|frequent repetition and become a| |
|unit of the | |
|language-as-a-system, reproduced| |
|in speech in its unaltered form.| |
|Here are some examples of | |
|language hyperbole: ‘a thousand | |
|pardons’; ‘scared to death’; | |
|‘I’d give the world to see him’ | |
|Epithet |Litotes |
|The epithet is a stylistic |Litotes is a stylistic device |
|device based on the interplay of|consisting of a peculiar use of |
|emotive and logical meaning in |negative constructions. The |
|an attributive word, phrase or |negation plus noun or adjective |
|even sentence, used to |serves to establish a positive |
|characterise an object and |feature in a person or thing. |
|pointing out to the reader, and |This pisitive feature is however|
|frequently imposing on him, some|is somewhat diminished in |
|of the properties or features of|quality as compared with a |
|the object with aim of giving an|synonymous expression making a |
|individual perception and |straightforward assertion of the|
|evaluation of these features or |positive feature. |
|properties. The epithet is |E. g. 1. It’s not a bad thing – |
|markedly subjective and |It’s a good thing |
|evaluative. The logical |2. He is no coward – He is a |
|attribute is purely objective, |brave man |
|non-evaluating. It is |In both cases the negative |
|descriptive and indicates an |construction is weaker than |
|inherent or prominent feature of|affirmative one. But we can not |
|the thing or phenomenon in |say that the two negative |
|question. |constructions produce a lesser |
|Thus in green meadows, white |effect than the corresponding |
|snow, round table and the like, |affirmative ones. Moreover, it |
|the adjectives are more logical |should be noted that the |
|attributes than epithets. They |negative construction here have |
|indicate those qualities of the |a stronger impact on the reader |
|objects which may be regarded as|than the affirmative ones. So |
|generally recognized. But in |the negation in litotes should |
|wild wind, loud ocean, |not be regarded as mere denial |
|heart-burning smile, the |of the quality mentioned. |
|adjectives do not point to |The stylistic effect of litotes |
|inherent qualities of the |depends mainly on intonation, on|
|objects described. They are |intonation only. If compare two |
|subjective evaluative. |intonation patterns, one which |
|Epithets may be classified from |suggests a mere denial (It is |
|different standpoints: semantic |not bad as contrary to It is |
|and structural. Semantically – |bad) with the other which |
|divided into associated with the|saggests assertion of a positive|
|noun following and unassociated |quality of the object (It is no |
|with it. |bad = it is good) the different |
|Associated epithets are those |will become apparent. |
|which point out to a feature |A variant of litotes is a |
|which is essential to the |construction with two negations,|
|objects they describe: the idea |as in (not unlike, not |
|expressed in the epithet is to a|unpromising). Here accordingly |
|certain extent inherent in the |to general logical and |
|concept of the object. For e. g.|mathematical, principles, two |
|‘dark forest’, ‘careful |negatives make a |
|attention’ etc. |positive(Soames, with his lips |
|Unassociated epithets are |and his squared chin was not |
|attributes used to characterize |unlike a bull dog) |
|the object by adding a feature | |
|not inherent in it. For e. g. | |
|‘heart-burning smile’, | |
|‘voiceless sands’. The | |
|adjectives here impose a | |
|property on objects which is | |
|fitting only in the given | |
|circumstances. | |
| | |
|Structurally, epithets can be | |
|viewed from the angle of a) | |
|composition and b) distribution.| |
| | |
|Compositional – may be divided | |
|into simple, compound and phrase| |
|epithets. Simple epithets are | |
|ordinary adjectives (wild wind, | |
|loud ocean). Compound epithets | |
|are built like compound | |
|adjectives (heat-burning sigh, | |
|sylph-like figures). Phrase | |
|epithets: a phrase and even a | |
|whole sentence may become an | |
|epithet if the main formal | |
|requirement of the epithets is | |
|maintained i. e. its attributive| |
|use. But unlike simple and | |
|compound epithets, which may | |
|have pre- and post-position, | |
|phrase epithets are always | |
|placed before the nouns they | |
|refer to. (Freddie was standing | |
|on front of the fireplace with a| |
|‘well-that’s-the-story-what-are-| |
|we-going-to-do-about-it’ air | |
|that made him a local point) | |
|Phrase epithets are generally | |
|followed by the expression, air,| |
|attitude and others which | |
|describe behaviour or facial | |
|expression, | |
| | |
|Reversed epithet is composed of | |
|two nouns linked in an of – | |
|phrase. The subjective, | |
|evaluating, emotional element is| |
|embodied not in the noun | |
|attribute but in the noun | |
|described (the shadow of a | |
|smile; a devil of a sea rolls in| |
|that bay) | |
| | |
|From the point of view of the | |
|distribution of the epithets in | |
|the sentence, the first model to| |
|be pointed out is the string of | |
|epithets (a plump, rosy-checked,| |
|wholesome, apple-faced, young | |
|woman; a well-matched, | |
|fairly-balanced, give-and-take | |
|couple). The string of epithets | |
|gives a many-sided depiction of | |
|the object. | |
|Transferred epithets are | |
|ordinary logical attributes | |
|generally describing the state | |
|of a human being, but made to | |
|refer to an inanimate object | |
|(sleepless pillow, unbreakfasted| |
|morning) | |
|It remains only to say that the | |
|epithet is direct and | |
|straightforward way of showing | |
|the author’s attitude towards | |
|the things described. | |
|Zuegma and pun | |
|Zuegma is the use of the word in| |
|the same grammatical but | |
|different semantic relations to | |
|two adjacent words in the | |
|context, the semantic relations | |
|being on the one hand literal, | |
|and on the other, transferred. | |
|E. g. “Dora, plunging at once | |
|into privileged intimacy and | |
|into the middle of the room” | |
|Zuegma is a strong and effective| |
|device to maintain the purity of| |
|the primary meaning when the two| |
|meanings clash. By making the | |
|two meanings conspicuous in this| |
|particular way, each of them | |
|stands out clearly | |
|The pun is another stylistic | |
|device based on the interaction | |
|of well-known meanings of a word| |
|or phrase. It is difficult to | |
|draw a hard and fast distinction| |
|between zeugma and the pun. The | |
|only reliable distinguishing | |
|feature is a structural: zeugma | |
|is realization of two meanings | |
|with the help of a verb which is| |
|made to refer to different | |
|subjects or objects. The pun is | |
|more independent. There need not| |
|necessarily be a word in the | |
|sentence to which the pun-word | |
|refers. But this does not mean | |
|that the pun is entirely free. | |
|Like any other stylistic device,| |
|it must depend on a context. E. | |
|g. “Bow to the board – Said | |
|Bumble. Oliver brushed away two | |
|or three tears that were | |
|lingering in his eyes; and | |
|seeing no board but the table, | |
|fortunately bowed to that.” | |
Climax (gradation)
Climax is an arrangement of sentences which secures a gradual increase in
significance, importance, or emotional tension in the utterance. E. g.” It
was a lovely city, a beautiful city, a fair city, a veritable gem of a
city.”
As it see from this e. g. each successive unit is perceived as stronger
than the preceding one.
A gradual increase may be maintained in three ways: logical,
emotional and quantitative.
Logical climax is base don the relative importance of the component
parts look at from the point of view of the concepts embodied in them.
Emotional climax is based on the relative emotional tension produced
by words with emotive meaning, as in the first example, with the words
“lovely”, “beautiful”, “fair”. Of course, emotional climax based on
synonymous strings of words.
Quantitative climax
Ellipsis is a typical phenomenon in conversation, arising out of the
situation. When it used as stylistic device, always imitates the common
features of colloquial language, where the situation predetermines absence
of the certain members
|Oxymoron |
|Oxymoron is a combination of two words (mostly an adjective and a |
|noun or an adverb with an adjective) in which the meanings of the |
|two clash, being opposite in sense, |
|E.g.: low skyscraper; sweet sorrow; pleasantly ugly face |
|The essence of oxymoron consists in the capacity of the primary |
|meaning of the adjective or adverb to resist for some time the |
|overwhelming power of semantic change which words undegro in |
|combination. The forcible combination of non-combinative words |
|seems to develop what may be called a kind of centrifugal force |
|which keeps them apart, in contrast to ordinary word combinations |
|where centripetal force is in action. |
|In oxymoron the logical meaning holds fast because there is no |
|true word combination, only the juxtaposition of two |
|non-combinative words. But we may notice a peculiar change in the |
|meaning of the qualifying word. It assumes a new life in oxymoron,|
|definitely indicative of assessing tendency in the writer’s mind. |
|E. g. (O. Henry) “I despise its very vastness and power. It has |
|the poorest millionaires, the littlest great men, the haughtiest |
|beggars, the plainest beauties, the lowest skyscrapers, the |
|dolefulest pleasures of any town I eve seen.” |
|Even the superlative degree of the adjectives fails to extinguish |
|the primary meaning of the adjectives: poor, little, haughty, etc.|
|But by some inner law of word combinations they also show the |
|attitude of the speaker, reinforced, of course, by the preceding |
|sentence: “I despise its very vastness and power.” |
|Oxymoron as a rule has one structural model: adjective + noun. It |
|is in this structural model that the resistance of the two |
|component parts to fusion into one unit manifests itself most |
|strongly. In the adverb + adjective model the change of meaning in|
|the first element, the adverb, is more rapid, resistance to the |
|unifying process not being so strong |
|Not every combination of words which we called non-combinative |
|should be regarded as oxymoron, because new meaning developed in |
|new combinations do not necessarily give rise to opposition. |
