CC BY
31NEW APPROACH TO PHRASEOLOGY Nabiyev M.A.1, Khalikova Kh.R.2
1Nabiyev Mashrab Abdivaitovich - Student;
2Khalikova Khusnora Ruziboyevna - Teacher, DEPARTMENT OF ENGLISH LANGUAGE AND LITERATURE, KARSHI STATE UNIVERSITY, KARSHI, REPUBLIC OF UZBEKISTAN
Abstract: the article deals with the problems of a new approach to phraseological units of language which is now more or less universally accepted by linguists. The chosen theme is actual because the problem of phraseology in which an attempt is made to overcome the shortcoming of the phraseological theories is not studied enough. The main features of this new approach are clarified and the definition of the term lexicalization is given in the article.
Keywords: approach, universally, phraseology, lexicology, set expressions, transferred meaning, component, literal meaning, diachronic aspect, lexicalization.
There is still another approach to the problem of phraseology in which an attempt is made to overcome the shortcoming of the phraseological theories. The main features of this new approach which is now more or less universally accepted by linguists are as follows:
1. Phraseology is regarded as a self-contained branch of linguistics and, not as a part of lexicology.
2. Phraseology deals with a phraseological subsystem of language and not with isolated phraseological units.
3. Phraseology is concerned with all types of set expressions.
4. Set expressions are divided into three classes: phraseological units (e.g. red tape, mare's nest, etc.), phraseomatic units (e.g. win a victory, launch a campaign, etc.) and borderline cases belonging to the mixed class. The main distinction between the first and the second classes is semantic: phraseological units have fully or partially transferred meanings while components of, phraseomatic units are used in their literal meanings.
1. Phraseological and phraseomatic units are not regarded as word- equivalents but some of them are treated as word correlates.
2. Phraseological and phraseomatic units are set expressions and their phraseological stability distinguishes them from free phrases and compound words.
3. Phraseological and phraseomatic units are made up of words of different degree of wordiness depending on the type of set expressions they are used in. (cf. e.g. small hours and red tape). Their structural separateness, an important factor of their stability, distinguishes them from compound words (cf. e.g. blackbird and black market).
Other aspects of their stability are: stability of use, lexical stability and semantic stability.
4. Stability of use means that set expressions are reproduced ready-made and not created in speech. They are not elements of individual style of speech but language units.
5. Lexical stability means that the components of set expressions are either irreplaceable (e.g. red tape, mare's nest) or party replaceable within the bounds of phraseological or phraseomatic variance: lexical (e.g. a skeleton in the cupboard - a skeleton in the closet).grammatical (e.g. to be in deep water - to be in deep waters), positional (e.g. head over ears - overhead and ears), quantitative (e.g. to lead smb a dance- to lead smb a pretty dance), mixed variants (e.g. raise (stir up) a hornets' nest about one's ears- arouse (stir up) the nest of hornets).
6. Semantic stability is based on the lexical stability of set expressions. Even when occasional changes are introduced the meaning of set expression is preserved. It may only be specified, made more precise, weakened or strengthened. In other words in spite of all occasional phraseological and phraseomatic units, as distinguished from free phrases, remain semantically
invariant or are destroyed. For example, the substitution of the verbal component in the free phrase to raise a question by the verb to settle (to settle a question) changes the meaning of the phrase, no such change occurs in to raise (stir up) a hornets' nest about one's ears.
7. An integral part of this approach is a method of phraseological identification which helps to single out set expressions in Modern English [1].
The diachronic aspect of phraseology has scarcely been investigated. Just a few points of interest may be briefly reviewed in connection with the origin of phraseology has scarcely been investigated. Just a few points of interest may be briefly reviewed in connection with the origin of phraseological units and the ways they appear in language. It is assumed that almost all phrases can be traced back to free word-groups which in the course of the historical development of the English language have acquired semantic and grammatical process of grammaticalization or lexicalization [2]. Cases of grammaticalization may be illustrated by the transformation of free word-groups composed of the verb have, a noun (pronoun) and Participle II of some other verb into the grammatical form- the Present Perfect in Modern English. The degree of semantic and grammatical inseparability in this analytical word-form is so high that the component has seems to possess no lexical meaning of its own. The term lexicalization implies that the word-group under discussion develops into a word-equivalent, i.e. a phraseological unit or a compound word [3]. These two parallel lines of lexicalization of free word-groups can be illustrated by the diachronic analysis of, e.g., the compound word instead and the phraseological unit in spite (of). Both of them can be traced back to structurally identical free phrases [4].
References
1. Кунин A.B. Английская фразеология. Москва: Прогресс, 1990. 65 с. (Kunin A.V. English Phraseology. Moscow: Progress, 1990. 65 p.)
2. Smith L. "Words and Idioms". London: Longman, 1990. - 78 p.
3. Thomas Hardy. "Lexicalization" New York: Ann. Arbor. University Michigan Press, 1994. 168 p.
4. WildH. "Word groups and Phraseological units". Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1995. 73 p.
