Classification of Phraseological Units
This classification was suggested by professor Amosova N.N. She considers phraseological units to be units of fixed context. Fixed context is characterized by a specific and unchanging sequence of definite lexical components and peculiar relationship between them. Units of fixed contexts are subdivided into two types: phrasemes and idioms.
Phrasemes are two-member word-groups in which one of the members has a particular meaning dependent on the second component as it is found only in the given context. For example, in ‘small hours’ (предрассветные часы; первые часы после полуночи) the second component ‘hours’ serves as the only clue to the particular meaning of the first component.
Idioms are distinguished from phrasemes by the idiomaticity of the whole word-group. They are semantically and grammatically inseparable units. For example, ‘red tape’, ‘a mare’s nest’, (an illusion’), ‘to let the cat out of the bag’ (to divulge a secret’).
The difference between phrasemes and idioms is based on semantic relationship and the demarcation line between the two groups seems rather subjective.
Professor Kunin’s Classification of Phraseological Units
(structural-semantic classification of phraseological units)
A detailed functional, semantic and structural classification is developled by professor A.V.Kunin. He thinks that phraseology is an independent branch of linguistics and not a part of lexicology and it deals will all types of set expressions. A.V.Kunin divides them into three classes: phraseological units, phraseomatic units, and borderline (mixed) cases. The main distinction between the first and the second classes is semantic: phraseological units have fully or partly transferred meaning while phraseomatic units are characterized by phraseological stability that distinguishes them from free phrases and compound words. Professor A.V.Kunin develops the theory of stability. He considers stability as a complex notion that consists of 4 aspects:
1) stability of usage (phraseological units are read-made, but not created in speech);
2) lexical stability as the components of phraseological units are either irreplaceable (‘red tape’, ‘a mare’s nest’) or partially replaceable within the bounds of phraseological variance (разногласие). Here we encounter various kinds of variance (изменение):
a) lexical (‘a skeleton in the cupboard’ – ‘a skeleton in the close’)
(‘a blind pig’ – ‘a blind tiger’) бар, где незаконно
торгуют спиртными напитками
b) grammatical (‘to be in deep water’ – ‘to be in deep waters’) in trouble
(‘a stony heart’ – ‘a heart of stone’)
c) positional (‘a square peg in a round hole’ – ‘a round peg in a square hole’)
человек не на своём месте
(‘to dot the i’s and cross the t’s’ – ‘to cross one’s t’s and dot one’s
i’s’)
d) quantitative (‘Tom, Dick and Harry’ – ‘every Tom, Dick and Harry’)
каждый встречный и поперечный
e) mixed (‘raisestir up a hornets’ nest about one’s ears’)
потревожить осиное гнездо, нажить себе много врагов
(‘to arousestir up the nest of hornets’).
3) semantic stability is based on the lexical stability of phraseological units. In spite of all occasional changes the meaning of a phraseological unit is preserved. It may only be specified, made more precise, weakened or strengthened.
4) syntactic stability (the grammatical structure of an expression).
Professor A.V.Kunin considers that any set expression that lacks one of these aspects of stability cannot be regarded as a phraseological unit. According to A.V.Kunin a phraseological unit is a stable word group with wholly or partially transferred meaning. Phraseological units are subdivided into 4 classes according to the function in communication determined by structural-semantic characteristics:
1) nominative phraseological units, standing for certain notions, e.g. ‘a bull in a china shop’ (‘слон в посудной лавке’)
2) nominative-communicative phraseological units, standing for certain notions in the Active Voice, and may be used in Passive constructions, e.g. ‘to cross the Rubicon’ – ‘The Rubicon is crossed’ (отважиться на какой-то бесповоротный шаг).
3) interjectional phraseological units, standing for certain interjections, e.g. ‘a pretty (nice) kettle of fish!’ (‘хорошая история!’, ‘японский городовой!’, ‘ничего себе ситуация!’), ‘For crying out loud!’ (‘чёрт возьми!’, ‘чёрт подери!’, ‘боже мой!’, ‘вот это здорово!’)
4) communicative phraseological units, standing for certain sentences (proverbs and sayings), e.g. ‘Still waters run deep.’ (‘В тихом омуте чертиодятся’). ‘The world is a small place’ (‘мир тесен’).
Further subdivision treats phraseological units as a changeable (“open”) and unchangeable (“closed”). The four classes of phraseological units are divided into subgroups according to the relationships between the meaning of the constituents and the meaning of the ser expression. Much attention is devoted to different types of variation of phraseological units. A.V.Kunin gives in his books an up-to-date survey of fundamental and special problems of phraseology.
Лекции № 12-13.