Russian phraseology, types of phraseological units. Sources of Russian phraseology

Vocabulary

Phraseology (Greek phrasis – ‘expression’, logos – ‘teaching’) is a section of the language of knowledge that studies stable combinations in language.

Phraseology is also called a set of stable combinations in the language as a whole, in the language of one writer, in the language of a separate work of art, etc.

Stable non-free phrases (beat the bucks, count the raven, get into trouble, win, etc.) are also called phraseological units (PU), phraseological units, phraseological turns, phrasemes.

A phraseological unit is a combination of two or more lexical units that are integral in meaning, stable in composition and structure.

As you know, phraseological units arise from a free combination of words that is used in figurative meaning. Gradually, portability is forgotten, erased, and the combination becomes stable. Depending on how the nominative meanings of the components of a phraseological unit are erased and merged, how strong the figurative meaning is in them, 4 types of phraseological units are distinguished: phraseological fusions, phraseological units, phraseological combinations, phraseological expressions.

Phraseological fusions are absolutely indivisible, indecomposable stable combinations, the general meaning of which does not at all depend on the meaning of their constituent words: beat the thumbs, sharpen the laces, eat the dog, kill the worm, speak the teeth, get into a mess, the mosquito will not undermine the nose, topsy-turvy and others

Phraseological fusions arose on the basis of the figurative meanings of their components, but later these figurative meanings became incomprehensible from the point of view of the modern language. For example, the meaning of the phraseological unit mosquito will not undermine the nose - “you can’t find fault, because it’s done very well” - does not follow from the meanings of the words mosquito and undermine. But if we remember that in the Old Russian language the word to undermine meant “slip”, then we will understand the figurative meaning of the whole expression. We observe a similar thing in phraseological units to get into a mess (a mess - "a device for twisting ropes"), etc.

Thus, in phraseological fusions, the connection between direct and figurative meanings is lost, figurative for them has become the main one. That is why phraseological fusions cannot be translated into other languages. Untranslatability is one of the signs of phraseological fusions.

Phraseological fusions have characteristic features:

1) they contain obsolete words (necroticisms) - words that are not used anywhere except for this fusion, are incomprehensible from the point of view of the modern language (upside down, you can’t see it at all, raise antimony, ask a rattle, raise shuras -mura, sharpen folly)

2) in their composition there are archaic grammatical forms (dark in the clouds - 'in the clouds', one does not know one's own - 'did not recognize', a parable in the town - 'among the nations', without hesitation - 'doubting nothing') ;

3) syntactic indecomposability (at least kua, a joke to say, how much in vain, headlong, headlong, on your mind, as if nothing had happened);

4) it is impossible to rearrange the components;

5) impenetrability - they do not allow additional words to be included in their composition.

6) approach in meaning to a single word (chickens do not peck - a lot, a little light - early, headlong - quickly, carelessly - lazily)

Phraseological units are semantically indivisible, indecomposable stable combinations, the meanings of which are motivated by the meaning of their constituent components: keep a stone in your bosom, wash dirty linen in public, seven Fridays a week, a shot sparrow, hang by a thread, swim shallowly, blood with milk, dance under someone else's pipe, slaughter without a knife, scratch with your tongue, substitute a leg, go with the flow, beat with a key, take it into your own hands, search during the day with fire, put it under a cloth, etc.

Phraseological units are somewhat closer to phraseological fusions in their figurativeness, metaphoricalness. But unlike phraseological fusions, where the figurative content is revealed only historically, in phraseological units, figurativeness and transference are recognized from the point of view of the modern language.

The connection between the components of phraseological unity is motivated. To understand phraseological unity, it is necessary to perceive its components in a figurative sense. For example, the meaning of the expression is to make an elephant out of a fly, i.e. ‘strongly exaggerate something’, is revealed only if the word fly is considered in the meaning of ‘something insignificant, small’, and the word elephant is ‘something very big’.

Characteristic features of phraseological units:

- the absence of incomprehensible words from the point of view of the modern Russian language;

– preservation of the semantics of individual components;

- changing the order of the components (throw a fishing rod - throw a fishing rod;

suck out of the finger - suck out of the finger);

- the possibility of homonymy with free phrases (cf .: lather your head, go with the flow, sit on your neck, scratch your tongue);

- the possibility of synonymous relations with words and other phraseological units.

Phraseological combinations are stable turns, which include words with both free and phraseological related value: black horse, ticklish question, bosom friend, sudden death, biting frost, sworn enemy, stunning view, eyesore, loose concept, cry sobbingly, etc.

A component with a non-free meaning is called a constant part, or a key word of a phraseological unit, a component with a free meaning is called a variable part. For example, in combination to look down, the first component is a constant part, the second is a variable (cf. eyes, gaze, gaze, etc.).

Unlike phraseological fusions and phraseological units that have a holistic indecomposable meaning, phraseological combinations are characterized by semantic decomposability. In this respect, they are close to free phrases.

Characteristic features of phraseological combinations:

1) the variance of one of the components is possible (pitch hell, pitch darkness);

2) a synonymous replacement of the core word is possible (stain with blood, stain with blood);

3) it is possible to include definitions (frowning black eyebrows, downcast guilty eyes);

4) it is possible to rearrange the components (search with fire during the day - search with fire during the day);

necessarily the free use of one of the components and the associated use of the other.

phraseological expressions.

The promotion of reproducibility as the main feature of phraseological units allowed Professor N.M. Shansky to develop further the classification of Academician V.V. Vinogradov and highlight the fourth type of phraseological units - the so-called phraseological expressions.

Phraseological expressions are stable phraseological turns, which consist of words with a free nominative meaning and are semantically distinct. Their only feature is reproducibility: they are used as ready-made speech units with a constant lexical composition and a certain semantics.

The composition of phraseological expressions includes Russian proverbs and sayings (Live a century - learn a century; Finished the job - walk boldly). Some scholars include stable terms consisting of two or more words (comparative linguistics, animated noun).

From the point of view of the sphere of initial use, phraseological units of the modern Russian language have different sources. Expressions (free phrases) from colloquial everyday speech, which have received a figurative, metaphorical meaning.

Wed, the original and phraseological use of Belmo in the eye can only be removed operational way- Chatsky is like a thorn in the eye. (A. Griboyedov) He carefully protected the sore spot on his leg from accidental injuries - Baklanov stung him in the most sore spot.

Let us give a number of phraseological units with the indicated source of origin: suck from a finger, take from the ceiling, on your head, carry a cross, tear off your head, open (open) your eyes, the song is sung, at hand, get under your feet, sit in a puddle, tie your hands , bare your teeth, gnaw your throat, eat a pound of salt, right under your nose, etc.

Expressions from professional vocabulary and slang: pull the gimp (from gold embroidery production); pull the strap (from the speech of barge haulers); play the first violin, get into tone (from the speech of musicians), play a role (from the speech of actors); clumsy work without a hitch without a hitch (from the speech of carpenters, joiners), butcher under a walnut (from the speech of cabinet makers); to come to a standstill, to put to a standstill, to give the green light (from the speech of railway workers); bit card, mix cards, juggling cards (from the speech of gamblers); bash on bash (from the speech of merchants); not in the tooth with a foot (from school slang), etc.

Facts from history.

In all Ivanovskaya - "very loudly, in full force, in full measure (shout, do something)". This phraseological unit is believed to be based on the loud announcement of royal decrees on Ivanovskaya Square in the Kremlin, near the bell tower of Ivan the Great.

Indefinitely (postpone, postpone, put) - "for an indefinite long time (postpone something)". The basis is the following fact: in the village of Kolomenskoye, Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich had a long box placed in a post, where complaints were placed, which, due to the unwillingness of the authorities, were not considered for a long time.

Bartholomew's Night - "a mass, brutal beating of peaceful, defenseless, innocent people." The historical event was based on the mass massacre of Protestant Huguenots by Catholics in Paris on the night before St. Bartholomew (August 24, 1572).

Kazan orphan. Pretend to be a Kazan orphan - "a person pretending to be unhappy, offended, helpless, etc., in order to pity someone." Initially, about the Tatar mirzas (princes), who, after the conquest of the Kazan kingdom by the Russians (during the time of Ivan the Terrible), tried to receive all kinds of indulgences from the Russian tsars, complaining about their bitter fate.

Facts from ancient myths, legends ancient world, biblical stories.

Sing Lazarus - "pretend to be unhappy, try to pity,

cry, complain about life" From the gospel parable of the poor Lazarus, who lay in scabs at the rich man's gate and was glad to eat the crumbs from his table.

Cain's seal - "imprint, trace, outward signs of crime". From the biblical myth about the murder by Cain, the son of Adam and Eve, of his brother Abel (this was the first murder on earth), as a punishment for which God marked his face with a special sign.

Pandora's box - "the source of misfortunes, disasters" From the ancient Greek myth of Pandora, according to which people once lived without knowing any misfortunes, illnesses and old age, until Prometheus stole fire from the gods. For this, the angry Zeus sent a beautiful woman to earth - Pandora; she received from Zeus a chest in which all human misfortunes were locked. Despite Prometheus' warning not to open the casket, Pandora, spurred on by curiosity, opened it and scattered all the misfortunes.

Rhetor's apple - "reason, reason, source of quarrels, contention." From the ancient Greek myth about an apple brought by Paris to the goddess Aphrodite as a prize for beauty (with the inscription “Most Beautiful”) and which served as a cause of contention between her and the goddesses Hera and Athena.

Ariadne's thread - "a way to help get out of a difficult situation." By the name of Ariadne, daughter of the Cretan king Minos, who, according to ancient Greek myth, helped the Athenian king Theseus kill the half-bull-half-man Minotaur and safely get out of the labyrinth with the help of a thread attached at the entrance.

Expressions from works of fiction.

There is still gunpowder in the powder flasks - "someone is full of strength, energy in order to do something, to accomplish something", an expression from the story of N.V. Gogol "Taras Bulba" (1842).

Kiseynaya young lady "a frivolous, pampered person", borrowed from the story of N.G. Pomyalovsky "Petty-bourgeois Happiness" (1860).

Stigma in fluff (cannon) - "someone is involved in an unseemly act, involved in some dishonest deed", borrowed from the fable of I.A. Krylov "The Fox and the Groundhog" (1813).

Knight for an hour - "a weak-willed person, incapable of a long struggle for the sake of noble goals", from the name of the opening verse of N.A. Nekrasov "Knight for an hour" (1863).

To the broken trough (to return) - "to return to the position when you lose everything you have acquired", borrowed from “The Tale of the Fisherman and the Fish” by A.S. Pushkin (1835).

Expressions that go back to beliefs, proverbs, sayings.

The swan song is "the latest, usually the most significant manifestation of talent, activity" (from the belief that a swan sings only once in a lifetime - before death).

Crocodile tears - "hypocritical compassion, insincere regret" (from the belief that a crocodile, eating its victim, cries).

Bite your elbows - "bitterly regret, be annoyed about something" (from the proverbs you can’t bite your elbow; The elbow is close, but you won’t bite).

Dig (dig) a hole - "prepare a big nuisance, harm" (from the proverb Do not dig a hole for another, you yourself will fall into it)

©2015-2019 site
All rights belong to their authors. This site does not claim authorship, but provides free use.
Page creation date: 2016-04-11

Introduction 2

Chapter 1. Features of the phraseology of the Russian language 5

1.1 The concept of phraseology 5

1.2 Meaning, correlation with the word and with the phrase 11

1.3 Classification 22

1.4 Sources of Russian phraseology 25
Chapter 2. The study of phraseological units from the point of view of semantic
characteristics, categorical meaning and systemic relationships 28
Conclusion 36
Literature 38
Appendix 41

INTRODUCTION

A lot of articles, books, dissertations have been written about phraseology, and interest in this area of the language does not dry out either among researchers or those who are simply not indifferent to the word. The accuracy of the formula expressed at the dawn of the century by the famous Danish linguist Otto Jespersen, who called phraseology “despotically capricious and elusive thing”, is confirmed. The very fact of the presence in the language, in addition to words, of entire verbal complexes, which are sometimes identical to the word, and more often are a unique linguistic phenomenon, distinguished by vivid expressiveness, imagery and emotionality, serves as a reason for us to explore this particular section of stylistics. However, phraseology as a set of all set expressions in a particular language is too wide a field of activity for such a small work as this one.

The Russian language is the national language of the Russian people, which has
the richest democratic and revolutionary traditions,
the highest culture. It is the language of modern science, technology and culture.
The Russian language in our time is the connecting link of the great multinational
The Russian state with the people of the whole planet. Russian word is the voice
peace, a passionate call for equality, fraternity and friendship of all peoples, in the name of
peace and social progress.

The scientific study of the Russian language begins where an element of awareness of the laws inherent in the language is added to the objectively ongoing process of mastering the native speech.

This work considers only one of the many independent sections that study individual aspects (levels) of the language. Are given brief information from the history of the study of Russian phraseology in Russian linguistics, some general concepts of phraseology, the object of phraseology, its scope and boundaries are determined. Separation

phraseological units into types according to the degree of semantic unity of their components. The problem of differentiation of variants and synonyms of phraseological units. Question about the original form of phraseological units.

In this paper, the object of description is a phraseological unit. Suggested course work in phraseology is devoted to the study of the structural and semantic features of the phraseology of the Russian language.

The study was conducted on the material of the modern Russian language.

The main goal that was set when creating the work is to conduct
synchronous-comparative structural-semantic analysis

phraseological units.

When creating this work, an attempt was made to solve the following problems:

Give an analytical review of the theoretical literature;

Explore the phraseological activity of nouns;

Establish relationships between the origin of these lexical units and their phraseological productivity;

Analyze the features - structural, semantic and lexical-stylistic phraseological units of this group.

This course work is based on the theoretical provisions put forward by Soviet and Russian researchers-phraseologists. The theoretical basis of the work was the works of N.M. Shansky, V.P. Zhukov, V.V. Vinogradov, V.L. Arkhangelsky and others. When selecting material for the study, we tried to reflect the richness and national originality of Russian phraseology as fully as possible. To this end, and to better illustrate the issues under consideration, numerous examples and quotations have been used. Examples were used to illustrate and confirm the statements put forward in the work.

The following methods were used in the work: synchronous-comparative, the method of phraseological identification, the method of phraseological description.

However, despite the involvement of a large amount of factual material, this work in no way claims to be a complete and exhaustive coverage of all the nuances of the problems under consideration, since they are too multifaceted. In addition, there is no consensus among linguists on many issues, they remain controversial to this day and are waiting for their resolution.

Chapter 1. Features of the phraseology of the Russian language 1.1 The concept of phraseology

The subject of phraseology as a section of linguistics is the study of the categorical features of phraseological units, on the basis of which the main features of phraseology are distinguished and the question of the essence of phraseological units as special units of the language is resolved, as well as the identification of patterns of functioning of phraseological units in speech and the processes of their formation. However, in the presence of a single subject of research and, despite the numerous detailed developments of many issues of phraseology, there are still different points of view on what phraseology is, what is the volume of phraseology of the Russian language. The lists of phraseological units of the Russian language offered by different scientists are so different from each other that with good reason one can talk about different, often directly opposite, even mutually exclusive views on the subject of research and about inconsistency and confusion in scientific terminology used to refer to the relevant concepts. . This explains the fuzzy understanding of the tasks, goals and the very essence of the term "phraseology", and the fact that there is no sufficiently specific unified classification of phraseological units of the Russian language in terms of their semantic unity. Although the most common (with clarifications and additions) is the classification of VV Vinogradov. That is why, finally, much in the Russian phraseological system is just beginning to be studied. Summarizing a wide range of views on phraseology, the following can be noted. In modern linguistics, two directions of research have been clearly outlined. The first direction has as its starting point the recognition that a phraseological unit is such a unit of language that consists of words, that is, by its nature, a phrase. At the same time, some scientists express the idea that the object of phraseology is everything is real

possible specific phrases in a given language, regardless of the qualitative differences between them. So, for example, Kopylenko says the following: "Phraseology covers all combinations of lexemes that exist in a given language, including the so-called "free" phrases."

a) as a phraseology of a language in the "broad" sense of the word, including in its composition both word combinations that are completely rethought, and word combinations in which there are not rethought word components. An example of such a "broad" understanding of the volume and composition of phraseology is the point of view of V. L. Arkhangelsky, O. S. Akhmanova, N. M. Shansky.

b) as the phraseology of the Russian language in the "narrow" sense of the word, which includes only phrases that have been completely rethought. Among the works reflecting such an understanding of the volume and composition of the phraseology of the Russian language are, for example, articles by V.P. Zhukov.

In both cases, the verbal nature of the phraseological unit, as well as the lexeme nature of its components, is not questioned by these scientists. Phraseologism is recommended to be considered as a contamination of the features of a word and a phrase, the homonymy of the phraseological unit and the structure of the phrase correlated with it is emphasized.

The second direction in Russian phraseology proceeds from the fact that a phraseological unit is not a phrase (neither in form nor in content), it is

a unit of language that is not made up of words. The object of phraseology are expressions that are only genetically the essence of phrases. "They are decomposable only etymologically, that is, outside the system of modern language, in historical terms." These expressions are opposed to phrases that are not homonymous, since they are qualitatively different from them. The main thing in the study of phraseological units is not the semantic and formal characteristics of the components that form it, and not the connections between the components, but the phraseological unit itself as a whole, as a unit of language that has a certain form, content and features of use in speech. The composition of phraseology is formed from categorically similar units. The history and etymology of each phraseological unit is studied in a non-straight line depending on some "universal" schemes for rethinking phrases, on the degree of semantic fusion of components and on the degree of desemantization of words in phrases. The main provisions of this direction are considered by A.I. Molotkov in the introductory article to the "Phraseological Dictionary of the Russian Language", in his book "Fundamentals of Phraseology of the Russian Language" and other works. We are closer to the position of N.M. Shansky, expressed in a number of his works, for example, in the book "Phraseology of the Modern Russian Language". This point of view seems to be the most justified, especially since it is shared by many scientists, in particular, the authors of the encyclopedia "Russian language". There, for example, the following definition of phraseologism is given: "Phraseological unit, phraseological unit, is the general name of semantically non-free combinations of words that are not produced in speech (as syntactic structures similar in form - phrases or sentences), but are reproduced in it in a socially fixed behind them is a stable correlation of semantic content and a certain lexical and grammatical composition.Semantic shifts in the meanings of lexical components, stability and reproducibility are interconnected universal and features phraseologism".

Phraseologism has a number of essential features: stability, reproducibility, integrity of meaning, dismemberment of its composition (separate structure). Stability and reproducibility are related, but not identical concepts. All linguistic units with stability are reproducible, but not all reproducible formations are endowed with stability.

Reproducibility is the regular repetition of language units of varying degrees of complexity. Proverbs and sayings are reproduced: The word is not a sparrow, it will fly out - you won’t catch it; The day is boring until the evening, if there is nothing to do winged sayings: Happy hours are not observed] composite terms and names: polar bear, sulfuric acid, nuclear reactor; actually phraseological units: to take in tow, ate the dog, etc.

Stability is a measure, a degree of semantic unity and indecomposability of components. Stability serves as a form of manifestation of idiomaticity. So, phraseological units with a holistic unmotivated meaning like in the middle of nowhere - "very far" are characterized by greater stability than phraseological units with a holistic motivated meaning like there is nowhere to spit - "so many people that there is no free space at all."

A holistic meaning is such a general (single) meaning of a phraseological unit that is difficult or impossible to derive from the meaning of the constituent parts. The integrity of the meaning of a phraseological unit is achieved by complete or partial rethinking of the components, as a result of which they, as a rule, diverge in meaning from the corresponding words of free use.

An important feature of a phraseological unit is its dissected structure, "super-verbalism". So, the phraseological unit to rub glasses and the free phrase to read a newspaper are built according to the same pattern "ch. + noun in wine. p.", They are separate units and do not differ in their external features.

Phraseologism with all its composition is combined in speech with a significant word.

Stylistically, phraseological units differ sharply from words. The bulk of words are stylistically neutral, which cannot be said about phraseological units, the main purpose of which is the expression of various kinds of assessments and the attitude of the speaker to what is being expressed, which are an essential element of phraseological meaning. There cannot be a text consisting of phraseological units alone.

Phraseological units of the Russian language can be divided into three main stylistic layers. Most of the phraseological units belong to colloquial speech. The scope of such phraseological units is everyday communication, an oral form of dialogic speech: turn up your nose, plug your belt. Colloquial idioms are used mainly in everyday speech and have a rudely reduced stylistic connotation: climb into a bottle, do not knit bast, do not slurp cabbage soup. One of the distinguishing features of colloquial vernacular phraseological units is that they are mainly formed as a result of a metaphorical rethinking of free phrases of the same lexical composition: throw at the daughter, plug in the belt (whom), etc.

Interstyle phraseological units do not have any stylistic coloring (reduced or sublime) and are actively used in different styles of oral and writing. This is a relatively small category of phraseological units: in any case, from time to time. For the most part, stylistically neutral phraseological units include components that correlate with words of non-specific content. Therefore, the corresponding turns, as a rule, cannot be opposed to free phrases of an equivalent composition and, as a result, are deprived of a generalized metaphorical meaning.

Bookish phraseological units are predominantly characteristic of written speech and usually give it a touch of elation and solemnity; they

are inherent mainly in public - journalistic, officially business and fiction speech. Book phraseological units do not always have an expression of solemnity or elation. They can also be stylistically neutral. Such are the turns of foreign origin, characteristic of literary and bookish speech, such as probing the soil, the Augean stables.

Journalistic phraseological units are used in social - political literature. Their goal is to communicate knowledge and influence readers or listeners. As a result, journalistic phraseological units are close to both scientific and book style. They contain the most diverse vocabulary - from special technical to high, poetic.

Scientific phraseological units are used in scientific papers all areas of knowledge. Their main purpose is to communicate information and results obtained by a particular branch of science. For scientific style Phraseological units are characterized by the use of a large number of terms related to the relevant field of science, and abstract vocabulary. Even specific words usually used in an abstract sense. In an official business style, phraseological units are used in clerical, legal and diplomatic documents. In business speech, they have a high degree of standardization. Phraseologisms are used in their direct and exact meaning, which does not allow for double interpretation.

From the point of view of the relevance of the use of phraseological units, like words,

may be common, obsolete, and obsolete. The degree of usage also depends on the stylistic coloring of the phraseological unit: stylistically neutral and colloquial phraseological units are usually used actively; on the contrary, book turns are not so characteristic of the word usage of our days. Obsolete phrases lose their internal form and often contain archaic elements.

1.2 Meaning, correlation with the word and with the phrase

The structural and semantic properties of phraseological units that distinguish their types are formed, as a rule, in the process of rethinking the original combinations of words as a whole or at least one of the lexical components of the combination. In the first case, phraseological units are formed that have a continuous meaning (or the property of idiomaticity). A fused meaning can be figurative or ugly, and the purpose of their lexical components is indecomposable: to look through one's fingers, to see the sights, to laugh at chickens, to feel relieved from the heart. In the second, a phraseologically related meaning is formed in the rethought word, which can be realized only in combination with a certain word or with a number of words, which leads to the formation of stable verbal complexes that have an analytical (dissected) meaning: white meat, golden youth, slave of passions (habits , fashion), to come to a thought (to a conclusion, to a decision).

Among the phraseological units of the first kind, phraseological fusions are distinguished (their meanings are absolutely unmotivated in the modern vocabulary of the language): pour bullets, the curve will take out, on all crusts, and phraseological units, in the meaning of which one can single out the meaning motivated by the meanings of the components in their usual use: block the way, at full speed, dark forest. A distinctive feature of unity is figurativeness.

Phraseologisms, characterized by analytical meaning, are a special type of structural and semantic units of phraseological composition - phraseological combinations. These are phraseological turns in which there are words both with free meaning and with phraseologically connected ones. specific feature words with a phraseologically related meaning is their lack of an independent sign function: with the semantic separation of such meanings of words, they are able to designate outside linguistic objects only in

compatibility with other words that act as nominative supporting components of these combinations of words (black bread, black market, black suit, black day). This property of them is manifested in the dependence of the choice of words with phraseologically related meanings on semantically keywords in the process of constructing the lexical and grammatical composition of the sentence. Restrictions in choice are fixed by a norm that fixes the compatibility of words in their phraseologically related meanings with certain words: in one word, a row of words or several rows, for example: overspending, the finger of fate, the son of the steppes (mountains), deep old age or deep night (autumn, winter), and combinations as a whole are characterized by limitations in the transformation of their lexical and grammatical structure. Words with phraseologically related meanings act as constant elements of phraseological combinations, they enter into synonymous, antonymic and subject-thematic relationships only together with semantically key words for them. Phraseological combinations have almost no homonymous free combinations of words.

NM Shansky also identifies the fourth type of phraseological units - phraseological expressions. These are phraseological phrases that are stable in their composition and use, which are not only semantically articulated, but also consist entirely of words with a free meaning. Phraseological expressions differ from phraseological combinations in that they do not contain words with phraseologically related meaning: All ages are submissive to love ; To be afraid of wolves - do not go into the forest; wholesale and retail; seriously and for a long time; the process has begun; market economy. The words that form them cannot have synonyms ". Their hallmark is reproducibility. Phraseological expressions are divided into nominative and communicative (correlated with a part of a sentence and with a sentence, respectively).

As significant units, phraseological units are used in the language in different ways. Some act in a constant lexical and grammatical composition: weeping willow; irony of fate, The dead have no shame; in the image and likeness; form the basis, others function in the form of several equal options. And the fact of the presence in the language of a large number of phraseological units similar in semantics, but differing in lexical and grammatical design, causes heated discussions. Main question, facing practical phraseology, - what to consider options, and what - synonyms of this or that turnover. The concept of a phraseological unit variant is usually given against the background of the identity of its integral meaning or image. Most scientists admit that "variants of a phraseological phrase are its lexical and grammatical varieties, identical to it in meaning and degree of semantic unity." However, disagreements arise when the definition of types of variation begins. The main types of phraseological variation are formal transformations and lexical substitutions of phraseological unit components. This classification of phraseological variants is recognized by most researchers. The formal variation of the components of a phraseological unit is determined by the fact of the genetic commonality of the word and the phraseological component, therefore the types of variation of the component are similar to the types of variation of lexemes. In live speech, you can record all kinds of such options - from accentological and phonetic (cf .: to dissolve mushrooms - "cry, whimper"; it is natural to become an oak, a oak, an oak, etc., or a distortion of the turnover St. Bartholomew's night into Khylamey's night) to syntactic (to work for the state instead of in the state). Morphological variants of phraseological units are usually reduced to two types - paradigmatic and derivational. In the first case, changes in the components are observed within the paradigm of the original words: beat (beat, beat) bucks, keep in mind (idial, in the minds). The second type is options

due to modifications of word-building formants: you will lick your fingers / fingers, go / go crazy.

The lexical variation of the phraseological turnover is stated by many researchers. But also in latest works one can find a decisive rejection of the interpretation of lexical substitutions as variance and the desire to consider this phenomenon as a phraseological synonymy. In this regard, the opinion of Babkin is very definite, who considers the concept of "phraseological synonym" undeniable, and "phraseological variant" is controversial in relation to cases of lexical replacement of the components of a phraseological unit. N.M. Shansky distinguishes three types of phraseological variants:

1) phraseological unit containing different, but semantically the same
empty components (in this case, the phraseological unit can function and
without these members): it’s not worth a penny (measured) - it’s not worth a penny, which
there is (was) strength - what strength

2) phraseological units containing words that differ grammatically;

3) phraseological units that differ from one another as complete and
abbreviated variety (in which case their relationship is identical
relations existing between full and abbreviated words):
go back down the yard - go back down; to be in an interesting position -
be in position (cf .: deputy - deputy, radio station - walkie-talkie).
Phraseological turns that have common members in their composition
original in meaning, he recommends considering "doublet synonyms".
Thus, turns of the type set a bath (pepper), from the bottom of my heart - from the whole
souls; beat the buckets (shabala); grind nonsense (nonsense); fold (break)
head; take (imprison) in custody; stuffed (round) fool, etc.
are recognized as synonyms - oak years. As Shansky writes, "in its own way
phraseological units of this kind are similar to the lexico-semantic character
single-root lexical synonyms like toponymy - toponymy, blue
- blue, treshka - treshnitsa, slyness - slyness ". Point

view, according to which lexical substitutions in phraseological phrases lead to the formation of synonyms, not variants, A.I. Fedorov also tries to theoretically substantiate. The replacement of the phraseological unit component, in his opinion, changes the nature of the figurative representation of the latter, its evaluative and stylistic coloring.

V.M. Mokienko, on the contrary, believes that such an interpretation significantly impoverishes the concept of a phraseological variant and overly expands the concepts of a phraseological synonym. The main premise that leads researchers to deny the lexical variance of a phraseological unit cannot be recognized as objective. The lexical replacement of components does not always change the image, the nature of the phraseological unit. Not infrequently, words can be replaced - synonyms that ensure the stability of the figurative representation, and the range of these words, especially in live speech, is very wide. Quite often, the replacement of components takes place in the thematic circle of vocabulary, which ensures the relative identity of the figurative representation: lather the neck (head); go crazy (go crazy, go crazy) It is difficult not to recognize the structural and semantic similarity, almost the sameness of phrases this type. Refusal to define them as lexical variants of phraseologism will lead them to confusion with phraseological synonyms of various structures and stylistic assessments such as throw back bast shoes - play box - give oak or count ribs - give a spanking - show Kuz'kin's mother. He also notes that "lexical variation is actually phraseological variation, the transformation of a separately formed, but semantically integral unit." Mokienko considers the unity of internal motivation, the image of phraseological turnover and the relative identity of the syntactic construction within which lexical substitutions take place as the main features of the phraseological unit variant. Thanks to these conditions, "lexical substitutions in variants of phraseological units are strictly regular, systemic in nature."

In the Encyclopedia "Russian Language 1" the issue of variants is covered briefly, but quite definitely: "Constant (constant) and variable elements are distinguished in the structure of most phraseological units-idioms. Constant elements form the basis of the identity of the unit, variable elements create the possibility of variation. Variation of phraseological units-idioms is expressed in the modification of elements correlated with units of different levels: lexical-semantic (fall / fall from the moon / from the sky, hang / hold on by a thread / on a thread, let's also compare stylistic options: climb / throw on the rampage, turn your head / head off), syntactic, morphological, derivational and phonetic, as well as in changing the number of lexical components that do not violate the identity of the unit. In other words, the authors of the "Encyclopedia" adhere to approximately the same point of view as V.M. Mokienko. We also consider this view to be the most reasonable. The separate arrangement and integrity of the phraseological unit image ensure the interchangeability of its components and, at the same time, the semantic stability of the phraseological unit with its variability. It is thanks to these properties that it becomes possible to create new turns, or "quasi-phraseological units", on the basis of those already existing in the language by varying the author's components. The issue of variants of phraseological units is especially important, as it is directly related to lexicographic practice. In each dictionary entry of one or another dictionary, one phraseological unit is considered. If we assume that a phraseological unit can have lexical and stylistic variants, then all these variants should be taken into account within one article. If we consider lexical modifications as doublet synonyms, then each synonym should be considered in a separate dictionary entry. At the same time, the task of the lexicographer is partly simplified, because not all synonymous phrases can be mentioned in the dictionary, but, for example, the most common, most

frequency. The problem of variants and synonyms of phraseological units is also closely related to the question of the original form of phraseological unit. As A.M. Babkin, if the phrases "to catch the eye, rush into the eye, rush into the eye, hit in the eye and climb into the eye - these are variants of one phraseological unit", then "the question is, which one?. Of course, with a purely external lexical- grammatical approach, one can imagine a model: a variable verb + in the eye. Naturally, the

lexicographers have difficulties related to the form in which

phraseological phrase to put in the title of a dictionary entry. The most logical, in our opinion, is the approach used by many lexicographers and considered by V.P. Zhukov in his work "Phraseological variance and synonymy in connection with the problem of phraseography (based on the Dictionary of Phraseological Synonyms of the Russian Language)." The author notes that phraseological units can have variants of one component and can combine several variant forms at the same time (this is especially typical for verbal phraseological units of varying degrees of complexity). Most difficult cases occur when several types of variation take place simultaneously. At the same time, individual variants of a phraseological unit in their specific word usage may outwardly noticeably differ from each other. VP Zhukov gives the following way out of the difficulty. Concerning the options to give the move and set the thrust ("hurriedly run away"), he writes: "the variance here does not turn into a synonym, since the original formula of the analyzed turnover looks like this: give (set) the move (traction, tear, scratch", where the variable nouns are synonyms". But even under the condition that the lexical modification is perceived by the authors of the dictionary as a synonym, and not a variant of turnover, the problems still remain. They are associated with finding the original form of phraseological units that have grammatical variants. Difficulties of this kind were noticed and characterized by B.T. Khaitov in the article "Phraseological units in the dictionary." The author draws attention

on the morphological features of verbal phraseological units of the Russian language and the reflection of these features in the "Phraseological Dictionary of the Russian Language" edited by A.I. Molotkov (ed. 1 - 1967, ed. U-1994). In the introductory article "How to Use the Dictionary" 1 regarding verbal phraseological units, limited in their word usage, the following instructions are given: "If the verbal component is given not in the infinitive, but in any of the personal forms, then this means that the phraseological unit is used only or predominantly in this form. "Nevertheless, the real embodiment of this provision in some dictionary entries of the Phraseological Dictionary reveals inconsistency. It is this inconsistency that B.T. Khaitov notes. Verbal phraseological units that are used only or mainly in any of grammatical forms, in some dictionary entries are placed in the infinitive (to hack oneself on the nose, not to sniff gunpowder, to knock out a wedge with a wedge, give oak, order to live long, play in a box, look out for all eyes). It is interesting that illustrative examples often contradict the corresponding heading forms for an obvious reason: due to the limited use of turnover in speech. The reverse picture is also observed: "many phraseological units that have several grammatical forms, the headings of the dictionary entry are placed in one of them. Nevertheless, the quotations show several possible forms for a given phraseological unit, and it is not always easy to clearly establish which of them is more common For example, a phraseological unit sits in the liver, fixed in the 3rd person singular, in illustrative examples is given in the following forms: "we sit in the liver, sat in the liver; without blinking an eye."

Fixing verbal phraseological units in the dictionary in one grammatical form or another is important for solving another problem: the differentiation of phraseological paronyms. For example: Whose foot has not set foot

(non-Russian view, past time) - where no one has ever been, has not lived. About deaf, wild, uninhabited places. Whose foot will not set foot (past temp., indefinite - personal) - someone will not appear anywhere. Phraseological paronyms can belong both to one and to different lexical and grammatical categories, in which the role of the morphological properties of the main word of a phraseological unit is also important: swallow the tongue - shut up, stop talking, not chat, etc. (verbal phraseological unit); swallow your tongue - very tasty (adverbial idiom) - used only in the form of the 2nd person. General recommendations for fixing verbal phraseological units in the dictionary can be indicated in three points, which was done by B.T. Khaitov: "1) phraseological units that have all or most grammatical forms in the heading of a dictionary entry should be given in the infinitive, and with the help of illustrative examples, show other forms; 2) with phraseological units that are limited in grammatical forms, it is desirable to place all the used forms, for example: what God sent - than God will send, "3) for phraseological units that have only one grammatical form, it seems more appropriate to fix it with an indication restrictive mark, for example: "only in the past tense", "only in the 3rd person", etc. But the main phraseological units are, of course, only a part of the entire phraseological system of the Russian language. And other types of phraseological units also have their own characteristics, and their description in dictionaries is also not ideal. This once again confirms the idea that in the field of phraseology and phraseography, a wide field for research is opening up for Russian scientists. In Russian (as in a number of other languages) words are combined with each other, forming phrases. Some of them are free, others are not. Compare, for example, the use of the phrase upside down in sentences: There they sheathed the boat with boards; there, turning it upside down, they caulked and tarred (Gogol) - At night, the police broke into Taras's house. They turned all the rooms and closets upside down (Gorbushkin). In the first sentence, this phrase is free,

each word in it retains an independent meaning and performs a specific syntactic function. Both words can be freely combined with other words: upside down, with a strong bottom; sideways up, stern up, up and down, etc. Such combinations are created in the process of speech in accordance with personal perceptions, impressions as a result certain situation. Such combinations are not stored in our memory: circumstances will change - new free combinations will arise. In the second sentence, the same combination has a completely different meaning: "bring something into disorder, into a state of chaos." It is no longer free. The independent meaning of the words-components in it is weakened, since the correlation with the subject is lost, the nominative properties of words have disappeared, so the meaning of the whole turnover is almost not connected with the semantics of each word separately. Lexically, such a combination is indivisible and is reproduced in speech as a ready-made speech unit. Syntactically, the role of the phrase as a whole, and not of each word separately, is considered. The connections of words in it are very limited: if you can still say upside down or use upside down in the same meaning, then other combinations will completely destroy the meaning of the turnover. Turnovers are also not free, to bring them to fresh water in sentences: Lubentsov laughed. He, a Far Easterner, thought this insignificant distance was ridiculous. He remembered the Amur distances, where a thousand kilometers was considered a stone's throw (Cossack.); The work of the consultation brought to fresh water much that should not have seen the light (Mamin-Sibiryak). It is impossible, for example, in the same sense to use the combinations “to give a foot” or “to take a hand”. The turnover to bring to fresh water has only the option to bring to clean water. Other substitutions in it are not possible. So, phraseological turnover, or phraseology, are semantically indivisible phrases, which are characterized by the constancy of a special integral meaning, component composition, grammatical categories and a certain evaluativeness. They are the subject of study.

a special section of linguistics - phraseology (f. pbgazeos - expression + logoz - doctrine). Often, phraseology is called the entire phraseological composition of the language, i.e. the totality of all lexically indivisible phrases.

The phraseology of the Russian language includes a wide variety of speech means, and so far its boundaries have not been clearly defined. In modern linguistic literature, two main directions have been identified in solving this problem.

Representatives of one direction (B.A. Larin, S.I. Ozhegov, A.G. Rudnev, etc.) refer to phraseological units only such semantic units of a more complex order that are equivalent to a word, which are characterized by semantic renewal and metaphorization. Proverbs, sayings, many quotations and almost all complex terms are excluded from the field of phraseology, i.e. all those phrases that have not yet turned into lexically indivisible phrases, have not received a figuratively generalized meaning, have not become metaphorical combinations.

A different opinion is shared by such scientists as L.A. Bulakhovsky, A.A. Reformatsky, A.I. Efimov, E.M. Galkina-Fedoruk, N.M. Shansky, V.L. Arkhangelsky and others. Along with phraseological phrases proper, they include proverbial and proverbial expressions, quotations that have become popular expressions, and complex terms in phraseology. Such turns are called phraseological expressions (N.M. Shansky),.

V.V. Vinogradov, in one of the first works on phraseology (“The Basic Concepts of Russian Phraseology as a Linguistic Discipline”, 1946), considered proverbs and sayings as part of phraseological turns, referring them to the group of phraseological units. In subsequent works (“On the main types of phraseological units in the Russian language”, 1947; “Russian language: Grammatical doctrine of the word”, 1947), proverbs and sayings are no longer included in phraseology.

Compound names, or terminological combinations, acad. V.V. Vinogradov considers after unities. However, he considers it possible to attribute some of them, such as the railway, angina pectoris, to "completely unmotivated unities", i.e. to splices, .

1.3 Classification

Summarizing a wide range of views on phraseology, the following can be noted. In modern linguistics, there are clearly two directions

research. The first direction has as its starting point the recognition that a phraseological unit is such a unit of language that consists of words, that is, by its nature, a phrase. At the same time, some scientists express the idea that the object of phraseology is all concrete phrases that are actually possible in a given language, regardless of the qualitative differences between them. So, for example, Kopylenko says the following: "Phraseology covers all combinations of lexemes that exist in a given language, including the so-called" free "word combinations".

On the other hand, only certain categories and groups of phrases are recognized as an object of phraseology within the boundaries of this direction, which stand out from all those possible in speech with a special originality. Depending on what signs are taken into account when highlighting such phrases, the composition of such units in the language is determined. Only these "special" phrases can be called phraseological units. Despite the conditionality of concepts and the distinction associated with this, it is usually said that phraseology can be represented: as the phraseology of a language in the "broad" sense of the word, which includes both phrases that are completely rethought and phrases that have non-rethought word components . An example of such a "broad" understanding of the scope and composition of phraseology is the point of view of V.L. Arkhangelsky, O.S. Akhmanova, N.M. Shansky, as the phraseology of the Russian language in the "narrow" sense of the word, which includes only revised to the end. Among the works reflecting such an understanding of the volume and composition of the phraseology of the Russian language are, for example, articles by V.P. Zhukov. In both cases, the verbal nature of the phraseological unit, as well as the lexeme nature of its components, is not questioned by these scientists. Phraseologism is recommended to be considered as a contamination of the features of a word and a phrase, the homonymy of the phraseological unit and the structure of the phrase correlated with it is emphasized.

The second direction in Russian phraseology proceeds from the fact that a phraseological unit is not a phrase (neither in form nor in content), it is a unit of language that does not consist of words. The object of phraseology are expressions that are only genetically the essence of phrases. "They are decomposable only etymologically, that is, outside the system of modern language, in historical terms." These expressions are opposed to phrases that are not homonymous, since they are qualitatively different from them. The main thing in the study of phraseological units is not the semantic and formal characteristics of the components that form it, and not the connections between the components, but the phraseological unit itself as a whole, as a unit of language that has a certain form, content and features of use in speech. The composition of phraseology is formed from categorically similar units. The history and etymology of each phraseological unit is studied in a non-straight line depending on some "universal" schemes for rethinking phrases, on the degree of semantic fusion of components and on the degree of desemantization of words in phrases. The main provisions of this direction are considered by A.I. Molotkov in the introductory article to the "Phraseological Dictionary of the Russian Language", in his book "Fundamentals of Phraseology of the Russian Language" and other works.

We are closer to the position of N.M. Shansky, expressed in a number of his works, for example, in the book "Phraseology of the Modern Russian Language". This point of view seems to be the most justified, especially since it is shared by many scientists, in particular, the authors of the encyclopedia "Russian language". There, for example, the following definition of phraseologism is given: "Phraseological unit, phraseological unit, is the general name of semantically non-free combinations of words that are not produced in speech (as syntactic structures similar in form - phrases or sentences), but are reproduced in it in a socially fixed behind them is a stable correlation of semantic content and a certain lexical and grammatical composition. Semantic shifts in the meanings of lexical

components, stability and reproducibility are interconnected universal and distinctive features of a phraseological unit.

1.4 Sources of Russian phraseology

The main part of the phraseological resources of the Russian language consists of phraseological units of native Russian origin. Among the phraseological units of a colloquial nature, there are a significant number of those whose source is professional speech, for example: to sharpen the lines, without a hitch and without a hitch (from the professional speech of carpenters), leave the stage, play the first violin (from the speech of actors, musicians), get into a mess ( associated with the manufacture of ropes, ropes; prosak - a machine for twisting ropes, ropes).

Single phraseological units got into the literary language from slang, for example, the turn to rub glasses is a cheating expression (sharpers used special powder cards to literally rub glasses, that is, add or remove points during a card game).

In the sphere of everyday and colloquial speech, turns have constantly arisen and arise, in which various historical events and customs of the Russian people are socially evaluated. For example, the phraseologism put (or put aside) in a long box is associated with the name of Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich (XVII century), on whose orders a box for petitions was installed in front of the palace in Kolomenskoye, but such an innovation did not eliminate the red tape, and the people accordingly reflected this fact: to put it on the back burner means to delay consideration of the issue for an indefinite period. The customs of the Russian people are reflected in such phraseological units as the case in the hat (by casting lots to resolve controversial issues), ride on the black (throw black balls when voting), hack on the nose (the nose is a tablet, a tag on which notes were made for memory) etc.

In addition to phraseological units, the origin of which is associated with colloquial speech, there is a significant number of phraseological units of book origin, both Russian and borrowed. Among them there are very old ones, borrowed from liturgical books, for example: seek and you will find, the holy of holies, the fiend of hell, in the image and likeness, etc.

The phraseology of the Russian language is actively replenished with popular expressions of literary origin. For example, the sword of Damocles, the Gordian knot, Procrustean bed - from ancient mythology; the expression from a beautiful far away belongs to N.V. Gogol; affairs of bygone days - A.S. Pushkin; happy hours are not observed - A.S. Griboyedov; great initiative - V.I. Lenin.

In addition to primordially Russian phraseological units, there are phraseological units of foreign origin. These are usually tracing papers from foreign phraseological units, for example: keep silent (from Latin), railway (from French), struggle for existence (from English, language), straw widow (from German).

As part of the modern phraseology of the Russian language, there is a certain number of foreign phraseological units used without translation. For example, a1ta ma1eg [alma mater], lat. "mother-nurse" - the higher educational institution where the speaker studied; 1abu1a gas [tabula times], lat. "blank slate" - something clean, untouched; a Nouguet osh? eP [a livre ouver], fr. “according to an open book” - without preparation (about reading any text).

Methodological note. Phraseological resources of the language are acquired by a person gradually. Phraseologisms that are compound names of well-known objects or are widely used speech stamps enter into speech use most freely and naturally, for example: Kindergarten. The North Pole, right there, out of nowhere, etc.

However, phraseological units with a pronounced metaphorical character are incomprehensible to children and are usually perceived by them.

literally. “... The simplest idioms are inaccessible to children,” writes K.I. Chukovsky. Therefore, in mastering the idiomatic language, consistency and careful selection of phraseological material is necessary.

Summarizing a wide range of views on phraseology, the following can be noted. In modern linguistics, two directions of research have been clearly outlined. The first direction has as its starting point the recognition that a phraseological unit is such a unit of language that consists of words, that is, by its nature, a phrase. At the same time, some scientists express the idea that the object of phraseology is all concrete phrases that are actually possible in a given language, regardless of the qualitative differences between them.

Chapter 2

In this chapter, we will consider phraseological units of the Russian language from the point of view of semantic characteristics, categorical meaning and systemic connections. The study is based on the example of phraseological units with the meaning of a qualitative assessment of actions and manners of human behavior.

Among the phraseological units of the Russian language, approximately 300 phraseological units (with an open list) have the value of a qualitative assessment of actions and manners of human behavior. Phraseologisms of this type are the object of our study. They are considered from the point of view of semantic characteristics, categorical meaning and system connections. The categorical meaning of the phraseological units included in this group is different: some (the majority of them) are equal in meaning to the verb, for example: ask pepper (to whom) - "to scold, scold, punish, usually making you feel your strength, power"; others (fifteen in all) in their own way grammatical meaning correspond to the adverb, for example: sit, stand, like a stump - "motionless, senseless, indifferent."

Using the method of non-redundant interpretations [I, p.204], we determine the categorical meaning of the analyzed phraseological units as close to the verb (for the first group) and as close to the adverb (for the second group). We say "close", because many phraseological turns are characterized by categorical polysemy, as V.P. Zhukov points out, illustrating this fact on the example of the phraseological unit "he ate his teeth". In relation to our material, this can be shown by the example of the phraseological unit "to walk along the string, along the thread (for someone)". The meaning of this phraseological unit can be conveyed by the following

phrases: 1) "tremble, tremble before someone", 2) "be obedient, well-trained." Words equivalent in meaning to this phraseological unit go back to two parts of speech - respectively, the verb and the adjective. But this phraseological turnover did not develop polysemy.

It means that. categorical polysemy can develop independently of the phenomenon of polysemy in the proper sense. In cases where one of the categorical meanings of a phraseological unit is the grammatical meaning of a verb, we consider them as part of the analyzed phraseological units (walk on a string, on a string (for someone); keep your mouth shut; keep your tongue on a leash; sing from someone else's voice) . Phraseological units with the general semantics "qualitative assessment of actions and manners of human behavior" can be grouped into narrower semantic subgroups:

1. Phraseologisms that characterize the actions of a person on the basis of his relationships and relationships with environment, as a team: to walk, stand on their hind legs (1tered by whom) - "to please, to serve." - Why does Molchalin walk on his hind legs in front of Famusov and his important guests? -Because of the despicable metal that sustains mortal existence. (Pisarev, Pushkin and Belinsky.) 1. To wash one's head (to whom) - "strongly scold, scold someone." (Herzen. Past and thoughts.). 2. Stand across the throat (of someone) - "very annoying, annoy, interfere with someone, annoy someone." - Tsvetkov banged his cane on the floor and shouted: - This is disgusting! ... Your lie in all nine years is at my throat. (Chekhov. Doctor.). There are 110 such phraseological units. This group includes semantic categories: a) phraseological units that characterize the behavior of a person who occupies a dependent position in society, such as: bend your back, spine, neck (before someone) - humiliate, fawn, servility;

crawl on the belly (before whom) - fawn, pander, grovel, grovel; wag your tail (in front of someone) (in the second meaning: to fawn, to be obsequious to someone); b) phraseological units that characterize the manifestation of anger, a person’s dissatisfaction with something, such as: throw thunder and lightning - scold someone; speak angrily, irritably, reproaching, denouncing someone or threatening someone; to mix with dirt someone, in every possible way to humiliate, insult, slander; c) phraseological units that characterize the behavior of a person who does not have his own opinion, such as: sing from someone else's voice - "without having your own opinion, express, repeat, etc. someone else's; 11" be dependent in your judgments "; look, look from hands (of whom, whose) "to act as another wants, not independently"; to dance to the tune (whose) - "to act, behave as anyone pleases, unconditionally obey someone."

2. Phraseologisms characterizing the manner of verbal communication: twirl, twist the ox - "talk, talk nonsense, assert something obviously ridiculous." - Notkin: Come on, you twirl the ox! Karl Marx never played any cards (Mayakovsky. Banya). To sharpen laces, balusters - "to engage in empty chatter, idle talk." - Well, you with your conversations - Semyon got angry. -Let's say your price, let's work, there's nothing to sharpen balusters in vain (K. Sedykh. Dauria). We have found 27 such phraseological units. Within the subgroup, they can be combined into three semantic categories: a) phraseological units with the meaning of "unwillingness to enter into a conversation or continue it", such as: bite, bite your tongue - "shut up; refrain from speaking"; keep your tongue on a leash - "keep silent, do not talk, do not say too much; be careful in statements"; swallow tongue - "shut up, stop talking, chatting, etc."; take water in your mouth - "keep stubborn silence, say nothing"; keep your mouth shut - "keep silent, do not talk, do not talk too much; be careful in statements"; b) phraseological units,

characterizing the manner of conducting a conversation, such as: make patterns, divorces - speak at length, verbosely; flood, spill like a nightingale - speak eloquently, with enthusiasm; pull the cat by the tail - tedious, slowly talking; bluntly - directly, openly, frankly, without resorting to hints (to speak, ask, etc.); through teeth - I. indistinctly, illegibly (to speak, whisper, mutter, etc.); 2. with contempt, displeasure, etc., as if reluctantly (to speak, spit, grumble, etc.); open the throat - speak loudly, shout, yell, laugh, etc .; scratching your teeth - chatting, talking a lot, talking; c) phraseological units that characterize the content of the conversation (usually on the negative side), such as: carry, fence nonsense, nonsense, nonsense - speak, write, etc. stupidity; twirl (twist) an ox - talk, talk nonsense, assert something obviously ridiculous; to carry, smack nonsense, game, nonsense, nonsense, nonsense, nonsense - to speak, write, etc. stupidity;

3. Phraseological units that characterize a person’s attitude to work, to business: rolling up his sleeves - diligently, diligently, energetically (doing something). Nothing prevented me from sitting and remaining a spectator with folded hands; and you had to go out into the field, roll up your sleeves, work, work (Turgenev. Rudin). To beat the bucks - to idly spend time, to mess around. -Having greeted, dad said that he would beat the bucks in the village for us, that we had ceased to be small and that it was time for us to study seriously (L. Tolstoy. Childhood). In the sweat of their brow - with great diligence, exertion, exerting all their strength (to work, labor, etc.). - The young men said that they had run out of all their savings, and they were earning by sawing firewood. Sancho showed the calluses on his hand: - You can be sure - in the sweat of our faces we get our bread! (O. Matyushina. For friendship). There are 28 such phraseological units. As part of this subgroup, two semantic categories are distinguished: a) phraseological units that characterize great diligence, stress in work, special skill in business, such as: bend, break your back, hump, backbone - work to exhaustion, exhaust yourself with heavy work; to spin (circle,

spinning) like a squirrel in a wheel - to be in constant chores, activities, worries; in the sweat of one's brow - with great zeal, exertion, making every effort (to work, toil, etc.); b) phraseological units that characterize idleness or an unscrupulous attitude to work, such as: spit on the ceiling - do nothing at all, mess around; chasing dogs - hanging out idle, messing around; folded hands - doing nothing, lounging; beat the buckets - idly spend time, mess around; to drive a loafer - to idly spend time, to mess around; on a living hand - hastily, badly, somehow (to do something); slipshod - carelessly, somehow (to do something); to bring down a deck through a stump - to do it slowly, clumsily, clumsily, or somehow and under. 4. Phraseological units that characterize the mental state of a person, which manifests itself externally, in his manner of behavior, such as: how an aspen leaf trembles, shakes - very strongly (trembles, shakes, usually from excitement, fear, etc.) - Like an aspen leaf shook Alena Dmitrievna, fell at her husband's feet, asking him to listen to her (Belinsky. Poems of Lermontov). Pout lips (lips) - get angry, offended, making a disgruntled face; express displeasure, annoyance, etc. - I was offended by his words. He noticed it. - Are you pouting your lips? Ish you (M. Gorky. Childhood). There are 12 such phraseological units. In this subgroup, two semantic categories are distinguished: a) phraseological units with the meaning "to be able to manage oneself, maintain self-control", such as: to keep oneself in check - to restrain the impulses of one's feelings, subordinating them to one's will; to keep oneself in hand, to keep one's self-control; keep yourself on the reins - be able to manage yourself; b) phraseological units with the meaning "externally show one's feelings," such as: hit, enter, break into ambition - violently show, express one's resentment, displeasure when self-esteem is hurt; how an aspen leaf trembles, shakes - very strongly (trembles, * shakes, usually from excitement, fear, etc.); grab, hold on to the bellies (tummies) - roll with laughter, laugh hard; make big, round eyes - express extreme surprise, bewilderment, etc.

5 Phraseological units that characterize the manner of visual or auditory perception, such as: sharpen your eyes (eyes) (at whom, at what) - carefully, watchfully look at someone or for something .- The girl pricked her eyes at him, expecting that he will do with crackers (Goncharov. Oblomov). Listen with all your ears - very carefully, without missing a single word, sound, etc. There are 18 such phraseological units.

The analyzed phraseological units are represented by the following most common grammatical constructions (models). 4 types: pout lips; shed a tear; break off the knee; flog a fever (110 phraseological units). 5 types: take by the throat; poke one's nose; wag the tail; douse, pour mud, slop (19 phraseological units)). With prepositions (on, in) No. 4, No. 6 of the type: pour water on the mill; pour oil on the flame; keep the ears on top; pull the wool over someone's eyes; keep your tongue on a leash; cast a shadow on the wattle fence, on a clear day (9 phraseological units). With prepositions (in, on) No. 4 type: spit in the eye; spit in the soul; inflate in the ears; raise (raise) on the shield; to board (10 phraseological units). Calculations show that most of the phraseological units of the study group are unambiguous (-85%). According to V.P. Zhukov, "the development of the polysemy of phraseological units is hindered by the fact that phraseological units are often formed as a result of a metaphorical rethinking of a free phrase of the same lexical content 11. Thirty-two phraseological units out of thirty-eight polysemantic ones have two meanings each. For example: chop off the shoulder - I. To speak directly, sharply, not 2. Act, act straightforwardly, often recklessly, imprudently, rashly.

Four idioms in the group under study have three meanings each: to turn up one's nose, to butcher, to breed antimonies, to dismiss nurses. Turn the nose (snout, muzzle) (from whom, from what). Rough, space. I. Turn away; 2. Treat with contempt, disdain for someone or something. 3. With disdain to refuse. Only one

Phraseologism has four meanings. Drool. Prost. I. Cry, start crying. 2. Whine, cry, complain, complain about something. 3. Be distracted, inattentive, not active enough. 4. To come to tenderness, to soften from something.

Phraseological units of the analyzed semantics enter into a relationship of synonymy and antonymy. When identifying synonymy in the study group, we relied on the definition of V.P. Zhukov "phraseological synonyms are understood as phraseological units with an extremely close meaning, as a rule, correlative with the same part of speech, having partially coinciding or (rarely) the same lexico-phraseological compatibility, but differing from each other in shades of meaning, stylistic coloring, and sometimes both at the same time" [I, p.178]. In the study group, "The dictionary of phraseological synonyms of the Russian language" marked 37 rows of phraseological synonyms-phraseological units. It should be noted that "due to polysemy, individual phraseological units are able to renew their synonymous connections in each new meaning [I, p.185]." For example, to clean up - 1. whom. To subdue oneself, to force one to obey (in deeds, actions, etc.). 2. what. Assign, seize something, take possession of something. Synonym: to impose a paw (in the first sense, to appropriate, to capture something, to take possession of something). Several rows of synonymous phraseological units have more than 15 phraseological units in their composition, others consist of two to four.

Many synonymic rows are semantically close, as indicated by V.P. Zhukov [I, p. 186], illustrating this with the example of synonymic rows [Appendix].

Phraseologisms of the studied semantics enter into a relationship of antonymy. When identifying antonymy, we rely on the definition of V.P. Zhukov: "the antonymy of phraseological units is based on complete opposition, divergence ... of meaningful semantic features" .

In the "Phraseological Dictionary of the Russian Language" one series of phraseological units-antonyms was found. [Appendix].

Thus, the studied material gives grounds to draw the following conclusions: 1. Most of the phraseological units of the studied group in their semantics indicate the manner of human behavior (270 phraseological units). 2. The categorical meaning of most of the phraseological units is equal to the verb (280 phraseological units). 3. The vast majority of phraseological units of the studied semantics are unambiguous (260 phraseological units). 4. Phraseological units of the group under consideration enter into a relationship of synonymy and antonymy; form 37 rows of phraseological units - synonyms and 1 row of phraseological units - antonyms.

CONCLUSION

Phraseologisms, although they have meaningful and formal features of level units (words and phrases), by themselves, however, do not form a special language level. The fact is that phraseological units practically do not combine with each other in a sentence, and are also not divided into simpler level units and do not generate more complex language units than themselves, - in other words, phraseological units are devoid of syntagmatic and hierarchical structural properties.

Phraseological turnover is a rather complex and contradictory unity. Being a separate formation, it is endowed with a holistic meaning. Some properties bring together a phraseological unit with a phrase, others - with a word. On the basis of the discrepancy between the content and the way of expressing the phraseological turnover, many transitional, intermediate phenomena arise.

Phraseologism is limited in the manifestation of its form-changing and combinational properties, which are regulated and constantly restrained by the internal form and the general (holistic) meaning of the phraseological phrase. Those or other modifications of phraseological units, as well as the expansion of contextual connections, must satisfy the requirements of the semantic and reverse unity of phraseological turnover.

In the field of phraseology, various patterns and regular trends are manifested. It has been established, for example, that with an increase in the evaluative meaning, the verbal qualities of such phraseological units are correspondingly weakened and, first of all, their aspect-temporal activity decreases, and vice versa. It is also known that the measure of the idiomaticity of a phraseological unit depends on the nature and degree of de-actualization of the components, the greater the discrepancy between the word of free use and the corresponding component, the more difficult it is to identify the proper meaning of the component, the higher the idiomaticity, semantic

indecomposability of phraseology. The inverse relationship is also true. A fairly reliable way to determine the semantic integrity of a phraseological unit is the method of imposing a phraseological phrase on an equivalent phrase. When determining the morphological and syntactic properties and possibilities of a phraseological unit (for example, when correlating a phraseological unit with a certain part of speech), the method of detailed non-redundant interpretations is quite suitable. In a detailed interpretation, not only meaningful, but also formal elements of phraseological meaning can be reflected. But it is not always possible to reliably judge the semantic and grammatical properties of the interpreted turnover from the descriptive interpretation, since there cannot be complete equality between the interpreted turnover and its identifier.

Observations on active processes in the development and change of Russian phraseology allow us to draw the following conclusions:

1. A large number of words have passed into the passive stock and
phraseological units that have ceased to be relevant.

2. New words and
phraseological units associated with the need to name new objects,
concepts and phenomena. Vocabulary enrichment is carried out by
word formation according to the patterns existing in the language, by
borrowing foreign words.

3. Wide use of scientific and technical terminology
leads to a change in the scope of its use, causes the use
terms in metaphorical and figurative terms; compare: high voltage,
strength test, etc.

4. Due to the interaction of styles, the stylistic
coloring of words and phrases (for example, time trouble, launch pad,
help, give directions, etc.).

The consequence of this process is the replenishment of neutral vocabulary.

LITERATURE

1. Arkhangelsky V.L. Set phrases in modern Russian.
Publishing House of Rostov University, 1964. -315s.

2. Akhmanova O.S. Essays on general and Russian lexicology. - M.: Uchpedgiz,
1957.-295 p.

3. Babkin A.M. Russian phraseology, its development and sources. L .: Science,
1970.-264p.

4. Vinogradov V.V. Selected works. Lexicology and lexicography. M.:
Science, 1977.-272 p.

5. Vompersky V.P. Return to the origins // Russian speech. - 1991.- No. 2.
With. 42-44.

6. Gavrin S.G. Phraseology of the modern Russian language (in the aspect of the theory
reflections). Perm: Perm. State Pedagogical Institute, 1974. -146 p.

7. Gvozdarev Yu.A. Fundamentals of Russian phrase formation. Publishing house of Rostov
un-ta, 1977.-262 p.

8. Glukhov V.M. Questions of polysemy of phraseological units and their
solution in the Phraseological Dictionary of the Russian Language 11, ed.
A.I. Molotkova // Problems of stability and variance of phraseological
units. Tula, 1968. - 282 p.

9. Grammar of modern Russian literary language. Moscow: Nauka, 1970.
-Z68.s.

10. Zhukov V.P., Zhukov A.V. Morphological characteristics
phraseological units of the Russian language. L., 1980. - 277 p.

11. Zhukov V.P. Russian phraseology. M.: Higher school, 1986. -158 p.

12. Zhukov V.P. Semantics of phraseological turns. M.: Enlightenment
1978.-160 p.

13. Ivannikova E.A. Synonymous relations between phraseological
units and words // Essays on the synonymy of modern Russian
literary language. M.-L., 1966. -153 p.

14. Kopylenko M.N., Popova Z.D. Essays on general phraseology. - Voronezh:
Publishing house of VSU, 1972.-144 p.

15. V.M. Mokienko Riddles of Russian Phraseology. - Moscow., Higher school,
1990.-192p.

16. Molotkov A.I. Fundamentals of phraseology of the Russian language. L .: Nauka, 1977. -
284s.

17. Solo oak Yu.P. Russian phraseology as an object of comparative
structural and typological research (based on phraseological units with
the value of a qualitative assessment of a person): Abstract of the thesis. dis. doc. philologist, science.
M., 1985.-140 p.

18. Solodub Yu.P. About semantic-grammatical classification
phraseological units // Russian language at school 1 ". 1988. Mo 3, pp. 39-42.

19. Tolikina E.N. On the nature and nature of synonymous relations
phraseological unit and word // Essays on the synonymy of modern
Russian literary language. M.-L., 1966. -163 p.

20. Khayitov B.T. Phraseological units in the dictionary // Russian speech. - 1987. - No. 1. - WITH.
86-89

21. Shansky N.M. Lexicology of the modern Russian language: 2nd ed. M.,
1972.-188 p.

22. Shansky N.M. Phraseology of the modern Russian language. M.: Higher
school, 1985. -192 p.

23. Shansky N.M., Zimin V.I., Filippov A.V. School phraseological
Dictionary of the Russian language: Meaning and origin of phrases. - M.:
Bustard, 1997.-196 p.

24. Phraseological dictionary of the Russian literary language in 2 vols. /Comp.
A.I. Fedorov.-Novosibirsk, 1995. -544 p.

25. Phraseological dictionary of the Russian language / Comp. L.A. Voinov. - M.,
1978-543 p.

26. Phraseological dictionary of the Russian language. Ed. Molotkova A.I. -
Russian language, 1986. - 464 p.

27. Russian LANGUAGE. Encyclopedia. - Ch. ed. F.P.Filin. - M.: Soviet
encyclopedia, 1979. - 432 p.

28. Dictionary of phraseological synonyms of the Russian language. - Comp.:
V.P. Zhukov, M.I. Sidorenko, V.T. Shklyarov / Ed. V.P.Dekova. - M.: Rus.
lang., 1987.-448s.-(SPS)

APPENDIX

Synonymous rows:

a) beat the buckets, play the fool, drive the quitter, lie on the side, lie on
stoves, spitting at the ceiling, sitting back, etc. - "indulge in idleness,
laziness";

b) to cut the pavement, elephants to loiter, polish the boulevards - "walk, loiter
without causes".

A number of phraseological units-antonyms:

Turn your back (to whom, to what) - show neglect, indifference; stop paying attention to someone or something. Turn your face (to whom, to what) - to show participation, interest in someone or something; start paying attention to someone or something.

CONTENTS Introduction 2 Chapter 1. Features of the phraseology of the Russian language 5 1.1 The concept of phraseology

Generally. It not only betrays it with brilliance and unique sharpness, but also carries the history of the life and culture of the country.

The Russian language is incredibly rich in phraseological phrases, which once again proves its saturation and unsurpassedness. In Russian, phraseology is used not only in colloquial, but also in writing.

Phraseology in language

Understanding phraseological units, first of all, indicates a high level of language proficiency. Phraseology is inherent in everyone modern language, however, there are a number of differences, because of which it is unacceptable to generalize phraseological units.

Let's remember what phraseology is. This is the use in the language of fixed phrases and statements that have a certain, not always objective, meaning.

So, for example, the phraseological unit “beat the bucks” will be understandable only to a Russian person, since “bucks” is a primordially Russian word, alien to the ear of a foreigner, even taking into account the translation. There are also phraseological units that are used in all languages of the world - for example, "Trojan horse", which means a cunning act or deceit.

Winged expressions, proverbs and sayings - the "salt" of the language

Winged expressions are statements famous people or quotes literary works, which are firmly established in speech, and are the definition of an action, event or object. Proverbs and sayings have their roots in the past of the people.

This is a kind of folklore wisdom that has not lost its relevance to this day. Thanks to these language techniques, we are able to express our thoughts more vividly and give our speech a sharp, and sometimes sarcastic, meaning.

bright object catchphrase are the words Galileo Galilei uttered during the inquisitional court, as a sign of confirmation of the correctness of their theory about the rotation of the Earth around the Sun: “And yet it revolves,” which means devotion to one’s views and rejection of someone else’s false position.

The incomparable Russian proverbs that have come down to us through many centuries are also integral to the Russian language. What can more vividly describe the premature, unsupported joy of a person than the old Russian proverb “Without waiting for the evening, there is nothing to praise!”

Sayings and proverbs contain the wisdom of the people, their deep understanding of the surrounding things, which finds a way out in sharp expressions. Old Russian proverbs are often based on historical events and pagan beliefs.

The proverb, “What a khan, such a horde”, originated during the period of the invasion of the Tatar-Mongol yoke and means that it depends on the leader what his subordinate will be, whether it be the head of state, family or army. The proverb "Egoriy da Vlas - the eye of the household" displays the beliefs of the Slavs in gods who patronize farmers.

Sayings are set expressions that are often used in conversation in the form of comparison. They give speech a special clarity. Vivid examples of sayings are the expressions: “like two drops of water” (similar to each other), “like snow on the head” (suddenly), “light in sight” (with the unexpected appearance of a person who was talking about at that moment).

Phraseologism is a separately formed, stable, reproducible combination of components, the meaning of which is expressive, not derived from the meaning of the components and arises as a result of a figurative rethinking of a free phrase, sentence or other grammatical construction. It is customary to distinguish a part of a phraseological unit from a word and call it a component.
Phraseologisms in structure resemble free phrases (a shot sparrow), sentences (a cat cried), combinations of independent and service parts of speech (without mind, neither fish nor meat). The meaning of a phraseological unit is not derivable from the meanings of each component, it is integral, this phraseological unit resembles a word. Like a word, a phraseological unit performs a nominative function in the language. Like a word, it is able to enter into a relationship of synonymy (without a king in the head - the head is stuffed with straw - without a mind), antonymy (without a king in the head - with a head), be polysemantic or homonymous (without a mind (from someone) - (man) Mad).
V. V. Vinogradov proposed to classify phraseological units according to the degree of connection of their components with each other and the non-derivability (relative deducibility) of the meaning of the whole phraseological unit from the meanings of its constituent components. He identified three groups of phraseological units.
Phraseological unions are absolutely indivisible, indecomposable units, the meaning of which does not depend on the lexical composition, the meaning of the components, and is just as conditional and arbitrary as the meaning of an unmotivated verbal sign. They are sometimes called idioms. They, according to Vinogradov, are homogeneous with the word, devoid of internal form. The external form of adhesions is sometimes unstable, subject to grammatical or phonetic changes (from the side of the burn - from the side of the burn; in the middle of nowhere - to hell in the middle of nowhere). In such cases, phraseologists today speak of varying components.
The next type of phraseological units is phraseological units. These units are also indivisible, they are an expression of a holistic meaning, but their meaning can be motivated (zero attention). There are four signs of unity: 1) a figurative, figurative meaning that creates the indecomposability of a phrase combination; 2) expressive richness; 3) the impossibility of replacing any of the elements of unity with a synonym; 4) the semantic substitution of only the entire unity by a word or a synonymous expression.
The third type of phraseological units is phraseological combinations. These are not unconditional semantic unities. They are formed on realizations of non-free meanings of words. They are analytical. A word with a non-free meaning in them admits a substitution. Lexical Components phraseological combination"tightly fitted one to the other," but still feel like separate words with their own special meanings. Combinations are semantically divisible and subject to decomposition. At the same time, it is necessary to distinguish between the core word of a phraseological combination and its variable parts. In addition, it can be noted that if in unity the components are in a certain sense equal in rights, but in combinations the meaning of only one of the words is perceived as not free (dead drunk, sudden death, unsleeping drunkenness).
N. M. Shansky, adhering to a broad approach to phraseology, supplemented this classification phraseological expressions. They consist of words, are semantically distinct, but differ from free phrases in stability and reproducibility in speech. The academician included cliches, aphorisms, proverbs and other set expressions in this group (all ages are submissive to love, wholesale and retail, seriously and for a long time).
Phraseological units are classified according to their general categorical meaning, taking into account the semantics and grammatical nature of a phraseological unit. A. M. Chepasova highlights the following types phraseological units by lexico-grammatical nature.
1. Subject phraseological units
A subject phraseological unit is a unit with general meaning person or object, which has the grammatical categories of gender, number, case, performs the function of the subject, object, action or predicate in the sentence and stands respectively in the syntactic position of the subject, object or nominal part of the predicate.
Usually, these phraseological units are called: face (Eva's daughter, white crow); a set of persons (old and young, the Jewish tribe); subject (Adam's tears = vodka); set of objects (white flies); space (blank spot, our Palestinians); dates and time intervals (yesterday, aredovy eyelids, day of Christ, age of Christ); abstract concepts, properties, attributes, states of an object (pillory, Achilles' heel, the path to Golgotha, vanity of vanities, Cain's sin).
2. Recognized phraseological units
These include units with a common value of the qualitative characteristics of an object, person, state of a person, which are an attribute or a predicate in a sentence. Among them, in terms of semantics, one can single out units denoting - only a sign of an object (affordable, as in the palm of your hand); - a sign or condition of only a person (not a timid ten, guilty without guilt); - a sign and properties of both a person and an object (according to the heart, neither one nor the other).
3. Qualitatively circumstantial phraseological units
These are expressions with the general meaning of the qualitative characteristics of the action used in the sentence in the syntactic position of the circumstance. This is one of the many classes of phraseological units, they can indicate the nature of the action (in all severity, to the point); the degree of action (if possible, on all counts); time (to the cap analysis, a little light); place (to all ends, distant lands); goal (for greater importance, in defiance).
4. Procedural phraseological units
These are phraseological units with a common meaning of action, having grammatical categories person, number, time, type, pledge, sometimes gender, acting in the sentence as a predicate. These include phraseological units of the following semantic types: human activity (knock down, day and night); the moral or physical condition of a person (hanging by a thread); relationships (keep in a black body); feelings, experiences, desires (shrug, sink into the soul).
5. Interjectional phraseological units
Units of this group are used to express various feelings, emotions, volitional impulses of a person. The following types of interjectional phraseological units are distinguished: the expression of the speaker's emotions (God!), formulas of greeting and farewell (God save you!), Invitation formulas, oaths (that's the cross!), Strengthening the request, prayer (for Christ's sake), gratitude, etc. .
6. Modal phraseological units
They express the speaker's personal, subjective attitude to his statement or his assessment of the content of the message (in all likelihood, honest mother, like cranberries, for the most part). Modal phraseological units are invariable, usually devoid of morphological features and cannot be combined with other words in the context, performing the function of introductory words (constructions) in the sentence.
7. Quantitative phraseological units
Here is a whole layer of expressions with the meaning of an indefinitely small or indefinitely greater number, correlated with the words "many" and "little", the position of which in the morphological system is disputed (sometimes they are called quantitative adverbs, sometimes special numerals). Examples of such phraseological units are chickens do not peck, the cat cried, not a penny, more than enough, to spare.
8. Service phraseological units
These are units that are a means of expressing various relationships. There are three subclasses here:
1) phraseological prepositions, which, like lexical ones, are a means of expressing relations between objects or objects to actions (at the address of whom, to the number of whom, what, towards);
2) phraseological unions (for the simple reason that, at the same time as, no matter what);
3) phraseological particles (at least, neither more nor less).