The stylistic peculiarities of lexical stylistic devices

Размещено на http://www.allbest.ru/

Introduction

The given work is devoted to the studying of Lexical stylistic devices and the ways of theirs rendering from Russian into English.

The actuality. The problem of stylistics for the last time attracts more and more attention of theoreticians, linguists, teachers of native and foreign languages and interpreters. Because the ability to see the aim of using language devices, gives us the possibility to understand deeply the content of the work, where the language expressions play a big role.

Most of the readers enjoying the perfection of form of the fiction are not able to define what exactly creates such kind of feeling of esthetic enjoyment. An observation of character of using different stylistic devices let us deeply get to the idea of the author and what is more it gradually teaches the reader to see the definite purpose in using of these devices.

It is known that in teaching foreign languages we usually pay attention to the form because it is new, not usual and that is why it demands an intent examination and analyze for understanding the content.

Stylistic devices also play an important role for translators. The methods of translation directly connected with the transmission of particular feature of language expression and original but it is impossible without a stylistic analyze of original language. Only when we clearly understand from the expressions in its art aesthetic function we can reach an identical translation of a fiction. Such kind of experience also helps teachers. Because pupils can be interested in reading in their foreign language lessons only that time when that process of reading afford them a pleasure.

The teachers should teach the students to treat attentively to the form of language expression and to estimate correctly the meaning of that form in a given fiction. A stylistic device of fiction helps very much to students even in practical mastery of language. These words and expressions of which the students are to think in order to understand their functions and meanings remaining in their memories for a long time.

Aim of the research is to learn and study the structure of stylistic devices and the ways of their translation into from Russian into English.

Object of the research is the stylistic peculiarities of lexical stylistic devices.

Subject of the research is the translation of lexical stylistic devices and revealing if the translations keep the meaning as lexical stylistic device or changing the meaning into another device.

Theoretical value of the work is in possibility of using of this diploma paper as a theoretical material because it contains a good theoretical description of lexical stylistic devices. The first chapter of the diploma paper would be very useful for young scholars and students who are interested in stylistics.

Practical value of the work is in its possibility of using in the course papers, teaching stylistics, theory of translation and other fields.

The material of the research was novel "Jamilya" by Chyngyz Aitmatov and its translations from Russian into English.

The methods of research. The method of research has the variety of discerned problems included the different forms of analyzes and stylistic devices, especially lexical stylistic devices.

The structure. The diploma thesis consists of Introduction, 2 Chapters , Conclusion and Bibliography.

Lexical stylistics studies the stylistic function of lexicon; it examines the interaction of direct and indirect meanings. The literary lexical stylistics as well as linguistic studies the different components of contextual meaning of words especially expressive and emotional potential of words which belong to the different layer of vocabulary.

1. General Notes on Style and Stylistics

There is big confusion between the terms style and stylistics. The first concept is so broad that it is hardly possible to regard it as a term. We speak of style in architecture, literature, behavior linguistics, dress and in other fields of human activity.

Even in linguistics the word style is used so widely that it needs interpretation. The majority of linguistics who deal with the subject of style agrees that the term applies to the following fields of investigation:

The aesthetic function of language;

Expressive means in language;

Synonymous ways of rendering one and the same idea;

Emotional coloring in language ;

A system of special devices called stylistic devices;

The splitting of literary language into separate subsystems called styles;

The interrelation between language and thought;

The individual manner of an author in making use of language;

The term style is also applied to the teaching of how to write clearly, simply and emphatically. This purely utilitarian approach to the problem of style stems from the practical necessity to achieve correctness in writing and avoid ambiguity.

These heterogeneous applications of the word style in linguistics have given rise to different points of view as to what is the domain of stylistics.

There is widely held view that style is correspondence between though and its expression. The notion is based on the assumption that of two functions of language, communication and expression of ideas the latter finds its proper materialization in strings of sentences specially arranged to convey the ideas and also to get the desired response. There is a problem of interrelation between the thought and its expression. The expression of the thought, the utterance is viewed for the angle of kind of relations there may be between the language unit and categories of thinking. The concept of this interrelation has given birth to a number of well-known epigrams and sententious maxims. Here are some which have become a kind of alter ego of the word style.

The notion of individual style extends much beyond the domain of linguistics. It is here that the two separate branches of human knowledge literature and linguistics come to grips in the most peculiar form. A writer's word is one of the essential constituents of his individual style. But word outlook cannot be included in the field of language investigation. Likewise the literary compositional design of writers work cannot be subjected to linguistic analyses, although this is one of the constituents of a writer's individual style. It follows then that individual style cannot be analyzed without an understanding of these and other component parts, which are not pure linguistics. Therefore Middleton Murry justly arrives at the conclusion that "... to judge style primarily by an analysis of language is almost on a level with judging a man by his clothes".

The essential property of truly individual style is its permanence. It has great powers of endurance. It is easily remembered and therefore yields itself to repetition. Due to the careful selection of language forms it is easily recognizable. Moreover, the form of the work, or in other words, the manner of using the language in which the ideas are wrought assumes far greater significance than in any other style of language. It is sometimes even considered as something independent of meaning. There are some critics who maintain that form is of paramount importance, and that in proper situations it can generate meaning.

N.J. Shvedova in her interesting article on the interrelation between general and the individual in the language of a writer states:

"The language of a writer ... is a peculiar creatively worked out concentration of the expressive means of the common language, which have undergone special literary treatment." Н.Ю.Шведова. К вопросу об общенародном и индивидуальном в языке писателя. «Вопросы языкознания» 1952, №2

¹ J.Middleton Murry. The problem of style. London Oxford University Press, 1961, p.71

"Style is a quality of language which communicates precisely emotions or thoughts or a system of emotions or thoughts peculiar to the author"¹

".. .a true idiosyncrasy of style is the result of an author success in compelling language to conform his mode of experience"²

"Thought and speech are inseparable from each other, Matter and expression are parts of one: speaking is a thinking out into language" (Newman)

"As your ideas clear or else obscure. The expression follows, perfect or obscure" (Boileau)

The linguistic problem of thought and expression, mistakenly referred to as one of the problems of style, has given rise to and her interpretation of the word style. The term is applied to the system of idiosyncrasies peculiar to one are recognized as possessing an ingenious turn of mind. This generally accepted notion has further contributed to the general confusion as to how it should be understood and applied. It is only lately that the addition of the attributive "individual" has somehow clarified the notion, though it has not put a stop to further ambiguity. "The term individual style is applied to that sphere of linguistic and literary science which deals with the peculiarities of a writer's individual manner of using language means to achieve the effect he desires

When Buffon coined his famous saying which due to its epigrammatical form, became a by-word all over the world: "Style is the man himself he had in mind those qualities of speech which are inherent and which reveal a man's breeding, education, social standing, etc. All this is undoubtedly interwoven with individual style..: A man's breeding and education will always tell on his turn of mind and therefore will naturally be revealed in his speech and writing.

It is a reflection of the common language, of the given period, but a prismatic reflection, in which the language units have been selected and combined individually, their interrelation being seen through the prism of the writer's world outlook, his aim and his skill. The language of a writer reflects the tendencies of the common language. translation device russian english

What we call here individual style, therefore, is a unique combination of the language units, expressive means and stylistic devices of a language peculiar to a given writer which make that writers works easily recognizable.

Hence individual style may be likened to a proper name. It has a nominal character. It is based on a thorough knowledge of the contemporary literary language and of earlier periods in its development as well. It allows certain deviations from the established norms. This, needless to say, presupposes a perfect knowledge of the invariants of the norms. Individual style requires to be studied in a course of stylistics in so far as it makes use of the potentialities of language means, whatever the character of these potentialities may be.

Another commonly accepted connotation of the term style is embellishment of language. This concept is popular and is upheld in some of the scientific papers on literary criticism language and style is regarded as separate bodies. Language can easily dispense with style, which is likened to the trimming on a dress. Moreover, style as an embellishment of language is viewed as something that hinders understanding. In its extreme, style may dress the thought in such fancy attire, that one can hardly get at the idea hidden behind the elaborate design of tricky stylistic devices.

The notion presupposes the use of bare language forms deprived of any stylistic devices of any expressive means deliberately employed.

In this connection Middleton Murry writes:

"The notion that style is applied ornament had its origin, no out, in the tradition of the school of rhetoric in Europe and its place in their teaching. The conception was not so monstrous as it is today. For the old professors of rhetoric were exclusively engaged in instructing their pupils how to expound an argument or arrange a pleading. Their classification of rhetorical devices was undoubtedly formal and extravagant... The conception of style as applied ornament... is the most popular of all delusions about style".

Perhaps it is due to this notion that the word "style" itself, bears, somewhat derogatory meaning. It is associated with the idea of something pompous, showy, artificial, something that is set against simplicity, truthfulness, the natural. Shakespeare was a determined enemy of all kind of embellishment of language.

To call style embellishment of language is to add further ambiguity to the already existing confusion.

A very popular notion among practical linguists, teachers of language, is that the style is the technique of expression. In this sense style is generally defined as the ability to write clearly, correctly and in a manner calculated to interest the reader. Though the last requirement is not among the indispensables, it is still found in many practical manuals on style. Style in this utilitarian sense should be thought, but it belongs to the realm of grammar and not to stylistics. It is sometimes and more correctly, called composition. Style as the technique of expression studies the normalized forms of the language. It sets up a number of rules as to how to speak and write, and discards all kinds of deviations.

Herbert Spancer writes:

"...there can be little question that good composition is far less dependent upon acquaintance with its laws, that upon practice and natural aptitude. A clear head, a quick imagination and sensitive ear, will go far towards making all rhetorical precepts needless. He, who daily hears and reads well-framed sentences, will naturally more or less tend to use similar ones".

The utilitarian approach to the problem is also felt in the following statement by E.J. Dunsany, an Irish dramatist and writer of short stories:

"When you can with difficulty write anything clearly, simply, and emphatically, then, provided that the difficulty it is not apparent to the reader, that is style. When you can do it easily, that is genius". V.G. Belinsky also distinguished two aspects of style making hard and fast distinction between the technical and the creative power of any utterance.

"To language merits belong correctness clearance and fluency, "he states" qualities which can be achieved by any talentless writer, by means of labor and routine".

In England there are in fact two schools of stylistics - the one represented by Prof. Middleton Murray whom we have already cited and the other, that of Prof. Lucas. Prof. Murry regards style as individual form of expression. Prof. Lucas considers style from the aims of a course in style are:

to teach to write and speak well,

to improve the style of the writer, and

to show him means of improving his ability to express his ideas. Lucas. Style. London. 1962

As the relation between lexicology and lexicography are accepted to be those of theory and practice, so theoretical and practical stylistic should be regarded as two interdependent branches of linguistic science. Each of these branches may develop its own methods of investigation and approach to linguistic data.

The term style also signifies a literary genre. Thus we speak of classical style of the style of classicism: realistic style; the style of romanticism and soon. On the other hand, the term is widely used in literature, being applied to the various kinds of literary work, the fable, novel, ballad, story, etc. Thus we speak of a story being written in the style of a fable or we speak of the characteristic features of the epistolary style or the essay and so on.

There is one more important application of the term style. We speak of the different styles of language.

A style of language is a system of interrelated language means which serves a definite aim in communication. Each style is recognized by the language community as an independent whole. The peculiar choice of language means is primarily independent on the aim of the communication. One system of language means is set against other systems with other aims, and arising from this, another choice and arrangement of the language means is made.

This we may distinguish the following styles within the English literary language:

1.the belles-lettres style;

the publicistic style;

the newspaper style;

4.the scientific style;

5.the style of official documents, and presumably some others.

A line of demarcation must be drawn between literary stylistic and linguistic stylistic. It is necessary to bear in mind the constant interrelation between the ends.

Some linguists consider that the subject of linguistic stylistics is confined to the study of the effects of the message, i.e. its impact on the reader or listener. Thus Michael Riffaterre writes that:

"Stylistics will be linguistics of the effects of the message, of the output of the act of communication, of its attention-compelling functional."

This point of view is influenced by recent developments in the general theory of information. Language, being one of the means of communications or, to be exact, the most important means of communication, is regarded as an instrument by means of which the actual process of conveying ideas from one person to another is carried out. Stylistics in that case is confined to the study of expressions of thought.

"Stylists", writes Riffaterre further, "studies those features of linguistic utterance that are intended to impose the encoder's way of thinking on the decoder, i.e. studies the act of communication not as merely producing a verbal chain, but as bearing the imprint of the speaker's personality, and as compelling the addressee's attention." 'M. Riffaterre. The stylistic function. Proceedings of the 9th International Congress of Linguistics, pp. 316-7

This point of view on style is shared by Professor W. Porzig who says that the means which "...would produce an impression, would cause a definite impact, effect" W. Porzid. Das Wunder der Sprache, Bern 1950, p. 60 is the science of stylistics.

Quite a different definition of style and stylistics, one that is interesting in more than one way, is that given by Archibald A. Hill.

"A current definition of style and stylistics", writes A. Mill, is that structures, sequences, and patterns which extend, or may extend, beyond the boundaries of individual sentences define style, and the study of them is stylistics".

The truth of this approach to style and stylistics lies in the fact that the author concentrates on such phenomena in language as present a system, in other words on facts which are not confined to individual use.

Almost the same view is held by Seymour Chatman who writes of "style as a product of individual choices and patterns of choices among linguistic possibilities" Seymour Chatman. Stylistics: Quantitative and qualitative in Style №4, 1967, p.30.. Professor Chatman, though he uses the word "individual" in a different meaning, practically says the same as Professor Hill but unlike him, confines style to what we have called here individual style or the style of the author.

A broader view of style is expressed by Werner Winter, who maintains that:

"A style may be said to be characterized by a pattern of recurrent selections from the inventory of optional features of a language. Various types of selection can be found: complete exclusion of an optional element, obligatory inclusion of a feature optional elsewhere, varying degrees of inclusion of a specific variant without complete elimination of competing features" Werner Winter. Styles as Dialects. Proceedings of the Ninth International Congress of Linguistics p.324.

The idea of distinguishing styles by various types of selection seems to be a sound one. It places the whole problem on a solid foundation of objective criteria, namely the interdependence of optional and obligatory features.

There is no use in quoting other definitions of style. They are too many and too heterogeneous to fall under one more of less satisfactory unified notion. Undoubtedly all these discrepancies in the understanding of the word style stem from its ambiguity. But still all the various definitions leave an impression that by and large they all have something in common. All of them point to some integral significance, namely that style is a set of characteristics by which we distinguish members of the same general class.

Three events in the development of linguistics stylistics as a branch of general linguistics must be considered as landmarks - the discussion of the problem of style in "Вопросы языкознания", 1954, in which many important general and particular problems of style were broadly discussed and some obscure aspects elucidated: the Conference on Style in language held in Indiana University in the spring of 1958 and the subsequent publication {I960} of the proceeding of this conference which revealed the existence of quite divergent points of view held by different students of style and literature: and the conference on Style and Stylistics held in the Moscow State Pedagogical Institute of Foreign Languages in March 1969 - which elucidated certain general principles followed in the study of style and stylistics, and ascertained in which direction studies in linguistic stylistics may be maintained.

A significant contribution to the cause of stylistics is being made by the journal Style published by the University of Arcansas.

From numerous conferences, discussions, theses, monographs and articles published in our country and abroad there emerges a more or less clear statement as to what we subject of linguo-stylistics represents. This is:

1 .The study of the styles of language as subsystems of the literary language and distinguished from each other by a peculiar set of interdependent language means and.

2. The study of these means in a system disclosing their linguistics properties and nature as well as the functioning of their laws.

The subject of stylistics can be outlined as the study of the nature, functions and structure of stylistic devices, on the one hand, and, on the other, the study of each style of language as classified above, i.e. its aim, its structure, its characteristic features and the effect it produces, as well as its interrelation with other styles of language. The task we set before ourselves is to make an attempt to single out such problems as are typically stylistic and cannot therefore be treated in any other branch of linguistic science.

Some of the notions of style enumerated not treated in this book. Because on the one hand not all of these notions are relevant to the domain of linguistics, and on the other, this book is intended to be a theoretical course of stylistics in which only crucial issues shall be taken up. Indeed, individual styles or manners of writing do not come under our observation, this being an entirely different field of linguistic and literary study. It has already been pointed out that individual manner, though it may conform to the norms of the language to a greater or lesser degree, will nevertheless be the practical realization of abstract language units in other words here we have language-in-action, that is, speech. Stylistic devices are abstract categories of language-as-a-system, that is, language proper. But the practical application of these abstract categories, being spontaneous, represents language-in-action, or speech. This is accordance with the laws which govern the functioning of every language fact.

We shall make an extensive analysis of individual usage of stylistic devices in as much as they disclose as yet unknown or unused potentialities. Our task is to show the variable functioning of stylistic devices. This will help as to define the means existing in the English language and perhaps in other language as we!!, which are used to serve definite aims of communication. It is obvious; that the observation of the variety of uses to which, a stylistic /device can advantageously be put, can only be carried out where there is a field for innovation and contextual meanings.

As regards style as technique of expression, we hold the view that this very important issue must be presented in a special work on composition.

So it is with stylistic devices. Being born in speech, after recognition as rightful members of the system in which they generally operate, they are duly taken away from their mother's breast, speech, and made independent members of the family, Language.

As regards the system of styles of language in English, we are in a position to point out the most characteristic features of the styles of language. These features have been carefully studies and on the basis of previous investigation into the linguistic character of stylistic devices brought into a kind of system. It is sometimes enough merely to point out the interrelation on the characteristic features of a given style of language to be able to tell one style from another.

A course of stylistics will be profitable to those who have a sound linguistic background. The expressive means of English and the stylistic devices used in the literary language can only be understood when a thorough knowledge of the phonetic, grammatical and lexical data of the given language has been attained. The stylistic devices

SD must be observed on different levels: on the phonetic, morphemic, lexical, phraseological, syntactical levels and on the utterance level. If a thorough command-of language data has not been acquired, the subtleties of the theory of stylistics may escape the student or may prove to be beyond his grasp.

1.1 Expressive Means and Stylistic Devices

There are different terms to denote those particular means in linguistics by which a writer obtains his affect. Expressive means, stylistic devices and other terms are used indiscriminately. For our purposes it is necessary to make a distinction between expressive means and stylistic devices.

All stylistic means of a language can be divided into expressive means (EM), which are used in some specific way, and special devices called stylistic devices (SD).

The expressive means of a language are those phonetic means, morphological forms, and means of word building, and lexical, phrase logical and syntactical forms.

Phonetic is the most powerful expressive means of any language. The human voice can indicate subtle nuances of meaning that no other means can attain. Pitch, melody, stress, pulsation, drawling out certain syllables, whispering, a sing-song manner of speech and other ways of using the voice are more effective than any other means in intensifying the utterance emotionally or logically.

Among the morphological expressive means the use of the Present Indefinite instead of the Past Indefinite Must is mentioned first. In describing some past event the author uses the present tense, thus achieving a more vivid picturisation of who was going on.

The use of shall in the second and third person may also be regarded as an expressive means.

Among word-building means we find a great many forms which serve to make the utterance more expressive and fresh or to intensify it. The diminutive suffixes as-y, -let, e.g.-dear, diaries, stream, and streamlet, add some emotional coloring to the words.

At the lexical level there are a great many words which due to their inner expressivities, constitute a special layer. There are words with emotive meaning only, like interjections, words which have both referential and emotive meaning only, like some of qualitative adjectives, words which retain twofold meaning; denotative and connotative; or word belonging to special groups of literary English. The expressive power of these words cannot be doubted. The same can be said of the set expressions of the language. Proverbs and sayings as well as catch words form a considerable number of language units which serve to make speech more emphatic.

In every day speech you often hear such phrases as "Well, it will only add fuel to the fire", and the like, which can easily be replaced by synonymous neutral expressions, like "It will only make the situation worse".

At the syntactical level there are many construction which, being set against synonymous ones, will reveal a certain degree of logical and emotional emphasis "1 have never seen such a film". "Never have I seen such a film". "Mr. Smith came in first". "It was Mr. Smith who came in first".

The expressive means of the language are studied respectively in „ manuals of phonetics, grammar, lexicology and stylistics. Stylistics, however, observes not only the nature of an expressive means, but also its potential capacity of becoming a stylistic device. Stylistic device is a conscious and intentional literary use of some of the facts of the language (including expressive means} in which the most essential features (both structural and semantic} of the language forms are raised to a generalized level and there by present a generative model. Most stylistic devices may be regarded as aiming at the further intensification of the emotional or logical emphasis contained in the expressive means.

A.A. Potebnja writes:

"As far back as in ancient Rome and Greece and faithful exceptions up to the present time, the definition of a Figurative use of a word has been, based on the contrast between ordinary speeches, used' in its own, natural, primary meaning and transferred speech".¹

A.A. Potebnja thus shows how the expressive means of the Russian languages are transformed into stylistic devices. He describes How Gogol uses the literal repetition characteristic of folklore instead of allusions and references.

The birth of an SD is not accidental language means which are used with more or less definite aims of communication and in one and the same function in various passages of writing, begin gradually to develop new features and become a relative means of the language, like proverbs and sayings, diminutive suffixes and the like. These SD's form a special group of language means which are more abstract in nature than the expressive means of the language. It would perhaps be more correct to say that unlike expressive means, stylistic devices are patterns of the language where as the expressive means do not font patterns. They are just like words themselves they are facts of the language.

This can be illustrated in the following manner: Proverbs and sayings are facts of language. They are collected in dictionaries.

They are special dictionaries of proverbs and sayings in a form that would present a pattern even though they have some typical features by which it is possible to determine whether of not we are dealing with one. These typical features are: rhythm, sometimes rhyme and alliteration.

The interrelation between expressive means and stylistic devices can be worded in terms of the theory of information. Expressive means have a greater degree of predictability than stylistic devices. Expressive means are commonly used in language, and are therefore easily predictable. Stylistic devices carry a greater amount of information because if they are at all predictable they are less predictable than expressive means. It follows that stylistic devices must be regarded as a special code which has still to be deciphered stylistic devices are used sparingly, lest they should overburden the * utterance with information. Not every stylistic use of a language fact will come under the term SD. There are practically unlimited possibilities of presenting any language fact in what is vaguely called its stylistic use. But this use forms an SDF or a language fact to become an SD there is one indispensable requirement, it should be so much used in one and the same function that is has become generalized in its functions. Even a use coined for the question, that is a nonsense use can, and very of ten creates the necessary 'conditions for the appearance, of an SD. Thus many facts of English grammar are said to be used with a stylistic function, e. g: some of the English morphemes are used in definite contexts as full words, but these facts are not SD's of the English language. They're still wandering in the vicinity of the realm of stylistic devices without being admitted into it. Perhaps in the near future they will be accepted as SD's, but in the meantime they are not. This can indirectly be proved by the fact that they have no special name in the English language system of SD's compare such SD's like metaphor, metonymy, oxymoron, parallel construction and the like. These have become facts of special branch of linguistic science as stylistics. All these facts are facts of general linguistics. But in general linguistics they are viewed as means either of creating new meanings of words, or of serving the purpose of making the utterance more comprehensive.

So far SD's have not been recognized as lawful members of the system of language. They're sent apart as stylistic phenomena, this being regarded as a special domain, of the system of language. But the process of the development of language does not take into confederation the likes or dislikes of this or that

linguist, it establishes its own path along which the formation of the whole system of a language is molded.

Stylistic devices of a highly developed language like English or Russian have brought into a literary language a separate body of means of expression which have won recognition as a constituent to be studied in the branch of language study named Stylistics.

The study of the linguistic nature of SD's in any language therefore becomes an essential condition for the general study of the function of the SD's and ultimately for the system of the language in general, not excluding such elements of language as deal with the emotional aspect.



1.2 Lexical Expressive Means and Stylistic Devices

Words in a context may acquire additional lexical meanings not fixed in dictionaries, what we have called contextual meanings. It may sometimes deviate from the dictionary meaning to such a degree that the new meaning becomes the opposite of the primary meaning. This is especially the case when we deal with transferred meanings. Transferred meaning is the interrelation between two types of lexical meaning: dictionary and contextual.

The transferred meaning of a word may be fixed in dictionaries as a result of language and frequent use of the word other than in its primary meaning.

When, we perceive two meanings of the word simultaneously, we are confronted with a stylistic device in which two meanings interact.

The relation between the dictionary and contextual logical meanings may be maintained along different lines: on the principle of affinity, on that of proximity, or symbol - referent relations, or on opposition. Thus the stylistic device based on the first principle is metaphor, on the second, metonymy and on the third, irony.

A metaphor is a relation between the dictionary and contextual logical meanings based on the affinity or similarity of certain properties or features of the two corresponding concepts. It is a transfer of a name based on the association of similarity and thus is actually a hidden comparison. It presents a method of description which likens one thing to another by referring to it as if it were some other one. A cunning person for instance is referred to as a fox. A woman may be called a peach, a lemon, a cat, a goose, etc.

N. Paul points out; metaphors may be based upon very different types of similarity, for instance, similarity of shape: head of a cabbage, the teeth of a saw. The similarity may be supported also by position: foot of a page, of a mountain, or behavior and function: bookworm, wirepuller. The word whip a lash used to urge horses on is metaphorically transferred to an official in the British Parliament appointed by a political party to see that members are present at debates especially when a vote is taken, to cheek to voting and also to advise the members on the policy of the respective party.

In the leg of the table the metaphor is motivated by the similarity of the lower part of the table and the human limb in position and partly in shape and function.

Some subgroup of metaphors comprised transitions of proper names into common ones: an Adonis, a Cicero, a Don Juan, etc.

When a proper name like Falstaff is used referring specifically to the hero of Shakespeare's plays it has a unique reference. But when people speak of a person they know calling him Falstaff they make a proper name generic for a corpulent, jovial, irrepressibly impudent person and it no longer denotes a unique being. If a person is an out - and - out mercenary and a hypocrite into the bargain they call him a Philistine, ruthlessly destructive people are called Vandals.

Metaphors can be embodied in all the meaningful parts of speech, in nouns, adjectives, verbs, and adverbs and sometimes even in the auxiliary parts of speech, as in preposition.

In: "The human tide is rolling westward". {Dickens, "Dombey and Son"} the metaphor is embodied in the adjective.

"In the slanting beams that streamed through the open window, the dust danced and was golden" (O.Wilde, "The Picture of Dorian Gray"}. Here the metaphors lie in the verbs. "The leaves fell sorrowfully" Here it is the adverb that is a metaphor.

Metaphors, like all stylistic devices can be classified according to their degree of unexpectedness. Thus metaphors which are absolutely unexpected 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 or dead metaphors. V. V. Vinogradov states:

"...a metaphor, if it is not a cliche, is an act of establishing an individual world outlook, it is an act of subjective isolation... Therefore a word metaphor is narrow, subjectively enclosed ... it imposes on the reader a subjective view of the object or phenomenon and its semantic ties". LB. В. Виноградов. Стиль Пушкина. М, 1945, стр.89

Genuine metaphors are regarded as belonging to language -in^_,action or speech metaphors; trite metaphors belong to the language -as - system, and are usually fixed in dictionaries as units of the language. They are time - worn and well rubbed into the language: a ray of hope, floods of tears, a storm of indignation, a flight of fancy, a gleam of mirth, a shadow of a smile and the like.

In such words as to melt away as in "these misgivings gradually melted away" we can still recognize remnants of the original meaning and in spite of the fact that the meaning to vanish, to disappear is already fixed in dictionaries as one of derivative meanings, the primary meaning still makes itself fell.

But if the metaphors in the word can hardly be felt and refreshed by the context which will give it a second life than such metaphors are called sustained or prolonged.

The metaphor is often defined as a compressed simile. But this definition lacks precision. As the metaphor aims at identifying the objects, while the simile aims at finding some point of resemblance by keeping the objects apart. That is why these two stylistic devices are viewed as belonging to two different groups of SDs.

They are different in their linguistic nature. The degree of identification of objects or phenomena in a metaphor varies according to its syntactic function in the sentence and to the part of speech in which it is embodied. Thus when the metaphor is expressed in a noun - predicative, the degree of identification is very low. This is due to the character of the predicative relation in general. The metaphor in this case can be likened to an epithet.

Indeed in the sentence 'Expression in the dress of thought' we can hardly see any process of identification between the concepts expression and dress, whereas in the lines:

"Yet Time, who changes all, had altered him.

In soul, and aspect as in age: years steal

Fire from the mind as I vigor from the limb;

And Life's enchanted cup but sparkles near the brim {Byron. "Childe Harold'"}

The metaphors steal; fire, cup, brim embodied in verbs and nouns not used predicatively can be regarded as fully, identified with the concepts they aim at producing. The metaphor is one of the most powerful means of creating images. This is its main function. Genuine metaphors are mostly to be found in poetry and emotive prose. Trite metaphors are generally used as expressive means in newspaper articles, in oratorical style and even in scientific language. The use of trite metaphors should not be regarded as a drawback of style. They help the writer to enliven his work and even make the meaning more concrete. There is constant interaction between genuine and trite metaphors. Genuine metaphors if they are good and can stand the test of time and consequently easily predictable. Trite metaphors may regain their freshness through the process of prolongation of the metaphor. Personification is a general category that covers a very wide range of metaphors. They allow us to make sense of phenomena in the world in human terms - terms that we can understand on the basis of our own motivations, goals, actions and characteristics. In personification the physical object is further specified as being a person. And this allows us to comprehend a wide variety of
experiences with non-human entities in terms of human motivations, characteristics, and activities. Here are some examples:

His theory explained to me the behavior of chickens raised in factories;

This fact argues against the standard theories;

Life has cheated me;

Inflation is eating up our profits.

In each case we are seeing something non-human as human.

Metonymy is based on different type 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.

The word crown may stand for 'monarchy' or 'king or queen, cup or glass for' the drink it contains, hand for 'handwriting'.

Here also the interrelation between the dictionary and contextual meanings should stand out clearly and conspicuously. Only then we can state that a stylistic device is used. The examples of metonymy given above are traditional in fact they are derivative logical meanings and therefore fixed in dictionaries. However, when such meanings are included in dictionaries, there is usually a label fig.

Here are some more widely - used metonymical meanings, some of which are already fixed in dictionaries without the label fig: the press for (the personnel connected with) a printing or publishing establishment, or for 'the newspaper and periodical literature which is printed by the printing press'. The bench is used as a generic term for 'magistrates and justices'. A hand is used for a worker; the cradle stands for infancy, earliest stages, place of origin and the grave stands for death. Metonymy used in language - in action or speech is contextual metonymy, is genuine metonymy and reveals a quite unexpected substitution of one word for another or even of one concept for another, on the ground of some strong impression produced by a chance feature of the thing, for example.

"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 ".

{Dorris Lessing. "Retreat to Innocence "}

We have a feature of a man which catches the eye, in this case his facial appearance: the moustache stands for the man himself. The function of the metonymy here is to indicate that the speaker knows nothing of the man in question, moreover there is a definite implication that his is the first time the speaker has seen him.

Metonymy and metaphor differ also in the way they are deciphered. In the process of disclosing the meaning implied 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 above the moustache and the man himself are both perceived by the mind.

Metonymy is based on the following most common types of relation:

The concrete thing used instead of an abstract notion. In this case the thing becomes a symbol of the notion, as in "The camp, the pulpit and the law for rich men's sons are free". {Shelley}

The container instead of the thing contained: "The hall applauded"

The relation of proximity, as in: "The round game table was boisterous and happy" (Dickens)

4.The material instead of the thing made of it, as in: "The marble spoke "

5. The instrument which the doer uses in performing the action instead of the action or the doer himself, as in:

"Well, Mr. We her, says the gentlemen, you're a very good whip. And can do what to like with your horses, we know" (Dickens)

"As the sword is the worst argument that can be used, so should it be the last" (Byron)

The instances of metonymy are very often used with the definite article, or with no article at all as in "There was perfect sympathy between Pulpit and Pew" where Pulpit stands for clergyman and Pew for the congregation.

This is probably due to the fact that any definition of a word a may be taken for metonymy, inasmuch as it shows a property or an essential quality of the concept, thus disclosing a kind of relation between the thing as a whole and a feature of it which may be regarded as part of it. When we are using one entity to refer to another that is related to it then this is a case of what we will call metonymy here are some examples:

He likes to read the Marquis de Sade (the writings of the Marquis de Sade)

He is in dance (the dancing profession)

The Times hasn't arrived at the press conference yes (the reporter from the Times).

New windshield wiper will satisfy him (the state of having new wipers).

We can include as a special case of metonymy what traditional rhetoricians have called synecdoche where the part stands for the whole, as in the following.

1. The automobile is clogging our highways (the collection of automobiles)

2. We need a couple of strong bodies for our team (strong people)

There are a lot of good heads in the university (intelligent people)

I've got a new set of wheels (car, motorcycle)

In these cases, as in the other cases of metonymy, one entity is being used to refer to another. Metaphor is principally a way of conceiving of one thing in terms of another, and its primary function understands: Metonymy, on the other hand, has primarily a referential function, that is it allows us to use one entity to stand for another. Metonymies are not random or arbitrary occurrences. Its concepts are systematic, as can be seen in the following representative examples that exist in our culture and the part for the whole.

Get your butt over here.

The Giant need a stronger arm in right field

We don't here longhairs

Producer for product

I'll have a Lowenbrau

He bought a Ford

I hate to read Heidegger

Object used for user

The sax has the flue today

The BLT is a lousy tipper

The buses are on strike

Controller for controlled

Nixon bombed Hanoi

Ozawa gave a terrible concert last night

Napoleon lost Waterloo

Institution for people responsible

Exxon has raised its prices again

The Army wants to reinstitute the draft

The Senate thinks abortion is immoral

The place for the Institution

The White House isn't saying anything

Washington is insensitive to the needs of the people

Paris is introducing longer skirts this season

Wall Street is in a panic

The place for the event

Let's not let Thailand become another Vietnam

Remenber the Alamo.

It's been Grand Central Station here all day

Metonymy concepts allow us to conceptualize one thing by means of its relation to something else. When we think of a Picasso, we are not just thinking of a work of art alone. We think of it in terms of, its relation to the artist that is, his conception of art, his technique, his role in art history. This is a way in which the producer for product.

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 characterize an object and pointing out to the reader, and frequently imposing on him, some of the properties or features of the object with the 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.

In green meadows, white snow, round table, blue skies, pale complexion, lofty mountains and the like, the adjectives are more logical than epithets. They indicate those qualities of the objects which may be regarded as generally recognized. But in wild wind, loud ocean, remorseless dash of billows, formidable waves, heartburning smile, the adjectives do not point to inherent qualities of the objects described. They are subjectively evaluative.

Epithets may be classified from different stand points: semantic and structural. Semantically, epithets may be divided into two groups: those associated with the noun following and those unassociated with it. Associated epithets are those which point to a feature which is essential to the objects they describe, for instance.