2. Semantic classification by V.V. Vinogradov.

Russian academician V.V. Vinogradov worked out his classification of Russian phraseological units. This classification influenced scholars in this country. It was the first classification based on the semantic principle. V.V. Vinogradov founded his classification on the degree of semantic cohesion between the components of a phraseological units (according to the degree of motivation of phraseological units). The more distant the meaning of a phraseological unit from the current meaning of its constituent parts is, the greater is its degree of semantic cohesion. Accordingly, V.V. Vinogradov classified Russian phraseological units into three big groups: phraseological combinations, unites and fusions. We can apply his classification to English phraseological units too.

1. phraseological combinations are word–groups with a partially changed meaning. They are clearly motivated, that is the meaning of the unit can be easily deduced from the meanings of its constituents, e.g. to bear a grudge, to take a liking to, to meet the requirements, to make up one’s mind, to take no notice, to catch sight of, to take care of somebody, to put an end, etc.

2. phraseological unities are word–groups with a completely changed meaning. They are motivated, that is the meaning of the whole unit can be deduced from the meanings of the constituent parts because the metaphor, on which the shift of meaning is based is mostly clear: e.g. to show one’s teeth ‘to show an intention to injure’, to wash one’s dirty linen in public ‘to discuss or make public one’s quarrels’, to throw cold water on the scheme ‘to refuse to put some scheme into practice’, to stick to one’s guns ‘to refuse to change one’s statement or opinion in the face of opposition’, etc.

3. phraseological fusions are word–groups with a completely changed meaning but they are demotivated. Their meaning cannot be deduced from the meanings of the constituent parts because the metaphor, on which the shift of meaning was based, has lost its clarity and is obscure, e.g. red tape ‘bureaucratic methods’, heavy father ‘serious or solemn part in a theatrical play’, as mad as a hatter ‘utterly mad’, to kiss the hare’s foot ‘to be late’ to have a bee in one’s bonnet ‘to have an obsession about something’.

This classification has several weak points: 1) it does not take into account the structural characteristics of phraseological units; 2) it is next to impossible to say whether a phraseological unit is demotivated for the speaker or not, as no rigorous criteria exist and no consistent procedures are offered; 3) being developed for the Russian phraseology, it does not fit the specifically English features.

3. Structural classification.

This classification is based on the ability of phraseological units to perform the same syntactical functions as words. Therefore we can distinguish phraseological units that function as verbs:

Verbal, e.g. to take advantage, to pick and choose, to snap one’s fingers at, to give one the bird ‘to fire somebody’, to see how the land lies ‘to discover the state of affairs’, etc.

Substantive or nominal: brains trust ‘a committee of experts’, cat’s paw ‘one who is used for the convenience of a cleverer and stronger person’, the arm of the law, lord and master ‘husband’, all the world and his wife ‘everybody’, rank and file ‘the ordinary working members of an organization’, etc.

Adjectival: high and mighty, safe and sound, as hard as nails, as mad as a hatter, silent as a grave, as dull as ditch water, etc.

Adverbial: by hook or by crook, once in a blue moon, before one can say Jack Robinson, here and there, etc.

Interjectional: Bless one’s soul! God bless me! Hang it all! By Jove! etc.