Дипломная работа (ВКР) - бакалавр, специалист на тему Component role in forming phraseological​ meaning in Phraseological Unit with component "thing" in modern English"

Содержание:

INTRODUCTION 5
CHAPTER 1. THEORETICAL FOUNDATIONS OF THE STUDY OF PHRASEOLOGICAL UNITS AND THEIR STRUCTURAL COMPONENTS 7
1.1 Phraseologism as a type of lexical unit 7
1.2 The structure of phraseological units 13
1.3 Ways of studying the semantics of phraseological units 18
CHAPTER 2: STRUCTURAL AND SEMANTIC ANALYSIS OF PHRASEOLOGICAL UNITS WITH THE "THING" COMPONENT 24
2.1 The semantic function and the structural role of the component 'thing' in the English phraseological units 24
2.2 The potential of studying phraseological units with the "thing" component in the school English course 49
CONCLUSION 59
REFERENCES 62

Введение:

Today's science is inherently anthropocentric, and this is a factor that has led to the increased interest of linguists in those areas related to the expression of the linguistic personality that they embody. Today, it is generally accepted that modern science is immersed in the study of the so-called "human factor" in the field of linguistics, with the aim of considering how people, as members of a particular culture, use language as a means of communication.
In this paper, the specificity of the phraseological unit as a linguistic symbol is explored through its linguistic and cultural aspects, i.e. through how cultural "language" is integrated into its content. It cannot be said that linguistic culture is undergoing a process of formation as a direction for phraseology and modern linguistics, its research topics, basic concepts, theoretical principles and scientific methods.
Phraseological units with a "thing" component are considered as autonomous components of the English lexical system, determining the communicative aspect of language and the ability to understand reality metaphorically. According to this statement, the relevance of the work can be proved by the fact that the phraseological unit with this component in its composition is a widely used lexical layer. Thus, the problem they analyse becomes relevant in the context of the growing interest of linguistics in cultural aspects. The work is also relevant because component analysis of phraseological units is rarely carried out and the role of the component "thing" has never been analysed before.
The work is based on the research of the following authors Sh. Bally, A.V. Kunin, V.V. Vinogradov, N.M. Shansky, V.N. Komissarov, A.D. Raihshtein, V.N. Teliya, V.A. Maslov, L.P. Smith, E.D. Polivanov, N.N. Amosov and others.
The goal of the study is the structural and semantic analysis of phraseological units with the component "thing". In order to achieve this goal, the following tasks were to be solved
- to clarify the scope of the concept of "phraseology";
- to consider the classification of phraseological units;
- to carry out a structural and semantic analysis of phraseological units with a "thing" component.
The subject of the study are phraseological units with a "thing" component.
The subject of the study is the structural and semantic characteristics of phraseological units with a "thing" component.
The research was conducted using the following methods: the method of generalisation of theoretical experience, the method of continuous sampling, the method of analysis and synthesis, the comparative method, the statistical method.
The practical significance of the study is the possibility of using its materials in the courses of lexicology, linguistics, stylistics, semantics, theory, as well as in writing term papers and diploma theses.
The goals and objectives set have determined the structure of this work, which consists of an introduction, two chapters, a conclusion, a bibliography and an appendix. 

Заключение:

This work has shown that the role of the component in the formation of phraseological meaning is significant in phraseological units with the component 'thing' in modern English. The component acts as a semantic anchor, providing a particular context (verbal or non-verbal) for the phraseological unit in question and allowing it to be better understood in order to ensure error-free communication in a foreign language. Furthermore, it can be seen that the component can be used to convey a range of meanings depending on the context in which it is used. This versatility further emphasises the importance of the component in forming the actual phraseological meaning in phraseological units of different types.
In order to carry out a semantic-structural analysis of phraseological units with the 'thing' component, we selected 50 units from modern English dictionaries: Cambridge Dictionary of English, Merriam-Webster Dictionary, The Dictionary of Idioms and Phrases, The Oxford Dictionary of Idioms, The Largest Idiom Dictionary.
The analysis carried out in the article is based on the classification of V.V. Vinogradov, who divides phraseological units into phraseological combinations, unities and fusions. The meaning of the selected units and the role of the "thing" component in them were subjected to structural and semantic analysis.
The predominance of phraseological unities (54%) indicates that the dominant area is occupied by stable turns, in which the signs of semantic separation of the components are nevertheless clearly preserved. As a rule, their overall meaning is motivated and derived from the meanings of their individual components. For example:
- (One) (has) never heard (of) such a thing.
- (The) next thing (one) knows
- A harbinger of things to come

The "thing" component in such phrases may have some metaphorical potential; it cannot be removed or replaced; it is also used in specific paradigmatic forms. Thus, it has structural and semantic functions.
Like idioms, phraseological unities are semantically indivisible; their grammatical forms and syntactic structure are strictly defined. The substitution of a word as part of a phraseological unit, including the substitution of a synonym, leads to the destruction of the metaphor or a change in the expressive meaning: "fall for the bait" and "get caught in the net" are phraseological synonyms but express different shades of meaning. Unlike idioms, however, unities are subject to the realities of modern language and may allow other words to be inserted between their parts.
Phraseological fusions (26%) are semantically indivisible phrases whose meaning cannot be deduced from the sum of the meanings of their constituent parts; their semantic independence has been completely lost. In a literal translation of phraseological fusions, a foreigner is usually unable to understand their general meaning. Often the grammatical forms and meanings of idioms are not determined by the norms and realities of modern language, i.e. rather often such fusions are lexical and grammatical archaisms. For example:
- A little knowledge is a dangerous thing
- A poor thing but mine own
- (Just, such) a (whole) thing
Phraseological combinations come last (20%). These are stable turns that contain words with a free meaning as well as phraseologically related, non-free (only used in this combination) words. Phraseological combinations are stable turns, but their holistic meaning follows from the meanings of their individual words. The figurative meaning of the component 'thing' in them is the weakest, since it can be easily replaced. It therefore has an exclusively structural function. For example:
- (Are) things getting you down?
- A (poor, pathetic, etc.) excuse for a (type of person or thing)
- A couple of (people or things)
It is clear that the component thing plays an essential role in the construction of phraseological meaning, as it allows for multiple interpretations and provides the necessary context for the phrase to be understood correctly. Furthermore, the component can be used to convey a range of meanings and emotions depending on the context in which it is used. As such, the component is an invaluable tool in creating phraseological meaning and should not be overlooked.
 

Фрагмент текста работы:

CHAPTER 1. THEORETICAL FOUNDATIONS OF THE STUDY OF PHRASEOLOGICAL UNITS AND THEIR STRUCTURAL COMPONENTS
1.1 Phraseologism as a type of lexical unit
An eminent Swiss linguist of the 20th century defined the concept of phraseology as follows: "The combination that is firmly established in the language is called a phraseological turn" . V.N. Teliya, V.L. Arkhangelsky, S.G. Gavrin defined phraseology as follows: "Phraseology is a linguistic unit characterised by reciprocity, synonymy and metaphor". N. M. Shansky defines: "A phraseological transformation is a linguistic unit, copied in the form of a completion, consisting of two or more reflexive components of linguistic character, whose meaning, composition and structure are fixed (i.e. constant)". .
In this paper we will take I. I. Chernysheva's definition, i.e. how she defines the phraseological unit. According to her, phraseological units are stable phrases that form semantic units based on semantic modifications of components performing nominal and expressive functions .
As a linguistic discipline, phraseology is the study of the phraseological basis of a language. The important aspects of this science are the stability of phrases, their system and semantic structure, the origin and main functions of units. Phraseology is one of the most interesting disciplines in modern linguistics. A large number of research papers have studied phrases, idioms and aphorisms.
The linguistic nature of idioms has now been carefully studied. However, some aspects of idiomatic language have not yet been properly studied. One of these is the study of words and their meanings. A particularly difficult part of phraseology is the translation of idiomatic phrases, which requires considerable experience in the study of the subject.
The subject of the history of phraseology is the study of the main forms and meanings of fixed phrases, the determination of the origin of all available linguistic monuments and their use in different periods of language development, as well as the establishment of linguistic phrases and their systematisation in a given historical period of language development.
A. V. Kunin believes that phraseology should be a separate linguistic discipline and not a part of lexicography. In lexicography there is a great deal of ambiguity between phraseological units and idioms. Opinions differ on how to define, classify, describe and analyse phraseological units. The term "phraseology" has a completely different meaning in Russia and in English-speaking countries (Great Britain, Canada, USA) .
In our work we often refer to A.V. Kunin's dictionary, because the principle of inclusion, the total number and compact arrangement of the phraseology used in it seem to be the most suitable for an initial quantitative assessment of the distribution of the studied phraseological units and for obtaining a general idea of the role of the concepts behind them in the overall linguistic picture of the studied language .
Kunin, Baranov, and Dobrovolsky's research on the theory of phraseology highlights several main points. First, they emphasize the importance of studying phraseology as a distinct area of linguistics, with its own set of rules and patterns. They argue that phraseological units cannot be fully understood by analyzing their individual components in isolation, but must be examined as a whole.
In the first part of the book "Aspects of the Theory of Phraseology" by A.N. Baranov and D.O. Dobrovolsky, the authors point out that the most serious problems are connected with the concept of idiomaticity, which has three main components: reinterpretation, opacity and complication of the way of indicating the denotation . The different types of reinterpretation (reinterpretation in the exact sense, post-component, referential, reinterpretation of whole, part, etc.) and complication of the way the denotation is indicated (complication of descriptiveness through quasi-synonyms and reduplications, euphemistic substitution; assimilation of form) are discussed in detail.