8.3. Criteria of phraseological units

The terms set-phrases, idioms, W-equivalents → the main debatable issues of phraseology: the nature & essential features of PhUs as distinguished from the free W-groups.

The term set-phrase → the basic criterion is stability of the lexical components & grammatical structure of W-groups.

The term idioms → the essential feature is idiomaticity = lack of motivation. Habitually used by English & American linguists, often treated as synonymous with the term PhU accepted in our country.

The term W-equivalent stresses the functional inseparability & their aptness to function in speech as single Ws.

The current definition of PhUs = highly idiomatic W-groups which cannot be freely made up in speech, but are reproduced as ready-made units. The objections:

1. The concept ready-made units can be applied to a variety of heterogeneous linguistic phenomena from W-groups to sentences (proverbs, sayings, quotations).

2. The criterion of idiomaticity is inadequate. Borderline cases between idiomatic & non-idiomatic W-groups are numerous & confusing, the final decision depends on “feeling of the language”. The same W-groups are treated as idiomatic phrases & as free W-groups: take the chair; take one’s chance; take trouble (to do smth.).

The impracticability of the criterion → in the traditional classification. The extreme cases (phraseological fusions & collocations) are easily differentiated; the borderline units (phraseological fusions & phraseological unities; phraseological collocations & free W-groups) are often doubtful. High treason (государственная измена) / show the white feather (струсить) are fusions → one finds it impossible to infer the meaning of the whole from the meaning of the components. Others may feel these W-groups as metaphorically motivated → phraseological unities.

The term idiomaticity requires clarification. It denotes lack of motivation from the point of view of one’s L1. Defies W by W translation → idiomatic. → The same English W-groups may be classified as idiomatic PhUs by Russians & as non-idiomatic by those whose L1 contains analogous collocations. Russians: take tea, take care → phraseology, the Russian equivalents (пить чай, заботиться) do not contain the habitual translation equivalents of take. The French: nothing idiomatic, there are similar lexical units in French (prendre du thé, prendre soin). This approach is interlingual.

The term idiomaticity = lack of motivation from the point of view of native speakers: only those W-groups are PhUs which are felt as non-motivated by the English (red tape, kick the bucket). This approach is intralingual.

3. The criterion of stability. Regular substitution of at least 1 of the lexical components in to cast (fling) smth. in smb’s teeth; to take (make) a decision; not to care a twopenny (farthing, button, pin, sixpence, fig). Stability of lexical components ≠ lack of motivation. Shrug one’s shoulders → no substitution of shrug / shoulders; the meaning of the W-group is deducible from that of the member-Ws → the W-group is completely motivated, though stable. Idiomatic W-groups may be lexically variable / stable. → Stability & idiomaticity are 2 different aspects. Stability is an essential feature of motivated & non-motivated set-phrases. Idiomaticity is a distinguishing feature of PhUs / idioms which comprise both stable set-phrases & variable W-groups. The 2 features are not mutually exclusive, not interdependent.

4. Functional criterion: PhUs = W-groups functioning as W-equivalents. The fundamental features = semantic & grammatical inseparability.

In a free W-group (heavy weight) each of the member-Ws has its own denotative meaning. The lexical meaning of the W-group = combined lexical meaning of its constituents. In the PhU (heavy father) the denotative meaning belongs to the W-group as a single semantically inseparable unit.

In free W-groups each component preserves its own stylistic reference: commence to scrub.

Kick the bucket is colloquial; heavy father is a professional term. → PhUs – a single stylistic reference. Semantic inseparability of PhUs = 1 of the aspects of idiomaticity → semantically equivalent to single Ws.

Grammatical inseparability: the part-of-speech meaning of PhUs belongs to the W-group as a whole. In in the long run the part-of-speech meaning = Advs finally, ultimately. Grammatical inseparability of PhUs = 1 of the aspects of idiomaticity → grammatically equivalent to single Ws.

The functional unity = aptness to function in speech as single syntactic units.

In heavy weight, long time Adjs heavy & long = attributes to weight, time. Heavy father & in the long run are functionally inseparable, =1 member of the sentence (the subject / the modifier) → functionally equivalent to single Ws.

PhUs are non-motivated W-groups functioning as W-equivalents due to their semantic & grammatical inseparability → N equivalents (heavy father), V equivalents (take place, break the news), Adv equivalents (in the long run).

The main disputable points:

A. The criterion of function is not reliable in singling out PhUs from among other more / less idiomatic W-groups. The same W-groups may function as an inseparable group & in others as a separable group with each component performing its own syntactic function. In She took care of everything take care = a single unit, the predicate. In Great care was taken to keep the children happy take care = 2 components: take = predicate, care = subject.

B. The criterion of function doesn’t work for W-groups occupying an intermediate position between free W-groups & highly idiomatic PhUs.

5. The criterion of specialised meaning (N. N. Amosova). PhUs are to be defined through specific types of context. Free W-groups make up variable contexts. The essential feature of PhUs is a non-variable / fixed context.

In variable contexts which include polysemantic Ws substitution of 1 of the components is possible within the limits of the lexical valency of the W. In a small town town may be substituted for by a room, audience, Adj. small by large, big. Substitution of Ns does not change the meaning of small. Substitution of Adjs does not affect the meaning of town. Variability of the lex. components is the distinguishing feature of free W-groups. In small business, a small farmer variable members serve as a clue to the meaning of small: ‘of limited size’ / ‘having limited capital’ → traditional collocations.

PhUs allow of no substitution. Small denotes ‘early’ only in collocation with hour, has the meaning ‘weak’ only in the fixed non-variable context small beer. A non-variable context → a specialised meaning of 1 of the member-Ws. The specialised meaning of 1 of the lexical components = meaning of the W only in the given phrase. → Specialised meaning & stability of lexical components are interdependent features of PhUs whose semantic structure is unique, no other W-groups can be created on this semantic pattern.

PhUs are subdivided into phrasemes & idioms according to this criterion.

Phrasemes = 2-member W-groups, 1 member has specialised meaning dependent on the 2^nd component (small hours).

Idioms → idiomaticity of the whole W-group (red tape), the impossibility of attaching meaning to the members of the group taken in isolation, semantically & grammatically inseparable.

The main objections to the contextual approach: non-variability of context does not necessarily imply specialised meaning (shrug one’s shoulders).

Some W-groups with a certain degree of idiomaticity are referred to traditional collocations. In the contextual approach traditional collocations = W-groups with partially variable members; the degree of idiomaticity is disregarded. → Clench fists (teeth) & cast (throw, fling) something in somebody’s teeth may both be referred to traditional collocations.