Free word groups and phraseological units
A word-group is the largest two-facet lexicalunit comprising more than one word but expressing one global concept.
The lexical meaning of the word groups is thecombined lexical meaning of the component words. The meaning of the word groupsis motivated by the meanings of the component members and is supported by thestructural pattern. But it’s not a mere sum total of all these meanings!Polysemantic words are used in word groups only in 1 of their meanings. Thesemeanings of the component words in such word groups are mutually interdependentand inseparable (blind man – «a human being unable to see», blind type – «thecopy isn’t readable).
Word groups possess not only the lexical meaning,but also the meaning conveyed mainly by the pattern of arrangement of theirconstituents. The structural pattern of word groups is the carrier of a certainsemantic component not necessarily dependent on the actual lexical meaning ofits members (school grammar – «grammar which is taught in school», grammarschool – «a type of school»). We have to distinguish between the structuralmeaning of a given type of word groups as such and the lexical meaning of itsconstituents.
It is often argued that the meaning of wordgroups is also dependent on some extra-linguistic factors – on the situation inwhich word groups are habitually used by native speakers.
Words put together to form lexical units makephrases or word-groups. One must recall that lexicology deals with words,word-forming morphemes and word-groups.
The degree of structural and semantic cohesion ofword-groups may vary. Some word-groups, e.g. at least, point of view, by means,to take place, etc. seem to be functionally and semantically inseparable. Theyare usually described as set phrases, word-equivalents or phraseological unitsand are studied by the branch of lexicology which is known as phraseology. Inother word-groups such as to take lessons, kind to people, a week ago, thecomponent-members seem to possess greater semantic and structural independence.Word-groups of this type are defined as free word-groups or phrases and arestudied in syntax.
Before discussing phraseology it is necessary tooutline the features common to various word-groups irrespective of the degreeof structural and semantic cohesion of the component-words.
There are two factors which are important inuniting words into word-groups:
– the lexical valency of words;
– the grammatical valency of words.
Lexical valency
Words are used in certain lexical contexts, i.e.in combinations with other words. E.g. the noun question is often combined withsuch adjectives as vital, pressing, urgent, delicate, etc.
The aptness of a word to appear in variouscombinations is described as its lexical valency. The range of the lexicalvalency of words is delimited by the inner structure of the English words.Thus, to raise and to lift are synonyms, but only the former is collocated withthe noun question. The verbs to take, to catch, to seize, to grasp aresynonyms, but they are found in different collocations:
to take – exams, measures, precautions, etc.;
to grasp – the truth, the meaning.
Words habitually collocated in speech tend toform a cliche.
The lexical valency of correlated words in differentlanguages is not identical, because as it was said before, it depends on theinner structure of the vocabulary of the language. Both the English flower andthe Russian цветокmaybe combined with a number of similar words, e.g. garden flowers, hot houseflowers (cf. the Russian – садовые цветы, оранжерейные цветы), but in English flowercannot be combined with the word room, while in Russian we say комнатные цветы (in English wesay pot-flowers).
Words are also used in grammatical contexts. Theminimal grammatical context in which the words are used to form word-groups isusually described as the pattern of the word-group. E.g., the adjective heavycan be followed by a noun (A+N) – heavy food, heavy storm, heavy box, heavyeater. But we cannot say «heavy cheese» or «heavy to lift, to carry», etc.
The aptness of a word to appear in specificgrammatical (or rather syntactical) structures is termed grammatical valency.
The grammatical valency of words may bedifferent. The grammatical valency is delimited by the part of speech the wordbelongs to. E.g., no English adjective can be followed by the finite form of averb.
Then, the grammatical valency is also delimitedby the inner structure of the language. E.g., to suggest, to propose aresynonyms. Both can be followed by a noun, but only to propose can be followedby the infinitive of a verb – to propose to do something.
Clever and intelligent have the same grammaticalvalency, but only clever can be used in word-groups having the pattern A+prep+N– clever at maths.
Structurally word-groups can be considered indifferent ways. Word-groups may be described as for the order and arrangementof the component-members. E.g., the word-group to read a book can be classifiedas a verbal-nominal group, to look at smb. – as averbal-prepositional-nominal group, etc.
By the criterion of distribution all word-groupsmay be divided into two big classes: according to their head-words andaccording to their syntactical patterns.
Word-groups may be classified according to theirhead-words into:
nominal groups – red flower;
adjective groups – kind to people;
verbal groups – to speak well.
The head is not necessarily the component thatoccurs first.
Word-groups are classified according to theirsyntactical pattern into predicative and non-predicative groups. Suchword-groups as he went, Bob walks that have a syntactic structure similar tothat of a sentence are termed as predicative, all others are non-predicativeones.
Non-predicative word-groups are divided intosubordinative and coordinative depending on the type of syntactic relationsbetween the components. E.g., a red flower, a man of freedom are subordinativenon-predicative word-groups, red and freedom being dependent words, while dayand night, do and die are coordinative non-predicative word-groups.
The lexical meaning of a word-group may bedefined as the combined lexical meaning of the component members. But it shouldbe pointed out, however, that the term «combined lexical meaning» does notimply that the meaning of the word-group is always a simple additive result ofall the lexical meanings of the component words. As a rule, the meanings of thecomponent words are mutually dependent and the meaning of the word-groupnaturally predominates over the lexical meaning of the components. The interdependenceis well seen in word-groups made up of polysemantic words. E.g., in the phrasesthe blind man, the blind type the word blind has different meanings – unable tosee and vague.
So we see that polysemantic words are used inword-groups only in one of their meanings.
The term motivation is used to denote therelationship existing between the phonemic or morphemic composition andstructural pattern of the word on the one hand and its meaning on the other.
There are three main types of motivation:
1) phonetical
2) morphological
3) semantic
1. Phonetical motivation is used when there is acertain similarity between the sounds that make up the word. For example: buzz,cuckoo, gigle. The sounds of a word are imitative of sounds in nature, or smththat produces a characteristic sound. This type of motivation is determined bythe phonological system of each language.
2. Morphological motivation – the relationshipbetween morphemic structure and meaning. The main criterion in morphologicalmotivation is the relationship between morphemes. One-morphemed words arenon-motivated. Ex – means «former» when we talk about humans ex-wife,ex-president. Re – means «again»: rebuild, rewrite. In borowed words motivationis faded: «expect, export, recover (get better)». Morphological motivation isespecially obvious in newly coined words, or in the words created in thiscentury. In older words motivation is established etymologically.
The structure-pattern of the word is veryimportant too: «finger-ring» and «ring-finger». Though combined lexical meaningis the same. The difference of meaning can be explained by the arrangement ofthe components.
Morphological motivation has some irregularities:«smoker» – si not «the one who smokes», it is «a railway car in which passengermay smoke».
The degree of motivation can be different:
«endless» is completely motivated
«cranberry» is partially motivated: morpheme «cran-»has no lexical meaning.
3. Semantic motivation is based on theco-existence of direct and figurative meanings of the same word within the samesynchronous system. «Mouth» denotes a part of the human face and at the sametime it can be applied to any opening: «the mouth of a river». «Ermine» is notonly the anme of a small animal, but also a fur. In their direct meaning «mouth»and «ermine» are not motivated.
In compound words it is morphological motivationwhen the meaning of the whole word is based on direct meanings of itscomponents and semantic motivation is when combination of components is usedfiguratively. For example «headache» is «pain in the head» (morphological) and «smth.annoying» (sematic).
When the connection between the meaning of theword and its form is conventional (there is no perceptible reason for the wordhaving this phonemic and morphemic composition) the word is non-motivated (forthe present state of language development). Words that seem non-motivated nowmay have lost their motivation: «earn» is derived from «earnian – to harvest»,but now this word is non-motivated.
As to compounds, their motivation ismorphological if the meaning of the whole is based on the direct meaning of thecomponents, and semantic if the combination is used figuratively: watchdog – adog kept for watching property (morphologically motivated); – a watchful humanguardian (semantically motivated).
Every vocabulary is in a state of constantdevelopment. Words that seem non-motivated at present may have lost theirmotivation. When some people recognize the motivation, whereas others do not,motivation is said to be faded.
Semantically all word-groups may be classifiedinto motivated and non-motivated. Non-motivated word-groups are usuallydescribed as phraseological units or idioms.
Word-groups may be described as lexicallymotivated if the combined lexical meaning of the groups is based on the meaningof their components. Thus take lessons is motivated; take place – ‘occur’ islexically non-motivated.
Word-groups are said to be structurally motivatedif the meaning of the pattern is deduced from the order and arrangement of themember-words of the group. Red flower is motivated as the meaning of thepattern quality – substance can be deduced from the order and arrangement ofthe words red and flower, whereas the seemingly identical pattern red tape (‘officialbureaucratic methods’) cannot be interpreted as quality – substance.
Seemingly identical word-groups are sometimesfound to be motivated or non-motivated depending on their semanticinterpretation. Thus apple sauce, e.g., is lexically and structurally motivatedwhen it means ‘a sauce made of apples’ but when used to denote ‘nonsense’ it isclearly non-motivated
Word-groups like words may be also analyzed fromthe point of view of their motivation. Word-groups may be called as lexicallymotivated if the combined lexical meaning of the group is deducible from themeaning of the components. All free phrases are completely motivated.
It follows from the above discussion thatword-groups may be also classified into motivated and non-motivated units.Non-motivated word-groups are habitually described as phraseological units oridioms.
Investigations of English phraseology began notlong ago. English and American linguists as a rule are busy collectingdifferent words, word-groups and sentences which are interesting from the pointof view of their origin, style, usage or some other features. All these unitsare habitually described as «idioms», but no attempt has been made to describethese idioms as a separate class of linguistic units or a specific class ofword-groups.
Difference in terminology («set-phrases», «idioms»and «word-equivalents») reflects certain differences in the main criteria usedto distinguish types of phraseological units and free word-groups. The term «setphrase» implies that the basic criterion of differentiation is stability of thelexical components and grammatical structure of word-groups.
There is a certain divergence of opinion as tothe essential features of phraseological units as distinguished from otherword-groups and the nature of phrases that can be properly termed «phraseologicalunits». The habitual terms «set-phrases», «idioms», «word-equivalents» aresometimes treated differently by different linguists. However these termsreflect to certain extend the main debatable points of phraseology which centrein the divergent views concerning the nature and essential features ofphraseological units as distinguished from the so-called free word-groups.
The term «set expression» implies that the basiccriterion of differentiation is stability of the lexical components andgrammatical structure of word-groups.
The term «word-equivalent» stresses not onlysemantic but also functional inseparability of certain word-groups, their aptnessto function in speech as single words.
The term «idioms» generally implies thatthe essential feature of the linguistic units under consideration isidiomaticity or lack of motivation. Uriel Weinreich expresses his view that anidiom is a complex phrase, the meaning of which cannot be derived from themeanings of its elements. He developed a more truthful supposition, claimingthat an idiom is a subset of a phraseological unit. Ray Jackendoff and CharlesFillmore offered a fairly broad definition of the idiom, which, in Fillmore’swords, reads as follows: «…an idiomatic expression or construction is somethinga language user could fail to know while knowing everything else in thelanguage». Chafe also lists four features of idioms that make them anomalies inthe traditional language unit paradigm: non-compositionality, transformationaldefectiveness, ungrammaticality and frequency asymmetry.
Great work in this field has been done by theoutstanding Russian linguist A. Shakhmatov in his work «Syntax». This work wascontinued by Acad. V.V. Vinogradov. Great investigations of Englishphraseology were done by Prof. A. Cunin, I. Arnold and others.
Phraseological units are habitually defined asnon-motivated word-groups that cannot be freely made up in speech but arereproduced as ready-made units; the other essential feature of phraseologicalunits is stability of the lexical components and grammatical structure.
Unlike components of free word-groups which mayvary according to the needs of communication, member-words of phraseologicalunits are always reproduced as single unchangeable collocations. E.g., in a redflower (a free phrase) the adjective red may be substituted by anotheradjective denoting colour, and the word-group will retain the meaning: «theflower of a certain colour».
In the phraseological unit red tape (bürokratikmetodlar) no such substitution is possible, as a change of the adjective wouldcause a complete change in the meaning of the group: it would then mean «tapeof a certain colour». It follows that the phraseological unit red tape issemantically non-motivated, i.e. its meaning cannot be deduced from the meaningof its components, and that it exists as a ready-made linguistic unit whichdoes not allow any change of its lexical components and its grammaticalstructure.
Grammatical structure of phraseological units isto a certain degree also stable:
red tape – a phraseological unit;
red tapes – a free word-group;
to go to bed – a phraseological unit;
to go to the bed – a free word-group.
Still the basic criterion is comparative lack ofmotivation, or idiomaticity of the phraseological units. Semantic motivation isbased on the coexistence of direct and figurative meaning.
Taking into consideration mainly the degree ofidiomaticity phraseological units may be classified into three big groups. Thisclassification was first suggested by Acad. V.V. Vinogradov. These groupsare:
– phraseological fusions,
– phraseological unities,
– phraseological collocations, or habitualcollocations.
Phraseological fusions are completelynon-motivated word-groups. Themeaning of the components has no connection atleast synchronically with the meaning of the whole group. Idiomaticity iscombined with complete stability of the lexical components and the grammaticalstructure of the fusion.
Phraseological unities are partiallynon-motivated word-groups as their meaning can usually be understood through(deduced from) the metaphoric meaning of the whole phraseological unit.
Phraseological unities are usually marked by acomparatively high degree of stability of the lexical components andgrammatical structure. Phraseological unities can have homonymous free phrases,used in direct meanings.
§ to skate on thin ice – to skate on thin ice (to risk);
§ to wash one's hands off dirt – to wash one's hands off (towithdraw from participance);
§ to play the first role in the theatre – to play the first role (todominate).
There must be not less than two notional wordsinmetaphorical meanings.
Phraseological collocations are partiallymotivated but they are made up of words having special lexical valency which ismarked by a certain degree of stability in such word-groups. In phraseologicalcollocations variability of components is strictly limited. They differ fromphraseological unities by the fact that one of the components in them is usedin its direct meaning, the other – in indirect meaning, and the meaning of thewhole group dominates over the meaning of its components. As figurativeness isexpressed only in one component of the phrase it is hardly felt.
§ to pay a visit, tribute, attention, respect;
§ to break a promise, a rule, news, silence;
§ to meet demands, requirement, necessity;
§ to set free; to set at liberty;
§ to make money, journey;
§ to fall ill.
The structure V + N (дополнение) is thelargest group of phraseological collocations.
Phraseological units may be defined as specificword-groups functioning as word-equivalents; they are equivalent to definiteclasses of words. The part-of-speech meaning of phraseological units is felt asbelonging to the word-group as a whole irrespective of the part-of-speechmeaning of component words. Comparing a free word-group, e.g. a long day and aphraseological unit, e.g. in the long run, we observe that in the freeword-group the noun day and the adjective long preserve the part-of-speechmeaning proper to these words taken in isolation. The whole group is viewed ascomposed of two independent units (A + N). In the phraseological unit in thelong run the part-of-speech meaning belongs to the group as a single whole. Inthe long run is grammatically equivalent to single adverbs, e.g. finally,firstly, etc.
So, phraseological units are included into thesystem of parts of speech.
Phraseological units are created from freeword-groups. But in the course of time some words – constituents ofphraseological units may drop out of the language; the situation in which thephraseological unit was formed can be forgotten, motivation can be lost andthese phrases become phraseological fusions.
The vocabulary of a language is enriched not onlyby words, but also by phraseological units. Phraseological units areword-groups that cannot be made in the process of speech, they exist in thelanguage as ready-made units. They are compiled in special dictionaries. Thesame as words phraseological units express a single notion and are used in asentence as one part of it. American and British lexicographers call such units«idioms». We can mention such dictionaries as: L. Smith «Words and Idioms», V.Collins «A Book of English Idioms» etc. In these dictionaries we can findwords, peculiar in their semantics (idiomatic), side by side with word-groupsand sentences. In these dictionaries they are arranged, as a rule, intodifferent semantic groups.
Phraseological units can be classified accordingto the ways they are formed, according to the degree of the motivation of theirmeaning, according to their structure and according to their part-of-speechmeaning.
A.V. Koonin classified phraseological unitsaccording to the way they are formed. He pointed out primary and secondary waysof forming phraseological units.
Among two-top units A.I. Smirnitsky pointsout the following structural types:
a) attributive-nominal suchas: a month of Sundays, grey matter, a millstone round one’s neck and manyothers. Units of this type are noun equivalents and can be partly or perfectlyidiomatic. In partly idiomatic units (phrasisms) sometimes the first componentis idiomatic, e.g. high road, in other cases the second component is idiomatic,e.g. first night. In many cases both components are idiomatic, e.g. red tape,blind alley, bed of nail, shot in the arm and many others.
b) verb-nominalphraseological units, e.g. to read between the lines, to speak BBC, to sweepunder the carpet etc. The grammar centre of such units is the verb, thesemantic centre in many cases is the nominal component, e.g. to fall in love.In some units the verb is both the grammar and the semantic centre, e.g. not toknow the ropes. These units can be perfectly idiomatic as well, e.g. to burnone’s boats, to vote with one’s feet, to take to the cleaners’ etc.
Very close to such units are word-groups of thetype to have a glance, to have a smoke. These units are not idiomatic and aretreated in grammar as a special syntactical combination, a kind of aspect.
c) phraseologicalrepetitions, such as: now or never, part and parcel, country and western etc.Such units can be built on antonyms, e.g. ups and downs, back and forth; oftenthey are formed by means of alliteration, e.g cakes and ale, as busy as a bee.Components in repetitions are joined by means of conjunctions. These units areequivalents of adverbs or adjectives and have no grammar centre. They can alsobe partly or perfectly idiomatic, e.g. cool as a cucumber (partly), bread andbutter (perfectly).
Phraseological units the same as compound wordscan have more than two tops (stems in compound words), e.g. to take a backseat, a peg to hang a thing on, lock, stock and barrel, to be a shadow of one’sown self, at one’s own sweet will.
Phraseological units can be classified as partsof speech. This classification was suggested by I.V. Arnold. Here we havethe following groups:
a) noun phraseologismsdenoting an object, a person, a living being, e.g. bullet train, latchkeychild, redbrick university, Green Berets,
b) verb phraseologismsdenoting an action, a state, a feeling, e.g. to break the log-jam, to get onsomebody’s coattails, to be on the beam, to nose out, to make headlines,
c) adjective phraseologismsdenoting a quality, e.g. loose as a goose, dull as lead
d) adverb phraseologicalunits, such as: with a bump, in the soup, like a dream, like a dog with twotails,
e) prepositionphraseological units, e.g. in the course of, on the stroke of,
f) interjectionphraseological units, e.g. «Catch me!», «Well, I never!» etc.
In I.V. Arnold’s classification there arealso sentence equivalents, proverbs, sayings and quotations, e.g. «The sky isthe limit», «What makes him tick», «I am easy». Proverbs are usuallymetaphorical, e.g. «Too many cooks spoil the broth», while sayings are as arule non-metaphorical, e.g. «Where there is a will there is a way».