A phrase in the English language that’s gotten to mean something different from it’s precise meaning such as “Near miss” or “Shooting star”.
I was thinking maybe Neologism?
Idiom?
I’m not sure what you are getting at. What, in your view, are the precise meanings of “near miss” and “shooting star”? Both are just combinations of adjectives with nouns they describe (recognizing that “star” here applies to its original meaning of any small heavenly body rather than another sun.)
I wouldn’t call it a neologism; that’s a new word, either derived from an existing word or words (for example, “phishing” for phony fishing) or completely made up (“frack” as a semi-polite euphemism for the “f” bomb).
“Near miss” doesn’t mean anything different from a precise interpretation, taking “near” to mean “close”. So a near miss is something that is a miss, but close.
“Shooting star” could be considered archaic for “meteorite”. It comes from ancient times, when anything in the heavens was thought to be a star. “Shooting” just means moving.
I am guessing that what you’re thinking of is an idiom or idiomatic expression. It’s late, and I’m a bit stuck thinking of a good one in English. That makes sense, though. I think that it’s easier to see idioms in other languages than in your own.
For example, a simple one in French is “Il fait froid”. That literally means “He(it) makes cold”, but it is the French equivalent of “It is cold.” And (I think) another good one that Anglophones confuse all the time is “Je suis fini.” In French that is literally “I am finished”, but you’d never say it, because it’s sense or common meaning is “I am dead”. Here’s another one: don’t wish someone (particularly someone of the opposite sex) “bon nuit”. That literally means “good night”, but you would only use it when you’re saying good night to your children or to your lover in the same bed! When you depart from someone at the end of the evening, you say “bon soir” (good evening).
It’s hard to define a clear border between idiom and slang. Idiom is something that is pretty much acceptable usage in the language, even in formal situations, while slang varies over time (when’s the last time you heard something say “Oh you kid!”) and is definitely informal.
I think an idiom is something like the standard American usage of the present participle instead of other tenses in many situations. This confuses speakers from other countries. For example, “Je vais au bibliotheque” in French can be translated as “I go to the library” or “I am going to the library”. We would naturally use the latter, and never the former, but they’re both encapsulated in the French, and a Francophone without much English experience might use the simple present (“I go”). That’s why speaking fluency is the hardest to achieve in any language.
Neologism: a new word.
Idiom: an expression that either has an idiosyncratic structure or that is used in an idiosyncratic way. In simple terms, you can’t work out its structure or its usage by applying the normal rules. You just have to know the structure or usage.
Slang: usage that is recognised as either a corruption of standard usage or an addition to it, often associated with a given time, region and type of person, which arises either because it facilitates communication in some way (faster, easier) or is cherished as a verbal marker of belonging to a given group.
With reference to the OP: “its” means “belonging to” while “it’s” is an abbreviated form of “it is”.
Neither “near miss” nor “shooting star” would constitute examples of a phrase whose meaning has changed over time.
It is true that some words and phrases change their meaning over time. The word “awful” was originally used as a compliment, meaning that something provoked or inspired a sense of awe. However, I am not aware of a specific term that denotes “the meaning has changed over time”.
Sometimes terms such as “drift” and “shift” are used to refer to some aspects of written or spoken language that can be shown to have changed over time.
I think that what furryman means is that “near miss” does not mean “something that nearly misses what it intends to hit,” which one could interpret as meaning “something that just barely hits what it intends to hit.” In a vaguely similar way, “shooting star” does not mean a “star that shoots” but instead a “light like a star that moves quickly across the sky.” At least that’s what I think he means. I suppose you could claim that the words for these two things should really be “near hit” and “moving star-like light.” If you want us to understand your questions, furryman, you’re going to have to make them clearer. In any case, as people have already said, the word you’re probably looking for is “idiom.”
The question is too vague to answer precisely. Check these lists for a fit:
figures of description
http://rhetoric.byu.edu/Figures/Groupings/of%20Description.htm
figures of naming
http://rhetoric.byu.edu/Figures/Groupings/OF%20NAMING.HTM
figures of definition
http://rhetoric.byu.edu/Figures/Groupings/of%20Definition.htm
figures of substitution
http://rhetoric.byu.edu/Figures/Groupings/of%20Substitution.htm
An example might be “Fair to Middlin’”. Although it’s not used often anymore, it was used especially in the South to mean “sort of OK, I guess.” In fact, Fair to Middlin was originally a very high grade of cotton, and one would have been overjoyed to hear that pronouncement on one’s delivery, as it indicated a high price would be paid.
Another might be bi-annual which started out to mean once every two years, but now could just as easily mean twice per year.
Um, biennial is once every 2 years and biannual is twice per year. When did the meaning of biannual change? Did they invent biennial after the fact?
That’s what I was going for. Sorry about not being clearer. Thanks.