No. 85 (2021): Southern Archive (philological sciences)
Romanic, Germanic and other languages

PHRASEOLOGICAL UNITS DENOTING FOREIGNERS IN ENGLISH (STRUCTURAL AND SEMANTIC ASPECTS)

Yuliia Viktorivna Sviatiuk
Taras Shevchenko National University of Kyiv
Liliia Oleksandrivna Sandyga
Taras Shevchenko National University of Kyiv

Published 2021-04-12

Keywords

  • phraseological units, ethnic names, cross-cultural communication, extralinguistic factors, cultural competence
  • фразеологічні одиниці, етнонім, фразеологізм, міжкультурна комунікація, екстралінгвістичні фактори, культурна компетенція

Abstract

Purpose. The article reveals the national and cultural peculiarities of English phraseological units with ethnic names. This study aims to present the semantic structure of the English phraseological units denoting foreigners.

Methods. The study was conducted using the method of dictionary definitions, the method of continuous sampling for the selection of phraseological units naming foreigners, interdisciplinary method for analysing linguistic aspects considering data from history, ethnology and sociology.

Results. The analysis of units under study revealed that the ethnic names used in these phraseological units specify and modify the meaning of the main component of the phraseological unit, as well as create antonymic correlations between direct and figurative meaning of the main component of the phraseological unit (Dutch cure, Irishman’s hurricane). Being the elements of phraseological units official ethnic names modify and reconsider the semantic structure of the phraseological units, thus attributing conventional characteristics and evaluations to the representatives of other nations (to talk to like a Dutch uncle, Jewish lightning), or perform exclusively structural function being the constituent part of such phraseological units and denote historical and cultural realia of a nation with neutral evaluation (Jewish typewriter). The figurative meaning of the phraseological units with ethnic names is build on the psychological universal opposition ‘we vs others’ according to which the culture, manner of life, image of other nation is often evaluated negatively and with unjustified prejudice. Such culturally marked meanings are entrenched in the semantic structure of the phraseological units and recognized due to cultural competence and actualization of specific historical and national context and background of a certain ethnic community.

Conclusions. It can therefore be concluded that phraseological units with ethnic names transfer the specific national and cultural vision and perception of the multinational world. As the component of the phraseological unit the ethnic names present characteristics and evaluations of the representatives of other nations and carry out structural function.

References

1. Алефиренко Н.Ф. Фразеология в свете современных лингвистических парадигм: монография. Москва : Академия, 2008. 271 с.
2. Ажнюк Б. М. Англійська фразеологія у культурно-етнічному висвітленні. Київ, 1989. 136 с.
3. Войцехівська Н.К. Конфліктний дискурс: структурно-семантичний і комунікативно-прагматчиний аспекти : монографія. Київ : Видавничий дім Дмитра Бураго, 2018. 404 с.
4. Городецька О.В. Відображення англоцентризму в англійській мові. Мовні і концептуальні картини світу : зб. наук. пр. Київ : КНУ імені Тараса Шевченка. 2000. № 4. С. 103–108.
5. Кунин А.В. Больщой англо-русский фразеологический словарь. Москва : Русский язык, 2005. 1210 с.
6. Левченко О. П. Фразеологічна репрезентація світу. Мовні і концептуальні картини світу : зб. наук. пр. Київ : КНУ імені Тараса Шевченка. 2003. № 7. С. 307–315.
7. Рогач О.О. Структурно-семантичні особливості фразеологізмів з етнонімами : автореф. дис.… канд. філол. наук : 10.02.15. НАН України ; Ін-т укр. мови. Київ, 1999. 18 с.
8. Телия В.Н. Русская фразеология. Семантический, прагматический и лингвокультурологический аспекты. Москва : Языки русской культуры, 1996. 288 с.
9. Davletbaeva D. N., Ivanova A. M., Kozlova Y. A., Psycholinguistic Criteria for Understanding Phraseological Units. Mediterranean Journal of Social Science. 2015. № 6(4). P. 353–358.
10. Dobrovol’skij D. Cross-linguistic equivalence of idioms: does it really exist? Linguo-Cultural Competence and Phraseological Motivation, Baltmannsweiler. 2011. P. 7–24.
11. Green J. Words Apart. The Language of Prejudice. London. 1996. 383 p.
12. Knapp K. Interkulturelle Kommunikation. Zeitschrift fur Fremdsprachenforschung. 1990. № 1. P. 62–93.
13. Melnyk N. Sociolinguistic studies of English language: analytical overview of the problem Science and Education a New Dimension. Philology Vol 63. Issue: 212. 2019. P. 36–40.
14. Zykova I. Phraseological Meaning as a Mechanism of Cultural Memory. Research on Phraseology Across Continents. Vol. 2. 2013. P. 388–407. URL : https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/83087031.pdf (дата звернення: 18.01.2021).