Questions:

1. Why does lexicology study word-groups?

2. Why is it difficult to distinguish between free word-groups and phraseological units?

3. What is the difference between free word-group, set-phrase and phraseological unit?

4. What does the term word-equivalent imply?

5. What is understood under the term additive information?

Phraseology Criteria of phraseological units

R.S. Ginzburg, A Course in Modern English Lexicology, §12. Criteria of Stability and Lack of Motivation (Idiomaticity), §15. Criterion of Function, §18. Criterion of Context [pp. 74-75, 79-80, 82-84]

Phraseological units are habitually defined as non-motivated word-groups that cannot be freely made up in speech but are reproduced as ready-made units. This definition proceeds from the assumption that the essential features ofphraseological units are stability of the lexical components and lack of motivation. It is consequently assumed that unlike components of free word-groups which may vary according to the needs of communication, member-words of phraseological units are always reproduced as single unchangeable collocations.

T

Non-variability of phraseological units

hus, for example, the constituentred in the free word-groupred flower may, if necessary, be substituted for by any other adjective denot­ing colour(blue, white, etc.), without essentially changing the denotational meaning of the word-group under discussion (a flower of a certain colour). In the phraseological unitred tape (bureaucratic methods) no such substitution is possible, as a change of the adjective would involve a complete change in the meaning of the whole group.A blue (black, white, etc.) tape would mean 'a tape of a certain colour'. It follows that the phraseological unitred tape is semantically non-motivated, i.e. its meaning cannot be deduced from the meaning of its components and that it exists as a ready-made linguistic unit which does not allow of any variability of its lexical components.

I

Non-variability of grammatical structure phraseological units

t is also argued that non-variability of the phraseological unit is not confined to its lexical components. Grammatical structure of phraseo­logical units is to a certain extent also stable. Thus, though the structur­al formula of the word-groupsred flower andred tape is identical(A+N), the nounflower may be used in the plural(red flowers), whereas no such change is possible in the phraseological unitred tape; red tapeswould then denote 'tapes of red colour' but not 'bureaucratic methods'. This is also true of other types of phraseological units, e.g.what will Mrs. Grundy say?, where the verbal component is invariably reproduced in the same grammatical form.

A

Functional unity of phraseological units

nother angle from which the problem of phraseology is viewed is the so-calledfunctional approach. This approach assumes that phraseological unitsmay be defined as specific word-groups functioning as word-equivalents.The fundamental features of phraseological units thus understood aretheir semantic and grammatical inseparability which are regarded asdistinguishing features of isolated words.

It will be recalled that when we compare a free word-group, e.g.heavy weight, and a phraseological unit, e.g.heavy father, we observe that in the case of the free word-group each of the member-words has its own denotational meaning. So the lexical meaning of the word-group can be adequately described as the combined lexical meaning of its consti­tuents. In the case of the phraseological unit, however, the denota­tional meaning belongs to the word-group as a single semantically inseparable unit. The individual member-words do not seem to possess any lexical meaning outside the meaning of the group. The meanings of the member-wordsheavy andfather taken in isolation are in no way connected with the meaning of the phraseheavy father—'serious or solemn part in a theatrical play'.

The same is true of the stylistic reference and emotive charge of phra­seological units. In free word-groups each of the components preserves as a rule its own stylistic reference. This can be readily observed in the stylistic effect produced by free word-groups made up of words ofwidely different stylistic value, e.g.to commenceto scrub, valiant chap and the like.

A certain humorous effect is attained because one of the member-words(commence, valiant) is felt as belonging to the bookish stylistic lay­er, whereas the other(scrub, chap) is felt as stylistically neutral or collo­quial. When we say, however, thatkick the bucket is highly colloquial or heavy father is a professional term, we do not refer to the stylistic value of the component words of these phraseological unitskick, bucket, heavyorfather, but the stylistic value of the word-group as a single whole. Taken in isolation the words are stylistically neutral. It follows that phra­seological units are characterized by a single stylistic reference irre­spective of the number and nature of their component words. Semantic inseparability of phraseological units is viewed as one of the aspects of idiomaticity which enables us to regard them as semantically equiva­lent to single word.

T

Grammatical inseparability of phraseological units

he term grammatical inseparability implies that the grammatical meaning or, to be more exact, the part-of-speech meaning of phraseological units is felt as belonging to the word-group as a whole irrespective of the part-of-speech meaning of the component words. Com­paring the free word-group, e.g.a long day, and the phraseological unit, e.g.in the long run, we observe that in the free word-group the noundayand the adjectivelong preserve the part-of-speech meaning proper to these words taken in isolation. The whole group is viewed as composed of two independent units (adjective and noun). In the phraseological unitin the long run the part-of-speech meaning belongs to the group as a single whole.In the long run is grammatically equivalent to single adverbs, e.g.finally, ultimately, firstly, etc. In the case of the phraseolog­ical unit under discussion there is no connection between the part-of-speech meaning of the member-words(in—preposition,long—adjective, run—noun) and the part-of-speech meaning of the whole word-group. Grammatical inseparability of phraseological units viewed as one of the aspects of idiomaticity enables us to regard them as grammatically equi­valent to single words.

It is argued that the final test of the semantic and grammatical insep­arability of phrases is their functional unity, i.e. their aptness to func­tion in speech as single syntactic units.

It will be observed that in the free word-groups, e.g.heavy weight, long time, the adjectivesheavy andlong function as attributes to other members of the sentence(weight, time), whereas the phraseological units heavy father andin the long run are functionally inseparable and are always viewed as making up one and only one member of the sentence (the subject or the object, etc.), i.e. they are functionally equivalent to single words.

Proceeding from the assumption that phraseological units are non- motivated word-groups functioning as word-equivalents by virtue of their semantic and grammatical inseparability, we may classify them into noun equivalents (e.g.heavy father), verb equivalents (e.g.take place, break the news), adverb equivalents (e.g.in the long run), etc.

A

Fixed content of phraseological units

s far as their structure is concerned these groups are not homoge­neous and may be subdivided into the same groups as variable phrases. Among verb equivalents, for example, we may find verb-noun units (take place) and verb-adverb units(give up), adverb equivalents com­prise preposition-noun groups (e.g.by heart, at length), adverb-conjunction-adverb groups (e.g.far and wide), etc.

Phraseological units in Modern Englishare also approached from the contextualpoint of view. Proceeding from the assumption that individual meanings of polysemantic words can be observed in certain contexts and may be viewed as dependent on those contexts, it is argued that phraseological units are to be defined through specific types of context. Free word-groups make up variable contexts whereas the essential feature of phraseologi­cal units is non-variable or fixed context.

Non-variability is understood as the stability of the word-group. In variable contexts which, include polysemantic words substitution of one of the components is possible within the limits of the lexical valency of the word under consideration. It is observed, e.g., that in such word-groups asa small town the wordtown may be substituted for by a num­ber of other nouns, e.g.room, audience, etc., the adjectivesmall by a number of other adjectives, e.g.large, big, etc. The substitution of nouns does not change the meaning ofsmall which denotes in all word-groups 'not large'. The substitution of adjectives does not likewise affect the meaning oftown. Thus variability of the lexical components is the distin­guishing feature of the so-called free word-groups. In other word-groups such assmall business, a small farmer the variable members serve as a clue to the meaning of the adjectivesmall. It may be observed that when combined with the wordstown, room, etc.a small denotes 'not large', whereas it is only in combination with the nounsbusiness, farmer, etc. thatsmall denotes 'of limited size' or 'having limited capital'. Word-groups of this type are sometimes described as traditional collocations.

Unlike word-groups with variable members phraseological units al­low of no substitution. For example, in the phraseological unitsmall hours—'the early hours of the morning from about 1 a.m. to 4 a.m.'— there is no variable member assmall denotes 'early' only in collocation withhours. In the phraseological unitsmall beersmall has the meaning 'weak' only in this fixed non-variable context. As can be seen from the abo­ve, a non-variable context is indicative of a specialized meaning of one of the member-words. The specialized meaning of one of the lexical compo­nents is understood as the meaning of the word only in the given phrase (e.g.small hours), i.e. this particular meaning cannot be found in the word taken in isolation or in any of the variable word-groups in which the word is used. It follows that specialized meaning and stability of lex­ical components are regarded as interdependent features of phraseologi­cal units whose semantic structure is unique, i.e. no other word-groups can be created on this semantic pattern.

The two criteria of phraseological units—specialized meaning of the components and non-variability of context—display unilateral depen­dence. Specialized meaning presupposes complete stability of the lexical components, as specialized meaning of the member-words or idiomatic meaning of the whole word-group is never observed outside fixed contexts.