one (...), not all phraseological units are stable” [Burmistrovich, 2006, p. 32].

The separate design is due to the fact that a phraseological unit is “a unit that genetically goes back to a phrase,” therefore it always contains two or more components. At the same time, “a phrase, becoming a phraseological unit, loses the characteristics of a phrase and becomes a special unit with characteristics different from those of a phrase” [Molotkov, 1977, p. 15-16]. Separate form is precisely the feature that separates a phraseological unit from a word, therefore, along with the presence of a holistic phraseological meaning, it is considered by us as one of the leading properties of phraseological units.

So, in our study, a phraseological unit is understood as “a separately formed (...) unit of language, which is correlated in general and particular semantic and grammatical properties with a word of a certain part of speech, and being a separately formed (...) unit of language, expresses a single holistic concept" [Chepasova, 1983 , With. 4]. This is a narrow understanding of phraseology, in which phraseological units include phraseological units that qualify according to the theory of V.V. Vinogradov as unity and fusion. The work does not consider phraseological combinations, compound terms, collocations, proverbs and sayings, catchphrases and cliches.

However, even when taking into account the main categorical features of a phraseological unit, there remain linguistic units whose belonging to the phraseological fund raises doubts among researchers. This phenomenon is quite understandable. It is connected, first of all, with the fact that the phraseological composition of a language is a dynamic, moving system. Phraseology is not characterized by clearly defined boundaries (especially when it is studied from a historical perspective). Its composition changes: some free phrases become phraseological units, some phraseological units become words. It is extremely difficult to determine the exact time of the changes that occurred. The degree of idiomaticity of phraseological units varies. That is why it is more productive to consider the phraseological composition as a system with a relatively stable center and periphery.

When determining the center (core) of the system and its periphery, we turned to the research of cognitive linguistics, in particular, to the “Theory of prototypes and basic level categories” by E. Roche [see. about this: Skrebtsova, 2000, p. 90-93)]. According to this theory, the center of the system, its typical element, is the one that meets a certain set of criteria in full (it is called a prototype). In our case, these are phraseological units that have a basic set of categorical criteria for identifying phraseological units:

1) idiomaticity, which presupposes, firstly, integrity, indecomposability of meaning (which allows one to correlate a phraseological unit with a word of a certain part of speech); secondly, the inability to motivate the meaning of phraseological units, its imagery; thirdly, the presence in the language of a simple name for the phenomenon designated in the phraseological unit;

2) separate design.

The remaining elements of the phraseological system are also “one hundred percent” (...), the difference lies only in their typicality, i.e. in the degree of closeness to the prototype" [Skrebtsova, 2000, p. 91]. While maintaining categorical features, such units may differ from the prototype:

1) The degree of idiomaticity. Some phraseological units have meanings whose imagery is lost: in gender (whom, what) - “like (whom, what)”, and then - “but”, by the way - “appropriate”, etc. Given the integrity of the phraseological meaning (not resulting from the meaning of its components) and the possibility of selecting a simple name for the phenomenon designated in the phraseological unit, we can say that the language unit is a phraseological unit, located on the periphery of the phraseological system.

2) The genetic nature of the components. It is a generally accepted postulate that most often phraseological units include in their composition components that go back to the significant parts of speech (to hit the spot, etc.). However, in the language there are prepositional-case combinations (in fact - “in reality”, until one is full - “enough”, etc.), one of the components of which goes back to the preposition (non-nominal part of speech). Therefore, some researchers do not consider them phraseological units. However, auxiliary parts of speech “are characterized by the same properties as significant ones: they are significant, meaningful, can be unambiguous, polysemantic, synonymous, antonymous, i.e. along with significant words, they can become a component of a new unit - phraseological unit" [Pavlova, 1991, p. 9]. Such phraseological units have a holistic phraseological meaning, separate form and correlation with the word of a certain part of speech, which brings them closer to the prototype and makes them full-fledged members of the phraseological system.

3) Belonging to the nominative inventory of the language. Traditionally, phraseological units were correlated on the basis of semantic and grammatical properties with certain significant parts of speech (verb, adverb, noun, etc.). In this regard, units of the type in mind (of what) - “because”, in a circle (of whom, what) - “among”, but after all - “but” were not included in the phraseology. However, they, like the previous variety of phraseological units, have a holistic phraseological meaning, are separately formed and correspond to the word of a certain part of speech (in this case, with prepositions and conjunctions, i.e., auxiliary parts of speech), and therefore are full members of the phraseological system.

In addition, the “extensibility” of the system boundaries of phraseology is determined by the level of knowledge accumulated and used in science [for more details, see: Skrebtsova, 2000, p. 86-93]. Traditionally, the lexical and phraseological fund of the first third of the 19th century is included in the modern Russian language and is reflected in modern dictionaries. In this regard, the presence at the beginning of the 19th century of separately written variants of the type in addition, not in a hurry, is explained by orthographic tradition and the lack of rules for writing adverbs [see. about this: Shansky, 1985, p. 29]. However, in the language of the 18th and early 19th centuries, the words ADDITIVE were used - an added part, an appendage [STS 2, vol. 1 (vol. 1-2), p. 682; SCS 1, vol. 1, p. 327]. LZYA - it is possible (a speech used in common parlance: “Is it possible to do this? It is not possible.” [SAR 1, vol. 3, art. 631; Dictionary XVIII, issue 1, p. 254], HURRY - excessive haste, fussiness (“IN A HURRY, I didn’t know what to answer”) [SAR 1, vol. 6, art. 209]. In this regard, we can assume that we are observing the process of transition of a free prepositional-case combination into a phraseological unit and, then, into a word. It is almost impossible to establish the time boundaries of this transition.Therefore, relying on the main categorical criteria for identifying phraseological units (the presence of a holistic phraseological meaning, separate form and correlation with a word of a certain part of speech), we include similar linguistic units in phraseology.

The first three criteria are the most common in phraseology, however, their objectivity and accuracy are constantly debated.

Noting the presence of all the categorical features of a phraseological unit in such prepositional-case combinations, N.M. Shansky denied them the status of a phraseological unit due to the lack of phonetic differentiation) [see. about this: Shansky, 1985, p. 28-29].

Phraseology is a branch of the science of language that studies stable combinations of words. Phraseologism is a stable combination of words, or a stable expression. Used to name objects, signs, actions. It is an expression that arose once, became popular and became entrenched in people's speech. The expression is endowed with imagery and may have a figurative meaning. Over time, an expression can take on a broad meaning in everyday life, partially including the original meaning or completely excluding it.

The phraseological unit as a whole has lexical meaning. The words included in a phraseological unit individually do not convey the meaning of the entire expression. Phraseologisms can be synonymous (at the end of the world, where the raven did not bring bones) and antonymous (raise to heaven - trample into the dirt). A phraseological unit in a sentence is one member of the sentence. Phraseologisms reflect a person and his activities: work (golden hands, playing the fool), relationships in society (bosom friend, putting a spoke in the wheels), personal qualities (turning up his nose, sour face), etc. Phraseologisms make a statement expressive and create imagery. Set expressions are used in works of art, journalism, and everyday speech. Set expressions are also called idioms. There are many idioms in other languages ​​- English, Japanese, Chinese, French.

To clearly see the use of phraseological units, refer to their list or on the page below.

The time comes when schoolchildren begin to learn what phraseological units are. Their study has become an integral part of the school curriculum. Knowledge of what phraseological units are and how they are used will be useful not only in Russian language and literature lessons, but also in life. Figurative speech is a sign of at least a well-read person.

What is a phraseological unit?

Phraseologism - with a certain content of words, which in a given combination have a different meaning than when these words are used separately. That is, a phraseological unit can be called a stable expression.

Phraseological phrases in the Russian language are widely used. The linguist Vinogradov studied phraseological units, and it was largely thanks to him that they began to be widely used. Foreign languages ​​also have phraseological units, but they are called idioms. Linguists are still arguing whether there is a difference between a phraseological unit and an idiom, but have not yet found an exact answer.

The most popular are colloquial phraseological units. Examples of their use can be found below.

Signs of phraseological units

Phraseological units have several important features and characteristics:

1. A phraseological unit is a ready-made linguistic unit. This means that a person who uses it in his speech or writing retrieves this expression from memory, and does not invent it on the fly.
2. They have a permanent structure.
3. You can always choose a synonymous word for a phraseological unit (sometimes an antonym).
4. A phraseological unit is an expression that cannot consist of less than two words.
5. Almost all phraseological units are expressive and encourage the interlocutor or reader to show vivid emotions.

Functions of phraseological units in Russian

Each phraseological unit has one main function - to give speech brightness, liveliness, expressiveness and, of course, to express the author’s attitude to something. In order to imagine how much brighter speech becomes when using phraseological units, imagine how a comedian or writer makes fun of someone using phraseological units. The speech becomes more interesting.

Phraseological styles

The classification of phraseological units by style is a very important feature of them. In total, there are 4 main styles of set expressions: interstyle, bookish, colloquial and colloquial. Each phraseological unit belongs to one of these groups, depending on its meaning.

Colloquial phraseological units are the largest group of expressions. Some believe that interstyle and colloquial phraseological units should be included in the same group with colloquial ones. Then only two groups of set expressions are distinguished: colloquial and bookish.

Differences between book and colloquial phraseological units

Each style of phraseological units is different from each other, and the most striking difference is demonstrated by book and colloquial phraseological units. Examples: not worth a penny And a fool is a fool. The first stable expression is bookish, because it can be used in any work of art, in a scientific journalistic article, in an official business conversation, etc. Whereas the expression " fool by fool" widely used in conversations, but not in books.

Book phraseological units

Book phraseological units are set expressions that are much more often used in writing than in conversations. They are not characterized by pronounced aggression and negativity. Book phraseological units are widely used in journalism, scientific articles, and fiction.

1. During it- means something that happened a long time ago. The expression is Old Slavonic and is often used in literary works.
2. Pull the gimp- the meaning of a long process. In the old days, a long metal thread was called a gimp; it was pulled out with metal wire tongs. They embroidered on velvet with gimp; it was a long and very painstaking job. So, pull the gimp- This is a long and extremely boring job.
3. Play with fire- doing something extremely dangerous, “being on the cutting edge.”
4. Stay with your nose- to be left without something that you really wanted.
5. Kazan orphan- this is a phraseological unit about a person who pretends to be a beggar or a sick person, while having the goal of getting a benefit.
6. You can't ride a goat- this is what they said a long time ago about girls whom jesters and buffoons could not cheer up on holidays.
7. Bring to clean water- to expose someone for committing something unpleasant.

There are a lot of book phraseological units.

Interstyle phraseological units

Inter-style ones are sometimes called neutral colloquial, because they are neutral from both a stylistic and emotional point of view. Neutral colloquial and book phraseological units are confused, because inter-style ones are also not particularly emotionally charged. An important feature of interstyle phrases is that they do not express human emotions.

1. Not a bit- means the complete absence of something.
2. Play a role- somehow influence this or that event, become the cause of something.

There are not very many interstyle phraseological units in the Russian language, but they are used in speech more often than others.

Conversational phraseological units

The most popular expressions are colloquial phraseological units. Examples of their use can be very diverse, from expressing emotions to describing a person. Conversational phraseological units are perhaps the most expressive of all. There are so many of them that one can give endless examples. Colloquial phraseological units (examples) are listed below. Some of them may sound different, but at the same time have a similar meaning (that is, they are synonyms). And other expressions, on the contrary, contain the same word, but are clear antonyms.

Synonymous colloquial phraseological units, examples:

1. Without exception, the meaning of generalization is: all as one; both old and young; from small to large.
2. Very quickly: in an instant; I didn’t have time to look back; in a moment; I didn’t have time to blink an eye.
3. Work hard and diligently: tirelessly; until the seventh sweat; rolling up your sleeves; in the sweat of his brow.
4. Proximity value: two steps away; be nearby; at hand.
5. Run fast: headlong; that there is strength; at full speed; what to eat; in all shoulder blades; with all my might; only his heels sparkle.
6. Similarity value: all as one; everything is as if chosen; one to one; Well done to well done.

Antonymous colloquial phraseological units, examples:

1. The cat cried(few) - Chickens don't peck(a lot of).
2. Can't see anything(dark, hard to see) - At least collect needles(light, clearly visible).
3. Lose your head(not thinking well) - Head on your shoulders(a reasonable person).
4. Like a cat and a dog(warring people) - Don't spill the water, Siamese twins; soul to soul(close, very friendly or
5. Two steps away(near) - Far away(far).
6. Head in the clouds(brooding, daydreaming and unfocused person) - Keep your eyes open, keep your ears open(attentive person).
7. scratch your tongue(talk, spread gossip) - Swallow tongue(be silent).
8. Uma ward(clever man) - Without a king in your head, live in someone else's mind(stupid or reckless person).

Phraseologisms examples with explanation:

1. American uncle- a person who very unexpectedly helps out of a financially difficult situation.
2. Fight like a fish on ice- do unnecessary, useless actions that do not lead to any result.
3. Beat your head- mess around.
4. Throw down the gauntlet- enter into an argument with someone, challenge.

Phraseologism- this is a stable combination of words characteristic only of a given language, the meaning of which is not determined by the meaning of the words included in it, taken individually. Due to the fact that phraseological units cannot be translated literally (the meaning is lost), difficulties in translation and understanding often arise. On the other hand, such phraseological units give the language a bright emotional coloring. Often the grammatical meaning of idioms does not correspond to the norms of the modern language, but are grammatical archaisms. An example of such expressions in Russian: “stay on your toes”, “keep your head down”, “give back”, “play the fool”, “point of view”, etc.

The main features of a phraseological unit. In order to separate phraseological units from other linguistic units, in particular from words and free phrases, it is necessary to determine the characteristic features of phraseological units.

1. Reproducibility of phraseological units in speech as finished units. Stable combinations exist in language as a set of ready-made, previously created linguistic formations that need to be remembered in the same way as we remember words.

2. Integrity of the meaning of phraseological units is that, despite the dismemberment of the structure, they have a generalized holistic meaning, which, as a rule, is a rethinking of the phrase, which is based on a specific semantic content. Clear examples of the fact that the meaning of a phraseological unit does not consist of the meanings of its components are stable combinations, one of the members of which is obsolete and has no use in modern language outside the boundaries of this expression. However, the speaker does not have the feeling that this word is unfamiliar to him, since he knows the general, holistic meaning of the entire phraseological unit. Expressions in which one can trace the connection between the general meaning of a stable combination and the meanings of its constituent components also have a generalized holistic meaning.

3. Constancy of the component composition, stability distinguishes phraseological units from free phrases. A feature of stable combinations is that they are, as a rule, constant in composition and structure, i.e. they contain certain words arranged in a prescribed order. The interchangeability of the components of a phraseological unit is possible only in general linguistic phraseological variants, i.e. in stable combinations that have the same meaning, the same figurative structure, but differ in their lexical and grammatical composition.

4. Equivalence of phraseological units and a separate word means that the stable combination has much in common with the word. Like a word, it is a unit of language, reproduced in finished form, and not created anew each time, has an independent meaning and grammatical correlation, which lies in the fact that a phraseological unit, like a word, refers to a specific part of speech. We can distinguish nominal phraseological phrases (a shot sparrow - an experienced person), adjectives (there are not enough stars from the sky - about an ordinary, unremarkable person) verbal ones (to be stumped - to be in a difficult situation); adverbial (working tirelessly - diligently, tirelessly), interjectional (know ours! - about praising yourself). Many phraseological units in meaning correspond to one word (put it on both shoulder blades - win). Set phrases are close to words in their syntactic function, since they serve as a separate member of a sentence. For example: She turned the head of more than one Adam’s grandson (M. Lermontov);

5. Separate formatting of phraseological units is that it includes at least two verbal components, each of which is grammatically formalized as an independent unit, i.e. has its own emphasis and its own ending. This is the main difference between a phraseological unit and a word.

6. Imagery of phraseology is that many stable phrases not only name phenomena, signs, objects, actions, but also contain a certain image. This applies primarily to those phraseological units, the meanings of which were formed on the basis of a linguistic metaphor, as a result of the similarity and comparison of two phenomena, of which one becomes the basis for comparison, and the other is compared with it. For example, the phraseological unit grated kalach, denoting an experienced person who has seen a lot in life, correlates with grated kalach (the name of one of the varieties of kalach), which is rubbed and kneaded for a long time before baking. This creates the imagery of the phraseological unit. Some phraseological units of the Russian language lack imagery. These include various kinds of semantically indivisible combinations, which are compound names and terms (such as coal, agenda, safety pin, eyeball), as well as phraseological units such as have meaning, win.

7. Emotionally expressive coloring phraseological units is manifested in the fact that most phraseological units of the Russian language, in addition to the nominative function, also perform a characterological function: they not only name some objects, phenomena, actions that exist in objective reality, but at the same time evaluate the named objects, phenomena, actions. The emotional and expressive significance of phraseological units in the Russian language is different. Some of them have minimal expression (expressiveness), for example: standing in the ears - “constantly being heard.” Others have a pronounced expression and serve as a means of emphasizing what is being said. These are, for example: to be in full swing - “to flow violently, to manifest.” The presence of emotional-expressive coloring in phraseological units can be traced in synonymous phraseological units, which, with a general meaning, can differ in their coloring. For example, about a person who can do everything, they say a jack of all trades (positive assessment), a jack of all trades out of boredom (jokingly ironic assessment), and a Swede, a reaper, and a player of the pipe (jokingly ironic assessment).

8. Phraseology, the non-free meaning of one of the components is a characteristic feature of most stable combinations. For some phraseological units, it manifests itself in the fact that its component has a phraseologically related meaning in the language, the main features of which are the lack of semantic independence and dependence in the choice of the lexical environment. For example, the phraseological nature of the meaning of the word “sworn” is manifested in the fact that it has its meaning only in a certain lexical environment, in combination with the word “enemy”: sworn enemy - “irreconcilable enemy” - and outside of this stable combination it is not used in the Russian language. The phraseological meaning of one of the components of a stable combination of another type is manifested in the fact that this component acquires a special phraseologically related meaning only within the framework of a given phraseological unit, and outside it it can have an independent meaning and be used in many free combinations. For example, the word “white” is used in the language with its own independent meaning in free combinations (white paper, white snow), but only within the framework of the stable combination white crow does it acquire its special, phraseologically related meaning - “unlike others, standing out for something” "

9. Idiomatic phraseology manifests itself in the fact that its semantically indivisible meaning is not derived from the meanings of its constituent components, taken separately, and does not coincide with them. Hence the impossibility of accurately translating phraseological units into other languages; this can be explained by the presence of specific laws inherent in this particular language. If free phrases are constructed mainly according to the general laws of linguistic reflection of extra-linguistic reality, then the use of words as part of a phraseological unit is determined by the specific laws of the system of a given language.

* Questions of the semantics of phraseological units have recently attracted increasing attention from phraseology researchers, who, noting the specifics of their semantics, use a variety of names: generalized metaphorical meaning (S. A. Abakumov), semantic monolithicity (P. P. Kalinin), single holistic meaning (V.V. Vinogradov), semantic idiomaticity (A.I. Smirnitsky), etc. Such an abundance of names to indicate the semantic specificity of phraseological units reflects the undoubted complexity of this phenomenon, associated with insufficient knowledge of the issue itself.

The main feature of phraseological units is their completely or partially rethought meaning. Only a part of phraseological units are identified by individual lexemes, while most of them can be defined only with the help of a phrase or a detailed description. The semantic originality of a phraseological unit lies in the specificity of the combination of components, thus, they act not only as parts of the main semantic components of the phraseological unit, but also as connecting links between them. These components are the minimum units of semantics of phraseological units and perform meaning-determining or meaning-forming functions.

* The classification of phraseological units is based on the sign of semantic unity of components, less or more motivation of the meaning of a phraseological unit. Following Academician V.V. Vinogradov, it is customary to distinguish three main types: phraseological fusions, phraseological unities and phraseological combinations.

Phraseological adhesions- these are phraseological units that are indecomposable in meaning, their holistic meaning is absolutely not motivated by the meanings of the component words, for example: to hit the bulls, get into trouble, sharpen the lasses, turuses on wheels, headlong, etc. Phraseological units often contain words that are not used independently in modern Russian.

Phraseological unities– these are phraseological units, the integral meaning of which is motivated by the meanings of their components. Examples of unities: pull the strap, float shallowly, bury talent in the ground, suck it out of your finger, lead by the nose, etc. One of the characteristic features of phraseological unities is their imagery. The presence of imagery distinguishes phraseological unities from the free combinations of words homonymous to them. So, in the sentence The boy lathered his head with toilet soap, the combination lathered his head - free, it has a direct meaning and is devoid of any imagery; in the sentence I'm afraid that the boss might lather his head for being late, the combination lathered his head is used figuratively and represents a phraseological unity.

Phraseological combinations- these are phraseological units, the holistic meaning of which is made up of the meaning of the components and at the same time one of the components has a so-called associated use. To understand what a related use is, consider the phrases: fear takes, envy takes, anger takes. The verb to take used in these phrases is not combined with every name of feelings, but only with some, for example: you cannot say “joy takes,” “pleasure takes.” This use of a verb is called bound (or phraseologically bound). Related is the use of the word ticklish in phrases: a ticklish question, a ticklish matter; The adjective ticklish does not combine with other nouns, even those close in meaning to the words question and deed.

As in phraseological combinations, many words that are part of phraseological combinations do not have free meanings at all and exist in the language only as part of phraseological units. For example, the words downcast, kromeshny in modern Russian function only as part of phraseological combinations: downcast gaze, downcast eyes, pitch hell, pitch darkness.

These kinds of phrases, in which a word is used in a non-free, phraseologically related meaning, are called phraseological combinations.

The semantics of a phraseological unit largely depends on its structural organization. Some phraseological units are formed according to the phrase pattern: rack your brains, while others are formed according to the sentence pattern: hands are itching (whose?), the sky seems like a sheepskin (to whom?). Phraseologisms of the first group have the greatest functional-semantic similarity with the word.

Phraseologisms formed according to the model of a non-predicative phrase can be unambiguous and polysemantic, capable of entering into synonymous and antonymic relationships, united into thematic series based on semantic community, etc.

The overwhelming majority of phraseological units are unambiguous. The development of polysemy is hampered by the fact that phraseological units are often formed as a result of a metaphorical rethinking of free phrases of the same composition. As a result of repeated metaphorization of the same free phrase, polysemantic phraseological units appear that have only metaphorical meanings. For example, the phraseological unit wag the tail means:

1. “to be cunning, to be cunning”; “You, brother, excuse me, I’m a taiga man, I’m straight, I don’t know how to be cunning, I don’t know how to wag my tail” (Yu.M. Shestakov);
2. “hesitate in choosing a solution, avoid a direct answer”: “Speak up! Don’t wag your tail... saddlebag” (M.E. Sltykov-Shchedrin);
3. (before whom?) “to achieve someone’s favor through flattery and servility.” “Because of one’s personal, one might say, family calculations, wagging one’s tail in front of the factory owner...” (D.N. Mamin-Sibiryak).

Polysemy is most typical for verbal and adverbial phrases, as they are the most common, and to a lesser extent for nominal ones (adjectival, etc.).

Individual phraseological units are capable of combining opposite meanings. For example, the verb phrase spinning in my head can mean:

1. “constantly in consciousness, agitating the mind.” “A chaotic dream was spinning in my head, which at night was interrupted several times by awakenings” (M.A. Bulgakov);
2. “I don’t remember at all”: “It seems so easy to remember, it keeps spinning in my head, spinning painfully close, but I don’t know what exactly. There’s no way to grab it” (V. Garm).

Antonymic relations in phraseology are less developed than synonymous ones. Only phraseological units enter into antonymic relationships that are correlative on some basis - qualitative, quantitative, temporal, spatial and belonging to the same category of objective reality as mutually exclusive concepts.

The antonymy of phraseological units is often supported by antonymic connections of their lexical synonyms: seven spans in the forehead (smart) - can’t invent gunpowder (stupid); blood with milk (ruddy) - not a drop of blood in the face (pale).

A special group includes antonymic phraseological units that partially coincide in composition, but have components that are opposed in meaning: with a heavy heart - with a light heart. Components that give such phraseological units the opposite meaning are often lexical antonyms. But they can receive the opposite meaning only as part of phraseological units (face - back).

The most striking semantic feature of phraseological units is their ability to enter into synonymous connections and relationships with each other: to lead by the nose, fool one’s head - to act dishonestly, to deceive someone.

Phraseological synonymy is rich and varied. There are about 800 synonymic series in the Russian language. By phraseological synonyms we have agreed to understand phraseological units with an extremely close meaning, correlative, as a rule, with one part of speech, and having similar or identical compatibility.

Phraseological synonyms can be single-structural, multi-structural and similar-structural. Single-structural synonyms are formed according to the same model: Kolomenskaya verst and fire tower - according to the “noun” model. in them p. + adj.” Synonyms with different structures are built according to different models: headlong, floundering, with eyes closed. In similar structural synonyms, the grammatically dominant component of the phraseological unit is expressed by one part of speech, and all the rest are differently formed: to hang one’s head, to lose heart - to become despondent, to despair.”

Phraseologisms included in the synonymous series may differ in shades of meaning, stylistic coloring, and sometimes all these features at the same time.

Due to polysemy, phraseological units can have synonymous connections in each meaning. In the Russian language, there are extensive synonymous series with general meanings: “to reprimand in harsh terms”: give heat, set a steam, remove shavings, soap your hair, let light a cigarette.

Many synonymous series are semantically close. Thus, phraseological synonyms for not taking an extra step, not to lift a finger (not to make the slightest effort) intersect with two other synonymous rows: to kick the bucket, to play the fool, to spit at the ceiling (indulge in idleness, laziness) and to trim the pavement, to polish the boulevards, elephants loiter (walk, loiter idle).

Phraseological synonymy not only approaches lexical synonymy, but also differs from it. Phraseologisms are much poorer than words in lexico-grammatical terms. Thus, among phraseological units there is no actual pronominal category; in rare cases, phraseological units are correlated with the full forms of adjectives. At the same time, phraseological synonyms often convey aspects of reality that cannot be expressed by lexical synonymy. For example, phraseological units of the synonymous series, the wind whistles in his pockets (who?), an empty pocket (who?), not a penny to his name (who?) can only be interpreted with a detailed description “no one has any money at all, there is no money at all” - signs of wealth."

Phraseological synonyms differ from lexical synonyms in a stylistic sense: phraseological units are distinguished by greater stylistic homogeneity than words of free use. This is explained by the fact that phraseological units are mainly characterized by emotional and expressive connotations.

*The main property of a phraseological unit (PU) as a component of a language system is, first of all, the property of compatibility with other units.

A phraseological unit can have a single, narrow or wide combinability, depending on the semantics of the verb being characterized. The phraseological unit in all eyes (in both eyes, in both eyes) is combined with verbs of visual perception of the semantic category of action, which indicates its narrow lexical-semantic compatibility: Various monovalent, divalent, trivalent, etc. Phrases are characterized only in relation to the number of joining verbs, i.e. only the quantitative aspect of valence is taken into account. The qualitative side of valency, determined by the nature of the semantic relationships between combining units, is not revealed with this approach, which necessitates further searches in the field of “power” capabilities of phraseological units. In addition, in some cases in a scientific linguistic text it is possible to use only one of two terms, which indicates a distinction between their use and functions: valence capabilities / combinability abilities, ability to combine, verbal valency (but not compatibility). The use of the term “valence” is recommended to avoid double meaning and ambiguity: compatibility, as we have found out, is divided into several types according to different criteria. “Valence” more successfully meets the requirements for terms, and helps to avoid ambiguity and achieve naming accuracy - in the context of our work - “verbal valence of a phraseological unit.”

*The main part of phraseological resources of the Russian language consists of phraseological units of original Russian origin. Among the phraseological units of a colloquial nature there are a significant number of those, the source of which is professional speech, for example: sharpen the lasses, without a hitch (from the professional speech of carpenters), leave the stage, play the first violin (from the speech of actors, musicians).

A few phraseological units came into the literary language from slang, for example, the phrase "rubbing glasses" is a cheating expression.

In the sphere of everyday and colloquial speech, phrases have constantly arisen and are emerging in which various historical events and customs of the Russian people find social assessment. For example, the phraseological unit put (or shelved) is associated with the name of Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich (17th century), by whose order a petition box was installed in front of the palace in Kolomenskoye, but such an innovation did not eliminate red tape, and the people reflected this fact accordingly: shelving means delaying consideration of the issue for an indefinite period.

In addition to phraseological units, the origin of which is associated with colloquial speech, there is a significant number of phraseological units of book origin, both Russian and borrowed. Among them there are very old ones, borrowed from liturgical books, for example: seek and you will find, holy of holies, fiend of hell, in the image and likeness, etc.

The phraseology of the Russian language is being actively replenished with catchphrases of literary origin. For example, the sword of Damocles, the Gordian knot, the Procrustean bed - from ancient mythology; the expression from a beautiful distance belongs to N.V. Gogol; things of bygone days.

In addition to native Russian phraseological units, there are phraseological units of foreign language origin. These are usually tracings from foreign phraseological units, for example: to remain silent (from Latin).

*The visual and expressive capabilities of Russian phraseology are difficult to overestimate. Linguists have written and are writing a lot about the stylistic possibilities of phraseological units. But linguistic material, which is so attractive to any writer or publicist, is not so easy to make serve effectively and with dignity. The stylistic functioning of idiomatic expressions has one extremely important feature, which the outstanding linguist, Professor B. L. Larin once wrote about. “As the light of the morning is reflected in a drop of dew,” so, according to the scientist, phraseological units reflect not only the historically established views of the people, but also the social system, the ideology of the era that brings them to life.

In 1955, the collection “Winged Words” by N.S. was published. Ashukin and M.G. Ashukina (3rd ed. M., 1966). The book contains a large number of literary quotes and figurative expressions, arranged in alphabetical order. The presence of an alphabetical index at the end of the book allows you to use it as a reference book.

Russian phraseology is presented with great completeness in the book published in 1967, edited by A.I. Molotkov “Phraseological Dictionary of the Russian Language”, containing over 4000 dictionary entries (3rd ed. 1978; 4th ed. 1986). Phraseologisms are given with possible variants of components, an interpretation of the meaning is given and the forms of use in speech are indicated. Each meaning is illustrated with quotes from fiction. In some cases, etymological information is provided.

In 1975, the dictionary-reference book “Stable verbal-nominal phrases of the Russian language” by V.M. Deribas. This manual contains over 5,000 set phrases, arranged according to their two components (verb - noun). In 1980, the “School Phraseological Dictionary of the Russian Language” was published by V.P. Zhukov, containing about 2000 of the most common phraseological units found in literature and oral speech. In 1997, the “Dictionary of Periphrases of the Russian Language (based on newspaper journalism)” (A.B. Novikov) was published, which gives phrases such as in an Adam’s suit (naked), blue helmets (UN armed forces), black gold (oil) and etc.

Phraseology in the broad sense of the term also includes proverbs and sayings. The most complete collection of Russian proverbs is the collection “Proverbs of the Russian People” by V.I. Dahl, published in 1861-1862. (reissued 1957). In 1966, V.P.’s “Dictionary of Russian Proverbs and Sayings” was published. Zhukov (3rd ed. M., 1967), containing about 1000 proverbs and sayings, arranged in alphabetical order by the first word. In 1981, the “Dictionary-Reference Book of Russian Phraseology” was published by R.I. Yarantsev (2nd ed. M., 1985), which included about 800 phraseological units.

Phraseological phrases are the bane of everyone who studies a foreign language, because when faced with them, a person often cannot understand what is being said. Often, in order to understand the meaning of a particular statement, you have to use a dictionary of phraseological combinations, which is not always at hand. However, there is a way out - you can develop the ability to recognize phraseological units, then it will be easier to understand their meaning. True, for this you need to know what types there are and how they differ. Particular attention in this matter should be paid to phraseological combinations, since they (due to the different ways of classifying them) create the most problems. So, what are they, what are their distinctive features, and in what dictionaries can you find clues?

Phraseology and the subject of its study

The science of phraseology, which specializes in the study of various stable combinations, is relatively young. In Russian linguistics, it began to stand out as a separate section only in the 18th century, and even then at the end of this century, thanks to Mikhail Lomonosov.

Its most famous researchers are linguists Viktor Vinogradov and Nikolai Shansky, and in English - A. Mackay, W. Weinreich and L. P. Smith. By the way, it is worth noting that English-speaking linguists, unlike Slavic specialists, pay much less attention to phraseological units, and the stock of them in this language is inferior to Russian, Ukrainian or even Polish.

The main subject on which this discipline concentrates its attention is phraseological units or phraseological units. What is it? This is a combination of several words that is stable in structure and composition (it is not compiled anew every time, but is used in a ready-made form). For this reason, during syntactic analysis, a phraseological unit, regardless of its type and the length of its constituent words, always appears as a single member of a sentence.

In each language it is a unique thing associated with its history and culture. It cannot be fully translated without losing its meaning. Therefore, when translating, phraseological units that already have similar meanings that exist in another language are most often selected.

For example, a well-known English phraseological combination: “Keep your fingers on the pulse”, which literally means “keep your fingers on the pulse”, but has the meaning of “keep abreast of events”. However, since there is no one hundred percent analogue in Russian, it is replaced with a very similar one: “Keep your hand on the pulse.”

Sometimes, due to the close proximity of countries, similar phraseological units arise in their languages, and then there are no problems with translation. Thus, the Russian expression “beat the buck” (do nothing) has its twin brother in the Ukrainian language - “byty baidyky”.

Often similar expressions come into several languages ​​at the same time due to some important event, for example, such as Christianization. Despite belonging to different Christian denominations, the phraseological unit “alpha and omega” taken from the Bible and meaning “from beginning to end” (completely, thoroughly) is common in Ukrainian, French, Spanish, German, Slovak, Russian and Polish.

Types of phraseological units

On the issue of classification of phraseological units, linguists have not yet come to a common opinion. Some additionally include proverbs (“You can’t live without the sun, you can’t live without your sweetheart”), sayings (“God won’t give you away - the pig won’t eat you”) and language cliches (“warm support”, “work environment”). But for now they are in the minority.

At the moment, the most popular classification in East Slavic languages ​​is the classification of linguist Viktor Vinogradov, who divided all stable phrases into three key categories:

• Phraseological fusions.
• Phraseological unities.
• Phraseological combinations.

Many linguists correlate fusions and unities with the term “idiom” (by the way, this word has the same root as the noun “idiot”), which is actually a synonym for the noun “phraseologism”. This is due to the fact that sometimes it is very difficult to draw the line between them. This name is worth remembering, since in English phraseological adhesions, unities, and combinations are translated precisely with its help - idioms.

Question about phraseological expressions

Colleague Shansky insisted on the existence of a fourth type - expressions. In fact, he divided Vinogradov’s phraseological combinations into two categories: actual combinations and expressions.

Although Shansky’s classification leads to confusion in the practical distribution of stable phrases, it allows us to take a deeper look at this linguistic phenomenon.

What is the difference between phraseological fusions, phraseological unities, phraseological combinations

First of all, it is worth understanding that these stable units were divided into these types according to the level of lexical independence of their components.

Phrases that are absolutely inseparable, the meaning of which is not related to the meaning of their components, were called phraseological adjuncts. For example: “to sharpen your lasses” (have a stupid conversation), to wear one’s heart on one’s sleeve (to be frank, literally means “to wear one’s heart on one’s sleeve”). By the way, fusions are characterized by figurativeness; most often they arise from folk speech, especially outdated expressions or from ancient books.

They are a more independent species in relation to its components. Unlike adjuncts, their semantics is determined by the meaning of their components. For this reason, puns are included here. For example: “small but daring” (a person who does something well, despite his unimpressive external data) or the Ukrainian phraseological unit: “katyuzi deservedly” (the culprit received a punishment corresponding to his own offense). By the way, both examples illustrate a unique feature of unities: rhyming consonances. Perhaps that is why Viktor Vinogradov included sayings and proverbs among them, although their belonging to phraseological units is still disputed by many linguists.

Third type: free phraseological combinations of words. They are quite noticeably different from the two above. The fact is that the meaning of their components directly affects the meaning of the entire turnover. For example: “heavy drinking”, “raise a question”.

Phraseological combinations in the Russian language (as well as in Ukrainian and English) have a special property: their components can be replaced with synonyms without loss of meaning: “to hurt honor” - “to hurt pride”, “raspberry ringing” - “melodic ringing”. As an example from the language of the proud British, the idiom to show one’s teeth (show teeth), which can be adapted for any person: to show my (your, his, her, our) teeth.

Phraseological expressions and combinations: distinctive features

The classification of Viktor Vinogradov, in which only one analytical type (phraseological combinations) was distinguished by composition, was gradually supplemented by Nikolai Shansky. It was quite easy to distinguish between idioms and combinations (due to their differences in structure). But Shansky’s new unit - expressions (“to be afraid of wolves, don’t go into the forest”) was more difficult to distinguish from combinations.

But, if you delve into the question, you can notice a clear difference, which is based on the meaning of phraseological combinations. Thus, expressions consist of absolutely free words that fully possess independent semantics (“all that glitters is not gold”). However, they differ from ordinary phrases and sentences in that they are stable expressions that are not composed in a new way, but are used ready-made, like a template: “radish horseradish is not sweeter” (Ukrainian version “radish horseradish is not malted”).

Phraseological combinations (“give your head to be cut off” - “give your hand to be cut off”) always contain several words with an unmotivated meaning, while all components of the expressions are absolutely semantically independent (“Man - that sounds proud”). By the way, this feature makes some linguists doubt whether the expressions belong to phraseological units.

Which combination of words is not a phraseological phrase?

Phraseologisms, from a lexical point of view, are a unique phenomenon: on the one hand, they have all the features of phrases, but at the same time they are closer in their properties to words. Knowing these features, you can easily learn to distinguish stable phraseological combinations, unities, fusions or expressions from ordinary phrases.

• Phraseologisms, like phrases, consist of several interconnected lexemes, but most often their meaning is unable to go beyond the sum of the meanings of their components. For example: “lose your head” (stop thinking straight) and “lose your wallet.” The words that make up a phraseological unit are most often used in a figurative sense.
• When used in oral and written speech, the composition of phrases is formed anew each time. But unities and fusions are constantly reproduced in finished form (which makes them similar to speech clichés). Phraseological combinations of words and phraseological expressions in this matter are sometimes confusing. For example: “to hang one’s head” (to be sad), although it is a phraseological unit, each of its components can freely appear in ordinary phrases: “to hang one’s coat” and “to lower one’s head.”
• A phraseological phrase (due to the integrity of the meaning of its components) in most cases can be safely replaced with a synonymous word, which cannot be done with a phrase. For example: the expression “servant of Melpomene” can easily be changed to the simple word “artist” or “actor”.
• Phraseologisms never act as names. For example, the hydronym “Dead Sea” and phraseological combinations “dead season” (unpopular season), “lying as a dead weight” (lying as an unused load).

Classification of phraseological units by origin

Considering the question of the origin of phraseological combinations, expressions, unities and adhesions, they can be divided into several groups.

Other classifications: version by Peter Dudik

• In addition to Vinogradov and Shansky, other linguists tried to separate phraseological units, guided by their own principles. Thus, the linguist Dudik identified not four, but five types of phraseological units:
• Semantically inseparable idioms: “to be on short terms” (to know someone closely).
• Phraseological unities with a freer semantics of the constituent elements: “soap the neck” (punish someone).
• Phraseological expressions consisting entirely of independent words, for the total meaning of which it is impossible to select a synonym. Dudik mainly includes sayings and proverbs among them: “The goose is not a friend to the pig.”
• Phraseological combinations are phrases based on a metaphorical meaning: “blue blood”, “hawk eye”.
• Phraseological phrases. They are characterized by a lack of metaphor and syntactic unity of components: “big swell”.

Classification by Igor Melchuk

Melchuk’s classification of phraseological units stands apart from all of the above. According to it, significantly more species are distinguished, which are distributed into four categories.

• Degree: full, semi-phrase, quasi-phrase.
• The role of pragmatic factors in the process of phraseological unit formation: semantic and pragmatics.
• Which one does it belong to: lexeme, phrase, syntactic phraseme.
• A component of a linguistic sign that has undergone phraseologization: syntactics of the sign, signifier and signified.

Classification by Boris Larin

This linguist classified them according to the stages of their evolution, from ordinary phrases to phraseological units:

• Variable phrases (analogue of phraseological combinations and expressions): “velvet season”.
• Those that have partially lost their primary meaning, but were able to gain metaphoricality and stereotyping: “keep a stone in your bosom.”
• Idioms that are completely devoid of the semantic independence of their components, as well as having lost connection with their original lexical meaning and grammatical role (analogous to phraseological adjuncts and unities): “out of the blue” (bad).

Common examples of phraseological combinations

Below are a few more fairly well-known stable phrases.

Although the classification of Vinogradov and Shansky does not apply to language, it is possible to select stable phrases that can be classified as phraseological combinations.
Examples:

• Bosom friend - bosom buddy (bosom friend - bosom buddy).
• A Sisyfean labor (Sisyphean labor).
• A pitched battle - a fierce battle (fierce battle - fierce battle).

Phraseological dictionaries

The presence of a large number of classifications is due to the fact that none of them gives a 100% guarantee of the absence of errors. Therefore, it is still worth knowing in which dictionaries you can find a hint if you cannot accurately determine the type of phraseological unit. All dictionaries of this type are divided into monolingual and multilingual. Below are translated the most famous books of this kind, in which you can find examples of set expressions that are most common in the Russian language.

• Monolingual:“Educational phraseological dictionary” by E. Bystrova; “Burning verb - a dictionary of folk phraseology” by V. Kuzmich; “Phraseological Dictionary of the Russian Language” by A. Fedoseev; “Phraseological Dictionary of the Russian Literary Language” by I. Fedoseev and “Big Explanatory and Phraseological Dictionary” by M. Michelson.
• Multilingual:“Large English-Russian phraseological dictionary” (twenty thousand phraseological units) by A. Kunin, “Large Polish-Russian, Russian-Polish phraseological dictionary” by Y. Lukshin and Random House Russian-English Dictionary of Idioms by Sofia Lyubenskaya.

Perhaps, having learned that it is sometimes difficult to immediately distinguish what type of phraseological unit belongs to, this topic may seem incredibly difficult. However, the devil is not as scary as he is painted. The main way to develop the ability to correctly find phraseological combinations of words among other phraseological units is to practice regularly. And in the case of foreign languages, study the history of the emergence of such phrases and memorize them. This will not only help you avoid getting into awkward situations in the future, but will also make your speech very beautiful and figurative.