Київський національний університет імені Тараса Шевченка

Інститут філології
Кафедра …

Comparative idioms with the zoo component in Modern English

(назва)

Курсова робота
Студента _____________курсу,
спеціальності
_______________________________,
________________________________
(прізвище, ім’я, по батькові)

науковий керівник:
________________________________
(науковий ступінь, посада)
_____________________________
(прізвище та ініціали)

КИЇВ – 2023
 2

CONTENTS

INTRODUCTION…………………………………………………………………….3
1. IDIOMS IN LINGUISTIC STUDIES……………………………………………...5
1.1. Defenition, general characteristics and functions of idioms……………………...5
1.2. Classification of idioms…………………………………………………………13
1.3. Specific features of comparative idioms in English…………………………….32
1.4. The place of idioms in the system of phraseological units of the language…….36
1.5. Types and classification of comparative idioms………………………………...39
2. PROBLEMS OF TRANSLATING ENGLISH AND GERMAN IDIOMS………48
2.1. Adequacy and equivalence of translation……………………………………….48
2.2. Means of translation of English idioms…………………………………………53
2.3. Means of translation of German idioms………………………………………...57
3. THE USAGE OF COMPARATIVE IDIOMS WITH THE ZOO COMPONENT
IN MODERN ENGLISH…………………………………………………………….72
3.1. Semantic characteristics of comparative idioms with the zoo component……...72
3.2. Comparative idioms with the zoo component in media and literature………….80
CONCLUSIONS…………………………………………………………………….89
REFERENCES………………………………………………………………………93
 3

INTRODUCTION

Phraseological units with a zoonym component are the focus of the given
scientific research. The relevance of this study arouses little doubt, since zoo-
phraseologisms are widely used among native speakers, but a person for whom
German and English are foreign languages uses these units in his speech extremely
rarely, as they are difficult to perceive, and their misuse can lead to failures in
intercultural communication. In addition, this layer of language is considered not
fully explored.
Despite the fact that idiomatic units are widely used in oral and written speech
(fiction, journalism, etc.), their structural and semantic features are not sufficiently
studied.
Many unresolved issues remain in the theory and practice of translating these
units from English to Ukrainian. In domestic translation studies, there is still no
comprehensive study and final solution to many problems related to the peculiarities
of the translation of English and German idioms into Ukrainian, which led to the
choice of this topic and explains the relevance of the study.
The object of research is idiomatic units in the English and German languages.
The subject of the study is the peculiarities of translating idioms from English
and German into Ukrainian.
The purpose of the work is to analyze the structural-semantic features and
stylistic function of idiomatic units, paying attention to the national uniqueness of
idioms in English and German and the means of their transmission in the Ukrainian
language.
The task of the research includes compiling a classification of ways of
translating idiomatic units, as well as researching idiomatic units, their
morphological, syntactic, semantic, and stylistic properties.
The following methods were used during this study: descriptive, distributive,
methods of comparative and cross-cultural analysis. Also as methods of research,
 4

discursive analysis, functional analysis, various methods of descriptive and

comparative method have served.
The theoretical value of the research is determined by the need for further
study of all types of phraseological units in the world of the development of
phraseological theory.
The practical significance of our research work is that the results of the study
can be applied in the study of a foreign language for understanding the culture of
native speakers.
The results obtained in the course of this study can be used in the theoretical
course of lexicology, stylistics, theory and practice translation, in practical classes in
English idioms at different levels of education. This is the practical meaning of the
work.
The material of our research is the data of phraseological dictionaries of the
German and English languages, stylistic and explanatory dictionaries, collections of
commonly used proverbs in English.
 5

1. IDIOMS IN LINGUISTIC STUDIES

1.1. Defenition, general characteristics and functions of idioms

Idioms, conceived as fixed multi-word expressions that conceptually encode

non-compositional meaning, are linguistic units that raise a number of questions
relevant in the study of language and mind (e.g., whether they are stored in the
lexicon or in memory, whether they have internal or external syntax similar to other
expressions of the language, whether their conventional use is parallel to their non-
compositional meaning, whether they are processed in similar ways to regular
compositional expressions of the language, etc.).
Idioms show some similarities and differences with other sorts of formulaic
expressions, the main types of idioms that have been characterized in the linguistic
literature, and the dimensions on which idiomaticity lies. Syntactically, idioms
manifest a set of syntactic properties, as well as a number of constraints that account
for their internal and external structure.
Semantically, idioms present an interesting behavior with respect to a set of
semantic properties that account for their meaning (i.e., conventionality,
compositionality, and transparency, as well as aspectuality, referentiality, thematic
roles, etc.).
The study of idioms has been approached from lexicographic and
computational, as well as from psycholinguistic and neurolinguistic perspectives.
Studies on idioms usually suffer from two main flaws. Most studies deal
exclusively with idioms in English, and most of them deal only with verbal idioms.
However, it has to be pointed out that some attempts exist to study idioms both
from cross-linguistic and cross-dialectal perspectives.
 6

Unfortunately, from a cross-linguistic perspective one can find basically

lexicographic studies that provide lists of form-meaning pairs for various sorts of
lexicalized multi-word expressions.
Some of these studies contain in addition to the collection of idioms and their
conventionalized meaning information regarding the syntactic manipulations each
idiom allows, based on single (or few) speakers’ judgements.
A second common failure extends to the syntactic category of the idioms
studied, usually verbal, and sometimes adverbial and/or prepositional.4 We hereby
wish to remark that idiomatic expressions are multicategorial, depending on whether
the head of the idiom is either a lexical or a functional category.
In relation to this issue, the distinction of Nunberg et al. between ICEs and IPs
has become extremely relevant. An ICE such as spill the beans is characterized by
being syntactically flexible and by having a referential DP, which means that the
definite article can be replaced by other determiners and that the use of either a
definite or an indefinite article constrains the referential properties of the DP while
keeping its idiomaticity.
Syntactic flexibility and referential availability allow not only for the change of
the D, but also for modification, topicalization, and for the mapping of the
complement noun into a figurative meaning. By contrast, an IP such as kick the
bucket is characterized by not being syntactically flexible and by not having a
referential DP, which means that in this case the definite D is not associated with a
referential interpretation.
Lack of syntactic flexibility and lack of reference go hand in hand, in such a
way that only the idiom as a whole, but neither the full DP nor the complement noun,
can be mapped onto a figurative meaning.
This distinction could be analyzed as postulating for an ICE such as spill the
beans, which can be associated with both a literal, compositional interpretation, and
with an idiomatic reading ‘divulge the secrets’, an internal syntax with a DP
structure.
 7

By contrast, the internal syntax of an IP such as kick the bucket, which can be
associated with both a literal, compositional interpretation, and the idiomatic meaning
‘die’, would project a DP layer only in the literal interpretation, whereas in the
idiomatic reading the complement of the verb would be of the category N.
Hence, the definite D in IPs has been said not to introduce a phase and to be
semantically vacuous or expletive, so that the nominal expressions in object position
have been analyzed as forming a complex predicate with the verb.
The external syntax of idioms is relevant as far as it has been claimed that
idioms represent opacity domains (i.e., phases) and, therefore, that there is a size
limitation to idioms. In relation to this issue it has been claimed that all parts of a
phrasal idiom must be minimally dominated by the same phrasal node (vP, CP).
Thus, it has been asserted that verbal idioms are composed of material from the
vP domain and cannot be composed of material from the TP domain, the general idea
being that while material in the TP domain (i.e., Tense, Mood, Aspect, Voice) can
embed idioms, verbal idioms are never dependent on such material.
In recent decades, no branch of linguistic science has attracted such attention of
linguists as phraseology. If earlier it was written that it was still in a state of "hidden"
development, now it can be said that phraseology has rightfully taken the place of an
independent linguistic discipline.
The formation of phraseology as a branch of linguistics was facilitated by the
thorough research of syntactic the nature of word combinations, as well as
highlighting the stylistic and semantic features of stable word complexes [2, p. 21].
In linguistics, more than 20 definitions of a phraseological unit are known, but
none of them has found general recognition. Some linguists rightly believe that
defining a phraseological unit is as difficult as defining a word.
This difficulty lies primarily in the fact that it is difficult to establish common
features that could be attributed to each of them without exception.
We consider a phraseology as a semantically related combination of words,
which, unlike syntactic structures similar to it in the form of expressions (phrases or
 8

sentences), does not arise in the process of speech in accordance with the general
grammatical and semantic patterns of the combination of lexemes, but is reproduced
in the form of an indivisible and integral design.
Phraseologisms are established expressions, the meaning of which does not
correspond to the sum of the values of their components. As an independent linguistic
unit, a phraseology is characterized by the corresponding differential features.
Such signs for phraseological units are:
1) phraseological meaning;
2) component composition;
3) grammatical categories [1, p. 80].
The definition of the differential features of FD gives grounds for establishing
the scope of the subject of phraseology, and also allows to consider phraseological
units as separate independent units of language, different from words, word
combinations and sentences, and at the same time as having a lot in common with the
latter.
According to L. P. Smith, the expressiveness inherent in idioms plays not the
least role in speech: "idioms are especially needed in emotional, excited speech:
imagery and metaphoricality give them expressiveness, energy." The English
phraseologist also adds: “they [idioms] perform a necessary function in the language.
This function is ... to return concepts from pure abstraction to the sensations
that gave rise to them, to embody them again in visual images and, above all, in the
dynamic sensations of the human body" [3, p. 162].
By origin, English phraseological units can be divided into four groups: purely
English, interlanguage borrowings, intralanguage borrowings, as well as
phraseological units borrowed in a foreign language form.
With the help of phraseological units, signs are attributed to objects and people,
which, in turn, are associated with the linguistic picture of the world, cover the entire
descriptive situation, and express an evaluative attitude towards it. Phraseologisms
are one of the ways of displaying the linguistic picture of the world.
 9

The language picture of the world forms the type of relationship of a person to
the world, it determines the norms of a person's behavior in the world, determines his
attitude to the world.
Phraseology emerged as an independent linguistic discipline relatively
recently. "The subject and tasks, scope and methods of its study are not yet clearly
defined, have not received full coverage" [20, p. 38].
Less than others developed questions about the main features of phraseological
units in comparison with free word combinations, about the classification of
phraseological units and their correlation with parts of speech, etc.
Linguists have not come to a single opinion about what a phraseology is, and,
therefore, there is no unity of views on the composition of these units in the language.
Some researchers (L.P. Smith, V.P. Zhukov, V.N. Teliya, N.M. Shanskyi, etc.)
include all stable conjunctions in the composition of phraseology, others (N.N.
Amosova, A.M. Babkin , A.I. Smirnytskyi, etc.) - only certain groups.
Thus, some linguists (including Academician V. V. Vinogradov) do not
include proverbs, sayings, and catchphrases in the category of phraseological units,
believing that they differ from phraseological units in terms of their semantics and
syntactic structure. V.V. Vynogradov claimed: "Proverbs and sayings have the
structure of a sentence and are not semantic equivalents of words" [10, p. 243].
The task of phraseology as a linguistic discipline includes a comprehensive
study of the phraseological fund of a particular language.
Phraseology (Greek: phrasis - "expression", logos - "teaching") is the science
of phraseological units (phraseologisms), i.e., stable combinations of words with
complicated semantics, which are not formed according to generating structural-
semantic models of variable combinations [20, p. 37].
Important aspects of the study of this science are: the stability of phraseological
units, the systematicity of phraseology and the semantic structure of phraseological
units, their origin and main functions.
 10

A particularly difficult branch of phraseology is the translation of

phraseological units, which requires considerable experience in the field of research
in this discipline.
Phraseology develops the principles of identifying phraseological units,
methods of their study, classification and phraseography - description in dictionaries.
Phraseology uses various research methods. [2, p. 76]. On the basis of research
methods existing in linguistics, "properly phraseological methods of analysis and
description" are being developed [13, p. 35]:
Identification method - establishing the identity of words and syntactic
constructions that form phraseological units with their free analogues;
The application method, which is a type of identification method, is limited in
the choice of variables, which establishes distinct structural and semantic
organizations of phraseology from combinations formed according to regular patterns
of selection and combination, etc.
Phraseology offers different types of classifications of the phraseological
composition of the language depending on the properties of phraseological units and
methods of their research.
The English phraseological fund is a complex conglomerate of ancient and
borrowed phraseological units with a clear predominance of the former. Archaic
elements - representatives of previous eras - are preserved in some phraseological
units.
Phraseologisms are highly informative language units; they can not be
considered as "decorations" or "excesses". Similar treatment phraseology is found
in some works and is now obsoletePhraseologisms are one-word universals, as we
cannot do without them phraseological units.
In the English and American linguistic literature, there are not many works
specifically devoted to the theory of phraseology, but even the most significant works
do not ask such fundamental questions as scientifically based criteria for the selection
of phraseological units, the ratio of phraseological units and words, the systematicity
 11

of phraseology, phraseological variation, phrase formation, methods of studying

phraseology etc.
English and American scientists also do not ask the question of phraseology as
a linguistic discipline, which can explain the absence of a name for this discipline in
the English language.
The question of phraseology as a linguistic discipline was first raised by the
outstanding Soviet linguist Prof. E.D. Polivanov, who repeatedly returned to this
problem and claimed that vocabulary is studied individually lexical meanings of
words, morphology - formal meanings of words, syntax - formal meanings of word
combinations.
"And so there is a need for a special department, which would be
commensurate with syntax, but at the same time would not have in mind the general
types, but the individual values of the data of individual word combinations, just as
vocabulary deals with the individual (lexical) values of individual words to this
department of linguistics, as well as to the set of phenomena studied in it, I give the
name of phraseology and indicate that another term is proposed for this meaning -
idiomatics" [17, p. 99].
B.A. Larin was the first scientist after E.D. Polivanova, who once again
addressed the question of phraseology as a linguistic discipline.
"Phraseology as a linguistic discipline is still in the stage of" hidden
development "... we already need the selection of such a discipline, because everyone
understands the dilettantish helplessness, inconsistency and failure of incidental,
random analysis of this material in lexicography, stylistics, and syntax" [17, p. 100].
Over time, V.V. Vynogradov contributed to the appearance of many works on
the phraseology of various languages. This accumulation of systematized facts is one
of the prerequisites for the creation of phraseology as a linguistic discipline.
The theory of lexical meaning developed in semantics helps to reveal the
semantic specificity of phraseological units and to distinguish different types of
meaning in the field of phraseology. A word in phraseological units does not always
 12

lose its morphological features, morphology helps to establish what has been lost and
what has been preserved.
Phraseology includes turns of various structural types, including phraseological
units with the structure of word combinations and sentences. Syntax data are very
important for revealing the grammatical specificity of these turns, their grammatical
structure and functions.
A word in a phraseology is characterized by a certain phonetic appearance, but
in the process of development it can change. In both cases, the data phonetics cannot
be ignored. The stylistic potential of idioms, especially idioms and idiophrases, is
very significant. In their meaning, the specific weight of the connotative aspect is
high.
Phraseological stylistics, which studies the stylistic possibilities of
phraseological units, relies on the experience of lexical stylistics, in particular, in the
development of some stylistic techniques.
The data of the history of the language and etymology are important in the
etymological analysis of phraseological units. The object of phraseology is so
complex and specific that its study provides new data that supplement the disciplines
mentioned above.
Phraseology enriches lexicology with change information, which words in the
composition of phraseological units are exposed, and lexical stylistics - with data on
usual and occasional stylistic features of phraseological units, and also provides
additional information in many sections of general linguistics.
Analysis of phraseological material is very important for linguistic and regional
studies. Phraseological information is still poorly usedby other disciplines. It is
therefore more gratifying to note its wide use phraseological material in the book by
E.M. Vereshchagina and V.G. Kostomarov, which onesemphasize that "a whole
series of phraseology contains its own semantics the national-cultural component -
either synchronously, from the standpoint of modern linguistic consciousness, or
 13

diachronically, that is, only because of the connection with the national the culture of
the word combination-prototype" [6, p. 107].

1.2. Classification of idioms

In modern linguistics, two directions of research have clearly emerged. The

starting point of the first direction is the recognition that a phraseology is a unit of
language that consists of words, that is, by its very nature, a word combination.
At the same time, some scientists express the opinion that the object of
phraseology is all concrete word combinations that are actually possible in a given
language, regardless of the qualitative differences between them.
So, for example, V.M. Kopilenko says the following: "Phraseology covers all
combinations of lexemes in a given language, including the so-called "free" phrases
[12, p. 81].
On the other hand, only some categories and groups of word combinations are
recognized as objects of phraseology within the limits of this direction, which are
distinguished from all possible ones in speech by their special originality.
Depending on which features are taken into account when selecting such word
combinations, the composition of similar units in the language is determined. Only
these "special" word combinations can be called phraseological units.
Despite the conventionality of the concepts and the related demarcation, it is
usually said that the phraseology can be represented:
- as the phraseology of the language in the "broad" sense of the word,
which includes in its composition both phrases, completely reinterpreted, and phrases
in which there are not reinterpreted component words. An example of such a "broad"
understanding of the scope and composition of phraseology can be the point of view
of V.L. Arkhangelskyi, O.S. Akhmanova, N.M. Shansky;
- as the phraseology of the language in the "narrow" sense of the word,
which includes only word combinations, reinterpretation to the end. Among the
 14

works that reflect such an understanding of the scope and composition of the
phraseology of the Russian language are, for example, the articles of V.P. Zhukov.
In both cases, the nature of the phraseology, as well as the lexeme nature of the
components, is not questioned. Phraseologisms are recommended to be considered as
a contamination of the features of a word and a word combination, the homonymy of
a phraseology and a phrase structure related to it is emphasized [12, p. 26].
Representatives of the second direction proceed from the fact that a
phraseology is not a word combination (neither in form nor in content), it is a unit of
language that does not consist of words.
The object of phraseology is statements that are only genetically the essence of
word combinations. "They are decomposed only etymologically, that is, outside the
system of the modern language, in the historical plan" [16, p. 202].
These expressions are contrasted by word combinations, not homonymy, as
qualitatively differ from them. The main thing in the study of phraseology is not the
semantic and formal characteristics of the components that make it up, nor the
connections between the components, but the phraseology itself as a whole, as a unit
of language that has a certain form, content and features of use in the language.
The composition of phraseology is formed from categorically identical units.
The history and etymology of each phraseology is studied without direct dependence
on some "universal" schemes of reinterpretation of word combinations, degree of
semantic fusion of components and de-semanticization of words in word
combinations.
So, "a phraseology is a stable combination of words with complicated
semantics, which are not formed by generating structural-semantic models of variable
combinations" [14, p. 5], that is, it is a stable expression or combination of words that
is introduced into the language in a ready-made form and cannot be used in
independent value.
The stability of a phraseological unit means the measure, the degree of
semantic fusion, the indissolubility of the components. According to V.P. Zhukova,
 15

stability, at least in terms of semantics, is organically connected with idiomaticity,

that is, with the semantic incommensurability of phraseology.
Stability is a degree, a measure of the semantic indecomposability of
components within a particular phraseology. It is a form of manifestation of
idiomaticity in relation to a specific phraseology. In other words, stability is a
measure of idiomaticity [12, p. 70].
Many scientists worked on the problem of phraseological units. The founder of
the theory of phraseology is the Swiss linguist Charles Balli, who first defined
phraseology as an independent section of lexicology. A number of classifications of
phraseological units were proposed.
Depending on the extent to which the nominative values of the components of
the phraseology are erased, how strong the figurative meaning is in them, V.V.
Vinogradov divides them into three types: phraseological fusions, phraseological
unity and phraseological combinations. V.V. Kunin singles out idioms, idioms and
idioms. N.M. Amosova divides all phraseological units into phrasemes and idioms.
The absence of at least one of the named features excludes the named unit from
the phraseological composition of the language.
The word is the main, but not the only, means of nomination in the language
system. In speech, it tends to appear in combinations with other words, and the
principle of organizing them into word combinations is regulated by syntactic norms
and rules.
Such combinations are created according to existing models in the language.
For example, the model A + N, reflecting the fundamental possibility of combining
an adjective and a noun, can be filled with an infinite number of components that
meet the requirements of the model, and the result of such an operation is quite
predictable: the resulting combination will denote something that has some
characteristic.
In identical situations, identical phrases are often used: May I come in? Knock
at the door, etc. This combination of words is usually used in a fixed form and is
 16

reproduced in speech as a ready-made block. Such combinations are stable, but

belong to the general, and not to the phraseological fund of the vocabulary.
The fact is that there are no semantic changes in the components of such
combinations; they keep their meaning, sometimes changing only the function, as, for
example, in the stable expression Good morning, the nominative function - a
description of the time of day - is replaced by the contact function - a greeting.
If the stability of the expression is supplemented by a semantic change of a
component or components, we are dealing with a phraseological unit. Despite the fact
that phraseological units are a combination of words, they are considered by linguists
not from the point of view of syntax, but from the point of view of lexicology.
There are several reasons for this. [1, p. 57] in the stable expression Good
morning, the nominative function - a description of the time of day - is replaced by a
contact function - a greeting. If the stability of the expression is supplemented by a
semantic change of a component or components, we are dealing with a phraseological
unit.
Despite the fact that phraseological units are a combination of words, they are
considered by linguists not from the point of view of syntax, but from the point of
view of lexicology.
First of all, in a free phrase created according to a model, it is possible to
replace any of the components within the framework of this model. Yes, the adjective
red can be used in combination with a huge number of nouns (red frock, red banner,
red strip, red hair, etc.),while retaining its color value. Similarly, any noun denoting
an object is potentially able to have a feature, according to the same model, will be
combined with an infinite number of adjectives, this feature is transitive (red frock,
dirty frock, new frock, expensive frock, etc.).
In the same phraseological combination, the connection between the
components is rigid and the replacement of any of them is impossible without
destroying the meaning of the entire unit.
 17

For example, the combination black sheep (= the worst member), although it is
built according to the regular model A + N, cannot be reproduced with the same
value even with minimal semantic substitutions (black ram or gray sheep).
Formally corresponding to the language model, phraseological units are not
modeled, that is, they represent a single use of the language model for transmission in
a constant context of some semantic structure.
Another reason why phraseological units are classified as objects of
lexicological research is the presence of such a combination of common features with
a word. Like a word, phraseological units are not created in the speech process from
units of a lower level, but are reproduced as a ready-made block.
This sign indicates that the phraseological unit, like the word, has a single
lexical meaning; the ability to relate to any part of the language and act as the only
member of the sentence for the entire combination signals the presence of a
grammatical meaning in the phraseological unit.
Thus, in the example "Instead of taking urgent measures the government chose
sitting on the fence", the phraseological unit "sit on the fence" has the only lexical
meaning "waiting" and performs the general grammatical function of the noun part of
the compound predicate (not the predicate and the circumstances of the place, as it
would be in the case of a free combination of the type ... chose sitting in the pub).
There are cases when, like a word, phraseological units are subject to
reinterpretation with further development of ambiguity. An example of this the
expression "to place oneself on record" can serve as a phraseological unit, which has
two meanings: 1. to do smth noteworthy and 2. to say smth. in public.
The ability of phraseological units to be reinterpreted is also reflected in the
stylistic component of its meaning. For example, the stable combination "wear and
tear" can be used both to describe the physical wear and tear of something (breaking
down) and the emotional state (overstrain).
In the latter case, the expression is quite rigidly attached to the colloquial
stylistic layer, while the first meaning can be used even in a terminological function.
 18

The cohesion of a phraseological unit allows it to undergo word-forming

processes, such as affixation. Thus, from the phraseological unit brain-trust, the unit
brain-truster was formed by adding the suffix -er, and from single-rhyme - single-
rhymer.
However, unlike a word, a phraseological unit in a language can vary more,
allowing grammatical changes of components within a fixed form. This is especially
clear when there is a verb component in phraseological units: I ground my teeth; he
was grinding his teeth; let her grind her teeth then, etc.
Changes are also possible in adjective components, although they occur less
often and bring additional expressiveness to phraseological units: You are the coolest
cucumber I've ever met. Thus, phraseological units are functionally and semantically
similar things, although formally they are word combinations.
So, a phraseological unit is a non-modeled word combination connected by
semantic unity. In speech, such a unity is not created, but is reproduced in a ready
form (not modeled) and functions as a single member of a sentence. Small variations
in the structure of a phraseological unit do not affect these main features.
Despite their non-modelling, phraseological units are quite clearly divided
according to the types of structures that form them. First of all, these are
phraseological units that coincide in form with the corresponding free ones phrases
(take silk; break the ice, etc.).
The second group consists of similar structures (pick and choose; lick and
promise; rain or shine; light to darkness; for love or money; by hook or by crook;
etc.).
The third group consists of phraseological units with a predicative structure (as
the matter stands; before you could say Jack Robinson; as the crow flies). It is
adjoined by phraseological units in the form of an imperative, which are exclamatory
(Take it easy! Draw it mild! Bless my soul! Take your time; etc.), as well as units of a
comparative nature (as dead as a door-nail; as mad as a hatter; etc.).
 19

Single-peaked structures consisting of one full meaning and one or more

official words (behind the scenes; in the blood; for good) and verbs - postpositive
phraseological units stand somewhat alone.
Scientists have different points of view regarding the scope of phraseology.
This is explained by the exceptional complexity of the research object and the
existence in the language of a number of transitional cases between classic
phraseological units and free, or, as they are now more often called, variable
combinations of words. It is also of great importance from which point of view the
scientist approaches the classification of phraseological units.
According to the proposed A.V. According to Kunin's classification,
phraseological units form two main groups according to the nature of their
functioning in speech. Nominative units name objects, phenomena, signs and can
have a different structure (a bitter pill to swallow; a wolf in sheep's clothing; a cock-
and-bull story; to stir up a hornets' nest; much cry and little wool; to call a spade a
spade; etc.).
Nominative-communicative phraseological units perform the functions of
speech amplification and are often close to exclamations, despite the variety of
structural types (as hell; birds of a feather; this cat won't jump; the fat's in the fire;
etc.) [14, p. 27]
The classification of phraseological units from the point of view of the
semantic fusion of their components belongs to Academician V.V. Vinogradov As
you know, phraseological units arise from a free combination of words that are used
figuratively.
Gradually, portability is forgotten, erased, and the combination becomes stable.
Depending on how much the nominative values of the components of the
phraseology are erased, how strongly they have a figurative meaning, V.V.
Vinogradov divides them into three types: "phraseological fusions, phraseological
units and phraseological combinations" [9, p. 89]. Let's consider these types of
phraseological units in relation to the modern English language.
 20

Phraseological conjugations, or idioms, are absolutely indivisible,

indecomposable stable combinations, the general meaning of which does not depend
on the meaning of their constituent words: kick the bucket (disambiguation) - bend
down, die; stretch your legs; send smb. to Coventry - boycott someone, stop
communication with someone; at bay - driven, in a hopeless situation; be at smb. 's
beck and call - to be always ready for services; to be on the run; to rain cats and dogs
- pour as if from a bucket (about rain); be all thumbs - to be clumsy, clumsy;
Kilkenny cats are mortal enemies [29, p. 54].
Phraseological fusions arose on the basis of figurative meanings of their
components, but later these figurative meanings became incomprehensible from the
point of view of modern language. "The image of phraseological conjunctions is
revealed only historically" [19, p. 29].
For example, the words bay, which means a dead end, and beck - a wave of the
hand are archaisms and are not used anywhere except for the phraseology given
above. Or, for example, the expression to be all thumbs historically developed from
the expression one's fingers are all thumbs.
We can see something similar in the phraseology Kilkenny cats (which
probably goes back to the legend of the fierce struggle between the cities of Kilkenny
and Irishtown in the 17th century, which led to their ruin) and send smb. to Coventry
(in Clarendon's book "The History of the Great Rebellion and Civil Wars in England"
it is said that during the English Revolution there was a prison in the city of
Coventry.
Thus, in phraseological conjugations, the connection between direct and
figurative meanings has been lost, the figurative meaning has become the main one
for them. That is why phraseological conjunctions are difficult to translate into other
languages.
Phraseological conjugations have a number of characteristic features:
 21

- their composition may include so-called necrotisms - words that are not
used anywhere, except for this conjugation, and are therefore incomprehensible from
the point of view of modern language;
• Archaisms may be included in the composition of splices;
• they are syntactically indecomposable;
• in most cases, it is not possible for them to rearrange the components;
• they are characterized by impenetrability - they do not allow additional
words into their composition.
Losing their independent lexical meaning, "... words included in the structure
of phraseological fusion turn into components of a complex lexical unit, which is
close in meaning to a single word" [27, p. 12].
Therefore, many phraseological combinations are synonymous with words:
kick the bucket - to die; send smb. to Coventry - to ignore, etc. But we should not
forget that from the point of view of stylistics, a phraseological unit and a word are
far from each other.
Phraseological units are such stable combinations of words in which, in the
presence of a common figurative meaning, signs of semantic separation of
components are clearly preserved: to spill the beans - to give out a secret; to burn
bridges - to burn bridges; to have other fish to fry - to have more important things to
do; to throw dust into smb. 's eyes - talking teeth; to burn one's fingers - to get burned
on something; to throw mud at smb. - Water with mud; to be narrow in the shoulders
- not to understand jokes; to paint the devil blacker than he is - thicken paint; to put a
spoke in smb.'s wheel - insert sticks into wheels; to hold one's cards close to one's
chest - to keep something a secret, not to divulge anything, keep silent, keep one's
mouth shut; to gild refined gold - to gild pure gold, to try to improve, to decorate
something is already good enough; to paint the lily- to color the color of a lily, to try
to improve or decorate something that does not need to be improved [15, p. 78].
Phraseological units are somewhat similar to phraseological fusions in their
imagery and metaphoricity. But in contrast to phraseological conjunctions, where the
 22

figurative content is revealed only diachronically, in phraseological units

figurativeness and portability are understood from the point of view of modern
language. No wonder Academician V.V. Vynogradov considers imagery to be a
characteristic feature only of phraseological units.
The connection between the components of the phraseological unity is
motivated, the metaphorization is clearly felt. To understand the phraseological unity,
it is necessary to perceive its components in a figurative sense.
For example, the meaning of the expression make a mountain out of a molehill
- to make an elephant out of a fly, that is, to greatly exaggerate something (literally,
to make a mountain out of a mound of a mole's mink), is revealed only if the word
molehill is considered in the sense of "something insignificant, small", and the word
mountain - "something very big". There are no words in the composition of
phraseological units that are not understandable from the point of view of modern
language. Characteristic features of phraseological units:
- vivid imagery and hence the possibility of coincidence with parallel
existing phrases (to throw dust into smb.'s eyes, to be narrow in the shoulders, to burn
one's fingers, to burn bridges);
- preserving the semantics of individual components (to put a spoke in
smb.'s wheel);
- impossibility of replacing some components with others (to hold one's
cards close to one's chest);
- emotional and expressive coloring plays a decisive role (to throw dust
into smb.'s eyes, to paint the devil blacker than he is);
- the ability to enter into synonymous relations with individual words or
other idioms (to gild refined gold - to paint the lily).
Phraseological combinations are established turns, which include words with
both free and phraseologically related meaning: a bosom friend - a sincere friend, a
pitched battle - a fierce fight, (to have) a narrow escape - to be saved by a miracle, to
 23

frown one's eyebrows, Adam's apple, a Sisyfean labor, rack one's brains, to pay
attention to smb. - pay attention to someone, etc. [15, p. 97]
In contrast to phraseological conjunctions and phraseological units, which have
a complete non-decomposable meaning, "phraseological combinations are
characterized by semantic decomposition." In this respect, they are similar to free
phrases.
Characteristic features of phraseological combinations:
- in them, the variant of one of the components is permissible (a bosom
friend - a sincere friend, a bosom buddy - an inseparable friend);
- possible synonymous replacement of the root word (a pitched battle - a
fierce battle, a fierce battle);
- it is possible to include definitions (he frowned his thick eyebrows);
- admissible permutation of components (a Sisyfean labor - Sisyphean
labor, a labor of Sisyphus- labor of Sisyphus);
- necessarily free use of one of the components and related use of another
(a bosom friend - a sincere friend: an enemy or someone else cannot be inseparable).
Proposing reproducibility as the main feature of phraseological units allowed
Professor N.M. Shansky to further develop the classification of Academician V.V.
Vinohradova and single out the fourth type of phraseological units - the so-called
"phraseological expressions".
Phraseological expressions are only turns with the literal meaning of the
components. Phraseological expressions include those that are stable in their
composition and used phraseological turns, which consist entirely of words with a
free nominative meaning and are semantically divisible. Their only feature is
reproducibility: they are used as ready-made language units with a constant lexical
composition and certain semantics [12, p. 29]
The composition of phraseological expressions includes numerous English
proverbs and sayings, which are used in the literal sense and do not have a figurative
meaning: live and learn - age live, age learn; better untaught than ill taught - it is
 24

better to be untaught than ill taught; many men, many minds - as many heads, as
many minds; easier said than done - easier said than done; nothing is impossible to a
willing heart - whoever wants, will achieve [12, p. 27].
As already mentioned above, the most traditional in domestic linguistics is the
division of phraseological units into phraseological fusions (or idioms in the narrow
sense), phraseological units and phraseological combinations. Let's add some
characteristics of other elements of this typology - phraseological units and
combinations.
Phraseological units are characterized by the figurative motivation of the
meanings of the components. However, like fusions, they represent an indivisible
whole. In contrast to the first two types, the third type of V.V. Vinogradov's
classification - phraseological combinations - necessarily have free and
phraseologically connected meanings in their composition.
Later, M. Shansky supplemented this classification with a fourth type -
phraseological expressions - these are "sentences with a reinterpreted composition of
components" [7, p. 644].
N.N. Amosova [8, p. 65], using contextual analysis, singles out "two types of
phraseological units - phrasemes and idioms. Phraseme is a unit of constant context
in which the indicative minimum required to actualize a certain meaning of the word
is the only possible one, i.e. constant.
The second component is an indicative minimum for the first. Idioms, unlike
phrases, are units of constant context, in which the indicative minimum and the
semantics of the unit normally constitute the identity represented by the lexical
composition of the phrase. Idioms are characterized by the integrity of meaning."
Also, Amosova singled out partially predicative phraseology - these are
inflections in which there is a grammatically leading (main) member - the antecedent
- and a predicative unit that depends on it.
At the beginning of the 60s of the XX century. the structural-semantic
classification was replaced by the functional classification of phraseological units.
 25

Based on the function of phraseological units, they were divided into two large
groups:
1) nominative phraseological units (perform a purely nominative function);
2) nominative-expressive phraseological units (in addition to the
nominative, they also perform an expressive function, helping the speaker to express
certain emotions, his attitude to the situation, etc.).
The first group includes, firstly, stable word combinations that have the
semantic integrity of the nomination based on their own lexical meanings of the
components. It also includes word combinations created on the basis of the figurative
meaning of one of the components, and stable verb combinations.
The second group contains semantically modified phraseological units with the
structure of phrases and sentences.
The compiler of the "Great English-Russian Phraseological Dictionary" is the
well-known German scholar O.V. Kunin [9, 15] provides a classification of
phraseological units by origin, which, although it was developed on the basis of the
English language and is, at first glance, specific only to this language, is successfully
used for the classification of foreign phraseological systems, that is, it can also be
considered universal.
He singles out phraseological derivations, that is, the formation of
phraseological units from other phraseological units, among which he distinguishes
the following techniques:
a) isolation of a phraseological unit from the composition of the original
phraseology: a hot potato is part of the expression drop something like a hot potato;
b) the formation of verbal phraseological units from a proverb with a verb in
the imperative mood:
- strike while the iron is hot;
c) conversion: a stab in the back from the verb phrase to stab someone in the
back;
 26

d) formation by analogy: Aunt Thomasina by analogy with Uncle Tom; e) by

contrast hell on earth antonym heaven on earth;
e) deployment of the image of the original phraseology - to be nuts (to fall off
one's nut);
g) contamination of gild the lily from gild refined gold and paint the lily.
According to Kunin, the second way of forming a phraseology is formation of
a phraseological unit from a variable phrase by changing it:
-through thick and thin (through thicket and thin wood).
The third group includes tracing phraseology: "formation of a phraseological
unit from a foreign phraseology by tracing it:
-it goes without saying from the French cela va sans dire".
Finally, the fourth, last group according to Kunin, includes phraseological units
from literary sources (in this case, the etymological notes indicate "Shakespearean",
"Dickensian", etc.) [9, p. 15].
There is also a classification of idioms of the American version of the English
language by O. Schweitzer, according to which idioms-partial Americanisms and
idioms-full Americanisms are distinguished [10, p. 143-144].
In the first case, the common English meaning remained primary, and the
American one is secondary, which developed on the basis of the first (examples can
be the phraseological turns dark horse - "a dark horse, an unknown horse in the
competition" - "a little-known candidate in the elections" or roaring forties - " fortieth
latitude of the Atlantic Ocean" - "the central area of New York").
Full Americanism is characteristic only of the American version of the English
language (to come right with a bang - pass brilliantly, have great success, big time -
big, significant, to be on the (water) wagon - advocate a sober lifestyle, do not drink
alcoholic beverages, lone wolf - a person who acts independently, without seeking
outside help).
According to Galina Grin, American phraseological units "are a microsystem,
the elements of which are characterized by polysemy, complex antonymic and
 27

synonymous relationships, belonging to certain semantic groups" [11, p. 13]. This

idea becomes the basis of her own typology.
According to her observations, the polysemy of American phraseology
developed in two ways:
- development of polysemy on the basis of the general English basis;
- complication of the semantic structure of phraseology in the process of its
functioning in the American version of the English language.
Most polysemous phraseological units have two meanings that arose as a result
of parallel primitive metaphorical shifts.
These are such expressions as, for example, to face the music - 1) endure
troubles, face criticism calmly; 2) to be responsible for what has been done
(analogously in Russian "rashlebyvat kashu").
But among them there are also separate units that have more than three
meanings, for example: to come up to the chalk - 1) stand up for the start (sport.);
2) to be up to the mark, fulfill one's obligations; 3) strictly follow the rules and
requirements; 4) to act energetically, to be in shape.
Observations show that not all meanings are equally common, not all have the
same valence, but they all have one or another stylistic function.
Many phraseological units form synonymous series. For example, the meaning
of "to act directly, freely, openly" corresponds to the following phraseological units
in the American version of the English language:
- to come on a straight shoot - to come from the shoulder - to cut the string.
Most often, synonyms belong to different fields of use. Yes, many synonymous
phraseological units have the same meaning: "to be drunk"
However, such expressions as "to bend (to crook, tip) one's elbow (little
finger)"; “to feel no pain; to have snakes in one's boots”; "to have one's pots on"; "to
dip the bill (beak)"; "to whoop things up"; "to have a bun on"; "to hit the big spots";
"to carry a (heavy) load"; "to get a can on"; "to hit the bottle (sauce, booze, red eye)"
belong to the colloquial style.
 28

The phraseology "to be on a bender" is a vulgarism. And such a phraseological

unit as "to get (have, have taken) one's load", the author of the classification refers to
dialectics or American slang [11, p. 20].
The researcher also gives numerous examples of complex synonymous series,
where each phraseology has several meanings, each of which forms its own
synonymous connection with similar meanings of other phraseology.
The next type of connection formed by phraseological units is antonymy.
Research carried out by Alyokhina A.I. and Grin H.S. [11, 30], show that the
antonymy of the phraseology of the American version of the English language is less
developed than the synonymy, but it exists and has certain regularities.
Most of the phraseological units that are in a relationship of antonymy with
each other are unambiguous. Yes, antonyms are, for example:
- to spill the beans (to spill the beans, divulge the secret to everyone) - to
button up (one's) lip (keep a secret);
- to lay down (to bury) the hatchet (the tomahawk) - to take up the tomahawk
(start a war against someone);
- to keep one's shirt on (to be calm, keep balance) - to go up in the air (get
nervous, get annoyed).
There is also a small group of polysemous phraseological units that have an
antonym for one or more of their meanings. So, for example, the phraseology to sit
on one's hands has for its first meaning "to meet with stingy applause" two antonyms
"to get (give) a big (good) hand", "to bring down the house" (to cause ovation, loud
applause) , and for the second "do nothing, idle" the following antonym "to come up
to the chalk" is given, which is antonymous to the above only in its second meaning.
According to the classification of phraseological units of the American variant
of the English language by H.S. Grin [11, p. 36-41], the following semantic groups of
phraseological units are distinguished.
Semantic group "speech":
- to tell the world - "to tell the whole world; categorically assert";
 29

- to talk wet - "tell nonsense";

- to swap lies - "gossip" [11, p. 36].
Semantic group "friendship":
- to stay until the last dog is hung - "stay close to the end"
- to take a shine to smb. (smth.) - "to feel sympathy, to like"
- to die dog for smb. - "to be absolutely devoted to someone, ready to die for
someone" [11, p. 36].
Semantic group "movement":
- to show leg - "escape"
- to take the airline - "go the shortest way"
- to burn one's road - "go fast" [11, p. 37].
Semantic group "will expression":
- to beat smb. out of one's track - "to force someone to change their plan of
action"
-to have the say - "to manage, to command" [11, p. 37].
Semantic group "intention":
- to go back on one's track - "to give up one's intentions";
- to salt the cow to catch the calf - "to reach the goal in a roundabout way, by
deception" [11, p. 37-38].
The semantic group "feelings", which, in turn, is divided into subgroups:
a) "anxiety"
- to cause a headache - "to cause concern, to make one think, to require great
effort"
b) "desire"
- to hitch one's wagon to a star - "to be ambitious" c) "suffering, patience,
longing"
- to have no kick left (in) - "to be without strength, unable to endure anymore"
- to get oneself into a spot - "to get into trouble, to find oneself in a difficult
situation" [11, p. 38].
 30

Semantic group "joy, satisfaction, success":

- to run away with a show - "to have great success";
- to be hitting on all four (six) cylinders - "to be in great shape";
- to run one's face - "achieve success thanks to attractive appearance, pleasant
manners" [11, p. 38-39].
Semantic group "unfriendliness, hostility, cruel treatment":
- to give smb the ha, ha - "to make fun of someone";
- to get one's hammer out - "treat with hostility" [11, p. 39].
Semantic group "intellectual activity":
- to have a cylinder missing - "not full of reason; freak, crazy";
- to get on to the ropes - "to learn in detail about the circumstances of the case";
- to put smb. wise to smth. - "to teach someone mind-mind; to open someone's
eyes to something" [11, p. 39].
Semantic group "death":
- to go home in a box - "die or be killed";
- to cross (go over) the Great Divide - "leave life, die" [11, p. 40].
Semantic group "anger, irritation, revenge":
- to hit the ceiling - "get angry to the point of rage";
- to get someone's Indian up (sl.) - "to annoy someone";
- to have it in for (coll.) - "desire revenge" [11, p. 40].
Semantic group "lie, dishonor":
- to put up a job on smb. - "play a trick, fool someone";
- to hang the landlady (sl.) - "to leave the apartment at night without paying
anything";
-to feel smb. on soft corn (sl.) - "compliment someone" [11, p. 40-41].
British researchers J. Seidle and U. McMordie provide several classifications
of phraseological units in the preface to their lexicographical work "English idioms
and how to use them", in particular according to the origin of the idiomatic unit and
 31

according to the criterion of complete/incomplete fixedness. So, according to the

etymological index, idioms are:
- biblical and literary ("to kill the fatted calf", "to turn the other cheek", "the
apple of one's eye" - Biblical sources, "the green-eyed monster" - Shakespeare);
- household (to make a clean sweep of something, to hit the nail on the head);
- agricultural (to go to seed, to put one's hand to the plow, to lead someone up
the garden path);
-culinary (to eat humble pie, out of the frying-pan into the fire, to be in the
soup);
- military (to cross swords with someone, to fight a pitched battle, to fight a
losing/winning battle);
- nautical (when one's ship comes home, to be in the same boat as someone, to
be in deep waters, to sail under false colors);
- animalistic origin (to play cat and mouse with someone, to kill two birds with
one stone, to be top dog, a pretty kettle of fish);
- with a color component (to beat someone black and blue, to have green
fingers, to be in the pink);
- with components for marking body parts (to pull someone's leg, to lose heart,
to get something off one's chest, to twist someone round one's little finger) [2, 5].
We consider the last two points of classification definitely interesting, but
somewhat logically inconsistent with the classification base - the etymology of
idiomatic units.
After all, when we name the components of an idiom, we are talking about a
structural, not an etymological classification. So, in our opinion, it would be more
appropriate to call this typology structural-etymological.
J. Seidl and U. McMordy also note that there are idioms that cannot be changed
at all (fixed idioms); there are also those that are fixed in certain parts, and in others
the word combination is free; finally, there is a third group of idiomatic units that
allow only individual changes in their unfixed parts.
 32

To make a clean breast of it (to tell the truth about it) belongs to the second
group of idiomatic units, in which changes in the verb tense are possible.
The third group, in which limited changes are allowed in the unfixed part,
includes such idioms as to have/to take/to enjoy forty winks, to keep a
sharp/careful/watchful/professional eye on someone.
There are also other classifications of phraseological units. Thus, according to
their syntactic function, phraseological units are divided into word combinations
organized by models, simple and complex sentences.
Phraseological units are also distinguished by the correlation of the base word
of phraseological turns with a certain grammatical class of words (nouns, adjectives,
verbs, etc.), by the method of creating connotation, by the method semantic transfers
when forming the meaning of phraseological units (metonymic, metaphorical,
hyperbolic, comparative, etc.).
Today, phraseology is such a promising and developed branch of linguistics
that almost every researcher has the opportunity to propose his own typology or
improve the classification developed by other scientists before him, taking into
account the needs of his own research.

1.3. Specific features of comparative idioms in English

The term "idiom" comes from the ancient Greek word "idifma", which means
"particularity, peculiarity". There are two main views on idiomatic units - the so-
called "broad approach" and "narrow approach" to idioms.
According to the latter, idioms are considered to be only such "stable phrases,
the semantics of which are not derived from the meanings of its components, but
formally integrated by them; arises as a result of the loss of motivational relations"
[1, p. 173].
In domestic linguistics, for a long time there was a tradition of calling idioms
"phraseological fusions", according to the terminology of the famous Soviet linguist
 33

Acad. V.V. Vinogradov, who divided phraseological units into phraseological fusions
(or idioms in the narrow sense), phraseological units and phraseological
combinations.
According to V.V. Vinogradov, phraseological conjugations are characterized
by the unmotivated composition of turns (that is, from the sum of the constituents of
such phraseological units it is impossible to learn about the general meaning of the
unit) and the absolute semantic unity of the components. The following subtypes are
distinguished among phraseological conjunctions:
1) Phraseological combinations, which include so-called "necrotism words"
(lexical archaisms, historicisms, and other lexemes that have fallen out of use in
speech).
For example, the English idiom "to buy a pig in a poke" to denote a
disadvantage and the unsuccessful purchase of something that was not carefully
considered first of all (compare the Ukrainian idiom "to buy a cat in a bag".
The lexeme a poke means "sack" and is an archaism (modern synonym "sack"),
which in modern English is used only in the above-mentioned idiomatic unit. That is,
we see a case where a lexeme continues to live much longer within an idiomatic
phrase than in a free phrase or in isolation.
2) Phraseological fusions containing grammatical archaisms, which are a
syntactically indivisible whole.
J. Seidl and U. McMordy note, in particular: "The way in which the words are
put together is often odd, illogical or even grammatically incorrect" [2, 4].
Yes, the idiom I am good friends with him ("we are good friends with him") is,
from the point of view of grammatical structure, incorrect and illogical. The pronoun
I stands in the singular, but the form I am a good friend with him is impossible,
although significantly more logical.The form I am good friend of his is possible, but
it is not an idiomatic unit.
 34

3) Phraseological conjunctions that have become indecomposable both

lexically and semantically, for example: to be born with the silver spoon in one's
mouth; to go through thick and thin.
4) Phraseological fusions, which represent such a semantic unity that the
lexical meanings of the components are completely unimportant for understanding
the whole [3, p. 144].
Examples of such units in the English language can be:
- to bring the house down;
- to take it out on someone.
In many respects, the definition of Seidle-McMurdy, which emphasizes the
differences between the semantics of an idiom and the semantics of its components,
is similar to the domestic understanding of the phenomenon of an idiomatic unit: "We
can say that an idiom is a number of words which, taken together, mean something
different from the individual words of the idiom when they stand alone" [2, 4].
However, it should be noted that the "broad approach" to the problem of
idioms is more popular in British and American linguistics. To the composition of
idioms, Western linguists include not only phraseological units of all types, but also
paremias - sayings, proverbs, catchphrases, quotations, etc.
Thus, Richard Spears in the preface to the "Dictionary of American Idioms"
explains the selection of units for this edition as follows: "Every language has phrases
or sentences that cannot be translated literally.
Many cliches, proverbs, slang phrases, phrasal verbs, and common sayings
offer this kind of problem. A phrase or sentence of this type is usually said to be
idiomatic. This Dictionary is a collection of the idiomatic phases and sentences that
occur frequently in American English" [4, 7].
That is, we see a significant expansion of the concept of "idiom" compared to
V. Vinogradov's understanding: after all, idioms include not only word combinations,
but also sentences (sentences) of various nature: clichés, proverbs, slang phrases,
 35

speech stamps (common sayings), which are united by one common feature: their
idiomaticity.
Most of the other original dictionaries and idiom guides of the English
language are compiled in a similar way. The compiler of another popular dictionary
of idioms of the British version of the English language, William Collins, in
particular, notes:
"When studying idioms, you always face two main problems. The first is the
problem of origin.
As Piercel Smith notes, even experts are unable to clearly and confidently
explain the meaning of numerous idiomatic expressions. Second, there is the problem
of the connection between origin and current use. It often becomes necessary, when
studying an idiom, the existing meaning of which is clear and widely used correctly,
to admit that the connection between the origin and the meaning is not known" [5, p.
11].
In his preface to the dictionary by J. Seidl and U. McMordy "English idioms
and how to use them" (1983), Prof. Mednikova notes: "The word "idiom" is not
unambiguous. It is also called a special phraseological unit that has pronounced
stylistic features (actually idioms) and other types of phraseological units.
That is why Jennifer Seidle and W. McMordy, understanding the word idiom
in its entire system of meanings, included in the manual everything that, in their
opinion, can be considered specifically English and what those who learn English as
a foreign language need to know.
Soviet linguistics, which has achieved great success in its theoretical
development, considers the problems of classifying phraseological units differently.
Our speech when we speak is idiomatic in the sense that we use expressions and turns
characteristic of our language, which demonstrate its specificity in their syntactic and
semantic composition" [6, 5].
In our work, we will use the term "idiom" or "idiomatic unit", referring to the
phraseological unit of the language, which is characterized by stability,
 36

reproducibility and unmotivated meaning, that is, the meaning of which is not equal
to the sum of the meanings of the constituent words.

1.4. The place of idioms in the system of phraseological units of the language

As can be understood from the above, the sphere of phraseology is understood

differently in different theoretical concepts. However, most researchers agree that
idioms should be characterized by three most important parameters: ambiguity,
stability and idiomaticity.
The first of these parameters can be considered the only relatively clear and
operational concept, although here too there are problems related to the availability or
the absence of an orthographic tradition in one or another language, the distinction
between words and phrases, words and sentences in a given morphological type of
language, etc.
The category of sustainability is already less defined, but the concept of
idiomaticity raises the biggest questions. In the most general sense, idiomaticity
means "the property of language units to form a coherent meaning not from the sum
of the values of its components or independently of them" [1, p. 173] Phraseology is
only one of the manifestations of idiomaticity.
Let's consider the factors that can be considered as the reason for the stability
of idiomatic units. Obviously, it is impossible to accurately identify the real reasons
for the formation of stable turns only within the framework of linguistics, because
most often the reasons for stability are extralinguistic in nature.
Here, the cultural significance of the original text can be important (cf.
numerous idioms-Biblicalisms, idioms of literary origin from famous works of art, in
particular, from the works of V. Shakespeare in the English language); increasing the
prestige and/or spreading the sphere of functioning of certain professional languages
or jargons (the spread of slangisms through colloquial speech and mass media to
fiction). cultural and historical context (so, according to A. Schweitzer, as a result of
 37

contacts with representatives of other nations during the colonization of North

America, idioms of not only British, but also Indian, French, Dutch, German and
Spanish origin appeared in the American version of the English language [10, p. 36-
37]. However, many of the reasons for usualization remain unclear.
The role of linguistic factors of usualization is obviously small, but purely
linguistic features of language expressions that contribute to usualization undoubtedly
exist.
You can confidently indicate only one of them - the complexity of the form.
Most often - it is a rhyme, cf. Ukrainian "did not sit, did not fall", "frequently-often",
"got on medication - lost forever", "neither matchmaker nor brother"; English "high
and dry", "by hook or by crook", "at sixes and sevens".
The same type of idiomatic formations also includes the doubling of the base,
for example: "age to age", "fool by fool", "in bag and baggage". Alliteration
(characteristic of Germanic languages), assonance, etc. are also among the methods
of form complication.
In particular, V. Collins notes: "Sometimes a dominating factor in the
formation or the popularity of an idiom must have been a desire for euphony,
alliteration, rhyme, repetition" [5].
Note that in modern linguistics, the concept of "idiomaticity" is associated not
only with phraseology. Idiomaticity manifests itself also in morphology and syntax.
Thus, in the word-form, idiomaticity is represented by a simple or complex
word, the formal components of which do not participate in the formation of its
semantics. Such words are characterized by conditional motivation
(pseudomotivation).
The reasons for such idiomatic meaning are formal changes, the loss of the
meaning of motivator words or their reinterpretation, the destruction of the original
image underlying the creation of the word, incorrect tracing, the effectiveness of
choosing motivators that are random, which gives the word a special expressiveness
 38

and emphasizes speech. In syntax, idiomaticity is considered on the basis of

phraseologized indivisible sentences [1, p. 173-174].
It should be added that the status of idioms as a constituent part of the
phraseological system has never been questioned, unlike proverbs, sayings,
catchphrases, which many scientists deny belonging to phraseology, believing that
such units form the so-called paremiological fund, which is the subject of research of
a specific marginal scientific field - paremiology, which correlates with linguistics
and folkloristics, or so-called clichés or language stamps, such as "good day", "dear
company", etc.
Let's also pay attention to the huge linguistic and cultural potential of
phraseology, because it is in the idiomatic units of the language that the centuries-old
history of the people, the uniqueness of its culture and way of life are reflected.
Due to the fact that the national character of the people is clearly reflected in
idiomatic expressions, their active assimilation is necessary for everyone who studies
the language. It is also necessary to develop the ability to correctly use idioms in
speech, correctly sensing their stylistic register - whether they belong to colloquial
speech, or vulgarisms, clericalisms or book style.
“One of the main difficulties is that the learner does not know in which
situations it is correct to use an idiom. The expression marked formal is found in
written more than in spoken English and is used to show a distant relationship
between the speakers. Such expressions would be used for example when making a
formal speech to a large audience.
Expressions marked `informal' are used in everyday spoken English and in
personal letters. Slang expressions are used in very informal situations between good
friends. Learners should not make frequent use of slang expressions as they usually -
but unexpectedly - become out-of-date and sound strange.
It is advisable to concentrate on the expressions that are marked informal and
on the unmarked expressions that are neutral in style and can be used in any situation.
 39

The authors also note that new ideas can be expressed not only by separate
lexemes-neologisms, but also by a combination of two or three words, for example:
the words wage and to freeze are well-known, but the idea of a wage-freeze entered
the language only at the beginning of the eighties of the past century. To freeze
wages is another expression that came from British politics and economics and means
"to stop the growth of wages." A similar idea is conveyed by the established
expressions to freeze prices and a price-freezer [2].
So, idiomatic units, or phraseological fusions, make up the core of the
phraseological fund of any language. They not only contain historical and cultural
information, but also reflect the dynamics of language development.

1.5. Types and classification of comparative idioms

Artistic texts are characterized by a particularly wide use of figurative and

expressive language tools, which help to fulfill the main function of these texts -
figuratively, emotionally, evaluatively reproduce objective reality through artistic
images with the help of language.
Comparative idioms are among such figurative and expressive language tools
that are often used in artistic texts [1, p. 101].
O. Shchepka gives the following definition of CI: "comparative phraseological
units are stable, reproducible, partially or completely reinterpreted expressive units of
language that have formal signs of comparability in the form of comparative
conjunctions or other comparative constructions" [2, p. 212].
Human cognition of objects and phenomena occurs through the search for
common and distinctive features with already known objects and phenomena. In the
language, this process is reflected in comparative constructions, which are later
phraseologized and become national property.
Thus, the phraseological units of comparison most vividly and fully reflect the
peculiarities of the life and daily life of native speakers, the peculiarities of their
 40

thinking and stereotypical ideas about the surrounding world. That is why the
adequate translation of this type of phraseological units is a very important task for
the translator, who strives to transfer CI not only from the original language to the
translated language, but also from one linguistic culture to another, which determines
the relevance of our research.
Adequate translation of a language unit requires a comprehensive
understanding of all its aspects, namely structural, semantic and syntactic features,
which is the goal of our study.
In this paper, the subject of research is the structural, semantic and stylistic
features of comparative phraseological units.
When translating, it is important to consider CI not in isolation, but as part of a
certain context, and to reproduce accordingly its role as a stylistic device in an artistic
text. That is why it is important to analyze the stylistic functions of CI and study two
types of phraseological units of comparison - usual and occasional.
Among the Ukrainian linguists dealing with the problem of translation of KI,
R. P. Zorivchak, O. O. Molchko, N. S. Khizhnyak, T. O. Tsepenyuk, Y. I. Retsker
made a great contribution [1, p. 101].
Structural features of CI.As mentioned, comparative idioms are stable and
reproducible combinations of words, the expressive expressiveness of which is based
on a traditional comparison. CIs always contain at least 2 elements and a comparative
component, for example as. They make up a special structural and semantic group of
phraseological units.
Their semantic specificity is that the first element retains its direct meaning,
and the second is subject to a complete or partial reinterpretation, which turns it from
an element of comparison into an element of clarification or intensifier of the quality
contained in the first component.
It is worth highlighting some structural features of comparative idioms:
a) two-component. The first element of such a phraseological unit describes the
property, feature or state of the designated object and is usually expressed by an
 41

adjective. The second structural element is a comparative word or word combination

that is introduced by the conjunction as.
Comparative conjunctions as, like unite the components of phraseological unity
and turn them into one semantic whole.
b) a special connection between the elements. The second component of the
comparative phraseological unit characterizes the property, feature or state
represented by the first component. The comparison is made through a certain image,
the comparison with which shows to what extent this or that quality is represented.
Usually, such comparisons have a three-term structure. In the structure of the
act of comparison, the following are distinguished: 1) compared object (comparant);
2) the object with which it is compared (comparator); 3) the basis of comparison is a
property or state that is common to both components and by which they are
compared.
Comparative idiomatic units can be spread at the expense of syntactically
related words that complement and specify the meaning of the phraseology. Such an
addition has an attributive character and occurs with the help of adjectives or adverbs
Based on the presence or absence of "propagators", CIs are divided into widespread
and non-spread [3, p. 43].
The need to introduce the basis of comparison as a mandatory structural
component of CI is still a subject of debate among scientists. Some scientists (M.
Shanskyi, A. Molotkov, V. Zhukov, etc.) consider CIs to be single-component
structures, and consider the basis of comparison as a feature already fixed in the
collective imagination of speakers, which is realized in a specific context.
However, as L. Lebedeva points out, the basis of comparison is the "obligatory
environment" of comparative phraseological units, which is also called "mandatory
lexical environment" [2, p. 212].
The second group of scientists believes that CIs are two-component structures.
Thus, B. Kyuvlieva notes that the basis of comparison is a mandatory element of CI,
 42

not a verbal environment, and N. Amosova emphasizes that the integral meaning of
the conjunction is formed by combining the basis of comparison and the comparator.
Lexicographic practice proves that cutting off the left part of the CI (base of
comparison) leads to the ambiguity of the phraseology, and therefore the theoretical
concept of a one-component composition of the CI is quite controversial [2, p. 212–
213].
Thus, the following reasons can be identified for considering CIs as two-
component structures:
1) integral meaning of the phraseological unit of comparison is formed by
interaction of values of its structural elements (base and object of comparison);
2) Without a basis of comparison, it is syntactically independent and
semantically independent insufficient;
3) cutting off the left part of the phraseology leads to its ambiguity;
4) lexicographical practice proves the necessity of indicating the first part
of CI in dictionaries;
5) in speech, CIs are implemented in their full, two-component form.
Stylistic features of KI. All the expressiveness of phraseology, its aptness and
emotional expressiveness are best revealed in an artistic text. It is in this literary style
that all the potential possibilities of phraseology to reveal figurative thought by
means of associations are revealed.
We investigated the functioning of CI on the basis of material selected from
works based on the works of English writers and identified a number of stylistic
functions performed by CI in a literary text.
Thus, one of the main functions of phraseological units of comparison, which
serve in the text as intensifiers of the accuracy of the statement, is the emotional and
expressive function. For example, A man who eats like a pig ought to look like a pig
[4].
Let's try to convey the meaning of the statement without using phraseological
units: "A man who eats a lot looks fat." As we can see, the use of comparative
 43

phraseology gave it expressiveness and a bright emotional color, conveying the

author's attitude.
Comparing objects of reality with artistic images, the author evokes a number
of associations in the reader, which gives his work high expressiveness and realism.
Comparative idioms based on a traditional comparison perfectly perform an
associative function in the text: The Central Barracks was humming like a hive
[5]. ...She of the shroud gasped like a dying fish [6]. Old Jolyon looked round at her.
Was she chaffing him? No, her eyes were soft as velvet [7].
Consider the estimated stylistic function. Comparative idioms do not simply
name a certain feature or state of the compared object, but also reveal it through a
certain image, for which certain associations - negative or positive - are already fixed
in the minds of native speakers, which are automatically endowed with the compared
object.
Thus, the author expresses his subjective assessment of this or that
phenomenon, for example, Now run in for the hall-door key, somebody. This little
brother is bleeding like a pig [8].
Investigating the semantic features of comparative idioms, we found that often
the contradiction that lies at the heart of CI gives the whole expression an ironic
color: 'Tis clear as mud you've forgotten me [9].
But even AIs that do not have an internal contradiction in their composition
quite often perform the function of creating humor, irony or satire: Many a circus has
shown the wondering world a learned pig, a creature of super-animal intelligence,
and yet we say of a dull person, “He is as stupid as a pig,” which proves merely that
pigs vary vastly [10].
The following passage is a vivid example of the function of creating gradation:
When a thing is as cold as charity, it can't get any colder [11].
A special stylistic function of CIs is laconization of speech - because they have
the ability to convey a thought or concept very succinctly and accurately: Here he
 44

was, as large as life and as ugly as death [12]. Arresting a forester is as easy as falling
off a log or walking out of a shop [13].
Naturally, comparative idioms also perform the function of conveying the
external and internal qualities of a character. For example, If we had known he would
have asked for you, we would have put you a clean collar on, and made you as smart
as sixpence [14]. "Emily was always as stupid as an owl," said Miss Blenkinsop [15].
And waving her hand, white as a lily, and fine as a fairy's, she vanished within the
porch [16].
Possessing a high degree of expressiveness, CIs also perform the function of
creating the necessary color in an artistic text: But by-and-by, when it came to me
that he was saying his prayers too long, 1 touched him, and he was as cold as a stone
[17].
There is a classification of comparative idioms based on the distribution and
frequency of use:
1) usual CIs function as traditional representatives of the linguistic picture
of the world, reflect a set of ideas about the surrounding reality and thought patterns
of a certain language group. A vivid example of this can be the English idiom as right
as rain, which reflects the perception of the surrounding reality among the British, for
whom rainy weather is a common phenomenon.
2) occasional or author's CIs are the result of modifications of traditional
CIs, which authors of artistic works resort to in order to increase their expressiveness.
This type of CI is usually used in only one context and is situationally motivated. For
example: Her face was white – not merely pale, but white like snow or paper or icing-
sugar, except for her very red mouth [16].
To create a bright artistic image, the author does not limit himself to the
traditional as white as snow, but modifies the structure of phraseology, adding new
components to it and accumulating associative images. It seems to give a new life to
phraseology, because traditional and authorial comparisons are combined in one
poetic image [18, p. 155].
 45

Occasional CIs involve changes in the semantics, form, and compatibility of

traditional CIs. Such transformations clearly illustrate the dual nature of language
units, which can simultaneously correspond to the established common language
system and embody the original author's intention. Occasional CIs are not a violation
of the language norm, but rather a reflection of its development, and over time they
can also be recorded in phraseological dictionaries [1, p. 102].
The results of the structural analysis of CIs demonstrated a sufficient number
of reasons to consider CIs as two-component structures, and the basis of comparison
is a mandatory element of such phraseological units.
The study of the stylistic functions of KI in the literary text based on the works
of English writers revealed that the nominative function of KI is reduced to a
minimum, and the connotative aspect plays the main role. Therefore, comparative
idioms are an important means of achieving coherence and coherence of an artistic
text.
The division of comparative phraseological units into usual and occasional CIs
is considered.
Prospects for further research consist in an in-depth study of other features of
this type of phraseological units in order to solve the problem of their adequate
reproduction in literary translation.

Conclusions to the 1st chapter

In the course of the study, an attempt was made to provide an assessment of the
current state of scientific research in the field of idiomatics. It is noted that in
domestic linguistics, linguists are mostly followers of the so-called "narrow"
understanding of idiomatic units, in accordance with the traditions started by the
Scientist V.Vinogradov, while their British and American colleagues prefer a "broad"
approach, including idioms are such units as sayings, proverbs, catchphrases, which,
 46

according to national scientific traditions, are considered to be the subject of study of

folkloristics, or paremiology.
In addition to the classification of V. Vinogradov - M. Shanskyi [1, p. 644], a
number of typologies of idiomatic units were also considered, in particular: the
typology of N. Amosova [8, p. 65], O. Kunin [9, p. 15], also a very interesting and
meaningful semantic classification H. Gryn [11, p. 36-41], which divides the verb
phraseological units of the American variant of the English language according to
semantic features.
Among the classifications proposed by foreign researchers, the classifications
of idioms by British lexicologists J. Seidle and U. McMordy by origin, as well as by
the criteria of complete/incomplete fixedness, are of particular interest.
Questions about the concepts of phraseology and phraseological units,
directions of their research, classification of phraseological units and their
characteristic features, as well as the internal form of phraseological units, were
considered, which allows us to draw conclusions that phraseology is an extremely
complex phenomenon, the study of which requires its own research method, as well
as the use of data from other sciences: lexicology, grammar, stylistics, phonetics,
history of language, history, philosophy, logic and country studies.
Phraseology enriches lexicology with information about the changes to which
words undergo as part of phraseological units, and lexical stylistics - with data on
usual and occasional stylistic features of phraseological units, and also provides
additional information in many sections of general linguistics. The analysis of
phraseological material is very important for linguistic and regional studies.
The internal form of phraseological units is aimed at the reproduction of some
essential connection for the purpose of secondary nomination or transmission of the
system of connections, it also contributes to the emergence of associative connections
in the mind.
Therefore, the internal form is a multifaceted phenomenon that arises from the
spirit of the people or national spiritual power. The phenomenon of "idiomaticity" as
 47

such, which determines the place of idioms in the system of phraseological units of
the language as its core or key component, is also considered.
 48

2. PROBLEMS OF TRANSLATING ENGLISH AND GERMAN IDIOMS

2.1. Adequacy and equivalence of translation

Translation as a term has a polysemantic nature, its most widespread and

mostly generalized meaning is associated with the process of transferring the
meaning/content of a word, group of words, sentence or passage from the original
language to the translated language.
The concept of "translation" can be defined as follows: replacement of text
material in one language (the original language) with equivalent text material in
another language (the language of translation). The main goal of any translation is to
achieve adequacy.
Adequacy is an exhaustive transmission of the semantic content of the original
and full functional and stylistic correspondence to it. According to L.S. Barkhudarov,
the translated text can never be a complete and absolute equivalent of the original
text.
A similar opinion is held by Y. Naida, according to which the attempt to
achieve equivalence can lead to a significant departure from the original. The terms
"adequacy" and "equivalence" are slightly different from each other when translating
any text and have a normative evaluative nature, but they also have a distinctive
feature.
Adequacy is the ratio of the source and final texts, which takes into account the
purpose of the translation. The translation of the text can be considered adequate if at
least one of the two conditions is met: all terms and their combinations are correctly
translated; the translation is understandable for the specialist and he has no questions
or comments for the translator.
An adequate translation is a reproduction of the unity of content and form of
the original by means of another language. An adequate translation takes into account
 49

both content and pragmatic equivalence, without violating any norms, is accurate and
without any inadmissible distortions.
Since an adequate translation has an evaluative nature, it is worth considering
such a concept as the completeness of the translation. The full value of the translation
consists in the transmission for the source text of the relationship between content
and form by reproducing the features of the latter (if this is possible under linguistic
conditions) or creating functional counterparts of these features.
A full-fledged translation assumes a balance between the whole and the
separate and determines the specificity of the work (content and form). Verbatim
transmission of individual elements does not mean full transmission of the whole,
since the latter is not the usual sum of these elements, but represents a certain system.
This definition of adequacy can be considered fair even at our stage of development
of translation theory.
One of the main tasks of a translator is to create an adequate translation.
According to N. Skladchikova's theory, there are four parameters of translation
adequacy: parameter of adequacy of semantic information transmission; the
parameter of the adequacy of the transfer of emotional and evaluative information;
parameter of adequacy of expressive information transmission; parameter of
adequacy of aesthetic information transfer.
If the semantic basis of the image of the original is accurately conveyed, then
the result is an adequate linguistic image in the translated language and its adequate
semantic content, which performs the nominative function of the image.
Considering the problem of transfer of expressive information through
translation, it should be noted that some fate of the figurative use of words in the
English and Russian languages coincides in the power of expression, which does not
depend on the type of lexical transformation that was used to preserve the semantic
basis of the figurative means.
Translation is the reproduction of the original by the means of another
language with the preservation of the unity of content and form, which is achieved by
 50

the integral reproduction of the ideological content of the original in its characteristic
stylistic originality in another language basis.
The way to achieve such unity does not lie through the establishment of formal
counterparts. Comparing the means of different languages, even the most distant
ones, is possible only by comparing the functions performed by different language
means.
Hence, the accuracy of the translation lies in the functional, and not the formal,
correspondence of the original. In particular, this provision requires an explanation
with a concrete example.
Each language has its own grammatical, lexical and stylistic norms, valid only
for this language. When moving to the expression of thought in another language, it
is necessary to find such means and, first of all, such grammatical forms that would
correspond to the content as well as merge with it, as the form of the original merges
with its content.
For example, typical for English-language meteorological reports: Mist
covered a calm sea in the Straits of Dover yesterday. An inexperienced translator
will most likely preserve both the syntactic structure and the word order of the
original: The fog covered the calm sea in the Pas-de-Calais strait. However, such a
translation is unlikely to be perceived by the reader as a meteorological report.
The structure of this English sentence is drastically different from the
Ukrainian language used in such cases. It is necessary to find such a form in the
Ukrainian language that would correspond to the content and be in complete unity
with it. In this case, the use of two independent sentences is much more common for
the Ukrainian meteorological report: Yesterday there was fog over the Pas de Calais
Strait. The sea was calm.
Although at first glance, such a translation may seem "free", but not only in
content, but also in style, it fully corresponds to the original. It is in such a translation
that the unity of content and form is reproduced and such a translation is called
adequate.
 51

It is worth noting that the concept of translation adequacy is interpreted too

literally. Since the word "adequate" means "same, identical", the term "adequacy"
began to be avoided altogether, using instead the term "equivalence".
In both cases it is about the same thing - the degree of correspondence of the
texts - original and translated, which ideally should be identical, but in practice this is
almost not achieved. Both adequacy and equivalence of translation are never
complete.
The problem of evaluating the quality of a translation cannot do without a
certain criterion. Since translation, like any other activity, has a multifaceted nature, it
is sometimes evaluated from different points of view.
In particular, Y. Naida proposed to distinguish between formal and dynamic
translation equivalence. Formal equivalence – when the translator tries to reproduce
the message as close as possible to the form and content of the original, conveying its
general structure and individual elements as accurately as possible.
As for dynamic equivalence, in this case the translator aims to create between
the translated text and its reader the same connection that existed between the original
text and its reader - a native speaker.
This type of translation especially appreciates the complete naturalness of the
means of expression, which are sometimes selected so that, perceiving the text, the
reader does not go beyond his own cultural context at all, which, in turn, gives
secondary importance to the reproduction of the structural and formal aspect of the
original.
So, equivalence means the relationship between the source and final texts,
which perform similar communicative functions in different cultures. The well-
known linguist H. Miram gives a generally accepted classification of types of
equivalence: syntactic, semantic (component and denotative) and pragmatic
equivalence.
Equivalence acts as the basis of communicative equivalence, the presence of
which makes a text a translation. The concept of equivalence of translation means the
 52

transfer in translation of the content of the original, which is considered as a set of

information contained in the text, including emotional, stylistic, figurative, aesthetic
functions of language units.
Thus, equivalence is a broader concept than "accuracy of translation", under
which it is usually used understand only the preservation of the "subject-logical
content" of the original. In other words, the norm of equivalence means the
requirement of maximum orientation towards the original.
The concept of equivalence is one of the main tasks of the translator, which is
to convey the content of the original as fully as possible, and, as a rule, the actual
commonality of the content of the original and the translation is very significant.
Equivalence, in the theory of translation, should be understood as the
preservation of relative equality of substantive, meaningful, semantic, stylistic, and
functionally communicative information contained in the original and the translation.
It should be especially emphasized that the equivalence of the original and the
translation is primarily a common understanding of the information contained in the
text, including that which affects not only the mind, but also the feelings of the
recipient and which is not only explicitly expressed in the text, but also implicitly
attributed to the subtext.
The equivalence of the translation also depends on the situation of the
generation of the original text and its reproduction in the translated language. The
main thing in any translation is the transmission of content information of the text.
All its other types and characteristics: functional, stylistic (emotional), stylistic,
sociolocal, etc. cannot be transmitted without reproduction of content information,
namely: all other content of message components is layered on content information,
extracted from it, prompted by it, transformed into figurative associations, etc. Thus,
the task of the translator is to convey the content of the original as fully as possible.
So, the concept of adequacy combines the transfer of stylistic and expressive
shades of the original, and equivalence is focused on the correspondence of the text
 53

created as a result of interlingual communication to the specified parameters set for

the originals.
In other words, equivalence is the ratio of the results of two communicative
acts - primary and secondary, and is also always, to a certain extent, aimed at an ideal
standard; refers to the comprehensive transfer of the content of the original to all
semiotics levels and in the full scope of its functions, or in relation to one or another
semiotic level. That is, the requirement of equivalence has a maximum character
either in relation to the text as a whole or in relation to its individual aspects.

2.2. Means of translation of English idioms

One of the main features of phraseological units, which distinguishes them

from free phrases, is idiomaticity. It is because of this characteristic that the overall
meaning of the phraseology is not equal to the total meaning of its components, often
this meaning has nothing to do with the meanings of the words included in it: to show
white feather – to be a coward.
Idioms often contain a metaphorical element, so they cannot be translated
literally, as in many cases they have a clearly expressed national color. All this and a
number of other factors lead to the fact that phraseological units often do not have
absolute counterparts in another language. And the difficulty of translation lies in the
fact that the translator must be able to find the appropriate Ukrainian version.
V. V. Vynogradov singled out three types of phraseological units:
1. Phraseological conjunctions or idioms are unmotivated units that act as
equivalents of words: to go between (to be a mediator), a quiet wedding (a quiet
wedding), to be dead with cold (to freeze to the bones).
2. Phraseological units are motivated units with a single integral meaning,
which arises from the merging of the meanings of lexical components: horn of plenty
(a full bowl), to rise to the occasion (to be at a height), to do somebody proud (to
honor someone).
 54

3. Phraseological combinations are turns in which one of the components has a

phraseologically related meaning, which appears only in connection with a clearly
defined range of concepts and their linguistic meanings. For example: gaining fear,
choking with laughter [1, p. 67].
N. M. Shanskyi [6, p. 143] added one more to the three types of phraseological
units - phraseological expressions: То share one's last shirt with somebody. If you run
after two hares, you will catch neither
– if you chase two hares, you won't catch either.
Summarizing the above, we will present the main ways of translating
phraseological units:
1. The best way is to convey phraseology by phraseology. This is possible
when the English and Ukrainian languages borrowed a phraseological phrase from
other (most often classical) languages: Strike while the iron is hot. - Strike the iron
while it's hot.
2. Translation by phraseological analogue, that is, the use of phraseological
units in the Ukrainian language that have the same meaning, but which are built on a
different image. With such a translation, it should be taken into account that the
Ukrainian image should be neutral in relation to the national color: Can the leopard
change his spots? - You cannot fix nature. A humpback grave will do.
Phraseological equivalents are also divided into two groups: full equivalents
and partial equivalents. Many phraseological units have no equivalents in other
languages. We can translate such idioms using tracing or descriptive translation.
When translating with tracing paper (that is, an attempt to copy an English
image and create its own phraseological unit), it is worth remembering that the image
should be clear, the metaphorical, figurative meaning should come from the direct
meaning [3, p. 211].
Phraseological turns are bright phrases that belong to a certain style and often
carry various national characteristics, and therefore the translation of phraseological
 55

units is a very difficult process. When translating idioms, we must also take into
account the context in which they are used.
From the point of view of translation, all phraseological units can be divided
into two groups - those that have equivalents in the language of translation, and those
that do not have equivalents [4, p. 43].
The first are divided into two groups - full and partial equivalents. Full
equivalents have not only the same meaning in both languages, but also the same
lexical and grammatical structure. The meaning and translation of such equivalents
does not depend on the context.
This group usually includes phraseological units, the source of which is: the
Bible; ancient myths and legends, well-known historical events. Linguists attribute
such phraseological turns to international ones, and translators to those that usually
have a clear translation.
However, against the background of the total number of phraseological turns,
the number of those that have a full equivalent in the translated language is small.
Partial equivalents do not mean insufficient completeness in conveying meaning, but
only have certain lexical, grammatical or lexical-grammatical differences.
Others, which do not have equivalents in the translation language, are
translated using tracing (literal translation), using descriptive or contextual
translation. Sometimes it is necessary to convey the meaning of a phrase literally, and
this method is used in the case when it is important to understand the text as a whole,
and there is no equivalent in the translated language.
However, during the translation of phraseological units, the translator faces
some difficulties: understanding that the translator is dealing with a phraseological
turn, because there are phrases that in one context can act as free phrases, and in
another - phraseological turns, so the translator can miss that fact , that it is precisely
the phraseological turn that needs to be translated.
In the case when there is no equivalent in the translation language and you
need to choose one of the non-equivalent translations, the main task here is to choose
 56

the correct one. If there are several equivalents in the translation language, it is
necessary to decide which of them is better to use in the relevant context.
Phraseological turns can carry national and cultural aspects, and the most
important task in this case is to preserve the national flavor and not to replace the
phraseology with an equivalent that already carries completely different cultural
realities.
A phraseological phrase may have an equivalent in the translation language,
and the context of its use does not allow such a replacement [5, p. 187].
The use of phraseological combinations is a matter of style, and the task of the
translator is to preserve this style. And therefore, despite all the difficulties of
translating phraseological units, they should be translated accordingly.
There is another big problem of translation of phraseological units -
"literalism", which means "word for word", that is, "literally", but during translation
this method acquires a completely different meaning. "Calculation" is really a word-
for-word translation, whereas "literalism" is a translation that distorts the meaning of
a phraseology in a given text or copies a lexical or grammatical structure. Such a
translation of phraseological units looks very strange.
The difficulties and peculiarities of the translation of phraseological units
indicated in the article testify to the special responsibility and the need for the
competence of linguists and translators.
In conclusion, it is worth noting that knowing these features and mastering the
methods of their translation into the Ukrainian language, without a doubt, increases
the efficiency of working with artistic texts and will make it possible to deepen
knowledgestudents about the culture and traditions of the people whose language is
studied, to improve the study of the language in the original, to form understanding
and the ability to feel the logic of speech, to enrich the worldview of students, to
teach them to adequately reflect their own thoughts using idioms.
 57

2.3. Means of translation of German idioms

Reproduction of phraseological units in German is a very difficult task.

"Thanks to its semantic richness, imagery, brevity and brightness, phraseology plays
a very important role in the language" [11,19]. It gives speech expressiveness and
originality.
Translation of phraseological units, especially figurative ones, poses significant
difficulties. This is explained by the fact that many of them are bright, emotionally
saturated turns that belong to a certain language style and often have a pronounced
national character.
When translating stable combinations of words, one should also take into
account the specifics of the context in which they are used. Many German
phraseological units are characterized by ambiguity and stylistic diversity, which
complicates their translation into other languages. Phraseologisms are especially
widely used in oral speech, in artistic and political literature.
When translating a phraseology, the translator needs to convey its meaning and
reflect its imagery, finding a similar expression in the German language and not
losing sight of the stylistic function of the phraseology.
In the absence of an identical image in the German language, the translator is
forced to resort to searching for an "approximate match" [14, p. 51]. From a
translation point of view, German phraseological units are divided into two groups:
1) phraseological units that have equivalents in the Ukrainian language;
2) non-equivalent phraseological units.
Phraseological equivalents
Phraseological equivalents can be of two types:
1) Constant equivalent correspondence, which is the only possible translation
and does not depend on the context.
 58

Since any equivalent correspondence is an equivalent, it is more appropriate to

call the above type of translation a monoequivalent. These correspondences can arise
as a result of the literal translation of English idioms, for example: "time is money".
2) on the other hand, it is possible to have two or more equivalents of a
German phraseological unit in the Ukrainian language, from which to translate this of
the text is chosen the best or any, if both or all of them are equal. Such equivalents
can be called selective. In addition to the specified distribution, equivalents can be
classified as follows:
Full equivalents are Ukrainian equivalents, which are mostly mono-equivalents
of German phraseological units that match them in terms of meaning, lexical
composition, imagery, stylistic coloring and grammatical structure. The number of
such correspondences is small; this group includes phraseological units of an
international nature, based on mythological tales, biblical legends and historical facts:
Augenasstallen - "Augian stables".
The translation of stable combinations of words with the help of full or
incomplete equivalents, which can be called phraseological translation, does not pose
significant difficulties and is not a creative translation.
Tracing or literal translation of phraseological units in the presence of a full or
partial equivalent
Tracing (from the French calque"copy") - copying a foreign word using one's
own, non-borrowed material; pomorphemic translation of a foreign word.
Stable combinations of words sometimes have to be translated literally, despite
the presence of a full or partial equivalent. Literal translation is especially important
when the image contained in the phraseology is necessary for understanding the text,
and replacing it with another image does not give a sufficient effect. Literal
translation is often used in the presence of extended metaphor, phraseological
synonyms, wordplay and puns.
Ukrainian translator N.V. Lyubchuk uses tracing when translating: "Wie,
umeinenPunktunterdiesenunverrückbarenEntschlußzu setzen, wie das Amen in der
 59

Kirche, halt plötzlich ein Schuß durch den Wald"(c. l88). a shot suddenly rolled with
an echo."
EinblauerBrief (Fallada, p. 79) - a letter of unpleasant content. N.V. Lyubchuk
translates it as "letter of dismissal from service". UonStadtzuStadt constant
movement.
Tracing makes it possible to convey to the Ukrainian reader a vivid image of
German phraseology, which is impossible when using a free non-figurative word
combination, which is a Ukrainian explanation of the meaning of German
phraseology.
Literalism
Tracing is fundamentally different from literalism. Tracing is a justified literal
translation, while literalism is a literal translation that distorts the meaning of the
translated expression or slavishly copies the constructions of a foreign language and
is essentially violence against the language into which the translation is made.
For some reason, the compilers took it upon themselves to translate every
German phraseological unit verbatim. Along with the literal translation, the
Ukrainian equivalent is often given. In general, a useful book is spoiled by numerous
literalisms. although there are fewer of them than in the first edition, but still they
remained in the third edition.
The following types of literalisms can be found in the book:
1) twisting the meaning of a German proverb from its literal translation, i.e.
semantic literalism. The correct Ukrainian equivalent is not given;
2) the Ukrainian equivalent is given in a distorted form, which is caused by the
desire to translate anything literally. It leads to lexical and grammatical literalisms;
3) along with the correct Ukrainian equivalent, a nonsensical literal translation
is given.
"Overtonal" translations
A large place in the "German-Ukrainian phraseological dictionaries" is
occupied by translations that we call "overtonal".
 60

"Overtonal" translations are a kind of occasional equivalent that is used to

translate phraseology only in a given context. Therefore, the "overtonal" translation is
given in the translation of the quote, and not of the given phraseology.
It should be taken into account that the occasionality of this equivalent is
determined exclusively by the specifics of the context and that in another context a
similar translation may not be "overtonal", but a full or partial equivalent. Finding an
"overtonal translation", as opposed to using a ready-made equivalent, is a creative
process.
The use of selective equivalents gives the translator the opportunity not only to
choose the optimal option, but also to introduce diversity into the translation of the
same phraseology, which is repeatedly used by the author in the same product.
Translation of non-equivalent phraseology
Many German phraseological units do not have equivalents in the Ukrainian
language. This primarily concerns phraseological units denoting realities that do not
exist in our country.
When translating similar phraseological units with the recommendation given
in the "Guide to translation from German into Ukrainian", when translating figurative
phraseological units of any type, never use Ukrainian phraseological units containing
specific national realities.
Sometimes a distinguishing feature of phraseological units is the frequency of
using one or another idiomatic expression in speech, in violation of which the used
phraseology can give the speaker's speech an unusual or even old-fashioned
character. The translator should always remember this.
When translating a FO, the translator must be able to determine whether he is
dealing with a variable or fixed phrase. For this, it is necessary to have a large
"receptive stock of phraseological units" [40, p. 15].
It should be borne in mind that phrases, as well as words, are characterized by
ambiguity and homonymy, and one of the meanings can be phraseological and one of
the homonyms - a phraseological unit.
 61

But theoretically, a context in which this phrase is used as a variable is

possible. A phraseology can sometimes differ from a variable phrase only by an
article, which in this case is a formal distinguishing feature.
If we talk about a phraseological turn in general, then this linguistic
phenomenon can be explained as follows: a phraseological turn (also: idiom,
idiomatic turn, phraseology) is a combination of several words ("close word
combination") that forms a whole. The meaning of this or that word combination may
not coincide with the meaning of the words taken separately in this or that phrase.
The ambiguity of both old and newly formed concepts causes the so-called
terminological chaos. Therefore, such concepts as phraseological turn, linguistic turn,
fixed expression, phrase, method of expression and others are used in parallel.
The metaphorical reflection is manifested in the difference between the
colloquial use and the simple phraseological turn. That is, the listener knows that he
has already heard what was just said and actually understands what it is about, that is,
what is already known to a wide range of interlocutors is taken as a basis. These are
linguistic elements that are used to reflect one or another meaning of a certain word
combination [23, p. 27].
The word "phraseologism" means both a linguistic turn that occurs in the
language and the meaning that arises from it. Phraseological unity is a combination of
two or more words that form one incompletely understood unity.
An example in German can be the phrase ins Graß beißen (literally - "to bite
the grass"). In this case, we are talking about a somewhat unusual combination of
words that have nothing to do with such word combinations as in den Apfel beißen
(literally "to bite the apple") or ins Graß fallen (literally "fall into the grass"). The
above phrase even has the meaning of "to die", "to give up one's soul", sterben,
untergehen.
This linguistic turn comes from the military theme, from the language of
soldiers. Heavily wounded fighters from pain simply fell into the grass (relatively
speaking) and died.
 62

The linguist Lutz Roerich points out that quite often verbal, literal meaning and
figurative meaning are used simultaneously.
So, for example, the sentence "Der Ofen ist aus" (literally: "The oven went out"
can have two meanings):
The room is cold because the stove went out.
I don't want to have anything to do with him (her) anymore.
Interpretation and understanding of a given, for example, sentence comes first
of all from the context, involves translation based on the above understanding. In
general, language acquisition is a process that involves understanding a large number
of details, which is learned from childhood and can last throughout life.
A non-native German, for example, can learn what words like "grün" (green)
and "ein Zweig" (branch) mean. But in order to understand that "grüner Zweig"
means "wealth, rich life", one must have a deep knowledge of the German language
[34, p. 54].
Phraseologisms determine the specificity of the language even more than the
vocabulary. The idiomatic nature of word combinations is manifested in the fact that
the replacement of individual elements constitutes an unsystematic, inconsistent
replacement of meanings.
So, for example, jemandem einen Katzendienst erweisen and jemandem einen
Bärendienst erweisen (to provide a bear service) - the literal reading and
interpretation of the phrase is not subject to the commonly used rule of using certain
words. The above-mentioned inflections differ from groups of "free phrases".
With a vague manner of speech, such groups of words as a proverb, a figure of
speech, a functional verbal structure and others are formed.
Idioms are a significant component of the language lexicon. Very often they
contain former rhetorical figures, primarily metaphors. They almost always arise
from language-historical non-idiomatic ("generally used, colloquial") syntagms.
In particular, those meanings are not subject to analysis when the history of the
linguistic turn goes back far into the past. Language phrases (like all elements of
 63

vocabulary) can have a limited, only regional application. Literary quotations, which
are widely used in common language, are designated as catchphrases, sayings.
Quite a large number of phraseological turns in the German language contain
the names of many animals and birds. This is partly connected with fairy tales, where
the heroes were (or are) animals almost always, and partly with the history of certain
events in which representatives of the animal world also took part.
From the entire number of idioms we found, we present in this article only
those that, in our opinion, are the most used in the German language and whose
analogue can be found in the Latin language, in the so-called maxims.
Giving examples of phraseological turns, we will first provide a literal
translation, and then the use of this or that phrase as an idiom.
Klappe zu, Affe tot!(lit. "Shut up, the monkey is dead"). Interpretation of the
phraseological phrase - "The matter is resolved!"
Den Affen für jemanden spielen(lit. "To play a monkey for someone"). It
actually means "Not everything can be done with me". Having tried to consider this
idiom historically, we get the following explanation. Previously, magicians
performed at annual fairs with various animals, including monkeys, which had to
perform various, sometimes impossible tricks.
Dem Affen Zucker geben(lit. "Give the monkey sugar"). The interpretation is
as follows: to be extremely cheerful due to intoxication. After all, if you give a
monkey sugar, it will be very happy.
Den Affen loslassen(lit. "Release the monkey"). That is, to be cheerful, to have
fun, to have fun. Ein Affentheater aufführen(lit. "Perform monkey theater"). That is,
behaving rather strangely.
Einen alten Affen (etwas) lehren (lit. "Teach the old monkey something"). It
means: doing something in vain, because what you have learned during your life is
already difficult to relearn.
 64

Ich denke, mich laust (kratzt) der Affe (ex. "I think I'm being searched by a
monkey"). That is, to be extremely surprised as a result of a certain negative event
(negative surprise). This phraseology originates from the 19th century.
Ich bin doch nicht dein Affe(lit. "I am not your monkey") - I will not allow you
to deceive me. It is about the fact that the monkey can be deceived, that is, the
monkey is interpreted as a stupid creature.
Affengeil- very well! A modern phrase, mostly used by young people, based on
the word "geil", which means joyful, sweet, giddy.
Jemandem einen Bärendiesnst erweisen (lit. "To provide someone with a
disservice") This expression means "to provide someone with an unnecessary service,
help that can harm." There is an assumption that this idiom comes from a fairy tale
where a tamed bear accidentally killed his master because he wanted to drive away
annoying flies from him.
Eulen nach Athen tragen (lit. "To bring an owl to Athens"). That is, doing
something stupid, wasting time. This phraseology has its own history, namely: coins
in ancient Rome had an owl depicted on the reverse side and were even called "owls".
Given that Athens had the reputation of being quite a rich city, it was considered
unwise to carry more money there.
In southern Germany, there is an idiom that is absolutely close in meaning:
"Carry water to the spring" - "Das Wasser in den Bach tragen."
Ich mache besser die Fliege (lit. "I'd rather make a fly"). What does "I would
like to leave now" really mean. After all, a fly very often changes its place so that it is
not killed. So sometimes it's better to leave to avoid something negative.
Er hört die Flöhe husten(lit. "He hears a flea coughing"), but actually it means
someone who sees and hears everything. That is, we are talking about a person who
does not make a good impression due to the fact that he is everywhere and knows
everything ("there are too many of him").
 65

Jemandem einen Floh ins Ohr setzen(lit. "To plant a flea in someone's ear").
That is, to worry someone for a long time with some news (usually negative). After
all, the presence of a flea in the ear causes inconvenience in one way or another.
Er ist Hahn im Korb(lit. "He is a rooster in a basket"). It means "being the only
man in the company of women." As a rule, there is only one rooster in a chicken coop
for several chickens, so that the chickens can continue to breed and can compete with
each other.
This phrase has a more neutral meaning and is used rather simply as an
interjection, an interjection.
Sie hatten den roten Hahn auf dem Dach(lit. "You had a red rooster on your
roof"). The meaning of this expression is: "Your house burned down" (if this fact
really happened). Just the burning rays of fire resemble the red crest of a rooster.
Mit ihm habe ich noch ein Hühnchen zu rupfen(ex. "With him I still need to
pluck the chicken"). That is, "I will still tell him my point of view, I will still argue
with him!".
Wir werden jetzt die Hühner satteln(ex. "And now we will feed the
chickens!"). That is, "We are leaving", "Now we have to go!"
Auf den Hund bringen(lit. "Bring to the dog!"). Actually in meaning "To
destroy, to spoil some business".
Given the history, we find an explanation that in medieval German the word
"dog" had the meaning "treasure", "prey". But this does not mean a domestic dog that
guards the house.
Das ist ein dicker Hund(lit. "This is a fat dog"). A dog cannot be fat, otherwise
it will not be agile and will not be able to perform its duties. Therefore, this idiom has
the meaning: "This is shamelessness, a gross violation of the rules"
Von ihm nimmt kein Hund ein Stück Brot(lit. "No dog will take a piece of
bread from him"). It means a person who cannot be trusted, that is, this or that person
is despised by everyone, no one wants to do business with such a person.
 66

Vor die Hunde gehen(lit. "Go before the dog"). It means "to decline or to lead a
directional way of life, also to decline morally." Based on history, a comparison can
be made with the fact that sick and old animals quickly became the prey of hunters.
Er will gerne mit den großen Hunden pinkeln(ex. "He wants to defecate with
big dogs"). In fact, the meaning of the idiom is: "He wants to be on an equal footing
with great men, without having any reason for it, without having done anything for
it."
Hunde, die bellen, beißen nicht (ex. "Dogs that bark don't bite!"). It is about a
person who shouts loudly, raises his voice, but in reality he cannot do anything, he
has no strength, so he tries to attract attention by shouting. We have an analogue of
the maxim in Latin: "Canis timidus vehementius latrat, quam mordet."
Da beißt die Maus keinen Faden ab (lit. "The mouse won't bite a single thread
here") - the idiom is used in the meaning: "Nothing can be changed anymore."
The basis of this phraseology was a fairy tale, which says that after biting the
net, a grateful mouse saved a lion that got caught in the net. Another version leads to
Saint Gertrude, who was invoked in the Middle Ages for protection against mice and
rats. Therefore, after her birthday on March 17, it was impossible to weave, otherwise
mice could bite the threads.
Er macht gerne aus einer Mücke einen Elefanten (lit. "He likes to make an
elephant out of a fly"). That is, to blow up an insignificant matter to great
proportions, to exaggerate incredibly.
Wie ein Ochs vor dem Scheunentor stehen(alternative: wie ein Ochs vor der
Apotheke bzw. vorm Berg stehen)-(lit. "To stand like a donkey in front of a granary"
(in front of a pharmacy, in front of a mountain). That is, to have no idea of how it
should be next, how you should behave further.
Einem geschenkten Pferd Zähne beschaut man nicht. (lit. "The teeth of a gifted
horse are not examined"). That is, you should be grateful for any gift received from
someone. No claims should be made regarding the gift. We have the Latin equivalent
"Equi donati dentes non inspiciuntur."
 67

Das Pferd von hinten aufzäumen (lit. "To saddle a horse from behind"). As you
know, horses should be saddled from the front. This means "working in the wrong
direction, starting from the wrong end."
Ihm sind die Pferde durchgegangen (lit. "The horses ran away from him"). That
is, the person acted irrationally, unwisely, losing all control and common sense. As a
rule, wild horses cannot be calmed down.
Die Sache hat einen Pferdefuß (lit. "The case has a hoof print"). It is about the
fact that there is a suspicion that an evil force is behind the case, that is, something
dark is hidden.
According to old beliefs, the devil had a hoof, and where a hoof mark remains,
it means that the matter is impure.
Er erhebt sich wie Phönix aus der Asche (lit. "He rises like a phoenix from the
ashes"). That is, to appear in an already lost case with a new look, to rise in a new
way, almost to be "reborn".
In Greek mythology, the phoenix bird had the ability to burn and then rise
again from the ashes, to be reborn.
Das falsche Schwein geschlachtet haben(lit. "Kill the wrong pig"). That is,
make an unacceptable mistake. A mistake that cannot be forgiven.
This phrase was used by Winston Churchill in relation to the Soviet Union.
Das kann kein Schwein lesen(lit. "No pig can read this"). That is, a document
that cannot be read at all is illegible. How as a rule, one of such documents is
prescriptions, which not every pharmacist can read.
Ich glaub', mein Schwein pfeift (lit. "I think my pig is whistling") That is, this
idiom is used to express indignation or extreme excitement. In fact, pigs cannot
whistle, but if a pig really whistled, it would be an extraordinary miracle!
Perlen vor die Säue werfen (lit. "Throw pearls before swine"). The idiom
sounds like "Throwing beads before swine", is used in the sense of unwisely,
senselessly squandering funds, wasting money.
 68

This verse comes from the Gospel of Matthew 7:6 "You must not give the holy
to dogs and you must not cast your pearls before swine", you should not give
something important, holy to unworthy, unworthy people. We have an analogue in
the Latin language "Margaritas ante porcos".
Schwein haben (lit. "To have a pig"). That is, to have happiness, luck, without
making any effort or without expecting it. The origin of this reversal is unknown.
There are several assumptions, one of which is a card game where the Ace is referred
to as a "pig" in many locales (the Ace is known to have an advantage in certain types
of card games).
Another interpretation: at competitions quite often a pig was given as a reward.
It caused laughter, but also something valuable, profit. This idiom still has the
meaning "There would be no happiness, but misfortune helped."
Wenn Schweine Flügel hagent... (lit. "If only pigs had wings..."). The
implication is that the wish could only come true if pigs could fly, and since pigs do
not fly, it is impossible.
Mal den Teufel nicht an die Wand! (ex. "Don't draw the devil on the wall!").
Don't scare someone with bad warnings. The idiom comes from the fact that the devil
comes when you call his name or paint on the wall. That is, it is a warning not to
cause trouble.
Er ist ein Wolf im Schafspelz (lit. "He is a wolf in sheep's clothing"). That is, it
is about someone who has evil intentions, but pretends to be a kind and gentle person.
Mit den Wölfen heulen. (lit. "Howl with wolves"). That is, for the sake of some
benefit or to avoid some danger, to behave not always correctly, to act according to
the rules that are established in this society at the present time.
This idiom was known even in the times of ancient Rome.
Summing up, it should be noted that idioms, the prototypes of which go back
centuries, continue to live in the actual consciousness of native speakers even today.
They are, as it were, living witnesses of the historical past of the people who speak
 69

the language. Idioms help to understand the culture of a people and even learn about
its history.
Consideration of phraseology with words from the animal world provides a
deeper insight into the essence of these units, a deeper understanding of the image
that formed the basis of the phraseology. Human behavior is often compared to
images and behavior of animals.
On the basis of the analysis of the phraseological composition of the German
language, it is possible to distinguish a fairly large layer of phraseological units with
a national-cultural component in their semantics, which confirms the fact that
phraseology, along with vocabulary, is a collection of background knowledge.
In general, idioms, their classification, interpretation and wide application in
the language process are quite an interesting topic for further research.
A good receptive knowledge of phraseology is also necessary in order to
distinguish between usual and occasional phraseology, as well as in order to be able
to restore phraseology that has undergone "author's transformation" [8,74-78], and
convey the effect achieved by it during translation.
Among the author's transformations, as a result of which the associative
meaning of phraseological units is emphasized (which is almost not perceived
otherwise), include, in particular, the following stylistic techniques:
1. Introduction of new components semantically correlated with the direct
meaning, i.e. with the value of the original variable phrase, into the phraseological
turn.
2. Restoration of the lexical-grammatical structure of a phraseology as a result
of replacing its individual components with other words. There is a peculiar
deformation of the phraseological turn, the text of which is easily restored.
3. Splitting a phraseology and using its component (or components) as part of a
variable phrase. A separate component (or components) in this case is the carrier of
the associative meaning of the entire phraseological unit, on which the entire content
 70

of the statement is built. The complete form of phraseology seems to pass through the
other side, but without its restoration, understanding is impossible.
To achieve maximum adequacy when translating phraseological units from
German to Ukrainian, the translator must be able to use various by "types of
translation" [8, p. 80]:
1. Equivalent, that is, an adequate phraseological phrase available in the
Ukrainian language, which coincides with the German phrase in terms of content and
figurative basis.
2. An analogue, i.e. such a Ukrainian stable phrase that is adequate in meaning
to the German one, but differs from it in whole or in part in terms of imagery.
3. Descriptive translation, i.e. translation by conveying the meaning of the
German phrase in a free word combination. Descriptive translation is used when there
are no equivalents and analogues in the Ukrainian language.
4. Antonymal translation, i.e. transfer of a negative meaning using an
affirmative construction or vice versa.
5. Tracing. The tracing method is used in those cases when the translator wants
to highlight the figurative basis of the phraseology, or when the German phrase
cannot be translated using other types of translation.
6. Combined translation. In cases where the Ukrainian analogue does not fully
convey the meaning of the German phraseology or has a different specific flavor of
place and time, a tracing translation is given, followed by a descriptive translation
and a Ukrainian analogue for comparison.
Allowing full or partial tracing in individual cases, the translator excludes any
possibility of using literalisms, that is, unjustified literal translations that distort the
meaning of German phraseological units or do not correspond to the norms of the
modern Ukrainian language.
Phraseological units are widely used in literature of all styles, a competent
translator should not allow inaccuracies in the translation of one or another
phraseology. Without knowledge of phraseology, it is impossible to assess the
 71

brightness and expressiveness of speech, to understand a joke, a play on words, and

sometimes simply the meaning of the entire statement.

Conclusions to the 2nd chapter

Based on the results of the work, the following conclusions can be drawn:
There are 2 main ways of translating phraseological units - phraseological and non-
phraseological.
For an adequate translation of a phraseological unit, the translator must take
into account and, if possible, fully convey all its components, namely: figurative,
visual, emotional, stylistic, and national-ethnic components.
The greatest difficulty for translation is represented by German and English
phraseological units that do not have equivalents in the Ukrainian language. For their
transfer, the techniques of lexical, verbatim and descriptive translation are used. At
the same time, the translator should try to preserve the figurative character of the
original unit as much as possible.
Examining excerpts of the text of newspaper articles, one can come to the
conclusion that the selection of lexical and grammatical counterparts in the
translation of journalistic texts is carried out taking into account the following trends:
1) search for the optimal variant of expression that meets the tasks of the form
of presentation and the content of the style of newspaper and magazine journalism;
2) the authors' desire to achieve "beauty" and completeness of style, variety of
forms of expression due to the use of idioms, etc.
 72

3. THE USAGE OF COMPARATIVE IDIOMS WITH THE ZOO

COMPONENT IN MODERN ENGLISH

3.1. Semantic characteristics of comparative idioms with the zoo component

Phraseology captures the vast experience of the people, reflects the ideas
associated with the labor, life and cultural life of people.Phraseology is an important
and integral part of any language. Over time, it accumulates phraseological units that
allow us to look into the past of the people or to know the culture of another country,
since phraseological units describe the mentality, national character, lifestyle, as a
rule, and much more.
It should be noted that the study of phraseology as an independent science has
been cunducted for a long time by both foreign and Russian scientists, but the interest
in this field of linguistics has not faded to this day. Semantic characteristics and
features of phraseological units are the focus of works by P. Kühn, H. Burger, V.V.
Vinogradov, N.M. Shanskii and many others.
Animalistic phraseology is a huge layer of phraseological units and is one of
the most common forms of the language nomination, because it is through comparing
ourselves with the animal world that a person comprehends the reality surrounding
him/her, and, to a certain extent, comprehends himself/herself in this reality.
Phraseological units with the names of animals are of great prevalence and
universality in many cultures. This is evidenced by the fact that in the languages
around the world they are widely used as a characteristic of the image of man and
possess high connotative potential. Phraseological units with a zoomorphic
component constitute a significant part of the dictionary stock of absolutely any
language.
The picture of the world, displayed by the phraseological means of the
language and regarded as a linguistic phenomenon of the national and cultural
heritage, is a phraseological picture of the world. In the phraseological picture of the
 73

world, the national uniqueness and uniqueness of the language is most clearly
reflected, since phraseological units often include components of meaning that
contain information about the nationally specific features of the people.
Phraseological units are special units of the language, in which people's
wisdom is displayed, the value-based picture of the world of ethnos, as well as
representations and knowledge, both about the outer and inner world of the
individual.
Thus, we can conclude that each specific language is a special system that
affects the consciousness of people and shapes their picture of the world. The
language picture of the world, in turn, reflects the complex of ideas about the world.
It creates homogeneity of the linguistic essence, contributes to the
consolidation of linguistic and cultural identity in the vision of the world and its
designation by means of language.
The linguistic view of the world exists in the homogeneous unique identity of
the linguistic community and is the transforming power of a language that shapes the
perception of the world around the human person through language as an
"intermediate world" of the speakers of that language.
The term "phraseological unit" denotes several semantically diverse types.
Some researchers refer to it the following units of language: the idioms das schwarze
Schaf, ein weißer Rabe / black sheep, they are joined by combinations-
phraseoschemes, in which the syntactic structure and a certain part of the lexical
composition are reassessed, and the rest is filled depending on the context; winged
words Buridans Esel, proverbs and sayings formed as a result of folk art and
traditions. In order to distinguish the phraseological unit from other similar linguistic
units, namely, from the word and free phrase, it is necessary to emphasize the
characteristic features of phraseological units.
They are: repeatability, integrity of meaning, stability of structure, separability,
emotional and expressive coloring, imagery, idiomaticity.
 74

Phraseology reflects the most characteristic and striking features of certain

people and therefore quickly memorable. Phraseological units with the zoonym
component are considered one of the most numerous and internally diverse groups of
phraseological funds: zoonimalistic phraseological units reflect the centuries-old
observations of a person over the appearance and habits and behavior of animals,
show the attitude of a person to their "smaller brothers", thus being a cultural-
informational fund in each language.
Zoonyms are often used as part of phraseological expressions. Such a demand
for animal images is due to the fact that the direct meanings of these lexical units
have great opportunities for the formation of connotations.
With each of the zoonyms a large number of ideas about the traits of human
nature is associated, ostensibly inherent in animals. Man, trying to characterize
his/her behavior and appearance, compared himself/herself with what was closest to
him, familiar and similar to himself/herself - the world of animals.
Zoonym components in the German and English language view of the world
are distinguished by a special mental natural association that unites people with the
animal world, which is based on a deep connection between the evaluation semantics
and biological signs of animals.
The zoonym in the phraseological unit is its semantic center (that is,
zoomorphism), and it is in it where lies the basic metaphorical meaning that gives the
meaning to the whole expression.
The German and English phraseological units with the zoonym component
fund is rich and diverse. The reference to the names of animals is considered natural
and normal, since animals, like humans, have their own characteristic habits and
peculiar features; each of them has its own way of life and has a unique type of
behavior.
Many animal names are currently set metaphors. In German, as well as in
English, for example, the cow is stupid, the hare is wise, the fox is sly/traitor, the bear
is clumsy and so on.
 75

Here are some examples:

• da stehen wie die Kuh vom neuen Tor - stare like a stuck pig;
• ein alter Hase sein - old sea dog; • dem Fuchs beichten - break a secret;
• plump wie ein Bär - play the bear.
The hyper theme Tier includes hyponyms Fish (fish) and Vogel (bird) and
Haustier (pets), Nutztiere (livestock), Saugetier (mammals) and Weichtier (shellfish).
Lexical-semantic group Insekten (insects) and Wurmer (worms) are presented in the
following phraseology units: emsig wie eine Biene / the busy bee, zwei Fliegen mit
einer Klappe schlagen / nail two birds with one stone.
In most cases, zoomorphic phraseologisms contain names of pets, which can be
explained by extra-linguistic factors, and, first of all, the peculiarities of the human
relationship with its closest domestic environment.
In German and English there are frequent phrases with components Schwein
(pig), Katze (cat), Hund (dog), for example, Schwein haben / hog heaven; Wie Hund
und Katze leben / live a cat-and-dog life; Wie die Katze um den heißen Brei
herumgehen / like a cat round hot milk.
Phraseological units with the zoonym component as the name of a wild animal
are also quite common. The main “heros” of such expressions are Hase (hare), Bär
(bear), der Affe (monkey), der Pfau (peacock), e.g., sich wie ein Pfau speizen / strut
like a peacock.
The phraseological image is formed on the basis of a person's idea of an
animal, and the animal's name is sequentially associated with an object that has
certain qualities and properties, and with its symbolic meaning. And this is natural,
since the whole world around a person is perceived by him through the prism of
mythological thinking.
One can agree with the view of N.D. Petrova, who focuses on the symbolism
of zoonyms in the German language, mentioning that they have an element of
symbolization.
 76

For example, the seme "rigidity, ruthlessness, rapacity" is characteristic of

zooseme "wolf" in both the languages, for example, ein Wolf im Schlafpelz / wolf in
sheep's clothing.
Thus, it can be concluded that the names of animals are used as certain
symbols. That is, the image or habits of a certain animal are transferred to a person or
objects of the surrounding reality, and the zoonym acquires a generally accepted
associative meaning. Over time, the symbol-animal is filled with profound social and
spiritual meaning, which is reflected in the phraseology.
The material was collected by the following groups of research methods:
analysis, comparison, included observation, modeling method, continuous sampling
method. With the use of modeling method the main characteristics of the
phraseological units with zoonym component in the English and German languages
has been introduced.
The material for this study comprised 200 German and English phraseological
units selected from authoritative German and English phraseological dictionaries: Der
Grobe Duden, Redewendungen und sprichwortliche Redensarten, The Contemporary
Dictionary of the English Language.
It was found out that of the 200 phraseological units of the German language
118 have the equivalent in English.
 77

From the presented diagram it follows that almost 2/3 of the selected
phraseological units have an analogue in the English language. Analysis of these
phraseological units allowed us to identify the following groups of idioms by the
presence (or absence) of equivalents.
1. Full phraseological equivalents. Full equivalents are phraseological units
that completely coincide with the set expressions of another language in the image,
component composition, phraseological meaning and style.
That is, phraseological units that completely coincide at the lexical and
grammatical levels:
• schwätzt wie eine Elster - to be as garrulous as a magpie;
• essen wie ein Spatz - eat like a bird; In the above equivalents, there is a
coincidence of the seminal composition of the phraseological meaning of the matched
phraseological units on both the connotative and the significative-denotative level,
which leads to their functional and semantic equality.
Partial equivalents are traditionally defined as phraseological units with the
same or close image, close meaning, similar or slightly different component
composition and structural and grammatical organization. In this study, we divided
the partial equivalents into two groups.
 78

2. Partial equivalents having the same meaning, but different zoonym:

 wie ein Dachs arbeiten - work like a horse;
 gesund wie ein Bär - as strong as a horse;
3. Partial equivalents without zoonym. The analogue in English carries the
same meaning, but does not contain the zoocomponent:
 auf der Bärenhaut liegen - to be idle;
 sich aufs hohe Pferd setzen - be haughty.
4. Nonequivalent phraseological units are phraseological units that have no
similarity in grammatical structure and lexical (component) composition in different
languages:
 um einen Lachs spielen - play for money;
 ein toller Hecht- merrymaker.
The presence of nonequivalent phraseological units can be related to the
following reasons.
First of all, the peculiarities of the geographical position and the prevalence of
certain species of animals in connection with this. Long ago, the territory of Germany
was inhabited by a huge number of hares and wild rabbits. In this connection, in
German there is a considerable number of phraseological units with the name of this
animal.
Among men, hunting for these animals was popular, but hares were described
as dodgy animals, which were difficult to catch even for the fastest hunting dogs.
Hares double on their traces, making huge leaps in different directions. Hence, for
example, there were such phraseologisms as "wissen wie der Hase läuft" (literally: to
know how the rabbit runs); or "ein alter Hase" (old hare) / old hand.
Secondly, it is not uncommon for phraseological units to arise as a result of
etymological errors. For example, the phraseological unit Das kann kein Schwein
lesen has nothing to do with the image of a pig. The history of this phraseology is
related to the name Swyn.
 79

Once upon a time there lived a very intelligent Swyn family in Germany. But
one day none of the members of this family could decipher the document, and
therefore the peasants began to say: "Dat kann keen Swyn lesen". And this popular
expression caught on, which, of course, can not have any analogue in other
languages, including English.
Third, national specificity. In German, nationally specific is the phraseological
unit das geht auf keine Kuhhaut! / This does not describe! (Literally: this can not be
written on the parchment). Parchment was made from the skin of animals, and, quite
often, from the skin of cows.
Under the word "Kuhhaut" superstitious people understood the parchment with
the list of sins, which Satan reads to the person at the time of his/her death. In
English, the same meaning is conveyed by exclamatory sentences that are not
phraseological.
The reason for the occurrence of nonequivalent phraseological units can also
be caused by history, folk games, customs, peculiarities of the life of peoples, rituals
and many other features.
As a result of the research it was also found out that 18% of phraseological
units in the German language have a full equivalent in English. This fact can be
explained by the features of some animals that vividly manifest themselves in their
appearance or behavior.
Representatives of different peoples noticed these features and, since people
tend to compare themselves with the animal world, they made a parallel between
themselves and them.
So, phraseological units: rot wie ein Krebs / red as a lobster, stark wie ein Pferd
/ strength of a horse, schwimmt wie ein Fisch / swim like a fish - completely coincide
in the two languages according to the meaning that they carry in themselves.
The next reason for having equivalents is the common origin, that is, one
source. An example is the phraseological unit ein Wolf im Schlafpelz and its
analogue in English - wolf in sheep's clothing. This expression became widely known
 80

thanks to the Bible. In the Gospel of Matthew there are these words: "Beware of false
blamers: they come to you in sheep's clothing, but inside they are predatory wolves."
In the course of the study it was found that some phraseological units of
German and English have the same meaning, but they contain different
zoocomponents. That is, to characterize the same phenomena, peoples resort to
different names of animals.
This can be explained by the fact that in one country one animal is more
popular and more common, and in another country is another one. In addition, a
single ethnic group can attach greater importance to specific qualities due to some
national characteristics.
Despite the commonness of semantics, various inner forms begin existence,
images that arise in the German and English linguistic consciousness on the basis of
various associations. The fact that 1/3 of the phraseological units of German has an
equivalent in English, but does not contain a zoonym can be explained by the
difference in views on the surrounding world.
The phraseological image is often based on realities, which are known only to
one nation. The national peculiarity of the phraseological image reflects the way of
life and character of the people, their spiritual life, historical events, unique traditions,
peculiar customs and ethnic life in the special selection of the lexical components of
this or that phraseology.

3.2. Comparative idioms with the zoo component in media and literature

Idioms are a type of figurative expression – where the meaning has no relation
to the words in the phrase. They use creative descriptions to share an idea or feeling.
The only way to learn them is to hear them and have the meaning explained to you.
1. At a snail’s pace
Meaning: Moving very slowly
 81

This idiom is pretty self-explanatory because we know that snails and slugs
move very slowly.
This idiom has been used for a very long time. The phrase is found in William
Shakespeare’s play “Richard III,” which was written and first performed in 16th
century England.
Example: Traffic is moving at a snail’s pace.
2. Busy as a bee
Meaning: Extremely busy
This idiom originated from Chaucer’s “Canterbury Tales” (specifically, “The
Squire’s Tale”) which was written around 1386. The English is very old, but the
phrase remains popular to this day.
“Lo, suche sleightes and subtilitees
In wommen be, for ay as busy as bees.”
The above language looks very different from modern English, but the animal
idiom is exactly the same. Today, the phrase is used to describe someone being very
busy, but working with a purpose in a pleasant manner.
Example: My son is working on his science project. He’s been as busy as a bee
all day.
3. Open a can of worms
Meaning: Create a whole new set of problems
This phrase is often used when you try to solve a problem or answer a question,
but you only create more problems or more questions.
Nobody is sure of the exact origin of this idiom, but some people believe it
came from a time when fishermen bought canned worms for bait. They would bring
the worms to the fishing site, but if they knocked the can over, they had a whole new
problem of catching their bait.
 82

Some also believe that “can of worms” is a modern version of the idiom,
“Pandora’s box.” Pandora’s box comes from an old myth, and it also means to create
a new set of problems.
Example: You’ve opened a real can of worms here.
4. Wild goose chase
Meaning: Chasing something that’s very difficult (or impossible) to catch
Imagine chasing a wild goose around and trying to catch it. Geese are fast,
strong and awkward animals – catching one would probably be very hard, and it
would also look very silly!
While many use the idiom “wild goose chase” to describe something that’s
hard to catch, it’s also used to describe a chase that takes the pursuer in a lot of
different directions.
Example: You’re taking me on a wild goose chase, will you just give me an
exact address where I should go?
5. The world is your oyster
Meaning: You have many good opportunities in front of you
It’s not easy to open an oyster. Finding opportunities in the world is like
opening an oyster, meaning it’s not easy.
Sometimes, when you open an oyster, you’ll find a pearl. When you say that
“the world is your oyster,” you have a positive outlook about the opportunities in
front of you. If you have an oyster in your hands, it could contain a beautiful treasure
that belongs completely to you.
Example: You just graduated from a wonderful university, so the world is your
oyster!
6. Watching like a hawk
Meaning: Watching something very, very, closely
Children often hear this idiom from a parent or other caregiver, “I’m watching
you like a hawk.”
 83

It’s often used to make sure that someone or something doesn’t misbehave or
make a mistake.
Example: The boss watches us like a hawk.
7. Mad as a hornet
Meaning: Very angry, or furious
A hornet is a type of wasp. When it gets angry, it can do a lot of damage, cause
pain and generally be dangerous. If someone is saying that they’re as mad as a hornet,
then they’re warning you to look out.
While the term “mad as a hornet” is popular in the United States, other
English-speaking countries and cultures often say something similar.
In the Southern region of the United States where farming was (and in some
places still is) a major industry, people used to say the idiom “mad as a wet hen,”
describing the anger a hen would have if you stole her eggs.
Example: Mom was as mad as a hornet when we broke the mirror.
8. Dog eat dog
Meaning: Very competitive
When you use this idiom, you’re saying that the competition is so stiff (intense)
that people will do anything to get ahead, even if it means hurting someone. “Dog eat
dog” may be used to describe a situation, a school, a company or an industry.
The exact origin varies. It may have come from similar phrases used in English
writings from a long time ago. For example, one similar phrase was used in a 16th
century Latin proverb which says “dog does not eat dog.”
Example: It’s a dog eat dog world out there.
9. Eagle eyes
Meaning: Have excellent vision, or watching something very closely, not
missing a detail
 84

This animal idiom is similar to “watching like a hawk,” but when someone
says “eagle eye,” they may not be referring to catching someone in the act of doing
something wrong.
If you have an eagle eye, it means that nothing gets past you because you are
very focused on details.
Example: The teacher goes over the tests with an eagle eye.
10. Get your ducks in a row
Meaning: Organize things
When baby ducks walk behind their mother, they’re often in a straight line or
“in a row.”
If someone is telling you to “get your ducks in a row,” it means to straighten up
and it usually refers to a project or task.
Example: I’ll be reviewing things to make sure you have your ducks in a row.
11. Guinea pig
Meaning: Test subject
If someone or something is being used as a “guinea pig,” they’re being used as
a test subject. It can be figuratively or literally.
The origin of the phrase likely comes from the practice of animal testing, as
guinea pigs are small rodents similar to mice and rats.
Example: We’re conducting a study and we’re looking for volunteers to act as
guinea pigs.
12. Hold your horses
Meaning: Slow down, stop
Have you ever seen an old Western movie where the cowboy pulls back on the
horse’s rein to slow down or stop? That’s the image in mind with this idiom. Also, if
someone says “hold your horses,” they’re also telling you to “wait a minute.”
Example: Hold your horses! There’s no need to rush.
13. I’ll be a monkey’s uncle
Meaning: I’m very surprised
 85

This idiom is used as a complete phrase. People often use this when something
happens that they didn’t expect.
It’s used in a lighthearted or comical way. Another idiom, “you could have
knocked me over with a feather” has a similar meaning.
Example: Well, I’ll be a monkey’s uncle. I never thought I’d pass that test.
14. Let sleeping dogs lie
Meaning: Leave it alone, leave something in peace
You’ll find that dogs show up in a lot of English idioms, as they’re very
common to our culture.
When someone tells you to “let sleeping dogs lie,” they’re telling you to let
things be. Often, you’re in a situation that you can’t change, so you should just leave
it alone and in peace, like a sleeping dog.
It’s also used to tell someone to stay out of a situation that’s none of their
business.
Example: I’m not telling the boss about Mark’s problem, it’s best to let
sleeping dogs lie.
15. Pet peeve
Meaning: Common annoyance, something that’s specifically annoying to you
It’s usually not a major problem, they just wish it wouldn’t happen. Often it
refers to a common habit that people around them do.
Pet peeves vary from person to person. What bothers one may not bother
another. That’s the meaning of “pet peeve,” it’s your personal annoyance.
Example: I hate when people don’t put things back where they belong, it’s a
pet peeve of mine.
16. Pick of the litter
Meaning: The best choice, or your favorite option
If you have the “pick of the litter” then you have top choice, or you can get the
best in the group.
 86

This phrase goes back to the early 1900s. When dogs or cats produce offspring,
the puppies or kittens are called a “litter.” To give someone the pick of the litter,
you’re offering the best puppy or kitten.
Variations of this phrase include “pick of the basket” and “pick of the market.”
Example: All the boys want to take her on a date, she can have the pick of the
litter.
17. Puppy love
Meaning: Feelings of love or affection, usually innocent and temporary,
occurring during childhood or adolescence.
Other English-speaking cultures may have their variations, such as “calf love.”
They often compare the love of children to young animals.
Example: I had a crush on my next door neighbor, but that was just puppy love.
18. Like shooting fish in a barrel
Meaning: Very easy to catch or trick
It can also mean a very easy task. This idiom goes back to the early 1900s.
Think of how easy it would be to shoot fish in a barrel. It’s a given.
Example: I’m an expert in auto repair, fixing this is like shooting fish in a
barrel.
19. A little bird told me
Meaning: Somebody secretly told me
When someone says “a little bird told me,” it’s a lighthearted way of saying
that they learned a secret but they’re not telling the source. This is a comical or
humorous phrase.
The origin of this phrase may come from a time when birds were used to
deliver messages. The bird has the message for you, but you don’t know where it
came from.
Example: I heard you were accepted to Harvard, a little bird told me!
20. Bull in a china shop
Meaning: Very clumsy person
 87

In English-speaking cultures, “china” or “fine china” is used to describe

porcelain dishes or other very delicate dishes. A bull is a large and reckless animal.
Combine china and a bull, and you’re setting up a disaster.
Example: He was like a bull in a china shop, he completely messed everything
up.
21. Butterflies in one’s stomach
When you say that you have butterflies in your stomach, you’re saying that
you’re very nervous. Sometimes when you get nervous, you get a fluttery feeling in
your stomach, similar to the way butterflies flutter around.
Example: I was so nervous before my speech, I had butterflies in my stomach.
22. All bark and no bite
Another dog idiom. Dogs of all breeds will bark, but many are harmless.
If you’re saying that someone is all bark and no bite, you’re saying that they
give threats but won’t act on them. They may seem scary or intimidating, but they’re
totally harmless.
Example: My boss yells a lot, but he’s all bark and no bite.
23. Which came first, the chicken or the egg?
Meaning: A question that shows that there may be no right answer
This animal question shows up in philosophy discussions. If someone asks this,
they want you to think about something more carefully. Philosophers came up with
this example to ask where and when the universe began.
24. Wolf in sheep’s clothing
Meaning: Something or someone dangerous presenting as gentle, weak or
innocent
Imagine a wolf who is dressed like a sheep as a costume. They may seem like a
gentle sheep, but they’re actually quite dangerous.
This idiom often shows up in fables, but it’s believed to have originated in the
Bible. When someone uses this idiom to describe someone, they’re warning you to be
careful of someone who seems nice but they really aren’t.
 88

Example: Don’t trust him, he’s a wolf in sheep’s clothing.

25. You can’t teach an old dog new tricks
When someone says “you can’t teach an old dog new tricks,” they’re saying
that there’s no point in changing someone’s established routine.
They may also say that it’s very difficult to teach a new task to someone,
almost impossible. This phrase comes from the difficulty of training older dogs.
Example: My mom won’t learn how to use the computer. I guess you can’t
teach an old dog new tricks.
Why make things harder by using idioms? Well, it’s a fun way to talk! You get
to express yourself in a whole new way.
Each language and culture has their own set of idioms. Idioms common in the
United Kingdom may be foreign to an English speaker from the United States of
America, and vice versa.
We can use idioms anytime you want, but you need to be careful. Only use
idioms when we’re certain of the meaning and the context. Also, since idioms can
express strong emotions, make sure that the idiom you choose expresses the idea that
we want to say.
Idioms are a fun way to practice and expand your English vocabulary. When
you begin to cover animal names, you may feel that some of the vocabulary isn’t
relevant to the English you’ll use in everyday life.
Make your study time relevant and interesting by learning some animal idioms.
You’ll find that many of these idioms have little meaning or relation to the animals
themselves. Remember, idioms often don’t have literal meanings at all—they only
have figurative meanings.
These idioms may be confusing at first, but once you learn them, you’ll have a
fun new way of talking.
Learning idioms helps you to learn more about English culture and history.
After all, many idioms have been in use for a very long time.
 89

CONCLUSIONS

In the course of research devoted to the peculiarities of the translation of

phraseological units and idioms, it was found that: phraseology is an extremely
complex phenomenon.
Without knowledge of phraseology, it is impossible to appreciate the
brightness and expressiveness of speech, to understand a joke, a play on words, and
sometimes simply the meaning of the entire statement.
Many scientists worked on the problem of phraseological units. The founder of
the theory of phraseology is the Swiss linguist Charles Balli, who first defined
phraseology as an independent section of lexicology.
A number of classifications of phraseological units were proposed. The
classification of phraseological units from the point of view of the semantic fusion of
their components belongs to Academician V.V. Vinogradov
As you know, phraseological units arise from a free combination of words,
which is used figuratively. Gradually, portability is forgotten, erased, and the
combination becomes stable.
Having considered the theories of well-known linguists who studied the
problems of phraseology (A.V. Kunina, M.M. Amosova, V.V. Vynogradova), the
classification of phraseological units proposed by them, the main features
characteristic of all phraseological units were highlighted in the work.
The main ways of translating phraseological units from English to Russian and
the difficulties that arise during translation were considered.
Phraseological units are nationally specific units of language that accumulate
the cultural potential of the people, therefore, when translating phraseological units,
the translator must make a choice of methods and methods of translation, the use of
which would help to achieve the desired result.
Knowledge of such difficulties that arise when translating phraseological units,
such as ambiguity and homonymy, national and cultural aspects, various kinds of
 90

historical expressions, which often have several counterparts, as in the language both
in the original and in the translated language can help prevent inconsistencies in
translation.
The choice of one or another type of translation depends on the peculiarities of
phraseological units, which the translator must recognize and be able to convey their
meaning, brightness and expressiveness.
Since phraseological units are widely used in literature of all styles, a
competent translator should not allow inaccuracies in the translation of one or another
phraseology.
To achieve maximum adequacy when translating phraseological units from
English and German into Ukrainian, the translator must be able to use various types
of translation.
Phraseological translation involves the use in the translated text of stable units
of varying degrees of closeness between the unit of the foreign language and the
corresponding unit of the translated language - from complete and absolute
equivalent to approximate phraseological correspondence.
The results of the structural analysis of CIs demonstrated a sufficient number
of reasons to consider CIs as two-component structures, and the basis of comparison
is a mandatory element of such phraseological units.
The study of the stylistic functions of KI in the literary text based on the works
of English writers revealed that the nominative function of KI is reduced to a
minimum, and the connotative aspect plays the main role. Therefore, comparative
idioms are an important means of achieving coherence and coherence of an artistic
text.
The division of comparative phraseological units into usual and occasional CIs
is considered.
Prospects for further research consist in an in-depth study of other features of
this type of phraseological units in order to solve the problem of their adequate
reproduction in literary translation.
 91

As a result of the research it was also found out that 18% of phraseological
units in the German language have a full equivalent in English. This fact can be
explained by the features of some animals that vividly manifest themselves in their
appearance or behavior.
Representatives of different peoples noticed these features and, since people
tend to compare themselves with the animal world, they made a parallel between
themselves and them.
So, phraseological units: rot wie ein Krebs / red as a lobster, stark wie ein Pferd
/ strength of a horse, schwimmt wie ein Fisch / swim like a fish - completely coincide
in the two languages according to the meaning that they carry in themselves.
The next reason for having equivalents is the common origin, that is, one
source. An example is the phraseological unit ein Wolf im Schlafpelz and its
analogue in English - wolf in sheep's clothing.
This expression became widely known thanks to the Bible. In the Gospel of
Matthew there are these words: "Beware of false blamers: they come to you in
sheep's clothing, but inside they are predatory wolves."
In the course of the study it was found that some phraseological units of
German and English have the same meaning, but they contain different
zoocomponents. That is, to characterize the same phenomena, peoples resort to
different names of animals.
This can be explained by the fact that in one country one animal is more
popular and more common, and in another country is another one. In addition, a
single ethnic group can attach greater importance to specific qualities due to some
national characteristics.
Despite the commonness of semantics, various inner forms begin existence,
images that arise in the German and English linguistic consciousness on the basis of
various associations.
The fact that 1/3 of the phraseological units of German has an equivalent in
English, but does not contain a zoonym can be explained by the difference in views
 92

on the surrounding world. The phraseological image is often based on realities, which
are known only to one nation.
The national peculiarity of the phraseological image reflects the way of life and
character of the people, their spiritual life, historical events, unique traditions,
peculiar customs and ethnic life in the special selection of the lexical components of
this or that phraseology.
 93

REFERENCES

1. Alekhine A.I. Phraseological unit and word./ A.I. Alekhina - Minsk, 2011. -
250 p.
2. Alekseeva I.S. Professional translator training./ I.S. Alekseeva - St.
Petersburg: "Soyuz" 2011. – 288 p.
3. Amosova H.H. Basics of English phraseology./ N.N. Amosova - L., 2009. -
345 p.
4. Arnold I.V. Lexicology of the modern English language./ I.V. Arnold M.:
2009. - 178 p.
5. Arnold I.V. Semantic structure of the word in modern English language and
methodology of its research (on the material of the name of the essence)./ I.V. Arnold
- L.: Enlightenment, 2006. - 192 p.
6. Arnold I.V. Stylistics of the modern English language./ I.V. Arnold - L.:
Enlightenment, 2013. – 301 p.
7. Brandes M.P. Stylistics of the text./ M.P. Brandes – M.: Progress-Tradition,
"INFRA" – M., 2014. - 408 p.
8. Barkhudarov L.S. Language and translation./ L.S. Barkhudarov - M.: Higher
School, 2015. - 235 p.
9. Vynogradov V.S. Introduction to translation science (general and lexical
questions) / V.S. Vinogradov. - M.: Izdatelstvo instituta szegosny sredno obrazovanjo
RAO, 2011. - 224 p.
10. Halperin I.R. Essays on the stylistics of the English language / I.R.
Halperin. - M.: Izdatelstvo literatury na izračný zyazakh, 2008. - C. 528.
11. Halperin I.R. Text as an object of linguistic research./ I.R. Halperin - M.:
Nauka, 2011. - 140 p.
12. Gorokhov V.M. Newspaper and magazine genres: Theoretical course of
authorized presentation./ V.M. Gorokhov - M.: Vysshaya Shk., 2013. - 235 p.
 94

13. Zhukov V.P. Semantics of phraseological turns. / V.P. Zhukov - M.:

Prosveschenie, 2010. – 160 p.
14. Zagorskaya A.P. and others. Diary for conducting business
correspondence./ A.P. Zagorskaya - M., 2012. - 175 p.
15. Zarytsky M.S. Stylistics of the modern Ukrainian language: Study.
manual / M.S. Zarytskyi - K.: Parliamentary Publishing House, 2011. - 156 p.
16. Kim M.N. Genres of modern journalism./ M.N. Kim - St. Petersburg: Izdvo
Mykhaylova VA, 2014. - 335 p.
17. N.M. Kozhina Stylistics of the Russian language./ N.M. Kozhina - M.: Pros
veschenie, 2003. - 222 p.
18. Komissarov V.N., Translation Linguistics./ V.N. Komissarov - M.: 2010. -
245 p.
19. Komissarov V.N. The word about translation./ V.N. Komissarov – M.:
International relations, 2003. - 288 p.
20. Komissarov V.N. Contemporary translation education: a course of
lectures / V.N. Komissarov. - M.: ETS. - 2010. - 192 p.
21. Komissarov V.N. Theory of translation (linguistic aspects): in Cheb. for
institutes and faculties. foreign I'm from. / V.N. Komissarov. - M.: Higher. Shk.,
2010. – 253 p.
22. Koptilov V.V. Theory and practice of translation./ V.V. Koptilov - K.,
Education, 2007. - 234 p.
23. Korunets I. Near the origins of Ukrainian translation studies. / I. Korunets -
VSESVIT - 2018. - 194 p.
24. Kreuchyk L.E. The system of journalistic genres/ L.E. Kroichyk //
Fundamentals of creative activity of a journalist. Ed. S.G. Korkonosenko. - St.
Petersburg, 2010. - 270 p.
25. Kuharenko V.A. Text interpretation./ V.A. Kuharenko - L.: Osvita, 2009. -
328 p.
 95

26. L.K. Latyshev Translation course (translation equivalence and ways to

achieve it) / L.K. Latyshev. - M., 2001.
27. L.K. Latyshev Translation: problems of theory, practice and teaching
methods./ L.K. Latyshev - M.: Nauka - 2008. – 159 p.
28. Lyovitskaya T.R., Fiterman A.M. Guide to translation from English to
Russian./ T.R. Lyovitskaya, A.M. Fiterman - M.: Higher School, 2003. – 136 p.
29. Maltsevich T.V. The problem of typology of journalism genres/ T.V.
Maltsevich // Herald of Belarus. Mr. Univ. Journalism., 2010. - 79 p.
30. Melnyk H.S., Teplyashyna A.N. Fundamentals of a journalist's creative
activity./ G.S. Melnyk - St. Petersburg: Peter, 2014. - 272 p.
31. Miram G.E., Profession translator./ G.E. Miram K.: Elga, 2018. – 160 p.
32. Moiseev V.A. Journalism and journalists./ V.A. Moiseev K.: Dakor, 2012.
– 400 p.
33. Moskalskaya O.I. Grammar of the text/ O.I. Moskalskaya - M.: Vysshaya
shkola, 2001. - 184 p.
34. Minyar-Beloruchev R.K. Translation theory and methods/ R.K. Minyar-
Beloruchev - M., 2006. – 208 p.
35. Moskalenko M. Essays on the history of Ukrainian translation. / M.
Moskalenko //VSESVIT. – 2016. 172-190 p.
36. Oleinyk B.I. Selected works, in two volumes. Translations. Journalism./
B.I. Oliynyk - K: Ukrainian encyclopedia. 2016. – 608 p.
37. A. Parshin. Theory and practice of translation.
38. Fundamentals of translation: a course of lectures; учебное пособие /
[Myram G.S. and others]. – K.: Elga, Nika Center, 2012. - P. 248.
39. Prokhorov E.P. Introduction to journalism./ E.P. Prokhorov - M.: Vysshaya
Shk., 2008. – 278 p.
40. A.L. Pumpyansky Introduction to the practice of translating scientific and
technical literature into English.
 96

41. Riesel E.G. To the question about the hierarchy of stylistic systems and
basic textological units/ E.G. Ryzel // Foreign languages in school., 2005. - 80 p.
42. Selivanova O.O. Modern linguistics. Terminological encyclopedia. / O.O.
Selivanova - Poltava: Dovkillya-K, 2016. - 716 p.
43. Sindeeva T.M. Speech genre newspaper review and its linguistic and
textual characteristics: (on the material of English language) / T.M. Sindeev - M.,
2004. - 209 p.
44. Skladchikova N.V. Semantic content of metaphors and types of ego
compensation during translation / N.V. Skladchikova // Nomination and context: Sat.
scientific works. – Kemerovo, 2005. – P. 21–29.
45. Suvorov S.P. Peculiarities of the style of English headlines (Based on the
materials of the Daily Worker)./ S.P. Suvorov - In sb.: Language and style. - M.:
Nauka 2005. - p. 193.
46. Sukhenko D.M. Lexical problems of translation./ D.M. Sukhenko - DO.:
View. Kyiv. National Univ. Named after Taras Shevchenko, 2012. - 45 p.
47. Stepanova M. D. Lexicology of the modern German language: a textbook
for students. / M.D. Stepanova - M.: Higher School, 2014. - 256 p.
48. Ter-Mynasova S.H. Language and intercultural communication: учеб. n
person / S.G. Ter-Mynasova. - M.: Slovo/ Slovo, 2010. - 624 p.
49. Turaeva S.Ya. Linguistics of the text: structure and semantics./ S.Ya.
Turveva - M.: Nauka, 2006. - 126 p.
50. Fedorov A.V. Fundamentals of general translation theory / A.V. Fedorov. -
M., 2003.
51. Fedorov A.V. Fundamentals of general translation theory./ A.V. Fedorov -
M.: LLC Philology three, 2012. – 416 p.
52. Chukovsky K.I. The art of translation./ K.I. Chukovsky - M.-L., 2006. -
200 p.
 97

53. Shahnarovych A.M., Yuryeva N.M. To the problem of metaphor

understanding. IN book: Metaphor in language and text./ A.M. Shakhnarovych M, -
2008. - 118 p.
54. Schweitzer. A. D. Theory of translation. Status, problems, aspects./ A.D.
Schweitzer - M.: Nauka, 2008. - 75 p.
55. A.D. Schweitzer Translation and Linguistics./ A.D. Schweitzer - M.:
Voenizdat, 2003. - 275 p.
56. Schweitzer A.D. To the question about the analysis of grammatical
phenomena in translation. "Translator's notebooks"./ A.D. Schweitzer - M., 2003, -
180 p.
57. Schweitzer A.D. On the problems of linguistic study of the translation
process. "Questions of language"./ A.D. Schweitzer - M., 2010.– 220 р.
58. Shmakov S.L. Communicative and stylistic aspects of translation activity./
S.L. Shmakov - M.: Progress, - 2014. - 215 p.
59. O.S. Yurchenko Phraseological paraphrases of the Ukrainian literary
language. Study guide./ O.S. Yurchenko - Kharkiv: RVG KhDU, 2013. - 119p.
60. Catford J. S. A Linguistic Theory of Translation / J. S. Catford. – Ldn.,
2005.
61. Hornby AS Oxford Student's Dictionary of Current English / ASHornby -
Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2004. - 748 p.
62. Sandig B. Textstilistik des Deutschen./ B. Sandig – Berlin, New York:
Walter de Gryuter, 2006. – 584 S.
63. Sinclair J. Collins Cobuild English Language Dictionary./ John Sinclair. -
London: Collins ELT, 2007 - 1703 p.
64. Katzner K. English-Ukrainian and Ukrainian-English Dictionary./ K.
Katzner - New York: John Wiley and Sons, 2003 - 904 p.
65. Kopf D. Textsorten in der Presse und Publizistik und ihre stilistische
Realisierung./ D. Kopf – Brünn, 2016. – 342 р.
 98

66. Tarasova A. V. Reproduction of English comparative phraseological units

in Ukrainian translations: thesis. Ph.D. philol. Sciences: 10.12.16. Dnipropetrovsk,
2017. 220 p.
67. Shchepka O. A. Typology of comparative phraseological units in the
Ukrainian and Russian languages: comparative aspect. Linguistic studies, 2011. Vol.
23.
68. Romanchenko A.P. About the essence of comparative phraseological units
and their semantic and structural features. Notes on Ukrainian Linguistics.O.:
"Astroprint", 2004. Vol. 14. P. 40–49.
69. Wells H. The truth about pyecraft. Scotts Valley: CreateSpace Independent
Publishing Platform, 2014. 28 p.
70. Tgease G. Bows Against the Barons. New York: Meredith Press, 1996. 152
p.
71. Poe EA The Complete Tales and Poems. New York: Doubleday &
Company, 2004. 821 p
72. Galsworthy J. Indian Summer of a Forsyte. Scotts Valley: CreateSpace
Independent Publishing Platform, 2015. 248 p.
73. Cronin AJ The Green Years. London: Orion Publishing Co, 1995. 240 p.
74. Kip1ing R. The City of Dreadful Night and Other Stories. London: British
Library, Historical Print Editions, 2011. 272 p.
75. Seton-Thompson E. Lobo, the King of Currumpaw and Other Stories.
Moscow: Foreign Languages Pub. House, 2006. 390 p.
76. Walsh J. Not Like This. London: Lawrence & Wishart, 2003. 144 p.
77. Maxwell WB Vivien. New York: D. Appleton, 2005. 510 p.
78. Chesterton GK The Outline of Sanity. Virginia: IHS Press, 2002. 184 p.
79. Dickens Ch. The Adventures of Oliver Twist. Rockville: Wildside Press,
2010. 418 p.
80. Thackeray W. The History of Pendennis. London: Ward, Lock & Co, 2002.
626 p.
 99

81. Brontë Ch. Shirley. Scotts Valley: CreateSpace Independent Publishing

Platform, 2016. 318 p.
82. Lyall E. Knight Errant, London: Hurst & Company, 2007. 402 p.
83. Dubrova S. V. Peculiarities of artistic translation of comparative
phraseological units. Scientific Bulletin of the International Humanitarian University.
Ser.: Philology, 2018. No. 32. Volume 2.
84. Alifirenko N.F. 2004. Teoriya yazyka. Vvodnyy kurs. - M. 368 р.
85. Davletbayeva D.N., Larionova E.S., Bashkirova K.A. 2016. Cultural
interpretation of phraseological units in their occasional use // Modern Journal of
Language Teaching methods. Special Issue (November). Pp. 164-169.
86. Gavrin S.G. 2003. Izucheniye frazeologii russkogo yazyka v shkole.
Posobiye dlya uchitelya. M. Uchpedgiz. 152 р.
87. Kulkova M.A., Rakhimova A.E., Zinecker T. 2015. Hermeneutical analysis
of paroemiological texts with semantics of permission // Journal of Language and
Literature. V. 6. № 1. Pp. 297-300.
88. Kunin A.B. 2003. O frazeologicheskoy nominatsii // Frazeologicheskaya
semantika: Sb. nauch. tr. M., Vyp. 211. - Р. 88-100.
89. Mellado Blanco, 2009. Carmen: Theorie und Praxis der idiomatischen
Wörterbücher. Tübingen.
90. Raykhshteyn, A. D. 2001.Teksty lektsiy po frazeologii sovremennogo
nemetskogo yazyka: Vopr. frazeol. semantiki.
91. Rakhimova A.E., Sharipova A.V., Zaripova Z.M., Olegovich G.I. 2015.
The realization of binary opposition joy/sorrow in contemporary german fiction
discourse // Review of European Studies. V. 7. № 6. Pp. 70-76.
92. Varlamova E.V., Tulusina E.A., Zaripova Z.M., Gataullina V.L. 2016.
Lexical Semantic Field as One of the Keys to Second Language Teaching //
Interchange. Volume: 48. Issue: 2. Pp: 183 – 193.
93. Verenich T.M. 2012. Cherty natsional'nogo kharaktera vo
frazeologicheskoy kartine mira (Tekst) // Filologiya i lingvistika v sovremennom
 100

obshchestve: materialy Mezhdunar. nauch. konf. — M.: Vash poligraficheskiy

partner, S. 51-53.
94. Vinogradov V.S., 2011. Vvedeniye v perevodovedeniye (obshchiye i
leksicheskiye voprosy). - M.: Izdatel'stvo instituta obshchego srednego obrazovaniya
RAO.
95. Abeillé, A. (2005). The flexibility of French idioms: A representation with
lexicalized Tree Adjoining Grammar. In M. Everaert, E. J. van der Linden, A.
Schenk, & R. Schreuder (Eds.), Idioms: Structural and psychological perspectives
(pp. 15–42). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
96. Abeillé, A., Borsley, R. D., & Espinal, M. T. (2016). The syntax of
comparative correlatives in French and Spanish. In S. Müller (Ed.), Proceedings of
the 13th International Conference on Head-Driven Phrase Structure Grammar (pp. 6–
26). Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications.
97. Bobrow, S. A., & Bell, S. M. (2003). On catching on to idiomatic
expressions. Memory & Cognition, 1(3), 343–346.
98. Booij, G. (2012). Constructional idioms, morphology, and the Dutch
lexicon. Journal of Germanic Linguistics, 14(4), 301–329.
99. Borsley, R. D. (2014). An approach to English comparative correlatives. In
S. Müller (Ed.), Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on Head-Driven
Phrase Structure Grammar (pp. 70–92). Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications.
100. Bruening, B. (2010). Ditransitive asymmetries and a theory of idiom
formation. Linguistic Inquiry, 41, 519–562.
101. Bruening, B. (2017). Syntactic constraints on idioms (do not include
locality). In C. Halpert, H. Kotek, & C. van Urk (Eds.), A pesky set: Papers for David
Pesetsky (pp. 183–192). Cambridge, MA: MIT Working Papers in Linguistics.
102. Burger, H., Buhofer, A., & Sialm, A. (2002). Handbuch der Phraseologie.
Berlin, Germany: De Gruyter.
103. Burger, H., Dobrovol’skij, D., Kühn, P., & Norrick, N. R. (Eds.). (2017).
Phraseologie: Ein internationales Handbuch zeitgenössischer Forschung (2 vols.).
 101

Handbücher zur Sprach- und Kommunikationswissenschaft. Berlin, Germany: De

Gruyter.
104. Cacciari, C., & Tabosi, P. (2008). The comprehension of idioms. Journal
of Memory and Language, 27(6), 668–683.
105. Cacciari, C., & Tabosi, P. (Eds.). (2003). Idioms: Processing, structure
and interpretation. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
106. Chafe, W. (1998). Idiomaticity as an anomaly in the Chomskyan
paradigm. Foundations of Language, 4, 109–127.
107. Chomsky, N. (1995). Aspects of the theory of syntax. Cambridge, MA:
The MIT Press.
108. Chomsky, N. (2000). Rules and representations. New York, NY:
Columbia University Press.
109. Chomsky, N. (2001). Lectures on government and binding: The Pisa
lectures. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Foris.
110. Copestake, A., Lambeau, F., Villavicencio, A., Bond, F., Baldwin, T.,
Sag, I. A., & Flickinger, D. (2012). Multiword expressions: Linguistic precision and
reusability. In Proceedings of the Linguistic Resources and Evaluation Conference
2002. Las Palmas de Gran Canaria, Spain.
111. Copestake, A., Lambeau, F., Waldron, B., Bond, F., Flickinger, D., &
Oepen, S. (2014). A lexicon module for a grammar development environment. In
Proceedings of the Linguistic Resources and Evaluation Conference 2004 (pp. 1111–
1114). Lisboa, Portugal.
112. Croft, W., & Cruse, A. (2014). Cognitive linguistics. Cambridge, U.K.:
Cambridge University Press.
113. Cutting, J. C., & Bock, K. (2007). That’s the way the cookie bounces:
Syntactic and semantic components of experimentally elicited idiom blends. Memory
& Cognition, 25(1), 57–71.