Термин «корневой повтор» появился в лингвистике сравнительно недавно, но сама проблема понятий, объединенных одним корнем, освещалась в довольно ранних исследованиях, связанных с изучением плеоназмов.
Этот факт обусловливает актуальность научного описания данного феномена, в том числе позиционной классификации данного художественного приема по месту повторяющихся слов в тексте и выявления структурных особенностей корневого повтора в художественном тексте, а также их влияния на выразительность художественных произведений.
Для комплексного описания данного феномена представляется важным осмысление не только смыслового значения корневого повтора, но и его структурных особенностей.
Однако Л.И. Савченко изучала повторы в прозаических текстах, поэтому ее терминологическую систему необходимо было адаптировать для стихотворной речи, так как строфическое деление в поэтическом тексте не всегда совпадает с синтаксическим.
Нами были выделены три основных класса повторов в поэзии М.И. Цветаевой.
Сложноопределяемыми случаями мы считаем такие примеры, когда в одном стихотворном контексте соединяются несколько разных типов повторов.
Л.И. Савченко не выделяет последний тип, поскольку, занимаясь исследованием прозаического текста, разделяет такие случаи на несколько простых, тем самым разрушая контекст.
Мы отказались от такого метода исследования, так как при разрушении поэтического контекста на простые составляющие происходит утрата смыслов, которая мешает читателю понять причины применения художественных приемов, а также происходит разрушение структуры художественных тропов и фигур. Стихотворный язык оказывается более обусловленным, чем прозаический.
Контактный повтор был разделен нами на две категории.
1. Контактный повтор, реализующийся в рамках одной стихотворной строки (без анжамбемана, то есть разрыва предложения через строфический перенос) — «Взмахом в пещь — развеществлялась вещь». Контактных повторов этого типа в художественной речи М. Цветаевой насчитывается 143 случая.
2. Контактный повтор, реализующийся в рамках двух стихотворных строк (с анжамбеманом) — «Музыка есть аффект, / Аффектация неких чувств, / Коих и нету. Хам, мол, — / Кто не чувствует». Контактных повторов данного вида — 35 случаев.
Такое преобладание одного типа контактных корневых повторов над другим объясняется сложностью выполнения приема, при котором два элемента контактного повтора разделены границей стихотворной строки. Контактный корневой повтор без анжамбемана естественен для русского языка и часто используется М. Цветаевой для имитации разговорной речи, например: «На кой цветы цветут, / Раз в брюхе гром гремит».
Искусственный разрыв контактного повтора с помощью анжамбемана не свойственен обычной речи: такой прием тяжело поддается осмыслению, потому что читатель ждет, что на новой стихотворной строке будет изложена новая информация, а корневой повтор отсылает его в конец предыдущей строки, и повышается вероятность восприятия такого повтора как тавтологии.
Контактный повтор, реализованный в рамках двух строк, образует риторическую фигуру — эпанафору (стык). Мы предлагаем трактовать данный прием расширенно, считая, что не только полные повторы, но и корневые повторения могут стать элементами формирования эпанафоры, потому что эмоциональный эффект, достигаемый при использовании в качестве элементов приема полиптота и корневого повтора, тождественен.
Дистантный повтор был разделен нами на 7 категорий. Всего в «Позиционном словаре корневых повторов» 298 случаев дистантного повтора. Преобладание дистантных повторов над контактными объясняется их структурными особенностями. Контактный повтор может возникать только в двух позициях: элементы повтора внутри строки или на стыке строк. Дистантный повтор позиционно не ограничен, он ограничен лишь тем контекстом, в котором он употребляется, и этот контекст шире, чем контекст контактного повтора.
Контекст дистантного повтора определяется читательской рецепцией: он распространяется до тех пор, пока читатель видит прием корневого повтора, несмотря на то что повторяющиеся элементы могут быть значительно отдалены друг от друга: «Тонкомер! / Давший меру и скорость тоске / Окоим! / Окодер, окорыв, околом! / Ох, синим — / Синё око твое, окоём! / Окохват!».
При изучении поэтических текстов перед нами встала необходимость усовершенствовать классификацию Л.И. Савченко, добавив следующие группы: анафорический корневой повтор и эпифорический корневой повтор, а также разделив группу «инпозитивные повторы» на две подгруппы:
1) инпозитивные повторы, реализующиеся в рамках одной строфы, и
2) инпозитивные повторы, реализующиеся в рамках нескольких строф.
Сложноопределяемые (смешанные) случаи корневых повторов являются самой малочисленной группой, в которой насчитывается всего 44 примера. Это объясняется тем, что для поэта представляет большую сложность создать такой прием, а для исследователя — классифицировать его. К повторам данного типа мы относим такие примеры, в которых одновременно использованы два или более типов повторов, описанных нами ранее.
1. Эпанод. Большая часть примеров из данной группы (21 случай) содержат одновременно и контактный, и дистантный повтор: «Лучший из возниц / Вознесен из горестей / Проспал, возница, / Воз! В щепы, в опилки!». Этот корневой повтор позволяет поэту использовать сочетание разнообразных художественных тропов и фигур, чем в том случае, если бы контактные и дистантные повторы использовались бы отдельно. В приведенном отрывке из драмы «Федра» М. Цветаева применяет и эпифору «Лучший из возниц / Вознесен из горестей / Проспал, возница», и контактный повтор с анжамбеманом: «Проспал, возница, / Воз! В щепы, в опилки!». Такое чередование контактного и дистантного повторов в отечественной стилистике носит название эпанод.
Следующей большой группой сложноопределяемых повторов являются промежуточные случаи дистантных повторов, содержащие в себе анафорические и эпифорические элементы.
2. Повтор, при котором возникает чередование анафорического и эпифорического корневого повтора: «Ныне же вся родина / Причащается тайн твоих / Все мы твои причастники / Смилуйся, допусти! — / Кровью своей причастны мы / Крестному твоему пути / Чаша сна — полная / Причастимся святых даров». Этот пример начинается с анафоры «Причащается тайн твоих», которая прерывается эпифорическим повтором «Все мы твои причастники», и продолжает свое развитие только на последней строфе: «Причастимся святых даров». Кроме того, присутствует повтор в инпозиции: «Кровью своей причастны мы», который осложняет структуру и выглядит как мнимая эпифора.
3. Контактный повтор, включающий в себя две пары корневых повторов, одна из которых содержит анжамбеман, а вторая — нет: «Миновали пригород / За городом мы, / Есть — да нету нам! / Мачеха — не мать! Жизнь есть пригород — за городом строй».
Данный пример — единственный случай в группе сложноопределяемых повторов, в котором нет дистантных повторений.
Преобладание в данной группе дистантных повторов объясняется тем, что по сравнению с контактными они позиционно свободнее, и это обеспечивает большую изощренность их комбинаций, широту контекста и простор для продуктивных лингвистических аномалий.
Итак, на основе «Словаря корневых повторов в художественной речи М. Цветаевой» был создан «Позиционный словарь корневых повторов в художественной речи М. Цветаевой», на материале которого был проведен анализ корневых повторов по их месту в строке, строфе и более крупных структурных контекстах в поэтических произведениях поэта.
Существующая классификация повторов была нами изучена и усовершенствована: были добавлены классы повторов, которые учитывали не только синтаксическое строение фразы или предложения, но и строфическое деление. В ходе исследования мы выделили три группы повторов в позиционной классификации: контактные повторы (178 рядов), дистантные повторы (294 ряда) и сложноопределяемые (смешанные) случаи корневых повторов, которые нельзя отнести ни к первой, ни ко второй группе (44 ряда), но которые соединяют в стихотворном контексте несколько разных типов повторов.
Преобладание дистантных повторов над контактными объясняется их структурными особенностями. Дистантный повтор позиционно более свободен, он ограничен лишь тем контекстом, в котором употребляется, этот контекст шире, чем контекст контактного повтора.
В рамках контактного повтора мы обнаружили преобладание контактного повтора, реализующегося в рамках одной стихотворной строки (143 случая), над контактным повтором с анжамбеманом (35 случаев). Этот факт объясняется сложностью выполнения приема, при котором два элемента контактного повтора разделены границей стихотворной строки. Контактный корневой повтор без анжамбемана вполне естественен для русского языка и используется поэтом для имитации разговорной речи.
Дистантные повторы активно участвуют в создании художественных тропов и фигур: на их основе возникает анафорический и эпифорический эффект, рамочная композиция (кольцо), актуализируется анжамбеман.
Рацибурская Л.В., д.фил.н., профессор, заведующая кафедрой современного русского языка и общего языкознания филологического факультета ННГУ им. Н.И. Лобачевского, г.Нижний Новгород.
Радбиль Т.Б., д.фил.н., профессор кафедры современного русского языка и общего языкознания филологического факультета ННГУ им. Н.И. Лобачевского, г. Нижний Новгород.
«Stop!»—she cried, «Don’t tell me! / don’t want to hear;
I don’t want to hear what you’ve come for. / don’t want to hear.»
The repetition of ‘I don’t want to hear’, is not a stylistic device; it is a means by which the excited state of mind of the speaker is shown. This state of mind always manifests itself through intonation, which is suggested here by the words ‘she cried’. In the written language, before» direct speech is introduced one can always find words indicating the intonation, as sobbed, shrieked, passionately, etc. J. Vandryes writes:
«Repetition is also one of the devices having its origin in the emotive language. Repetition when applied to the logical language becomes simply an instrument of grammar. Its origin is to be seen in the excitement accompanying the expression of a feeling being brought to its highest tension.» When used as a stylistic device, repetition acquires quite different functions. It does not aim at making a direct emotional impact. On the contrary, the stylistic device of repetition aims at logical emphasis, an emphasis necessary to fix the attention of the reader on the key-word of the utterance. For example:
Repetition is classified according to compositional patterns. If the repeated word (or phrase) comes at the beginning of two or more consecutive sentences, clauses or phrases, we have anaphora, as in the example above. If the repeated unit is placed at the end of consecutive sentences, clauses or phrases, we have the type of repetition called epiphora, as in:
«I am exactly the man to be placed in a superior position in such a case as that. I am above the rest of mankind, in such a case as that. I can act with philosophy in such a case as that.
Here the repetition has a slightly different function: it becomes a background against which the statements preceding the repeated unit are made to stand out more conspicuously. This may be called the background function. It must be observed, however, that the logical function of the repetition, to give emphasis, does not fade when it assumes the background function. This is an additional function. Repetition may also be arranged in the form of a frame: the initial parts of a syntactical unit, in most cases of a paragraph, are repeated at the end of it, as in:
«Poor doll’s dressmaker! How often so dragged down by hands that should have raised her up; how often so misdirected when losing her way on the eternal road and asking guidance. Poor, little doll’s dressmaker». (Dickens)
This compositional pattern of repetition is called framing. The semantic nuances of different compositional structures of repetition have been little looked into. But even a superficial examination will show that framing, for example, makes the whole utterance more compact and more complete. Framing is most effective in singling out paragraphs.
Any repetition of a unit of language will inevitably cause some slight modification of meaning, a modification suggested by a noticeable change in the intonation with which the repeated word is pronounced.
Sometimes a writer may use the linking device several times in one utterance, for example:
«A smile would come into Mr. Pickwick’s face: the smile extended into a laugh: the laugh into a roar, and the roar became general.» (Dickens)
«For glances beget ogles, ogles sighs, sighs wishes, wishes words, ^K and words a letter.» (Byron)
This compositional pattern of repetition is also called c h a i n-r e p-e t i t i o n.
What are the most obvious stylistic functions of repetition?
A weary lot is thine, fair maid,
A weary lot is thine! To pull the thorn thy brow to braid,
And press the rue for wine. A lightsome eye, a soldier’s mien
A feather of the blue, A doublet of the Lincoln green— No more of me you knew My Love!
No more of me you knew. (Walter Scott)
The repetition of the whole line in its full form requires interpretation. Superlinear analysis based on associations aroused by the sense of the whole poem suggests that this repetition expresses the regret of the Rover for his Love’s unhappy lot. Compare also the repetition in the line of Thomas Moore’s:
«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’.
The distributional model of repetition, the aim of which is intensification, is simple: it is immediate succession of the parts repeated.
Repetition may also stress monotony of action, it may suggest fatigue, or despair, or hopelessness, or doom, as in:
«What has my life been? Fag and grind, fag and grind. Turn the wheel, turn the wheel.» (Dickens)
Here the rhythm of the repeated parts makes the monotony and hopelessness of the speaker’s life still more keenly felt.
This function of repetition is to be observed in Thomas Hood’s poem «The Song of the Shirt» where different forms of repetition are employed.
Till the brain begins to swim! Work—work—work
Till the eyes are heavy and dim! Seam, and gusset, and band,
Band, and gusset and seam,— Till over the buttons I fall asleep,
And sew them on in a dream.»
Of course, the main idea, that of long and exhausting work, is expressed by lexical means: work ’till the brain begins to swim’ and ‘the eyes are heavy and dim’, till, finally, ‘I fall asleep.’ But the repetition here strongly enforces this idea and, moreover, brings in additional nuances of meaning.
In grammars it is pointed out that the repetition of words connected by the conjunction and will express reiteration or frequentative action. For example:
«Fledgeby knocked and rang, and Fledgeby rang and knocked, but no one came.»
There are phrases containing repetition which have become lexical units of the English language, as on and on, over and over, again and again and others. They all express repetition or continuity of the action, as in:
«He played the tune over and over again.»
Sometimes this shade of meaning is backed up by meaningful words, as in:
I sat desperately, working and working.
They talked and talked all night.
The telephone rang and rang but no one answered.
The idea of continuity is expressed here not only by the repetition but also by modifiers such as ‘all night’.
Background repetition, which we have already pointed out, is sometimes used to stress the ordinarily unstressed elements of the utterance. Here is a good example:
«I am attached to you. But / can’t consent and won’t consent and / never did consent and / never will consent to be lost in you.» (Dickens)
The emphatic element in this utterance is not the repeated word ‘consent’ but the modal words ‘can’t’ ‘won’t’ ‘will’, and also the emphatic ‘did’. Thus the repetition here loses its main function and only serves as a means by which other elements are made to stand out clearly. It is worthy of note that in this sentence very strong stress falls on the modal verbs and ‘did’ but not on the repeated ‘consent’ as is usually the case with the stylistic device.
Like many stylistic devices, repetition is polyfunctional. The functions enumerated do not cover all its varieties. One of those already mentioned, the rhythmical function, must not be under-estimated when studying the effects produced by repetition. Most of the examples given above give rhythm to the utterance. In fact, any repetition enhances the rhythmical aspect of the utterance.
There is a variety of repetition which we shall call «root-repetition», as in:
«To live again in the youth of the young.» (Galsworthy)
or, «Schemmer, Karl Schemmer, was a brute, a brutish brute.» (London)
In root-repetition it is not the same words that are repeated but the same root. Consequently we are faced with different words 4iaving different meanings (youth: young; brutish: brute), but the shades of meaning are perfectly clear.
Another variety of repetition may be called synonymical repetition. This is the repetition of the same idea by using synonymous words and phrases which by adding a slightly different nuance of meaning intensify the impact of the utterance, as in
Is there not blood enough upon your penal code?» (Byron)
Here the meaning of the words ‘capital punishments’ and ‘statutes’ is repeated in the next sentence by the contextual synonyms ‘blood’ and ‘penal code’.
Here is another example from Keats’ sonnet «The Grasshopper and the Cricket.»
There are two terms frequently used to show the negative attitude of the critic to all kinds of synonymical repetitions. These are pleonasm and tautology. The Shorter Oxford Dictionary defines pleonasm as «the use of more words in a sentence than are necessary to express the meaning; redundancy of expression.» Tautology is defined as «the repetition of the same statement; the repetition (especially in the immediate context) of the same word or phrase or of the same idea or statement in other words; usually as a fault of style.»
Here are two examples generally given as illustrations:
«It was a clear starry night, and not a cloud was to be seen.» «He was the only survivor; no one else was saved.»
It is not necessary to distinguish between these two terms, the distinction being very fine. Any repetition may be found faulty if it is not motivated by the aesthetic purport of the writer. On the other hand, any seemingly unnecessary repetition of words or of ideas expressed in different words may be justified by the aim of the communication.
For example, «The daylight is fading, the sun is setting, and night is coming on» as given in a textbook of English composition is regarded as tautological, whereas the same sentence may serve as an artistic example depicting the approach of night.
A certain Russian literary critic has wittily called pleonasm «stylistic elephantiasis,» a disease in which the expression of the idea swells up and loses its force. Pleonasm may also be called «the art of wordy silence.»
Both pleonasm and tautology may be acceptable in oratory inasmuch as they help the audience to grasp the meaning of the utterance. In this case, however, the repetition of ideas is not considered a fault although it may have no aesthetic function.
Enumeration is a stylistic device by which separate things, objects, phenomena, properties, actions are named one by one so that they produce a chain, the links of which, being syntactically in the same position (homogeneous parts of speech), are forced to display some kind of semantic homogeneity, remote though it may seem.
Most of our notions are associated with other notions due to some kind of relation between them: dependence, cause and result, likeness, dissimilarity, sequence, experience (personal and/or social), proximity, etc.
In fact, it is the associations plus social experience that have resulted in the formation of what is known as «semantic fields.» Enumeration, as an SD, may be conventionally called a sporadic semantic field, inasmuch as many cases of enumeration have no continuous existence in their manifestation as semantic fields do. The grouping of sometimes absolutely heterogeneous notions occurs only in isolated instances to meet some peculiar purport of the writer.
«There Harold gazes on a work divine,
A blending of all beauties; streams and dells,
Fruit, foliage, crag, wood, cornfield, mountain, vine
And chiefless castles breathing stern farewells
From grey but leafy walls, where Ruin greenly dwells.» (Byron)
Enumeration is frequently used as a device to depict scenery through a tourist’s eyes, as in Galsworthy’s «To Let»:
«Fleur’s wisdom in refusing to write to him was profound, for he reached each new place entirely without hope or fever, and could concentrate immediate attention on the donkeys and tumbling bells, the priests, patios, beggars, children, crowing cocks, sombreros, cactus-hedges, old high white villages, goats, olive-trees, greening plains, singing birds in tiny cages, watersellers, sunsets, melons, mules, great churches, pictures, and swimming grey-brown mountains of a fascinating land.»
The enumeration here is worth analysing. The various elements of this enumeration can be approximately grouped in semantic fields:
1) donkeys, mules, crowing cocks, goats, singing birds;
2) priests, beggars, children, watersellers;
3) villages, patios, cactus-hedges, churches, tumbling bells, sombreros, pictures;
4) sunsets, swimming grey-brown mountains, greening plains, olive-trees, melons.
Galsworthy found it necessary to arrange them not according to logical semantic centres, but in some other order; in one which, apparently, would suggest the rapidly changing impressions of a tourist,. Enumeration of this kind assumes a stylistic function and may therefore be regarded as a stylistic device, inasmuch as the objects in the enumeration are not distributed in logical order and therefore become striking.
This heterogeneous enumeration gives one an insight into the mind of the observer, into his love of the exotic, into the great variety of miscellaneous objects which caught his eye, it gives an idea of the progress of his travels and the most striking features of the land of Spain as seen by one who is in love with the country. The parts of the enumeration may be likened to the strokes of a painter’s brush who by an inimitable choice of colours presents to our eyes an unforgettable image of the life and scenery of Spain. The passage itself can be likened to a picture drawn for you while you wait.
Here is another example of heterogeneous enumeration:
Date: ; view:
Stylistics is a branch of linguistics which deals with expressive resources and functional styles of the language.
Stylistics is connected with other branches of linguistics: phonetics, lexicology and syntax. In connection with phonetics stylistics studies expressive sound combinations, rhythmics and international patterns. In connection with lexicology stylistics studies connotatively marked and expressive words and layers of the voc. In connection with syntax stylistics concentrates on particular structural units which makes speech expressive and colourful. Stylistic semasiology studies stylistic devices, or tropes (alsofigures of speech).
Stylistics is subdivided into literary stylistics and linguo- stylistics. Literary stylistics studies a combination of expressive means typical for a piece of prose or poetry, or the whole literary epoch.
Linguo-stylistics compares the national norm & language system with particular subsystem of language typical for different spheres of communication which are called functional styles.
Under the norm we mean a set of language rules which are considered the most correct in certain epoch in the society, so-called neutral literary standard.
Correlation analysis: selection of fragments of 100 words / word combinations by method of random numbers (випадкових чисел), then it is calculated the representation in them particular characteristics, e.g., clases of words. The calculation is made on the basis of qualitative-quantitative characteistic of lexis.
Functional styles are classified into two general groups: bookish and colloquial. The group of bookish styles embraces academic / scientific, official / business, mass media and literary. The colloquial style is subdivided into literary, informal and substandard colloquial styles. Both bookish and colloquial styles exist in written and oral forms. The only known written form of the colloquial style is personal letters.
The academic style, or the style of the scientic prose, serves as an instrument for promoting scientific ideas and exchanging scientific info among people. Its main function is to transmit the intellectual knowledge and to inform about results of research and their explanation. The stylistic factors is the necessity in clarity and logical consequence of presentation of the complex material and traditional norms. To academic genres belong: papers, monographs, theses, conference abstracts, scientific reviews, scientific reports (wr.); lectures, disputes, scientific conferencies, ritualized procedures like defending a thesis (or.).
The graphical peculiarities of this style is number- or letter- indexed paragraphs, a developed system of headlines, titles and subtitles, footnotes, tables, schemes and formulae.
A great part of the vocabulary is constituted by special terms of international origin. Most of such words are borrowed from Greek & Latin and are not translated into English, e.g.: a priori, a posteriori, ab ovo, erratum, per capita, per diem, pe se, post factum, sic. Here belong Latin abbreviations widely used in academic writing: cf, e.g., et al.,etc„ ib., i.e., loc. cit., N.B., P.S., viz., v.v. So-called scientific words (загалънонаукова лексика) is of French & Latin origin is also used in scientific writing in all branches of science: to account for, to assume, to deduce, to estimate, to focus on, to identify, to infer, to investigate, to occur, to refer to, etc. Words are used in their direct or terminological meanings. Many bookish words are used: susceptible, approximate, heterogeneous, phenomenon, simultaneously, the former, the latter. Set- phrases and cliches are widely used: to sum up, as we have seen, so far we have considering, note that, another poit of consideration is, it is worth emphasize that etc. Metaphoric terms in English are also observed. They can be represented by a metaphoric word in language metaphors: coal basin (вугільний басейн), captan’s bridge; or in speech metaphors: alligator skin (дефект поверхні), snow (TV) — сніг (на екрані).
Morphological feature of this style is the use of the personal pronoun we in the meaning of I. It is explained by two reasons: 1 * — that the science is created by a community of scientists, the 2nd — we is used to invite the reader to the process of reasoning and argumentation.
— addition: furthermore, moreover
— cause & effect: became of, due to,
— comparison: likewise, similarly, accordingly
— concession: nevertheles. even though, in spite of, despite of
— conclusion: therefore, thus,
— contrust: on the other hand, otherwise, conversely
— enumeration: firstly, secondly, lastly
— illustration: for example, for instance
— intensification: as a matter of fact, in fact
— reformulation: in other words,
— relation: regarding, concerning, as to
— summation: overall, finally, hence, in brief, on the whole
— time: meanwhile, at the same time, while
The most peculiar features of this style are: preciseness, clearness / unambiguity, logical correctness, accurateness, argumentation, laconism, unemotiveness. Genres: decrees, laws, government acts, edicts, bills, enactments, international treaties, notes (dipl.), memoranda (dipl.), statutes, regulations, minutes, official letters (wr.); public speeches, negotiations, meetings, presentations (or.).
The general tone of official and business documents is neutral, the layout is tactful and polite. The documents are standardized, having headings and clear composition (date, addressee’s name, introduction, the body / main part closing, parting, signature, seal).
The morphological level:
— usage of composite conjunctions and prepositions: on the ground that, for the reason that, notwithstanding that, in spite of the fact that;
• impersonal and indefinite pronouns,
— adverbial nouns,
— non-finite forms of the verb.
— nominative constructions, infinitive,
— participle and gerundial complexes,
— obsolescent mood forms (Subjunctive I & Suppositional).
The syntactic level:
— direct word order;
— passive voice;
— long and super-long composite polypredicative sentences of all structural types, always two-member, complicated by secondary predication and parenthetic insertions. Sometimes an official document includes only one very long composite sentence with subordination, coordination, and detachments.
Public speeches abound in stylistic devices of repetition (direct, anaphoric, cataphoric, epiphoric, framing, linking), polysyndeton and parallelism which are aimed at making the speech pursuasive.
Mass media style (also newspaper, publicist, oratory). The function is to inform the public about events and occurences that may be of interest, to persuade and to influence the people’s consciousness. Genres: news reviews, information and feature articles, editorials, essays, news, ads (wr.); news, interviews, debates, press conferences, open studios, radio- TV commentaries, talk shows (or.).
Graphical perculiarities: different fonts, italics, bald-types; particular layout of the page; distribution of one and the same article on differents pages; a system of headlines. For headlines is typical: omittance of predicates, prepositions and articles: Italy’s radio. TV workers on strike-, rhymed and rhythmic lines: Back to work — to kill the bill, pun (play on words): Ugly noises from Los Angeles mayor’s nest (instead of mare’s nest — нісенітниця); citation frequently without inverted commas.
The structure of the article: the title, subtitles; the 1″ paragraph gives the gist of the article; the rest of the text reveals the details.
Vocabulary: neutral common literary words; political, social and economic terms: apartheid, summit, tactical nuclear missile, European currencey; great pecentage of proper names: antroponyms, toponyms, names of institutions and organizations; a lot of numerals — dates, words belonging to lexical grammatical field of plurality; abandance of words-internationalisms and neologisms which quickly turn into cliches: vital issue, free world, pillar society, bulwark of
liberty, escalation of war; abstract nouns: democracy, freedom, peace, independence; words with evaluative and expressive meaning: O.K., key (essential), ordeal, to ax (to cut), boost; pretentious lexis: epoch-making, triumphant, unforgattable; archaic military words: banner, champion, clarion, shield; abbreviations and shortenings: EN, WTO, UN, NATO; set-phrases instead of simple verbs: to haw an effect, to play a leading role, to exercise influence; cliches: the Trojan horse, to do the trick, just what the doctor ordered, to run along smoothly; political metaphors: backbencher — «government M.P. who are not members of the cabinet», bagman — «fund-raiser for political party», ban-wagon effect — «desire to be with the winner of elections».
Syntax: diversity of all structural types of sentences; passive forms: greatly to be desired; attributive noun groups: War Minister, oil men’s strike; participle, infinitive and gerund constructions.
Colloquial style: literary, informal, substandard.
Literary colloquial: neutral, bookish, and literary words; reduction of grammatical forms; sentences are short and elliptical; asyndetic composite sentences.
Informal colloquial: words with connatative meanings: jolly, rotten, foul, swell, smash; words with wide meaning: thing, business, stuff, get, fix (Am.), nice; phrasal verbs: to give up, to take out, to put down; dialectal words: ghost, E — bogle, Scot.; regional varieties of specch: subway, Am. — tube, Br.; pleonastic expressions: dead & gone, good & well, lord & master, far & away; time fillers / parasitic words: well, I mean, you see, you know; interjections: wow dear me oh my; contractions: don’t, can’t, I’ve got; abbreviations: doc, vegs, frige; ellipsis: Morning! Evening!; disjunctive questions: Nice weather, isn’t it?; baby-talk, diminutive suffixes: mummy, daddy, dearie, lovey.
Substandard (special coll.): vulgarisms: hell, damn, lousy, shit; slangy words: cabbage (money), frog-eater (a French man); contaminated speech patterns: more better; pleonastic forms: Let’s us have us a drink; reduced forms: feller (fellow), dunno (don’t know); constructions with how, what, why + ever: What ever are you doing?; simplified substitute ain 7 for am! is I are not, was / were not, have / has / had not, will not.
Lexico-stylistic devices are subdivided into figures of quality and figures of relations.
Figures of quality are: metaphoric group, metonymic group, and mixed group, or figures of combination.
Metaphoric group are tropes based on similarity (уподібнення). They are: simile, metaphor, epithet, personification.
Simile (from Lat. similis — «similar») is a comparison of two objects according to their common feature to make one of them more picturesque. The words are connected by conj. as and like: as pure as snow, a raindrop like a crystal, fear like an abyss, it leaps like living flame. Logical comparison does not become a simile, e.g.: She hated it as I did. Many similes became cliches: as fresh as a rose, as fat as a pig, as proud as a peacock, to drink like a fish, to blush like a peony. Traditional character of many clicftes transforms them into phraseological units whose motivation is not clear: as dead as a doornail, as thick as thieves. There are other structures of similes: art not so unkind as man’s ingratitude (in negative fonn); redder than a red rose (by comparative degree of an Adj.); With the quickness o f a long cat, she climbed up into the nest. (attributive construction);
Metaphor (from Gr. «transference») is a transference of the name of one object to another: the machine sitting at a desk (about a man). Metaphor is a substitution of the direct name of the objects by the word in figurative meaning, it is a kind of identification (ототожнення): He is a mule. M. is more expressive & emotional than a simile. Many M became cliches: seeds of evil, a flight of imagination, to bum with desire’, some of them enriched the vocabulary and phraseology of the English language: the apple of one’s eye, the arm of the chair, the leg of the table, so transforming them into denotative devices.
Classification of metaphors
According to the pragmatic effect:
a) trite, or dead, metaphors are fixed in dictionaries and sound hackneyed: to prick up one’s ears, flood of tears;
b) genuine, or original, metaphors are created in speech as a result of imagination. They sound fresh and unexpected, e.g.: Some books are to be tasted, others swallowed, and some few to be chewed and digested.
According to the degree of stylistic potential:
a) nominative metaphors do not render any stylistic information. They name new objects or phenomena of the reality. They are technical devices of nomination, when a new object is denoted by means of already existing words, e.g.: an arm of the chair, a leg of the table, a foot of the hill, a nose of the teapot;
b) cognitive metaphor is formed when an object obtains a quality typical to another object, e.g.: the day died; the idea came; the road leads; the sun rises /sets down; time flies’,
c) imaginitive metaphor is occasional and individual. It is bright, picturesque, image-bearing, and poetic, e.g.: her eyes were deep pools of water, time was bleeding away;
According to the structure (complexity of image creating):
a) simple / elementary metaphor consists of a single word / word- combination expressing indiscrete notion, e.g.: The leaves were falling sorrowfully,
b) sustained metaphor appears in the case when a metaphoric word stimulates metaphoric potential of other words in a sentence or paragraph, e.g.: The average New Yorker is caught in a Machine. He whirls along, he is dizzy, he is helpless.
Epithet (from Gr. «appendix») is a word or word-combination having expressive characteristics of an object It is usually a dependant part of an attributive or adverbial word-combination: a silvery laugh.
— metaphoric (N + N+of): the ghost ofa smile’, a doll of a baby,
— phrasal prepositional (by prep, attribute / sentence): wind-in-the- orchard style.
Personoftcation is imparting characteristics, thoughts and actions of a human being to inanimate objects or animals: Lie is a strange creature. English has no gender, so personification can be expressed by personal pronouns and capital letters, e.g.: The Night, like loving mother, lays her hand on my fevered head.
Metonymic group are tropes based on the principle of contiguity (суміжність) of two objects. Such transference of the name is observed in many cases, e.g., china — «фарфор» < China («Китай»); iron — «праска» < iron («залізо»). Here belong metonymy and synechdoche.
Metonymy (from Gr. metonymia — «re-naming») is a transference of the name of one object to another object. The relations between the objects may be quite different. The most typical are:
a) the name of symbol instead of a notion, e.g.: crown, throne instead of king’s power,
b) the name of instrument instead of an action, e.g.: ear instead of to hear; voice instead of to speak; heart instead of to love;
c) conscequence instead of the cause, e.g.: to take the death instead of «to take the hook»;
d) the name of a characteristic feature instead of its bearer, e.g.: a hand instead of a worker, the press instead of journalists, a pair of boots instead of a soldier;
e) abstract nouns denoting emotions instead of a subject, e.g.: my love instead of the beloved person.
Synecdoche (from Gr. «taken in a bundle») is a transference of the name of a part to the whole and vice versa.
a) part instead of the whole: under the same roof (house);
b) the whole instead of its constituent: The hall applauded, (the
c) sg. instead of pi-
Mixed group are tropes based both on metonymic and metaphoric transference. Here belong allegory and antonomasia.
Allegory (from Gr. allegoria — «інакомовлення») is a kind of representation of abstract notion by means of a concrete image. The simplest examples are proverbs: All is not sold that glitters (metaphoric allegory, i.e. likening of abstract notions to concrete objects and phenomena).
Antonomasia (Gr. «renaming») is the usage of a proper name as a common noun: He is the Napoleon of crime (metaphoric antonomasia; Napoleon in the meaning of a strategic genius).
He sold two Van Dykes (metonymic antonomasia — the name of the artist is used for his works).
Figures of relations comprise: identifying relations, contrast relations, and non-equal relations.
Identifying relations (відношення тотожності). Here belong euphemism and periphrasis.
Euphemism (Gr. «speaking politely») are «decent» synonymic substitutes of impolite words. Euphemisms may have different causes:
a) superstition: deuce — devil;
b) social and moral taboos: Lord- God, bear — 0;
c) reasons of politeness and decency: intoxicated — drunk, unwise — stupid.
^ Euphemism has its antipode called disphemism, i.e., rough, rude, impolite words and word-combinations: to die = to kick the bucket.
Periphrasis («speak about») is a description of the subject of speech instead of its name (usually consists of a word-combination and has a poetic or humorous colouring).
a) logical: weapons = means of destruction-,
b) figurative: to marry = to tie the knot; money = the root of
Besides bearing the stylistic colouring, periphrasis performs a cognitive function, i.e., it deepens our knowledge about the reality.
Contrast relations (відношення протилежності). Here belong antithesis, oxymoron, zeugma, pun, and irony.
Antithesis (from Gr. «contrast») is a comparison of 2 different notions. There are two variants of antithesis:
— two different words with opposite meanings denoting one and the same object, e.g.: It was the best of times, it was the worst of times’,
— two different words with opposite meanings denoting two different but logically connected objects: His fees were high; his lessons were light.
Oxymoron (from Gr. «witty-foolish») is used in the case when an object obtains characteristics contrary to its nature, e.g.: hot snow, pleasantly ugly, horrible beauty, Her beauty is horrible.
Zeugma consists of at least 3 constituents. The basic word stands in the same grammatical but different semantic relations to a couple of adjacent words, e.g.: He got out of bed and low spirits.
Thus, the basic word get forms with the 1я adjacent word a free word-combination, with the 2nd adjacent word — a phraseological unit.
Pun (play on words) does not need a basic component. It is formed on different understanding of the same word by two speakers, e.g.: — Is your mother engaged? — Engaged? She’s married!
Irony (from Gr. «hidden mockery») originates when a word acquires the meaning opposite to its primary meaning. Ironical good means had, pleased — displeased. It is often accompanied by intonation, mimics, jestures in speech; inverted commas and cursive — in writing; also observed in ironic set phrases e.g.: head cook & bottle-washer.
Non-equal relations based on objective-speech inequality reflect the degree of intensity, quality or action that violates the real state of things.
Hyperbole (from Gr. «exaggeration») — a word or word- combination exaggerating the degree of quality or intensity. It can be expressed by all notional parts of speech, e.g.: a thousand pardons, scared to death, He knows everybody.
Meiosis opposite to hyperbole, a deliberate diminution of the degree of quality or intensity. It underlines insignificance of such qualities of the objects as their size, volume, shape, distance, time, e.g.: a drop of water, in a second.
Litotes (from Gr. «simplisity»), E. understatement — a kind of meiosis but with negative participle «not» and a word with negative prefix or meaning. It creates a positive effect, e.g.: not a bad, not unkind. It makes statements and judgements delicate and diplomatic.
Climax (from Gr. — «ladder»), E. gradation is an arrangement of an utterance so that each subsequent component increases significance or emotional tension of the narration, e.g.: I am sorry. I am so sorry. I am extremlv sorry.
Anticlimax (from Gr. «розрядка») is an arrangement of an utterance so that each subsequent component decreases significance or emotional tension of the narration, e.g.: Early to rise and early to bed makes a male healthy and welthy and dead (J. Thurber)
Repetition is the simple repeating of a word, within a short space of words (including in a poem), with no particular placement of the words to secure emphasis. It is a multilinguistic written or spoken device, frequently used in English and several other languages, such as Hindi and Chinese, and so rarely termed a figure of speech.
Today, as never before, the fates of men are so intimately linked to one another that a disaster for one is a disaster for everybody.
— A verse from The Little Virtues, 1962 by Natalia Ginzburg, with repetition of disaster
«I know what I like, and I like what I know.»
«The children gathered in a round circle.»
«We must all hang together, or assuredly we shall all hang separately.» (Benjamin Franklin)
«Words, words, words.» (Hamlet)
«For your gods are not gods but man-made idols.» (The Passion of Saints Sergius and Bacchus)
«The king is dead, long live the king!»
The life that I have
Is all that I have
And the life that I have
Is yours.
The love that I have
Of the life that I have
Is yours and yours and yours.
A sleep I shall have
A rest I shall have
Yet death will be but a pause.
For the peace of my years
In the long green grass
Will be yours and yours and yours.
«Diamond me no diamonds, prize me no prizes» (Alfred, Lord Tennyson, Lancelot and Elaine)
- Nordquist, Richard. «Epizeuxis». Lincoln Financial Group. Retrieved 2008.
- «Term: Anadiplosis». usingenglish.com. White Smoke. Retrieved 2008.
- «BBC History: Fight on the beaches». bbc.co.uk. Retrieved 2017.
