The intensification of some features
of the concept in question is realized in a device called simile. S. must not
be confused with ordinary comparison. They represent two diverse processes.
C. means weighing two objects belonging to one class of things with the
purpose of establishing the degree of their sameness or difference. To use S.
is to characterize one object by bringing it into contact with another object
belonging to an entirely different class of things. C. takes into
consideration all the properties of the two objects, stressing the one that
is compared. S. excludes all the properties of the two objects except one
which is made common to them.
E. g. ‘The boy seems to be as
clever as his mother
It is ordinary comparison. ‘Boy’ and ‘Mother’ belong
to the same class of objects – human beings – and only one quality is being
stressed to find the resemblance.
‘Maidens, like moths, are ever
caught by glare,’
It is simile.
‘Maidens’ and ‘moths’ belong to different classes of objects and Byron has
found the concept ‘moth’ to indicate one of the secondary features of the
concept ‘maiden’, i. e., to be easily lured. Concept ‘Maidens’ is
characterized and the concept ‘moths’ characterizing.
Similes
have formal elements in their structure: connective words such as like,
as, such as, as if, seem.
Similes
may suggest analogies in the character of actions performed. In this case the
two members of the structural design of this simile will resemble each other
trough the actions they perform. Thus:
“The Liberals have plunged for entry without
considering its effects, while Labour leaders like cautious bathers have
put a timorous toe into the water and promptly withdrawn it.”
The
simile in this passage from newspaper’s article is based on the simultaneous
realization of the two meanings of the word ‘plunged’. The primary meaning
‘to through oneself into the water’ – prompted the figurative periphrasis ‘have put a timorous toe into the water and
promptly withdrawn it’ standing for ‘have abstained from taking action’.
In
the English language, there is a long list of hackneyed similes pointing out
the analogy between the various qualities, states or actions of human being
and animals: busy as a bee, blind as a bat, to work like a hors, to fly
like a bird, thirsty as a camel. These combinations have become cliches.
Oxymoron
Oxymoron is a
combination of two words (mostly an adjective and a noun or an adverb with an
adjective) in which the meanings of the two clash, being opposite in sense,
E.g.: low skyscraper; sweet sorrow; pleasantly
ugly face
The essence of
oxymoron consists in the capacity of the primary meaning of the adjective or
adverb to resist for some time the overwhelming power of semantic change
which words undegro in combination. The forcible combination of
non-combinative words seems to develop what may be called a kind of
centrifugal force which keeps them apart, in contrast to ordinary word
combinations where centripetal force is in action.
In
oxymoron the logical meaning holds fast because there is no true word
combination, only the juxtaposition of two non-combinative words. But we may
notice a peculiar change in the meaning of the qualifying word. It assumes a
new life in oxymoron, definitely indicative of assessing tendency in the
writer’s mind.
E. g. (O. Henry) “I despise its very vastness and
power. It has the poorest millionaires, the littlest great men,
the haughtiest beggars, the plainest beauties, the lowest
skyscrapers, the dolefulest pleasures of any town I eve seen.”
Even
the superlative degree of the adjectives fails to extinguish the primary
meaning of the adjectives: poor, little, haughty, etc. But by some
inner law of word combinations they also show the attitude of the speaker,
reinforced, of course, by the preceding sentence: “I despise its very vastness and power.”
Oxymoron
as a rule has one structural model: adjective + noun. It is in this
structural model that the resistance of the two component parts to fusion
into one unit manifests itself most strongly. In the adverb + adjective model
the change of meaning in the first element, the adverb, is more rapid,
resistance to the unifying process not being so strong
Not
every combination of words which we called non-combinative should be regarded
as oxymoron, because new meaning developed in new combinations do not
necessarily give rise to opposition.
Irony
Irony is
stylistic device based on the simultaneous realization of two logical
meanings – dictionary and contextual, but the two meanings stand in
opposition to each other.
E.g. “It must be delightful to find oneself in
a foreign country
without a penny in one’s pocket.”
The word
“delightful” acquires a meaning quite the opposite to its primary dictionary
meaning, that is “unpleasant”.
Irony
must not be confused with humor, although they have very much in common.
Humor always causes laughter. What is funny must come as sudden clash of the
positive an the negative. In this respect irony can be likened to humor. But
the function of irony is not confined to producing a humorous effect. In a
sentence like “How clever of you” where, due to the intonation pattern, the
word “clever” conveys a sense opposite to its literal signification, the
irony does not cause a ludicrous effect. It rather expresses a feeling of
irritation, displeasure, pity or regret
Richard
Altick says, “The effect of irony lies in the striking disparity between what
is said and what is meant.” This “striking disparity” is achieved trough the
intentional interplay of the two meanings, which are in opposition to each other.
We must also take into
consideration that irony is generally used to convey a negative meaning.
Therefore only positive concepts may be used in their logical dictionary
meanings.
Metonymy
Metonymy is
based on different types of relation between the dictionary and contextual
meanings, a relation based not on affinity, but on some kind of association
connecting the two concepts which these meanings represent.
Thus
the word “crown” may stand for “king or queen”, “cup or glass” for the “drink
it contains” These examples of metonymy are traditional. In fact they are
derivative logical meanings and therefore fixed in dictionaries, there is
usually a label “fig”. This shows that new meaning not entirely replaced the
primary one, but, as it were, co-exists with it.
Contextual
metonymy is used in speech. It is genuine metonymy and reveals a quite
unexpected substitution of one word, or even concept for another, on the
ground of some strong impression produced by a chance feature of the thing.
E.g. “Then they came in. Two of them, a man with long
fair moustaches
and a silent dark man… Definitely, the moustache
and I had nothing in common.”
Here we have a
feature of a man which catches the eye, in this case his facial appearance:
the moustache stands for himself. The function of the metonymy here is to
indicate that the speaker knows nothing of the man, moreover there is a
definite implication that this is the first time the speaker has seen him.
Metonymy
and metaphor differs in the way they are deciphered. In this process of
disclosing the meaning in a metaphor, one image excludes the other, that is
the metaphor “lamp” in the “The sky lamp of the night” when
deciphered, means the moon, and though there is a definite interplay of
meanings, we perceive only one object, the moon. This is not the case
with metonymy. Metonymy, while presenting one object to our mind does not
exclude the other. In the example given above the moustache and the
man himself are both perceived by the mind.
Mane
attempts have been made to pinpoint the types of relation which metonymy is
based on. Among them the following are most common:
1.
A concrete thing used
instead of an abstract notion. In this case the thing becomes a symbol of the
notion. E.g. “The camp, the pulpit and the law For rich men’s sons are
free.”
2.
The container instead
of the thing contained: E. g. “The hall applauded.”
3.
The relation of
proximity: E. g. “The round game table was boisterous and happy.”
4.
The material instead
of the thing made of it: E. g. “The marble spoke.”
5.
The instrument which
the doer uses in performing the action instead of the action or the doer
himself: E. g. “as the sword is the worst argument that can be used, so
should it be the last.”
Chiasmus
Chiasmus
belongs to the group of stylistic devices based on the repetition of
syntactical pattern, but it has a cross order of words and phrases. The
structure of two successive sentences or parts of a sentence may be described
as reversed parallel construction, the word order of one the sentences being
inverted as compared to that of the other:
E. g. “Down dropped the breeze,
The sails dropped down.”
The device is
effective in that it helps to lay stress on the second part of the utterance,
which is opposite in structure
Chiasmus
can appear only when there are two successive sentences or coordinate parts
of a sentence
Syntactical chiasmus is somtimes used to break the
monotony of parallel constructions. But whatever the purpose of chiasmus, it
will always bring in some new shade of meaning or additional emphasis on some
portion of the second part.
Polysyndeton
Polysyndeton is
the stylistic device of connecting sentences or phrases or syntagms or words
by using connectives (mostly conjunctions and prepositions) before each
component part.
E. g. “Should you ask me, whence these
stories?
Whence these legends and traditions,
With the odours of the forest,
With the dew, and damp of meadows,
With the curling smoke of wigwams
With the rushing of great rivers,
With their frequent repetitions,…”
The repetition
of conjunctions and other means of connection makes an utterance more
rhythmical; so much so that prose may even seem like verse. So one of the
functions of polysyndeton is a rhythmical one. In addition to this ,
polysyndeton has a disintegrating function. It generaly combines homogeneous
elements of thought into one whole resembling enumeration. But unlike
enumeration, which integrates both homogeneous and heterogeneous elements
into one whole, polysyndeton causes each member of a string of facts to stand
out conspicuously. That is why we say that polysyndeton has a disintegrating
function. Enumeration snows the things united: polysyndeton snows them
isolated.
Polysyndeton has also the function of axpressing
sequence:
E. g. “Then Mr. Boffin… sat staring at a little bookcase
of Law Practic and Law Reports, And at a window, and at an empty blue bag…..”
Stylistic inversion
Stylistic
inversion aims at attaching logical stress or additional emotional colouring
to the surface meaning of the utterance. Therefore a specific intonation
pattern is the inevitable satellite of inversion
Stylistic inversion in Modern English is the
practical realization of what is potential in the language itself.
The following patterns of stylistic inversion are
most frequently met in both English prose and poetry:
1.
The object is placed
at the beginning of the sentence: “Talent Mr. Micawber has; capital
Mr. Micawber has not.”
2.
The attribute is
placed after the word it modifies. This model is often used when there is
more than one attribute: “With fingers weary and worn…”
3.
The predicative is
placed before the subject: “A good generuos prayer it was”
The predicative stands before the link verb and both
are placed before the subject: “Rude am I in my speech…”
4.
The adverbial modifier
is placed at the beginning of the sentence: “My dearest daughter, at your
feet I fall.”
5.
Both modifier and
predicate stand before the subject: “Down dropped the breeze…”
Antonomasia
The interplay
between logical and nominal meanings of a word is called antonomasia. As in
other stylistic devices based on the interaction of lexical meanings, the two
kinds of meanings must be realized in the word simultaneously.
E. g. “Society is now one polished horde,
Form’d of two mighty tribes, the Bores and Bored.”
In this example
of use antonomasia the nominal meaning is hardly perceived, the logical
meaning of the words “bores” and “bored” being to strong. It is very
important to note that this stylistic device is mainly realized in the
written language, because sometimes capital letters are the only signals of
the stylistic device. But there is another point that should be mentioned.
Most proper names are built in some law of analogy. Many of them end in
“-son” (as Johnson) or “-er” (as Fletcher). We easily recognize such words as
Smith, White, Brown, Green, Fowler and others as proper names. But
such names as: Miss Blue-Eyes or Scrooge or Mr. Zero may
be called token names. They give information to the reader about the bearer
of the name.
Antonomasia is
intended to point out the leading, most characteristic feature or event, at
the same time pinning the this leading trait as a proper name to the person
or event concerned.
Antonomasia
is much favoured device in the belles-lettres style.
Hyperbole
Hyperbole is
deliberate overstatement or exaggeration, the aim of which is to intensify
one of the features of the object in question to such a degree as will show
its utter absurdity.
E. g. “And this maiden she lived with no other
thought
Than to love and be loved by me.”
Like
many stylistic devices, hyperbole may lose its quality as a stylistic device
through frequent repetition and become a unit of the language-as-a-system,
reproduced in speech in its unaltered form. Here are some examples of
language hyperbole: ‘a thousand pardons’; ‘scared to death’;
‘I’d give the world to see him’
Epithet
The epithet is
a stylistic device based on the interplay of emotive and logical meaning in
an attributive word, phrase or even sentence, used to characterise an object
and pointing out to the reader, and frequently imposing on him, some of the
properties or features of the object with aim of giving an individual
perception and evaluation of these features or properties. The epithet is
markedly subjective and evaluative. The logical attribute is purely objective,
non-evaluating. It is descriptive and indicates an inherent or prominent
feature of the thing or phenomenon in question.
Thus in green meadows, white snow,
round table and the like, the adjectives are more logical attributes than
epithets. They indicate those qualities of the objects which may be regarded
as generally recognized. But in wild wind, loud ocean, heart-burning smile,
the adjectives do not point to inherent qualities of the objects described.
They are subjective evaluative.
Epithets
may be classified from different standpoints: semantic and structural.
Semantically – divided into associated with the noun following and unassociated
with it.
Associated
epithets are those which point out to a feature which is essential to the
objects they describe: the idea expressed in the epithet is to a certain
extent inherent in the concept of the object. For e. g. ‘dark forest’,
‘careful attention’ etc.
Unassociated
epithets are attributes used to characterize the object by adding a feature
not inherent in it. For e. g. ‘heart-burning smile’, ‘voiceless sands’. The
adjectives here impose a property on objects which is fitting only in the
given circumstances.
Structurally,
epithets can be viewed from the angle of a) composition and b)
distribution.
Compositional
– may be divided into simple, compound and phrase epithets. Simple
epithets are ordinary adjectives (wild wind, loud ocean). Compound
epithets are built like compound adjectives (heat-burning sigh, sylph-like
figures). Phrase epithets: a phrase and even a whole sentence may
become an epithet if the main formal requirement of the epithets is
maintained i. e. its attributive use. But unlike simple and compound
epithets, which may have pre- and post-position, phrase epithets are always
placed before the nouns they refer to. (Freddie was standing on front of the
fireplace with a ‘well-that’s-the-story-what-are-we-going-to-do-about-it’ air
that made him a local point) Phrase epithets are generally followed by the expression,
air, attitude and others which describe behaviour or facial expression,
Reversed
epithet is composed of two nouns linked in an of – phrase. The
subjective, evaluating, emotional element is embodied not in the noun
attribute but in the noun described (the shadow of a smile; a devil
of a sea rolls in that bay)
From the point
of view of the distribution of the epithets in the sentence, the first
model to be pointed out is the string of epithets (a plump,
rosy-checked, wholesome, apple-faced, young woman; a well-matched,
fairly-balanced, give-and-take couple). The string of epithets gives a
many-sided depiction of the object.
Transferred
epithets are ordinary logical attributes generally describing the state
of a human being, but made to refer to an inanimate object (sleepless pillow,
unbreakfasted morning)
It remains only to say that
the epithet is direct and straightforward way of showing the author’s
attitude towards the things described.
Litotes
Litotes is a
stylistic device consisting of a peculiar use of negative constructions. The
negation plus noun or adjective serves to establish a positive feature in a
person or thing. This pisitive feature is however is somewhat diminished in
quality as compared with a synonymous expression making a straightforward
assertion of the positive feature.
E. g. 1. It’s not a bad thing – It’s a good thing
2. He is no coward – He is a brave man
In both cases
the negative construction is weaker than affirmative one. But we can not say
that the two negative constructions produce a lesser effect than the
corresponding affirmative ones. Moreover, it should be noted that the
negative construction here have a stronger impact on the reader than the
affirmative ones. So the negation in litotes should not be regarded as mere
denial of the quality mentioned.
The
stylistic effect of litotes depends mainly on intonation, on intonation only.
If compare two intonation patterns, one which suggests a mere denial (It
is not bad as contrary to It is bad) with the other which saggests
assertion of a positive quality of the object (It is no bad = it is good) the
different will become apparent.
A variant of litotes is a
construction with two negations, as in (not unlike, not unpromising). Here
accordingly to general logical and mathematical, principles, two negatives
make a positive(Soames, with his lips and his squared chin was not unlike a
bull dog)
Zuegma and pun
Zuegma is the
use of the word in the same grammatical but different semantic relations to
two adjacent words in the context, the semantic relations being on the one
hand literal, and on the other, transferred.
E. g. “Dora, plunging at once into privileged
intimacy and into the middle of the room”
Zuegma is a
strong and effective device to maintain the purity of the primary meaning
when the two meanings clash. By making the two meanings conspicuous in this
particular way, each of them stands out clearly
The
pun is another stylistic device based on the interaction of well-known
meanings of a word or phrase. It is difficult to draw a hard and fast
distinction between zeugma and the pun. The only reliable distinguishing
feature is a structural: zeugma is realization of two meanings with the help
of a verb which is made to refer to different subjects or objects. The pun is
more independent. There need not necessarily be a word in the sentence to
which the pun-word refers. But this does not mean that the pun is entirely
free. Like any other stylistic device, it must depend on a context. E. g. “Bow
to the board – Said Bumble. Oliver brushed away two or three tears that
were lingering in his eyes; and seeing no board but the table,
fortunately bowed to that.”
Climax (gradation)
Climax is an arrangement of sentences
which secures a gradual increase in significance, importance, or emotional
tension in the utterance. E. g.” It was a lovely city, a beautiful city, a fair
city, a veritable gem of a city.”
As it see from this e. g. each
successive unit is perceived as stronger than the preceding one.
A gradual increase may be
maintained in three ways: logical, emotional and quantitative.
Logical climax is base
don the relative importance of the component parts look at from the point of
view of the concepts embodied in them.
Emotional climax is
based on the relative emotional tension produced by words with emotive meaning,
as in the first example, with the words “lovely”, “beautiful”, “fair”. Of
course, emotional climax based on synonymous strings of words.
Quantitative climax
Ellipsis is a typical phenomenon in
conversation, arising out of the situation. When it used as stylistic device,
always imitates the common features of colloquial language, where the situation
predetermines absence of the certain members
Oxymoron
Oxymoron is a
combination of two words (mostly an adjective and a noun or an adverb with an
adjective) in which the meanings of the two clash, being opposite in sense,
E.g.: low skyscraper; sweet sorrow; pleasantly
ugly face
The essence of
oxymoron consists in the capacity of the primary meaning of the adjective or
adverb to resist for some time the overwhelming power of semantic change
which words undegro in combination. The forcible combination of
non-combinative words seems to develop what may be called a kind of
centrifugal force which keeps them apart, in contrast to ordinary word
combinations where centripetal force is in action.
In
oxymoron the logical meaning holds fast because there is no true word
combination, only the juxtaposition of two non-combinative words. But we may
notice a peculiar change in the meaning of the qualifying word. It assumes a
new life in oxymoron, definitely indicative of assessing tendency in the
writer’s mind.
E. g. (O. Henry) “I despise its very vastness and
power. It has the poorest millionaires, the littlest great men,
the haughtiest beggars, the plainest beauties, the lowest
skyscrapers, the dolefulest pleasures of any town I eve seen.”
Even
the superlative degree of the adjectives fails to extinguish the primary
meaning of the adjectives: poor, little, haughty, etc. But by some
inner law of word combinations they also show the attitude of the speaker,
reinforced, of course, by the preceding sentence: “I despise its very vastness and power.”
Oxymoron
as a rule has one structural model: adjective + noun. It is in this
structural model that the resistance of the two component parts to fusion
into one unit manifests itself most strongly. In the adverb + adjective model
the change of meaning in the first element, the adverb, is more rapid,
resistance to the unifying process not being so strong
Not
every combination of words which we called non-combinative should be regarded
as oxymoron, because new meaning developed in new combinations do not
necessarily give rise to opposition.