Modern Greek Constructional Phrasemes with Antonymous Verbs: Χ τον ανε- βάζει, Χ / Y τον κατεβάζει and Χ μπαίνει, Χ βγαίνει
https://doi.org/10.24224/2227-1295-2020-10-142-158
Abstract
The paper presents the results of the corpus and lexicographical analysis of two Modern Greek constructional phrasemes (a class of phraseologisms distinguished by A. N. Baranov and D. O. Dobrovol’skij) with antonymous verbs in their fixed part — Χ τον ανεβάζει, Χ / Y τον κατεβά- ζει and Χ μπαίνει, Χ βγαίνει. It is noted that though these constructional phrasemes have different meanings and dissimilar functions in the sentence there is structural and semantic similarity between them. The two phrasemes represent a rhyming two-part structure, whose main lexical “anchors” are antonymous locative verbs expressing a counter-directional movement of a subject or an object in space. It is shown that the pairs of the antonymous verbs become desemanticized and the relation of antonymy between them becomes lost as they form the fixed part of the constructional phrasemes. It is emphasized that at the same time the original locative meaning of the verbs adds it imagery to the semantic content of these phrasemes, becoming the basis of their inner form, and determines some part of their meaning — the meaning of multitude of repeating situations. The paper also takes into consideration some idiomatical constructions of other languages that have similar meanings to those of the Greek constructional phrasemes. It is demonstrated that many of these constructions are also formed by means of locative antonyms, which provides evidence to suggest that this type of inner form is frequent among phraseologisms denoting multitude of repeating situations.
About the Author
E. S. Onufrieva
Federal State Budgetary Educational Institution of Higher Education Lomonosov Moscow State University
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Elizaveta S. Onufrieva, Post-graduate student, Department of Byzantine and Modern Greek Studies
Moscow
References
1. Akçataş, A. (2011). A study on antonymous relations in Turkey Turkish proverbs and idioms. Turkish Studies, 6 / 1: 311—322. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.7827/TurkishStudies.1576.
2. Alefirenko, N. F., Semenenko, N. N. (2009). Frazeologiya i paremiologiya: uchebnoye posobiye dlya bakalavrskogo urovnya filologicheskogo obrazovaniya [Phraseology and paremiology: textbook for bachelor’s level of philological education]. Moskva: Flinta: Nauka. 344 p. (In Russ.).
3. Antonyms in English. Construals, Construcions and Canonicity. (2012). New York: Cambridge University Press. 186 p. Apresjan, V. (2012). The “Russian” attitude to time. In: Space and Time in Languages and Cultures. Language, culture, and cognition. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company. 103—120.
4. Baranov, A. N., Dobrovol’skij, D. O. (2014). Osnovy frazeologii (kratkiy kurs): uchebnoye posobiye [Fundamentals of phraseology (short course): textbook]. Moskva: Flinta. 312 p. (In Russ.).
5. Chernysheva, I. I. (1970). Frazeologiya sovremennogo nemetskogo yazyka [Phraseology of the modern German language]. Moskva: Vysshaya shkola. 199 p. (In Russ.).
6. Dobrovol’skij, D. (2011). Phraseologie und Konstruktionsgrammatik. In: Konstruktionsgrammatik III: Aktuelle Fragen und Lösungsansätze. Tübingen: Stauffenburg Linguistik. 110— 130. (In Germ.).
7. Dobrovol’skij, D. (2019). «Pokazateli bezrazlichiya» v russko-nemetskom korpuse parallelnykh tekstov [“Indicators of indifference” in the Russian-German corpus of parallel texts]. Trudy Instituta russkogo yazyka im. V. V. Vinogradova [Proceedings of the V. V. Vinogradov Institute of the Russian language], 21: 202—213. (In Russ.).
8. Fillmore, Ch. (1979). Innocence: a second idealization for linguistics. Berkeley Linguistics Society, 5: 63—76.
9. Finkbeiner, R. (2015). The grammar and pragmatics of N hin, N her (‘N thither, N hither’) in German. Pragmatics and Society, 6(1): 89—116. DOI: 10.1075/ps.6.1.05fin.
10. Finkbeiner, R. (2017). “Argumente Hin, Argumente Her.” Regularity and idiomaticity in German N Hin, N Her. Journal of Germanic Linguistics, 29.3: 205—258. DOI: 10.1017/S1470542716000234.
11. Finkbeiner, R. (2018). Sentence-peripheral coordinative reduplication in German: a pragmatic view. In: Exact Repetition in Grammar and Discourse. Berlin: Walter De Gruyter. 265— 294. DOI: 10.1515/9783110592498-011.
12. Fleischer, W. (1982). Phraseologie der deutschen Gegenwartssprache. Leipzig: VEB Bibliographisches Institut. 299 p. (In Germ.).
13. Gelblu, Ya. I. (1964). Antonimichnye pary [Antonymous pairs]. Voprosy obshchego i germanskogo yazykoznaniya [Questions of General and Germanic linguistics], 15: 161—164. (In Russ.).
14. Jones, S. (2002). Antonymy. A corpus-based perspective. London—New York: Routledge. 212 p.
15. Justeson, J., Katz, S. (1991). Co-occurrences of antonymous adjectives and their contexts. Computational Linguistics, 17: 1—19.
16. Kiparsky, P. (1976). Oral poetry: some linguistic and typological consideration. In: Oral Literature and the Formula.Ann Arbor: Center for the Coordination of Ancient and Modern Studies. 73—106.
17. Khrakovskiy, V. S. (1989). Semanticheskiye tipy mnozhestva situatsiy i ikh yestestvennaya klassifikatsiya [Semantic types of a set of situations and their natural classification]. In: Tipologiya iterativnykh konstruktsiy [Typology of iterative constructions]. Leningrad: Nauka. 5—53. (In Russ.).
18. Kiseleva, K. L. (2011). Antonimiya vo frazeologii: formalnoye skhodstvo kak usloviye protivopolozhnosti znacheniy [Antonymy in phraseology: formal similarity as a condition for the oppositeness of meanings]. In: Kompyuternaya lingvistika i intellektualnyye tekhnologii. Po materialam yezhegodnoy Mezhdunarodnoy konferentsii «Dialog» (2011) [Computer linguistics and intellectual technologies. Based on the materials of the annual international conference “Dialog” (2011)], 10: 305—314. (In Russ.).
19. Mattiola, S., Massini, F. (30th August 2018). Syntactic discontinuous reduplication in Italian (and beyond): paper presented at SLE51 Conference. University of Tallin.
20. Maysak, T. A. (2005). Tipologiya grammatikalizatsii konstruktsiy s glagolami dvizheniya i glagolami pozitsii [The typology of grammaticalization of constructions with verbs of motion and verbs of position]. Moskva: Yazyki slavyanskikh kultur. 481 p. (In Russ.).
21. Mettinger, A. (1994). Aspects of Semantic Opposition in English. Oxford: Clarendon Press. 216 p.
22. Molotkov, A. I. (1968). Frazeologizmy russkogo yazyka i printsipy ikh leksikograficheskogo opisaniya [Phraseological units of Russian language and the principles of their lexicographic description]. In: Frazeologicheskiy slovar’ russkogo yazyka [Phraseological dictionary of Russian language]. Moskva: Sovetskaya entsiklopediya. 543 p. (In Russ.).
23. Novikov, L. A. (1982). Semantika russkogo yazyka [Semantics of the Russian language]. Moskva: Vysshaya shkola. 272 p. (In Russ.).
24. Shvedova, N. Yu. (1960). Ocherki po sintaksisu russkoy razgovornoy rechi [An essay on the syntax of Russian spoken speech]. Moskva: Izdatelstvo AN SSSR. 377 p. (In Russ.).
25. Shmelev, D. N. (2002). Izbrannyye trudy po russkomu yazyku [Selected works on the Russian language]. Moskva: Yazyki slavyanskoy kultury. 888 p. (In Russ.).
26. Taylor, J. (2003). Linguistic Categorization. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 328 p. Tsaregorodtseva, N. V. (2011). Antonimicheskiye korrelyatsii s semantikoy dvizheniya v sostave angliyskikh paremiy [Antonymic correlations with the semantics of movement as part of English paroemias]. Izvestiya Uralskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta. Gumanitarnyye nauki [Proceedings of the Ural State University. Humanities], 2 (90): 106—112. (In Russ.).
27. Zuluaga, A. (1980). Introducción al estudio de las expresiones fijas. Frankfurt am Main: P. Lang. 278 p. (In Span.).
Review
For citations:
Onufrieva E.S. Modern Greek Constructional Phrasemes with Antonymous Verbs: Χ τον ανε- βάζει, Χ / Y τον κατεβάζει and Χ μπαίνει, Χ βγαίνει. Nauchnyi dialog. 2020;1(10):142-158. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.24224/2227-1295-2020-10-142-158
Views:
609
Email this article 