Stylistic devices (SD) based on the interaction of lexical and contextual meaning (metaphor, metonymy, antonomasia, irony).

_{The term 'metaphor',}_{as the etymology of the word reveals, means transference of some quality from one object to another.}

_{A metaphor becomes a stylistic device when two different phenomena (things, events, ideas, actions) are simultaneously brought to mind by the imposition of some or all of the inherent properties of one object on the other which by nature is deprived of these properties.}

_{it is better to define metaphor as the power of realizing two lexical meanings simultaneously.}

_{Metaphors, like all stylistic devices, can be classified according to their degree of unexpectedness. Thus metaphors which are absolutely unexpected, i.e. are quite unpredictable, are called genuine metaphors.}_{Those which are commonly used in speech and therefore are .sometimes even fixed in dictionaries as expressive means of language are trite metaphors, or dead metaphors.}

_{Genuine metaphors are regarded as belonging to language-in-action, i. e. speech metaphors; trite metaphors belong to the language-as-a-system, i.e. language proper, and are usually fixed in dictionaries as units of the language.}

_{Here are some examples of metaphors that are considered trite. 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.}

_{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, may, through frequent repetition, become trite and consequently easily predictable. Trite metaphors, as has been shown, may regain their freshness through the process of prolongation of the metaphor.}

_{The constant use of a metaphor gradually leads to the breaking up of the primary meaning. The metaphoric use of the word begins to affect the dictionary meaning, adding to it fresh connotations or shades of meaning.}

_{Metonymy is b}_{ased on a different type of relation between the dictionary and contextual meanings, a relation based not on identification, but on some kind of association connecting the two concepts which these meanings represent.}

_{Thus, the word crown may stand for 'king or queen', cup or glass for 'the drink it contains', woolsack for 'the Chancellor of the Exchequer who sits on it, OJT the position and dignity of the Lord Chancellor*, e. g., "Here the noble lord inclined his knee to the Woolsack." (from}_Hansard).

_{Metonymy used in language-in-action, i.e. contextual metonymy, is genuine metonymy and reveals a quite unexpected substitution of one word for another, or one concept for another, on the ground of some strong impression produced by a chance feature of the thing, for example:}

_{'A cocked hat and a Babylonian collar' stand for the wearer of the articles in question. One can hardly admit that there is a special characterizing function in such a substitution. The function of these examples of genuine metonymy is more likely to point out the insignificance of the wearer rather than his importance, for his personality is reduced to his externally conspicuous features, the hat and red collar.}

_{Many attempts have been made to pin-point the types of relation which metonymy is based on. Among them the following are most common:}

_{1. A}_{concrete thing used instead of an abstract notion. In this case the thing becomes a symbol of the notion, as in "The camp, the pulpit and the law For rich men's sons are free." (Shelley)}

_{2. The container instead of the thing contained: • The hall applauded.}

_{3. 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.}

Irony is astylistic device in which the contextual evaluative meaning of a word is directly opposite to its dictionary meaning. The context is arranged so that the qualifying word in irony reverses the direction of the evaluation, and the word positively charged is understood as a negative qualification and (much-much rarer) vice versa. The context varies from the minimal – a word combination to the context of a whole book. e.g. It must be delightful to find oneself in a foreign country without a penny in one’s pocket.

Irony can be of three kinds: verbal irony isa type of irony when it is possible to indicate the exact word whose contextual meaning diametrically opposes its dictionary meaning, in whose meaning we can trace the contradiction between the said and implied (e.g. She turned with the sweet smile of an alligator. (J.Steinbeck) (V.A. Kucharenko); Dramatik irony happens when a reader or viewer knows more information that a character in book or in a movie; Situational irony is a kind of joke that is against you or situation.

antonomasia is a substitution of any epithet or phrase for a proper name, such as "the little corporal" for Napoleon I. The reverse process is also sometimes called antonomasia. The word derives from the Greek verb (antonomázein), meaning "to name differently". Antonomasia is a particular form of metonymy.

Не знайшли потрібну інформацію? Скористайтесь пошуком google:

Генерація сторінки за: 0.003 сек.