Polysemantic character of English phrases

Тип работы:


Детальная информация о работе

Выдержка из работы

Daniyeva M. (Republic of Uzbekistan)
Полисемантический характер английских словосочетаний Даниева М. Дж. (Республика Узбекистан)
Даниева Майсара Джамаловна /Daniyeva Maysara — старший преподаватель, кафедра английского языка и литературы, факультет иностранных языков,
Каршинский государственный университет, г. Карши, Республика Узбекистан
Abstract: the article analyzes polysemantic character of English phrases. The function of the components of substantive phrases in the process of creating the titles of articles and other literary works is clarified.
Аннотация: в статье анализируется полисемантическая характеристика английских субстантивных словосочетаний. Рассмотрены функции составляющих компонентов словосочетаний в образовании названий статей и художественных произведений.
Keywords: analysis, phrases, polysemy, phraseological units, morph syntactic conditions.
Ключевые слова: анализ, словосочетание, полисемия, фразеологические единицы, морфосинтаксические условия.
While investigating English phrases it is important to take their double character into consideration. In one hand, the general syntactic rules of word combinations without the separate components' meanings and the features of syntactic construction of phrases must be taken into consideration. It is the expression of collogation which is the morph syntactic condition of the building of speech construction of lexical units. In second hand, the main lexical meaning of the lexemes, i.e. collocation, the lexical-phraseological condition of the uniting of words in phrases mustn’t be forgotten.
According to the root meaning and explanation of the components, the English phrases can express various ideas and become polysemantic units. For example, the unit a small town girl can be understood as «a girl from a small town», or «a small girl of a town», or, a last train ticket is understood as «a ticket for the last train» or «last ticket for the train». Such kind of polysemy makes difficult the translation of phrases from one language into another. We often come across with the difficulties in translation of phrases when they are used as the titles of articles. There was given an article under the title «Deer Tragedy» in one of the numbers of the newspaper «Weekly News». For the first glance one can accept it as the tragedy, happened with the deer, because the phrase deer tragedy is understood in this way. But after reading the whole article it became clear, that nothing happened with the deer, in stead, the deer caused the accident. So, in above mentioned title, another meaning of the phrase as deer is guilty of tragedy is getting active. While comparing the semantic and syntactic constructions of phrases, it’s obvious, the question: «Why the word keeps its certain nominal meaning in the function of a part of a sentence, but cannot do it as the component of a phrase, i.e. as the component of phrase it can exist only in the content of complicated nominative unit?» appears. Some researchers may answer this question very simply: «In free syntactic phrases the unit of two meanings is not followed, that’s why any phrase cannot be a nominal unit» [1: 47].
We do not agree to this opinion accounting the phrases as the nominal units of the language system and any phrase is able to carry nominal function. This ability is seen not only in the names of literary works, as: Treasure Island (R. L. Stivenson’s novel), Cat’s Cradle (Vonnegut's novel), Rose Tattoo (play by Th. Willams), World Report (name of a journal) etc. but it means that the phrases can name all the events, things, objects existed in our everyday life.
If we avoid from the ability of nominal function of such occasional appearing phrases in the various types of texts in English: end-the-war demonstration- the stop-me-govern movement- pick-me-up-and-carry-me-or-I'll-die girls- make-or-break crises an on-and-off-affair- «everyone will keep his promise" — «give us our money back» demand, we cannot clarify their meanings and semantic structures. In the same time, the occasional features, which can be followed in all branches of the language, reflect in the system of phrases too. It is explained with the situation, in which the phrases are replaced in the space between the features of «freeness» and «statics». In certain conditions phrases lose their freedom and begin to move to the side of static units. But sometimes such movement is not over and phrases remain in the middle of different spaces, at result of what the phraseological units appear. In other words, the phraseological units appear in the process of becoming statics of free units. In its turn, in the structure of the sentence or other speech constructions, the nominative function of such static phrases as separate linguistic units is clarified easily.
The structural-semantic construction of phrases in most cases consists of the synthesis of the signs standing opposite to each other. For example: exert influence, offer resistance, show trust, give an explanation, quote an example, make a promise etc. [2: 283]. Taking into consideration, that these combinations structurally consist of several parts, some linguists belong them to the line of faraway events and replace them in the borderline of free and static phrases [3: 304].
Analytical character of phrases can be approved with the existence of their equivalents consisting of one word: to exert influence — to influence- to offer resistance — to resist- to show trust — to trust- to give an explanation — to explain- to quote an example — to exemplify- to make a promise — to promise etc.
It will be more correct if these phrases are placed in the middle line, because together with their ability to be used in static form, their components keep all the features typical to lexemes. The meaning of «suburb» does not refuse the signs of various characteristics of the components of phrases, but helps to join them in one unit [4: 46−47].
The existence of the meanings «centre» and «suburb» in the system of phrases is connected with the keeping of
certain features of syntactic units. It means the process of getting syntactical value of semantic elements, or
opposite, the process of becoming lexical of syntactic constructions. The process of such kind of moves is always
equal in the relationship of exact nominal words and the words with the abstract meaning.
1. Долгов Ю. С. Слово как компонент структуры словосочетания // Деривация и полисемия. — Тамбов, 1984. — С. 38−49.
2. Verbal Collocations in Modern English. — M.: Просвещение. 1975. — 302 р.
3. ZandvoortR. W. A Handbook of English Grammar. — London, 2009. — 612 p.
4. Абдуазизов А. А. Узбек тили фонологияси ва морфонологияси. — Т.: Университет, 2010. — 170 б.
5. Даниева М. Дж. Строевые элементы предложения (на материале английского языка). Научный обозреватель. Научно-аналитический журнал № 11 (59) / 2015 г. Москва: Россия, — с. 25−27.
6. Daniyeva M. Dj. Derivational — Functional Features of Substantive Phrases in English. Журнал научных и прикладных исследований. Научно-практический журнал № 11 г. Уфа: Россия, 2015. — с. 69−71.
7. Daniyeva M. Dj. Substantive Word Combination is a Grammatical Structure. Great Silk Road. International scientific-practical conference. Shankhay: China, 2015. p. 82−84.
8. Daniyeva M. Dj. Substantive is Nominal. «Актуальные научные исследования в современном мире» VI Международная научно-практическая интернет-конференция. Выпуск 6 Часть 4. Переяслав-Хмельницкий: Украина, 2015. ISCIENCE. IN. UA c. 61−63.
9. Daniyeva M. Dj. Using Word Combinations (Phrases) in Poetry. The Ninth European Conference on Languages, Literature and Linguistics. East West Association for Advanced Studies and Higher Education GmbH. Vienna: Austria. 2015. p. 160−162.

Заполнить форму текущей работой