APPLYING COGNITIVE LINGUISTICS TO TEACHING ENGLISH

IDIOMATIC EXPRESSIONS

APLIKOVANIE KOGNITVNEJ LINGVISTIKY VO VUBE

IDIOMATICKCH VRAZOV
SRNKA, Jakub

Katedra anglistiky a amerikanistiky, sekcia lingvistickch vied

Ciprinov, Elena, Doc. Mgr. M.A., PhD.
Abstrakt

SRNKA, Jakub: Aplikovanie kognitvnej lingvistiky vo vube idiomatickch vrazov.

Univerzita Kontantna Filozofa v Nitre. Filozofick fakulta: Katedra anglistiky
a amerikanistiky.

Hlavnm cieom predkladanej prce je poukza na efektvnos vyuitia kognitvno-

lingvistickch prstupov pri vube idimov v anglickom jazyku. Prca poskytuje
komparan pohad na vubu idimov, priom sa prida modernho lingvistickho
prstupu, ktor je zameran na vyuitenos figuratvneho jazyka v procese vuby
idimov. Na zklade terie konceptulnej metafory, prca pojednva o monosti
kdovania idimov prostrednctvom konceptulnej metafory a jej podtypov. Takto
kdovanie uahuje proces spracovvania idimov a ich nsledn retenciu.

Kov slov: Figuratvny jazyk. Idim. Kognitvna lingvistika. Konceptulna

metafora. Tradin pohad. Vuba idimov.
TABLE OF CONTENTS

TABLE OF CONTENTS ............................................................................................... 3

LIST OF TABLES .......................................................................................................... 4
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS ........................................................................................ 5
INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................................... 6
1 ON DEFINING IDIOMS ............................................................................................ 8
1.1 The Basic Characteristic Features of Idioms ......................................................... 11
1.2 Classification of Idioms ........................................................................................ 12
2 PHRASAL VERBS ................................................................................................... 15
3 TRADITIONAL VIEW OF IDIOMS ...................................................................... 20
4 COGNITIVE LINGUISTIC VIEW OF IDIOMS .................................................. 24
5 CONCEPTUAL METAPHOR THEORY............................................................... 28
LIST OF RESOURCES ............................................................................................... 31
APPENDECIES ............................................................................................................ 36
Appendix I .................................................................................................................... 36
Appendix II ................................................................................................................... 37
Appendix III .................................................................................................................. 38
Appendix IV.................................................................................................................. 41
Appendix V ................................................................................................................... 43
LIST OF TABLES

Table No. I: The Basic Features of Idioms.

Table No. II: Classification of Lexemic Idioms.

Table No. III: A Graphic Synthesis of the Related Meanings of the Particle OUT.

Table No. IV: Frasers Frozenness Hierarchy of Idioms.

Table No. V: Idioms in the Traditional View.

Table No. VI: The Conceptual Motivation for Many Idioms.

Table No. VII: The Bipartite Semantic Structure of an Idiomatic Construction.

4
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

EFL learner English foreign language leraner

EFL teacher English foreign language teacher
CMs Cognitive metaphors
EFL-oriented English foreign language oriented

5
INTRODUCTION
There is no doubt that lexicon, as one of the knowledge areas in every language,
takes a very significant role in acquiring a foreign language. David Wilkins (1972, as
cited in Thornbury, 2002) stated that without grammar very little can be conveyed;
without vocabulary nothing can be conveyed. This is the reason why EFL learners
should be provided with satisfactory vocabulary so that they could express themselves
freely and spontaneously. Emphasizing the significance of vocabulary acquisition,
Schmitt (2000, p. 55) claims that lexical knowledge is central to communicative
competence and to the acquisition of a foreign language.
A notoriously difficult area of English vocabulary is considered to be idioms.
The issue of idiomatic expressions has long been an exacting matter in post-Chomskyan
linguistic theory since the ambiguousness in terms of viewing idioms is still debatable.
Pursuant to Brenner, it is estimated that there are over 10,000 idioms in
English, some relatively recent and some that have been used for more than 2,000
years (2011, cited in McPherron & Randolph, 2014, p. 1). This is the credible evidence
that the English language is really rich in idiomatic expressions, and thus they cannot be
definitely overshadowed in the classroom context.
If natural language had been designed by a logician, idioms would not exist,
this is how Cacciari and Patrizia (1993, vii) start their publication Idioms: Processing,
Structure, and Interpretation. Based on the above-mentioned, idiomatic expressions are
considered to be a complex phenomenon to interpret. It is assumed that they are an
oddity in language as they may not be translated on the basis of individual components
they normally consist of. Attempts to translate them literally usually lead to
misunderstanding of meaning and, more often, to bewilderment and frustration in the
process of acquiring English. The perplexity comes from the fact that idioms are often
taught in isolation and EFL learners are not provided with any learning strategies that
may be applied to master their meaning more easily. Even many EFL teachers do avoid
using idiomatic expressions in discourse due to their poor English idiomatic
competence.
Traditionally, idioms have been considered to be polylexemic units whose
meaning is fully arbitrary. Treating idioms as semantically non-compositional led to

6
the assumption that the only way EFL learners can acquire idiomatic expressions is by
rote memorization. However, our research study intends to disapprove the traditional
linguistic view of idioms. Even though idioms are being examined from the view of
various linguistic disciplines such as phraseology, lexicology, semantics, stylistics,
cognitive linguistics, psycholinguistics etc.; the diploma thesis will be notably focused
on cognitive linguistic view of idioms that perceives idioms to be motivated by pre-
existing metaphorical schemas (conceptual metaphors) in our mind, what ought to
facilitate mastering idioms in a systematic way and subsequently lead to idiom
transparency. Conceptual metaphors are considered to be often culture-specific. It
follows that even though they are transparent to native speakers, they are not transparent
to EFL learners.
Following in the footsteps of cognitive linguistic studies, that have proved a new
effective way of teaching, learning and processing idioms, the main aim of the present
study is to employ new cognitive approaches to teaching idiomatic expressions and
prove that the conceptual grouping of idioms facilitates comprehension, and that EFL
learners are more likely to benefit from presentation of idioms supported by conceptual
metaphors because they help EFL learners to decipher their meanings figuratively.

7
1 ON DEFINING IDIOMS
Despite the fact, idioms have relatively rich background; idiom dictionaries still
take a broad view of what an idiom is. To give an explicit definition of an idiom is
nearly impossible. However, Kvetko (2015, p. 103) claims that they can be broadly
characterized as follows:
They have a multi-word character;
They are institutionalized i.e. considered as units by a language
community (they operate as single semantic units);
They are relatively fixed/stable combinations of words;
Their meaning is non-literal, but fully or partially figurative and unique.
Beside other things, the term idiom is used in the English language as a
generally accepted term for a syntactically complex, fixed expression. However, the
term idiom is a polysemous and relatively ambiguous word (Kvetko, 2009, p. 14).
If we take The Concise Oxford Dictionary (1995, as cited in Kvetko, 2009, p.
15), the definition of idiom is as follows: (1) A group of words established by usage
and having a meaning not deducible from those of individual words (2) a form of
expression peculiar to a language, person or group of people (3) (a) the language of a
people or country (4) a characteristic mode of expression in music, art, etc.
In the international research community, many linguists tend to use different
terms referring to idioms. According to Slovak linguists Kvetko (2009, p. 15), there are
other terms used: idiomatic expression, idiomatic phrase, (sometimes shorten to phrase)
or less frequently: fixed / set expression, formulaic phrase, bound collocation, complex
lexeme, phrasal lexeme, prefabricated multi-word expression, fixed expression,
cohesive cluster, etc.
Before dealing with various idiom definitions, it is important to mention
linguistic disciplines that study idioms. However, it is really demanding as there is no
concrete name for the study of idioms. In the Slovak language, phraseology, as the sub-
branch of lexicology, studies phraseological units (idiomatic expressions). However, in
the English language, phraseology predominantly deals with the choice of words and
style. The Oxford Dictionary (n.d.) defines phraseology as a particular mode of

8
expression, especially one characteristic of a particular speaker or subject area. Thus, it
is not completely correct to use the mentioned linguistic discipline as a starting point for
studying idioms.
According to Kvetko (ibid.), the terms: idiomatics, idiomology (study of
idioms, idiomography (description of idioms, idiomatology (collection of idioms), are
sometimes used, though rarely. Therefore, it is not easy to make a final decision in
terms of choosing the linguistic discipline of which an idiom is the subject matter. All in
all, in English linguistics, there is no independent linguistic discipline for the theoretical
study of idioms (Kvetko, 2015). Thus idioms, as multi-word expressions, are mainly
studied within lexical studies, including semantics, pragamatics, psycholinguistics, etc.
To continue dealing with idioms, let us have a look at several idiom definitions
according to famous linguists and accessible glossaries.
Barkema (1996, p. 127) defines idiomatic expressions by contending that []
idioms are expressions which contain at least two lexical items and the meaning of an
idiom is not the combinatorial result of the meanings of the lexical items in the
expression.
Slovak linguist Kvetko (2009, p. 13) claims that idioms are types of
prefabricated multi-words units well established, relatively fixed combinations of
more than one word with more or less unpredictable meanings.
Kovecses (2010, p. 231) claims that an idiom is a mixed bag [] involves
metaphors (e.g., spill the beans), metonymies (e.g., throw up ones hands), pairs of
words (e.g., cats and dogs), idioms with it (e.g., live it up), similes (e.g., as easy as pie),
sayings (e.g., a bird in the hand is worth two in the bush), phrasal verbs (e.g., come up,
as in Christmas is coming up), grammatical idioms (e.g. let alone), and others.
Ghazala (2003, as cited in Aldahesh, 2013, p. 23) defines idioms as special,
metaphorical, fixed phrases whose meanings and forms are not negotiable.
The Glossary of Cognitive Linguistics (Evans, 2007, p. 105) provides us with the
following definition: idiomatic expressions are conventional linguistic units which are
not predictable simply by knowing the grammar rules and the vocabulary of a
language.
According to The Cambridge Dictionary (n.d.), an idiom is defined as a group
of words in a fixed order that have a particular meaning that is different from the
meanings of each word on its own.

9
 Similarly, The Oxford Dictionary (n.d.) characterizes an idiom as a group of
words established by usage as having a meaning not deducible from those of the
individual words.
Macmillian English Dictionary (Rundell & Fox, 2007, p. 710) defines an idiom
as an expression whose meaning is different from the meaning of the individual
words.
Idioms have further been defined as frozen patterns of language which allow
little or no variation in form [] often carry meanings which cannot be deduced from
their individual components (Baker, 2006, p. 63).
According to A Dictionary of Linguistics and Phonetics (Crystal, 2008, p. 236),
an idiom is a sequence of words which is semantically and often syntactically
restricted, so that they function as a single unit. From a semantic viewpoint, the
meanings of the individual words cannot be summed to produce the meaning of the
idiomatic expression as a whole. From a syntactic viewpoint, the words often do not
permit the usual variability they display in other contexts, e.g. its raining cats and dogs
does not permit *its raining a cat and a dog/dogs and cats, etc..
As seen above, idiomatic expressions are seen as a kind of linguistic
idiosyncrasy particular expressions that deviate not only from the rules of logic but
also from the maxims of Grice's cooperative principle. Cambridge Idioms Dictionary
(2006, p. VI) states that idioms are a colourful and fascinating aspect of English []
commonly used in all types of language, informal and formal, spoken and written.
Following on from the above discussion, the broad spectrum of not coincident
definitions can serve as the impulse for further idiom investigation from the point of
various linguistic disciplines.
Contrary to idiosyncratic oddities, idioms are worth being learned and used
because they give us opportunities to get involved into the real world of a language in
which the language is not any more used in isolation.
Undoubtedly, mastering most commonly used English idioms helps EFL
learners to move closer towards sounding like a native speaker, to attest to mastery of
English, to comprehend the target-language culture and identity of the native population
and, last but not least, to make learners speech vibrant and sophisticated. Furthermore,
idioms may be exploited not only in informal English, but also in more formal English,
e.g. Business English.

10
1.1 The Basic Characteristic Features of Idioms
Bearing in mind the characteristic features of idioms, idioms are supposed to be
differentiated from other fields of the lexicon. One of the substantial features is
considered to be fixedness. According to Kvetko (2015, p. 35), fixedness of idioms is
a relatively complex phenomenon since individual idioms are characterized by
different degrees of (structural, semantic, morphological and syntactical) fixedness. It
concerns the whole and/or individual components (words). In fact, only a small number
of idioms are completely and formally fixed (unchangeable, frozen, invariant). As
some idiomatic expressions are not fully fixed frozen, we may have a look at the
follow-up feature of idioms variability. Kvetko (ibid.) claims that idioms may be
altered only within definite limits, while the ranges of variations of word combinations
(collocations) are relatively wide relatively unlimited. [] Some variations involve
the common regular changes in accordance with current grammatical rules (make up
ones mind: he made up his mind, they made up their minds, her mind was changed, etc.
[] Others include limited lexical, grammatical or orthographic variations.
Moon (1998) provides the following basic features of idioms: institutionalization
(frequent vs. rare occurrence of idioms), fixedness (frozen vs. flexible idioms in terms
of form), non-compositionality (opacity vs. transparency). Kavka (2003) offers
a highly-developed list of typical features of idioms. The simplified schematic list
includes institutionalization (conventionality), figuration (by means of metaphor,
metonymy, hyperbole, simile), proverbiality (reflection of folk wisdom), informality
and effect (colloquial registers), compositionality (relations with predictability,
variability and literalness). Ghazala (2003, as cited in Aldahesh, 2013, p. 23)
encapsulates the basic features of idioms in the following table I.:

The main features of idioms in five points:

1. Idioms are all in all metaphorical and cannot be understood directly.

2. They should not be taken literally; in the sense that their meanings are not the
outcome of the individual meanings of their constituent words taken collectively.
3. Their syntactic form is usually fixed and cannot be changed or described as
ungrammatical [].
4. [] They are mainly cultural and informal.

11
 The sub-chapter offers a few summarizations of characteristic features of
idioms. Our intention was to point to considerable inhomogeneity in terms of viewing
idioms, and thus the study of idioms is considered to be an interminable process that
demands further research studies.

1.2 Classification of Idioms

Since the subject of idioms is interdisciplinary and wide-ranging, there is the
diversity of criteria according to which idioms may be classified. The typologies often
arise from the properties idioms incorporate; in most cases - syntactic (i.e. classifying
idioms in terms of their syntactic forms), semantic (i.e. classifying idioms in terms of
their semantic roles using idiom compositionality, transparency and figurativeness
(metaphoricity) as the criteria for determining the idiom categories) and pragmatic
properties.
On condition that we take the traditional linguistic approach of classifying
idioms, we may mention Makkais taxonomy of idioms that is still considered to be one
of the best and well-organized classifications of idioms serving as a coherent system in
spite of shortcomings it has. Makkai (1972) divides idioms into two groups: idioms of
encoding and idioms of decoding. Encoding idioms are accounted identifiable and
transparent combinations of words, whereas decoding idioms are not possible to be
figured out by knowing the literal meaning of their constituents and linguistic
conventions (grammar of the language, etc.). Decoding idioms are further subdivided
into lexemic and sememic idioms. In Makkais publication Idiom Structure in English
(1972), the main attention is paid to idioms of decoding lexemic idioms. Let us have a
look at the figure where Makkai (1972) divides lexemic idioms into six categories.

a) Phrasal Verb Idioms: e.g. to give up, to throw up, to come up, etc.

b) Tournure Idioms: e.g. to break it up, to bury the hatchet, to rain cats and dogs, etc.

c) Irreversible Binominal Idioms: coffee and cream, the quick and the dead, etc.

d) Phrasal Compound Idioms: e.g. hot seat, darkroom, black ice, pen name, etc.

e) Incorporating Verb Idioms: e.g. to baby-sit, to brow-beat, etc.

f) Pseudo-Idioms: e.g. kit and kin, chit-chat, etc.

Table II. Classification of lexemic idioms (Makkai, 1972, p. 135 179)

12
 Sememic idioms can be defined as polylexonic constructions whose aggregate
literal meaning functions additionally as the realization of another combination of
meaning units (Makkai, 1969, cited in Katsarou, 2011, p. 33).
Such idioms are considered to be more abstract. They usually have a form of the
sentence and correlate with pragmatic meanings that are culture-bound. Besides, they
may be seen as clichs and have mainly discoursal functions. They include proverbs
(e.g. Dont count your chickens before theyre hatched.), familiar quotations (e.g. Not a
mouse stirring.), first base idioms associated with a national game like American
baseball (e.g. have two strikes against one), idioms of institutionalized politeness (e.g.
May I ?), idioms of institutionalized greeting (e.g. How do you do?), idioms of
institutionalized understatement (e.g. I wasnt too crazy about him.) and idioms of
institutionalized hyperbole (e.g. He wont even lift a finger) (ibid.).
Alexander (1984, as cited in Beloussova, 2015) distinguishes seven classes of
phrase-long idioms and five classes of sentence-long idioms. When it comes to the first
group of idioms, he added proverbial idioms (e.g. a watched pot never boils),
metaphorical allusive idioms (e.g. a hot potato), and idiomatic similes (e.g. so sober as
a judge) to phrasal verbs, tournures, irreversible binomials, and phrasal compounds of
devision of Makkais lexemic idioms. However, he eliminated incorporating verb
idioms and pseudo-idioms from Makkais lexemic idioms.
As can be seen in the linguistic literature, idioms are most often classified into
lexico-grammatical idiom classes (Lexicology, Semantics, etc.) and functional idiom
classes (Pragmatics, etc.).
Most linguists traditionally divided them into paremiological and non-
paremiological multi-word sets of expressions. Paremiological expressions (mainly
proverbs, aphorisms, sayings, etc.) can be seen in the form of a sentence. They usually
have the socio-cultural value and are generally used as a general truth (Kvetko, 2009).
In contrast to paremiological expressions, non-paremiological expressions can be
divided as follows (ibid.):
Phrasal verbs containing idiomatic meaning (e.g. to hang on, etc.);
Similes describing one thing by comparing it to another (to eat like a
bird, etc.);
Binomials consisting of two related antonymous or identical words
usually joined by a conjunction (e.g. Now and again, etc.);

13
 Social formulae gambits, pragmatic idioms semi-transparent or
transparent fixed expressions used in everyday discourse (e.g. How goes
it? etc.).
McCarthy (1998, as cited in Beloussova, 2015) categorized idioms similarly to
those found in the above-described typologies. His categorization of idioms includes
tournures (e.g. pul somebodys leg), binomials (e.g. give and take), trinomials (e.g.
ready, willing and able), phrasal verb idioms (e.g. take somebody off), opaque
compounds (e.g. a mish-mash), restricted collocations (e.g. breakneck speed), frozen
similes (e.g. (as) keen as mustard), possessives phrases (e.g. a kings ransom),
idiomatic speech routines (e.g. by the way), gambits and discourse markers (e.g. by the
way), and cultural allusions (e.g. to be or not to be).
From the semantic point of view, according to the degree of opacity or based on
the spectrum of idiomaticity, idioms may be classified into pure idioms demotivated,
opaque idioms (e.g. to spill the beans), semi-opaque idioms partially motivated,
figurative idioms (e.g. to know the rope), semi-transparent idioms semi-idioms,
restricted collocations (e.g. horse sense), transparent idioms (e.g. on foot) (Kvetko,
2015).
As has already been mentioned above, there are a huge number of different
taxonomies of idioms. That is the main reason why it is hard to make a decision which
one should be followed. However, in the diploma thesis, our main aim is to carry out
experimental research on phrasal verb idioms. As the categorization of phrasal verbs
may differ from one linguist to another, the main focus of the diploma thesis is on
Makkais and Kvetkos classifications.

14
2 PHRASAL VERBS
Phrasal verbs are an inseparable and typical part of the English language as they
make the language frisky, fluid and natural. It is estimated that there are about 3,000
phrasal verbs in the English lexicon, including 700 used on a daily basis (McArthur &
Atkins, 1974; Cornell, 1985; as cited in Riguel, 2013).
Rudzka-Ostyn (2003, p. 1) mentions that although they are common in spoken
and written English and new ones are constantly being created, they do not enjoy a good
reputation for EFL learners. Besides, they also form a huge group of expressions used
in English for specific purposes ESP (e.g. Business sphere business documents,
etc.).
It is well known that EFL learners have a tendency to adopt a strategy of
avoidance as they are not sure about both their form and meaning. It is mainly because
of the fact that many languages lack verb-particle constructions and thus EFL learners
cannot apply L1 interference and benefit from it. If we travel to an English speaking
country, we will certainly hear a great deal of them in everyday conversations between
native speakers.
There in an unspoken rule that native speakers tend to avoid using phrasal verbs
when speaking with non-native speakers. They commonly adjust their speech to make
themselves understood in a natural way. In order to make a breakthrough in using
phrasal verbs on a daily basis, they should not be any more overshadowed.
Looking at the definitions of phrasal verbs, we may ascertain that there is no
universal definition for phrasal verbs. However, most scholars strove to give a general
definition, although their definitions are very brief and sometimes vague. Richards &
Schmidt (2010, p. 436) define a phrasal verb as a verbal construction consisting of a
verb plus an adverb particle. Crystal (2008, p. 367) claims that a phrasal verbs is a
type of verb consisting of a sequence of a lexical element plus one or more particles,
while syntactically the particles may be classified into prepositional and adverbial
type. Kvetko (2009, p. 21) defines phrasal verb as follows: Phrasal verbs are non-
literal (idiomatic) very productive combinations (units) of a verb and adverbial
particle/preposition or both. Rudzka-Ostyn (2003) similarly defines phrasal verbs by
calling them idiomatic multi-word verbs.

15
 Most linguists defined and categorised phrasal verbs differently. They assert that
a phrasal verb is the combination of a lexical verb + an adverbial particle, whereas
a lexical verb + a preposition should be called a prepositional verb (Quirk et al., 1985;
Fraser, 1974). However, it is not straightforward to differ between a phrasal verb and a
prepositional verb since many scholars concur in claiming that both phrasal verbs and
prepositional verbs are phrasal in nature.
Let us look at the following examples. If we take a close look at the combination
of the lexical verb + the preposition look at, there is no doubt that it is the
prepositional verb. However, let us compare these two examples:
e.g. I was looking into the car. the lexical verb + the preposition;
e.g. I looked into the problem. the lexical verb + the prepositional particle.
The first sentence is fully transparent on condition that one knows the literal meaning of
each lexical item. It follows that there is used the prepositional verb; whereas, in the
second sentence, there is used the idiomatic phrasal verb, i.e. the literal translation
would lead to the incomprehension of the sentence. Quirk et al. (1985, p. 1167, as cited
in David, 2002, p. 116) adverts to the following differences between phrasal verbs and
prepositional verbs:
(a) The particle of a phrasal verb can stand either before or after the noun phrase
following the verb, but that of the prepositional verb must (unless deferred)
precede the noun phrase.
(b) When the noun phrase following the verb is a personal pronoun, the pronoun
precedes the particle in the case of a phrasal verb, but follows the particle in the
case of a prepositional verb.
(c) The particle of the phrasal verb cannot precede a relative pronoun at the
beginning of a relative clause.
(d) Similarly, the particle of a phrasal verb cannot precede the interrogative
word at the beginning of a wh-question.
(e) The particle of a phrasal verb is normally stressed, and in final position
normally bears the nuclear tone, whereas the particle of a prepositional verb is
normally unstressed and has the sail of the nuclear tine falls on the lexical
verb.
Despite the main differences between phrasal and prepositional verbs above, many
linguists are inclined to be in favour of the unified term phrasal verbs.

16
 A Polish linguist, Rudzka-Ostyn (2003) pioneered in investigating particles
within phrasal verbs from the EFL-oriented cognitive linguistic perspective. Based on
her research, the overwhelming majority of particles of phrasal verbs have the literal
meanings of spatial orientations; however, the mentioned spatial concepts additionally
contribute to the figurativeness of phrasal verbs meanings. The practical part of the
present study will proceed from her research studies of particles.
According to Rudzka-Ostyn (ibid.), particle IN includes in its meaning the
concept of a CONTAINER, and so the core meaning of the particle in can be the
position of the object. A container (also called landmark) is anything in which the
moving object (known as trajector) may be situated or may enter. As the time is an
abstraction, we may just conceptualize it. One way of viewing time as a concept is by
means of the container. This is the case of the phrasal verb to wait in. In addition to
the fact that this phrasal verb indicates the abstraction time, it can also be viewed as a
place where one may wait for somebody at home. Furthermore, not only physical
conditions but also activities, relations, situation which affect a given entity can be
conceived as containers.
The container particle OUT has the prototypical meaning that may be
explicated as the departure of an object (entity) from within another position, object.
The metaphorical meanings of the particle out may be conceptualized as containers.
Let us look at the diagram (Ruzdka-Ostyn, 2003, p. 26) that illustrates abstract
meanings (states) by means of the particle out.

The STATE of with OUT

non-existence comes into existence

ignorance becomes known
invisibility becomes visible
silence becomes to be heard

Regarding the above-mentioned diagram, our extension would be THE STATE

OF FULNESS becomes to be empty in the case of the phrasal verb to breathe out.

17
 Rudzka-Ostyn (2003, p. 41) also formed a graphic synthesis of the related
meanings of the particle OUT.

Table III. A Graphic Synthesis of the Related Meanings of the Particle OUT
Rudzka-Ostyn (ibid.) claims that UP is the most commonly used particle in
English. It can be explained by the fact that the upward position (either as a spatial
orientation or abstractly) is part of our everyday experience. Therefore, spatially, UP
stands for motion from a lower to a higher place or position. Moreover, if we extend the
senses of the particle UP, we may find out that UP is also associated with abstract
meanings of being in a good mood, having good/positive feelings (e.g. to cheer up, to
perk up, etc.). Other derived sense of UP is the meaning to reach an end, a goal, a
limit (e.g. to drink up, to use up, etc.). Current studies also deal with the sense of the
future by using the particle UP (e.g. to come up).
The particle DOWN is prototypically the opposite of the particle UP. The up-
down schema structures the basic orientational metaphors MORE IS UP and LESS
IS DOWN. However, it is important to mention that meanings of UP and DOWN
that usually code paths in different domains cannot be always seen as opposites as in the
pairs to write up to write down, etc.). There are many combinations with the particles
DOWN that imply the negative sense by using the force or superiority (e.g.to to grind
down, to gun down, etc.).

18
 The above discussion can serve as the evidence why EFL learners ought to be
familiarised with the semantics of particles and, consequently, PVs can be processed
more easily. We assume that the visual elucidation of the movement of particles can
facilitate the processing of PVs and increase the memorability.

19
3 TRADITIONAL VIEW OF IDIOMS
Investigating idioms has a rich research tradition in the former Soviet Union and
Russia, whereas in the west idioms have not attracted such special attention. Hence a
very limited number of studies were translated into western languages. Despite the fact,
some studies may be dated back to 60s and 70s (Mntyl, 2004).
By comparison with eastern and western attempts to create a generally accepted
definition of idioms and categorization systems, idiom dictionaries have been mostly
influenced by Russian linguists. Among other things, in Russia there were some
linguistic terms such as phraseloids that are absent in western explorations (ibid.).
Based on the numerous studies, idioms were really difficult to define. Many
scholars were in dispute over the exact definition of idioms. Pursuant to the traditional
linguistic view, idioms are defined as sets of words used as fixed expressions whose
meanings may not be deduced figuratively but must be processed through the
traditional linguistic model with the help of pragmatic interpretation in discourse.
Following the formalist tradition, Uriel Weinreich, a Polish-American linguist,
was considered to be the pioneer at investigating idiom forms. He claims that the most
common definition of an idiom is a complex expression whose meaning cannot be
derived from the meanings of its elements (Weinreich, 1969, p. 26). By looking at
idiomatic expressions from the generative perspective, Weinreich calls a phraseological
unit any expression in which at least one constituent is polysemous, and in which a
selection of subsense is determined by the verbal context. However, a phraseological
unit that involves at least two polysemous constituents, and in which there is a
reciprocal contextual selection of subsense, will be called an idiom (ibid., p. 42).
Another significant view of idioms is by Bruce Fraser who investigated idioms
within the framework of transformational grammar. In his research paper (1970, p. 22),
Fraser regards an idiom as a constituent or series of constituents for which the
semantic interpretation is not a compositional function of the formatives of which it is
composed. Working on the misapprehension that idioms are fully frozen, he (ibid., pp.
39-41) worked out six degrees of frozenness: at one end of the continuum were
expressions that tolerate a fair amount of variation (spill the beans), and the other end
totally frozen idioms (dip into ones pocket) that behave unpredictably and are to be

20
interpreted as semantic wholes, and as expressions consisting of parts each of which
contributes to the meaning.

Least frozen: Allows reconstitution: spill the beans

Allows extraction: take interest in
Allows permutation: turn back the clock
Allows insertion: lend a hand to
Allows adjunction: insist on
Completely frozen: Allows no variation: dip into ones pocket
Table IV. Frasers frozenness hierarchy of idioms (Fraser, 1970, pp. 39-41)

One way or the other, the shown hierarchy has been extensively lambasted for
being unconvincing and fully subjunctive, thus it has not succeeded in putting it into
practice.
Another significant linguist Adam Makkai (1972) attempted to categorize idioms
hierarchically. Makkais classification of idioms consists of two classes: idioms of
encoding and idioms of decoding. However, his main concern was idioms of decoding.
These were further subdivided into two areas, according to lexemic stratum and
sememic stratum. Lexemic idioms include phrasal verbs (e.g. bring up), tournure idioms
(e.g. kick the bucket), irreversible binominal idioms (e.g. here and there), phrasal
compounds (e.g. yellow pages), incorporating verbs (e.g. baby-sit), and pseudo-idioms
(e.g. cranberry). Inter alia, Makkai (ibid., p. 122) claims that idioms provide the
listener with disinformation in the sense that they may lead to erroneous decoding.
To some extent, the presented claim might be truthful since some idiomatic expressions
such as give the green light are a typical example of idioms that ought to be referred to
their literal meaning so that we may grasp the meaning more easily. Notwithstanding
the claim, the literal interpretation is not always a right way of understanding the
context where idioms are used.
As seen above, idioms have been studied from diverse perspectives depending on
the predominant views in linguistic disciplines. The approaches focused on idioms may
be broadly divided into five categories that directly reflect different linguistic
conceptions of idioms during the course of time (Mntyl, 2004, p. 48):

21
1. the structure of an idiom and its variations and transformations (1960s
1970s);
2. the processing and storing of idioms (late 1970s 1980s);
3. the metaphoricity of idioms (1985 onwards);
4. teaching, learning and understanding idioms (late 1980s onwards);
5. idioms within the wider perspective of idiomatic language, and the functions of
idioms (1990s).
From the traditional point of view, idioms were perceived as non-compositional
items, whose meaning is arbitrary and does not have anything to do with the meaning of
the constituents (Benczes, 2002, p. 17). The notion compositionality comes from the
well-known principle of compositionality. The principle says that the semantic
meaning of any unit of language is determined by the semantic meanings of its parts
along with the way they are put together (Fasold & Connor-Linton, 2014, p. 141).
However, the aforementioned principle was not applied to the traditional view of
idioms.
The principal target of the traditional studies of idioms was to focus on their form,
treating them as dead or frozen, that is, their origin may not be detected but their
meanings are fully abstract. That is why the traditional approaches to idioms are mainly
seen as the ones which study idiomatic expressions from the view of traditional
grammar. Therefore, syntax, as a linguistic discipline, considered idioms to be frozen
elements (Gibbs, 1994, as cited in Benczes, 2002, p. 18). It follows that idioms are
fixed in form with a limited tolerance of transformations. However, the presented view
has varied. Nowadays, it is allowed to change them with regard to their form.
In compliance with the traditional view, it was assumed that idioms had
metaphorical origins; nevertheless they have lost their metaphoricity over time and
turned into dead metaphors (Aitchison, 1987, as cited in Gibbs & O'Brien, 1990).
Scholars often laboured under the misapprehension that meaning of idioms comes from
historical background that is opaque and has nothing to do with human cognition
(Levitin, 2010). Regarding the traditional view, Chomsky (1980) claims that idioms
should be perceived as semantically non-compositional since their figurative meaning is
not based on the meaning of their individual elements.
According to Kovecses (2010, p. 231), idioms have certain syntactic properties
and have a meaning that is special, relative to the meanings of the forms that comprise

22
it. It follows that the linguistic meaning is divorced from the human conceptual
system and encyclopaedic knowledge that speakers of a language share (ibid.).
In order to better understand the traditional view of idioms; let us have a look at
Kovecses diagrammatic form in the figure II below.

special idiomatic meaning:

die

the meanings of the linguistic forms:

kick the bucket

linguistic forms and their syntactic properties:

kick the bucket (no passive, etc.)
Table V. Idioms in the traditional view (Kovecses, 2010, p. 232)

In the cited figure above, the English idiom kick the bucket, whose idiomatic
meaning to die may not be derived from the literal sense of the individual components
it is comprised of, may serve as a typical example of perceiving idioms in the past.
In a nutshell, the aforesaid studies show the miscellaneous understanding of
idioms. However, all of the studies proved that none of them may be convincing enough
to be applied in contemporary view of idioms.

23
4 COGNITIVE LINGUISTIC VIEW OF IDIOMS

The cognitive linguistic viewpoint of idioms differs on the perception of idioms

from the traditional perspective. Cognitivist research has demonstrated the correlation
between the language and human mind. Therefore, the processing and comprehension
of idioms are, to a large extent, influenced by phenomena outside the language such as
cognitive principles, one of them being human categorization; pragmatic principles; and
functional principles in general (Kemmer, 2007).
One of the striking persuasions in terms of cognitive linguistics is that idiomatic
expressions are not always arbitrary. It follows that the overwhelming majority of
idioms contains concealed meaning that may be decoded by means of cognitive-
semantic mechanisms. As Lakoff (1987, cited in Kovecses, p. 2, 2006) asserts,
idiomatic expressions are conceptually motivated by the underlying metaphors and
metonymies. Additionally, the connection between the source domain and target
domain is founded on direct sensorimotor experiences and interactions with the physical
world (ibid.). Gibbs (1997, p. 142) also shares this belief by contending that idioms do
not exist as separate semantic units within the lexicon, but actually reflect coherent
systems of metaphorical concepts. Kvetko (2015, p. 150) similarly contends that
looking at phraseology from the diachronic point of view, it can be said that idioms are
not arbitrary but semantically motivated expressions.
The breakthrough in the cognitive research of metaphors was made by Lakoff
and Johnsons book Metaphors We Live By. They (2003, p. 3) claim that the
concepts that govern our thought are not just matters of the intellect. They also govern
our everyday functioning, down to the most mundane details. Our concepts structure
what we perceive, how we get around in the world, and how we relate to other people.
Our conceptual system thus plays a central role in defining our everyday realities. If we
are right in suggesting that our conceptual system is largely metaphorical, then the way
we think, what we experience, and what we do every day is very much a matter of
metaphor.
According to numerous research studies in the field of cognitive linguistics,
Kovecses and Szabo (1996, p. 330) claim that many, or perhaps most idioms are

24
products of our conceptual system and not simply a matter of language (i.e. a matter of
lexicon). An idiom is not just an expression that has meaning that is somehow special in
relation to the meanings of its constituent parts, but it arises from more general
knowledge of the world (embodied in our conceptual system). In other words, idioms
(or, at least, the majority of them), are conceptual and not linguistic, in nature. It
follows that meanings of idiomatic expressions come from the knowledge in our
conceptual system. Based on that, the overwhelming majority of meanings of idioms
may be seen as motivated. The motivation can serve as a cognitive mechanism that links
domains of knowledge to idiomatic meanings. These mechanisms can be seen in the
figure III below.

Idiomatic meaning:
the overall special meaning of an idiom

Cognitive mechanisms:
metaphor, metonymy, conventional knowledge
(=domain(s) of knowledge)

Conceptual domain(s):
one or more domains of knowledge

Linguistic form and their meanings:

the words that comprise an idiom, their
syntactic properties together with their meanings

Table VI. The conceptual motivation for many idioms (p. 234)
However, in some cases, there is no conceptual motivation for the meaning of
idioms as in the case of the idiom kick the bucket (ibid.).
As may be seen above, the conceptual motivation plays an irreplaceable role in
idiom acquisition. Lakoff (1987, p. 448) provides the schematic theorem in which he
explains the significance of the motivation that facilitates idiom comprehension: The
relationship between A and B is motivated just in case there is an independently
existing link, L, such that A-L-B 'fit together'. L makes sense of the relationship
between A and B.
Lakoff (1987) claims that people normally possess large sets of conventional
image schemas of the world. Johnson (1987, p. 19) defines them as a cluster of
knowledge representing a particular generic procedure, object, percept, event, sequence
of events, or social situation. This provides a skeleton structure for a concept that can be

25
instantiated, or filled out with the detailed properties of the particular instance being
represented. These image schemas are formed on the basis of human experience and
specific culture people belong to. It means that these images are not context-bound, but
they are rooted in peoples minds. That is the reason why native speakers do not have to
struggle to decipher the meaning of idioms. The image schemata have a lot in common
with conceptual metaphors as orientational and container schemata are intimately
interconnected with the physical structuring of the world. Lakoff (ibid.) provides the
concept of kinaesthetic image schemas. He (1987, p. 19; as cited in David, 2002, p. 38)
claims that image schemas are relatively simple structures that constantly recur in our
bodily experience: CONTAINER, PATH, LINKS, FORCES, BALANCE, and in
various orientations and relations: UP-DOWN, FRONT-BACK, PART-WHOLE,
CENTER-PERIPHERY, etc.
Based on Langacers suggestion (1991, cited in Langlotz, 2006 p. 90), idioms
are complex scenes with a bipartite semantic structure, i.e. a literal reading and a
figurative, idiomatic meaning. It follows that if we take the idiom to throw a spanner
into the works, this one literally describes a rich scene belonging to the domain of
operating a machine, whereas the lexicalised idiomatic meaning involves a more
abstract conceptualisation cause a problem to prevent something from happening
(Langlotz, 2006). Let us look at the following illustration of the aforementioned
perception of the idiom.

IDIOMATIC MEANING
cause a problem to prevent something from happening

FIGURATION

throw a spanner into the works

LITERAL MENANING

Table VII. The bipartite semantic structure of an idiomatic construction (Langlotz,

2006)
The lexical structure of the idiom basically profiles the literal meaning, whereas
the figurative meaning denotes a semantic extension based on conceptual processing. In
other words, the lexical elements of the idiom are not actuated to encode the figurative
idiomatic meaning directly. Rather, the lexical elements encode part of a literal source

26
domain that is stimulated to provide a concrete conceptual background in order to make
a model of the abstract target domain of the idiomatic meaning (ibid.).

27
5 CONCEPTUAL METAPHOR THEORY
Since ancient times, classical theorists have viewed metaphors as a set of
extraordinary linguistic expressions, or semantically deviant expressions, used in the
language as a rhetorical device to depict poetic and aesthetic imagination. However, this
traditional view has changed by numerous research studies in the field of cognitive
linguistics since they found that metaphors are omnipresent. The cognitive linguists
Lakoff & Johnson (1980) are considered to be pioneers in studying the metaphor from
the cognitive view as they have ascertained that metaphors are part of our everyday life
stemming from human thinking and sensory experience, that is to say, our relationship
with the physical world. It follows that conceptual metaphors are systematic patterns
according to which we create metaphors so as to construe abstract matters. In other
words, conceptual metaphors manifest how we conceptualize the world around us
(ibid., pp. 8 - 9). Similarly, Kess (1992, as cited in Boers, 1996, p. 23) claims that
conceptual metaphor serves as an indispensable cognitive ability that allows us to
conceive and think of abstract concepts. It suggests that meanings of many idiomatic
expressions are motivated by cognitive mechanisms such as conceptual metaphor,
metonymy and conventional knowledge (Kovecses & Szabo, 1996). However, as
Samani & Hashemian (2012) claim, the general meaning of many idioms (i.e., what
concepts they are about) remains completely unmotivated, unless we take into account
the interplay between meaning and our conceptual system as comprised by conceptual
metaphors to a large extent.
From the comparative point of view, the main difference between linguistic
metaphor and conceptual metaphor is that conceptual metaphors belong to the level of
thought and constitute a small group of mental schema whereby the human mind
understands abstract concepts in terms of more concrete bodily experiences by
establishing ontological correspondences across conceptual domains, whereas linguistic
metaphors are the concrete realization in language of conceptual metaphors (Lakoff &
Johnson, 1980). Therefore, the idiomatic expressions referring to life (e.g. We are at
the crossroads. or She has left this world. etc.) seem to reflect peoples experience by
resorting them to more concrete experiences with journeys by means of the conceptual
metaphor LIFE IS A JOURNEY (Lakoff & Johnson, 1980). The domain JOURNEY

28
from the aforementioned conceptual metaphor is hypothesised to include
representations for entities such as traveller, mode of transport, route, resting place,
destination, obstacles encountered on route and so forth (Evans, 2007). A conceptual
metaphor here serves to establish correspondences known as cross-domain mappings
between a source domain and a target domain by projecting representations from one
conceptual domain onto corresponding representations in another conceptual domain
(ibid., p. 62). In other words, the conceptual metaphor denotes the mapping from a
source domain to the target domain (Lakoff & Johnson, 1980). In a conceptual
metaphor, source domain refers to the element that conveys the literal meaning of an
expression, whereas target domain is the element that is characterized by source
domain (Cruse et al., 2004, p. 195). In order to illustrate the connection between the
source and target domain and remember the mapping in the conceptual system, Lakoff
and Johnson (1980) propounded two ways of calling the mapping:
TARGET-DOMAIN IS SOURCE-DOMAIN;
TARGET-DOMAIN AS SOURCE-DOMAIN.
Accordingly, the mapping in this case is LIFE IS A JOURNEY. Source domain is
represented by JOURNEY and target domain by LIFE. According to the example,
the mapping process is formed coherently and facilitates to grasp the underlying
meaning of idiomatic expression that is motivated by the aforesaid conceptual
metaphor.
For the purposes of a more explicit exposition of functions of conceptual
metaphors, they may be further divided into three groups: structural, orientational and
ontological metaphors (Lakoff & Johnson, 1980; Kovecses, 2010).
Structural metaphors are estimated to be the largest group. Kovecses (2010, p. 37)
claims that in this kind of metaphor, the source domain provides a relatively rich
knowledge structure for the target concept. It follows that understanding is based on
conceptual mappings between the element of A and element of B (ibid.). Lakoff &
Johnson (p. 197) claim that structural metaphors involve the structuring of one kind of
experience or activity in terms of another kind of experience of activity. In most cases,
these metaphors refer to the source domain of physical space and build directly on its
image-schematic structure (Boers, 1996). If we take the metaphor AN ACTIVITY IS
MOTION ALONG A PATH, the PATH schema is mapped onto abstract experience.
(ibid.).

29
 Another group comprises orientational metaphors. The name orientational comes
from the fact that these metaphors have to do with spatial orientations (e.g. UP-DOWN,
CENTRE-PERIPHERY, etc.). Boers (1996) asserts that orientational metaphors project
the orientational image schemas of oriented physical space (e.g. UP-DOWN) onto
abstract experience. Therefore, if we take the spatial orientations UP-DOWN, the
upward orientation tends to go together with positive evaluation, while downward
orientation with a negative one (Kovecses, 2010). Based on this, idiomatic expressions,
mainly phrasal verbs, can be presented by means of orientational metaphors as they
consist of particles that hide their idiomatic meaning.
Moreover, Kovecses (ibid., p. 40) claims that the cognitive aim of these metaphors
is to make a set of target concepts coherent in our conceptual system. He also
suggests that these metaphors should be called coherence metaphors as the coherence,
in this case, means that certain target concepts tend to be conceptualized in a uniform
manner.
The last group of conceptual metaphors represents ontological metaphors. The
name ontological comes from the branch of philosophy that has to do with the nature
of existence. Boers (1996, p. 24) claims that they can be considered as mapping the
image-schematic structure of OBJECT onto abstract categories of experience.
Kovecses (2010, p. 38) agrees on the above-mentioned claim by contending that we
conceive of our experiences in terms of objects, substances, and containers, in general,
without specifying exactly what kind of object, substance, or container is meant.
Besides, personification, as a figure of speech, may serve as a special type of
ontological metaphors since it attributes characteristics of living creatures to abstract
concepts (Boers, 1996, p. 24).
In conclusion, it is noteworthy that a conceptual metaphor should not be regarded
just as a mental phenomenon originating from human experience since the conceptual
metaphor is reflected in language, and language is the product of culture and society
(Lakoff & Johnson, 1980; Kovecses, 2005). It follows that conceptual metaphors are
culture-bound, i.e. people from different cultures experience and consequently
conceptualize the world in a different way, which means that conceptual metaphors can
differ from one culture to another.

30
LIST OF RESOURCES

SAMANI, R. E. HASHEMIAN, M. The Effect of Conceptual Metaphor on Learning

Idioms by L2 Learners. In International Journal of English Linguistics. Canada :
Canadian Center of Science and Education. ISSN 1923-8703 (Online), February 2012,
Vol. 2, No. 1, pp. 249 256. [online]. [cit 2017-02-28]. Retrieved from
http://www.ccsenet.org/journal/index.php/.

ALDAHESH, Y., A. On Idiomaticity in English and Arabic: A Cross Linguistic

Study. In Journal of Language and Culture. Australia : The University of Sydney,
March, 2013, Vol. 4(2), pp. 23 29. ISSN: 2141-2540.

IDIOM (n. d.) In Cambridge Dictionary. [online]. [cit 2017-02-05]. Retrieved from
http://dictionary.cambridge.org/.

IDIOM (n. d.) In Oxford Dictionary. [online]. [cit 2017-02-05]. Retrieved from
https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/.

PHRASEOLOGY (n. d.) In Oxford Dictionary. [online]. [cit 2017-02-22]. Retrieved

from https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/.

BAKER, M. In Other Words. A coursebook on translation. London ; New York :

Routledge, 1992. ISBN 0415030854.

BELOUSSOVA, V. Idiom Learning Materials for Estonian Secondary School Students

(MA thesis). Estonia : University Of Tartu, Department Of English Language and
Literature, 2015. pp. 115. [online]. [cit 2017-02-05]. Retrieved from
https://dspace.ut.ee/bitstream/handle/10062/47069/Violetta_Beloussova_MA_thesis1-
1.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y.

BENCZES, R. The semantics of idioms: a cognitive linguistic approach. In The Even

Yearbook 5. ELTE SEAS Working Papers in Linguistics. ISSN 1218-8808, 2002, pp.
17 30.

31
BOERS, F. Spatial Prepositions and Metaphor: A Cognitive Semantic Journey along the
Up-Down and the Front-Back Dimensions (Language in Performance). Germany :
Tubingen Narr, 1996. pp. 221. ISBN-13: 978-3823349358.

KVECSES, Z. Metaphor in Culture, Universality and Variation. Cambridge :

Cambridge University Press, 2005. pp. 314. ISBN: 0-5216-9612-7.

CRUSE, D. A., et al. Cognitive Linguistics. New York : Cambridge University Press,
2004. pp. 374. ISBN-13: 9780521667708.

CACCIARI, C. & TABOSSI, P. Idioms: Processing, Structure and Interpretation. New

Jersey, Hillsdale : Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 1993. 356 pp. ISBN-13: 978-
0805810387.

CRYSTAL, D. A Dictionary of Linguistics and Phonetics 6th Edition. Blackwell

Publishing, 2008. pp. 529. ISBN: 978-1-405-15296-9.

DAVID, G. Spatiality Underlying the Conceptual System of Figurative English. pp.

238. ISBN 963-472-621-6.

EVANS, V. A Glossary of Cognitive Linguistics (Glossaries in Linguistics). Scotland :

Edinburgh University Press, 2007. 256 pp. ISBN-13: 978-0748622801.

FASOLD, W. R. & CONNOR-LINTON, J. An Introduction to Language and

Linguistics, 2nd Edition. Cambridge University Press, 2014. pp. 574. ISBN-13: 978-
1107637993.

FRASER, B. Idioms within a Transformational Grammar. In Foundations of Language.

the USA : Springer International Publishing. February 1970, Vol. 6, No. 1, pp. 22 42.
[online]. [cit 2017-12-02]. Retrieved from
https://www.academia.edu/578294/Idioms_within_a_transformational_grammar/.

32
GIBBS, W. R. & OBRIAN, J. E. Idioms and Mental Imagery: The Metaphorical
Motivation for Idiomatic Meaning: Cognition. 1990. pp. 35-68.

GIBBS, W. R., BOGDANOVICH, M. J., SYKES, R. J. Metaphor in Idiom

Comprehension. In Journal of Memory and Language. 1997, Vol. 37, No. ML962506,
pp. 141 154. [online]. [cit 2017-17-02]. Retrieved from http://www.cogsci.ucsd.edu/.

CHOMSKY, A. N. Rules and representations. In Behavioral and Brain Sciences. U.S. :

Columbia University Press, March, 1980. Vol. 3, pp. 1 15.

KEMMER, S. About Cognitive Linguistics: Historical Background. International

Cognitive Linguistics Association, 2007, July. [online]. [cit 2017-17-02]. Retrieved
from: http://www.cognitivelinguistics.org/.

KAVKA, J. S. A Book of Idiomatology. Slovakia : University of ilina, 2003. ISBN

80-8070-041-9.

KOVECSES, Z. & SZABO, P. Idioms: A View from Cognitive Semantics. In Applied

Linguistics. Oxford University Press. September, 1996, Vol. 17, No. 3, pp. 326 355.
[online]. [cit 2017-17-02]. Retrieved from https://student.cc.uoc.gr/.

KOVECSES, Z. A cognitive linguistic view of learning idioms in an ELT context. In

Series B: Applied and Interdisciplinary Papers. LAUD Linguistic Agency: Universitat
Duisburg-Essen. ISSN 1435-6481, 2006, No. 288, pp. 1 26.

KOVECSES, Z. Metaphor: A Practical Introduction, 2nd Edition. Oxford University

Press, 2010. pp. 400. ISBN-13: 978-0195374940.

KVETKO, P. An Outline of English Phraseology (3rd Revided ed.). Slovakia :

University of SS. Cyril and Methodius, 2009.

RICHARDS, J. C. & SCHMIDT, R. Longman Dictionary of Language Teaching and

Applied Linguistics. Great Britain : Pearson Education Limited, 2010. pp. 656. ISBN-
13: 978-1408204603.

33
KVETKO, P. English Lexicology in Theory and Practice (4th ed.). Slovakia :
University of SS. Cyril and Methodius, 2015. pp. 204. ISBN 978-80-8105-639-0.

LANGLOTZ, A. Occasional Adnominal Idiom Modification A cognitive Linguistic

Approach. Switzerland : University of Basel. 2006, Vol. 6 (1), pp. 85 108. [online].
[cit 2017-20-02]. Retrieved from http://revistas.um.es/ijes/article/view/46881/44911/.

KATSAROU, E. Descriptive and Theoretical Aspects of English Idioms. Monograph.

LAP Lambert Academic Publishing, 2011. pp. 95. ISBN: 978-3-8465-9897-9.

LAKOFF, G. & JOHNSON, M. Metaphors We Live By (1st edition). U.S. : University

Of Chicago Press, 1980, (reprint) 2003. pp. 242. ISBN: 978-0226468013.

LAKOFF, G. Women, Fire, and Dangerous Things: What categories reveal about the
mind. The University of Chicago Press, 1987. 614 pp. ISBN 0-226-46804-6.

LEVITIN, J., D. Foundations of Cognitive Psychology: Core Readings (2nd Edition).

UK : Pearson, 2010. 768 pp. ISBN-13: 978-0205711475.

MAKKAI, A. Idiom Structure in English. Germany : Walter de Gruyter, 1972, (reprint)

2013. 371 pp. ISBN13: 9789027921055.

FRASER, B. The Verb-particle Combination in English. Tokyo: Taishukan Pub. Co.,

1974.

QUIRK, R. et al. Comprehensive Grammar of the English Language. New York:

Longman, 1985.

MNTYL, K. Idioms and Language Users: The Effect of the Characteristics of

Idioms on their Recognition and Interpretation by Native and Non-native speakers of
English. Finland : University of Jyvskyl, 2004. 239 pp. ISBN: 951-39-1717-7.

34
McPHERRON, P. & RANDOLPH, T., P. Cat Got Your Tongue? Virginia, Alexandria :
TESOL International Association, 2014. 294 pp. ISBN 9781931185196.

McCarthy, M. Cambridge Idioms Dictionary. Cambridge : Cambridge University Press,

2006. pp. 520. ISBN-13 978-0-521-86037-6.

MOON, R. Fixed Expressions and Idioms in English: A Corpus Based Approach.

Oxford : Clarendon Press, 1998. ISBN 019823614X.

RUDZKA-OSTYN, B. Word Power: Phrasal Verbs and Compounds: A Cognitive

Approach. Mouton De Gruyter, 2003 (reprint 2011). pp. 221. ISBN-13: 978-
3110177039.

RIGUEL, E. Phrasal Verbs: Usage and Acquisition. In Athens Journal of Philology,

2014, Vol. 1, No. 2. pp. 111-125. [online]. [cit 2017-28-02]. Retrieved from:
https://www.atiner.gr/journals/philology/2014-1-2-3-Riguel.pdf.

RUNDELL, M. & FOX, G. IDIOM Macmillan English dictionary for advanced

learners. London : Macmillan, 2007. pp. 1784. ISBN-13: 9780415030854.

SCHMITT, N. Vocabulary in language teaching. Cambridge : Cambridge University

Press, 2000. 242 pp. ISBN 0-521-669383.

THORNBURY, S. How to teach vocabulary. Essex : Longman, 2002. 192 pp. ISBN-13:
978-0582429666.

BARKEMA, H. Idiomaticity and terminology: a multi-dimensional descriptive model.

Studia Lunguistica, 1995. Vol. 5 No. 2, pp. 125 160.

35
APPENDECIES

Appendix I

Phrasal verbs with in

CONCEPTUAL PHRASAL MEANING SLOVAK

METAPHOR VERB TRANSLATION

to let in to allow sb to enter pusti dovntra, vpusti

koho

to ask in to invite sb into your pozva koho alej

house

BUILDING IS to be in to be at home or at work by doma, by

A prtomn (v prci ap.)

CONTAINER to break in to go into a building to vlma sa, vnikn

steal sth dovntra (nsilm)

to move in to start living in a place nasahova sa,

prisahova sa kde, ku
komu

to wait in to stay at home because sb aka doma a sa

is going to visit niekto zastav

to come in to enter a room or building vstpi, vojs (do

miestnosti ap.)

36
Appendix II

Phrasal verbs with OUT

CONCEPTUAL PHRASAL MEANING SLOVAK

METAPHOR VERB TRANSLATION
to bowl out to scold sb; to shout at hulka, vyrevva,

HUMAN BODY sb vynada

IS A to breath through your mouth vydchnu, vydychova
CONTAINER out to exhale; to send air
out of your lungs

Subtype of the to blurt out to utter suddenly or vyhknu, vyrazi zo

metaphor inadvertently; divulge seba o (tajomstvo ap.)
impulsively or
MOUTH IS A unadvisedly
CONTAINER to chew out to tell someone (hovor.) zvozi, znosi,
angrily that they have sprdn koho
done something
wrong

to shout out to shout or make a vykrknu, zakria (od

loud noise because bolesti ap.)
you are frightened,
hurt, etc.

to read out to read sth aloud (pre)ta nahlas,

37
Appendix III
Phrasal verbs with UP

CONCEPTUAL PHRASAL MEANING TRANSLATION

METAPHOR VERB

to drink up to finish a drink dopi, dorazi o

completely (pohrik, npoj ap.)

to throw up to vomit; to puke grca, vydvi, vyvrti,

up hodi abu

to dry up to make or become vyschn, vysui (sa),

completely dry zoschn

to beat up to hurt sb by zbi, zmlti koho

COMPLETION
hitting or kicking
IS UP
them many time

to fill up to fill sth naplni (sa), zaplni (sa)

completely o m, nalia o kam
(vodu do hrnca ap.),
natankova

to use up to consume all of spotrebova, vyerpa o

sth (cel zsobu)

to chop up to cut sth into narba, poseka (drevo,

small pieces zeleninu ap.)

to buck up to become happier zdvihn nladu komu,

or more positive povzbudi, privies na
or to make sb veselie mylienky koho
happier or more
positive
HAPPY IS UP
to crack up to laugh with great (hovor.) rozosmia sa,
GOOD IS UP
enthusiasm, or to rozrehota sa
cause sb to laugh
in this way

to perk up to become more dvihn nladu,

energetic, happier rozveseli
38
 to light up to look happy, to roziari (sa), rozjasni
become happy, to (sa) (vraz tvre ap.),
brighten up potei (sa)

to cheer up to become more rozveseli (sa), prs na

cheerful; to make in mylienky
sb/sth more
cheerful

to speed up to go or happen zrchli (sa), zvi

faster, or to cause rchlos oho
something to
happen faster

to blow up to make something zveliova, nafukova

seem larger, more (problm, nieie zsluhy
important, better, ap.)
or worse than it
really is
MORE IS UP to build up to develop, vybudova, vystava
accumulate, or
increase
something, such as
wealth, business,
goodwill, etc

to grow up to become mature; vyrs, dospie (lovek)

to become adult

to bank up to heap or mound navi nsyp, nakopi

up something to (sa), nahromadi (sa)
guard against
something.

POWER IS UP to move up to get a more postpi (vyie),

important job in a vypracova sa, povi,
company or postupova (sluobnm

39
 organization; to postupom ap.)
promote

to bolster up to support or morlne podpori,

improve podra, upevni,
something or posilni (pozciu ap.)
make it stronger;
to reinforce sth

FUTURE IS to come up to happen soon nastva, bli sa

UP and unexpectedly

40
Appendix IV

Phrasal verbs with DOWN

CONCEPTUAL PHRASAL MEANING SLOVAK

METAPHOR VERB TRANSLATION

to grind down to treat sb so badly tra, ubja, ikanova

for such a long time koho
that they are no
longer able to fight
WEAK IS
back
DOWN
to wear down to make sb feel postupne nii,
tired and less able vyerpa, zodrie
to deal successfully (trner svojho zverenca
with a situation ap.)

to put down to make sb feel (hovor.) zhadzova,

foolish and znemoova,
unimportant poniova koho (pred
ostatnmi ap.)

to gun down to shoot sb and kill streli, postreli,

or seriously injure zastreli koho
them, often when (bezbrannho ap.)
that person cannot
COMPLETION
IS DOWN defend himself or
herself

to strike down To incapacitate; to (kni.) sklti, zloi (o

make sb unable to chorobe), vne
lead an active life; pokodi zdravie
to make somebody
seriously ill; to kill
somebody

to be down To feel sad, by na dne (psychicky)

41
 depressed, dejected,
or generally unwell;
to be down in the
dumps
SAD IS DOWN
to let down to fail to fulfil the sklama (dveru ap.),
expectations of (a sklama sa, zradi koho
person); to
disappoint sb

to cut down to reduce the size, zmeni (vdavky,

amount or number poet nieoho ap.),
of something obmedzi (produkciu
LESS IS DOWN
ap.)

to slow down to reduce speed; to ubra rchlos,

go slower pribrzdi, spomali

42
Appendix V

List of Phrasal Verbs Represented by Conceptual Metaphors

PHRASAL SAMPLE USAGE

VERBS
to let in Dont let anybody in Ill be back in 15 minutes.
I'd ask you in for a coffee but I have to get up early for work in
Building is a

to ask in the morning.

container.

to be in They are never in; I always get their answerphone.

to break in Someone had broken in through the bedroom window.
to move in Were moving in next week.
to wait in I have to wait in for a delivery this morning.
to come in Try not to wake the whole house when you come in!
to breath out The doctor told me to breathe out slowly.
Mouth is a
container.

to blurt out She blurted out the truth.

to chew out He chewed me out for being late
to shout out An officer was shouting out orders.
to read out He read the list of names out.
to drink up Drink up, everyone, its time to go!
Completion is up.

to throw up She always throws up on long car journeys.

to dry up The land had dried up and no crops would grow.
to beat up They threatened to beat me up.
to fill up Jenny kept filling my glass up with champagne.
to use up Don't use up all the milk - we need some for breakfast.
to chop up Sarah was busy chopping up onions.
to buck up I took him out to lunch to try to buck him up a bit.
Happy is up.
Good is up.

to crack up She tries to keep a straight face, but she keeps cracking up.
to perk up Sue perked up when she heard the news.
to light up Rosa's face lit up when she saw the dog.
to cheer up She went shopping to cheer herself up.
to speed up The car suddenly sped up and went through a red light.
More is up.

to blow up The media always blows up reports of celebrity behaviour.

to bank up The river was rising, so we banked some dirt up.
to heat up Let's see what happens when I heat it up.
to go up Her salary will go up by a hefty 10%.
to speak up Could you speak up? We can't hear at the back.
Power
is up.

to move up Hes been moved up to the position of manager.

to bolster up We were all scared but she bolstered up our courage.

43
 Ground down by years of abuse, she didnt have the

Weak is
down.
to grind down confidence to leave him.
to wear down They were worn down by the stress of feeding five children.
to put down Hes always trying to put me down.
Completion is
down.

to gun down He was gunned down in his own doorway.

to strike down As a tiny baby she was struck down by polio.

You didn't do that poorly on the exam, don't be so down!
down.
Sad is

to be down
I'm relying on your help - please don't let me down.
to let down
I need to cut this section down to 500 words.
Less is
down.

to cut down

to slow down The car slowed down, then suddenly pulled away.
Future is
up.

to come up My vacation is coming up next week!

44