Academic literature on the topic 'Phraseology, idioms, names of animals, differences'

The aim of this article is to compare French and Russian phraseological units including the names of domestic ani-mals (кошка/ chat, собака/ chien, лошадь/ cheval, корова/ vache, свя/ cochon, коза /chèvre, баран/ mouton) which are discussed according to structural, functional and semantic criteria proposed by A.G. Nazarian. According to the structural criterion, phraseological units include: a) non-predicative (жирный как свинья/ gras comme un cochon; ме-тать бисер перед свиньями/ jeter des perles aux cochons), b) partially predicative (cheval qui n’a ni bouche ni éperon) and с) predicative (le chat parti [absent, quand le chat n’est pas là, quand le chat dort], les souris dansent). Idioms (manger de la vache enragée) and unique phraseological units (appeler un chat un chat) are distinguished according to semantic classification. According to the functional criterion, phraseological units are divided into communicative (да-реному коню в зубы не смотрят/ à cheval donné on ne regarde pas la bouche) and non-communicative (конек, глав-ный козырь/ cheval de bataille), including nominative and infinitive units. Comparing Russian and French phraseolog-ical units we can observe the following relations: coincidence of the plan of content and the image (играть как кошка с мышью/ jouer avec sa victime comme un chat avec une souris), coincidence of the plan of content and different im-ages ( не иметь ни кола, ни двора/ n’avoir ni cheval ni mule), difference of the plan of content and of images, but the presence of domestic animal’s name (кошки скребут на душе, avoir un chat dans la gorge). Phraseological units can сontain metaphor, продать (купить) кота в мешке/ vendre (acheter) chat en poche metonymy (Троянский конь/ cheval de Troie), comparison (amoureuse comme une chatte).

The article is devoted to phraseology, one of the most complex linguistic phenomena at the junction of various scienc-es – lexicology, grammar, stylistics, phonetics, language history, history, philosophy, logic and regional studies, which is investigated using a particular research method. The article aims at conducting a comparative analysis of idioms with the names of domestic animals in Russian and English. The methodological basis of the study is theoret-ical works related to classification and semantic analysis of phraseological units, which are not onlycollocations with complicated semantics, but also units of mental representation. It is emphasized that the phraseological units under consideration contain culturally significant information, which is expressed in both denotative and connotative aspects of meaning. A comparative analysis of phraseological units in English and Russian shows that English phraseological units, without an equivalent in Russian, are often translated in a descriptive way. The author explains this by the fact that phraseological units are verbalized in a certain logosphere of the language culture, connected, on the one hand, with linguistic consciousness and thinking, and on the other, with the linguistic picture of the world. The article points out that the concept “animal” has a universal meaning and national peculiarity, generalized in the national linguistic picture of the world. The attention is drawn to the fact that the English phraseological units with animal names do not coincide partially or completely with their Russian equivalents on the figurative basis due to national peculiarities. In conclusion, the number of English phraseological units denoting dogs with negative connotations is much greater than the number of phraseological units with positive emotional connotations.

The aim of the article is to show the relationship between the homo and animal spheres. The research material consists of Polish and Russian phraseological units in a broad sense (idioms, comparisons and proverbs) with zoonyms being the names of farm animals. The main emphasis was placed on the inherent – in faunal phraseology – and the closely related features of anthropocentrism and didacticism. Tracing the relationship between humans and animals clearly indicates the pejorativization of the linguistic image of fauna by a man. People like to use animal portraits to speak of the dark sides of their own world. Ascribing disabilities to representatives of fauna at the same time exposes the value of everything that is human. Parallel however, there is a phenomenon of hyperbolization of the negative portrait of a man who tries to subjugate living creatures from outside his species, guided by heartlessness, greed and selfishness. The lack of morality or culture cannot be considered animal traits, since higher feelings are characteristic of homo sapiens and constitute the foundation that distinguishes humans from the fauna world. Animals only fight for food, domination, and take care of the young. Their behavior is not due to ill will, lack of morals or culture. In the behavior of animals, their nature prevails and their innate instincts ensure their survival. Animals are not uncultivated and immoral, it is only a man who thinks of them in this way, involuntarily projecting his own world onto the animal world. There is a human interpretation of the world in animalistic phraseological units.

Frequently used phrases in Danskovīte’ plays help to create a typical cultural landscape of Latgale, at the same time a wide range of stylistically expressive vocabulary, most often verbal phrases, and the predominance of poetic comparisons outline the individual writing style of this author. Dramatic work of Danskovīte, which is chosen as the source of phraseology of the research in question, is an area that has not been explored until now. The source of the research consists of 15 plays, 10 of which are available to the readers, “Ontans i Anne” (5 parts), “Sīvasmuotes senču laiki” (3 parts), “Tāva meitas” and “Duorgīs pierkums” (Danskovīte 2008) and five manuscripts of plays: “Lauku kūrorts pilsātnīkim”, “Ontans i rodne”, “Ontans i sābri”, “Ontans i Zīmassvātki” and “Prece ai zatanu”. The aim of the research is to analyse the language of Danskovīte”s plays (phraseology, comparisons, stylistically expressive lexis), revealing the dominant features of the comic. In order to analyse the language of the comic and the features of language as a cultural phenomenon, the linguacultural approach was selected and studies in phraseology were applied. In its turn, the method of receptive aesthetics was used for questionnaires in order to find out the attitude of the respondents towards the plays of Danskovīte, their popularity, as well as to highlight the most characteristic elements of the comic, since, in accordance with the basic principles of receptive aesthetics, text does not have a single meaning – the meaning is formed in the process of interaction between the text and the reader, and a literary work exists as a literary work only in the process of reading and perception and helps to understand that the text is rooted in the communication system and depends on the functioning of the society. For this study, phraseological equivalents in the Latgalian language were searched in “Kalupes izloksnes vārdnīca” (Dictionary of Kalupe vernacular, 1998), in the materials of the Congress of Latgalistics and in the “Latgolys lingvoteritorialo vuordineica” (Latgale lingvoterritorial dictionary, 2012). In the Latvian literary language, however, phraseological equivalents are sought in the Kārlis Mīlenbahs’ and Jānis Endzelīns’ “Latviešu valodas vārdnīcā” (Dictionary of the Latvian language) (1923–1932) and “Latviešu valodas frazeoloģijas vārdnīca” (Dictionary of Latvian phraseology, 2000). In the plays of Danskovīte, about 250 phraseological expressions are excerpted, of which 40% are constructions made by author’s lexical modifications, 31% –traditionally used phraseological units, 23.3% – author’s idioms, 2.4% – author’s semantic modifications, 3.3% – author’s grammatical modifications. It should be noted that 42% of all excerpted units are constructions that include comparisons, where the most part includes a component that identifies a feature from the world of animals, often ascribing animal conduct and properties to a person. Authors’ idioms are used occasionally, functioning only in literary works of the given writer, and they do not have equivalents in the phraseology of the Latvian or other languages. The study of modifications of phraseological units is important in view of the fact that such idioms in the plays of Danskovīte make up about 70% of the total number of all types of set phrases in general; only 30 phraseological units exist in a standardized form, thus most of the existing set phrases in Danskovīte’s plays form the transformations of prescriptive phraseology of all kinds – grammatical, lexical and semantical. The number of modifications includes author’s own phraseology – idioms, which determine the formation of the phraseological expression and specific style of writing. Conceptually, prescriptive phraseological units are understood in terms of stable and traditionally established word combinations, the common meaning of which is different from the meaning of individual components of the phrase. The main methods of creating comic effect in terms of prescriptive phraseology are mostly comparisons, for example, kuo cītumnīks (like a prisoner), kuo bomzs (like a beggar), kuo iz pasyutiejuma (by order), kuo diele (like a leech), kuo myusa (like a fly), kuo troks (like mad). There are also other methods at the basis of the phraseology of Danskovīte’s plays, but it is difficult to find a common characteristics, since their differences are nuanced and context specific. Viewing the lexical modifications by keyword, it is obvious that combinations with the components of tongue, head and eye are represented most often. The second type of transformations consists of phraseological units, which change the grammatical features in author’s language. As already mentioned, they are fewer in number. One of the characteristics of the grammatical modifications is the addition of prefixes that deny the activity specific to the object or subject, or, on the contrary, reinforce such activity, for example, like in the phraseological unit borrowed from Russian: наступить на хвост > iz astes (na)izkuopt. Semantic variations change the meaning of phraseological units, although any modification more or less strongly promotes the departure of the idiom from its main meaning registered in dictionaries, however, this modification is more pronounced in terms of the change of meaning. Analysed in this study are the semantic modifications of phraseological units: kuo syvāns (like a piglet) and kuo bārns (like a child). Danskovīte applies several ways of creating comic effect: misapprehension and comic action and behaviour revealed in a grotesque manner; exaggeration and comic language, peculiarities of pronunciation, associations, epitomized language and misunderstandings.

Аннотация: Фразеологизмдердеги образдуулук касиет жөнүндө сөз кылганда, анын маанисине кайрылууга туура келет, башкача айтканда, андагы образдуулук фразеологизмдердин маанилери анын жеке сөзгө карата эквиваленттүүлүгү менен белгиленет. Фразеологизмдерде нерсе, анын белгилери, кыймыл-аракети, сапаты, абалы жөнүндөгү мааниден сырткары ал маанилердин чекке жетип, күчөтүлгөн, же тескерисинче, өтө басаңдатылган мүнөздөгү оттенкалары, эмоционалдык, экспрессивдик кошумча белгилери кошо берилген болот. Андыктан, алар ой-пикирди таамай, курч, жеткиликтүү берүүдө жана анын көркөмдүк татымын күчөтүүдө кеңири колдонулуучу эң бай тилдик каражаттардан болуп саналат. Бул макалада жазуучунун өлүмдү, оорулардын түрлөрүн, кудайлардын жана духтардын аттарын атоого тыюу салынган табуланган сөздөрдү да өзгөчө көркөмдүк ыкмада колдонуп келгендиги айтылат. Эвфемизмдерди колдонуу пикир алышкан адамдардын жашы, жыныстык айырмачылыктары менен тыгыз байланыштуу. Эвфемизмдик фразеологизмдер менен атап, көркөмдөтүп окурманга тартуулоо жазуучунун тил каражаттарын иштетүү, тандоо, өтмө маанисин туя билүү чеберчилигине жараша ишке ашат. Бул жагдайдан байкоо жүргүзгөндө Т.Сыдыкбеков эвфемизмдик фразеологизмдердин стилистикалык маанисине өзгөчө мамиле кылгандыгы көрүнүп турат. Түйүндүү сөздөр: эквиваленттүүлүк, фразеологизм, эмоционалдык, образдуулук, табуланган сөздөр, стилистикалык маани, экспрессивдик, тандоо. Аннотация: Образность фразеологизмов, когда речь идет о сущности, приходится обращаться к ее значению, т. е. образность в нем определяется эквивалентностью смысла фразеологизмов к личному слову. В фразеологизмах, помимо смысла о чем-либо, его признаках, поступках, качествах, состоянии, могут быть представлены оттенки эмоционального состоянии, экспрессивного характера, достигающие предела этих значений, усиленные или, наоборот, сильно замедленные. Поэтому они являются самыми богатыми языковыми средствами, широко используемыми в четком, остроумном, доступном вещании и усилении его художественного вкуса. Эта статья показывает, что автор использует особенно изящный метод описания смерти, видов болезней, имен богов и духов, запрещенных к названию. Применение эвфемизмов тесно связано с возрастом, половыми различиями в общении. Использование эвфемических фразеологизмов в качестве художественного выражения читателю осуществляется в зависимости от умения автора обрабатывать, выбирать, копировать переходное значение языковых средств. При наблюдении за этой ситуацией Т.Сыдыкбеков обратил особое внимание на стилистические значения эвфемических фразеологизмов. Ключевые слова: эквивалентность, фразеологизм, эмоциональность, образность, табу слова, стилистическое значение, экспрессия, выбор. Abstract: the Imagery of phraseology when talking about the essence, it is necessary to refer to its value, i.e., the imagery in it is determined by the equivalence of meaning of the idioms to the personal word. In phrase logical units, in addition to meaning about something, its signs, actions, qualities, and state, shades of an emotional state or an expressive character can be represented, reaching the limit of these values, amplified, or, conversely, severely slowed down. Therefore, they are the richest language tools, widely used in clear, witty, accessible broadcasting and enhancing its artistic taste. This article shows that the author uses a particularly elegant method of detecting corpses, types of diseases, names of gods and spirits that are forbidden to be named. The use of euphemisms is closely related to age and gender differences in communication. The use of euphemisms is closely related to age, in particular. phraseology as an artistic expression for the reader is carried out depending on the author's ability to process, select, and copy the transitional meaning of language tools. When observing this situation, T.Sydykbekov paid special attention to the stylistic meanings of euphemistic phrase logical units. Keywords: equivalence, phraseology, emotionality, imagery, taboo words, stylistic meaning, expression.

The object of this article are animal idioms in contemporary German and Albanian: the article treats those units that denote animal names in their formal structure with phraseological, figurative meaning. The aim of the article is to identify and describe the differences and similarities between these two languages from the viewpoint of a contrastive analysis. The German phraseology has often been the subject of inter-linguistic comparisons. However, this can not be claimed for the German – Albanian language analysis. In this article, some similarities and differences in animal symbolism in the German and Albanian phraseology are illustrated by typical examples, and equivalence relations between the German and Albanian animal idioms are identified. It can be concluded that the animal names in idiom units indicate positive and negative characteristics or behavior of people. One result is that the negative semantic characteristics predominate in both languages. The animal name depends on a concrete idiom not only from the ideas and values that are attributed to an animal in a language community, but also from the already existing structures and pragmatic rules in a concrete language.