Tatiana V. Safonova

Candidate of Sciences (Philology), Associate Professor, Associate Professor of the Department of Russian Language and Literature

Tula State Lev Tolstoy Pedagogical University

(Tula, Russia)

DOI: https://doi.org/10.22405/2712-8407-2024-3-129-138

Abstract. The article examines the problem of set expressions changing according to a quantitative parameter, putting forward a hypothesis about the dependence of the reduction processes and distribution of their component composition on the structure specifics. This task predetermines the necessity to cover a number of additional issues: the concept of ‘set expressions’ (SE), their place in the linguistic system, variation. The methods of continuous sampling, quantitative-statistical, and observations of the use of SE in speech used in the study allow us to confirm the hypothesis put forward and come to the following main conclusions: quantitative variation is aimed primarily at changing the plan of expression of these phrases, therefore the final result of such a transformation is largely determined by the nature of the form source units; according to existing research, quantitative variation itself can be represented by a reduction (implication) of the lexical extent of a unit - this is an ellipsis with intonation of incompleteness and intonation completeness, isolating a fragment or word from the composition of the SE, as well as an increase in the lexical extent of a unit (explication) – distribution by one or more components original unit, contamination; for a simple SE structure, it is more typical to isolate fragments equivalent to phrasemes and/or lexemes; for SE organized according to the model of a complex sentence - ellipsis with intonation of completeness, when reduction is carried out along a structural-semantic seam, provided that the predicative parts are equivalent, both parts can be reduced, the grammatical dependence of the components predetermines the reduction of only one fragment; during contamination, units of complex structure are reduced, followed by the parts combination and the obligatory preservation of one of the original SE models, taken as a phraseological basis.
Keywords: set expression, implication, contamination, variant, phrasal unit.

Full text of the article (PDF)

For citation: Safonova, TV 2024, ‘The Quantitative Change of Set Expressions in Speech: Conditions and Results’, Tula Scientific Bulletin. History. Linguistics, issue 3 (19), pp. 129–138, http://doi.org/10.22405/2712-8407-2024-3-129-138 (in Rus)

References

1. Arkhangelskiy, VL 1964, Ustoychivyye frazy v sovremennom russkom yazyke: Osnovy teorii ustoychivykh fraz i problemy obshchey frazeologii (Set phrases in the modern Russian language: Fundamentals of the theory of set phrases and problems of general phraseology), Izdvo Rost. un-ta publ, Rostov-na-Donu. (In Russ.)
2. Bondarenko, VT 1995, Varyirovaniye ustoychivykh fraz v russkoy rechi (Variation of set phrases in Russian speech), izd-vo TGPU im. L. N. Tolstogo publ, Tula. (In Russ.)
3. Bondarenko, VT 2011, Ustoychivyye frazy v russkoy rechi (Set phrases in Russian speech), izd-vo TGPU im. L. N. Tolstogo publ, Tula. (In Russ.)
4. Zhukov,VP 2007, Slovar russkikh poslovits i pogovorok (Dictionary of Russian proverbs and sayings), Rus. yaz.-Media publ, Moscow. (In Russ.)
5. Kuznetsov, SA 2000, Bolshoy tokovyy slovar russkogo yazyka (Large current dictionary of the Russian language), Norint publ, St.Petersburg. (In Russ.)
6. Mokiyenko, VM & Walter, H 2006, Prikolnyy slovar (antiposlovitsy i antiaforizmy) (Cool dictionary (anti-proverbs and anti-aphorisms)), Neva publ, St. Petersburg. (In Russ.)
7. Potebnya, AA 1990, ‘Iz lektsiy po teorii slovesnosti. Basnya. Poslovitsa. Pogovorka’ (From lectures on the theory of literature. Fable. Proverb. Proverb), Teoreticheskaya poetika (Theoretical poetics), Vyssh. shk. publ,Moscow. (In Russ.)
8. Safonova,TV 2012, Implitsirovaniye ustoychivykh fraz v russkoy rechi (Implication of set phrases in Russian speech), PhD thesis, Yelets. (In Russ.)