Classification of synonyms

The only existing classification system for synonyms was estab­lished by Academician V. V. Vinogradov. In his classification system there are three principles of classification of synonyms:

1. according to the difference in connotational and denotational meanings

we distinguish:

• ideographic (which he defined as words conveying the same notion but differing in shades of meaning),

Among ideographic synonyms are those that:

- very close in meaning e.g. terrible horrible

- differ in meaning considerably interpreter, translator

- differ in manner f action look, stare

- differ in the degree of quality, in intensity of an action want, desire, be eager to, like, adore, be fond of

- denote the same thing but differ in their emotional colouring boy, fellow

- differ in volume of concept they express happy lucky

- pairs of synonyms when one expresses continuity of the action or state, another expresses elementary action to speak – to say

• stylistic (differing in stylistic characteristics) – differ in connotational component in emotional, expressive and evaluative overtones: doctor – doc., captain – cap., to help – to assist

2. according to the criterion of interchangeability

§ total – can replace each other in any context without distortion; they can be mostly found in terms flexion, inflection, ending

§ partial – have some differences but are interchangeable ask, beg

3. according to the criterion of context

• proper -are similar in meaning irrespective of the contextual conditions to buy to purchase
• contextual – are similar in meaning only under some specific conditions: buy get

Some linguists single out absolute synonyms (coinciding in all their shades of meaning and in all their stylistic characteristics) fatherland - motherland

LECTURE 6ENGLISH PHRASEOLOGY 1. Phraseological units in English. 2. Ways of forming phraseological units. Different classifications of phraseological units. 1. Phraseological units in English. The vocabulary of a language is enriched not only by words but also by phraseological units. Phr. units (idioms) can be described as the most picturesque, colourful and expressive part of language vocabulary. If synonyms can be figuratively referred to as tints and colours of vocabulary, phraseology is a kind of picture gallery, in which are collected vivid and amusing sketches of the nation’s customs, traditions & prejudice, recollections of its past history scraps of fairy-tales. Phraseological units are word-groups that cannot be made in the process of speech, they exist in the language as ready-made units. They are compiled in special dictionaries. Phraseological units express a single notion and are used in a sentence as one part of it. American and British lexicographers call such units „idioms”. Phr. units are viewed as functionally and semantically inseparable units and they are usually described as word equivalents. There are have been made several attempts to approach the problem of Phraseologisms in different6 ways. Until now there is a certain argument in opinions as to the essential features of phraseological units. The term “ set phrase ” idiom, word equivalent are treated now differently by different scholars. Most Ukrainian and Russian scholars use the term phraseological unit (ph.u.), which was first introduces by acad. Vinogradov. The term idiom is widely used by western scholars. The boarder line between a free word group and ph.u. is not clearly defined. The so-called free word group are relatively free because their collocations with with number of words is limited by their lexical and grammatical valency which makes some of them very close to set phrases. Free word groups are so called not because of any absolute freedom but simply because they are each time built up anew in the speech process whereas idioms are used as ready-made units with fixed and constant structures. The term idiom implies that the essential feature of linguistic unit is its idiomasity or lack of motivation. The term word equivalent stresses not only semantic but functional inseparability of a certain word-group, its ability to function in speech as a single word. a nice kettle of fish = nonsenseto cross words with smb.= to argueonce in a blue moon= very seldomto cry for the moon =demand impossibleto be on the carpetto turn a blind eyeto turn a deaf earto break one’s word So in general Ph. u. is defined as a non-motivated w. gr. that can’t be freely made up in speech but is reproduced in speech as a ready-made unit. This definition is based on the assumption that the essential features of the Ph. u. are:· idiomacity – the quality of ph.g. when the meaning of the whole is not deductible from the meaning of its constitutive parts· stability – implies that it exists as a ready-made linguistic unit that doesn’t allow any variability of its lexical components and gram. structures· roproductibility – the regular usage of p. u. in speech as a single unchangeable collocation 2. Ways of forming phraseological units. Their classification. A.V. Kunin classified phraseological units according to the way they are formed. He pointed out primary and secondary ways of forming phraseological units.Primary ways of forming phraseological units are those when a unit is formed on the basis of a free word-group: a) Most productive in Modern English is the formation of phraseological units by means of transferring the meaning of terminological word-groups, e.g. in cosmic technique we can point out the following phrases: „ launching pad ” in its terminological meaning is „стартовая площадка”, in its transferred meaning - „отправной пункт”, „ to link up ” - „cтыковаться, стыковать космические корабли” in its tranformed meaning it means -”знакомиться”;b) a large group of phraseological units was formed from free word groups by transforming their meaning, e.g. „ granny farm ” - „пансионат для престарелых”, „ Troyan horse ” - „компьюторная программа, преднамеренно составленная для повреждения компьютера”;c) phraseological units can be formed by means of alliteration, e.g. „ a sad sack ” - „несчастный случай”, „ culture vulture ” - „человек, интересующийся искусством”, „ fudge and nudge ” - „уклончивость”. d) they can be formed by means of expressiveness, especially it is characteristic for forming interjections, e.g. „ My aunt!”, „ Hear, hear!” etce) they can be formed by means of distorting a word group, e.g. „ odds and ends ” was formed from „ odd ends ”, f) they can be formed by using archaisms, e.g. „ in brown study ” means „in gloomy meditation” where both components preserve their archaic meanings, g) they can be formed by using a sentence in a different sphere of life, e.g. „ that cock won’t fight ” can be used as a free word-group when it is used in sports (cock fighting), it becomes a phraseological unit when it is used in everyday life, because it is used metaphorically, h) they can be formed when we use some unreal image, e.g. „ to have butterflies in the stomach ” - „испытывать волнение”, „ to have green fingers ” - “преуспевать как садовод-любитель” etc. i) they can be formed by using expressions of writers or politicians in everyday life, e.g. „ corridors of power ” (Snow), „ American dream ” (Alby) „ locust years ” (Churchil), „ the winds of change ” (Mc Millan).Secondary ways of forming phraseological units are those when a phraseological unit is formed on the basis of another phraseological unit; they are:a) conversion, e.g. „to vote with one’s feet” was converted into „ vote with one’s feet ”;b) changing the grammar form, e.g. „ Make hay while the sun shines ” is transferred into a verbal phrase - „ to make hay while the sun shines ”; c) analogy, e.g. „ Curiosity killed the cat ” was transferred into „ Care killed the cat ”; d) contrast, e.g. „ cold surgery ” - „a planned before operation” was formed by contrasting it with „ acute surgery ”, „ thin cat ” - „ a poor person ” was formed by contrasting it with „ fat cat ”; e) shortening of proverbs or sayings e.g. from the proverb „ You can’t make a silk purse out of a sow’s ear ” by means of clipping the middle of it the phraseological unit „ to make a sow’s ear ” was formed with the meaning „ошибаться”. f) borrowing phraseological units from other languages, either as translation loans, e.g. „ living space ” (German), „ to take the bull by the horns ” (Latin) or by means of phonetic borrowings „ meche blanche ” (French), „ corpse d’elite ” (French), „ sotto voce ” (Italian) etc. Phonetic borrowings among phraseological units refer to the bookish style and are not used very often. SEMANTIC CLASSIFICATION OF PHRASEOLOGICAL UNITSPhraseological units can be classified according to the degree of motivation of their meaning. This classification was suggested by acad. V.V. Vinogradov for Russian phraseological units. He pointed out three types of phraseological units:a) fusions where the degree of motivation is very low, we cannot guess the meaning of the whole from the meanings of its components, they are highly idiomatic and cannot be translated word for word into other languages, e.g. at sixes and sevens - (in a mess) etc;b) unities where the meaning of the whole can be guessed from the meanings of its components, but it is transferred (metaphorical or metonymical), e.g. to play the first fiddle (to be a leader in something), old salt (experienced sailor) etc;c) collocations where words are combined in their original meaning but their combinations are different in different languages, e.g. cash and carry - (self-service shop), in a big way (in great degree) etc. STRUCTURAL CLASSIFICATION OF PHRASEOLOGICAL UNITSProf. A.I. Smirnitsky worked out structural classification of phraseological units, comparing them with words. He points out one-top units which he compares with derived words because derived words have only one root morpheme. He points out two-top units which he compares with compound words because in compound words we usually have two root morphemes.Among one-top units he points out three structural types;a) units of the type „to give up” (verb + postposition type), e.g. to art up, to back up, to drop out, to nose out, to buy into, to sandwich in etc.; b) units of the type „to be tired”. Some of these units remind the Passive Voice in their structure but they have different prepositons with them, while in the Passive Voice we can have only prepositions „by” or „with”, e.g. to be tired of, to be interested in, to be surprised at etc.c) prepositional-nominal phraseological units. These units are equivalents of unchangeable words: prepositions, conjunctions, adverbs, that is why they have no grammar centre, their semantic centre is the nominal part, e.g. on the doorstep (quite near), on the nose (exactly), in the course of, on the stroke of, in time, on the point of etc. In the course of time such units can become words, e.g. tomorrow, instead etc.Among two-top units A.I. Smirnitsky points out the following structural types:a) attributive-nominal such as: a month of Sundays, grey matter, a millstone round one’s neck and many others. Units of this type are noun equivalents and can be partly or perfectly idiomatic. In partly idiomatic units sometimes the first component is 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-nominal phraseological units, e.g. to read between the lines, to speak BBC, to sweep under the carpet etc. The grammar centre of such units is the verb, the semantic 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 to know the ropes. These units can be perfectly idiomatic as well, e.g. to burn one’s boats, to vote with one’s feet, to take to the cleaners’ etc.c) phraseological repetitions, 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. Phraseological units the same as compound words can have more than two tops (stems in compound words), e.g. to take a back seat, a peg to hang a thing on, lock, stock and barrel, to be a shadow of one’s own self, at one’s own sweet will. SYNTACTICAL CLASSIFICATION OF PHRASEOLOGICAL UNITSPhraseological units can be classified as parts of speech. This classification was suggested by I.V. Arnold. Here we have the following groups:a) noun phraseologisms denoting an object, a person, a living being, e.g. bullet train, latchkey child, redbrick university, Green Berets, b) verb phraseologisms denoting an action, a state, a feeling, e.g. to break the log-jam, to get on somebody’s coattails, to be on the beam, to nose out, to make headlines,c) adjective phraseologisms denoting a quality, e.g. loose as a goose, dull as lead,d) adverb phraseological units, such as: with a bump, in the soup, like a dream, like a dog with two tails, e) preposition phraseological units, e.g. in the course of, on the stroke of, f) interjection phraseological units, e.g. „ Catch me!”, „Well, I never!” etc.In I.V.Arnold’s classification there are also sentence equivalents, proverbs, sayings and quatations, e.g. „The sky is the limit”, „ What makes him tick ”, „ I am easy ”. Proverbs are usually metaphorical, e.g. „ Too many cooks spoil the broth ”, while sayings are as a rule non-metaphorical, e.g. „ Where there is a will there is a way ”.