New Russian phraseology. Phraseology of the modern Russian language

1. Phraseology.

1.1. What are phraseological units. Their main features

1.2. The main directions in the development of vocabulary and phraseology today.

2. New Russian phraseology

3. Conclusions.

4. List of used literature.

1. Phraseology

1. 1. What are phraseological units. Their main features

In Russian, words, connecting with each other, form phrases. Some of them are free combinations, and some are non-free. The meaning of the latter remains the same in different contexts, as well as their form (relatively unchanged). In addition, their meaning is non-literal and often metaphorical. Moreover, the general meaning of a phraseological unit is not just the sum of the meanings of its parts. For example: . This phraseological unit has 2 variants of use - clean or fresh water. But in general, its form remains almost unchanged in different contexts, as well as its meaning. Phraseologism bring someone to clean/fresh water according to the "Educational Phraseological Dictionary" has the following meaning: "to expose, convict someone (to reveal cases, usually dark, unseemly)". The literal meaning of this phraseological unit could be represented as a picture where one person leads (brings) another person to clean water (perhaps to some clean source).

In different languages, the units that make up certain phraseological combinations of words are different, although the general meaning of many combinations is approximately the same. Therefore, we can find correspondences between phraseological units from different languages. For example, English to kill two birds with one stone(lit.: "to kill two birds with one blow") corresponds to Russian kill two birds with one stone. Or English to be busy as a be(lit.: "Be busy like a bee") has a Russian equivalent - spin like a squirrel in a wheel.

So, "phraseologism (or phraseological phrase) is called semantically indivisible phrases, which are characterized by the constancy of the integral meaning, component composition, grammatical categories and a certain evaluativeness" . You can also add to this definition: phrases that exist in a particular language and the general meaning of which is not a simple sum of their parts. “They are the object of study of a special section of linguistics - phraseology (gr. Phraseos - expression + logos - teaching). Often, phraseology is called the entire phraseological composition of the language, that is, the totality of all lexically indivisible phrases.

What phraseological units can be called new? New, in my opinion, are those phraseological units that have either emerged recently (often in connection with some phenomena or events), or these are “old” phraseological units that have received a new life, i.e. have been somehow changed or reinterpreted.

1.2. The main directions in the development of vocabulary and phraseology today

“In the development of Russian vocabulary and phraseology, the following main directions can be distinguished: 1) the emergence of new words and phrases; 2) changing the meanings of already existing lexical and phraseological units; 3) falling out of the active use of words and phrases; 4) the return to life of old words.

2. New Russian phraseology

2.1. Reasons for the formation of new vocabulary and phraseological units

The lexical and phraseological system of the language is closely connected with the life of a person in society and the development of the latter. Of all levels of language, vocabulary and phraseology are particularly subject to change. And these changes directly reflect the state of a person, society, state. Therefore, for each era, one can single out its own unique lexical and phraseological composition. In addition, from this composition, you can learn a lot about a person and society of a certain period.

Changes in the lexical and phraseological system can be especially clearly traced if there have been some serious changes in the country or in the world. Such events include world wars, revolutions, crises, etc. All this will be reflected in the language and will be interpreted in a certain way in it.

Thus, we can say that the main reason for changes in the language, and specifically the formation of new phraseological units (and words in general) are mostly extralinguistic factors. That is, the language reflects all the changes that occur in the social, political, economic, scientific, industrial, technical, cultural and everyday life of the country. In accordance with this, in my opinion, one can single out their own special phraseology for each sphere of life (although, of course, there is also a neutral or inter-style phraseology). In this work, I would like to dwell on the consideration of two areas: socio-political (on the material of the blog of D. A. Medvedev) and social and domestic (on the material of the social network "Vkontakte"). These two spheres are absolutely different, and each of them in its own way characterizes the state of modern society.

2.2. New Phraseology in the Socio-Political Sphere (Based on D. A. Medvedev's Blog)

Viewing blog posts by D. A. Medvedev for about the last month (texts of records of his various interviews and speeches) made it possible to identify the following phraseological combinations.

Demographic scissors

Make decisions / moment of decision / decisions made

Support the initiative

shoot a cigarette

Neither mind nor heart

Social programs

Civil society

Take on chest

Serious offense

Pass the bill

leverage

State structures

Personnel potential

Public opinion

Investment climate

Puff up with happiness

Middle class

social stability

Economic growth

World market

New technologies

Agenda

Get (one's) life/something got a life

traffic accident

Quality of life / standard of living

Innovative development

Turn / do not turn off the path

Power structures

Artificial intelligence

The above phraseological units can conditionally be divided into several groups according to the general meaning that they express.

The first group includes all phraseological units denoting actions (especially the actions of the authorities). The second group includes modern realities of social and political life. The third group includes phraseological units denoting a state (they will sometimes intersect with phraseological units from other groups). To the fourth group - the remaining phraseological units.

Actions	realities	State	Rest
Make decisions / moment of decision / decisions taken Support the initiative Shoot a cigarette Take on the chest Pass the bill Pout with happiness Get (one's) life / something got life Turn / stay on track	Demographic scissors Social programs Civil society Serious offense State structures Personnel potential Public opinion Investment climate Middle class Social stability Economic growth World market New technologies Traffic accident Innovative development Power structures Artificial intelligence	Neither mind nor heart Inflate with happiness Social stability	Leverage Agenda Quality/ standard of living

Thus, it can be noted that the majority of phraseological units denote current realities or problems that are currently relevant. Most of the listed phraseological units are not distinguished by a special kind of emotionality, figurativeness or evaluativeness, but rather resemble certain clichés that we often hear in the media. Therefore, phraseological units of the socio-political sphere are not very easy to identify.

It is interesting to note that such a phraseological combination as “to make decisions” (as a variant of “the moment of decision making” or “decisions made”) turned out to be very common in the speech of D. A. Medvedev. For example: “It seems to me that these talks about contradictions are, of course, far-fetched in many respects. Indeed, members of the Government may have different approaches to moment of decision. Now decisions made and all members of the Government must participate in their implementation. I have repeatedly said that if someone has doubts about the justice decisions taken, then you can make a choice - you can criticize this or that system, but already being outside the Government. But there are no such people in the Government now.”

Interestingly, the lexeme “accept” itself is also actively found in other combinations, for example: take on the chest, pass the bill.

Summing up, we can say that the considered phraseological units rather reflect the modern socio-political reality, "name" problems, tasks and realities, and also indicate their interpretation by people.

Viewing the material of the Vkontakte social network, as well as personal experience of communication, made it possible to identify the following phraseological units, the meanings of which I tried to formulate, or used for this such a site as http://lurkmore.to/ (“Lurkomorye is an encyclopedia of modern culture, folklore and subcultures, as well as everything else”).

delivers something(used, as a rule, with the word “in general”) - brings joy, pleasure, likes. Example: finally delivers directly)

Face palm / rukalitso(face - hand, palm - palm) - a phraseological unit expressing the emotion of disappointment or shame. Example: No, I'm just eating and making a face palm every minute.

Poker face - phraseologism expressing the absence of emotions on the face.

Topic / off topic. A topic is an expression of a positive attitude towards something. Off topic - about something inappropriate, equal to the expression "out of line." Example: satan ending topic =) Example: The site says that the voting should have been closed on the 22nd, but it was extended off topic.

epic fail(epic - epic, fail - failure failure) literally "epic / epic failure", that is, a big failure. Example: this is an epic fail!

Epic wines (epic - "epic, epic", win - "victory") - about something very good that happened to a person, about great luck, good luck.

Enough tolerating this- phraseological unit, the authorship of which belongs to V. V. Zhirinovsky. Example: Vyacheslav, stop enduring this, rather

Something burns / anneals - phraseological unit expressing an assessment, i.e., about something very funny, funny. Example: Comments are burning)

credit(used, as a rule, with the word "in general") - about something funny, good, liked. Example: generally credit)) I liked everything, even the fat guy at the 8th second)))

Takes out / decides something- about something good, liked. Example: The final video delivered ... and the last chapter takes out.

clear karma. Example: Reposting this message adds two years to life, clears karma and gives a discount of 50 rubles on the entrance ticket.

Happy end- (happy - happy, end - end) - a good, happy and kind ending to something. Example: Action, blood, violence, police, the triumph of justice and a happy ending (in some sense of the word) are guaranteed.

We don’t live in a fairy tale / you don’t live in a fairy tale / did you think that you were in a fairy tale?- About not very good or bad life, about something that does not meet expectations. Example: what to do .. we do not live in a fairy tale)

+1 - an expression of agreement with someone's ideas, opinions or instead of a read message (so as not to write again).

Chocolate medal- something pleasant, a reward for any action. Example: People, vote more actively! Let's help Tykar win a chocolate medal :)

Office plankton / office cattle / clerical rat -“knowledge workers with a reduced creative component, who spend their lives in offices and other departments, but are not classified as engineers: lower managers, accountants, secretaries, etc. They are transmission mechanisms, cogs and grease in the mechanisms of control, accounting, planning , Finance. The fast-growing proletariat of the post-industrial world".

Light up something to want to do something, to bring something to life. Example: I once read an article in MH about going to sea on a small sailing ship. A kind of men's rest-test in the style of "Check Yourself". It has been on fire since then.

When I become big and important / become big and important - become an adult, grow up and succeed in self-realization. Example: I would very much like to spend a few days at sea, among the waves and seagulls, constantly adjusting the sails and cables .. ehh .. as they say, "when I become big and important ..")))

Without a market phraseological unit expressing the meaning of "easily do something, without unnecessary questions and conversations."

Chokavo- phraseological unit meaning "how are you?" / "how are you?".

true story- about something that has already happened to you, or usually happens at all.

No more cake- a phraseological unit based on a play on the words "that" and "cake" has the meaning "not as good as before." Example: Aftors are no longer a cake.

ROFL / I'm under the table / Lol / Lol / laughing- (laughing out loud - laughing out loud, rolling on the floor laughing - rolling on the floor with laughter) - about something very funny. Example: lol

default city- Moscow. Example: What city, defaultcity?

Butthurt(butthurt - lit. “ass pain” or “popobol”) is a special psycho-emotional state widely represented on the Internet, as well as the person in it. The closest scientific (psychological) term for Butthurt is frustration or unfinished (unfinished) gestalt. Example: I demand butt-thumping two-girls screaming "cancer!" to this thread.

Shkolota detected/ shkolota/ shkolota- phraseological unit, meaning that someone who left a stupid message is a schoolboy. This phraseological unit has a sharply negative connotation.

Orthodoxy of the brain(pgm) - about a fanatically believing person.

Captain obvious / cap / c.o.- about someone who said an obvious, well-known and understandable thing.

80 level / 80 lvl- designation of achieving the highest degree of something (phraseologism came from the game “World of Warcraft”) Example: Vyacheslav, troll 80 lvl).

Grammar nazi / Grammatik-Nazi / grammar Nazi / grammar Nazi / national linguist / linguofascist / literate-oprichnik– “an aggressive literate person with innate literacy and a heightened sense of beauty. He gets annoyed when someone makes a grammatical or spelling mistake, and instantly rushes to the attack, waving dictionaries and links to Gramota.ru.

Bayan / boyan / bayan– “denoting a republished joke or information. In this case, in the classical sense, the information must be re-published in the same source (for example, in the same forum, or even in the same section of the forum). In other words, repost (copying information from one source to another) is not a boyan in the classical sense.

Let's divide the above phraseological combinations into groups. The first group includes phraseological units expressing an assessment of a phenomenon or attitude towards it (both positive and negative). The second group includes phraseological units-emotions (in faces) or the absence of them. To the third group - phraseological units denoting any modern realities (they may intersect with phraseological units from other groups). The fourth group includes phraseological units expressing any actions. To the fifth group - phraseological units expressing agreement with someone's opinion. To the sixth group - all the rest.

Score, attitude	Directly emotions or their absence	Modern realities	Actions	Agreeing with someone's opinion	Rest
Delivers something Topic / off topic Epic fail Lol / Lol / laughter Something burns Test Takes something out / decides Happy End I am under the table. +1. Chocolate medal Office plankton / office redneck / clerical rat When I become big and important / become big and important No bazaar Epic wines True story Not cake anymore ROFL Butthurt Shkolota detected / shkololo / shkolot Orthodoxy of the brain 80 level / 80 lvl Grammar nazi / Grammatik-Nazi	Face palm/ handball Poker face	Office plankton/ office redneck/ clerical rat Default City Shkolota detected/ shkolota/ shkolota	Stop enduring this Cleanse karma We don't live in a fairy tale / you don't live in a fairy tale / but you thought you were in a fairy tale? Light up something When I get big and important / become big and important	+1 No bazaar True story	Chokavo

Thus, we can see some features of phraseological units from social networks - they are all very emotional, evaluative and, as a rule, are part of the youth jargon of social networks. Most of them are aimed at expressing some kind of emotion, evaluation or interpretation of some phenomenon. Noteworthy is such a phraseological unit as "default city", which denotes the city of Moscow. Here there is an interpretation of certain historical events that took place in our country. In addition, one can note such phraseology as “enough to endure it”, the author of which was V.V. Zhirinovsky. This phraseological unit has become widespread on the Internet.

It can also be said that most of the phraseological units were borrowed from English (as a variant of American).

Next, we note such an interesting phenomenon on the Internet as “memes”. “Meme (English meme, read as “mime”), also known as a media virus, is an idea, image or any other object of the non-material world that is transmitted from person to person verbally, non-verbally, via the Internet or in any other way. A meme can change inside the carrier, have an impact on him and society as a whole. All phraseological units associated with "faces", in fact, are such Internet memes. It is characteristic that in the original version they are accompanied by a certain picture, which becomes stable, just like the expressions themselves.

Summing up, we can say that the phraseology and vocabulary of the modern Russian language, being the most mobile level of the language, reflects all the changes taking place in human society (namely, in its various spheres: social, political, economic, scientific, industrial, technical, cultural and everyday life of a particular country).

It can be concluded that for each of the listed areas the phraseological composition will be different and will have its own characteristics, although this does not exclude the presence of the so-called. "neutral" or "interstyle" phraseology, characteristic of all spheres of human life and speech styles.

In addition, phraseology and vocabulary is different for each era. The differences are especially noticeable if there have been drastic changes in the country. So, for example, in our country - the transition from the Soviet era to the post-Soviet.

New phraseology, as well as new vocabulary, is formed because new realities appear that must be reflected in the language. In turn, some already existing (or existing realities and events) can be interpreted in a new way. Then this causes a change in one or another phraseological unit. For example: authorities -> authorities -> power structures.

It is interesting to note that some phraseological units (especially, perhaps, this is typical for the socio-political sphere) are born in the speech of politicians and public figures. It is typical for the Internet environment that one or another set phrase is born from a video clip, a computer game, or is directly borrowed from Internet memes.

Thus, in my opinion, it is quite possible to trace the state of modern society and make a certain cut through the study of the modern phraseological and lexical (the so-called "key words of the era") composition of the language.

4. List of sources used

1. Modern Russian language: A textbook for students of higher educational institutions studying in philological areas and specialties / N. S. Valgina, D. E. Rozental, M. I. Fomina. - M.: Logos, 2001. - 528 p.

2. Kostomarov V. G. Language taste of the era: From observations on the speech practice of the mass media / V. G. Kostomarov. - St. Petersburg: Zlatoust, 1999. - 319 p.

3. Educational phraseological dictionary. - M.: AST. E. A. Bystrova, A. P. Okuneva, N. M. Shansky. 1997.

4. http://lurkmore.to/

5. http://vk.com/

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; at the middle of nowhere - to hell with 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. The lexical components of the phraseological combination are "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 with 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 distinguishes the following types of phraseological units according to their lexical and grammatical nature.
1. Subject phraseological units
A subject phraseological unit is a unit with a general meaning of a person or an object, having the grammatical categories of gender, number, case, performing the function of a subject, object, action or predicate in a sentence and standing 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 general meaning of action, having grammatical categories of person, number, tense, aspect, voice, sometimes gender, acting as a predicate in a sentence. 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 a 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).

Phraseology of the modern Russian language. Phraseology as a nominative and expressive means of language. Phraseologisms and non-free combination of words. Phraseologism and the word. Phraseological unit and its signs. . The question of the volume of phraseology, the types of its units and the principles of their allocation. Classifications of phraseological units in the concepts of VV Vinogradov, VN Telia. Controversial issues of phraseology. The question of the boundaries of the phraseological composition of the Russian language. Stability and variability of phraseological units Linguistic and cultural approach to the description of phraseological units. Picture of the world in the mirror of Russian vocabulary and phraseology. National cultural component in the semantics of words and phraseological units. Representation of the meaning of a word and phraseological unit in cognitive semantics. Conceptual analysis of vocabulary and phraseology. Phraseological dictionaries.

Phraseology as a special scientific discipline was founded by VV Vinogradov in the 50s of the XX century. Vinogradov paid attention to the description of phraseological units in the structural-semantic scientific paradigm paradigm. The main question is the difference between phraseological units from words and sentences, the disclosure of their own specifics.

The word idiom phrase

Reproducibility

Idiomatic free combination of words

Based on syntactic

Semantic integrity of the connection

Nominativity free word order

Whole-formation dissected concept

Take, word, book, Take your books back Back, your

Lexeme-seme L1 + L2 + L3=C1+C2+C3

Take your words back L1 + L2 + L3 + L4 = C1 PS: integrity, idiomatic meaning, undivided nomination, reproducibility.

PV: combination of words, separate form of components, syntactic connection, grammatical dependence of words as part of a phraseological unit, but in PS they are identical to the word, since they function as integral units of the nomination, stable not only in their meaning, but also in structure. Subsequently, the system-classification approach dominated, which in the 70s became the subject of criticism. It was during these years that there was a crisis in the study of phraseology and there was a need to revise this section of linguistics and the nature of its constituent units. Currently, their situationality is indicated as the most important property of phraseological units, i.e. their ability to point to situations and at the same time express an evaluative attitude towards them. All of them in this regard have a predicate character: puzzle, fool around, grated kalach, in the middle of nowhere, bonanza etc. The sign specificity of phraseological units is manifested in the fact that they have a textual nature, they are microtexts, in the nominative basis of which, when displaying the situation, all types of information are included in the form of a "convolution" ready for use as a text in a text . The textual nature gives them the status of special linguistic signs. In this regard, they are actively used in the speech of politicians, in artistic and poetic speech. Paradigmatic relations in phraseology.

They are manifested in the presence of internal close variants of one phraseological unit. Phraseologism options are its lexical and grammatical varieties, identical in their meaning and semantic unity. What varies?

1) elements of lexical composition; 2)structure; 3) word order; 4) stylistic coloring.

For example: throw stone - stone(morph. Designed); Not worth a penny broken / copper(lex.);

Through the stump deck (to bring down); To be in an (interesting) position is fullness. Through the stump deck ...- painting: arch./new

In phraseology, synonymous relations can be observed. This usually refers to phraseological units that have in their composition common members, components, replaced by words of related semantics: talk nonsense(nonsense); chase a loafer (dogs); sleep on the road (on the way); stuffed fool -round fool.

Grammatical properties of phraseological units.

syntactic properties. They always function as one member of the sentence, depending on the lexical and grammatical meaning. For example: just spit - easy; to prevaricate - to lie.

The morphological nature of phraseological units is determined by the properties of the main, pivotal word, on the one hand, and, on the other hand, taking into account the correlation with a grammatically equivalent other word. The following varieties of F. are distinguished:

Verbs: drink bitter, stretch your nose...

Substantive: pun, Augean stables...

adverbs: forever and ever,

Adjectives: skin and bones (thin), what the mother gave birth to (naked)

Interjection: Here's to you! Tell me please!

Modal: What's question?

Allied: despite the fact that, because...

Morphological properties of F.: they can be changeable (verbal, substantive, adjective) and invariable (adverbial, interjectional, modal, allied). For example: What (what) is there ... I saw (saw) views.

Typology of phraseological units.

It is built taking into account the degree of semantic proximity of the phraseological units, since the degree of proximity can be very different.

Phraseological unions. - these are turns, which are unmotivated equivalents of words, in which their constituent components do not have semantic separation, do not correlate with the individual meanings of their constituent words. For example: wash the bones - gossip, beat the thumbs, headlong, etc.

According to V.V. Vinogradov, they are "a chemical combination of some dissolved and, from the point of view of the modern language, amorphous lexical parts", only superficially similar to words. If their constituent elements are monosonic with some independent, separate words of the language, then their relationship is purely homonymous. "Thus, there is an extreme fusion of words that function as a single nomination. At the same time, each word has its own accentological registration.

So, FS is a semantically indivisible phraseological phrase, consisting of two or more phonetic words that do not have a separate meaning.

Phraseological units. These are semantically indivisible and holistic (like splices), but their holistic semantics is motivated by separate meanings.

niami of their constituent words. Indecomposability is the result of the merging of their individual parts into a single generalized figurative holistic meaning. For example: throw a fishing rod, the first pancake is lumpy, swims shallowly, put the teeth on the shelf...

Their motivation is felt, like that of derivative words, not directly, but indirectly. These are free words that allow insertion. These are all figurative expressions, since they have an internal figurative basis, therefore they may have homonyms. For example: lather your head, plug it into your belt ...

phraseological combinations. They rely on a single combination of words, one of which has a phraseologically related meaning, and the other may have a free meaning. But the main thing is that one word necessarily functions in a secondary, phraseologically related meaning. For example: bosom(link) - friend(free): kind, old, dear. Sworn enemy, bloody nose, sudden death, biting frost...

They cannot have correlative homonyms, and in their composition words with a related meaning can be replaced by synonymous words (suddenly - sudden, smash - break). Not all scientists attribute them to phraseology, for example, Larin (verbal-nominal turnover).

Phraseological expressions (precedent texts). They are not formed by the speaker in the process of communication, but are reproduced as ready-made units with a constant composition and meaning (universal property). For example: Love for all ages; To be afraid of wolves - do not go into the forest; Not all that glitters is gold-

They are similar to free phrases: they are semantically distinct, they consist of words with a free meaning, but unlike them, they are reproduced entirely from memory.

Varieties: Phraseological expressions of a communicative nature: Man - it sounds proud! Radish horseradish is not sweeter. The structure is equal to the proposal.

PV of a nominative nature: warmongers, higher educational institution... By structure, they are a phrase.

Their variety is compound names: neutral, unambiguous means of designating certain concepts: abbreviations (LEP.NTR.), verb-nominal turns, stable combinations: general notebook, record book etc.

Varieties of phraseological units can be depicted on a transitivity scale: Word: F. fusion - F. unity - F. combinations - F. turns - (expressions - turns) - Free phrases and sentences.

According to the degree of semantic unity: Indivisible: adhesions, unity;

Articulated: combinations, expressions.

Phraseological turns in terms of origin.

1.Originally Russian FD.

They differ in time of appearance: 1) common Slavic: lead by the nose, hit in the eyes (Yuolg. Biya in the eyes; Ukrainian Biti in the eyes);

East Slavic: under a hot hand.

proper Russians (since the 16th century) the soul has gone to the heels, you go quieter ...

By the nature and method of formation, they can be formed: A) From free combinations that have become phraseological for some reason. A man in a case, former people, with nothing.- As a result of metaphorization, the use of a word in a figurative sense. More often phraseological units and expressions of a communicative nature are formed. Red maiden, abyss in vain, heart-rending cry- As a result of the development of one of the words of the associated meaning. Phraseological combinations are usually formed.

Expression by a free combination of words of a single concept: pedagogicalpractice, austerity regime, socialist competition. Phraseological expressions of a nominative nature are formed.

B) Native Russian phraseological units, formed by analogy (according to the model). For example: birch porridge(spanking) - semolina, millet ... As an oxymoron: living corpse, white crow.

2. Borrowed PU. - a stable phrase that, as a ready-made reproducible unit, came into the Russian language from outside and is used as in the source language.

2 digits: 1 .. PU of Old Slavic origin - walking quotes from Holy Scripture: salt of the earth, into flesh and blood, a scapegoat, for a dream to come, without hesitation, an eye for an eye ...

3. Foreign language phrases without translation from Western European languages. AN pf1? O Tetroga, O toges(lat).

Phraseological tracing paper.

PhD, which appeared in the Russian language as a result of the literal, i.e. word for word, translation of a foreign language turnover. For example: struggle for existence(8 1gi ё 1 gog Ige) - word by word, component by component translation. These are the closing words of Darwin's The Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection, or the Preservation of Favored Species in the Struggle for Existence (1859).

Calques can be accurate and approximate. Exact tracing paper - reproduction of an alien phraseological unit without digressions: blue stocking - Eng.

Inaccurate - with deviations in the lexical and grammatical transmission of its individual components, for example, word order: standard of living - Eng. Strangers! oPgGe.

PhD of a colloquial and everyday nature. These are stable combinations of words, mainly used in oral speech. Usually they have a reduced expressive-stylistic coloring: caresses. Br., irony, joke ... Sharpen your skis, poke your nose...

Almost all of them have a figurative basis: kill a worm, put a pig in it, drive it into the head.

FO of a bookish nature. Ust., used in written speech. They have an increased expressive and stylistic coloring: book, torzh., poet. They are used in strictly standardized speech, journalism, artistic speech: Golden calf(money) female(women), sea ​​of ​​life(a life)

Among them, a special place is occupied by fr. Historicisms - obsolete due to the disappearance of the corresponding phenomenon of reality: state councilor, cloth snout.

Fr archaisms - out of active use due to their displacement by other stable combinations of words or separate words: New World(America) wandering stars s- planets, bet-argue

Felix Krivin "Sin" (sketch):

"They let the soul go to repentance. The soul goes, rejoices: - Oh, and I will repent now!So I repent! They met her as it should be: they surrounded her from all sides, asking her what her heart desires. So and so, says the soul.

-Okay, answer in order: what did you take into your soul, what did you hide in your soul?I didn't take anything, I didn't hide anything.“We’ll see, we’ll see,” they say. And climb into the soul.The soul couldn't take it.

I'm sorry, he says. - I'll say whatever you want!

Well, here they took the soul. And then, when they took them away, they found out that for the soulwhat is not. In vain she took the sin upon herself.

And since sin has been inflicted, it means that again we must repent "

2. Interstyle - used in all styles of speech. Stylistically neutral. They are simple names for the phenomena of objective reality without any evaluation: keep one's word, secret ballot, pun. There are a lot of them and their number is growing.

Stylistic use of phraseological units.

Functions: give speech strength and persuasiveness, brilliance and imagery.

The winged word, saying make the speech brighter and more convincing. Also used in

poetic speech, performing figurative and expressive and characterizing

function.

S. Kirsanov. Comic miniature with the word "airy":

Let me have a castle in the air

To wander in its airy halls.

Where will we be, leaving the stuffy city,

Sit together and eat an airy pie.

We are not in the castle, we do not wander, we do not feast ...

Am I fed up with air kisses

Am I glad that in the sky above the boulevard

Love flies like a balloon.

1. Filling PO with new content while maintaining its lexical and grammatical integrity: " A dead fish swims alone. Fins hang like padded wings. She swims for a week, and she has neither a bottom nor a tire"(V.Mayakovsky0.

2. Updating the lexical and grammatical structure of the PhD while maintaining the PS and

structures. Usually, replacing one component with a synonym, expanding the

2-And the Slavophiles? Populists? -

“Some are already gone, and those are far from reality,” answered Turobaev(M.G).

- We smoked a lot that day in the middle of total silence.(Floor).

3. The use of FO as a free combination of words is often associated with

changing its meaning and grammatical properties.

- We will be considered glory - after all, we are our own people(M.G.)

His fuselage(SS), Your pronoun(Czech.). hacky masters. 5. The use of FO both as FO and as free phrases:

I began to write on fruits and ears, on the skin of a mole, on the scales of salmon,I splashed the lines with an oar on the pond,I even wrote on the water with a pitchfork.(S.Kirsanov)

No need to swagger! Humble your pride, friend. You go gogol, and pee ... much worse(E.K.?).

Phraseological dictionaries.

Berkov V.P., Mokienko V.M., Shulezhkova S.G. A large dictionary of winged words of the Russian language. M.: Russian dictionaries; Astrel; AST, 2000.

Birikh A.K., Mokienko V.M., Stepanova L.I. Dictionary of Russian phraseology: Historical and etymological reference book. St. Petersburg: Folio-Press, 1998. 704 p.

Dobrovolsky D.O., Karaulov Yu.N. Associative Phraseological Dictionary of the Russian Language / In-t Rus. Yaz. RAN. M.: Pomovsky and partners. 1994. 116.

Zhukov A.V. Lexical-phraseological dictionary of the Russian language. Moscow: Ast-rel; AST, 2003. 607 p.

Zhukov V.P. Dictionary of Russian proverbs and sayings. M.: Rus. Yaz. 1994. 431 p.

Zhukov V.P., Sidorenko M.I., Shklyarov V.T. Dictionary of phraseological synonyms of the Russian language: About 730 synonymic series / Ed. V.P. Zhukov. M.: Rus. Yaz., 1987. 448 p.

Kozlova T.V. Ideographic dictionary of Russian phraseological units with the names of animals. Moscow: Business and Service, 2001. 208 p.

Melerovich A.M., Mokienko V.P. Phraseologisms in Russian speech. Vocabulary. M.: Russian dictionaries, 1997. 864 p.

Mikhelson M.I. Russian thought and speech: Own and alien: Experience of Russian phraseology. Collection of figurative words and allegories: In 2 vols. M .: Terra. T. 1. 779 p.; T. 2. 580 p.

Phraseological dictionary of the Russian literary language of the end of the 18th-20th centuries: In 2 volumes / Ed. A.I. Fedorova. Novosibirsk: Science. 1991.

Shansky N.M., Zimin V.I., Filipov A.V. Experience of the etymological dictionary of Russian phraseology. M.: Rus. Yaz., 1987. 240 p.

Yarantsev R.I. Russian Phraseology: Dictionary Reference. M.: Rus. Yaz., 1997. 845 p.

1. Russian phraseology and expressiveness of speech

1.1 The concept of phraseology

1.2 The concept of phraseological meaning

1.3 Expressiveness of speech

2. Formation and use of forms of degrees of comparison of adjectives

2.1 The concept of degrees of comparison of qualitative adjectives

2.2 Ways of forming forms of comparative degree

2.3 Ways of forming superlatives

Bibliography

1. Russian phraseology and expressiveness of speech

1.1 The concept of phraseology

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 (G.). - At night, the police broke into Taras's house. They turned all the rooms and closets upside down (Hump). In the first sentence, this phrase is free, each word in it retains an independent meaning and performs a certain 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 of a 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 (M.-S.). 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.

1.2 The concept of phraseological meaning

Phraseological turnover, as mentioned earlier, first of all, distinguishes from a free phrase the generalization of the meaning of the entire turnover as a whole. This is what makes it possible to single out a special kind of turnover meaning - phraseological meaning, which does not coincide with the lexical meaning of words - the components that make it up. In addition, the phraseological meaning, as a rule, is not direct, but figurative, arising on the basis of the primary, nominative meanings of words in various free combinations. Consequently, the phraseological meaning has not a direct, but an indirect connection with the subject. Further, in comparison with the direct meaning of words in the semantics of phraseological units, there is a noticeable increase in the evaluativeness of the expressed names, signs, actions, etc. (cf .: go broke - fly out into the pipe; starve - put your teeth on a shelf, etc.). So, the phraseological meaning does not consist of the sum of the lexical meanings of the words that make them up, but represents a new semantic generalized type of the meaning of the entire turnover as a whole. Phraseologisms, like words, can be single-valued (most of them) and multi-valued. For example, the speed of the Achilles' heel, take in tow, Babylonian pandemonium, do not give a go, right off the bat, and many others are unambiguous. etc. Two or more meanings have turns to bet, beat with a forehead, take (take) one's own, give (give) a word, hang in the air, golden hands, and many others. etc. Different meanings of the phraseological unit swallow the tongue make it possible to use it in various synonymic rows. So, in the meaning of “there is something tasty”, its synonym will be the turnover of fingers to lick. And in the case when they talk about a person who does not want or cannot tell about something, they use several synonymous phrases: to swallow the tongue - how to get water in your mouth - it is dumb like a fish, etc. The quantitatively synonymous series of phraseological units are also not the same, as well as synonymous rows of individual words. Some of them consist of two turns, others - of three or more. Wed: put aside in a long box - put under a cloth; to understand from a half-word - to grasp on the fly; keep your eyes open - look both ways - prick up your ears; empty space - zero without a wand - the last spoke in the chariot; to get into a mess - to get a finger in the sky - to sit in a galosh (in a puddle); with all his might - with all his might - with all his might; in the twinkling of an eye - in two counts - in an instant - in one swing - one leg here, the other there; tear off the mask - reveal the cards - catch red-handed - pinned to the wall; one field of berries - two boots of a pair - made from the same dough - both on the same block - Siamese twins - smeared with one world, etc. In the phraseological composition there are also phraseological units-antonyms, the functions of which are similar to synonymous phrases. In terms of meaning and structure, antonymous phraseological units most often arise as a result of replacing one of the components with a semantically correlative antonym. For example: to someone else's account - to your own account, it doesn't go crazy - it doesn't go to your mind, etc. However, there are also phraseological units-antonyms of different structure. For example: roll on an inclined plane - go uphill. In general, the antonymy of phraseological units is not as widespread as their synonymy.

1.3 Expressiveness of speech

The lexical and phraseological system is directly related to human activity in society and the development of the latter. Vocabulary and phraseology (especially the first) of all levels of the language are considered the most penetrating. In the development of Russian vocabulary and phraseology, the following main directions can be distinguished: 1) the emergence of new words and phrases; 2) a change in the meanings of existing lexical and phraseological units; 3) falling out of the active use of words and phrases; 4) the return to life of old words.

Thus, the lexical and phraseological composition of the Russian language is in a state of continuous movement. It reflects all the changes taking place in the social, political, economic, scientific, industrial, technical, cultural and everyday life of the country.

2. Formation and use of forms of degrees of comparison of names

adjectives

2.1 The concept of degrees of comparison of qualitative adjectives

In modern Russian, qualitative adjectives have two degrees of comparison: comparative and superlative. As for the so-called positive degree, it is the initial form for the formation of the main degrees of comparison. Adjectives in the "positive degree" do not contain comparison in their meaning, they characterize the quality without regard. Wed: smart person - This person is smarter than many; beautiful flower - He brought a flower much more beautiful than mine, etc. The adjective in a comparative degree denotes a quality characteristic of a given object to a greater or lesser extent in comparison with the same qualities in other objects, as well as in comparison with the qualities that this object had previously or will have in the future. For example: This book is more interesting than the previous one; He became noticeably more distracted. The superlative adjective indicates the highest degree of quality in an item compared to the same qualities in other similar items. For example: Of all those around him, this was the smartest person; They picked the most beautiful flowers.

Thus, the superlative form can be used as a means of comparing some quality only in homogeneous, similar to one another objects (for example: Of all those present, this was the most noticeable person), while the comparative degree is a means of comparing some quality or one and the same person, object at different times of its existence (for example: He is now calmer than before) or the most diverse objects (for example: The house turned out to be taller than the tower).

2.2 Ways of forming forms of comparative degree

In modern Russian, there are two main ways of forming a comparative degree: 1) using the suffixes -ee (-s) and -e, for example: Somehow everything is friendlier and stricter, somehow everything is dearer to you. And dearer than an hour ago (Tward.). This method is called synthetic or simple; 2) using the words more, less. This method is called analytical, or complex (descriptive), for example: stronger, less high. Synthetic forms of the comparative degree are equally common in all styles of speech of the modern Russian language, while analytical forms are used most often in official, business, and scientific styles. Forms of the comparative degree are sometimes complicated by the prefix po- to mitigate the degree of predominance of quality over the form of the comparative degree formed in the usual way (stronger, older, taller). Such formations are, as a rule, part of the colloquial style of speech, as they have greater expression. Individual adjectives form forms of the comparative degree in two ways: both with the help of the suffix -ee (further, more), and with the help of the suffix -e (further, more); moreover, the first forms are used mainly in the book style of speech.

In some cases, conversely, the -ee form is colloquial compared to the -e form; for example, smarter and louder are vernacular options, and smarter, louder are general literary ones. From adjectives with a basis on g, k, x, d, t, st, to forms of a comparative degree, they are formed using the suffix -e, which is unproductive for the modern Russian language. There is an alternation of consonants. For example: expensive - more expensive, distant - farther, deaf - deaf, young - younger, rich - richer, simple - easier, cheap - cheaper.

Adjectives used in the synthetic form of comparison do not change in gender, number and case, they do not agree with nouns. In a sentence, the synthetic form of the comparative degree most often serves as a predicate (for example: In the conditions of the Far North, a deer is more enduring than a dog) and less often as a definition (for example: He wanted to consult about everything with an older, more experienced person). The analytical form (compound), which includes a full adjective, usually acts as a definition in a sentence (for example: A more convenient shelter would save us all), although it can also be a predicate (for example: This shelter is more convenient). the composition of the complex form of the degree of comparison includes a short adjective, then it is a predicate and, as a rule, a comparative conjunction is used with it (for example: The eldest son was more friendly than the younger). Individual adjectives, such as cumbersome, friendly, businesslike, cruel, desolate, caustic, and others, do not have a synthetic form of the degree of comparison. The form of the degree of comparison can be formed from them only analytically. For example: more friendly, more businesslike, more violent. Separate adjectives form suppletive forms, i.e. from other roots: good - better, bad - worse.

2.3 Ways of forming superlatives

Tutoring

Need help learning a topic?

Our experts will advise or provide tutoring services on topics of interest to you.
Submit an application indicating the topic right now to find out about the possibility of obtaining a consultation.

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
Annex 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 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. Brief information is given 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. The proposed term paper on 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."

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 conventions of concepts and the associated distinction, it is usually said that phraseology can be represented:

a) as a phraseology of the language in the "broad" sense of the word, including in its composition both phrases that are completely rethought, and phrases that have non-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 a phraseological unit and a phrase correlated with it in structure 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 distinctive features of a phraseological unit.

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 written speech. 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 socio-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 works of all fields of knowledge. Their main purpose is to communicate information and results obtained by a particular branch of science. The scientific style of phraseological units is characterized by the use of a large number of terms related to the relevant field of science, and abstract vocabulary. Even specific words are 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. A specific feature of 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 out of 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 key words in the process of constructing the lexico-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. The main question facing practical phraseology is what is considered options, and what is synonymous with one or another 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 even in the 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-semantic closeness, almost the identity of phrases of 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 components by the author. 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). The 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 the grammatical forms are placed in the infinitive in some dictionary entries (to chop one’s 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 everything 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 opposite 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 Russian scientists open up a wide field for research. 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 of a 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

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, 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 a phraseological unit and a phrase correlated with it in structure 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 connected with colloquial speech, there are 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, for example, kindergarten, enter into speech use most freely and naturally. 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.

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 11 phrases can be called phraseological units.

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 (there are only fifteen) in their 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". With regard 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 a person's actions on the basis of his relationships and relationships with the environment, the team: walk, stand on his hind legs (1 among 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. Phraseologisms characterizing 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, spacious. 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 the 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 relationships
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