12. The structure of metaphor. Types of metaphor

Metaphor is a transference of names based on the associated likeness between two objects, on the similarity of one feature common to two different entities, on possessing one common characteristic, on linguistic semantic nearness, on a common component in their semantic structures. e.g. ”pancake” for the “sun” (round, hot, yellow)

The expressiveness is promoted by the implicit simultaneous presence of images of both objects – the one which is actually named and the one which supplies its own “legal” name, while each one enters a phrase in the complexity of its other characteristics.

The wider is the gap between the associated objects the more striking and unexpected – the more expressive – is the metaphor. e.g. His voice was a dagger of corroded brass. (S. Lewis); e.g. They walked alone, two continents of experience and feeling, unable to communicate. (W.S.Gilbert).

Metaphors, like all SDs can be classified according to their degree of unexpectedness. Thus metaphors which are absolutely unexpected, i.e. are quite unpredictable, are called genuine metaphors. Those which are commonly used in speech and therefore are sometimes even fixed in dictionaries as expressive means of language are trite metaphors, or dead metaphors. Their predictability therefore is apparent and they are usually fixed in dictionaries as units of the language (I.R. Galperin); prolonged metaphor is a group (cluster) of metaphors, each supplying another feature of the described phenomenon to present an elaborated image (V.A.Kucharenko).

The constant use of a metaphor, i.e. a word in which two meanings are blended, gradually leads to the breaking up of the primary meaning. The metaphoric use of the word begins to affect the dictionary meaning, adding to it fresh connotations or shades of meaning. But this influence, however strong it may be, will never reach the degree where the dictionary meaning entirely disappears.

How metaphor works (according to Leikoff and Johnson)

Source domain is a realm with the help of which the imagianary and verbal representation are made. Taken from the Source Domain (область-источник) images and words are applied to a Target Domain (область-цель).

Types of metaphors (according to Leikoff and Johnson)

1. Oriental metaphors (up and down, front and back, in and out, near for, etc.)

2. Antological metaphors, associate with activity motions – personification

3. Structural metaphors (argument is war, life is a journey, etc.)

13. Syntagmatic semasiology. Semantic figures of co-occurrence (general remarks on classification)

Semantic Figures of Co-occurrence

1. Figures of Identity

a. simile; b. quasi-identity; c. replacers

2. figures of inequality

a. specifiers; b. climax; c. anti-climax; d. pun; e. zeugma; f. tautology; g. pleonasm

3. Figures of contrast

a. oxymoron; b. antithesis

As distinct from syntagmatic semasiology investigating the stylistic value of nomination and renaming, syntagmatic semasiology deals with stylistic functions of relationship of names in texts. It studies types of linear arrangement of meanings, singling out, classifying, and describing what is called here 'figures of co-оссuгrеnсе', bу which term combined, joint арреаrаnсе of sense units is understood.

The interrelation of semantic units is unique in аnу individual text.

Yet stylistics, like any other branch of science, aims at generalizations.

The most general types of semantic relationships саn bе reduced to three. Меаnings саn bе either identical, or different, оr else opposite. Let us have а more detailed interpretation.

1.Identical meanings. Linguistic units co-occurring in the text either have the same meanings, or аrе used аs nаmеs of the same object (thing, phenomenon, process, property, etc.).

2. Different meanings. The correlative linguistic units in the text аrе perceived as denoting different objects (phenomena, processes, properties).

3. Opposite meanings. Two correlative units аrе semantically polar. The meaning of one of them is incompatible with the meaning of the second: the one excludes the other.

The possibility of contrasting notions stand in nо logical opposition to each other (as do antonyms long - short, young ­- old, uр - down, etc.).

As for the second item discussed (difference, inequality of co-occur­ring meanings), it must bе specially underlined that we are dealing here not with аnу kind of distinction or disparity, but only with cases when carriers of meanings are syntactically and/or semantically correlative. What is meant here is the difference manifest in units with homogeneous functions.

То sum uр, sometimes two or more units are viewed bу both the speaker and the hearer - according to varying aims of communication - as identical, different, or еvеn opposite.

The three types of semantic interrelations are matched bу three groups of figures, which are the subject-matter of syntagmatic semasiology. They are: figures of identity, figures of inequality, and figures of contrast.