COGNITIVE-PRAGMATIC PRINCIPLES OF PHRASEOLOGICAL UNITS IN THE TRANSLATION CONTEXT: STYLISTICS FROM SECONDARY NOMINATION TO COMMUNICATIVE FUNCTION

Abstract

The article outlines the current problems of phraseology and provides a comprehensive examination of the cognitive-pragmatic and stylistic principles of functioning of phraseological units in the context of translation. The research is conducted within the framework of the anthropocentric approach, which regards language as an essential tool of human communication, reflecting the inner world, worldview, and values of an individual linguistic personality as a representative of a language community. This perspective allows phraseological units to be considered not merely as fixed or stable linguistic expressions, but also as complex cultural signs of secondary nomination, carrying a rich emotional-evaluative component and encoding specific cultural and national experiences.

Special attention is paid to the semantic depth of phraseological units, which often condense collective memory and mentality into concise linguistic forms. The article argues that phraseological units embody both cognitive structures and pragmatic intentions, thereby linking linguistic meaning with communicative function. On the example of English phraseological units, the study identifies and analyzes the main phraseological-semantic groups that reflect such linguocultural dominants as restraint, independence, arrogance, and fairness. These values are traced not only in the literal meaning of expressions, but also in their stylistic coloring, emotional load, and cultural associations, which are essential for adequate translation.

The research highlights that the translation of phraseological units cannot be reduced to a literal or mechanical reproduction of the source text. Instead, it requires the translator to possess a deep understanding of the conceptual and linguistic worldview of both source and target language communities. Only by taking into account cognitive, pragmatic, and stylistic aspects is it possible to preserve not only the semantic content of phraseological units, but also their expressive and stylistic functions. The ability to reproduce the connotative and communicative potential of phraseological expressions plays a decisive role in achieving functional equivalence and ensuring successful intercultural communication.

Conclusions: The study demonstrates that phraseological units serve as key indicators of cultural identity and worldview, making their translation a particularly complex yet essential task. Properly rendered phraseological expressions contribute to the preservation of stylistic integrity, communicative effect, and cultural specificity of the text. Thus, cognitive-pragmatic and stylistic approaches provide the necessary methodological foundation for accurate and adequate translation of phraseological units, ensuring that they retain both meaning and function in cross-cultural discourse.