Russian phraseology. Lectures on the course “Phraseology of the modern Russian language. Stylistic use of phraseological units
| Preface to the fifth edition (T. A. Bobrova) | |||
| From the author | |||
| Introduction to phraseology of the Russian language | |||
| § 1. | Subject and tasks of phraseology of the Russian language | ||
| § 2. | Formation of phraseology as a linguistic discipline | ||
| § 3. | Phraseological dictionaries | ||
| Phraseological turnover as a linguistic unit | |||
| § 4. | The concept of "phraseological turn" | ||
| § 5. | Phraseological structure | ||
| § 6. | The meaning of the phraseological turn | ||
| § 7. | Composition of phraseological units | ||
| § 8. | Polysemy in the sphere of phraseological system | ||
| § 9. | The concepts of semantically supporting and grammatically core words of phraseological units | ||
| § 10. | Phraseological turn in its relation to part of speech | ||
| § eleven. | Morphological properties of phraseological turns | ||
| § 12. | Phraseological options | ||
| § 13. | Phraseological units of synonymous nature | ||
| § 14. | About phraseological nests | ||
| Phraseological phrases from the point of view of their semantic unity | |||
| § 15. | Classification of phraseological units from the point of view of their semantic unity | ||
| § 16. | Phraseological adhesions | ||
| § 17. | Phraseological unities | ||
| § 18. | Phraseological combinations | ||
| § 19. | Phraseological expressions | ||
| § 20. | Determining the degree of semantic cohesion of a phraseological unit | ||
| § 21. | The question of the place of phraseological units of a terminological nature | ||
| Phraseological units from the point of view of their lexical composition | |||
| § 22. | Classification of phraseological units of the Russian language according to their lexical composition | ||
| § 23. | Phraseological phrases from words of free use | ||
| § 24. | Phraseological phrases with lexico-semantic features | ||
| § 25. | Phraseological phrases with words known only in their composition | ||
| § 26. | Phraseological phrases with words of outdated or dialect semantics | ||
| § 27. | The relationship between the semantic cohesion of a phraseological unit and its lexical composition | ||
| Phraseological phrases from the point of view of their structure | |||
| § 28. | Structural types of phraseological units in the Russian language | ||
| § 29. | Phraseological phrases that are structurally equivalent to a sentence | ||
| § thirty. | Classification of phraseological units, which are combinations of words | ||
| § 31. | Phraseological phrases of the “adjective + noun” model | ||
| § 32. | Phraseological phrases of the model “noun + genitive case of a noun” | ||
| § 33. | Phraseological phrases of the model “noun + prepositional case form of the noun” | ||
| § 34. | Phraseological phrases of the “preposition + adjective + noun” model | ||
| § 35. | Phraseological phrases of the model “prepositional-case form of a noun + genitive case of a noun” | ||
| § 36. | Phraseological phrases of the model “prepositional-case form of a noun + prepositional-case form of a noun” | ||
| § 37. | Phraseological phrases of the model “verb + noun (with and without preposition)” | ||
| § 38. | Phraseological phrases of the “verb + adverb” model | ||
| § 39. | Phraseological phrases of the “gerund + noun” model | ||
| § 40. | Phraseological units, which are constructions with coordinating conjunctions | ||
| § 41. | Phraseological units, which are constructions with subordinating conjunctions | ||
| § 42. | Phraseological units, which are constructions with negation | ||
| § 43. | Irregular patterns of phraseological units | ||
| § 44. | Phraseological phrases with artistic and poetic features | ||
| Phraseological units of the modern Russian literary language from the point of view of their origin | |||
| § 45. | Classification of phraseological units by their origin | ||
| § 46. | Original Russian phraseological phrase as a linguistic unit | ||
| § 47. | Reasons for turning free combinations of words into phraseological units | ||
| § 48. | Original Russian phraseological units formed according to the model | ||
| § 49. | The concept of "borrowed phraseological expression" | ||
| § 50. | Phraseological phrases borrowed from the Old Church Slavonic language | ||
| § 51. | Phraseological phrases without translation from Western European languages | ||
| § 52. | The concept of "phraseological tracing paper" | ||
| § 53. | Exact and inaccurate phraseological tracing papers | ||
| § 54. | Sources of phraseological cripples in the Russian language | ||
| § 55. | Phraseological semi-calculations | ||
| § 56. | Phraseological tracing and the degree of semantic unity of phraseological units of the source language | ||
| § 57. | Phraseological phrases from the point of view of the sphere of their original use | ||
| Changes in semantics, structure and composition of phraseological units | |||
| § 58. | The historical nature of the modern type of phraseological units | ||
| § 59. | Changes in the degree of semantic cohesion of phraseological units | ||
| § 60. | Changes in the semantics of phraseological units | ||
| § 61. | Changes in the lexical composition of phraseological units | ||
| § 62. | Changes in the structure of phraseological units | ||
| § 63. | Etymological analysis of phraseological units | ||
| Phraseology and word formation | |||
| § 64. | Phraseological phrase and its synonymous word | ||
| § 65. | Methods of derivation of words based on phraseological units | ||
| § 66. | Words formed on the basis of phraseological units | ||
| § 67. | "Decomposition" of words and the emergence of phraseological units | ||
| Phraseological phrases from the point of view of their expressive and stylistic properties | |||
| § 68. | Classification of phraseological units in terms of their expressive and stylistic properties | ||
| § 69. | Interstyle phraseological units | ||
| § 70. | Phraseological phrases of a colloquial and everyday nature | ||
| § 71. | Phraseologisms of a book nature | ||
| § 72. | Phraseological archaisms and historicisms | ||
| Stylistic use of phraseological units | |||
| § 73. | Types of use of phraseological units for stylistic purposes | ||
| § 74. | Stylistic use of phraseological units in their popular form | ||
| § 75. | Stylistic use of phraseological units in the author's treatment | ||
| § 76. | Different variations of the same phraseological phrase | ||
| § 77. | Imaginary alteration of phraseological turns | ||
| Literature on phraseology | |||
| Alphabetical index of phraseological units explained in the book from the point of view of origin | |||
| Supplements to the fifth edition | |||
| Russian nationally marked phraseological units | |||
| Gospel text and phraseology of the Russian language | |||
| List of works by N. M. Shansky on phraseology | |||
The first publications by N. M. Shansky, covering the problems of the phraseological system of the Russian language, began to appear in the 50s. XX century Thus, the article “Lexical and Phraseological Calques in the Russian Language” (RYASh. 1955. No. 3) examines phraseological units that arose as a result of the literal translation of a foreign language phrase into Russian words, and in 1957 a small book “Vocabulary and Phraseology of the Russian Language” was published. which already reflected the phraseological concept of N.M. Shansky. The characteristics of the defining properties of phraseological units as significant units of language and the methods of their use for artistic and expressive purposes were covered in the article “Basic methods and techniques for the stylistic use of phraseological units” (RYANSh. 1957. No. 3). The specific features of the corresponding linguistic phenomena became the subject of attention in the article “Phraseological units from the point of view of their lexical composition” (RYANSH. 1960. No. 2). The publication “On words that arose on the basis of phraseological units” (RYANSH. 1960. No. 6) can be called innovative.
N. M. Shansky outlined his understanding of phraseology in lectures on lexicology, which he read for many years at the Faculty of Philology of Moscow State University for many years since 1953. M. V. Lomonosov. The results of his thoughts in this area were summarized in the book “Phraseology of the Modern Russian Language”, the first edition of which was published in 1963. Subsequently, the book, supplemented and corrected, including according to the comments of numerous domestic and foreign reviewers, was repeatedly republished, finding its reader and admirer. It must be said that this was the first monographic study on this issue, “for the first time in our linguistics (and not only in ours) an attempt is being made to present the theory of Russian and general phraseology in the form of a short essay” ( Roizenzon L. I. Rec. // RYASH. 1964. N 2. P. 113).
Reviewers also note that the content of the work “is much broader than its title. The book not only analyzes various issues of phraseology of the modern Russian language, but also highlights many of the most important general theoretical problems,” and “the second great advantage of N. M. Shansky’s book is that the author with his monograph he simultaneously created a program on the phraseology of the modern Russian language" (Ibid.); his "serious study of the peculiarities of phraseological units of the Russian language<...>prompts interesting thoughts about the specifics and originality of our phraseological system, creates the necessary basis for further comprehensive study of various problems of Russian phraseology" ( Popov R. N. Rec. // FN. 1964. N 2. P. 198).
I must say that the 60s and 70s. The last century became the heyday of phraseology as a separate direction in the study of nominative systems of different languages. Scientific conferences on general and specific issues of phraseology were held, attracting the attention of many researchers. Thus, in connection with the appearance in 1967 of the “Phraseological Dictionary of the Russian Language” edited by A.I. Molotkov, a grandiose conference was held in Samarkand, where this major publication was subjected to impartial discussion. N. M. Shansky took an active part in this hectic “phraseological” life, made presentations at many forums of phraseologists, opposed a number of candidate and doctoral dissertations (including those of the now most famous phraseologists), and was the scientific supervisor of young specialists. At this time, monographic works on the phraseology of various languages began to appear, and almost none of them could do without analyzing the phraseological concept of N. M. Shansky.
N. M. Shansky understood the phraseological fund of the Russian language broadly, believing that “a phraseological unit is a unit of language reproduced in finished form from two or more stressed components of a verbal nature, fixed (i.e. constant) in its meaning, composition and structure" ( Shansky N. M. Phraseology of the modern Russian language. P. 27). Considering phraseological units from the point of view of their semantic unity, N. M. Shansky, generally following V. V. Vinogradov, adds phraseological expressions, i.e. “so stable in their composition and use of phraseological units, which are not only semantically distinct, but also consist entirely of words with free meanings" (Ibid. P. 84), thus including proverbs and sayings, winged words that have a communicative nature in phraseological units, as well as phraseological expressions of a nominative nature, which differ from free combinations of words in that “in the process of communication they are not formed by the speaker, but are reproduced as ready-made units with a constant composition and meaning” (Ibid. p. 84).
The monograph by N. M. Shansky examines various aspects of the phraseological system of the Russian language: from the point of view of the lexical composition of stable phrases, their morphological and syntactic structure, as well as from the point of view of their origin, classification of sources of appearance. Describing phraseology as part of a developing language system, N. M. Shansky describes the changes that have occurred over time in the semantics, structure and lexical composition of some phrases, and outlines the basis for the etymological analysis of phraseological units. Note that the book explains the origin of a large number of specific phraseological units.
A major specialist in the theory of word formation, N. M. Shansky raised the question of the relationship between words and phraseological units from the point of view of the derivation of both, identifying the various directions of the corresponding processes - from phraseological units to words and from words to phraseological units. In the 3rd and 4th editions of “Phraseology of the Modern Russian Language,” the chapter “Phraseology and word formation” contains a new paragraph “Similarities and differences in the processes of word formation and phraseological units.” Subsequently, he developed the study of this issue in the article “Derivation of words and phraseological units (On the question of the similarities and differences in the processes of word formation and phrase formation) // Russian and Slavic linguistics. To the 70th anniversary of Corresponding Member of the USSR Academy of Sciences R. I. Avanesov. M.: Nauka, 1972. P. 300--308; See also: Shansky N. M. Essays on Russian word formation. M.: URSS, 2005. pp. 311--319).
The book reflects the expressive and stylistic characteristics of phraseological units from the point of view of their distribution in different styles of speech, as well as - especially - the types of their use, in particular in the artistic work of wordsmiths.
Initially intended for philology students, “Phraseology of the Modern Russian Language” by N. M. Shansky gives a general description of the development of phraseology as a science and contains a brief critical review of the works of predecessors, which touch upon phraseological problems. The reader can familiarize himself with the material in more detail on his own, focusing on the list of recommended literature, as well as the works indicated in the footnotes. In the original edition, the bibliography is chronologically limited to 1969. In the 3rd edition of the book, N. M. Shansky adds a paragraph: “In recent decades, the study of the phraseological composition of various languages (and primarily Russian) has become especially intensive and multidirectional. In addition to numerous works on individual problems, studies of a general nature also began to appear. Here, first of all, it is necessary to name the books of A. S. Aksamitov ("Belarusian Phraseology", 1978), V. L. Arkhangelsky ("Stable phrases in the modern Russian language", 1964). M. Babkin ("Lexicographic development of Russian phraseology", 1964), S. G. Gavrina ("Study of phraseology of the Russian language at school"), A. D. Grigorieva and N. N. Ivanova ("Poetic phraseology of Pushkin", 1969 ), V. P. Zhukova ("Semantics of phraseological phrases", V. M. Mokienko ("Slavic phraseology"), A. I. Molotkova ("Fundamentals of phraseology of the Russian language", 1977), A. P. Mordvilko ("Essays on Russian phraseology. Nominal and verbal phraseological units", 1964), R. N. Popova ("Phraseological units of the modern Russian language with archaic meanings and forms of words", 1976), M. T. Tagieva ("Verbal phraseology of the modern Russian language", 1966), V. N. Telia (“What is phraseology”, 1966), M. I. Fomina (“Modern Russian language. Lexicology", 1983, section 2) and others." ( Shansky N. M. Phraseology of the modern Russian language. M., 1985. P. 9).
N. M. Shansky gives a brief description of phraseological literature of a lexicographic nature. It is not outdated in the part that covers the time of publication of the book, but, naturally, does not fully reflect the state of lexicographic practice of phraseologists, including the author himself.
After the publication of “Phraseology of the Modern Russian Language,” N. M. Shansky continued research in this area, which was reflected in its subsequent editions and in other books, articles, public scientific speeches, as well as in phraseological dictionaries of various types created under his leadership in collaboration with colleagues. In particular, N. M. Shansky, together with V. I. Zimin and A. V. Filippov, compiled an etymological dictionary of Russian phraseology, the first work of this kind in the twentieth century. Readers could first get acquainted with him on the pages of the magazine "Russian Language at School" in 1979 (N 1--6), 1980 (N 1--2), 1981 (N 4). In 1981, the publishing house "Russian Language" published "An Experience in an Etymological Dictionary of Russian Phraseology", which instantly sold out mainly abroad. On its basis, a dictionary was prepared, published under the inaccurate title “School Phraseological Dictionary” (M., 1995), which was later republished several times with the subtitle “The Meaning and Origin of Phrases.”
Working as director of the Research Institute for Teaching the Russian Language at the national school of the Academy of Pedagogical Sciences of the USSR (1970-1992), N. M. Shansky, in the educational lexicography sector he organized, led the work to identify the phraseological minimum of the Russian language, on the basis of which he and his associates Several phraseological educational dictionaries were created, as well as a whole series of bilingual dictionaries “700 phraseological units of the Russian language” for students of the Russian language in the republics of the USSR and foreign countries.
Looking through the table of contents of the book, one can notice that the titles of many chapters and paragraphs later turned out to be the topics of separate phraseological studies (of different formats) on the phraseology of other authors, which indicates the diversity and breadth of coverage of relevant problems in N. M. Shansky’s monograph “Phraseology of the Modern Russian Language” ".
Candidate of Philology
Nikolay Maksimovich SHANSKY (1922--2005)A major specialist in the field of Russian linguistics and linguodidactics, Doctor of Philology, professor, full member of the Russian Academy of Education, author of more than 500 publications, including scientific research, textbooks and teaching aids for students and schoolchildren, popular science works for teachers, students and to all lovers of Russian literature. His numerous students and followers successfully work in universities, schools, and research institutions in Russia and foreign countries.
A noticeable mark in the science of the Russian language was left by the classic works of N.M. Shansky “Fundamentals of word-formation analysis”, “Essays on Russian word-formation and lexicology”, “Linguistic analysis of a literary text”, “Phraseology of the modern Russian language”, “Etymological dictionary of the Russian language” (with the co-authorship, editing and general scientific supervision of N.M. Shansky, issues from A to L were published), as well as “Lexicology of the modern Russian language”, one of the first monographic descriptions of the nominative system of the Russian language, which largely determined the structure and content of subsequent textbooks other authors who began to be actively created after the publication of N.M. Shansky’s books on lexicology and phraseology. In addition to a systematic description of vocabulary presented in monographs, dictionaries and numerous articles devoted to individual lexicological problems, there are a large number of notes, samples of analysis of specific lexical units in a synchronic and diachronic aspect, reflecting systemic relationships in vocabulary, derivational and semantic connections of words.
1. Phraseological units, their main features.
2. Basic types of phraseological units.
3. Sources of Russian phraseology.
4. Stylistic differentiation of phraseological units.
The term phraseology comes from the Greek words phrasis - “expression” and logos - “word, doctrine”.
In Russian, this term is used in two senses:
1) a set of stable idiomatic expressions, such as ( work) carelessly, eat the dog(in some matter) come to a dead end, sharpen the lasses and under.;
2) a section of linguistics that studies such expressions (they are called phraseological units or phraseological units).
1. Phraseological units, their main features.
A phraseological unit, or phraseological unit, is a semantically non-free combination of words that is reproduced in speech as something unified in terms of semantic content and lexico-grammatical composition. Phraseological units serve in the language to name various phenomena of reality: high flying bird- “celebrity”; blood with milk- “blooming”; headlong- "fast"; turn a blind eye to something- “deliberately not to notice.”
A phraseological unit as a special unit of language has a number of features: semantic integrity, reproducibility, dismemberment of structure, etc.
Semantic integrity is understood as the non-derivability of the meaning of a phraseological unit from the meaning of its components (words). For example, the meaning of a phraseological unit shot sparrow- “a seasoned, very experienced person” is not motivated by the meaning of the word shot, nor the meaning of the word sparrow. Thus, the meaning of a phraseological unit differs from the meaning of a free phrase, which has a dissected meaning. Wed. “Caught in a snare, “pressed game... better shot, because it lasts longer” (M. Prishvin) and “This former policeman is a shot sparrow!” (A. Saburov).
Expression eat the dog means “to be a master in some matter”; meaning of the words " eat(eat) and dog(pet) do not play any role here.
Under reproducibility phraseological unit is understood as the invariability of the form in which the phraseological unit is used each time in speech. Unlike free combinations of words, which are created anew in the process of speech - depending on what meaning we want to express (cf. eat pie, candy, bowl of soup etc.), phraseological units are reproduced in speech in their unchanged, constant form, preserving all components, and often the order of these components, for example: “Get dressed, mother, otherwise random analysis you will come” (N. Leskov); “I almost didn’t fight, but random analysis, one might say, appeared” (Yu. German); “The red light began to fade - the fire was ending. And since Pavel Petrovich did not take the tram, but it was a long walk, he arrived at the scene, so to speak, to random analysis"(V. Panova).
Semantic integrity and reproducibility are features that bring a phraseological unit closer to a word. However, there are significant differences between a word and a phraseological unit. Firstly, the phraseological unit is more complex, richer in meaning; Wed shot sparrow- “seasoned, experienced.” Compared to synonymous words, a phraseological unit contains an indication of the person who is the bearer of this characteristic, and of a high degree of experience, and, finally, the meaning of “accustomed to difficulties.”
Secondly, unlike a word, a phraseological unit has dismembered structure : it consists of two or more component words, each of which has its own stress, its own grammatical form. So, phraseology wash dirty linen in public- “to disclose quarrels, squabbles occurring between close people” - has three verbal stresses and is built on the same model as a free phrase ( remove furniture from the room): verb + noun in the accusative case + noun in the genitive case with a preposition from.
Phraseological units in their semantics can correlate with various parts of speech, namely: with a noun ( oil of birch- "rods" ink soul- "bureaucrat" blue blood- “aristocrat”, etc.); with an adjective (seen types - “experienced, experienced”, nailed down by a sack as if from around the corner- “silly, with oddities”); with verb ( put teeth on a shelf- "to starve" kick your ass- “to mess around”); with adverb ( leave no stone unturned- "absolutely nothing", like the back of my hand(to know) - “thoroughly, thoroughly”).
However, the lexico-grammatical meaning of the dominant component does not always coincide with the general grammatical meaning of the phraseological unit. For example, phraseology with gulkin nose- “little, very little” correlates in meaning with an adverb, although it is structurally represented by the forms of an adjective and a noun.
Phraseologisms, like words, appear in a sentence as the main or secondary members of a sentence. For example, “Kerensky is between two millstones, - if not the one, then the other will erase him... He - king for a day» (M. Sholokhov) - dedicated turnover king for a day acts as a predicate; “Marya Nikitichna suddenly raised her gaze, met Sylvester Petrovich’s eyes, and flushed to the roots of the hair"(Yu. German) - the emphasized phraseological unit in this sentence is a circumstance.
The words that make up phraseological units may change. For example, in phraseology kill without a knife- “to put in a very difficult, hopeless position” verb slaughter can take the form of the past tense: “Ofimya Vasilievna! After all without a knife you me stabbed to death... They didn’t pay for three months” (F. Gladkov).
The formal variation of other phraseological units is limited: for example, turnover eat the dog is used mainly in the past tense form and only in the perfect form of the verb ( ate or ate the dog in something or on something, but you cannot say “He will eat (or eats) the dog in this matter”). There are also phraseological units that cannot change in any of their components and always retain a certain order of their occurrence: more than aspirations, without hesitation and some etc.
2. Basic types of phraseological units.
The classification of phraseological units is based on a sign of semantic unity of components, less or more motivation of the meaning of the phraseological unit. Following Academician V.V. Vinogradov, it is customary to distinguish three main types: phraseological fusions, phraseological unities and phraseological combinations .
Phraseological adhesions- these are phraseological units that are indecomposable in meaning, their holistic meaning is absolutely not motivated by the meanings of the component words, for example: to beat one's head, to get into trouble, to sharpen lasses, turuses on wheels, at breakneck speed etc. Phraseological units often contain words that are not used independently in modern Russian: in trouble(goof), thumbs up(knuckle down) turuses(tours on wheels). Only special studies can establish that a leak in the old days they called a machine for twisting ropes, thumbs up- chocks for making small wooden products (for example, spoons); in a word tourists in the Old Russian language they called plank towers with holes on the sides, which were placed on wheels and used to storm enemy fortresses. As part of phraseological compounds the words prosak, baklushi, turus do not have these meanings.
Phraseological unities- these are phraseological units, the integral meaning of which is motivated by the meanings of their components. Examples of unities: pull the strap, swim shallowly, bury talent in the ground, suck it out of your finger, lead by the nose etc. One of the characteristic features of phraseological unities is their imagery. So, the speaker understands why one can say about a weak-willed person wet chicken: The sight of a wet chicken that has been in water is pitiful. The presence of imagery distinguishes phraseological unities from the free combinations of words homonymous to them. Yes, in a sentence The boy lathered his hair with toilet soap combination lathered my hair- free, it has a direct meaning and is devoid of any imagery; in a sentence I'm afraid that his boss won't soap his head for being late. combination lathered my hair used figuratively and represents a phraseological unity.
Phraseological combinations- these are phraseological units, the holistic meaning of which consists of the meaning of the components and at the same time one of the components has a so-called associated use. To understand what connected usage is, consider the phrases fear takes, envy takes, anger takes. The verb used in these phrases take is not combined with every name of feelings, but only with some, for example: it is impossible to say “joy takes”, “pleasure takes”. This use of a verb is called related(or phraseologically related). Related is the use of the word ticklish in revolutions touchy question, touchy matter; with other nouns, even those close in meaning to words question And case, adjective ticklish doesn't match.
As in phraseological combinations, many words that are part of phraseological combinations do not have free meanings at all and exist in the language only as part of phraseological units. For example, words look down, pitch black in modern Russian they function only as part of phraseological combinations: look down, look down, pitch hell, pitch darkness.
These kinds of phrases, in which the word is used in a non-free, phraseologically related meaning, are called phraseological combinations. Greater freedom in the compatibility of components (compared to phraseological adhesions and unities) makes it possible in many cases to synonymously replace these components: lower your eyes - lower your eyes, pitch darkness - pitch darkness and so on.
3. Sources of Russian phraseology.
Phraseological units of the Russian language are diverse in origin. Most of them originated in the Russian language itself, they are originally Russian: in the buff. naked as a falcon, grated roll, hang your nose, on one block; take to the quick and many more etc.
Original Russian phraseological units can be genetically related to professional speech: pull the gimp(weaving), remove chips, cut like a nut(joinery), play first fiddle(musical art), back up(transport).
A certain number of native Russian phraseological units arose in dialect or slang speech and became the property of the national language. For example, smoke rocker, clumsy work, case - tobacco, pull the strap, peak position and etc.
Phraseologisms of the Russian language can also be borrowed. In this case, they represent the result of rethinking phrases from Old Church Slavonic and other languages on Russian soil.
Old Church Slavonic in origin are such phraseological units as second coming- “a time that is unknown when it will come” the Forbidden fruit- “something tempting, but not permitted”, Ared's eyelids- “very long, about someone’s longevity” dark water in the clouds- “not clear, unclear” during it- “a very long time ago”, etc.
Many phraseological units came to us through various sources from ancient mythology. They are international, as they are common in all European languages: sword of Damocles- “a constant threat to someone”; tantalum flour- “suffering caused by contemplation of the desired goal and the awareness of the impossibility of achieving it”, apple
discord- “the reason, the reason for a quarrel, disputes, serious disagreements”, sink into oblivion- “to be forgotten, to disappear without a trace”, colossus with feet of clay- “something majestic in appearance, but essentially weak, easily destroyed”, etc.
Among the borrowed phraseological units there are phraseological tracings, i.e. literal translations of foreign language phrases in parts. For example, blue stocking- blue stocking from English, on a grand scale- auf grobem Fub - from German, have the pip- ne pas être dans son assiette from French.
Phraseological expressions(Winged words. Proverbs and sayings).
N.M. Shansky, unlike V.V. Vinogradova, among the FOs, also distinguishes phraseological expressions. By the nature of word connections and general meaning phraseological expressions are no different from free phrases. They are not only semantically distinct, but also consist entirely of words with free meanings ( Love for all ages; Wholesale and Retail; seriously and for a long time; If you are afraid of wolves, do not go into the forest; All that glitters is not gold etc.).
The main specific feature that distinguishes phraseological expressions from free combinations of words is that in the process of communication they are not formed by the speaker, but are reproduced as ready-made units with a constant composition and meaning.
Use of phraseological expression Love for all ages differs from the use, for example, of a sentence in that it is extracted by the speaker from memory as a whole, just like individual words and phraseological units equivalent to a word, while a sentence The poems captivated the reader with their sincerity and freshness is created by the speaker according to the laws of Russian grammar from individual words in the very process of communication. Many researchers include catch words, proverbs and sayings as phraseological expressions.
Winged words- these are figurative expressions from the works of Russian and foreign writers, which are often used by speakers in oral and written speech: Happy hours don't watch(A. Griboedov “Woe from Wit”; There is no beast stronger than a cat; And nothing has changed(I. Krylov); Love for all ages(A.S. Pushkin); The province went to write; Visible laughter through tears invisible to the world(N. Gogol); Born to crawl, cannot fly(M. Gorky).
Proverbs and sayings- these are figurative expressions created by the people and passed down from generation to generation orally. Proverb expresses a complete judgment, teaching, applicable to many similar situations. Each proverb usually has a deep allegorical meaning. For example, the proverb If you like to ride, you also like to carry sleds, in addition to its literal meaning, has a much more important figurative, allegorical meaning. Proverb Do not count your chickens before they are hatched figuratively conveys the meaning “the results of any business should be judged at its completion.”
Proverb, unlike a proverb, does not represent a complete judgment: it is usually a figurative comparison, moreover, emotionally charged and expressive. For example: how to give something to drink- “certainly, definitely”; not one of the brave ten- about a cowardly person, when the cancer on the mountain whistles- "never", in the middle of nowhere- “very far”, etc.
Proverbs and sayings reflect the intelligence and observation skills of the Russian people, their love for their homeland, their attitude to life, work, and basic moral concepts. Here are some examples: Take care of your dress again, and your honor from a young age; Labor feeds a person, but laziness spoils him; Don't rush with your tongue, hurry with your deeds; The master's work is afraid; On the other side, even spring is not red, Houses and walls help; Your own land is sweet in a handful and so on.
In fiction, in everyday communication, proverbs, sayings and popular words serve to express speech, its imagery and liveliness.
4. Stylistic differentiation of phraseological units.
Phraseological units of the Russian language are characterized by great imagery and expressiveness. That is why they are widely used in both oral and written speech.
You don’t need to have a special sense of language to understand the difference in expressiveness of such statements: He It works somehow. - He works carelessly; You just need to talk. - You just need to sharpen your lasses; There's nothing you can do to convince him. - At least he's got a stake on his head and so on.
Most of the phraseological units of the Russian language stylistically colored. Some of them are bookish in nature and are used primarily in bookish styles of writing. So, with the label “book.” in phraseological dictionaries of the Russian language, for example, phraseological units are noted voice in the wilderness- “vain call”; turn to dust- “to destroy completely, to the ground”; byword- “the subject of general conversation and gossip”; Pandora's Box- “source of misfortune, disaster” two-faced Janus- “two-faced person”, etc.
Book phraseological units constitute a relatively small group of phraseological units. A much more extensive group of phraseological units that have a reduced - colloquial or colloquial - stylistic coloring. They are characteristic primarily of everyday speech, and are also used in fiction and journalism to enhance expressiveness, for the liveliness and imagery of the statement.
These are, for example, the turnover without a king in my head- “close-minded, stupid”; under Tsar Gorokh- "a long time ago"; lie on your side- “to mess around”; seven Fridays a week(about someone who often and easily changes his decisions); muddy the waters- “deliberately causing confusion in something” skid- "deceive"; climb into a bottle- “get irritated over trifles”; per block- “the same, similar”, etc. There are few stylistically neutral phraseological units, moreover, they mostly resemble compound names: point of view, raise the level, push the boundaries, rising star, conspiracy of silence, etc.
Phraseology of the modern Russian language. Types of phraseological units. System connections of phraseological units.
Lecture No. 13.
1. Phraseological units, their main features.
2. Basic types of phraseological units.
3. Sources of Russian phraseology.
4. Stylistic differentiation of phraseological units.
The term phraseology comes from the Greek words phrasis - “expression” and logos - “word, doctrine”. In Russian, this term is used in two senses: 1) a set of stable idiomatic expressions, such, for example, as ( work) carelessly, eat the dog(in some matter), come to a dead end, sharpen the lasses and under.; 2) a section of linguistics that studies such expressions (they are called phraseological units or phraseological units).
1. Phraseological units, their main features.
A phraseological unit, or phraseological unit, is a semantically non-free combination of words, which is reproduced in speech as something unified in terms of semantic content and lexico-grammatical composition. Phraseological units serve in the language to name various phenomena of reality: high flying bird– ʼʼcelebrityʼʼ; blood with milk– ʼʼbloomingʼʼ; headlong- fast; turn a blind eye to something– ʼʼdeliberately not to noticeʼʼ.
A phraseological unit as a special unit of language has a number of features: semantic integrity, reproducibility, dismemberment of structure, etc.
Semantic integrity is usually understood as the non-derivability of the meaning of a phraseological unit from the meaning of its components (words). For example, the meaning of a phraseological unit shot sparrow– ʼʼexperienced, very experienced personʼʼ is not motivated by the meaning of the word shot, nor the meaning of the word sparrow. Thus, the meaning of a phraseological unit differs from the meaning of a free phrase, and has a dismembered meaning. Wed.
Posted on ref.rf
ʼʼCaught in a snare, ʼʼpressed game... better shot, because it lasts longer (M. Prishvin) and “This former policeman is a shot sparrow!” (A. Saburov).
Expression eat the dog means “to be a master in some matter”; meanings of words ʼʼ eat(eat) and dog(pet) do not play any role here.
Under reproducibility
A phraseological unit is generally understood to be the invariability of the form in which a phraseological unit is used each time in speech. Unlike free combinations of words, which are created anew in the process of speech - based on what meaning we want to express (cf.
Posted on ref.rf
eat pie, candy, bowl of soup etc.), phraseological units are reproduced in speech in their unchanged, constant form, preserving all components, and often the order of these components, for example: “Get dressed, mother, otherwise random analysis you will come (N. Leskov); ʼʼI almost didn’t fight, random analysis, one might say, appearedʼʼ (Yu. German); ʼʼThe red light began to fall - the fire was ending. And since Pavel Petrovich did not take the tram, but it was a long walk, he arrived at the scene, so to speak, to random analysisʼʼ (V. Panova).
Semantic integrity and reproducibility are features that bring a phraseological unit closer to a word. At the same time, there are significant differences between a word and a phraseological unit. First of all, phraseological units are more complex and richer in meaning; Wed
Posted on ref.rf
shot sparrow– ʼʼexperienced, experiencedʼʼ. Compared to synonymous words, a phraseological unit contains an indication of the person who is the bearer of this characteristic, and of a high degree of experience, and, finally, the meaning of “accustomed to difficulties.”
Secondly, unlike a word, a phraseological unit has dismembered structure : it consists of two or more component words, each of which has its own stress, its own grammatical form. So, phraseology wash dirty linen in public– “to disclose quarrels, squabbles occurring between close people” – has three verbal stresses and is built on the same model as a free phrase ( remove furniture from the room): verb + noun in the accusative case + noun in the genitive case with a preposition from.
Phraseological units in their semantics can correlate with various parts of speech, namely: with a noun ( oil of birch– ʼʼrozgiʼ, ink soul– ʼʼbureaucratʼʼ, blue blood– ʼʼaristocratʼʼ, etc.); with an adjective (seen types - ʼʼexperienced, seasonedʼʼ, nailed down by a sack as if from around the corner– ʼʼsilly, with odditiesʼʼ); with verb ( put teeth on a shelf– ʼʼstarveʼ, kick your ass– ʼʼidleʼʼ); with adverb ( leave no stone unturned- absolutely nothing, like the back of my hand(to know) – ʼʼthoroughly, thoroughlyʼʼ).
At the same time, the lexico-grammatical meaning of the dominant component does not always coincide with the general grammatical meaning of the phraseological unit. For example, phraseology with gulkin nose– “little, very little” correlates in meaning with an adverb, although it is structurally represented by the forms of an adjective and a noun.
Phraseologisms, like words, appear in a sentence as the main or secondary members of a sentence. For example, “Kerensky between two millstones” - if not the one, then the other will erase him... He - king for a dayʼʼ (M. Sholokhov) – dedicated turnover king for a day acts as a predicate; ʼʼMarya Nikitichna suddenly raised her gaze, met Sylvester Petrovich’s eyes, and flushed to the roots of the hairʼʼ (Yu. German) – the underlined phraseological unit in this sentence is a circumstance.
The words that make up phraseological units may change. For example, in phraseology kill without a knife– ʼʼput in a very difficult, hopeless positionʼʼ verb slaughter can take the form of the past tense: ʼʼOfimya Vasilievna! After all without a knife you me stabbed to death... They didn’t pay for three months” (F. Gladkov).
The formal variation of other phraseological units is limited: for example, turnover eat the dog is used mainly in the past tense form and only in the perfect form of the verb ( ate or ate the dog in something or on something, but you cannot say “He will eat (or is eating) the dog in this case.” There are also phraseological units that cannot change in any of their components and always retain a certain order of their occurrence: more than aspirations, without hesitation and some etc.
2. Basic types of phraseological units.
The classification of phraseological units is based on a sign of semantic unity of components, less or more motivation of the meaning of the phraseological unit. Following Academician V.V. Vinogradov, it is customary to distinguish three basic types: phraseological fusions, phraseological unities and phraseological combinations .
Phraseological adhesions- phraseological units that are indecomposable in meaning, their holistic meaning is absolutely not motivated by the meanings of the component words, for example: to beat one's head, to get into trouble, to sharpen lasses, turuses on wheels, at breakneck speed etc. Phraseological units often contain words that are not used independently in modern Russian: in trouble(goof), thumbs up(knuckle down) turuses(tours on wheels). Only special studies can establish that a leak in the old days they called a machine for twisting ropes, thumbs up– chocks for making small wooden products (for example, spoons); in a word tourists in the Old Russian language they called plank towers with holes on the sides, which were placed on wheels and used to storm enemy fortresses. As part of phraseological compounds the words prosak, baklushi, turus do not have these meanings.
Phraseological unities- ϶ᴛᴏ such phraseological units, the integral meaning of which is motivated by the meanings of their components. Examples of unities: pull the strap, swim shallowly, bury talent in the ground, suck it out of your finger, lead by the nose etc. One of the characteristic features of phraseological unities is their imagery. So, the speaker understands why one can say about a weak-willed person wet chicken: The sight of a wet chicken that has been in water is pitiful. The presence of imagery distinguishes phraseological unities from the free combinations of words homonymous to them. Yes, in a sentence The boy lathered his hair with toilet soap combination lathered my hair– free, it has a direct meaning and is devoid of any imagery; in a sentence I'm afraid that his boss won't soap his head for being late. combination lathered my hair used figuratively and represents a phraseological unity.
Phraseological combinations- ϶ᴛᴏ such phraseological units, the integral meaning of which consists of the meaning of the components and at the same time one of the components has the so-called associated use. To understand what connected usage is, consider the phrases fear takes, envy takes, anger takes. The verb used in these phrases take is not combined with every name of feelings, but only with some, for example: it is impossible to say “joy takes”, “pleasure takes”. This use of the verb is usually called related(or phraseologically related). Related is the use of the word ticklish in revolutions touchy question, touchy matter; with other nouns, even those close in meaning to words question And case, adjective ticklish doesn't match.
As in phraseological combinations, many words that are part of phraseological combinations do not have free meanings at all and exist in the language only as part of phraseological units. For example, words look down, pitch black in modern Russian they function only as part of phraseological combinations: look down, look down, pitch hell, pitch darkness.
These kinds of phrases, in which the word is used in a non-free, phraseologically related meaning, are called phraseological combinations. Greater freedom in the compatibility of components (compared to phraseological adhesions and unities) makes it possible in many cases to synonymously replace these components: lower your eyes – lower your eyes, pitch darkness – pitch darkness and so on.
3. Sources of Russian phraseology.
Phraseological units of the Russian language are diverse in origin. Most of them originated in the Russian language itself, they are originally Russian: in the buff. naked as a falcon, grated roll, hang your nose, on one block; take to the quick and many more etc.
Original Russian phraseological units are genetically related to professional speech: pull the gimp(weaving), remove chips, cut like a nut(joinery), play first fiddle(musical art), back up(transport).
A small number of original Russian phraseological units arose in dialect or slang speech and became the property of the national language. Eg, smoke rocker, clumsy work, case - tobacco, pull the strap, peak position and etc.
Phraseologisms of the Russian language can also be borrowed. In this case, they are the result of rethinking phrases from Old Church Slavonic and other languages on Russian soil.
Old Church Slavonic in origin are such phraseological units as second coming– ʼʼtime, it is unknown when it will comeʼʼ, the Forbidden fruit– “something tempting, but not permitted”, Ared's eyelids– ʼʼvery long, about the longevity of someoneʼʼ, dark water in the clouds– “it’s not clear, it’s not clear”, during it– “a very long time ago”, etc.
Many phraseological units came to us through various sources from ancient mythology. Οʜᴎ are international, as they are common in all European languages: sword of Damocles– “a constant threat to someone”; tantalum flour– “suffering caused by contemplation of the desired goal and the awareness of the impossibility of achieving it,” apple of discord– “reason, reason for a quarrel, dispute, serious disagreement”, sink into oblivion– “to be forgotten, to disappear without a trace”, colossus with feet of clay– “something majestic in appearance, but essentially weak, easily destroyed”, etc.
Among the borrowed phraseological units there are phraseological tracings, i.e. literal translations of foreign language phrases in parts. Eg, blue stocking– blue stocking from English, on a grand scale– auf grobem Fub – from German, have the pip– ne pas être dans son assiette from French.
Phraseological expressions(Winged words. Proverbs and sayings).
N.M. Shansky, unlike V.V. Vinogradova, among the FOs, also distinguishes phraseological expressions. By the nature of word connections and general meaning phraseological expressions are no different from free phrases. Οʜᴎ are not only semantically distinct, but also consist entirely of words with free meanings ( All ages are submissive to love; Wholesale and Retail; seriously and for a long time; If you are afraid of wolves, do not go into the forest; All that glitters is not gold etc.).
The main specific feature that distinguishes phraseological expressions from free combinations of words is essentially that in the process of communication they are not formed by the speaker, but are reproduced as ready-made units with a constant composition and meaning.
Use of phraseological expression All ages are submissive to love differs from the use, for example, of a sentence in that it is extracted by the speaker from memory as a whole, similar to how individual words and phraseological units equivalent to a word, while a sentence The poems captivated the reader with their sincerity and freshness is created by the speaker according to the laws of Russian grammar from individual words in the very process of communication. Many researchers include catch words, proverbs and sayings as phraseological expressions.
Winged words- figurative expressions from the works of Russian and foreign writers, which are often used by speakers in oral and written speech: Happy hours don't watch(A. Griboedov “Woe from Wit”; There is no beast stronger than a cat; And nothing has changed(I. Krylov); All ages are submissive to love(A.S. Pushkin); The province went to write; Visible laughter through tears invisible to the world(N. Gogol); Born to crawl, cannot fly(M. Gorky).
Proverbs and sayings- ϶ᴛᴏ figurative expressions created by the people and passed down from generation to generation orally. Proverb expresses a complete judgment, teaching, applicable to many similar situations. Each proverb usually has a deep allegorical meaning. For example, the proverb If you like to ride, you also like to carry sleds, in addition to its literal meaning, has a much more important figurative, allegorical meaning. Proverb Chickens are counted in the fall figuratively conveys the meaning of “the results of any business should be judged at its completion.”
Proverb, unlike a proverb, does not represent a complete judgment: it is usually a figurative comparison, moreover, emotionally charged and expressive. Eg: how to give something to drink– ʼʼcertainly, necessarilyʼʼ; not one of the brave ten- about a cowardly person, when the cancer on the mountain whistles- never, in the middle of nowhere– “very far”, etc.
Proverbs and sayings reflect the intelligence and observation skills of the Russian people, their love for their homeland, their attitude to life, work, and basic moral concepts. Here are some examples: Take care of your dress again, and your honor from a young age; Labor feeds a person, but laziness spoils him; Don't rush with your tongue, hurry with your deeds; The master's work is afraid; On the other side, even spring is not red, Houses and walls help; Your own land is sweet in a handful and so on.
In fiction, in everyday communication, proverbs, sayings and popular words serve to express speech, its imagery and liveliness.
4. Stylistic differentiation of phraseological units.
Phraseological units of the Russian language are characterized by great imagery and expressiveness. It is for this reason that they are widely used both in oral and written speech.
You don’t need to have a special sense of language to understand the difference in expressiveness of such statements: He It works somehow. – He works carelessly; You just need to talk. - You just need to sharpen your lasses; There's nothing you can do to convince him. - At least he’s got a stake on his head and so on.
Most of the phraseological units of the Russian language stylistically colored. Some of them are bookish in nature and are used primarily in bookish styles of writing. Thus, the mark ʼʼbook.ʼʼ in phraseological dictionaries of the Russian language marks, for example, phraseological units voice in the wilderness– “vain call”; turn to dust– “to destroy completely, to the ground”; byword– “the subject of general conversation and gossip”; Pandora's Box– “source of misfortunes, disasters”, two-faced Janus– ʼʼtwo-faced personʼʼ, etc.
Book phraseological units constitute a relatively small group of phraseological units. A much more extensive group of phraseological units that have a reduced - colloquial or colloquial - stylistic coloring. Οʜᴎ are characteristic primarily of everyday speech, and are also used in fiction and journalism to enhance expressiveness, for the liveliness and figurativeness of the statement. These are, for example, the turnover without a king in my head– “narrow-minded, stupid”; under Tsar Gorokh- a long time ago; lie on your side– ʼʼidleʼʼ; seven Fridays a week(about someone who often and easily changes his decisions); muddy the waters– “deliberately causing confusion in something”, lead by the nose- deceive; climb into a bottle– ʼʼget irritated over triflesʼʼ; per block– ʼʼidentical, similarʼʼ, etc.
Posted on ref.rf
There are few stylistically neutral phraseological units; moreover, they mostly resemble compound names: point of view, raise the level, push the boundaries, rising star, conspiracy of silence, etc.
Phraseology of the modern Russian language. Types of phraseological units. System connections of phraseological units. - concept and types. Classification and features of the category "Phraseology of the modern Russian language. Types of phraseological units. Systemic connections of phraseological units." 2017, 2018.
A manual for part-time students of the faculties of Russian language and literature of pedagogical institutes. Approved by the Department of Russian Language of the Moscow Correspondence Pedagogical Institute and the Academic Council of the Scientific and Methodological Cabinet for Correspondence Education of Teachers.
For a future teacher of Russian language and literature, among other linguistic disciplines, the course of modern Russian literary language is the most important. Studying the Russian language, the means of communication of the great Russian people, a part-time student must not only learn its system, but also perfectly master the norms of literary speech and develop strong skills in linguistic analysis. All this is possible only with systematic work on the course.
The work provides a presentation of all the most important issues of vocabulary and phraseology reflected in the current program on the modern Russian language, and as an appendix a list of relevant linguistic literature is provided.
The author will be grateful to readers for all critical comments that will help him improve the proposed textbook.
1. INTRODUCTION TO LEXICOLOGY OF THE RUSSIAN LANGUAGE
§ I. Subject and tasks of lexicology of the Russian language
Lexicology is a branch of the science of language that studies vocabulary in its current state and historical development. The department of lexicology in the course of modern Russian language covers the modern vocabulary system of arable speech, historical lexicology of the Russian language - its formation and enrichment in connection with the history of the Russian people.
The object of study in lexicology is primarily words. Words, as is known, are studied in both morphology and word formation. However, words are studied in morphology and word formation in completely different ways and for completely different purposes than in lexicology. If for morphology and word formation words turn out to be a means of studying the grammatical structure and word-formation laws and rules of a language, then in lexicology words are studied for the knowledge of the words themselves, the vocabulary of the language as such.
So, for example, in the word nonsense for morphology it will be important that it belongs to the category of inanimate nouns, has a grammatical case category, is a masculine word, does not have, like all abstract nouns in their basic meaning, a plural, and is capable of being defined an adjective, which in this case will agree with it in gender, number and case, etc.
For word formation in this word, it will be important that it is a word with a non-pronounced base, formed from the verb to tear up using an affix-free method of word formation, due to a change in meaning, it has undergone a process of simplification, etc.
As for lexicology, it will be important for it in the word nonsense that this word is synonymous to a certain extent with the words absurdity, nonsense, nonsense, nonsense, nonsense, nonsense, etc., stylistically it is colloquially familiar, in origin originally Russian, in the course of its existence it expanded the scope of its use (initially it was professionalism) and sharply changed its meaning (previously it meant “shavings, waste, garbage”), etc.
If for morphology in a word the morphological character of the word and its grammatical properties are important, and for word formation its word-formation structure and method of formation, then for lexicology in a word only what characterizes it as a lexical fact of the language is important.
In lexicology, in accordance with this, words are studied from the point of view of: 1) their semantic meaning, 2) their place in the general system of vocabulary, 3) origin, 4) usage, 5) scope of application in the process of communication and b) their expressive-linguistic nature.
From the same points of view, as well as from the point of view of the degree of merging of their parts and structure in lexicology, phraseological units similar to words but reproducible as ready-made integral units are studied (put on your feet, a sharp knife, smash on your head like cheese in butter, being left behind, beating up babies, etc.).
Since vocabulary and phraseology in a particular language are not a simple sum of words and phraseological units, but a certain system of correlative and interconnected facts, lexicology appears to us as a science not about individual words and phraseological units, but about the lexical-phraseological system of the language as a whole.
Familiarity with the lexical and phraseological system of the Russian language allows us to deeply penetrate into the complex and varied life of Russian words and phraseological units. It allows you to find out the main types of lexical meanings of Russian words and structural-semantic categories of phraseological units, have an idea of the most important stylistic layers of words in set phrases, find out their origin, etc.
Studying the vocabulary of the Russian language, we learn, for example, that words are in synonymous and antonymic relationships with each other (wonderful - charming, everywhere - nowhere), that many words that previously existed in the Russian language have disappeared from it (network - guest, kovar - blacksmith , br - eyebrow, cf.: visit, deceit, blond), in many of them the meaning has changed (arrogant used to mean “sudden”, vegetate used to mean “to grow”), as well as the nature or scope of use (the word shuya could previously be used and as a common noun in the meaning of “left”, the word heron used to be a dialectic), that among the words and phraseological units we use there are both native Russian and borrowed ones, there are those that are inter-style, and those that are used only in a certain style of speech, and etc.
Lexicology as a section in the modern Russian language course not only provides a systematic description of the current state of vocabulary and phraseology, but also helps to master the literary norms of word usage. A solid mastery of the norms of the literary language in the field of word usage is absolutely necessary for every student of the modern Russian language, because without this there will always be errors in his speech that reduce its expressive qualities.
As examples of violations of the norms of literary speech, several excerpts from the works of our poets can be cited. In one of Debedsva-Kumyach’s songs we find: “Come evening, beloved,” although the word vechor means “yesterday evening.” In Yakovlev’s poem “Petrushka” (see the magazine “Youth”, 1955, No. 5) we read:
“The shaft (sic!) 1 mighty he squeezed
And raised the banner higher"
1 Correct pronunciation: shaft, not shaft.
although the adjective mighty as a synonym for elephants, powerful, strong, powerful cannot define the word shaft.
In the first case, there is a violation of semantic norms (the word vechor is assigned the meaning “evening,” which it does not have), in the second, we have a lexical-syntactic error (the word dreoko is combined with a word that cannot be combined with it).
Errors in word usage arise not only due to ignorance of the meanings of words and phraseological units or their connections with other words, but also due to the fact that their expressive and stylistic qualities, scope of application, speech context, etc. are not taken into account.
Thus, it is a mistake to use option eighteen instead of eighteen in the poem “Zoe” by M. Aliger: “The herbs woke up from sleep. The weather became more and more noisy, And the spring of Your eighteenth year stood annoyed.” The lexical-phonetic archailm of eighteen, as an outdated fact, cannot currently be used outside of any stylistic purposes. Its use is now possible only as a phenomenon that plays a certain expressive role (for this, see § 24).
A deviation from the norms of literary speech (leading to the reader’s misunderstanding of what is being expressed) is also S. Prokofiev’s indifferent use of the word weather in the dialectal meaning of “bad weather, bad weather, rain”: “What is in the spring in the homeland? Weather. The waves incessantly hit the shore" (Poems, 1950, p. 119).
Theoretical study of the modern Russian vocabulary system in lexicology allows one to learn its laws and rules and at the same time gives the opportunity to learn the basic norms of literary use of layers and phraseological units, which play a big role in improving the general culture of speech.
II. TYPES OF WORD MEANINGS AND RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN WORDS IN THE LEXICAL SYSTEM OF THE MODERN RUSSIAN LANGUAGE
§ 2. Main types of lexical meanings of Russian words
Like any other language, Russian as a means of communication is a language of words. From words, acting separately or as whole expressions, a sentence is formed using grammatical rules and laws; words in the language denote specific objects and abstract concepts, human emotions and sensations are expressed.
Thus, in any language the word acts as its basic unit. Despite the undoubted reality of the word as a separate linguistic phenomenon, despite the bright features inherent in it, it is very difficult to define. This is explained by the variety of words from a structural and grammatical point of view (cf.: table, goodwill, write, black; with, since, only, probably; scat! oh! etc.). That is why, first of all, in linguistics there is still no comprehensive definition of the word. Taking into account the specific properties of a word among other linguistic units, it can be defined as a phonetically and structurally-grammatically designed unit of speech, correlative with a separate subject of thought or feeling; unlike a morpheme, a word acts as an element of a sentence (a morpheme exists only in a word); Unlike a phraseological unit that is semantically equivalent to a word, a word has, if it is not unstressed, one main stress.
The most numerous group of words in the vocabulary of the Russian language, like any other, is formed by words that represent designations of various phenomena of objective reality (objects, actions, signs, etc.). They are usually called independent or full-valued words. From a grammatical point of view, these are nouns, adjectives, numerals, verbs, adverbs, state category words and pronouns. The main, most important and striking feature of such words is their nominative function. These words are characterized by the fact that, acting as a lexical unit, they always name one or another phenomenon of objective reality. Thus, the word heroism refers to the ability to perform a feat, the word brown - a dark brown color, the word to mature - the process of becoming mature, etc. Pronouns that occupy a special place among other full-voiced words have a specific nominal function: they are actually not designations, but only their demonstrative substitutes. Independent words, thus, always appear before us as words correlated with one or another phenomenon. This correlation of a word with some phenomenon of objective reality, historically fixed in the minds of speakers, is usually called the lexical meaning of the word.
However, not all words have this lexical meaning. Interjections, function and modal words that are not directly related to the phenomena of objective reality and lack subject relevance do not have it. Their meanings are completely different. That is why, first of all, they are usually studied not in lexicology, but in grammar. Lexicology, as a rule, studies only full-meaning words.
The question of the main types of lexical meanings of words cannot be discussed without first touching on the nature of the name. Objects and phenomena are named according to the characteristic that turns out to be sufficiently characteristic to distinguish them from other objects and phenomena. Such a striking feature by which an object or phenomenon gets its name can be shape, color, function, size, similarity to something and other external and internal properties. The ring got its name, for example, from its shape (colo - circle), kukuig-
ka - by its characteristic cry, currant - by its characteristic smell (stench, ancient Russian currant - strong smell), islo - by function (from the verb to sew), spring - by sowing time (ancient Russian. brightly - spring), etc.
The attribute underlying the name and the service morphemes that form it into a word are not equivalent, however, to the meaning characteristic of a particular word.
Firstly, they form only the basis of the meaning that the word then receives as a result of use. The attribute underlying the name of a given object can characterize not only it, but also other phenomena of the objective world. In addition, it is always insufficient definite. The real meaning of a word, on the contrary, is concrete. Therefore, very often the sign underlying the name does not give a clear idea of the real meaning of the word. For example, knowledge of the feature underlying the Bulgarian words blueberry, sail, bird (black, wind, bird), does not give us knowledge of their actual meaning (blueberry - mulberry tree, berry of this tree, sail - fan, kite, bird - sparrow; in Russian blueberry - in the dialects "blueberry*, sail - sail, bird - cleverly- affectionate towards bird). A clear representation of the image in the Russian dialect words golpnka and zelenets (naked, green) still does not make it possible to firmly say, without knowing the corresponding dialect, what they call (golyanka - a special mud mitten, zelenets in different dialects - a fresh broom , unripe berry, island overgrown with reeds or willows, etc.).
Secondly, a word, having one or another lexical meaning, can be an absolutely conventional name for the corresponding phenomena of objective reality. Sign. which forms the basis of many words, is no longer felt in them at the present time, but this does not make them cease to be significant units of language. For example, it is no longer clear why such a space as a room is called the word comnita, and why an insect such as a beetle is called the word beetle. a tool such as a chisel is called the word chisel. however, every Russian speaker clearly understands the lexical meanings of the words room, beetle, chisel.
Thus, in the Russian language there are two types of full-valued words: 1) unmotivated names such as chisel (what is used to chisel, from dolbto), beetle (by sound), room (originally - a room with a fireplace, Latin saminata); 2) motivated names such as icebreaker, cherry, blue. However, both of them necessarily have some lexical meaning. This lexical meaning can be the only one in a word (words with such semantics are called unambiguous: willow, rook, neck, angry, blush, typical, fraught, etc.). But it can be in a word along with another or with other lexical meanings (words with such semantics are called polysemantic): know, head, beat off, deaf, drive, etc. In this case, one lexical meaning acts as the main, initial meaning, and another or others as secondary, derivative. For example, in the polysemantic word go, you can note the meaning: move by walking (“I look, and my brother is already walking”), fall (“It’s been raining since the morning”), spread (“Rumor is spreading, why did I leave you”), sell (“ The goods are being buried”), getting married (“She agrees to marry me”), showing (“This film is showing at the Luch cinema”), growing (“The beets are going to the tops”), etc. Meaning “to move with steps "in the verb to go is the main, initial meaning, all the rest are secondary, arising on the basis of the main, initial one. Consequently, the different nature of words from a semantic point of view is manifested primarily in the fact that, along with single-valued words, there are also polysemantic ones that have not one, but several meanings.
Polysemy, or polysemy, which represents one of the foundations of the brightness and expressiveness of Russian vocabulary, belongs to many full-valued words. Such a property as polysemy determines the great meaning of the context for a word: outside the context, a word in its meaning is only approximately determinable.
The ambiguity of a word, which acts as “the ability of a word to synchronically simultaneously have different meanings” (V.V. Vinogradov), appears due to the fact that a word, along with the designation of a phenomenon, can also serve as the name of another phenomenon of objective reality, if the latter has any characteristics or properties in common with the named phenomenon. The phenomenon of polysemy of words is thus a consequence of the transfer of a name from one object of reality to another. Such transfers of names occur, firstly, on the basis of similarity (in shape, color, internal properties and qualities, etc.): sleeve (torn) - sleeve (river), oppression (put the gvorog under oppression) - oppression (capitalist oppression), strong (rope) - strong (friendship), etc.; secondly, but contiguity (temporal, spatial, logical, etc.): class (light class) - class (able class), tenor (he has a lyric tenor) - tenor (a famous tenor performed), etc. ; thirdly, by function: feather (quill) - pen (fountain pen), wing (bird) - wing (airplane), etc.
Much less often, new meanings in words arise from the convergence of an emotional character (cf.: a deep abyss and the abyss of affairs, etc.) and from the convergence of the sound of words (cf.: a tallow candle and a strong anecdote, etc.).
END OF TEXTBOOK FRAGMENT
Ed. 3rd, rev. and additional - M.: Higher School, 1985. - 160 pp. This publication is approved as a textbook for students of higher educational institutions studying in the specialty "Russian language and literature". Preface.
Introduction to the phraseology of the modern Russian literary language.
Subject and tasks of phraseology.
Phraseology as a linguistic discipline.
Phraseological dictionaries.
Phraseological turnover as a linguistic unit.
The concept of “phraseological turn”.
The structure of phraseological units.
The meaning of phraseological units.
Composition of phraseological units.
Polysemy of phraseological turns.
The concepts of semantically supporting and grammatically core components of phraseological units.
Phraseological turn in its relation to the part of speech.
Morphological properties of phraseological units.
Phraseological options.
Phraseological synonymy.
Phraseological nests.
The degree of semantic unity of phraseological units.
Classification of phraseological units from the point of view of their semantic cohesion.
Phraseological fusions.
Phraseological unities.
Phraseological combinations.
Phraseological expressions.
Determining the degree of semantic unity of phraseological units.
Phraseological units of a terminological nature.
Lexical composition of phraseological units.
Classification of phraseological units by composition.
Phraseological phrases formed from words of free use.
Phraseological phrases with lexico-semantic features.
Phraseological phrases with words known only in their composition.
Phraseological phrases with words with outdated or dialectal meanings.
The relationship between the semantic cohesion of a phraseological unit and its composition.
Structure of phraseological units.
Structural types of phraseological units.
Phraseological phrases that correspond in structure to the sentence.
Phraseological phrases that correspond in structure to a combination of words.
Phraseological phrases of the “adjective + noun” model.
Phraseological phrases of the “noun + genitive case form of the noun” model.
Phraseological phrases of the model “noun + prepositional case form of the noun.”
Phraseological phrases of the “preposition + adjective + noun” model.
Phraseological phrases of the model “prepositional-case form of a noun + genitive case form of a noun.”
Phraseological phrases of the model “prepositional-case form of a noun + prepositional-case form of a noun.”
Phraseological phrases of the “verb + noun” model.
Phraseological phrases of the “verb + adverb” model.
Phraseological phrases of the “gerund + noun” model.
Phraseological units, which are constructions with coordinating conjunctions.
Phraseological units, which are constructions with subordinating conjunctions.
Phraseological units, which are constructions with the negation of not.
Phraseological phrases of irregular patterns.
Phraseological phrases with features of an artistic and poetic nature.
Origin of phraseological units.
Classification of phraseological units according to their origin.
Originally Russian phraseological units.
The reasons for the transformation of free combinations of words into phraseological units.
Original Russian phraseological units formed according to the model.
The concept of “borrowed phraseological expression”.
Phraseological phrases borrowed from the Old Church Slavonic language.
Phraseological phrases borrowed from Western European languages without translation.
The concept of “phraseological tracing paper”.
Accurate and inaccurate phraseological tracing papers.
Sources of phraseological cripples in the Russian language.
Phraseological semi-calculations.
The degree of semantic unity of phraseological units of the source language and phraseological tracing.
The initial sphere of use of phraseological units.
Changes in the meaning, composition and structure of phraseological units.
Historical nature of phraseological units.
Changes in the degree of semantic unity of phraseological units.
Changes in the meaning of phraseological units.
Changes in the composition of phraseological units.
Changes in the structure of phraseological units.
Etymological analysis of phraseological units.
Phraseology and word formation.
A phraseological phrase and a word synonymous with it.
Methods of forming words based on phraseological units.
Words formed on the basis of phraseological units.
The emergence of phraseological units based on the “decomposition” of words.
Similarities and differences in the processes of word formation and phraseological units.
Expressive and stylistic properties of phraseological units.
Classification of phraseological units from the point of view of their expressive and stylistic properties.
Interstyle phraseological units.
Colloquial and everyday phraseological units.
Book phraseological units.
Phraseological archaisms and "historicisms".
Stylistic use of phraseological units.
Ways to use phraseological units for stylistic purposes.
Stylistic use of phraseological units in their commonly used form.
Stylistic use of phraseological units in the author's treatment.
List of recommended literature.
Conditional abbreviations.
Loading...