The
article presents a selective overview of functional and pragmatic differences
between idiomatic and figuration expressions. The author focuses on differences
in stylistic and cultural values, semantic implicatures, and effects on
facilitation and organization of communication.
Idiomatic
expressions create a significant portion of our everyday communication. Even at
present modern times we use expressions whose original sense lies far away from
their present communicative function. Why do we often speak of spilling the
beans when we actually mean revealing a secret, or chewing the
fat when we actually mean chatting and gossiping? The following
pages shall offer some answers to why we sometimes use the opaque word
combinations that are in apparently ´senseless´ relation to the intended
purpose of our utterance. The present paper shall give a basic outline of the
functional and pragmatic differences between idiomatic and transparent ´single
word´ expressions.
Stylistic and cultural value of idiomatic expressions
An
idiomatic unit comes into existence from a figurative expression describing
situations, phenomena, or human traits that usually exceed limits of neutral
perceptions. Referring to Miko (1989) and his view of idiom as an expressively
more mouldable and more tangible expression than a literal naming unit,
idiomatic images enable the speaker to cover sensitive pictures and phenomena
hiding and mildening the unpleasant and undesired positions of everyday life
expressed by linguistic means. In other words, idiomatic units can grasp the
meaning of complex positions of life in a more re-fined communicative manner.
Similarly, Gibbs in his Idioms and formulaic language (In: Geeraerts
& Cuyckens 2007) reports that people use idioms (mostly with an underlying
metaphorical concept) to politely communicate subjective opinions and so in an
indirect manner avoid responsibility for what is communicated. For example,
under the ´guise´ of an objectively common physical situation of throwing in
the towel we can indirectly communicate the negative act of giving up a
fight. Thus we can use a figurative image to represent the meaning proper
of an expression.
As
to the cultural status of idiomatic expressions, this is reflected by the
extra-linguistic motivation that offers a deeper insight into the origin of the
term and provides more complex information on cultural and historical status
than literal single ´words´ do. Idiom takes on an objective demonstration of
the cultural origin of the expression. Consider the example of an idiomatic
expression for an intensive downpour in Slovak leje ako z krhly
(literally: it is pouring like from a watering can) and in English it´s
raining cats and dogs.
Idioms facilitate communication
Becker
(In: Wray 1998) made an observation that successful communication is often at
odds with the production of novel utterances. Idiomatic and formulaic language
can provide a basis for an interweaving network for embedding novel
proposition, which results in the fact that a lengthy utterance is likely to
contain more prefabricated frames and routine structures. Thus, one of the
purposes of the use of formulaic and idiomatic structures is keeping the focus
on formulation of one’s novel ideas while maintaining fluency through holistic
retrieval of prefabricated complex structures from mental lexicon.
As
the introductory lines imply, one of the principal goals of using formulaic and
idiomatic language is to facilitate communication in the sense that idiomatic
and formulaic language based on holistic processing of phenomena came to be the
preferred strategy for coping with a wide range of troubles that could arise in
the course of language communication. Where interaction fluency of processing
complex utterances might be in danger, formulaic language is drawn upon to meet
the communicational shortfall. Wray (1998:47) argues that prefabricated and
holistic units are functionally used as a “way of maximising the processing
space available for the novel referential and descriptive creativity that is
unique to analytic language”. It is simply a natural human tendency to
economize the effort of communication about recurrent human affairs through
generation of stereotyped formulae and so avoid processing overload. Wray &
Perkins (2000:18) say also that formulaic recurrent phenomena better suit to be
communicated through idiomatic prefabricated language, because “a hearer is more
likely to understand a message if it is in a form he/she has heard before, and
which he/she can process without recourse to full analytic decoding”. Thus it
seems that we use routine sequences as a way of minimizing the risk of mismatch
between our linguistic capabilities and the information to be expressed.
Similarly, Bolinger, Fillmore, Coulmas, or Sinclair propose that “we do not
have to go through the labour of generating an utterance all the way out from
´S´ every time we want to say something” (Becker In: Wray 1998:63). In terms of
keeping and enhancing fluency, Pawley (In: Skandera 2007) reports that some
language learners attempt to gain language command fluency in that they
instinctively memorize larger language chunks, and among those also formulaic
and idiomatic phrases that might be useful in particular contexts. This
phenomenon is not that illogical for one simple reason: idiomatic expressions
or any other type of prefabricated speech structures enable the speakers to fix
their attention to larger content units of the discourse. In other words, if
speakers were supposed to focus on individual words as they are pronounced one
by one, the desired idiomatic fluency of a native-like speech would be
endangered (Nattinger and DeCarrico In: Kavka 2003).
Concentration
on larger (preferably holistically processed) meaning units makes it possible
for language user to use larger language chunks to communicate recurrent
stereotypes of everyday life without losing time with permanent re-formulation
of linguistic material. Instead, such units spare space for processing
capacities for generation of completely novel analytic units describing new
phenomena.
Idioms contain more meaning
Carter
(1998) suggests that idioms not only facilitate communication of stereotyped
phenomena and play a maintaining and stabilizing role in communication, but
also allow for both, larger grammatical units to be built from their base, and
modifications resulting in generation of a more creative and cognitively richer
speech. According to Gibbs (1992), idioms appear to contain more meaning than
roughly do their equivalent literal paraphrases. They convey more complex
meaning entailments and implicatures at once than single ´word´ paraphrases
could express in several sentences.
What
shall we understand under ´more complex entailments and implicatures´?
Following Gibbs (1997), idioms have complex meanings that seem to be motivated
by independently existing lively and creative conceptual metaphors that are
able to reflect the complexity of human thought better than single words can.
Therefore, Gibbs refuses the assumption that idioms are dead metaphors. Many
conceptual metaphors underlying idioms almost ideally encapsulate the
stereotyped and recurrent patterns of experience. To elucidate the point of the
difference between ´single words´ and idioms, let us compare the literal phrase
to get very angry and its idiomatic counterparts such as flip your
lid, blow your stack, or hit the ceiling. Encountering ´anger´
idioms, speakers / listeners infer that the cause of anger is an internal
pressure, the expression of anger is unintentional, and anger ´exploded´ in an
abrupt manner. However, they cannot comprehend such concepts from the phrase to
get very angry. This is the reason why Gibbs says that literal expressions
“do not convey the same inferences about causes, intentionality, and manner”
(1992:487) as idioms do. He also adds that simple literal paraphrases of idioms
are not by themselves motivated by the same set of conceptual metaphors and
therefore do not possess the same kind of complex interpretations as idiomatic
expressions.
We
can widen our view of idiom also to other fixed expressions crutching on
Baker’s assumption that encountering such expressions “conjures up in the mind
of the reader or hearer all the aspects of experience which are associated with
the typical contexts in which the expression is used” (Baker 2006:64). Idioms
as well as other fixed expressions encapsulate the stereotyped aspects of
experience. The view of broader contextual and experiential encapsulation is
also supported by Gibbs (2007) arguing that idiomatic language helps the
language user to remind their listeners of other related contexts more than
literal phrases can. Idiomatic expressions possess a stronger capacity to
retrieve mental concepts of broader contexts to be present in actual utterance,
therefore their “cognitive benefits […] in providing mental shortcuts in both
language production and comprehension“ (Gibbs 2007:702) of complex experiential
content are irrefutable.
Idioms convey speaker’s commitment and evaluation
“The
words of a language often reflect no so much of the reality of the world, but
the interest of people who speak it” (Palmer In: Baker 2006:18). In other
words, idiomatic figures not only express factual meaning but also convey
certain evaluative aspect towards the relevant phenomenon. Expressing ideas
through idioms communicates an evaluation of the situation that the speaker
refers to. Miko (1989) says that the speaker puts him/herself into position of
a judge of the situation. Idiomatic expressions convey a sort of aphoristic
truth about the referred affairs. The speaker’s expressive commitment to the
discussed matter via a figurative approximation with an emotional evaluative
aspect of the phenomenon is more than a mere stating about the matter of fact.
Similarly, Gibbs (In: Geeraerts & Cuyckens 2007) states that speaking
idiomatically conveys an interpretation and evaluation of the situation that
the speaker refers to. Let us consider the idiom to skate on thin ice.
The idiom conveys in itself the experiential image of movement on thin ice
implying a dangerous situation. The perception of danger is strengthened
through specifying the movements as intensive movement of skating, which
increases the jeopardy of breaking the ice and drowning. Everybody knows that
walking on thin ice is dangerous, and performing any more intensive movements
on such a thin surface would be qualified (evaluated) as audacious
boldness of the person about which the speaker would expresses his/her
attitude.
References
Baker,
M. (2006): In other words - Coursebook on translation. New York: Routledge
Carter,
R. (1998): Vocabulary - Applied Linguistic Perspectives (2nd ed.).New
York: Routledge
Cruse,
A. (2004): Meaning in language - An introduction to semantics and pragmatics
(2nd ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press
Gibbs,
R.W.: Idioms and formulaic language. IN: Geeraerts, D. and Cuyckens, H.
(eds.) (2007):The Oxford Handbook of Cognitive Linguistics. Oxford: Oxford
University Press
Gibbs,
R.W.: What do idioms really mean? IN: Journal of memory and language,
1992, Vol. 31, pp.485-506
Gibbs,
R.W., Bogdanovich, J.M., Sykes, J. R., Barr, J.D.: Metaphor in idiom comprehension.
IN: Journal of memory and language, 1997, Vol.37, pp.141-154.