Page 66 - 4805

It is obvious that this classification system does not take into
account the structural characteristics of phraseological units. On
the other hand, the border-line separating unities from fusions is
vague and even subjective. One and the same phraseological unit
may appear motivated to one person (and therefore be labeled as a
unity) and demotivated to another (and be regarded as a fusion).
The more profound one's command of the language and one's
knowledge of its history, the fewer fusions one is likely to discover
in it.
The structural principle of classifying phraseological units is
based on their ability to perform the same syntactical functions as
words. In the traditional structural approach, the following
principal groups of phraseological units are distinguishable.
1. Verbal: to run for one's {dear) life, to get (win) the upper
hand;
2. Substantive: dog's life, cat-and-dog life, calf love,
3. Adjectival: high and mighty, spick and span, brand new,
safe and sound. In this group the so-called comparative word-
groups are particularly expressive and sometimes amusing in their
unanticipated and capricious associations: (as) cool as a
cucumber,(as) nervous as a cat, (as) weak as a kitten, (as) good as
gold (usu. spoken about children), (as) pretty as a picture, as large
as life,
4. Adverbial: high and low, by hook or by crook, for love or
money, in cold blood, in the dead of night, between the devil and
the deep sea, to the bitter end, by a long chalk.
5. Interjectional: my God! by Jove! by George! goodness
gracious! good Heavens!
Professor A.I. Smirnitsky offered a classification system for
English phraseological units which is interesting as an attempt to
combine the structural and the semantic principles. Phraseological
units in this classification system are grouped according to the
number and semantic significance of their constituent parts.
Accordingly two large groups are established:

65