English lexicology

-th - suffix of the 3rd person sing., Present Indef. Tense, e.g. hath, doth, speaketh;

-st - 2nd person - dost, hast, speakest;

art - 2nd person of the verb «to be» pl.;

thou, thee, thy, thine - pronouns;

ye - plural, 2nd person.

Lexical archaisms. Poetry is especially rich in archaisms. Words that are too well known and too often used do not call up such vivid images as words less familiar. This is one of the reasons which impel poets to use archaic words. They are «new» just on account of their being old, and yet they are not utterly unknown to be unintelligible. The following are some of the most common lexical archaisms used in poetry:

billow - война; save - кроме; plain - жаловаться; behold - видеть; yon (yonder) - тот; eke - тоже; brow - чело; foe - враг; ere - до; steed - конь; morn - утро; belike - вероятно; damsel - девушка; woe - rope; oft, oft-times - часто; mere - озеро, пруд; hearken - слушать; albeit - хотя, etc.

Obsolete indicates that a term is no longer in active use, except, for example, in literary quotation. Obsolete may apply to a word regarded as no longer acceptable or useful even though it is still in existence.

28. Different types of semantic transfer

Semantic change (also semantic shift, semantic progression or semantic drift) is the evolution of word usage -- usually to the point that the modern meaning is radically different from the original usage. In diachronic (or historical) linguistics, semantic change is a change in one of the meanings of a word. Every word has a variety of senses and connotations, which can be added, removed, or altered over time, often to the extent that cognates across space and time have very different meanings. The study of semantic change can be seen as part of etymology, onomasiology, semasiology, and semantics.

A number of classification schemes have been suggested for semantic change. The most widely accepted scheme in the English-speaking academic world is from Bloomfield (1933):

· Narrowing: Change from superordinate level to subordinate level. For example, skyline used to refer to any horizon, but now it has narrowed to a horizon decorated by skyscrapers.^[1]

· Widening: Change from subordinate level to superordinate level. There are many examples of specific brand names being used for the general product, such as with Kleenex.^[1] Such uses are known as generonyms.

· Metaphor: Change based on similarity of thing. For example, broadcast originally meant "to cast seeds out"; with the advent of radio and television, the word was extended to indicate the transmission of audio and video signals. Outside of agricultural circles, very few people use broadcast in the earlier sense.^[1]

· Metonymy: Change based on nearness in space or time, e.g., jaw "cheek" > "mandible".

· Synecdoche: Change based on whole-part relation. The convention of using capital cities to represent countries or their governments is an example of this.

· Hyperbole: Change from weaker to stronger meaning, e.g., kill "torment" > "slaughter"

· Meiosis: . Change from stronger to weaker meaning, e.g., astound "strike with thunder" > "surprise strongly".

· Degeneration: e.g., knave "boy" > "servant" > "deceitful or despicable man".

· Elevation: e.g., knight "boy" > "nobleman".

However, the categorization of Blank (1998) has gained increasing acceptance:^[2]

· Metaphor: Change based on similarity between concepts, e.g., mouse "rodent" > "computer device".

· Metonymy: Change based on contiguity between concepts, e.g., horn "animal horn" > "musical instrument".

· Synecdoche: A type of metonymy involving a part to whole relationship, e.g. "hands" from "all hands on deck" > "bodies"

· Specialization of meaning: Downward shift in a taxonomy, e.g., corn "grain" > "wheat" (UK), > "maize" (US).

· Generalization of meaning: Upward shift in a taxonomy, e.g., hoover "Hoover vacuum cleaner" > "any type of vacuum cleaner".

· Cohyponymic transfer: Horizontal shift in a taxonomy, e.g., the confusion of mouse and rat in some dialects.

· Antiphrasis: Change based on a contrastive aspect of the concepts, e.g., perfect lady in the sense of "prostitute".

· Auto-antonymy: Change of a word's sense and concept to the complementary opposite, e.g., bad in the slang sense of "good".

· Auto-converse: Lexical expression of a relationship by the two extremes of the respective relationship, e.g., take in the dialectal use as "give".

· Ellipsis: Semantic change based on the contiguity of names, e.g., car "cart" > "automobile", due to the invention of the (motor) car.

· Folk-etymology: Semantic change based on the similarity of names, e.g., French contredanse, orig. English country dance.

Blank considers it problematic, though, to include amelioration and pejoration of meaning as well as strengthening and weakening of meaning. According to Blank, these are not objectively classifiable phenomena; moreover, Blank has shown that all of the examples listed under these headings can be grouped into the other phenomena.

Change of Meaning as a Linguistic Phenomenon

In the course of the historical development of a language, the meaning of words change, e.g.: glad had the meaning of bright in OE; husband had the meaning of master of the house-hold; meat had the meaning of food, etc.

Change of meaning has been profoundly studied. This problem embraces three points (aspects):

1. the causes of semantic change;

2. the nature of semantic change;

3. the result of semantic change.

When we discuss the causes of semantic change we concentrate on the factors which bring about this change, we try to find out why the word changed its meaning, what circumstances cause and stimulate their development.

When we analyse the nature of semantic change we try to understand how different changes of meaning were brought about, how it happened (under what conditions).

When we analyse the result of the semantic change we try to find out what has changed. We do it by comparing the result and the original meanings and describe the difference between them.

Causes of Semantic Change

There are two groups of causes of semantic change: extralinguistic (historical) and linguistic factors.

Extralinguistic causes

In nation's social life, in its culture, knowledge, technology, arts, changes occur in all spheres of human activities. Newly created objects, new notions and phenomena must be named. There are two main ways for providing new names for newly created notions: making new words, and borrowing foreign ones. There is one more way: it is applying some old word to a new object or notion.

E.g.: the word carriage had and has the meaning of a vehicle drawn by horses. But with the first appearance of railways in England, it received a new meaning - a railway car; pen --> feather, metal, ball pen; sail - плавать под парусами --> плавать (о любом судне).

Some changes of meaning are due to purely linguistic causes, i.e. factors acting in the language system. Linguistically speaking, the development of new meanings, and also a complete change of meaning, may be caused by the influence of other words, mostly of synonyms.

The process of changing the meaning of words due to collision of synonyms is called discrimination of synonyms. Other examples of discrimination of synonyms: land (страна, земля) - country (Fr.) - страна, stool (стул, табурет) - chair (Fr.) - стул, meat (пища, мясо) - food (Fr.) - пища, deer (животное любое, олень) - animal (Fr.) животное.

The next linguistic process is ellipses - the omission of a word in a phrase and the meaning of the whole word-group is transferred to the remaining component. E.g.: the OE verb steorfan (to starve) meant to perish. When the verb to die was borrowed from the Scandinavian, these two synonyms, which were very close in their meaning, collided, and, as a result, to starve gradually changed into its present meaning: to die (or suffer) from hunger. Already in the 14th century the word hunger gradually stopped to be used in this phrase and the verb itself got this meaning.

Other examples of ellipses: a sit-down (demonstration); a daily (newspaper); a monthly (magazine); a taxi (cab).

The third linguistic cause is linguistic analogy. It is found out that if one of the members of a synonymic set gets a new meaning, other members of this set change their meaning accordingly. E.g., verbs synonymous with catch (grasp, get, etc.) got the meaning to understand.

Nature of Semantic Change: Metaphor and Metonymy

To answer the question «how new meanings develop» we must investigate the inner mechanism of this process. A necessary condition of any semantic change, no matter what the cause, is some connection, some association between the old meaning and the new. There are two kinds of association involved in different semantic changes: similarity of meanings and contiguity of meanings.

Similarity of meanings, or metaphor may be described as a semantic process of associating two referents, one of which in some way resembles the other. In other words, metaphor is a transference of meaning on the basis of similarity, e.g.: the word hand got in the 16th century the meaning of a «pointer of a clock or a watch» because of the similarity of one of the functions performed by the hand.

The words denoting parts of human body are widely used metaphorically in different languages, e.g.: the leg of the table; the foot of the hill; the neck of a bottle; the tongue of the flame; the mouth of a pot, river, cave. In this case we create the figurative meaning of a word. Thus, we must differentiate between the primary meaning of a word and its derived meaning, that is the meaning which the word got in the language development.

If a metaphor is based on physical properties it is called a simple or linguistic metaphor. Simple metaphors can be classified according to the physical properties of the similarity on which they are based:

1. appearance or form: bridge - мост, переносица; nut - орех, голова; arm - рука, ветка. A lean person may be called a skeleton, a tall and lean person is sometimes called a lamp-post;

2. temperature: boiling hot - кипяток, сердитый (горячий) человек;

3. position: the head and the foot of a page;

4. colour: the names of some flowers and shrubs are commonly used to denote their colours: lilac - сирень, сиреневый; violet - фиалка, фиолетовый;

5. function of use: hand - рука, стрелка часов;

6. movement: caterpilar-tractor - гусеничный трактор; foxtrot - бег лисы, фокстрот (танец); albatros - альбатрос (птица), аэроплан.

Sometimes two or more of these kinds of resemblances are combined: the ear of a pitcher is something like a human ear in form, appearance and position, or the eye of a needle is similar to part of a human face in form and position.

In English there are many words and phrases in which the names of the animals are metaphorically used to denote human qualities, in this case we observe resemblance of qualities of animals and people, e.g.: a bear - a surly person; cat, sheep, snake, lion, monkey, parrot, goose, duck, etc. Horse is used as a kind of prefix to indicate size or coarseness: horse-laugh - a loud laugh; cf. Russian - ржание, horse-play - грубое развлечение, игра, horse-sense -грубоватый, здравый смысл. A few verbs belong to this class of animal names: to ape, to monkey - to imitate; to rat - to desert smb. in difficulty. There is a great many of idiomatic phrases containing the names of animals, insects, birds, etc.: it rains cats and dogs; to flog a dead horse; dog-cheap; to have a bee in one's bonnet.

Transference of meanings may be based on resemblance not only between two physical objects, but also a concrete object and an abstract notion, e.g.: bar - барьер (a physical object); social bars - социальные барьеры; racial bars - расовые барьеры.

Contiguity of meaning, or metonymy may be described as the semantic process of associating two referents, one of which makes part of the other or is closely connected with it. In other words, metonymy is a transference of meanings on the basis of contiguity. Contiguity is a more complex phenomenon as compared with similarity and it may be of different kinds.

The word hand besides the meaning «pointer of a clock» (metaphor) also developed the meaning «worker». This meaning is based on another kind of association: hands are the most important feature that is required of a person engaged in physical labour (association of an object and the process). Another example: ABC - the alphabet (part of the whole).

The simplest case of metonymy is that of synecdoche. A synecdoche is a trope by which

1. a part is made to stand for the whole or

2. the whole for a part.

E.g.: grey-beard - an old man (cf. Russian - послушай, борода!); motor - motor-car; to save one's skin; bigwig - важное лицо, шишка.

The names of different animals are commonly used to mean their furs and sometimes - meat: fox, rabbit, hare, sable, tiger, etc. Names of different organs can be used metonymically: lend me your ears! - послушайте меня! head -голова, начальник; he has a good eye for old books - наметанный глаз; brain - мозг, голова (ум!).

Some other cases of metonymy:

1. the names of containers are used to denote things contained: the kettle is boiling; have another late (glass);

2. the names of the things contained are used instead of the containers:

school - for school-building; institute - for institute-building; university;

3. the names of places are used to denote what is going on in these places or people who are there: the whole chair was present; the whole city came to meet the hero; street; town; village;

4. the name of the material may be used instead of the product: brass - латунь, духовые инструменты, mahogany - красное дерево, мебель, iron - железо, утюг, silver - серебро, приборы (столовые), flax - лен, изделие из льна, nickel, glass;

5. the name of the author is used for his works: give me Byron, please;

6. the name of a passion is used for its object: My love.

Proper names are widely used metonymically; e.g. the names of the inventors are used instead of what they have invented: makintosh - a waterproof overcoat after Makintosh (1766-1843), Farenheit (прусский ученый, 1736 г.), mauser - род оружия, Sandwich - имя лорда, Whatman - имя фабриканта, Sepp - имя конструктора, сконструировавшего дирижабль, Colt - имя конструктора, сконструировавшего револьвер, Pullman (1831-1897) - имя конструктора, создавшего определенный тип вагона пассажирского поезда.

Geographical names are used metonymically:

1. the names of countries are used to denote products manufactured there: china - porcelain; holland - a linen fabric; marocco - сафьян, bengal - сорт материала из Бенгалии;

2. names of cities and towns: rocquefort (деревня во Франции) - сыр, magnesia (древний город в Малой Азии) - лекарство, Bordeaux (город во Франции) - красное вино, havana - гаванские сигары, tangerine (город в Северной Африке) - мандарин, tokay (город в Венгрии) - вино токай, pambroke (город в Англии) - стол с двумя опускающимися сторонами;

3. names of islands: canary - l)light sweet wine, 2)a song bird found there; sardine - a small fish found in the Mediterranean Sea about the island of Sardinia;

4. names of mountains: cheviot - шевиот (ткань).

In all the above-mentioned cases the elements of contiguity are evident enough. All these cases of transference of meaning are called linguistic metonymy.

Both the processes, metaphor and metonymy, are closely connected, being different stages of the same semantic process, the result of the use of a word in different situations.

Results of Change of Meaning

Results of semantic change can be generally seen in the changes of the denotational meaning of the word - restriction and extention of meaning, or in the change of its connotational component - amelioration and deterioration of meaning - elevation and degradation of meaning. Restriction takes place more often than extention.

Changes in the denotational meaning may result in the narrowing or extention of meaning, i.e., a -word of wide meaning gets a narrower sense in which it denotes only some of the objects which it had previously denoted, or a word of narrow meaning becomes the one with extended meanings. The examples of narrowing of meanings: the word hound (OE hund) was used to denote a dog of any breed, but now it denotes only a dog used in the chase -гончая.

Mod E deer - a particular kind of beast - олень, OE - wild beast;

Mod E meat - eatable flesh (мясо), OE - food;

Mod E to teach - OE to show;

Mod E to write - OE to scratch.

Terms of wide sense may narrow in meaning in a concrete situation. Thus, the River is to a Londoner the Thames; the Abbey stands for Westminster Abbey; the Tower - a museum now; the City - the business part of London; Oxford - the university, etc. One of the commonest ways of narrowing of meaning is to add a qualifying word: corn (grain) - Indian corn (maize) - кукуруза, engine - steam engine.

Extension of meaning means extension of the word-range, that is to say the change of specific to general, e.g., the following words underwent several changes:

pipe: 1. originally - a simple musical instrument made of wood; 2. of any other material; 3. other things resembling this musical instrument in shape; 4. a general name for a hollow cylindrical body;

box: l.a container for solid objects or substances, drugs and money; 2. other things bearing a close resemblance in form and use; 3. a chest for holding clothes; 4. a box in a stable, in a theatre, a signalman's box;

target: 1. a small round shield; 2. now - anything that is fired at and figuratively any result aimed at;

camp (Latin - campus): 1. the place where troops are lodged in tents; 2. temporary quarters of travellers, nomads.

Extension of meaning is often due to contiguity or similarity. Thus, very often proper names become common nouns: mackintosh, sandwich, colt, etc.

In all the above-mentioned cases the denotational meaning was changed. But there are cases of changes in the connotational component. The changes in the connotational meaning may be subdivided into two main groups:

- degradation of meaning;

- elevation of meaning.

Degradation of meaning involves a lowering in social scale, reflection of the contempt of the upper classes towards the lower ones, e.g.:

wench 1. дочь, сирота, 2. крестьянская девушка, 3. грубая девка;

knave (German knabe): 1. a boy, 2. a servant, 3. any low person; 4. a term of contempt in general referring to any person, a scoundrel - негодяй, подлец;

hoor: 1. a villager - крестьянин, 2. clumsy or ill-bread fellow - грубиян, грубый человек;

villain: 1. a villager, a peasant - крестьянин, 2. a term of scorn - презрение, 3. a scoundrel, a ruffian - хулиган, буян, головорез, злодей, негодяй;

blackguard: I. a servant who was in guard of kitchen things black with soot, 2. a scoundrel, due to the contempt of masters for the servants - подлец, бездельник.

Sometimes a word is neutral in meaning but its derivative has a derogatory, degraded meaning: design - замышлять, designing - коварный, лукавый, art - artful (cunning), scheme - scheming (intriguing), mood - moody (out of humour) - унылый.

Elevation of meaning is a semantic shift undergone by words due to their referents coming up the social scale, e.g.:

steward- an attendant on ships and airlines but originally - a person who took care of pigs (stigo - a sty, weard - ward);

minister - a civil servant of higher rank, originally - a servant, an attendant, then a priest;

marshal - a high military rank, originally - a horse-servant;

queen -- originally a woman;

knight - originally a young servant, now a man who receives a title of honour;

nice - originally foolish, now - тонкий, умелый, отличный;

fame - слава; originally a report, common talk, rumour.

The causes, nature and result of semantic changes should be viewed as three essentially different but inseparable aspects of one and the same linguistic phenomenon, as any change of meaning may be investigated from the point of view of its cause, nature and its consequences. Essentially the same causes may bring about different results, e.g., the semantic development in the word knight (OE cniht) from «a boy servant» to «a young warrior» and eventually to the meaning it possesses in Modern English due to extralinguistic causes just as the semantic change in the word boor, but the results are different. In the case of boor we observe pejorative development while in the case of blight we observe elevation of the connotational component.

29. Polysemy and context

Polysemy is the existence within one word of several connected meanings. These meanings appeared as a result of the development and change of its original meaning. Words are divided into two: polysemantic and monosemantic words. Polysemantic words are words which have more than two meanings.. Ex. The word “man” has eleven meanings in modern English. 1) человек, 2) адвокат, 3) мужчина, 4) мужественный человек 5) человечество, 6) слуга 7) рабочий , 8) муж , 9) рядовые матросы, 10) вассал, 11) пешка

Polysemy may be analised from two ways: diachronically and synchronically. If polysemy is analised diachronically it is understood as the development of the semantic structure of the word or we establish how the meaning of the word has changed whether it has got new meanings in the course of the development of the language. From the historical point of view one of the meanings of the word will be primary meaning; that is such a meaning of a word which was first registered. All

other meanings are secondary meanings. The term secondary meaning shows that the meaning appeared in the language after the primary meaning was already established.

Synchronically polysemy is understood as the coexistence of various meanings of the word at a certain historical period of the development of English. Synchronically the main problem of polysemy is to establish whether all the meanings of a word are equally important. We divide the meanings of a word into two: the major (or basic) meaning of a word and the minor meaning. In most cases the surrounding context points out quite clearly which of the meanings of a word is intended.

The meaning which is not dependent on context is the major (or basic) meaning of the word and the meanings which are dependent on the context are minor meanings. By context we mean the minimal stretch of speech determining each individual meaning of the word. Ex. “to make” means “to produce smth”. This is its basic meaning but other meanings are minor meanings because they can be found only in a context.

The meaning of a word may be determined either by its lexical or by its grammatical context.

Ex. the verb “to take” in such lexical distributions as: take+tea (coffee, medicine) -its meaning is пить; take+care -заботиться, take+of - раздеваться; to take + tram, the metro, a bus- сесть на; The meaning “больной” of the adjective “ill” is brought out only by a syntactical pattern in which “ill” is used as a predicative (ex.the man is ill) while the syntactical pattern in which the word “ill” is used as an attribute, brings out the meaning- плохой, вредный an ill man

- плохой человек.

30. Idiomaticity or phraseology in the English language. The main problems of phraseology

Functionally and semantically inseparable units are usually called phraseological units. Phraseological units cannot be freely made up in speech but are reproduced as ready made units. The lexical components in phraseological units are stable and they are non-motivated i.e. its meaning cannot be deduced from the meaning of its components and they do not allow their lexical components to be changed or substituted. In phraseological units the individual components do not seem to possess any lexical meaning outside the word group.

Ex. red tape (bureaucratic methods), to get rid of; to take place; to lead the dance; to take care.

A.V. Koonin thinks that phraseology must be an independent linguistic science and not a part of lexicology. His classification of phraseological units is based on the functions of them in speech. They are: nominating, interjectional and communicative.

V.V. Vinogradov classified phraseological units into three groups taking into consideration their motivation. They are:

1) phraseological fusions; they are such units which are completely non motivated word groups; Ex. to kick the bucket to get one's goat, show the white feather. In these word groups the meaning of the whole expressions is not derived from the meaning of components.

2) phraseological units; the meaning of such word-groups can be perceived through the metaphorical meaning of the whole phraseological unit or the meaning of which may be seen as a metaphorical transference of the meaning of the word group: ex. to show one's teeth, to know the way the wind blows, to stand to one's guns, to take care of;

3) phraseological collocations: They include motivated relatively stable word groups. They have a certain degree of stability; ex. to take an interest, to fall in love, to look through one's fingers, meet

the demand etc.

At present the term “phraseological unit” is usually used not to all set expression but only to those which are completely or partially non-motivated.

Prof N. Amosova gives two categories of phraseological units depending on whether just one component or both are used in phraseologically bound meaning. If all the components have idiomatic meaning such phraseological units are called “idioms” ex: to toe the line (to do exactly as one is told),a free lance (a person who acts independently). If one of the components has bound specialized meaning dependent on the second component she called “phrasemes”.

Ex. dutch courage (courage given by drink), to bring to book (to bring to justice) small years (in the childhood), small beers (weak beer).

Stubility of phraseological units is seen in its disallowance of the substitution of word groups. Ex. “to shrug one's shoulders” does not allow to substitute either “shrug” or “shoulder”.

Idiomaticity of phraseological units is lack of word groups. If a word droup does not allow word by word translation it is called idiomatic word groups. Ex. to kick the bucket (умереть) in the soup (в затруднительном положении) under a cloud (в плохом настроении).

Prof. A.I. Smirnitsky states that a phraseological unit may be defined as specific word groups functionning as a word-equivalent. The phraseological units are single semantically inseparable units. They are used in one function in the sentence and belong to one part of speech.

According to their semantic and grammatical inseparability we may classify the phraseological units into: noun equivalents (heavy father), verb equivalents (take place, break the news) abverb equivalents (in the long run, high and low). Prof. A. Koonin does not support Smirnitsky's point of view on the equivalence of phraseological units. A. Koonin points out that the components of phraseological units are mounted separately and therefore they can't be used in one

function in the sentence. Ex. He gets rid of it. The problems of equivalency of phraseological units to words demands further investigation.

Among the phraseological units there are the so-called imperative phraseological units.

Ex. God Bless his soul! , Curse her!

Damn him!, Stay well!, Go well!,

Heaven forbid!, Lord love us! etc.

These phraseological units mostly denote the emotional and expressive state of a person.

Proverbs, sayings and quotations exist also as ready made units with a specialized meaning of their own which can not be deduced from the meaning of their components. Therefore they may be included in phraseological units. Ex. East or West home is best, a friend in need is a friend indeed. To be or not to be.

The history of many phraseologisms is an interesting record of the nation's past, of its way of life, customs and traditions. Many phraseological units are connected with commerce, Ex. to talk shop, to make the best of the bargain, to have all one's goods in the shop window, a drug on the market (наркотик). Many phraseological units are associated with the sea (the waves). Ex. all at sea, to nail one's colours to the madt, to sail under false colours. Many phraseological units were borrowed from the Bible, Ex: the root of all evil - корень зла, любовь к деньгам. Daily bread - хлеб насущный, средства к существованию.

There is a subject of discussion among the linguists about the state of such combinations like “to give in”, “to make up”, to take off”, “to get up”, “to give up” etc; what is the natuer of the second element of such combinations? The second element of such units is not a word therefore they are not phraseological units.

Phraseological units, as we know, consist of words. The second element is not a morpheme because it is not a part of the word, they are not adverbs because adverbs have definite lexical meanings and are used in a certain function in the sentence.

But these units (get up, give up etc) have idiomatical meanings therefore. A. V. Koonin calls such units “set phrases” which have no phraseological character. There are synonyms among phraseological units, Ex: through thick and thin, by hook or by crook, for love or money -во что бы не стало; pull one's leg, to make a fool of smb - дурачить. Some of phraseological units are polisemantic as “at large” - 1) на свободе, 2) в открытом море, 3) без опредеренной цели, 4) не попавший цель, 5) свободный, 6) в целом, 7) вообще, 8) подобно etc.

It is the context that realizes the meaning of a phraseological unit in each case. The usage of phraseological units in speech is a subject of research work of many linguists1.

31. Classification of phraseological units. Sources of phraseological units

General Classification of Phraseological Units Taking into consideration mainly the degree of idiomaticity phraseological units may be classified into three big groups. This classification was first suggested by Acad. V. V. Vinogradov. These groups are:

- phraseological fusions (сращения),

- phraseological unities (единства),

- phraseological collocations (словосочетания), or habitual collocations.

Phraseological fusions are completely non-motivated word-groups. The meaning of the components has no connection at least synchronically with the meaning of the whole group. Idiomaticity is combined with complete stability of the lexical components and the grammatical structure of the fusion,

E.g.:to kick the bucket - умирать,

at sixes and sevens - в беспорядке,

to see the elephant -- узнать жизнь,

to go for a song - продать за бесценок,

ball and chain - законная жена,

a mare's nest - вздор,

to talk through one's hat*-- говорить вздор,

white elephant - обуза, никчемный предмет.

Phraseological unities are partially non-motivated word-groups as their meaning can usually be understood through (deduced from)the metaphoric meaning of the whole phraseological unit,

e.g. to skate on thin ice -- рисковать,

to wash one's dirty linen in public - выносить сор из избы,

to turn over a new leaf--начать новую жизнь,

to be in smb's shoes - быть на чьем-либо месте,

as busy as a bee - очень занятый,

as cool as a cucumber - хладнокровный,

green light - зеленая улица.

Phraseological unities are usually marked by a comparatively high degree of stability of the lexical components and grammatical structure. Phraseological unities can have homonymous free phrases, used in direct meanings.

E.g.:to skate on thin ice-- to skate on thin ice (to risk);

to wash one's hands off dirt - to wash one's hands off (to withdraw from participance);

to play the first role in the theatre - to play the first role (to dominate).

There must be not less than two notional words in metaphorical meanings. Phraseological collocations are partially motivated but they are made up of words having special lexical valency which is marked by a certain degree of stability in such word-groups. In phraseological collocations variability of components is strictly limited. They differ from phraseological unities by the fact that one of the components in them is used in its direct meaning, the other - in indirect meaning, and the meaning of the whole group dominates over the meaning of its components. As figurativeness is expressed only in one component of the phrase it is hardly felt.

E.g.:to pay a visit, tribute, attention, respect;

to break a promise, a rule, news, silence;

to meet demands, requirement, necessity;

to set free; to set at liberty;

to make money, journey;

to fall ill.

The structure V + N (дополнение) is the largest group of phraseological collocations.

Structural Classification Phraseological units may be defined as specific word-groups functioning as word-equivalents; they are equivalent to definite classes of words. 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 component words. Comparing a free word-group, e.g. a long day and a phraseological unit, e.g. in the long run, we observe that in the free word-group the noun day and the adjective long preserve the part-of-speech meaning proper to these words taken in isolation. The whole group is viewed as composed of two independent units (A + N). In the phraseological unit in 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, firstly, etc.

So we distinguish set-expressions that are nominal phrases, functioning like nouns,

e.g.:Jack-of-all-trades - мастер на все руки,

ways and means - способы, средства,

Baker's dosen - чертова дюжина,

a thorn in the flesh - бельмо на глазу,

skeleton in the cupboard - семейная тайна; \

verbal phrases, functioning like verbs:

to take the bull by the horn - действовать решительно,

to know the ropes - знать все ходы и выходы,

to flog a dead horse - попусту тратить время,

to put a finger into every pie - соваться во все дела,

to talk through one's hat - пороть чепуху;

adjectival phrases, functioning like adjectives:

spick and span - как с иголочки,

(as)cool as a cucumber - хладнокровный,

(as)poor as a church mouse - очень бедный,

(as) good as gold - золотой (о ребенке);

adverbial phrases, functioning like adverbs;

in a trice -- в мгновение ока,

at sixes and sevens -- в беспорядке,

before you can say «Jack Robinson» - мгновенно,

by hook or by crook - не мытьем, так катаньем; любыми средствами;

prepositional and conjunctional phrases:

as long as;

as well as;

in spite of;

as soon as;

interj ectional phrases:

well, I never! - кто бы мог подумать (ну и ну!),

by George! - (удивление, сожаление),

like hell! - черта с два,

my foot - держи карман шире,

my aunt! - боже мой! Здравствуйте, я ваша тетя!

my eye and Betty Martin! - вот так так!

So, phraseological units are included into the system of parts of speech.

Genetic (Etymological) Classification

Phraseological units are created from free word-groups. But in the course of time some words - constituents of phraseological units may drop out of the language; the situation in which the phraseological unit was formed can be forgotten, motivation can be lost and these phrases become phraseological fusions. The sources of phraseological units are different spheres of life:

sea life:

tell that to the marines -- вздор! ври больше!

in deep waters - в беде,

in low waters (сесть на мель) - быть без денег,

to be at sea - быть в недоумении,

to see land (видеть сушу) - быть близко к цели,

to run into difficult waters - попасть в затруднительное положение;

fish and fishing:

to fish in troubled water - ловить рыбу в мутной воде,

to drink like a fish - пить запоем,

to feed the fishes -- утонуть; страдать морской болезнью;

sport:

to have the ball at one's feet - быть хозяином положения, иметь все преимущества в каком-либо деле,

to hit below the belt - применить запрещенный прием, не стесняться в выборе средств,

to back the wrong horse - поставить не на ту лошадь, сделать неправильный выбор,

the ball is with you! - слово за вами!

army:

to stick to one's guns - не сдавать позиций; твердо проводить свою линию,

to mask one's batteries - скрывать, маскировать свое враждебное настроение,

to mark time (маршировать на месте - воен.) - топтаться на месте, бездействовать;

hunting:

to turn tail - обратиться в бегство, пуститься наутек, дать стрекача;

(as) hungry as a wolf;

zoosemv (animal life):

crocodile tears; lion's share; white elephant;

it rains cats and dogs;

theatre:

to play to the gallery - искать дешевой популярности, разводить демагогию;

to pull the ropes - управлять;

medicine:

to sweeten the draught - подсластить лекарство;

technic:

to get up steam - развести пары, дать волю чувствам;

with full steam on - на всех парах, поспешно;

to grease the wheels - смазать колеса, дать взятку;

agriculture:

to sow one's wild oats - отдаваться увлечениям юности;

to put the plough before the oxen - начинать не с того конца;

to get somebody's goat - разозлить кого-либо;

historical events, customs:

by hook or by crook - у трактирщиков старой Англии было в обычае тащить к себе клиентов, хватая их крюками. Женщин - за платье острыми крючками, мужчин - за ногу большими крюками;

peeping Tom - чересчур любопытный человек. Источник происхождения данного выражения - легенда о леди Годиве в Ковентри. Муж ее, граф, обложил город большими налогами. Годива заступилась за жителей. Граф поставил условие, что отменит налог, если Годива осмелится проехать в полдень обнаженной через весь город. Она приняла условие. Узнав об этом, жители сговорились в назначенный час закрыть наглухо ставни всех домов. Годива проехала по пустым улицам. Только портной Том подсматривал в щелку и ослеп. В Ковентри до сих пор есть городские часы, на которых в 12 часов открываются ставенки и из них выглядывает голова любопытного Тома;

to win one's spurs - быть посвященным в рыцари; продвинуться (средневековый обычай - награждать шпорами при посвящении в рыцари); trade:

to talk shop - говорить по делу, to make the best of the bargain - получить доход, into the bargain - впридачу, best seller - ходкий товар; автор такой книги.

Native phraseological units are connected with British realia, traditions, history:

By bell book and candle (jocular) - бесповоротно. This unit originates from the text of the form of excommunication (отлучение от церкви) which ends with the following words: ^ Doe to the book, quench the candle, ring the book!

To carry coal to Newcastle (parallells: Ехать в Тулу со своим самоваром, везти сов в Афины, везти пряности в Иран)

According to Cocker - по всем правилам, точно. E. Cocker is the author of a well-known book on arithmetics.

To native phraseological units also belong familiar quotations came from works of English literature. A lot of them were borrowed from works by Shakespeare: a fool's paradise(“Romeo and Juliet”), the green-eyed monster (“Othello”), murder will out - шила в мешке не утаишь (“Macbeth”), etc.

A great number of native phraseological units originate from professional terminologies or jargons: one's last card, the game is up/over lay one's cards on the table hold all the aces (terms of gambling).

Borrowed phraseological units come from several sources.

A number of units were borrowed from the Bible and were fully assimilated: to cast pearl before swine, the root of all evil, a woolf in sheep's clothing, to beat swords into plough-shares.

A great amount of units were taken from ancient mythology and literature: the apple of discord, the golden age, the thread of Ariadne, at the greek calends ( до греческих календ, никогда), etc, They are international in their character.

A lot of phraseologisms were borrowed from different languages - let's return to our muttons (revenons а nos moutons), blood and iron (принцип политики Бисмарка - Blut und Eisen), blue blood, to lose face (кит. tiu lien) and from the other variants of the English language (AmE) - a green light, bark up the wrong tree, to look like a million dollars, time is money (B. Franklin “Advice to a Young Tradesman”).

32. Assimilation of borrowings in English

Assimilation of Borrowings

Assimilation - the process of adaptation of foreign words to the norms of the language.

Types of assimilation - phonetic, grammatical, lexical.

Degree of Assimilation

Completely assimilated words do not differ from the native ones in pronunciation, spelling, frequency, semantic structure and sphere of application. It is difficult to distinguish them from words of Anglo-Saxon origin, e.g.: pupil, master, city, river, window, dish, box. The majority of early borrowings have acquired full English citizenship.

Partly assimilated loan words fall into subgroups:

- words not assimilated semantically, e.g.: sari, sombrero, shah, radja, sfeih; bei, toreador, rickshaw/picksha;

- loan words not assimilated grammatically, e.g. nouns borrowed from Latin or Greek preserve their original plural inflexion: phenomenon - phenomena, addendum - addenda, radius - radii, antenna - antennae;

- loan words not assimilated phonetically: communique, chaussee, cafe ; machine, cartoon, police; bourgeois, camouflage, prestige, regime, sabotage, memoir/(Fr.); spits (G.); pneumatics, psychology, ptolomey (Gr.);

- loan words not completely assimilated graphically: ballet, buffet, corps,

cafe, cliche, bouquet, brioche( Fr.).

Completely unassimilated words, or barbarisms, e.g.: addio, ciao (It.), af-fiche (Fr.) - «placard», ad libitum (Lat.) - «at pleasure».

33. American English

The variety of English spoken in the USA has received the name of American English. The term variant or variety appears most appropriate for several reasons. American English cannot be called a dialect although it is a regional variety, because it has a literary normalized form called Standard American, whereas a dialect has no literary form. Neither is it a separate language, as some American authors, like H. L. Mencken, claimed, because it has neither grammar nor vocabulary of its own.

An americanism - a word (set expression) peculiar to the English language as spoken in the USA. E.g. cookie 'a biscuit'; frame house 'a house consisting of a skeleton of timber, with broad or shingles laid on''; frame-up 'a staged or preconcerted law case'; guess 'think'; store 'shop'.

A general Aand comprehensive description of the American variant is given in Prof. A.D. Shweitzer's monograph. An important aspect of his treatment is the distinction made between americanisms belonging to the literary norm and those existing in low colloquial and slang.

The difference between the American and British literary norm is not systematic. The American variant of the English language differs from British English in pronunciation, some minor features of grammar, but chiefly in vocabulary.

The historic causes of the deviations. American English is based on the language imported to the new continent at the time of the first settlements, that is on the English of the 17th century. The first colonies were founded in 1607, so that the first colonizers were contemporaries of Shakespeare, Spenser and Milton. Words which have died out in Britain, or changed their meaning may have survived in the USA. Thus, I guess was used by Chaucer for / think. For more than three centuries the American vocabulary developed more or less independently of the British stock and was influenced by the new surroundings. The early Americans had to coin words for the unfamiliar fauna and flora. Hence there appeared bull-frog 'a large frog', moose (the American elk), oppossum, raccoon - (an American animal related to bears), for animals; and corn, hickory, etc. for plants. The settlers also had to find names for the new conditions of economic life: back-country 'districts not yet thickly populated', back-settlement, backwoods 'the forest beyond the cleared country', backwoodsman 'a dweller in the backwoods'.

The opposition of any two lexical systems among the variants described is of great linguistic and heuristic value because it furnishes ample date for observing the influence of extra-linguistic factors upon the vocabulary. American political vocabulary shows this point very definitely: absentee voting Voting by mail', dark horse 'a candidate nominated unexpectedly and not known to his voters', to gerrymander 'to arrange and falsify the electoral process to produce a favorable result in the interests of a particular party or candidate', all-outer 'an adept of decisive measures'.

Many of the foreign elements borrowed into American English from the Indian dialects or from Spanish penetrated very soon not only into British English but also into several other languages, Russian not excluded, and so became international. They are: canoe, moccasin squaw, tomahawk, wigwam, etc., and translation loans: pipe of peace, pale-face and the like, taken from Indian languages. The Spanish borrowings like cafeteria, mustang, ranch, sombrero, etc. are very familiar to the speakers of many European languages.

As to the toponyms, for instance, Iowa, Kansas, Michigan, Missouri, Utah (all names of Indian tribes), or other names of towns, rivers and states named by Indian words, it must be borne in mind that in all countries of the world towns, rivers and the like show in their names traces of the earlier inhabitants of the land in question.

Another big group of peculiarities as compared with the English of Great Britain is caused by some specific features of pronunciation, stress or spelling standards, such as [ae] for [a:] in ask, dance, path, etc., or [e] for [ei] in made, » day and some others.

The American spelling is in some respects simpler than its British counterpart, in other respects just different. The suffix -our is spelled -or, so that armor and humor are the American variants of armour and humour. Altho stands for although and thru for through. The table below illustrates some of the other differences but it is by no means exhaustive.

British spelling American spelling

cosy cozy

offence offense

practice practise

jewellery jewelry

travelling traveling

thralldom thraldom

encase incase

In the course of time with the development of the modern means of communication the lexical differences between the two variants show a tendency to decrease. Americanisms penetrate into Standard English and briticisms come to be widely used in American speech. It was, for instance, customary to contrast the English word autumn with the American fall In reality both words are used in both countries, only autumn is somewhat more elevated, while in England the word fall is now rare in literary use, though found in some dialects and surviving in set expressions: spring and fall, the fall of the year are still in fairly common use.

Cinema and TV are probably the most important channels for the passage of americanisms into the language of Britain and other languages as well: the Germans adopted the word teenager and the French speak of Г automatization. The British term wireless is replaced by the americanism radio. The jargon of American film-advertising makes its way into British usage; i.e. of all time (in «the greatest film of all time»). The phrase is now firmly established as standard vocabulary and is applied to subjects other than films.

The personal visits of writers and scholars to the USA and all forms of other personal contacts bring back americanisms.

The existing cases of difference between the two variants are conveniently classified into:

1) Cases where there are no equivalent in British English - drive-in 'a cinema where you can see the film without getting out of your car' or 'a shop where motorist can buy things staying in the car'; dude ranch 'a sham ranch used as a summer residence for holiday-makers from the cities'. The noun dude was originally a contemptuous nickname given by the inhabitants of the Western states to those of the Eastern states. Now there is no contempt intended in the word dude. It simply means 'a person who pays his way on a far ranch or camp”.

2) Cases where different words are used for the same denotatum, such as can, candy, mailbox, movies, suspenders, truck in the USA and tin, sweets, pillar-box (or letter-box), pictures or flicks, braces and lorry in England.

3) Cases where the semantic structure of a partially equivalent word is different. The word pavement, for example, means in the first place 'covering of the street or the floor and the like made of asphalt, stones or some other material'. The derived meaning is in England 'the footway at the side of the road1. The Americans use the noun sidewalk for this, while pavement with them means 'roadway'.

4) Cases where otherwise equivalent words are different in distribution. The verb ride in Standard English is mostly combined with such nouns as a horse, a bicycle, more seldom they say to ride on a bus. In American English combinations like a ride on the train, to ride in a boat are quite usual.

5) The same word is used in American English with some difference in emotional and stylistic colouring. Nasty, for example, is a much milder expres sion of disapproval in England than in the States, where it was even considered obscene in the 19th century. Politician in England means 'someone in polities', and is derogatory in the USA.

6) There may be a marked difference in frequency characteristics. Thus, time-table which occurs in American English very rarely, yielded its place to schedule.

This question of different frequency distribution is also of paramount importance if we wish to investigate the morphological peculiarities of the American variant.

...