Semantic classification of phraseological units

This classification was suggested by acad. V.V. Vinogradov for Russian phraseological units. He developed some points first advanced by the Swiss linguist Charles Bally and gave a strong impetus to a purely lexicological treatment of the material. It means that phraseological units were defined as lexical complexes with specific semantic features and classified accordingly. Phraseological units can be classified according to the degree of motivation аnd idiomaticity of their meaning. He pointed out three types of phraseological units:

1) phraseological fusions are completely non-motivated word-groups where the meaning of the whole expression is not derived from the meaning of components, it’s highly idiomatic, e.g. show the white feather ‘to act in a cowardly manner’, to talk through one’s hat ‘to talk foolishly’, a fishy story ‘a suspicious story’, on Shank’s mare ‘on foot’;

2) phraseological unities are partially non-motivated word-groups where the meaning of the whole can be guessed from the meaning of its components, it’s less idiomatic, e.g. to show one’s teeth ‘to threaten’, to stand to one’s guns ‘to refuse to change one’s opinion’, to skate on thin ice ‘to take risks’, to be caught napping ‘be taken unawares’. Phraseological unities can vary structurally, substitutions of their components are sometimes possible, e.g. to stick to / hold / stand one’s ground, old boy / chap / fellow; against / for a rainy day ‘until a time in the future when you might need it (esp. money will be needed)’.

3) phraseological combinations (collocations) are relatively stable motivated word groups which contain one element used in its direct meaning, while the other is used metaphorically, e.g. to meet the demand / the requirements / the necessity / the needs, to break a word / a promise / an agreement / a rule, to inflict harm / injury / strike / blow / a loss / damage. These above substitutions are not synonymic as the meaning of the whole changes, while the meanings of the verbs ‘meet’, ‘break’ and ‘inflict’ are kept intact.

The shortcoming of the classification is that it’s difficult to distinguish between the phraseological fusions and phraseological unities basing on the criterion of motivation only, as the latter works differently for people of different background.