III. Morphological Level
3. 1. Morphemic Repetition
3.2. Extension of Morphemic Valency
The basic unit of the morphological level is a morpheme. A morpheme is foregrounded and it becomes vehicle of additional information - logical, emotive, and expressive.
One important way of promoting a morpheme is its repetition. Both roots and affixation morphemes can be emphasized through repetition. Especially vividly it is observed in the repetition of affixational morphemes. Normally they carry the main weight of the structural significance and not of the denotational significance. When repeated they come into the focus of attention. They stress their logical meaning: “She unchained, unbolted and unlocked the door”. Such prefixes like a-, anti-, mis-, may stress contrast, negation, absence of a quality; such suffixes like -ling, -ette may stress the quality of smallness. The suffixes forming degrees of comparison stress their emotive and evaluative meaning, or they add to the rhythmical effect and text unity.
The second way of promoting a morpheme is extension of its normative valency. It results in the formation of new words. They are not neologisms in the true sense. They are created for special communicative situations only. They are not used beyond these occasions. This is why they are called occasional words. They are characterized by freshness, originality, lucidity of their inner form and morphemic structure: “His guest was washed, mended, brushed and branded”. Very often occasional words are the result of morphemic repetition: “I am an undersecretary in an underbureau”.
In case of repetition, a morpheme gains much independence. It bears major responsibility for the creation of additional information and for the creation of stylistic effect. In case of occasional words, an individual morpheme is only instrumental in bringing forth the impact of their combination, i.e. of new individual lexical unit.
Iy. Lexical Level.
4.1. Word and its Semantic Structure.
4.2. Connotational Meanings of a Word.
The Role of the Context in the Actualization of Meaning.
Linguistic units, such as a graphon or a morpheme are more primitive than a word. They are found at lower levels of language structure. When they are foregrounded in a specially organized context, they are able of conveying additional information. The word is a linguistic unit of major significance. A word names, qualifies and valuates the micro- and macrocosm of the surrounding world. It expresses the concept of a thing, process, and phenomenon. Doing so, it names (denotes) them. This is the most essential feature of a word.
Concept is a logical category. Its linguistic counterpart is meaning. L.Vygotsky said that meaning is the unity of generalization, communication and thinking. The meaning of a word is liable to historical changes. They are responsible for the formation of an expanded semantic structure of a word.
This structure is constituted of various types of lexical meanings. The major one is denotational. It informs of the subject of communication. Connotational lexical meaning informs about participants and conditions of communication.
Different linguistic schools and individual scholars have different views of the list of specification of connotational meanings. The list includes such entries as pragmatic, associative, ideological or conceptual, evaluative, emotive, expressive, stylistic.
Pragmatic one is directed at the perlocutionary effect of utterance.
Associative one is connected with related and non-related notions through individual psychological or linguistic associations.
Ideological (conceptual) one reveals political, social, ideological preferences of the user.
Evaluative one states the value of the indicated notion.
Emotive one reveals the emotional layer of cognition and perception.
Expressive one aims at creating the image of the object in question.
Stylistic one indicates “the register” or the situation of the communication.
These meanings are classified as connotational. They supply additional information. For the most part, they are observed not all at once and not in all words either. Some of them are more important for the act of communication than the others are. Very often they overlap. All words, possessing an emotive meaning, are also evaluative: “rascal”. This rule is not reversed, as we can find non-emotive intellectual evaluation:" good”, “bad”. All emotive words are also expressive. At the same time, there are hundreds of expressive words that cannot be treated as emotive. For example, the so-called expressive verbs not only denote some action or process, but also create their images: “to gulp” = “to swallow in big lumps in a hurry”, “to sprint” = “to run fast”. Connotational meanings are incorporated into the semantic structure of a word. Their number, importance and the overlapping character are brought forth by the context, that is by a concrete speech act. It defines and actualizes each one.
Each context does not only specify the existing semantic possibilities of a word, as denotational, as connotational. It is also capable of adding new ones. Sometimes they differ considerably from what is registered in the dictionary. Because of that all contextual meanings of a word can never be exhausted. They can never be comprehensively enumerated.
In semantic actualization of a word, the context plays a dual role. On the one hand, it cuts off all meanings, which are irrelevant for the given communicative situation. On the other, it foregrounds one of the meaningful options of a word. It focuses the communicators’ attention on one of the denotational or connotational components of its semantic structure. The significance of the context is comparatively small in the field of stylistic connotations. The word is labelled stylistically in the dictionary before it enters some context.
Y. Stylistic Differentiation of the Vocabulary
5.1. Literary Stratum of words
5.2. Neutral, Literary and Colloquial Words
5.3. Special Literary Words:
a) terms b) archaisms
5.4 Special Colloquial Words:
a) slang b) jargonisms
c) vulgarisms d) dialectal words
The word stock of any language can be roughly divided into three uneven groups. They differ from each other by the sphere of its possible use.
The biggest division is made up by neutral words. They possess no stylistic connotation and they are suitable for any communicative situation. Two smaller groups are literary and colloquial words. Literary words serve to satisfy communicative demands of official, scientific, poetic messages. Colloquial words are employed in non-official everyday communication. There is no immediate communication between the written and the oral forms of speech, or between the literary and colloquial words. Nevertheless, for the most part literary words are mainly observed in the written form, as most literary messages appear in writing. On the other hand, the usage of colloquial words is associated with the oral form of communication. However, there are many examples of colloquialisms in writing: informal letters, diaries, certain pages of memoirs, etc. If we take for analysis printed materials, we shall find literary words in authorial speech, descriptions, and considerations. Colloquialisms will be observed in the types of discourse, which copy everyday oral communication - in the dialogue of prose work, etc. Some speech or text fragment may be classified as literary or colloquial. However, it does not mean that all the words of the fragment have a corresponding stylistic meaning. Words with a pronounced stylistic connotation are few in any type of discourse. The overwhelming majority of its lexics is neutral. L.V.Shcerba once said that a stylistically coloured word is like a drop of paint, which is added to a glass of pure water and coloures the whole of it. Literary and colloquial words possess a stylistic meaning, but they are not homogeneous as to the quality of the meaning, frequency of use, sphere of application, or the number and character of potential users. This is why each group is further divided into the general and special bulk. General literary words are also called learned, bookish, high-flown. Special literary words and general literary words contribute to the message the tone of solemnity, sophistication, seriousness, gravity, learnedness.
General ones are known to and used by most native speakers in generalized literary (formal) or colloquial (informal) communication. Special ones are subdivided into subgroups. Each one serves a rather narrow, specified communicative purpose. Two major subgroups among special literary words are terms and archaisms. Terms are words, which denote objects, processes, phenomena of science, humanities, technique. Certain terms appear in a literary composition. They reveal the profession of a character, or they are used to secure the necessary exactness in the terminology of a science:
“Eric withdrew his head from the barrel of a microscope, turned on his stool and started absently out of the window next to his experimental lathe”.
Archaisms are ancient or obsolete words, gone out of current use:
“He held him with his skinny hand,
‘There was a ship’, quoth he.
‘Hold off! Unhand me, grey-bead loon!’
Eftsoone his hand dropt me”. (T.Coleridge).
Archaisms may denote historical phenomena, which are no more in use: “yeoman”, “vassal”, “falconet”. These are historical words. Archaisms are used in poetry of the 17-18th centuries (“steed” - “horse”, “quoth” - “said”, “woe” - “sorrow”). These are poetic words. Archaisms may be ousted by newer synonymic words or forms in the course of language history: ‘ whereof’ - “of which”, “deen” - “think”, “repast” - “meal”, “nay” - “no”, “maketh” - “makes”, “thou wilt” - “you will”, “brethren” - “brothers”. These words are called archaic words proper.
General literary words are also called learned, bookish, high-flown. Special literary words and general literary words contribute to the massage the tone on solemnity, sophistication, seriousness, gravity, learnedness. They are used in official papers and documents, in scientific communication, in high poetry, in authorial speech of creative prose.
Colloquial words, on the contrary, mark the passage as informal, non-official, and conversational. General colloquial words are widely used by all speakers of the language in their everyday communication: “dad”, “kid”, “and fan”, “folks”.
Slang, jargonisms, vulgarisms, dialectal words form special subgroups of colloquial words. Slang forms the biggest subgroup. They are words in common colloquial use. In some or all of their senses, they are outside of the literary language. However, they continually force their way into it. Slang words are often humorous, witty. They add the picturesqueness of the language:
”Elizabeth came to the flat with a fascinating young Swedish painter she had met at a Chelsea rag that evening. Besides she was a bit sozzled”. (Aldington); “Good bye, sir, and thank you! I’m so fearfully bucked”. (Galsworthy).
Most speakers in very informal communication use slang words. They are highly emotive and expressive. As such, they lose their originality rather fast and are replaced by newer formations. This tendency to synonymic expression results in long chains of synonyms. They are of various degrees of expressiveness and denote the same concept. The idea of the concept “a pretty girl” is worded by more than one hundred ways in slang: “cookie”, “tomato”, “Jane”, “sugar”, “bird”. The substandard status of slang words and phrases can be raised to the standard colloquial status through universal usage.
Professional words are characteristic words and phrases, which are used within the sphere of a particular profession. In fiction they are used to mark the speech of a character with certain peculiarities. They are used mostly figuratively. They should not be confused with terms (technical words):
“Will she stay the course?” (Galsworthy).
Jargonisms stand close to slang. They are substandard, expressive and emotive. Nevertheless, unlike slang, limited groups of people use them. These groups of people may be united professionally. In this case, we deal with professional jargonisms - professionalisms. They also may be united socially. Here we deal with jargonisms proper. In distinction from slang, jargonisms of both types cover a narrow semantic field.
Professional jargonisms are connected with the technical side of some profession. In oil industry for the terminological word “driller” there exist “borer”, “digger”, “wrencher”, “hogger”, “brake weight”; for “pipeliner” - “swabber”, “bender”, “cat”, “old cat”, “hammerman”; for “geologist” - “smeller”, “pebble pup”, “rock hound”, “witcher”. Professionalisms are formed according to the existing word-building patterns or present existing words in new meaning. They cover the field of special professional knowledge, which is semantically limited. They offer a vast variety of synonymic choices for naming the same professional item.
Similar linguistic features characterize jargonisms proper. Nevertheless, they differ in function and sphere of application. They originated from the thieves “jargon” and served to conceal the actual significance of the utterance. Their major function was to be cryptic secretive. This is why among them there are cases of conscious deformation of the existing words. The so-called “back jargon” (or “back slang”) can serve as an example. Dishonest card-players tried to conceal their machinations, so they used numerals in their reversed form: “ano” for “one”, “owt” for “two”, “erth” for “three”, etc.
Anglo-American tradition does not differentiate between slang and jargonizes. It regards these groups as one extensive stratum of words. It divides it into general slang and special slang. All or most speakers use general slang. Special slang is limited to professional or social standing of the speaker. This debate concentrates more on terminology than on essence. Slang and jargonisms have much in common. They are emotive, expressive, and unstable. They tend to expand synonymity within certain lexico-semantic groups. They are limited to a highly informal, substandard communication. Therefore, it seems appropriate to use the indicated terms as synonyms.
Vulgarisms are coarse words. They have a strong emotive meaning. It is mostly derogatory. They are normally avoided in polite conversation. History of vulgarisms reflects the history of social ethics. In Shakespearean times, people were much more linguistically frank in their communication than in the age of Enlightment or the Victorian era. These periods were famous for their prudish and reserved manners. Nowadays words that were labeled vulgar in the 18th and 19th centuries are no more considered as such. At present, we are faced with the reverse of the problem. There are practically no words, which are banned from use by the modern society. Such intensifiers as “bloody”, “damned”, “cursed”, “hell of” were formerly deleted from literature. They were not allowed in conversation. Now they have lost much of their emotive impact and substandard quality. They may be used in both written and oral speech.
Dialectal words are normative. They are devoid of any stylistic meaning in regional dialects. However, they are used outside of them. In such cases, they carry a strong flavour of the locality where they belong. In Great Britain four major dialects are distinguished: Lowland Scotch, Northern, Midland (Сentral), Southern. In the USA three major dialects are distinguished: New England, Southern and Midwestern (Central, Midland). These classifications do not include many minor local variations. Dialects differ on the phonemic level. The same phoneme is differently pronounced in each of them. They differ also on the lexical level. They have their own names for local existing phenomena. They also supply locally circulating synonyms for the words, which are accepted by the language in general. Some of them have entered the general vocabulary and lost their dialectal status: “lad”, “pet”, “squash”.
Each of these four groups of colloquial words is used by a certain group of people or in certain communicative situation.
YI. Lexical Stylistic Device.
6.1. Metaphor. Personification
6.2. Metonymy. Synecdoche
6.3. Play of Words:
paronomasia zeugma,
violation of phraseological units semantically false chains,
nonsense of non-sequence
6.4. Irony.
6.5. Antonomasia.
6.6. Epithet.
6.7. Hyperbole.
6.8. Understatement.
6.9. Oxymoron.
Among multiple functions of the word, the main one is to denote. Denotational meaning is the major semantic characteristic of the word. This particular function may be foregrounded. Such type of denoting phenomena creates additional expressive, evaluative, subjective connotations.
The existing names are approved by long usage and are fixed in dictionaries. They may be substituted by new, occasional, individual ones, which are prompted by the speaker’s subjective original view and evaluation of things. This act of name-exchange, of substitution is traditionally named as transference. The name of one object is transferred onto another. This proceeds from their similarity of shape, colour, function, or closeness of material existence, cause, effect, instrument, result. Each type of intended substitution results in a stylistic device, which is called a trope.
Metaphor is the most frequently used, well-known and elaborated trope. Metaphor is transference of names which is based on associated likeness between two objects: ”pancake”, “ball”, “volcano” = “sun”; “silver dust”’ “sequins” = “stars”: “vault”, “blanket”, “veil” = “sky”.
By its structure, metaphor can be simple or sustained:
“Where, bees of England forge”
Many a weapon, chain and scourge
That these stingless drones may spoil
The forced produce of you toil?” (Shelly).
“In November a cold, unseen stranger, whom the doctors called Pneumonia, stalked about the colony, touching one here and one there with icy fingers (O.Henry).
The process of naming reality by means of the language is called nomination. Nomination proceeds from choosing one of the features of the object for the representative of the object. The connection between the chosen feature, which represents the object and the word, is especially vivid in cases of transparent “inner form”. The name of the object can be easily traced to the name of one of its characteristics: “railway”, “chairman”. The semantic structure of a word reflects characteristic features of the piece of reality which it denotes (names). Similarity between real objects or phenomena reflects in the semantic structures of words and it denotes them. Both words possess at least one common semantic component.
Metaphor is expressive because the images of both objects possess similar feature: one of the objects is actually named, and the second supplies its own so-called legal name. This is the name transference, which is based on the similarity of one feature. This feature is common to two different entities. The wider is the gap between the associated objects, the more striking and unexpected, the more expressive is the metaphor.
If a metaphor involves likeness between inanimate and animate objects, we deal with personification. Personification is a trope by which inanimate object or idea is given human characteristic: "the face of London”; “the pain of the ocean”.
“O sleep, o gentle sleep,
Nature’s soft nurse, how have
I frightened thee,
That thou no more wilt weigh
My eyelids down,
And sleep my senses in forgetfulness?” (W.Shakespeare)
Metaphor is fresh, original, genuine, when it is first used. It is trite, hackneyed, and stable when it is repeated. In this case, it gradually loses its expressiveness: “leg of a table”; “sunrise”. In such cases it becomes just another entry in the dictionary. Therefore, it serves a very important source of enriching the vocabulary of the language. Metaphor can be expressed by all notional parts of speech. It functions in the sentence as any of its members.
Metonymy is the usage of one word for another that it suggests, as the effect of the cause, the cause for the effect, the sign for the thing signified, the container for the thing contained, the instrument for the action, etc:
“… to whose young love
The vines of France and milk of Burgundy
Strive to be interess’d”. (W.Shakespeare)
(“vines of France” = the King of France; “milk of Burgundy” = the Duke of Burgundy).
Metonymy, like metaphor, can lose its originality and becomes instrumental in enriching the vocabulary of the language, though a different semantic process creates metonymy. It is based on contiguity (nearness of objects or phenomena). Transference of names in metonymy does not involve a necessity for two different words, which have a common component in their semantic structure. It proceeds from the fact that two objects or phenomena have common grounds of existence in reality. Such words as “cup" and “tea” have no semantic nearness. Nevertheless, the first one may serve the container for the second. So “one more cup” is a conversational cliché. This is the case of metonymy. It was once original but due to long use, it is no more accepted as a fresh stylistic device:
“My brass will call your brass”. (A.Haily’s “Airport”).
The scope of transference in metonymy is much more limited than that of metaphor, because actual relations between two objects are more limited, than the scope of human imagination when we identify two objects, phenomena, actions. Metonymy is less frequently observed stylistic device, than metaphor.
Synecdoche as one of the types of metonymy is often viewed independently. It is based on the relations between the part and the whole:
“As the great champion of freedom and national independence, he conquers and annexes half of the world, and calls it colonization. When he wants a new market for his goods, he sends a missionary to teach the natives the Gospel of Peace. The natives kill the missionary; he flies to arms in defence of Christianity; fights for it; conquers it; and takes the market as a reward from heaven”. (B. Shaw.).
As a rule, metonymy is expressed by nouns, less frequently - by substantivized numerals. It is used mostly in syntactical functions of nouns (subject, object, predicative). Metaphor operates on the linguistic basis. It proceeds from the similarity of semantic components of a word. Metonymy rests solely on the extralinguistic, actually existing relations between the phenomena, which are denoted by the words.
Some lexical stylistic devices are united into a small group because they have much in common both in the mechanism of their formation and their function. They are paronomasia, violation of phraseological units, zeugma, semantically false chains and nonsense of non-sequence. The effect of these stylistic devices is humorous. They are called play on words or pun. Pun is the humorous or ludicrous use of a word in more than one sense.
Paronyms are words similar in (though not identical) in sound, but different in meaning. Co-occurrence of paronyms is called paronomasia.
“When I am dead, I hope it may be said: ‘His sins were scarlet, but his books were read’.” (Hilaire Belloc’s epigram “On Books”)
Contextual conditions lead to the simultaneous realization of two meanings and to the formation of pun. They may vary. It can be misinterpretation of one speaker’s utterance by the other. It results in his remark, which deals with a different meaning, of the misinterpreted word or its homonym. Punning may be the result of the speaker’s intended violation of the listener’s expectation: “There comes a period in every man’s life, but she is just a semicolon in his.” Misinterpretation may be caused by the phonetic similarity of two homonyms: “The Importance of Being Earnest” by O.Wilde.
Zeugma is the use of a word in the same grammatical relation of two adjacent words in the context, one metaphorical and the other literal in sense. Zeugma is highly characteristic of English prose of previous and contemporary centuries: “He lost his hat and his temper”. Polysemantic verbs have a practically unlimited lexical valency. They can be combined with nouns of most varying semantic groups. They may be used with two or more homogeneous members, which are not connected semantically:
”He took his hat and his leave”. (Ch. Dickens);
“Medora took heart, a cheap hall bedroom, and two art lessons a week from Professor Angeline.” (O.Henry).
When the number of homogeneous members increases but they are semantically disconnected we deal with semantically false chains. This is a variation of zeugma. As a rule, it is the last member of the chain that falls out of the thematic group. Doing so it produces humorous effect: “A Governess wanted. Must possess knowledge of Rumanian, Russian, Italian, Spanish, German, Music and Mining Engineering.”
In the cases of classical zeugma, the ties between the verb and each of the dependent members are of different intensity and stability. In most cases, one of them together with the verb forms a phraseological unit or a cliché. However, the verb loses some of its semantic independence: “The boys took their places and their books.” Zeugma restores the literal original meaning of the word. This also occurs in violation of phraseological units of different syntactical patterns:
“Little Jon was born with a silver spoon in his mouth which was rather curly and large.” (Galsworthy).
Punning can be realized on most levels of language hierarchy. Non-sequence rests on the extension of syntactical valency. It results in joining two semantically disconnected clauses into one sentence: “Emperor Nero played the fiddle so they burnt Rome.” Cause / effect relations link two disconnected statements together.
Various transformations of the logical meaning of words participate in the creation of metaphors, metonymies, zeugma, etc. Each stylistic device adds expressiveness and originality to the nomination of the object. Evaluation of the named concept may be present, but it is an optional characteristic.
In irony, subjectivity lies in the evaluation of the phenomenon, which is named. Irony is a figure of speech that expresses an attitude or a situation in which words or actions mean the opposite to their customary acceptance for purpose of ridicule:
“It was a regular place of public entertainment for the poorer classes; a tavern where there was nothing to pay; a public breakfast, dinner, tea and supper all the year round; a brick and mortar Elysium where it was all play and no work.” (Ch.Dickens. “Oliver Twist”).
The essence of this stylistic device consists of the foregrounding not of the logical but of the evaluative meaning. Irony is a stylistic device in which the contextual evaluative meaning of a word is directly opposite to its dictionary meaning. Irony does not exist outside the context. Verbal irony is the contextual meaning, which diametrically opposes its dictionary meaning: “She turned with the sweet smile of an alligator.” Sometimes the effect of irony is created by a number of statements, by the whole of the text - sustained irony. It is formed by the contradiction of the speaker’s (writer’s) consideration and the generally accepted moral and ethical codes.
Antonomasia is a lexical SD in which a proper name is used instead of a common noun or vice versa. The case of antonomasia of the first type is when the nominal meaning of a proper name is suppressed by its logical meaning, or the logical meaning acquires the new nominal component. It substitutes an epithet, or descriptive phrase, or official title for a proper name: “He is the Napoleon of crime.” (C.Doyle). It is close to metonymy.
Sometimes a proper name is used to express a general idea: “He took little satisfaction of telling each Mary, shortly after she arrived, something…”
The second type of antonomasia is when a common noun serves as an individual name: “There are three doctors in an illness like yours. I don not mean only myself, my partner and the radiologist, who does x-rays, the three I am referring to are Dr.Rest, Dr.Diet and Dr.Fresh Air.” (D. Cusack).
The third type of antonomasia is presented by the so-called “speaking names”. Their origin from common nouns is obvious: “Mr. Smith”, “Mr. Brown”, “Lady Teazle”, “Mr. Surface” (Sheridan”The School of Scandal”). The double role of the “speaking names is to name and to qualify. Sometimes it is preserved in translation: Miss Languish -Мисс Томней ; Mr. Backbite - Мистер Клеветаун; Mr. Credulous - Мистер Доверч; Mr. Snake -Мистер Гад (Sheridan. “The Rivals”).
Antonomasia is created mainly by nouns, more seldom by attributive combinations (Dr.Fresh Air) or by phrases (Mr. What's-his-name).
Epithet is a word or phrase, which expresses some quality of a person, thing, idea or phenomenon. It serves to emphasize a certain property or feature. Epithet is of special significance in different kinds of poetry. Each epoch and each genre has its own stock of traditional epithets. Sometimes they are called fixed: “green wood”, “merry men”, “true love”, “yellow hair”. The choice of epithets is one of the primary characteristics of a poet’s style:
“The flowing Spring leads Sunny Summer,
And yellow Autumn presses near,
Then in its turn comes gloomy Winter
Till smiling Spring appears.” (R.Burns).
Epithet expresses a characteristic of an object, both existing and imaginary. Its basic feature is its emotiveness and subjectivity, that is the characteristic, which is attached to the object in order to qualify it. The speaker himself always chooses it. In epithet, the emotive meaning of the word is foregrounded to suppress its denotational meaning.
Epithet has remained through centuries the most widely used SD. It offers ample opportunities of qualifying every object from the author’s partial and subjective viewpoint. The structure and semantics of epithets are extremely variable. This is explained by their long and wide use.
Semantically we differentiate two main groups: affective (or emotive proper) - this is the biggest group - and figurative (or transferred). Emotive epithets serve to convey the emotional evaluation of the object by the speaker. Most of the qualifying words can be used as affective epithets (“gorgeous”, “nasty”, “magnificent”, atrocious”).
Figurative epithets are metaphors, metonymies and similes which are expressed by adjectives: ”the smiling sun”, “the frowning cloud”, “the sleepless pillow”, “a ghost-like face”, “a dreamlike experience”. These epithets are based on similarity of characteristics of two objects, or nearness of the qualified objects, or their comparison.
In the overwhelming majority of examples epithet is expressed by adjectives, or qualitative adverbs: “his triumphant look” = “he looked triumphantly”. Nouns are used in exclamatory sentences or as post-positive attributes: “You, ostrich!”; “Richard of the Lion Heart”.
Epithets are used singly, in pairs, in chains, in two-step structures, in inverted constructions, as phrase-attributes.
Pairs are represented by two epithets joined by a conjunction or asyndetically: ”wonderful and incomparable beauty”.
Chains (strings) of epithets present a group of homogeneous attributes which vary in number from three up to sometimes twenty and even more: “You are scolding, unjust, abusive, aggravating, bad old creature”.
Epithets are called two-step epithets because the process of qualifying seemingly passes two stages - the qualification of the object and the qualification of the qualification itself: “an unnaturally mild day”, “a pompously majestic female”. They have a fixed structure of “adverb + adjective” model.
Phrase epithets produce an original impression: “the sunshine-in-the-breakfast-room-smell”; “a move-if-you-dare-expression”; “the man-I-saw-yesterday-son”. A semantically self-sufficient word combination or even a whole sentence is turned into a phrase epithet.
Inverted epithets are based on the contradiction between the logical and the syntactical meanings. The article with the second noun will help in doubtful cases. Foe example: ”this devil of a woman” instead of “this devilish woman”, “the giant man” (a gigantic man); “the prude of a woman” (a prudish woman), “the toy of a girl” (a small, toylike girl), “the kitten of a woman” (a kittenlike woman);. She was a faded white rabbit of a woman. (A.Cronin); a doll of a wife (the wife is like a doll), an angel of a girl (the girls is an angel), a hell of a mess, a devil of a sea, a dwarf of a fellow, a horse of a girl, a fool of a policeman, a hook of a nose, a vow of a hat, a jewel of a film.
An inverted epithet should not be mixed up with an ordinary of-phrase: “the toy of the girl” and “the toy of a girl”; “the kitten of the woman” and “the kitten of a woman”.
Subjective qualification is the leading characteristic of an epithet. Such attributes as in “a round table”, “a tall man”, reflect objective features of epithets, but not their subjective qualification. They form the group of logical attributes.
Hyperbole is a SD in which emphasis is achieved through evident exaggeration. Like epithet, it relies on the foregrounding of the emotive meaning: “Here is the smell of the blood still: all the perfumes of Arabia will not sweeten this little hand”. (W.Shakespear).
Hyperbole may have an ironical ring: “The earth was made for Dombey and Son to trade in, and the sun and moon were made to give them light. Rivers and seas were formed to float their ships; rainbows gave promise of fair weather; winds blew for and against their enterprises; stars and planets circled in their orbits to preserve a system of which they were the center”. (Ch.Dickens).
Hyperbole is one of the most common expressive means of everyday speech: “I would gladly see this film a hundred times”. This is the case of a trite language hyperbole. Through long and repeated use, it has lost its originality and it is just a signal of the speaker’s emotion. Hyperbole may be the final effect of metaphor, simile, and irony: “He has the tread of a rhinoceros”. Hyperbole may be expressed by all notional parts of speech. Some words - “all”, “every”, “a million”, “a thousand”, “ever”, “never” - are used in hyperbole more often: “Calpurina was all angles and bones”.
Hyperbole is aimed at exaggerating of quantity or quality. When it is directed the opposite way, we deal with understatement.
Understatement means representing things as less, or less strongly, than may be done truthfully. It is considered by many as an essential attribute of English humour: “I am rather annoyed” = “I am infuriated”; “The wind is rather strong” = “There is a gale blowing outside”. These examples are typical of British polite speech.
Oxymoron is a SD which consists in the use of an epithet or attributive phrase in contradiction to the noun which it denotes. The syntactic and semantic structures come to clashes. Oxymoron is a combination of two semantically contradictory notions. The speaker’s (writer’s) subjective view is expressed through the members of the word combination:
“Loving hate! Serious vanity!”;
“His humble ambition, proud humility
His jarring concord and his discord dulcet”.
(W.Shakespear).
Originality and specificity of oxymoron becomes especially evident in non-attributive structures. They are also used to express semantic contradiction: “the streets damaged by improvement”; “silence was louder than the thunder”.
Oxymoron rarely becomes trite. Their components repulse each other and oppose repeated use. There are few colloquial oxymorons. They show a high degree of the speaker’s emotional involvement in the situation: “awfully pretty”.
YII Syntactical Level
7.1. Main Characteristics of the Sentence
7.1.1. Syntactical SDs
7.1.2. Sentence Lengths
7.1.3. One-Word Sentence
7.1.4. Sentence Structure
7.1.5. Punctuation.
7.2. Arrangement of Sentence Members
7.2.1 Rhetorical Questions
7.2.2. Types of Repetition
7.2.3. Parallel Constructions
7.2.4. Chiasmus
7.2.5. Inversion
7.2.6. Suspense
7.2.7. Detachment
7.3. Completeness of Sentence Structure
7.3.1 Ellipsis
7.3.2 One-Member Sentences
7.3.3 Apokoinu Constructions
7.3.4 Break
7.4. Types of Connection
7.4.1 Polysyndeton
7. 4 2Asyndeton
7.4.3 Attachment
Stylistic study of the syntax begins with the study of the length and the structure of a sentence. The length of any language unit is a very important factor in information exchange. The human brain can receive and transmit information only if information is punctuated by pauses. Theoretically speaking a sentence can be of any length. There are no linguistic limitations for its growth. Constructions of several hundred words technically should be viewed as sentences. The upper limit of sentence-length cannot be specified, but its lower mark is one word.
One-word sentences possess a very strong emphatic impact. Their only word obtains both the word- and the sentence-stress. The word in a one-word sentence also obtains its own sentence intonation. Its intonation helps to foreground the context:
”They could keep the Minden Street Shop going until they got the notice of quit, which might not be for two years. Or they could wait and see what kind of alternative premises were offered. If the sight was good. If. Or. And, quite inevitably, borrowing money”. (J.Braine).
In the context, we may notice abrupt changes from short sentences to long ones and then back again. They create a very strong effect of tension and suspense. They serve to arrange a nervous, uneven, ragged rhythm of utterance. There is no direct or immediate correlation between the length and the structure of a sentence. Short sentences may be structurally complicated. Long sentences may have one subject-predicate pair:
“Through the windows of the drug-store Eighth Street looked extremely animated with families trooping toward the center of the town, flags aslant in children’s hands, mother and pa in holiday attire and sweating freely, with patriarchal automobiles of neighbouring farmers full of starched youngsters and rapped with bunting”. (J.Reed).
At the same time a very short sentences may consist of two and more clauses (may be complex):
“He promised he’d come if the cops leave”. (J.Baldwin).
Still, more often bigger lengths go together with complex structures.
The clarity, understandability and expressiveness of the sentence depend on the position of the clauses, which constitute it. A structure is called loose if a sentence opens with the main clause and is followed by dependent units. It is less emphatic. It is highly characteristic of informal writing and conversation. Periodic sentences open with subordinate clauses and absolute and participial constructions. The main clause is withheld until the end. Such structures are emphatic. They are used in creative prose mainly. Balanced sentences have similar structuring of the beginning of the sentence and of its end. They stress the logic and reasoning of the context. They are preferred in publicist writing.
When a word becomes a member of the sentence, it normally loses its dictionary polysemy. It actualizes only one of its dictionary meanings in the context. At the same time, it loses its syntactical valency. A member of the sentence fulfils one syntactical function. There are cases when syntactical ambivalence is preserved by certain member of a sentence. This fact creates semantic ambiguity for it for it allows at least two different readings of the sentence:”The shooting of the hunters”.
Sometimes syntactical ambivalence is intentional. In this case, it is used to achieve a humorous effect. It is like the play on words on the lexical level: “Do you expect to dance with you in the room?” The solution lies with the reader and it is explicated in oral communication by corresponding pausation and intonation.
Order of words and punctuation are used to convey pausation and intonation in the written form of speech. The possibilities of intonation are much richer than those of punctuation. Intonation alone may create, add, change, and reverse both the logical and the emotional information of an utterance. Punctuation is much poorer. It is used not alone. It emphasizes the lexical and syntactical meanings of sentence-components. Points of exclamation and interrogation, dots, dashes help to specify the meaning of the written sentence. More conventional types of punctuation - commas, semicolons, full stops - may serve as an additional source of information as well:
“What’s your name? - “John Lewis”. - “Mine’s Lisa. Watkins”. (K.Kessey).
Punctuation also specifies the communicative type of the sentence. A point of interrogation marks a question. A full stop signals a statement.
There are cases though when a statement ends with a question mark. Often this punctuation change is combined with the change of word order. Word order follows the pattern of question. This is peculiar interrogative construction. It semantically remains a statement. It is called a rhetorical question. Unlike an ordinary question, the rhetorical question does not demand any information. It serves to express the emotions of the speaker, to call the attention of listeners. Rhetorical questions make a part of oratoric speech. They emphasize the orator’s ideas. In fact, the speaker knows the answer himself and gives it immediately after the question is asked. The interrogative intonation and punctuation draw the attention of listeners or readers to the focus of the utterance. Rhetorical questions are also asked in “unanswerable” cases. When in distress or anger we use such phrases as “What have I done to deserve…?” or “What shall I do when…?”
The question-form of such constructions is artificial. That is why exclamation marks, which may end rhetorical questions, sometimes stress it.
Completeness of the structure or the arrangement of its members serves to the effect of the syntactical stylistic devices. The order of words or clauses is of extreme importance. It influences the logical and connotational meaning of the sentence. The following sentence shows carelessness, talkativeness and emotionality of the speaker:
”Well, Tony rang up Michael and told him that I’d said that William thought Michael had written the review because of the reviews I had written of Michael’s book last November, though as a matter of fact, it was Tony himself who wrote it”. (E.Waugh).
Repetition. Any repetition causes some modification of meaning which needs analysis. The functions of the repetition are the following: 1) to intensify the utterance. Those evening bells! Those evening bells! Meditation, sadness, reminiscence and other psychological and emotional states of mind are suggested by the repetition of the phrase with the intensifier ‘those’. 2) Repetition may also stress monotony of action, suggest fatigue, despair, hopelessness or doom: What has my life been? Fag and grind, fag and grind. Turn the wheel, turn the wheel.
Repetition also deals with arrangement of members of the sentence. It is one of the most prominent SDs. Repetition of the same word, word combination, and phrase for two and more times is a syntactical SD repetition:
”Fog everywhere. Fog up the river, where it flows among green aits and meadows; fog down the river, where it rolls … among the tiers of shipping … Fog on the Essex marches, fog on the Kentish heights. Fog creeping into the cabooses of collier-brigs, fog lying out on the yards, and hovering in the rigging of great ships; fog dropping on the gunwalls of barges and small boats”. (Ch.Dickens)
“Alone, alone, all, all, alone, alone on a wide, wide sea”. (Coleridge).
The repeated unit may occupy different places in a sentence. According to the place in a sentence, it is classified into several types.
Anaphora - the beginning of some successive sentences (clauses) is repeated - a…, a…, a…. The main stylistic function of anaphora is to create the background for the non-repeated unit. Through its novelty it becomes foregrounded:
” …to see the minutes how they run,
How many make the hour full complete;
How many hours bring about the day;
How many days will finish up the year;
How many years a mortal man may live”. (W.Shakespear)
I might as well face facts: good-bye, Susan, good-bye a big car, good-bye a big house, good-bye power, good-bye the silly handsome dreams. (J.Braine)
And everywhere were people. People going into gates and coming out of gates. People staggering and falling. People fighting and cursing. (P.Abrahams)
Repetition of conjunctions in close succession is polysyndeton:
“If you know anything that is not known to others, if you have any suspicion, if you know any clue at all … think of me”. (Ch.Dickens).
Epiphora - the end of successive sentences is repeated: …a, a, a. The main function of epiphora is to add stress to the final words of the sentence:
“While I nodded, napping, suddenly there came a tapping,
As of someone gently rapping, rapping at my chamber door.
‘Tis some visitor, I muttered, tapping at my chamber door -
Only this and nothing more”
“Let me see, then what thereat is, and this mystery explore -
Let my heart be still a moment, and this mystery explore,
‘Tis the wind, and nothing more”. (E.Poe)
Framing - the beginning of the sentence is repeated in the end, thus forming the “frame” for non-repeated part of the sentence: a…a. The function of framing is to explain the notion mentioned in the beginning of the sentence. The developing middle part of the sentence comes between two appearances of the repeated unit. It explains and clarifies what was introduced in the beginning. By the time it is used for the second time its semantics is concretized and specified:
“No wonder his father wanted to know what Bosinney meant, no wonder”.
(Galsworthy).
How beautiful is the rain!
After the dust and heat,