a study on structural and semantic components of idioms in english and vietnamese

The study undertakes an investigation of idioms in English and Vietnamese in terms of structural and semantic components. There are three foci: (1) similarities and differences between English and Vietnamese idioms in terms of structural components; (2) similarities and differences between English and Vietnamese idioms in terms of semantic components; and (3) similarities and differences between English and Vietnamese in terms of main factors behind the formation of semantic components of idioms. In order to collect the data, we have conducted a hand search approach of the two dictionaries, which has enabled the establishing of a corpus of more than 6,000 entries in English and more than 4,000 entries in Vietnamese. In the present study, we establish a theoretical frame for canonical structural components and noncanonical structural components of idioms in both English and Vietnamese. The canonical structural components involve three types of idioms existing in our data: symmetrical, similized, and ordinary (Đức 1995; Hành 2008). The structural components of these idioms are coded in A, B, M, X, etc, which are then realized, described and analyzed according to grammatical rules (Quirk, Greenbaum, Leech, Svartvik 1985). The noncanonical structural components involve two types of idioms: idiom variants and synonymous idioms (Giang 2009). The structural components of idiom variants in English are divided into morphosyntactic variation (verb inflection, flexible use of determiners, and noun inflection), lexical variation (substitution, modification, and partial deletion), and syntactic variation (constituent reversal and dative shift). The structural components of idiom variants in Vietnamese are also divided into three types: phonological orthographic variation (substitution of initial consonant or initial vowel of a word), lexical variation (substitution, modification, and partial deletion), and syntactic variation (constituent reversal, and truncated reversal). The structural components of synonymous idioms in English are classified under two general headings: lexical synonymy and syntactic synonymy. The lexical synonymy heading involves the substitution, i.e. a constituent part of an idiom can be replaced with alternatives belonging to different fields of meaning (Giang 2009). The syntactic synonymy heading refers to the change of grammatical structures including pattern changing and passivization. In Vietnamese, the structural components of synonymous idioms can also be classified under two general headings: lexical synonymy (including substitution, literalized transformation, and language transformation) and syntactic synonymy. In the light of the findings, the study has shown that a high level of canonicity is observed in the idioms in both languages. As regards the semantic components, the study is substantially reliant on the cognitive theory of idioms (Gibbs 1990, 1995; Nunberg et al. 1994; Kövecses Szabo 1996; Fernando 1996) to analyze the data. The semantic components of idioms in both languages appear from totally transparent to the totally opaque: transparent, semitransparent, semiopaque, and opaque. The semantic components are investigated under two categories: canonical (symmetrical idioms, similized idioms, and ordinary idioms), and noncanonical (idiom variants and synonymous idioms). In the present study, we once again suppose that the idiom formation in both English and Vietnamese lies in diachronic evolution (Fernando Flavell 1981). In addition, the idiomatic meaning formation in both languages is closely associated with the process of human cognition about the world around them through images. It is a natural process implicitly affected by several different factors. The differences between English and Vietnamese in terms of the formation of semantic components of idioms are dominated by different living circumstance (geographical environment, climate) different historical allusion (historical events, fables and mythologies, literary works), different religions and beliefs, different traditions and customs (food and cooking, animals). This leads to a fact that the components forming idioms in the two languages are different although they denote similar concepts. The dissertation also presents the implications for language teaching and translation of idioms. Keywords: idioms, idiomaticity, symmetrical idioms, similized idioms, ordinary idioms, idiom variants, synonymous idioms, structural components, semantic components, underlying factors.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Declaration by Author……….……

Published Works by the Author Relevant to the Dissertation……….……

Acknowledgements……….…

Abstract……….……….…….

List of Exposures……….…

List of Figures……….……

List of Tables……….….

List of Abbreviation and Symbols Used in the Dissertation……….…….

List of Vietnamese – English Terms……….……

i ii iii viii x xi xiv xv xvii PART A: INTRODUCTION……….…

1 Rationale……….………

2 Aims and Objectives of the Study……….………

3 Research Questions……….………

4 Scope of the Study……….

5 Contributions of the Study……….………

6 Methodology……….………

6.1 Analytical Framework……….……

6.2 Data Collection……….……

6.3 Data Analysis……….………

6.4 Procedure……….……

7 Structure of the Study……….……

1 1 3 3 4 4 5 5 9 11 12 13 PART B: DEVELOPMENT……….………

CHAPTER I: LITERATURE REVIEW……….………

1.1 Theoretical Background……….………

1.1.1 Idioms Defined……….…

1.1.2 Fundamental Considerations……….…

1.1.2.1 Idioms from Traditional View……….……

1.1.2.2 Idioms from Cognitive View……….…

1.1.2.3 Idioms from Taxonomic View……….……

1.1.2.4 Idioms from Cultural View……….……

1.1.2.5 Functions of Idioms……….…

1.1.3 Demarcation of Idioms……….…

1.1.3.1 Idioms versus Words……….…

15 15 15 15 17 17 18 20 31 32 35 35

1.1.3.2 Idioms versus Collocations……….…….

1.1.3.3 Idioms versus Clichés and Catchphrases……….………

1.1.3.4 Idioms versus Proverbs and Sayings……….………

1.1.3.5 Idioms versus Free Combinations……….………

1.2 Previous Research……….…………

1.2.1 Previous Research Works on Idioms in English……….………

1.2.2 Previous Research Works on Idioms in Vietnamese……….………

1.2.3 Previous Research Works on Idioms in English and Vietnamese under Comparison and Contrastive Analysis………

1.3 Chapter Summary……….……….

CHAPTER II: STRUCTURAL COMPONENTS OF ENGLISH AND VIETNAMESE IDIOMS………

2.1 Canonical Structural Components………

2.1.1 Symmetrical Idioms………

2.1.1.1 Realization………

2.1.1.2 Structural Patterns……….………

2.1.1.3 Structural Components………

2.1.2 Similized Idioms………

2.1.2.1 Realization………

2.1.2.2 Structural Patterns………

2.1.2.3 Structural Components………

2.1.3 Ordinary idioms………

2.1.3.1 Realization………

2.1.3.2 Structural Patterns………

2.1.3.3 Structural Components………

2.2 Non-Canonical Structural Components………

2.2.1 Idiom Variants………

2.2.1.1 Realization………

2.2.1.2 Structural Components………

2.2.2 Synonymous Idioms………

2.2.2.1 Realization………

2.2.2.2 Structural Components………

2.3 Structural Components of English and Vietnamese Idioms Compared……

2.3.1 Similarities………

36 37 39 41 43 43 45

48 50

52 52 52 52 53 54 61 61 62 63 69 69 69 70 78 78 78 79 88 88 89 94 94

2.3.1.1 Canonical Structural Components Found in both Languages……….

2.3.1.2 Non-Canonical Structural Components Found in both Languages… 2.3.2 Differences………

2.3.2.1 Canonical Structural Components Unique to English………

2.3.2.2 Non-Canonical Structural Components Unique to English…………

2.3.2.3 Canonical Structural Components Unique to Vietnamese…………

2.3.2.4 Non-Canonical Structural Components Unique to Vietnamese……

2.4 Chapter Summary………

CHAPTER III: SEMANTIC COMPONENTS OF ENGLISH AND VIETNAMESE IDIOMS………

3.1 Canonical Semantic Components………

3.1.1 Semantic Components of Symmetrical Idioms………

3.1.1.1 Transparent Symmetrical Idioms………

3.1.1.2 Semi-opaque Symmetrical Idioms………

3.1.2 Semantic Components of Similized Idioms………

3.1.2.1 Semi-transparent Similized Idioms………

3.1.2.2 Semi-opaque Similized Idioms………

3.1.3 Semantic Components of Ordinary Idioms………

3.1.3.1 Transparent Ordinary Idioms………

3.1.3.2 Semi-Opaque Ordinary Idioms………

3.1.3.3 Opaque Ordinary Idioms………

3.2 Non-Canonical Semantic Components……….

3.2.1 Semantic Components of Idiom Variants………

3.2.2 Semantic Components of Synonymous Idioms………

3.3 Semantic Components and their Underlying Properties………

3.3.1 Idiom Formation………

3.3.2 Idiomatic Meaning Formation………

3.3.3 Main Factors Affecting the Formation of Semantic Components…………

3.3.3.1 Living Circumstance………

3.3.3.2 Historical Allusion………

3.3.3.3 Religions and Beliefs………

3.3.3.4 Traditions and Customs………

3.4 Semantic Components of English and Vietnamese Idioms Compared……….

3.4.1 Similarities………

94 94 95 97 98 98 99 100

101 101 101 101 102 103 103 104 105 105 106 107 111 113 114 116 116 120 128 128 129 132 132 135 136

3.4.1.1 Canonical Semantic Components Found in both Languages………

3.4.1.2 Non-Canonical Semantic Components Found in both Languages…

3.4.1.3 Underlying Properties of Semantic Components Found in both Languages………

3.4.2 Differences………

3.4.2.1 Canonical Semantic Components Unique to English………

3.4.2.2 Non-Canonical Semantic Components Unique to Vietnamese……

3.4.2.3 Differences between English and Vietnamese in terms of Main Factors that Affect the Shaping of Semantic Components…………

3.5 Chapter Summary………

136 136 137 139 140 140 140 145 PART C: CONCLUSION……….

1 Recapitulation………

2 Conclusions………

3 Implications for Language Teaching and Translation………

4 Suggestions for Further Studies………

146 146 149 153 155 REFERENCES………

APPENDIX 1………

APPENDIX 2………

APPENDIX 3………

APPENDIX 4………

APPENDIX 5………

157 I VII XII XIV XVIII

ABSTRACT

The study undertakes an investigation of idioms in English and Vietnamese in terms of structural and semantic components There are three foci: (1) similarities and

differences between English and Vietnamese idioms in terms of structural components;(2) similarities and differences between English and Vietnamese idioms in terms ofsemantic components; and (3) similarities and differences between English andVietnamese in terms of main factors behind the formation of semantic components ofidioms In order to collect the data, we have conducted a hand search approach of thetwo dictionaries, which has enabled the establishing of a corpus of more than 6,000entries in English and more than 4,000 entries in Vietnamese.

In the present study, we establish a theoretical frame for canonical structuralcomponents and non-canonical structural components of idioms in both English andVietnamese The canonical structural components involve three types of idioms existing

in our data: symmetrical, similized, and ordinary (Đức 1995; Hành 2008) The structuralcomponents of these idioms are coded in A, B, M, X, etc, which are then realized,described and analyzed according to grammatical rules (Quirk, Greenbaum, Leech, &Svartvik 1985) The non-canonical structural components involve two types of idioms:idiom variants and synonymous idioms (Giang 2009) The structural components ofidiom variants in English are divided into morphosyntactic variation (verb inflection,flexible use of determiners, and noun inflection), lexical variation (substitution,modification, and partial deletion), and syntactic variation (constituent reversal anddative shift) The structural components of idiom variants in Vietnamese are alsodivided into three types: phonological & orthographic variation (substitution of initialconsonant or initial vowel of a word), lexical variation (substitution, modification, andpartial deletion), and syntactic variation (constituent reversal, and truncated reversal).The structural components of synonymous idioms in English are classified under twogeneral headings: lexical synonymy and syntactic synonymy The lexical synonymyheading involves the substitution, i.e a constituent part of an idiom can be replaced withalternatives belonging to different fields of meaning (Giang 2009) The syntacticsynonymy heading refers to the change of grammatical structures including patternchanging and passivization In Vietnamese, the structural components of synonymousidioms can also be classified under two general headings: lexical synonymy (includingsubstitution, literalized transformation, and language transformation) and syntacticsynonymy In the light of the findings, the study has shown that a high level ofcanonicity is observed in the idioms in both languages

As regards the semantic components, the study is substantially reliant on the cognitivetheory of idioms (Gibbs 1990, 1995; Nunberg et al 1994; Kövecses & Szabo 1996;Fernando 1996) to analyze the data The semantic components of idioms in bothlanguages appear from totally transparent to the totally opaque: transparent, semi-transparent, semi-opaque, and opaque The semantic components are investigated undertwo categories: canonical (symmetrical idioms, similized idioms, and ordinary idioms),and non-canonical (idiom variants and synonymous idioms) In the present study, weonce again suppose that the idiom formation in both English and Vietnamese lies indiachronic evolution (Fernando & Flavell 1981) In addition, the idiomatic meaningformation in both languages is closely associated with the process of human cognitionabout the world around them through images It is a natural process implicitly affected

by several different factors The differences between English and Vietnamese in terms

of the formation of semantic components of idioms are dominated by different livingcircumstance (geographical environment, climate) different historical allusion(historical events, fables and mythologies, literary works), different religions andbeliefs, different traditions and customs (food and cooking, animals) This leads to afact that the components forming idioms in the two languages are different althoughthey denote similar concepts The dissertation also presents the implications forlanguage teaching and translation of idioms

Keywords: idioms, idiomaticity, symmetrical idioms, similized idioms, ordinary

idioms, idiom variants, synonymous idioms, structural components, semanticcomponents, underlying factors

LIST OF EXPOSURES

Exposure 3.1: Spill the beans (give away information)……… 120

Exposure 3.2: Cưỡi ngựa xem hoa (do something summarily and perfunctorily) 120

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1.1: Classification of symmetrical figurative idioms in Vietnamese (Hành

2008: 76)……… Figure 1.2: Classification of non-symmetrical figurative idioms in Vietnamese

(Hành 2008: 100)……… Figure 1.3: Classification of similized idioms in Vietnamese (Hành 2008: 115)…Figure 2.1: Structural patterns of symmetrical idioms in English………Figure 2.2: Structural patterns of symmetrical idioms in Vietnamese………

Figure 2.3: Structural components of A and B symmetrical idioms in English… Figure 2.4: Structural components of A or B symmetrical idioms in English…… Figure 2.5: Structural components of A but B symmetrical idioms in English…… Figure 2.6: Structural components of A to B symmetrical idioms in English…… Figure 2.7: Structural components of A, B symmetrical idioms in English……… Figure 2.8: Symmetrical relationship between A and B of mẹ tròn con vuông in

Vietnamese………

Figure 2.9: Symmetrical relationship between A and B of chạy ngược chạy xuôi

in Vietnamese………Figure 2.10: Canonical structural components of symmetrical idioms in

Vietnamese……… ……… …Figure 2.11: Structural patterns of similized idioms in English……… …Figure 2.12: Structural patterns of similized idioms in Vietnamese………

Figure 2.13: Structural components of as A as B similized idioms in English…… Figure 2.14: Structural components of A like B similized idioms in English…… Figure 2.15: Structural components of […] like B similized idioms in English… Figure 2.16: Structural components of […] as B similized idioms in English…… Figure 2.17: Structural components of A như B similized idioms in Vietnamese Figure 2.18: Structural components of (A) như B similized idioms in Vietnamese Figure 2.19: Structural components of như B similized idioms in Vietnamese… Figure 2.20: Structural components of AB similized idioms in Vietnamese… ….

Figure 2.21: Structural patterns of ordinary idioms in English………….…… …Figure 2.22: Structural patterns of ordinary idioms in Vietnamese………….……

Figure 2.23: Structural components of A HN (B) ordinary idioms as noun phrases

59

59

61626363646465666768687070

71

72

Figure 2.29: Structural components of AB ordinary idioms as noun phrases in

Vietnamese……… ………Figure 2.33: Realization criteria of idiom variants in English and Vietnamese… Figure 2.34: Realization criteria of synonymous idioms in English and

Vietnamese……… ……….Figure 2.35: Distribution of idiom types in English and Vietnamese……… Figure 3.1: Semantic components of transparent symmetrical idioms in English

and Vietnamese………

Figure 3.2: Transformation of quốc sắc thiên hương (from Sino-Vietnamese into

Vietnamese)……… Figure 3.3: Semantic components of semi-opaque symmetrical idioms in English

and Vietnamese……….Figure 3.4: Semantic components of semi-transparent similized idioms in

English and Vietnamese………Figure 3.5: Semantic components of semi-opaque similized idioms in English

and Vietnamese………

Figure 3.6: Semantic components of in any case in English………… …………

Figure 3.7: The relationship between the literal readings and idiomatic meanings

of throw a spanner into the works in English and cưa sừng làm nghé in

Vietnamese……… ………Figure 3.8: Semantic components of semi-opaque ordinary idioms in English and

Vietnamese……… ………

72

73

7475

75

76

77

7779

8996

106

107

Figure 3.9: The relationship between the literal readings and idiomatic meanings

of kick the bucket in English and đẽo cày giữa đường in Vietnamese…

Figure 3.10: Semantic components of opaque ordinary idioms in English and

Vietnamese……… ………Figure 3.11: The formation of idiom in English and Vietnamese………Figure 3.12: Idiomatic meaning formation in English and Vietnamese…… ……Figure 3.13: Main factors that affect the formation of semantic components of

idioms in English and Vietnamese……… ……

108

111117127

Table 1.4: Distinguishing criteria of idioms……….………Table 2.1: Possible structural components of idiom variants in English………….Table 2.2: Possible structural components of idiom variants in Vietnamese… …Table 2.3: Possible structural components of idiom variants in English and

Vietnamese……… Table 2.4: Possible structural components of synonymous idioms in English and

Vietnamese……….………

Table 2.5: Distributional degree of idiom variants and synonymous idioms in

English and Vietnamese……… Table 2.6: Structural components of ordinary idioms found to be distinctive in

English……….………Table 2.7: Structural components of ordinary idioms found to be distinctive in

Vietnamese……… ………Table 3.1: The continuum of semantic components of idioms in English and

Vietnamese……… ………Table 3.2: Distribution of semantic components of different idiom types in

English and Vietnamese……… …………Table 3.3: Differences between English and Vietnamese in terms of main factors

that affect the formation of semantic components of idioms… ………

428588

adverbial phraseclause

determiner dependent clauseDictionary of Vietnamese Idioms (1978)English

English as a foreign languageindependent clause

language teachingnegative particlenoun

noun phrasemodifierOxford Dictionary of Catchphrases (2002)Oxford Dictionary of English Idioms (1993)operator

ordinaryphrasal verbprepositionprepositional phrasetarget languageto-infinitivesentencesimilizedsource languagesynonymousverb

verb phraseVietnamese

LIST OF VIETNAMESE – ENGLISH TERMS

bán mờ

bán tường minh

biến thể âm vị và chữ viết

chuyển đổi theo nghĩa đen

semi-opaquesemi-transparentphonological & orthographic variationliteralized transformation

approachnon-coordinationetymologizingetymologysymmetrical idiomsimilized idiomordinary idiomcomponenttransparent nuance

PART A: INTRODUCTION

1 Rationale

‘If natural language had been designed by a logician, idioms would not exist’ (Johnson

- Laird in a foreword to a collection of works on idioms, cited in Tim 2002) However,exist they do, and not only that they present a rich vein in structural and semanticcomponents as well as language behaviors and styles; therefore, they cry out forexplanation

It seems that the accurate and appropriate use of expressions which are in the broadestsense idiomatic is one distinguishing mark of a native command of the language and areliable measure of the proficiency of foreign learners (Cowie, Mackin & McCaig 1993:x) We can go beyond simple observation of the usage of such learners and ask them

whether the verb in catch someone’s imagination (rouse the interest, engage the thoughts and feelings of a specified group or kind) in English and the noun in dữ như

cọp (ferocious) in Vietnamese can be replaced If they recognize seize someone’s imagination or dữ như hổ, they have a sense of fine lexical tolerances It cannot be

denied that all foreign learners in general and Vietnamese learners in particular desire tomaster English as the native speakers; however, they usually face a lot of difficultiesthat prevent them from gaining successful conversations One of the reasons for theseproblems lies in the way people perceive and use idioms

In Vietnam, there exist three approaches in studying idioms: etymology, synchronicevolution, comparison and contrastive analysis (Hành 2008) Firstly, the investigations

on idioms under etymology go into macro field These studies are focused on theformation and transformation of each idiom in the language history It is a hard worktaking a lot of time and energy The method mainly used in these studies is theetymologizing, i.e the origins of idioms are recovered in order to make the forms andthe idiomatic meanings transparent Hành (2002) and Minh (2007) are the typicalauthors who pay attention to this field of study The second approach in studying idioms

is synchronic evolution Descriptive method is used in these studies from which the

underlying cultural factors behind the idioms can be partly interpretable This field ofstudy attracts a lot of authors such as San (1974), Việt (1981), Lực & Đang (1978), Đức(1995), Hành (2008), etc Studying idioms under comparison and contrastive analysis isthe third approach It can be said that the studies under original recovery and synchronicevolution are the backgrounds for comparison and contrastive works Several attemptshave been made to work out the similarities and differences between English andVietnamese in terms of emotion expressing idioms (Trào 2009), idiomatic verb phrases(Long 2010), idiom translation (Lan 2001; Phúc 2009), etc It seems that an in-depthinvestigation of the structural and semantic components of idioms will offer excellentopportunities for cross-language comparison and analysis This not only helps introducecultural linguistic features of a language and its speakers, but also contributes to furtherresearch into cross-cultural communication, language universals, and the semiotics ofculture.

Structurally, English and Vietnamese are very different English is a hybrid languageconsisting of some isolating features: prepositions, some inflecting (e.g the presenttense of lexical verbs), and some agglutinating, particularly in word formation (e.g

anti-dis-establish-ment-arian-ism) (Crystal 1997: 295) Vietnamese is strongly isolating

(Trào 2009) It is interesting, however, that several idioms in English have the same

structural patterns as those in Vietnamese For example, like water off a duck’s back in English and như nước đổ đầu vịt in Vietnamese are both prepositional phrases It is

more interesting that the idiomatic meanings of the two idioms are also similar, and theycan be paraphrasable as ‘ineffective’ In terms of structural components, these idiomshave both similarities and differences They are similized idioms introduced by

prepositions as the first components (like in English and như in Vietnamese) The differences lie in the rest of components forming the idioms The components after like

in English together form a noun phrase whereas those after như in Vietnamese together

form a clause To the best of my knowledge, the structural components of idioms inboth English and Vietnamese have not yet been investigated in this way

Although the components forming idioms expressing the same concepts in English andVietnamese are usually different, they have some features in common The semantic

components of idioms in both languages appear from totally transparent to the totally

opaque: transparent, i.e all the components are explicit (e.g on foot in English and bàn

đi tính lại (discuss something carefully) in Vietnamese); semi-transparent, i.e some

components are explicit (the meaning focused) and the other are implicit (e.g as busy

as a beaver (very busy) in English and cay như ớt (very hot) in Vietnamese);

semi-opaque, i.e all the components are implicit but possibly interpretable (e.g like a duck to

water (feel comfortable) in English and như chó với mèo (always conflictive) in

Vietnamese); and opaque, i.e all the components are implicit (e.g kick the bucket (die)

in English and đẽo cày giữa đường (always passive and changeable) in Vietnamese)

(Fernando & Flavell 1981; Fernando 1996) Investigating semantic components ofidioms based on these semantic criteria in English and Vietnamese is still the gap Inaddition, what main factors lie behind the differences between English and Vietnamese

in terms of the formation of semantic components of idioms also need uncovering(Hành 2008)

For the reasons presented above, we state that studying the structural and semanticcomponents of idioms in both English and Vietnamese in order to fill in the gap inresearch is necessary

2 Aims and Objectives of the Study

The study attempts to find out the similarities and differences between English andVietnamese idioms from structural and semantic perspectives

In order to achieve the aims, the study is expected to reach the following objectives:

- to identify the similarities and differences between English and Vietnamese idioms interms of structural components;

- to identify the similarities and differences between English and Vietnamese idioms interms of semantic components;

- to identify the main factors that affect the idiom formation, idiomatic meaningformation, and semantic components of idioms in English and Vietnamese

3 Research Questions

The objectives of the study can be elaborated into the following research questions:

i) What are the similarities and differences between English and Vietnamese idioms interms of structural components?

ii) What are the similarities and differences between English and Vietnamese idioms interms of semantic components?

iii) What main factors lie behind the formation of semantic components of idioms inEnglish and Vietnamese?

4 Scope of the Study

This study focuses on everyday idioms selected from Oxford Dictionary of English

Idioms (ODEI) by Cowie, Mackin & McCaig (1993) and Thành ngữ tiếng Việt

[Dictionary of Vietnamese Idioms] (DVI) by Lực & Đang (1978) The idioms in ODEIare ‘both current and used, or at least understood, by most native speakers’ (Cowie,Mackin & McCaig 1993: vi) Moreover, the idioms and their examples for illustration inDVI are mostly from literary works, magazines and newspapers It means that theidioms in these dictionaries are usually used in daily communication Therefore, thestudy is deliberately limited to common idioms The idioms used in business, scienceand technology, politics, etc are not of our concerns

5 Contributions of the Study

Scientifically, the work revisits theories on idioms, looks at the typical features ofEnglish and Vietnamese idioms in general, and compares structural and semanticcomponents of idioms in English to those in Vietnamese This is a major contribution tothe knowledge of linguistics in general and that of idioms in particular Since languageand culture are closely intertwined, the findings will help improve the knowledge of thetwo underlying cultures, which are expressed through those idioms

Practically, for language teaching (both English and Vietnamese), the study facilitates

learners’ communication because language is for communication, and idioms are anindispensable part of common expressions (Cowie, Mackin & McCaig 1993: x) Thework will provide assistance to English-speaking learners of Vietnamese andVietnamese learners of English to tell one kind of idiom from the other in eachlanguage The work will also enable learners to tell when idioms in English andVietnamese are similar and different in terms of structural and semantic components, sothat they can use them accurately and adequately in actual communication Languageteachers will be aided to help their learners reach this communicative goal (see Section

3 in Part C) For translation, knowledge of idioms from this work will help translatorsfind closest equivalents to the expression in the source language It can be said thatidioms and idiomatic expressions are the most culture-bound part of any language, sotheir transfer is one of the most problematic issues in translation It is because transfer

of language also involves that of culture, which is not always transferable In this way,knowledge from this sort of work will be of great benefit to translators, who should beable to find the possible equivalents in the target language

6 Methodology

6.1 Analytical Framework

According to Krzeszowski (1990: 35), ‘No exact or reliable exploration of facts can beconducted without a theoretical background, providing concepts, hypotheses, andtheories which enable the investigator to describe the relevant facts and to account forthem in terms of significant generalizations’

In the present dissertation, we will apply a select range of theories to the investigation

of the idioms collected: the theory of contrastive linguistics (König and Volker 2008)and the theory of contrastive idiom analysis (Dobrovol’skij 2000; Dobrovol’skij &Piirainen 2005; Fernando & Flavell 1981; Fernando 1996)

Narrowly defined, contrastive linguistics can be regarded as a branch of comparativelinguistics that is concerned with pairs of languages which are ‘socio-culturally linked’.Two languages can be said to be socio-culturally linked when (i) they are used by a

considerable number of bi- or multilingual speakers, and/or (ii) a substantial amount of

‘linguistic output’ (text, discourse) is translated from one language into the other (Königand Volker 2008) According to this definition, contrastive linguistics deals with pairs

of languages such as English and Vietnamese, but not with Latin and Vietnamese, asthere is no socio-cultural link between these languages

More broadly defined, the term ‘contrastive linguistics’ is also sometimes used forcomparative studies of (small) groups (rather than just pairs) of languages, and does notrequire a socio-cultural link between the languages investigated (König and Volker2008) On this view, contrastive linguistics is a special case of linguistic typology and isdistinguished from other types of typological approaches by a small sample size and ahigh degree of granularity Accordingly, any pair or group of languages (even Latin andVietnamese) can be subject to a contrastive analysis

Contrastive linguistics invariably requires a socio-cultural link between the languagesinvestigated, but that it is not restricted to pair wise language comparison Contrastivelinguistics thus aims to arrive at results that carry the potential of being used forpractical purposes, e.g in foreign language teaching and translation As it provides thedescriptive basis for such applications, its research programme can also be summarized

as ‘comparison with a purpose’ The ‘objective of applicability’ is also reflected in thefact that contrastive studies focus on the differences, rather than the similarities,between the languages compared König and Volker (2008) give four steps in theprocedure of contrastive linguistics (see Section 7.4)

Contrastive idiom analysis is regarded as a special type of language comparison, which

is different from other kinds of cross-linguistic research, such as contrastive phonology,

or contrastive semantics In the current literature, the contrastive analysis of idioms hasfocused on the description and comparison of (a) structural components and (b)semantic components

The investigation of structural types or typological aspects of idioms cannot beseparated from the semantic factors of contrastive aspects, since both are needed toestablish the theoretical background to the implementation of the contrastive

investigation (Dobrovol’skij 2000; Dobrovol’skij & Piirainen 2005).

From the theoretical point of view, contrastive idiom analysis has concerned relationsbetween the idiosyncratic aspects and the universal features of idioms The cognitiveand cultural aspects of these relationships are of prime importance For instance, if twolanguages show major similarities in the field of idioms, it is necessary to know whetherthese similarities ‘could be traced back to accidental parallels, borrowing processes,genetic factors, or the universal character of the conceptualization of the given entities’(Dobrovol’skij 2000: 170) In contrast, the cross-linguistic differences can be tracedback to ‘metaphorization, to preferences for certain conceptual metaphors (metaphoricmodels) by the linguistic communities in question, i.e cognitive factors, or relevantdifferences in the given cultures’ (op cit Dobrovol’skij 2000: 170) In sum, besideslisting parallels and non-parallels of the surface structure of idioms, it is crucial for acontrastive idiom analysis to establish the cognitive frameworks of idiom componentsand their underlying cultural factors from which the idiomatic meanings can be derived

Idioms are traditionally claimed to be idiosyncratic and cannot translate acrosslanguages or cultures (Brown & Levinson: 1978: 144-145) If they are literallytranslated into another language, they may have an unpredictably different signification,

or may be nonsensical However, there are many idioms that are not language specificand which do translate across languages (Strässler 1982) or at least their metaphoricalmeaning can be decoded Many idioms in one language can have a ‘fairly closelymatching translation equivalent in another language’ (Fernando & Flavell 1981: 84).There are reasons for this First, idioms usually refer to ordinary concrete everyday itemsand entities that are common to particular areas and cultures as their source material.Fernando & Flavell (1981: 84) state that ‘human beings from whatever race have similarpsychological attitudes From such sources, languages generate similar idioms’ Second,acculturation can take place Acculturation refers to the process of cultural change thatresults from contact between two or more cultures (see Berry (2005) for morediscussion) To a large extent, culture is shared by speakers of one language which iswidely spread throughout the world and by speakers of different languages in the samegeographical region, for instance, Southeast Asia, north America or north-eastern Asia

(Fernando & Flavell 1981) Third, there is significant inter-language borrowing ofidioms across languages (Fernando & Flavell 1981) Fourth, the translation of someidioms can be traced back to accidental parallels (Dobrovol’skij 2000)

Translation requires sophisticated strategic judgments (Fernando & Flavell 1981;Strässler 1982) Idioms generally demand that the translator be ‘not only accurate buthighly sensitive to the rhetorical nuances of the language’ (Fernando & Flavell 1981:85) Any forced attempt to translate an idiom by an idiom across the board can result ininappropriate translation (op cit Fernando & Flavell 1981) Depending on the idiom,the translator’s command of the language and the relationship between the sourcelanguage (SL) and the target language (TL), idioms can be translated through a variety

of strategies

The first strategy is paraphrase Paraphrase is the best option if there is no appropriate

formal match (Baker 1992; Fernando & Flavell 1981; Valero-Garcés 1997) Paraphraseexpresses the meaning of the idiom in the TL by using other words The meaning is not

a precise equivalent, but there is significant parallelism on the formal and/or semanticlevel A drawback of this strategy is that the impact of the idiom and any culturalsignificance associated with it will be totally sacrificed in the translated text It isclaimed that ‘whenever the two cultures and the language pair in question are verydifferent, paraphrase tends to be the safest and the most commonly used strategy’ (Abu-Ssaydeh 2004: 119)

The second strategy is to use an idiom of similar meaning but dissimilar structure

and/or lexical constituents (Fernando & Flavell 1981) The syntactic structure and

lexical constituents of an idiom in the SL, in many cases, are different from itscounterpart in the TL, but the semantic content is roughly synonymous (Abu-Ssaydeh2004; Fernando & Flavell 1981) But any ‘such attempt to render an idiom by an idiomhas to face the difficulty of getting a close enough correspondence of semantic field, andeven where it is possible there are often considerable differences of style, register,frequency’ (Fernando & Flavell 1981: 82)

The third strategy is to use an idiom of similar structure and/or lexical constituents but

dissimilar sense The superficial similarities of structure and/or lexical constituency do

not always entail a correlation of meaning (Fernando & Flavell 1981)

The fourth strategy is a match of structure, lexical constituents and meaning A good

match shows a high syntactic, lexical and semantic correlation (Fernando & Flavell1981; Abu-Ssaydeh 2004)

Alternatively, the translator may provide a literal translation of the lexical constituents

of the idiom (Abu-Ssaydeh 2004) This strategy will be adopted if the metaphorical

potentials are similar and if the literal version is acceptable in the TL

The translation of an English idiom into another language, then, depends on the idiomstock in the target language; the rhetorical effect of a given idiom in the sourcelanguage, the text that is being translated, and the translator’s linguistic and culturalcompetence (Ghazala, 2003) The discussion of the strategies shows that semanticaspects of an idiom have a better chance of being retained in a translation than itsstructure (Fernando & Flavell, 1981) In the present study, we use the first strategy(paraphrase) to translate the idioms from English into Vietnamese, and vice versa

6.2 Data Collection

It is a matter of fact that we can make comparison of languages in various ways Wemay start from categories of traditional grammar, phrases, a whole vocabulary or acollection of texts (Dirven & Verspoor 2004: 250) with any appropriate database andprocedures The usage-based or empirically-based (Bybee 2009) foundation ofcognitive grammar suggests that real linguistic examples taken from genuine usage-datashould form the basis for linguistic analysis and theory construction (Langlotz 2006;Quirk, Greenbaum, Leech, & Svartvik 1985) Accordingly, the recent development oflinguistics has witnessed the rise of corpus-linguistics, which bases linguistic analyses

on large computer-aided corpora of both spoken and written language (Kemmer &Barlow 2000)

In the present dissertation, the data are mainly obtained by observation and throughcontent-analysis (Kothari 1990):

By observation: The observation method implies the collection of information by way

of investigator’s own observation (Kothari 1990) The data used for description andanalysis in terms of structural and semantic components are subjected to checks andcontrols on validity and reliability through observation The observation is characterized

by a careful definition of the units (structural and semantic components of idioms) to beobserved, the style of recording the observed information (grouping and categorizing),and the selection of pertinent data of observation The observation following thesecharacteristics is called as ‘structured observation’ The main advantage of this method

is that subjective bias is eliminated Secondly, the information obtained under thismethod relates to what is currently happening Thirdly, it seems to be a cheap method

Through content-analysis: Content-analysis consists of analyzing the contents of

documentary materials such as books and journals which are printed (Kothari 1990) Inthe present study, the content-analysis is mostly qualitative analysis concerning thegeneral message of the existing documents The review of the research involves theanalysis of the contents of books and articles that have been published The analysis is

at a relatively simple level because the researcher pursues it on the basis of certaincharacteristics of the document that can be identified and counted

The data for the present study come from two dictionaries:

i) Cowie, A P., Mackin, R & McCaig, I R (1993) Oxford Dictionary of English

Idioms Oxford: Oxford University Press.

ii) Lực, N., & Đang, L V (1978) Thành ngữ tiếng Việt [Dictionary of Vietnamese

Idioms] Hà Nội: Khoa học Xã hội Press

The dictionaries are chosen for several specific reasons Firstly, it can be said that theyare quite popular and currently available Secondly, the scope of the two dictionaries isfocused on common idioms, i.e they are usually used in daily speaking (see Section 4).And finally, the dictionaries satisfy the diachronic perspective because the examples forillustrations are mostly from literal works, magazines and newspapers The collecteddata forms a corpus under three categories: symmetrical idioms (378 for English and

2,403 for Vietnamese), similized idioms (819 for English and 605 for Vietnamese), andordinary idioms (5,103 for English and 1,029 for Vietnamese).

The data in the present dissertation are also published or submitted data which are

available in books, PhD theses and journals such as On Idiom: Critical Views and

Perspectives by Fernando and Flavell (1981), Idioms and Idiomaticity by Fernando

(1996), Bình diện cấu trúc hình thái-ngữ nghĩa của thành ngữ tiếng Việt [Vietnamese Idioms from Formal-semantic Perspectives] by Đức (1995), Thành ngữ học tiếng Việt [Vietnamese Idiom Studies] by Hành (2008), Seeking the Nature of Idioms: A Study in

Idiomatic Structure by Tim (2002), ‘Study of Idiomatic Origins in Cultural Perspective’

by Xian (2007), Emotion Expressing Idioms in English and Vietnamese: A Contrastive

Analysis by Trào (2009), etc The sources of these data are believed to be reliable,

suitable and adequate because they are all published, submitted and related to the area

of the study

6.3 Data Analysis

Due to the aims, the objectives, and the scope of the study, componential analysis,describing, comparing and contrasting are regarded as the main methods used in thepresent dissertation The study makes use of the Vietnamese language as the target andthe English one as the source language (the base language) In some cases, we may usethe opposite (the English language as the target and the Vietnamese one as the sourcelanguage)

Componential analysis is one of the main methods used to describe and analyze theidioms, especially semantic components of idioms in both English and Vietnamese Wedescribe meanings, meaning relationships and the grammatical behavior of idiomclasses by analyzing idiomatic meanings into meaning components This analysisprocedure is called lexical decomposition (Dowty 1979; Zhang 2002) However, how tounderstand and apply this approach in the dissertation is not entirely like the traditionalsense Componential analysis in the concept of the dissertation means that we do notonly manipulate objects existing in a static way but we also analyze and access idioms

in their operation More specifically, we study idioms in their existence and operating

environment Here, we do not separate idioms from their ‘internal’ environment andcharacteristics directly impacting on the rules of formation, survival and thedevelopment of the idioms On the other hand, we do not also separate idioms fromtheir ‘external’ environment, i.e culture - society - history related to the establishmentand administration of the idioms.

According to Wisker (2001: 118), descriptive research aims to find out more about aphenomenon and to capture it with detailed information Often the capturing anddescription is only true for that moment in time, but it still helps us to understand andknow more about the phenomenon The description might have to be repeated severaltimes and then further exploratory questions asked about the reasons for its change orstability In addition, descriptive research attempts to determine, describe, or identify

what is, i.e the descriptive research uses description, classification, measurement, and

comparison to describe what phenomena are (Wisker 2001: 120) Describing method isapplied in the present dissertation to present the theoretical foundation of structural andsemantic components of idioms, which is then illustrated by examples with explanationsand discussions, and hopefully reach conclusions by deductive reasoning

The term 'contrastive linguistics' was suggested by Whorf (1941) and was defined as ‘asub discipline of linguistics concerned with the comparison of two or more languages orsubsystems of languages in order to determine both the differences and similaritiesbetween them’ (Fisiak 1981: 1) Contrastive Analysis is the method of analyzing thestructure of any two languages with a view to estimate the differential aspects of theirsystems, irrespective or their generic affinity or level of development Contrastiveanalysis of two languages becomes useful when it is adequately describing the soundstructure and grammatical structure of two languages, with comparative statements,giving due emphasis to the compatible items in the two systems In appearance,comparing and contrasting are similar to each other, for both compare two or moreitems (languages in our case) in order to find similarities and differences between them.But academically they have quite different connotations nowadays, partly of theetymological meanings of the two words, and partly because of the different traditions

of the two disciplines in their development Although neither carries an extreme demand

to look for ‘similarity’ or ‘difference’ only, each has nevertheless a tendency for one ofthe two, i.e methodologically, the ‘comparative’ method stresses similarity more, whilethe ‘contrastive’ method emphasizes the differences In the present study, comparingand contrasting help us to identify, analyze and explain similarities and differencesbetween the structural and semantic components as well as their formation in Englishand those in Vietnamese

From our corpus, we first explore the characteristics of idioms from different views.The results help set up componential frames, especially:

(a) their canonical structural and semantic components based on three types of idioms:symmetrical, similized, and ordinary (Đức 1995; Hành 2008);

(b) their non-canonical structural and semantic components based on two types ofidioms: idiom variants and synonymous idioms (Giang 2009)

Given the structural components of idioms due to structural patterns and specificgrammatical rules (Quirk, Greenbaum, Leech, Svartvik 1985), we then explore thesemantic components of the idioms from perspective of cognitive theory (Nunberg et al.1994; Fernando 1996; Kövecses & Szabo 1996) We also seek the underlying factorsaffecting the idiom formation, the idiomatic meaning formation and the semanticcomponents of idioms in English and Vietnamese (Hành 2008; Lijie 2010)

Finally, we provide an in-depth contrastive analysis of the linguistic and cultural aspects of the idioms We also investigate the regularities for the establishedsimilarities and differences.

cross-7 Structure of the Study

The present study consists of three major parts, in addition to the appendices and thereferences

Part A, introduction, consists of the rationale, the aims and objectives, the researchquestions, the scope, the contributions, the methodology, and the structure of the study

Part B, development, is divided into three chapters including chapter 1: LiteratureReview, chapter 2: Structural Components of English and Vietnamese Idioms, andchapter 3: Semantic Components of English and Vietnamese Idioms

The last part is conclusion which includes the recapitulation of the study as well as theconclusions and some suggestions for implications achieved from the discussion in thedissertation and for further studies

PART B: DEVELOPMENT

CHAPTER I LITERATURE REVIEW

The literature and the theoretical background on idioms in both English and Vietnameseare presented in this chapter Section 1.1 presents definitions of idioms and theirfundamental considerations such as idioms from traditional view, idioms from cognitiveview, idioms from taxonomic view, idioms from cultural view, and functions of idioms.This section also provides a borderline that demarcates idioms from other linguisticstructures and units Then, Section 1.2 reviews studies related to idioms in English andVietnamese and those under comparison and contrastive analysis in both languages.Section 1.3 summarizes the chaper and highlights the research gap in which the presentinquiry aims to situate itself A working definition of an idiom formulated to concludethe chapter is also in this section

1.1 Theoretical Background

1.1.1 Idioms Defined

Words have their own meanings They, however, do not just come individually; theyalso come in expressions or in groups Idioms are among the most common of theseexpressions And it seems impossible to master a language without learning idioms – avery important part of the language What is an idiom? The question may have severalanswers

Many linguists such as Robins (1989), Palmer (1981), Jackson and Amvela (1998) andothers regard idioms as a special kind of collocation The meaning of an idiom,however, cannot be deduced from the meanings of its constituents An idiom isdistinguished from a collocation, for a collocation is a sequence of lexical items whichhabitually co-occur and each lexical constituent of a collocation is a semantic

component Hornby (1995) argues in his Oxford Advanced Learner’s Dictionary, an

idiom is ‘a phrase or sentence whose meaning is not clear from the meaning of itsindividual words and which must be learnt as a whole unit’ Sharing the same point of

view, Seidl and Mordie (1988) defines ‘an idiom is a number of words which, takentogether, mean something different from the individual words of the idiom when they

stand alone’ For instance, the collocation of kick and the bucket forms an idiom meaning die, which is not systematically determinable from the meanings of kick and

the bucket This idiom or phrasal lexeme is formally identical with the phrase kick the bucket whose meaning is systematically determinable on the basis of the meaning of the

lexemes of which it is composed – hit a certain type of container for liquids with their

foot.

An idiom is regarded as an expression which functions as a single unit and whosemeaning cannot be worked out from its separate parts (Longman Dictionary ofLanguage Teaching and Applied Linguistics 1992) Sharing the same point of view,Cowie, Mackin & McCaig (1993) state that idioms are groups of words with setmeanings that cannot be calculated by adding up the separate meanings of the parts.Fernando (1996) also defines an idiom as ‘an indivisible unit whose components cannot

be varied or varied only within definable limits’ No other words can be substituted forthose comprising Nor are the words of an idiom usually recombinable

Mệnh (1972), Giáp (1975), Châu (1981) suppose that idioms are available languageunits which have stable structures, typical meanings and nominative functions Anidiom is a fixed group of words having a complete meaning and descriptive value (Dân1986) He also adds that idioms express concepts based on separated images It is thereason why idioms usually have their own figurative meanings For example, the phrase

cưỡi ngựa xem hoa (do something summarily and perfunctorily) is considered as an

idiom because its idiomatic meaning cannot be infered from the meanings of its

constituents (cưỡi, ngựa, xem and hoa)

Hành (2008: 31) states that an idiom is a fixed group of words which is firm in terms ofstructure, complete and figurative in terms of meaning, and is widely used in dailyspeaking The fixed properties of an idiom can be realized as follows: (i) the words of

an idiom are generally fixed It means that the components forming an idiom areunchanged in using; (ii) the fixed characteristic of the structure of an idiom is expressed

by the fixed order of the components forming an idiom

As can be seen from the above definitions, there are different ways of defining anidiom In general, most of the linguists share the same point that an idiom is a fixedexpression whose meaning cannot be worked out by looking at the meanings of itsindividual constituents.

1.1.2 Fundamental Considerations

1.1.2.1 Idioms from Traditional View

Traditionally, idioms are believed to be unpredictable or non-compositional (Chafe 1970; Chomsky 1965, 1980; Katz 1973; Mệnh 1972; Giáp 1975; Châu 1981; Đức 1995; Hành 2008; etc) That is, having learned the meaning and syntactic property

of each word of an idiom, we are still unable to capture the overall meaning of that idiom Kovecses & Szabo (1996) represent this traditional view of idioms by a diagram, which is adapted slightly and represented in the following table:

special idiomatic meaning – ‘die’

the meaning of the linguistic form – ‘kick’, ‘the’, ‘bucket’

linguistic forms and their properties – kick the bucket (no passive, etc)

Table 1.1: Traditional view of kick the bucket in English

The table above shows that the special idiomatic meaning ‘die’ seems to have no

relationship with the literal meaning and syntactic properties of the idiom kick the

bucket This can be applied to idioms in Vietnamese as follows:

special idiomatic meaning – ‘ngạc nhiên (surprised)’

the meaning of the linguistic form – ‘mắt’, ‘tròn’, ‘mắt’ and ‘dẹt’

linguistic forms and their properties – mắt tròn mắt dẹt Table 1.2: Traditional view of mắt tròn mắt dẹt in Vietnamese

Owing to the above factor, idioms are basically treated as larger items in the lexiconthat are independent of any human conceptual system (Carter and McCarthy 1988) Just

as words are characterized by their semantic and syntactic properties one by one in thelexicon, so idioms can be characterized in the same way This leads to the assumptionthat idioms are independent of each other conceptually However, certain issues arefound from such a point of view For one thing, for most concepts, more than one idiom

can be found to express the same or similar concepts For instance, hit the ceiling, flip

one’s lid, and spit fire are all used to express the same concept – anger For another

thing, some kinds of similarity in mental images can be found in the various idioms thatexpress the same or similar concepts Gibbs (1990, 1995) has summarized the result ofhis mental image experiments on idioms, which will be presented in the next section

The traditional approaches to idioms mainly take the perspective of syntax; however, afull account for the characteristics of idioms would also require more explanations fromthe perspective of semantics

1.1.2.2 Idioms from Cognitive View

Although it is commonly accepted that there is no complete predictability for themeanings of idioms, a substantial amount of research has supported that most idiomsare analyzable and have meanings that are at least partly motivated (Geeraets 1995;Gibbs 1990, 1995; Kövecses & Szabo 1996; Nunberg et al 1994; Fernando 1996; etc).Nunberg et al (1994) divides idioms into two categories (i) idiomatically combiningexpressions whose constituent parts carry identifiable parts of their idiomatic meanings,and (ii) idiomatic phrases whose idiomatic meanings cannot be derived from their parts

A classical example of idiomatic phrases is the widely discussed idiom kick the bucket

whose figurative meaning, ‘die’, cannot be motivated and obtained from the

combination of ‘kick’, ‘the’, ‘bucket’ literally Đẽo cày giữa đường (always passive and

changeable) is also a Vietnamese idiom whose figurative meaning cannot be worked outfrom the combination of ‘đẽo’, ‘cày’, ‘giữa’ and ‘đường’ Except for idioms such as

kick the bucket, đẽo cày giữa đường, most idioms belong to idiomatically combining

expressions Take spill the beans as an example Unlike kick the bucket whose figurative interpretation cannot be decomposed to match the constituent parts, spill the

beans, which means ‘divulge the information’, can be analyzed by looking at the action

of ‘spill’ as the action of divulging and ‘beans’ as the information It may be obscurehow ‘spill’ and ‘beans’ link to their figurative interpretation Even so, this idiom is still

regarded as idiomatically combining expressions Another example bắn như mưa

(shoot/fire heavily) is also regarded as an idiom belonging to idiomatically combiningexpressions because its meaning can be analyzed by combining the meanings of ‘bắn’,

‘như’ and ‘mưa’ According to Nunberg et al (1994: 497), ‘saying an expression is anidiomatic combination (i.e idiomatically combining expression) doesn’t require us toexplain why each of its parts has the figurative interpretation it does, so long as we canestablish a correspondence between it and the relevant element of the idiomaticdenotation’

In fact, most idioms are motivated by cognitive – semantic mechanisms such asmetaphors, metonymies and conventional knowledge For instance, anger idioms like

blow your stack, flip your lid, and hit the ceiling (lose one’s temper suddenly and

violently) are widely explored by the conceptual metaphors behind these idioms (Gibbs

1990, 1995) It seems that conceptual metaphor anger is heated fluid in a container

activates the linguistic realizations of the anger emotion Gibbs (1990) conducts apsychological experiment to prove the existence of such a conceptual metaphor byasking subjects to form a mental image for anger idioms Gibbs (1990: 434) states:

When imagining Anger idioms, people know that pressure (that is stress or frustration) causes the action, that one has little control over the pressure once it builds, its violent release is done unintentionally (for example, the blowing of the stack) and that once the release has taken place (i.e once the ceiling has been hit, the lid flipped, the stack blown), it is difficult to reverse the action Each of these responses is based on people’s conceptions of heated fluid or vapor building

up and escaping from containers (ones that our participants most frequently reported to be the size

of a person’s head) We see that the metaphorical mapping of a source domain (for example, heated fluid in a container) into target domains (for example, the anger emotion) motivates why people have consistent mental images, and specific knowledge about these images, for different idioms about anger.

Other than the mental image experiment, other psychological experiments conducted byGibbs (1990, 1995) also prove that the figurative meanings of most idioms are by no

means arbitrary.

In the present study, we once again suppose that most idioms can be analyzable Itmeans that most idiomatic meanings can be derived from the meanings of thecomponents forming idioms, or at least partly motivated

1.1.2.3 Idioms from Taxonomic View

The category of idioms can be described as ‘a mixed bag’ (Kövecses & Szabó 1996:327) or not being a uniform group (Liu 2008) in terms of syntactic and semanticcomposition As regards syntactic composition, some idioms are phrasal verbs (e.g

come up roses (happen in the best)); some are verbs + noun phrases or what Makkai

(1972) calls ‘tournures’ (turns of phrase) (e.g hit the hay (go to bed)); some are noun phrases (e.g a red herring (a diversionary topic)); others are prepositional phrases (e.g.

with one voice (unanimously)) In terms of semantic composition, the category involves

metaphors (e.g hit the ceiling (lose one’s temper suddenly and violently)), metonymies (e.g tie one’s hands (restrict one’s activity)), similes (e.g as easy as pie (very easy)), and sayings (e.g a bird in the hand is worth two in the bush (it is better to be content

with something one has, or can be sure of, than risk having nothing at all by trying toget something more or something else)) Such complexity of types of idioms causesgreat difficulty for any attempt at a generalized taxonomy of idioms

According to Fernando & Flavell (1981), idioms are divided into two main headings,which in practice usually overlap to some extent: the 'formal' idiom family and the'concept' idiom family The first of these involves a set of idioms sharing a similarsyntactic pattern and at least one lexical item The second of these types, the 'concept'

idiom family, contains pairs such as bury the hatchet and take/dig up the hatchet (come

to friendly or peaceful terms with somebody else)

Based on the topics in terms of parts of speech, Seidl & Mordie (1988) give eightgroups of idioms as follows:

Key words with idiomatic uses:

- Adjectives and adverbs: bad, good, long, etc.

- Nouns: end, line, thing, etc.

- Miscellaneous: all, how, too, etc.

Idioms with nouns and adjectives:

- Noun phrase: a drop in the ocean (something of inconsiderable value)

- Adjective + noun: a close shave (escape from)

Idiomatic pairs:

- Pairs of adjectives: cut and dried (make a quick or sudden escape)

- Pairs of nouns: wear and tear (deterioration and damage from use)

- Pairs of adverbs: more or less (approximately)

- Pairs of verbs: hit and miss (guess-work)

- Identical pairs: bit by bit (each piece at a time)

Idioms with prepositions: by, for, from, etc.

Phrasal verbs: act up (annoy), call something off (cancel), make something up to someone (compensate for), etc.

Verbal idioms: blow one’s own trumpet (praise oneself), call a spade a spade (call

something by its own name and not by a euphemism), do a bunk (go away without

warning), etc

Idioms with key words from special categories:

- Animals: bird, bee, bull, etc.

- Colors: black, blue, red etc.

- Numbers, size, measurement: one, inch, mile, etc.

- Parts of the body: arm, back, nose, etc.

- Time: day, minute, night, etc.

Idioms with comparisons:

- Comparisons with as … as: as bold as brass (impudent)

- Comparisons with like: go like the wind (move very fast)

Based on the grammatical patterns, Cowie, Mackin & McCaig (1993) classify Englishidioms into clause patterns, possessive clause patterns, phrase patterns, and noun phrasepattern with repeated element (see Appendix 2)

Nunberg et al (1994) classify English idioms into two types: idiomatically combiningexpressions (or idiomatic combinations) and idiomatic phrases Idiomatic combinationsrefer to idioms whose parts carry identifiable parts of their idiomatic meanings The

idioms like take advantage of (make good use of; profit by) and pull strings (exert

influence unobtrusively), whose meanings, while conventional, are distributed amongtheir parts Idiomatically combining expressions differ from collocations and ordinaryexpressions only in that the conventional way of expressing the individual parts and the

meaning is conventional and also relatively opaque Idiomatic phrases (e.g kick the

bucket (die)) are non-compositional, i.e they do not distribute their meanings to their

components (op cit Nunberg et al 1994)

Nunberg et al.’s distinction between idiomatically combining expressions and idiomaticphrases, as discussed earlier, corresponds quite closely to Fillmore et al.’s first feature:distinction of encoding and decoding idioms (Croft & Cruse 2004) However, theidiomatically combining expression/idiomatic phrase distinction is not completely the

same as the encoding/decoding distinction (Croft & Cruse 2004) For instance, spill the

beans (give away information) is an encoding idiom though it is an idiomatically

combining expression Fillmore et al.’s encoding/decoding distinction is not veryclearly defined The distinction involves the language user’s capacity in parsing ordecoding an expression

Nunberg et al.’s distinction appears to put idiomatically combining expressions undertransparent idioms and idiomatic phrases under opaque idioms It is the semanticopaqueness (or transparency) of an idiom, which has been based as a criteria in Nunberg

et al.’s taxonomy, yields a small class of idioms Consequently, it may leave out ofaccount an important group of expressions which have figurative meanings, but which

also preserve a current literal interpretation (e.g hit the jackpot (have a big success),

beat one’s breast (show grief or sorrow)) The literal meanings of the words making up

these idioms ‘are still partly operative, though the idiomatic meaning is the dominant

one’ (Fernando & Flavell 1981: 77) For instance, red carpet can either convey ‘the

especially good treatment/give an impressive welcome’, or ‘the red colour of the

carpet’ Slap someone on the back could signify both ‘strike on rear upper vertical

surface of the human body’ and a sign ‘to show cordiality’

Invariance and restricted variation of an idiom call for a scale of idiomaticity Severalresearchers (Carter 1987; Cowie et al 1983; Fernando 1996; Nattinger & DeCarrico1992) have used the scales to classify idioms The table of classification of idioms presented by Fernando (1996: 32) given below is in a modified form covering pure idioms, semi-idioms, and literal idioms This taxonomy shares much with that of Cowie et al (1983) and reflects to a certain extent sort of collected ideas of various researchers (e.g Bolinger 1975; Fernando

& Flavell 1981; Wood 1981) The lexicogrammatical feature of idioms is used together with the functional; the sememic idioms (Makkai 1972) and discoursal expressions (Alexander 1984; Carter 1987) are also included in the categorization.

Pure idioms Invariant, non-literal devil-may-care; red herring; spick and span; smell a

rat; the coast is clear, chin-wag

Restricted variance, non-literal

pitter-patter/pit-a-pat; take/have forty winks; seize/grasp the nettle; get/have/cold feet

Semi-literal

idioms

Invariant drop names; catch fire; kith and kin; foot the bill; fat

chance, float a loan

Restricted variance chequered career/history; blue

film/story/joke/gag/comedian

Literal idioms Invariant on foot; in sum; on the contrary; arm in arm; waste

not, want not; happy New Year

Restricted variance opt in favour of/for; for example/instance;

happy/merry Christmas

Table 1.3: Types of idioms (Fernando 1996: 32)

A pure idiom (Carter (1987) uses ‘full-idioms’) is defined as a type of conventionalized

and non-literal multiword expression (Fernando 1996) Blow the gaff (let out the secret

or give information), tie the knot (get married) are typical examples of this type The

meanings of these idioms are not openly decipherable ‘Historically, pure idioms formthe end-point of a process by which word-combinations first establish themselvesthrough constant re-use, then undergo figurative extension and finally petrify orcongeal’ (Cowie et al 1993: xii)

A semi-idiom acquires one or more literal components and ‘at least one with a

non-literal subsense’ (Fernando 1996: 36), for example, foot the bill (pay the bill) Foot only means ‘pay’ when it co-occurs with the bill In catch a bus, catch has a specialized subsense ‘be in time for’ Usually catch co-occurs with means public transport (except

for ship), but not with forms of private transport like bicycle, car or yacht An alternate

example is make a bed A bed is not idiomatic because it does refer to the piece of furniture used to sleep on, however, to make is not used in the usual sense of ‘to manufacture’ Similarly, white coffee is brown in colour, white wine is usually yellow, and white people are generally off-pink In these ‘partial’ idioms, some of the words

have their usual meaning, while the others have meanings that are peculiar to thatparticular structure Furthermore, idioms of this type allow lexical variation or

synonymy (e.g blue film/story/joke/gag/comedian; close to/near the bone (tactless) We

will return to this in Chapter 2 and 3

As has been presented in Table 1.3, a literal idiom, such as on foot, on the contrary,

while invariant, is less semantically complicated than pure and semi-idioms (Fernando1996)

Compared with Makkai’s categorization, Fernando’s (1996) classification seems muchsimpler (Liu 2008) However, problems can be seen in the examples she gives in her

categorization For instance, she labels chin-wag a pure idiom, while foot the bill is semi-literal However, for many people, chin-wag is perhaps more literal than foot the

bill Similarly, on foot is labeled as literal and good morning semi-literal, but many

people would probably consider that on foot is as literal as good morning (Liu 2008).

Then, Fernando’s judgment about where examples belong seems to be fuzzy.Admittedly, this seems to be unavoidable for any classification Such fuzziness ‘afflictstaxonomies in every area of language’ (Fernando 1996: 37).

Relying on the functions of idioms, Fernando (1996: 72-73) addresses English idiomsand identifies three major types of semantic functions that idioms fulfil:

(a) Ideational idioms: These idioms clearly show either the content of the messageincluding feelings, effects, and assessment or the nature (the modality) of the message(specific or not specific) The content of the message divides idioms into 7 subgroups:

- Actions (idioms describing actions which have verbs as nucleus): spill the beans

(give information away)

- Events: a turning point (an incident that causes or marks the beginning of a new

trend in somebody’s life, a project, the course of events)

- Situations: be in a pickle (in a situation)

- People and things: a man about town (a playboy)

- Attributes (idioms describing the quality): as green as grass (easily deceived)

- Evaluations: turn back the clock, it’s a pity, I am not my brother’s keeper

- Emotions: tear one’s hair (tug one’s hair with both hands as an expression of

anxiety, grief, despair or frustration)

The nature of the message contains two smaller groups: idioms containing specific

information (e.g to be exact, for example, in other word), and idioms with non-specific information (e.g kind of, sort of, such and such).

(b) Interpersonal idioms: these idioms realize either an interactional function or identifythe nature of the message These idioms usually initiate, maintain or close a transactionand are therefore often associated with communication etiquette and commonpoliteness:

- Greetings and farewells: good evening, how are you?, bye for now

- Directives: let’s face it, tell you what

- Agreement: that’s true, say no more

- ‘Feelers’, eliciting opinion: what do you think? How do you feel?

- Rejections: You’re kidding, come off it

Idioms can fulfil the function of commenting on (assessing) the message by indicating

newsworthiness (e.g guess what, what do you know), sincerity (e.g as a matter of fact,

believe you me), calls for brevity (e.g cut the cackle, get to the point), and uncertainty

(e.g I dare say, mind you).

(c) Relational idioms: These idioms perform a textual function: to ensure the cohesionand aid the coherence of discourse

- Adversative: on the contrary, far from

- Comparison: on the one hand … on the other

- Causal: no wonder, so that when

- Concessive: at the same time

- Addition: in addition to, what is more

Idioms can indicate meta-discoursal information by sequencing information (e.g in the

first place, last but not least) Idioms can also chain temporal information (e.g one day,

a long time ago, up to now) (adapted from Fernando 1996: 72-73).

In Vietnamese, Lực and Đang (1978) classify Vietnamese idioms basing on the number

of words forming idioms as well as their structures:

- Idioms with three single words or more: bạn nối khố (a bosom friend), bở hơi tai (fagged out), treo đầu dê bán thịt chó (play a confidence trick on), trẻ không tha

già không thương (wicked), etc.

- Idioms with a single word and a compound word: bé hạt tiêu (small but spirited),

câm miệng hến (keep silence), có máu mặt (rich), etc.

- Idioms with two compound words: buôn gian bán lận (cheat), nhắm mắt xuôi tay (die), năm xung tháng hạn (an unpropitious period of time), etc.