Contrastive analysis of idioms expressing “body partsâ€‌ in the...

Click here to load reader

download Contrastive analysis of idioms expressing “body partsâ€‌ in the English, Kyrgyz and Russian languages

of 63

  • date post

    05-Aug-2015
  • Category

    Documents

  • view

    784
  • download

    10

Embed Size (px)

Transcript of Contrastive analysis of idioms expressing “body partsâ€‌ in the...

CONTENT:

Introduction Chapter I. Theoretical background of the concept of phraseological unit 1 . 1 1 . 2 1 . 3 Chapter II. Contrastive analysis of idioms expressing body parts in the English, Kyrgyz and Russian languages 2 . 1 2 . Complete equivalents of English Body Idioms in Kyrgyz and Russian Idioms with the components of Body parts The difficulties in using and translating the English language idioms Classification of Idioms Semantic peculiarities of Idioms

2 2 . 3 Incomplete equivalents of English Body Idioms in Kyrgyz and Russian

INTRODUCTION

The idioms - an essential and extremely dedicated language components, the most striking, unique, unusual, culturally significant and nationally specific, able to express not only the features of the language, but its speakers attitude, mindset, mentality, national character and thinking style. The English idioms, it is very rich and diverse in form and semantics. Idioms- an extremely complex phenomenon, the studying of which requires its own research methods and the use of data from other sciences - lexicology, stylistics, history, language, etc No doubt that the idioms give our speech the brightness, originality and national character, which distinguishes the languages from each other. However, when talking about national identity, we can not ignore the fact that idioms are present in all languages and are a universal feature. As noted the L.P. Smith somatic idioms being the core of idiomatic speech of modern English language, is the actual theme for many contrastive research. In spite of the many works, which devoted to data theme group, the contrastive study

of somatic idioms of three English, Russian and Kyrgyz languages did not consider till nowadays. The appointed reason is the conditions of our theme choice and the topicality because the complex study of somatic lexis of English, Russian and Kyrgyz languages in semantic word formation and lingua cultural aspect was not the subject of research. The topicality of the work is to compare phraseological units of three not cognate languages certain lexical semantic fields. The object of this study are idioms of tree languages: English, Russian and Kyrgyz, which is a mixed number of languages being compared. And we studynot all phraseological fund of these languages, but only the lexical semantic fields Body parts. This is such idioms, which contains in its composition the components body parts or so-called somatic idioms. For example :to be glad to see back of someone, to be all ears, to knock ones head against a break wall.(English). -, , . (Russian). , , .(Kyrgyz). The aim of the work is to study semantic features of somatic idioms in English, Russian and Kyrgyz languages and make a contrastive analysis. To achieve this arm was accomplished the following tasks: 1.Give a definition of phraseological units and consider the theoretical materials on theme semantic classification and comparative Phraseology. 2. define the concept of somatism. 3. study and analyzing the connotative meaning of idioms with components Body parts in English, Russian and Kyrgyz languages. 4.classified the somatic idioms based on their semantic features 5 expose to contrastive analysis the somatic idioms of three languages.

6. Study and determine the main linguistic and extralinguistic facts, which have influence on equivalents of idioms and identify the degree of inter language equivalence. As a theoretical material served the work of home and foreign linguists in sphere of phraseology, semantics and comparative phraseology: V.V. Vinogradov, A.V. Kunin, A.P.Nasarov, Osmonova J. Solodub U.P. and many others. Source of this research were more than 4000 somatic idioms in English, Russian and Kyrgyz languages together. Also special phraseological and different types of dictionaries served as a source of this work. Theoretical significance is that the results of our research paper can be used in the solution of very actual problems, as a general translations theories and so in studying idioms of not cognate languages by method of contrastive analysis. Practical value is that result of our research can be served as rich and variety real materials for future studying and development of somatic English idioms and their equivalents in Russian and Kyrgyz languages. The new approach of this work is to study the English, Russian and Kyrgyz somatic idioms deeper and consider their metaphorical meanings. The structure of the work consists of introduction, two chapters, conclusion and bibliography. In first chapter The theoretical background of research was considered the main concept of research: The concept of phraseological unit, Semantic classification of phraseological unit, Historical development of comparative Phraseology. In the second chapter Contrastive analysis of idioms expressing body parts in English, Russian and Kyrgyz languages was researched the somatic idioms of these languages. By analyzing was determined the figurative meanings of somatism, was made the contrastive analysis of somatic English idioms and their equivalents in Russian and Kyrgyz.

Chapter I. Theoretical background of the concept of phraseological unit 1.1. Semantic peculiarities of Idioms Phraseological Unit (also called idiom), a word group with a fixed lexical composition and grammatical structure; its meaning, which is familiar to native speakers of the given language, is generally figurative and cannot be derived from the meanings of the phraseological units component parts. The meanings of phraseological units are the result of the given languages historical development. Phraseology studies such collocations of words (phraseologisms, phraseological units, idioms), where the meaning of the whole collocation is different from the simple sum of literal meanings of the words, comprising a phraseological unit. The founder of the theory of phraseology is a Swiss linguist Charles Bally (1865-1947), who first coined the term phraseology within the meaning of partition style, leaning the phrase but the term has undergone several changes and today is used in the other three meaning: 1. Choice of words, a form of expression, the wording 2. The language style, style 3. Expression, phrase. These definitions are supported by British and American monolingual dictionaries. The question of phraseology as a linguistic discipline was first raised by the soviet linguist E.D. Polivanova, who believed that the phraseology take apart and stable positionin the linguistic literature of the future, when a coherent statement of the problems our science is devoid of random gaps. B.A Larin was the first scientist

after Polivanova again raises the question of phraseology as a linguistic discipline. Thus over the past decade has grown beyond the phraseology of one the section of lexicology and turned into an independent linguistic discipline, which has its own object and its methods of investigation. Object and the key concept of phraseology is the notion idiom, or phraseological unit. Difference in terminology set-phrases, idioms and word-equivalentsreflects certain differences in the main criteria used to distinguish types of phraseological units and free word-groups. The term set phrase implies that the basic criterion of differentiation is stability of the lexical components and grammatical structure of word-groups. There is a certain divergence of opinion as to the essential features of phraseological units as distinguished from other word-groups and the nature of phrases that can be properly termed phraseological units. The habitual terms set-phrases, idioms, word-equivalents are sometimes treated differently by different linguists. However these terms reflect to certain extend the main debatable points of phraseology which centre in the divergent views concerning the nature and essential features of phraseological units as distinguished from the socalled free word-groups. The term set expression implies that the basic criterion of differentiation is stability of the lexical components and grammatical structure of word-groups. The term word-equivalent stresses not only semantic but also functional inseparability of certain word-groups, their aptness to function in speech as single words. The term idioms generally implies that the essential feature of the linguistic units under consideration is idiomaticity or lack of motivation. Uriel Weinreich expresses his view that an idiom is a complex phrase, the meaning of

which cannot be derived from the meanings of its elements. He developed a more truthful supposition, claiming that an idiom is a subset of a phraseological unit. Ray Jackendoff and Charles Fillmore offered a fairly broad definition of the idiom, which, in Fillmores words, reads as follows: an idiomatic expression or construction is something a language user could fail to know while knowing everything else in the language. Chafe also lists four features of idioms that make them anomalies in the traditional language unit paradigm: non-compositionality, transformational defectiveness, ungrammaticality and frequency asymmetry. The term idiom, both in this country and abroad, is mostly applied to phraseological units with completely transferred meanings, that is, to the ones in which the meaning of the whole unit does not correspond to the current meanings of the components. Language communicational function is a leading one. It conveys information from one communicant to other. Despite the character of transferring information the building material of the communicative process is words, word blocks, among which are phraseological units, the units which convey this information. Informative value of these units is not equal thats why they color the communicative process in which they participate differently. Komisarov claims that meanings are sense blocks on the basis of which content of expr