CC BY
9
PECULIARITIES OF THE FORMATION OF MORPHOLOGRAPHY OF NOMINAL PHRASEOLOGY Faleeva E.V. (Republic of Uzbekistan) Email: Faleeva557@scientifictext.ru
Faleeva Ekaterina Vadimovna - Teacher, DEPARTMENT OF THEORY AND PRACTICE OF ENGLISH LANGUAGE, SAMARKAND STATE INSTITUTE OF FOREIGN LANGUAGES, SAMARKAND, REPUBLIC OF UZBEKISTAN
Abstract: it is revealed in the article that the grammatical record is important when choosing the optimal phraseoform for dictionary codification. It is determined that the followings must be done when describing grammatical marking: 1) to identify an exact marking of every unit regarding its correlation to a certain lexical-grammatical category [verbal, nominal, and etc.]; 2) to indicate grammatical combinability of PhU; 3) to record peculiarities of manifesting grammatical categories in PhU. Establishing the limits of varying forms of the components is considered to be important from the point of view ofphraseology.
Keywords: nominal morpholography, phraseology, structural components, identical structures, transformational analysis, grammatical structures, paradigmatic forms of the given components, functioning in speech, varying forms of the components, categorical meanings.
ОСОБЕННОСТИ ФОРМИРОВАНИЯ МОРФОЛОГОГРАФИИ ИМЕННОЙ ФРАЗЕОЛОГИИ Фалеева Е.В. (Республика Узбекистан)
Фалеева Екатерина Вадимовна - преподаватель, кафедра теории и практики английского языка, Самаркандский государственный институт иностранных языков, г. Самарканд, Республика Узбекистан
Аннотация: в статье выявлено, что грамматический учёт важен при выборе оптимальной для словарной кодификации фразеоформы. Определено, что при описании грамматических свойств фразеологических единиц [ФЕ] в словаре необходимо: 1) установить точную маркировку каждой единицы с точки зрения отнесённости её к определённому лексико-грамматическому разряду [глагольному, именному и др.]; 2) указать на грамматическую сочетаемость ФЕ; 3) фиксировать особенности проявления у ФЕ грамматических категорий. Важным с точки зрения фразеологии является установление предела варьирования форм компонентов.
Ключевые слова: именная морфологография, фразеология, строевые компоненты, тождественные структуры, трансформационный анализ, грамматические структуры, парадигматические формы компонентов, речевое функционирование, варьирование форм компонентов, категориальные значения.
It is fair to suggest that morphology of PhUs is brought to morphological abilities of their structural components. "There is an important lexical-structural group of verbs in modern English language" [1, 45].
Thus, from grammatical point of view, the PhU the lion's share and the free word combination the lion's share have identical structures. Between their parts a certain relationship exists. However, consequent transformational analysis [with the help of which the meaning difference between two identical grammatical structures is formed] cannot be applied to the PhU 'the lion's share. It is impossible due to peculiarities of the meaning it expresses "the largest or best portion" [«большая, лучшая часть чего-либо», «львиная доля чего-либо»].
Simultaneously with this, change in the form of components [possible for the components of variable combination, see: the lion's share; the lion's shares] is counter-indicative for the
components of the PhU subject to discussion, because its meaning is realized only with paradigmatic forms of the given components.
Certainly, there are nominal PhUs whose components change their form when functioning in speech: castle in Spain: castles in Spain [visionary unattainable schemes; daydreams]; wheels within wheels and its lexical-morphological variants worlds within worlds; a world within the world [«a complex mechanism»; «игра интересов»; «переплетение влияний или интриг»]; a Greek gift; Greek gifts and morphologic-syntactic variant: the gifts of the Greeks [«дары данайцев»; «дар, таящий в себе опасность»^ gift given with the intention of tricking and causing harm to the recipient)].
However, in any case, establishing the limits of varying forms of the components is considered to be important from the point of view of phraseology. The PhU itself serves as a kind of such barrier limiting variation of paradigmatic components of the components. Its general meaning regulates the paradigmatics of the components within a phraseoform.
From the above mentioned, we can conclude that morphology of PhU relies on morphological peculiarities of their components realized outside phraseological identity.
PhUs are correlated to one or another part of speech. Just as words, they can express objectivity, action process, quality or indication. Therefore, grammatically, PhUs and words are similar due to common categorical meanings.
The above mentioned meanings are lexical-grammatical. They differentiate large and opposed to each other word classes. Their essence is in confluence of two meanings in a word: material (lexica) meaning peculiar to this word, and general-categorical, characterizing the part of speech.
Grammatical meaning own two most characterized features:
The first feature consists of the methods of expressing grammatical meaings. They are expressed with formal grammatical means of the language - affixes, sound alternation, word order, and etc.
The second feature of grammatical meanings consists of the most common relationships between objects and phenomenon, cognized by a man.
Maximally generalized character of grammatical meanings in combination with specialized means [morphological and syntactical] of their expression create a specific-grammatical- method of representing the reflected mental content.
In PhUs with total phraseological meaning, general grammatical meanings are also expressed with grammatical means.
Thus, the objective character of nominal PhU can be established depending on the grammar of its core component, and in PhUs with coordinating structure - depending on grammatical features of its constituent components: the hook without the bait [«крючок для наживки»; «что-либо, лишённое самого основного, самой сути»]; evil eye [«недоброжелательный взгляд»; «дурной глаз»]; the haves and havenots [«имущие и неимущие»]; ins and outs [«все ходы и выходы»]; Jack Horner [«самодовольный мальчик»].
In a number of cases objective meaning of a PhU can be establishes only byt its compatibility: give and take [«взаимная уступка»; «обмен мнениями», «обмен любезностями»]; touch and go [«быстрое прикосновение к предмету и мгновенное удаление от него»]; gentle and simple; high and low [«люди всякого звания»]; enough and to spare [«более, чем достаточно»; «больше, чем нужно»], and others.
When regular manifestations of morphological characteristics of PhUs of different semantic-structural and functional categories are addressed, for some of them a not-yet-established norm in their phraseformation is significant.
For instance, a number of PhU present a noticeable morphological variability of their phraseforms, to which dictionaries react differently.
See the samples of such non-established morphological characteristics of PhU:
grandfather (or grandfather's) clock [«старинные часы»] [3, 186], where substantive word forms with zero paradigm and possessive case are varied;
or the following phrasal nest with a larger set of varied derivatives:
the Procrustes' bed = the Procrustean bed [«прокрустово ложе»] ^ Procrustean bed, the bed of Procrustes ^ the Procrustean (или Procrustes') bed (также the bed of Procrustes).
Dictionaries when choosing basic [codificational] phraseform must start from textual data. This common tendency of the newest linguistics: «Changes of the scientific paradigm in the light of understanding that none of language phenomena can be understood and described adequately outside their usage, required turning their attention to various types of analyzing discourse as a speech process».
Thus, forthediscussion of morpholographic explanation of PhU we are studying, the following contexts are of interest:
To... tie them down to their own Procrustean bed [2, 250]; This is the deadly logic of the Big Lie. Of such is made the procrustean bed in which all must be stretched out or cut down to size once the original fraudulent premise is accepted; It became the Procrustes' bed on which the faith and hope of the nation were offered up[2, 111].
For defining invariability of a phraseoform, derivational activity of one of the variants of the appropriate PhU should be taken into account too. For instance, in a number of variants of the expression the Procrustean bed/ Procrustes' bed/ the bed of Procrustes the phraseoform the Procrustean bed possesses such indicator which entered the other mobile PhU: make fit [place on или stretch on] the Procrustean bed [«уложить в прокрустово ложе», «втиснуть в узкие рамки»].
For the morphological characteristic s of PhU semantic-grammatical specificity of one or a number of [more frequently two] components is relevant when they preserve their initial [free syntactical] qualities of a part of speech. Thus, for the adjectival component of a PhU realization of degrees of comparison is peculiar, and this promotes the achievement of a figurative expressiveness of a certain saturation. Glossaries of the largest volume provide the description of PhUs in degrees in the order of the development from initial degree to the derivative.
Modern lexicography [glossary and translation] reflects the main grammatical data about language units subject to codification increasingly. Grammatically, PhU are presented in the vocabulary quite diversely.
References / Список литературы
1. Фалеева Е.В. Особенности кодификации глаголов комплектной структуры // European Research: Innovation in Science, Education and Technology/Collection of scientific Articles. XLV International Correspondence Scientific and Practical Conference (London, United Kingdom, October 8-9, 2018). London. 2018. C.43-45.
2. Collins Cobuild. English Language Dictionary. London: Harper Collins-Publishers, 2012. 1704 p.
3. Random House. Webster's Basic Dictionary of American English. New York: Random House, 2008. 525 p.
