1

Lecture 3.
STYLISTIC SEMASIOLOGY OF THE ENGLISH LANGUAGE.
Expressive Means of Semasiology
Working definitions of principal concepts.

Semasiology is a branch of linguistics which studies semantics, or meaning of linguistic

units, belonging to different language levels (morphemes, words, word-combinations,
sentences, utterances, texts).
Lexical Semasiology Stylistic Semasiology
analyses the meaning of words and word- is concerned only with those semantic
combinations, relations between these relations and changes which are used as
meanings and the changes which these EM and SD, that is, we shall deal with
meanings undergo. stylistic semantics.
The subject of stylistic Semasiology is not the basic meaning of a linguistic unit as such
but its additional meaning which appears in two cases:
1) in case of unusual denotative reference of words, word-combinations,
utterances;
2) in case of unusual combination of the meanings expressed by these units.
In stylistic Semasiology we also distinguish EM and SD.
EM are figures of substitution, that is different means of secondary nomination. The
development of human experience leads to creating new notions which are fixed in the
language and in the vocabulary. However, if every new notion was given a new name (new
word) the vocabulary would have been too big, beyond human memory. The tendency of
economy of language means and analytical activity of people leads to the usage of secondary
nomination, the usage of the existing words and word-combinations to denotate new notions
or to give a new name to the already known objects.
Secondary nomination is not arbitrary, it is carried out according to certain principles or
rules. Most often used transfer of the name occurs:
1) on the basis of similarity or likeness of two objects (real or imaginary)
which may be rather subjective and based on individual perception of
different objects: flower – girl; rabbit – трус; rat – шпион; шляпа –
растяпа, etc.
2) on the basis of contiguity or some logical relations that are usually objective:
chicken (food), шляпа – человек в шляпе; the hall – people inside.
Thus, figures of substitution are units of secondary nomination which exist in the

language or are formed on the basis of regular patterns. Secondary nomination units enter

into paradigmatic (synonymic) relations or rather homofunctional relations (performing one

and the same function) with primary nomination units.

 2
Secondary nomination units are stylistically marked because they have additional

stylistic colouring. In this aspect the stylistic and semantic opposition may be between units

of different levels:

1) between two words: man – bear;

2) between a word and a word-combination: to die – to sleep in the grave; to

find out – to bring into the open;

3) between a word-combination and an utterance (sentence): a skeptical man –

I’m from Missouri: You’ve got to show me;

4) between a sentence and a sentence: everyone can make a mistake – Homer

sometimes nods.

SDs of Semasiology are Figures of combination – stylistically relevant means of

combination of the units belonging to the same or different language levels, including EM.

Figures of substitution may be presented in the table:

Figures of Substitution

Figures of quantity Figures of qualification

Hyperbole Meiosis Metonymy Metaphor Irony

Litotes Synecdoche Antonomasia
Periphrasis Personification
Euphemism Allegory

1. Figures of Quantity.

Here we refer figures based on comparison of two different objects (or phenomena)
having one common quantitative feature. This common feature characterizes one object in a
greater degree – it is the case of hyperbole, and in the least degree – it is the case of meiosis
and its structural variety – litotes.
 3
Hyperbole – deliberate overstatement or exaggeration, the aim of which is to intensify
one of the features of the object (in question). An overstatement is to be considered
hyperbole only in case when the exaggeration is deliberate and both the speaker and the
listener are aware of it. Hyperbole is mainly used to intensify physical qualities of objects (or
people): size, colour, quantity, etc.
E.g. The girls were dressed to kill.
The use of hyperbole shows the overflow of emotions.
E.g. I loved Ophelia; forty thousands brothers
Could not, with all their quantity of love
Make up my sum. (W. Shakespeare. Hamlet).
Hyperbole is often used in oral speech to intensify the statement. Hyperbole as any

other EM through frequent repetition may become trite: E.g. for ages, I beg thousand

pardons, etc.

More examples: Mary was scared to death.

Sam would give the world to see Dave again.

Pete knows everybody in the town.

It was so noisy inside that you couldn’t hear yourself think.

Meiosis – is a figure opposite to hyperbole. It is a deliberate underestimating of the

features of the object (in question) with the aim of intensifying the expressiveness of speech.
The features are usually size, volume, distance, time, etc. Meiosis emphasizes insignificance
of the object in question. E.g. Emma’s father died and left his family without a penny.
Meiosis is mainly used in oral speech to give it more expressiveness: a pretty penny,
E.g. It cost me a pretty penny; in Russian: влететь в копеечку, в мгновение ока, etc.
More examples: It was a cat-size pony.
August can do the job in a second.
Cary and Jane’s house is one minute from here.
Litotes differs from meiosis not only by its content, but by its structure as well. Litotes
presents a statement in a form of a negation. From the point of view of its structure it can as
well as rhetorical question, be considered a kind of transposition of the syntactic
construction.
Litotes has a specific semantic and syntactic structure (the usage of the particle “not”
before a word with a negative prefix): not unkind, not impossible. E.g. Julia was not
dissatisfied with herself. (Maugham).
More examples: Martin is not without sense of humour.
The decision was not unreasonable.
John’s behaviour was not disrespectful.
This EM is used in oral speech to weaken the positive characteristics of a thing or
phenomenon; to convey doubts of the speaker concerning the exact characteristics of the
object.
 4
In scientific prose style litotes underlines carefulness of judgment or uncertainty.

2. Figures of Qualification.

To this group we refer figures based on comparison of features and qualities of two
different objects having a common feature. The basic figures of this group are metaphor,
metonymy and irony. These notions are the most ancient in linguistics. They are described in
the works of ancient grammarians. Metaphor and metonymy are universal means of
reinterpretation and transfer of a name from one denotate to another, but in metaphor this
transfer is realized on the basis of likeness (real or imaginary) of two objects (He is a brick,
a log, a bear) and in case of metonymy on the basis of contiguity of the two objects [I like
Goya (pictures); The cars were full of moustaches, i.e. men with moustaches].
Latest linguistic papers dealing with metaphor state that metaphoric and metonymic
transfer is much determined by purely linguistic factors – syntactical and lexical.
Metonymy is more often found in subject and object groups, while metaphor – in the
predicate group (The hat is still here; But she is a monkey, flower). When metaphor is used
as a subject it takes certain actualizers, usually demonstrative pronouns (He is a bear; but that
bear broke the glass).
Irony is also a transfer of the meaning but if metaphor is based on similarity, metonymy
– on contiguity, irony is based on opposition of the two meanings of a speech unit.
To metonymic group we refer metonymy, synecdoche, periphrasis and euphemism.
Metonymy as secondary nomination unit is based on the real association of object
named with the object whose name is transferred to the former. The simplest kind of
metonymy is lexical metonymy when the name of one object (a proper name more often) is
transferred to another object (ohm, amper, hooligan, Mackintosh). But the mentioned cases
of metonymy have no stylistic value as they became common nouns. Stylistic metonymy
suggests the realization of some new unexpected association between the two objects. In
metonymy association between the object named and the object implied is various. We’ll
mention but a few most frequent types of metonymic relations:
1) The association between some features of a person himself. E.g. The other
voice shook his head and went away…
2) The association between the article of clothing and the person wearing it.
E.g. A hat passed by.
3) The association between the instrument and the action it performs. E.g. As
the sword is the worst argument that can be used, so should it be the last. (G.
Byron).
4) The association between two objects whose functions coincide. E.g. Henry
H. Fisher, with half the alphabet after his name, was something at the
Foreign office. (C. Chesterton).
Apart from this group of metonymies there are many other trite types of metonymies:
5) Association between the creator and his creation: Your father would go crazy
about Goya (J. Galsworthy); She is full of Schubert now. (Maugham).
6) Material and the thing made of it: dressed in silk; nylon, etc.
More examples: The hall applauded.
The school went to the Zoo.
The sword is the worst argument in a situation like that.
 5
Linda gave her heart to the grocer’s young man.
The messenger was followed by a pair of heavy boots.
Metonymy can be seen as a specific kind of symbolism by which the most essential
component of the subject is abstracted to represent it. This component acts as a single symbol
for something larger and usually more complex. For instance, a crown is the most essential
material component of the trapping of royalty, and so it serves well in representing the whole
system of monarchy.
Metonymy can be realized in naming the whole object by mentioning part of it
(Caroline lives with Jack under the same roof) and in using the same of the whole object to
denote a constituent part of this object (The hall applauded).
Similarly, the stage is a material component of acting as a profession. This too serves to
represent symbolically something abstract and dynamic.
In a statement such as “Shakespeare depicts monarchs as human” the name is actually
symbolizing the total collection of his works.
This pragmatic explanation could also apply to the example of “Whitehall announced
today …” Remember, “Whitehall” represents the civil service of the UK. Whitehall as a
material location stands for something abstract, in this case an institution. This symbolic use
depersonalizes the source of the statement and gives it more authority.
Synecdoche – is a variety of metonymy in which the transfer is on the basis of
association between a part and the whole, the singular and the plural. This type of metonymic
relationship may be considered quantitative one. E.g. Since I left you, mine eye is in my
mind. (W. Shakespeare). A well-known type of synecdoche is the usage of the words “ear”
and “eye” in the singular. E.g. For there can live no hatred in thine eye. (W. Shakespeare).
More examples: I wish you had Gary’s ears and Jack’s eyes.
Metonymy and synecdoche as stylistic means are used to achieve concreteness of

description. By mentioning only one feature or detail connected with the phenomenon, the

author draws the reader’s attention to it and makes him see the character he wants to present.

Periphrasis – is a stylistic figure which substitutes the word, designating the object, for
a word-combination which describes the most essential and characteristic features of the
given object. Periphrasis both names and describes. Every periphrasis indicates the feature of
a notion which the writer wants to stress and conveys a purely individual perception of a
given phenomenon.
As a result of frequent repetition periphrasis may become well established in the
language as a synonymous expression for the word generally used to signify the object. It is
called traditional, dictionary or language periphrasis: a gentleman of the long robe (lawyer);
my better half (wife); the man in the street (ordinary person).
More examples: cotton – white gold – біле золото;
women – the better sex - краща стать;
medical men – people in white gowns - люди у білих халатах;
oil – black gold - чорне золото;
Київ - місто каштанів.
 6
In contrast to periphrastic synonyms genuine periphrasis is created by the writer
disclosing some quality of the object and is an element of the individual style: an instrument
of destruction – pistol – gun (Ch. Dickens), Young blood of Cambridge.
Euphemism (Gr. eupheme – speaking well) – is a variety of periphrasis which is used to
replace an unpleasant word or expression by a conventionally more acceptable one.
The origin of euphemism is in the past, when the religious taboo dictated the avoidance
of certain terms. People were forbidden, for instance, to utter the name of a person who was
no longer living, and to give it to a child. Euphemisms were widely spread in England in the
XVI century and in the XVIII century. It was considered indecent to use the word “God”.
In present-day English euphemism is mostly based on some social and ethic standard of
behaviour. The usage of Es is based on the desire not to hurt other people’s feelings, to soften
painful news and only in the second place, on superstition.
Euphemisms may be divided into several groups according to their spheres of
application:
1) Religious: the word “God” was replaced by Goodness, Lord, Jove, Heaven,
etc. the word “Devil” was replaced by the deuce, the dickens, old Nick, old
Harry.
2) There is a large group of euphemisms connected with the notion of “death”:
to join the majority, to pass away; to go the way of all flesh; expire; breathe
one’s last; to go west. “Dead” – the deceased, the departed, the late.
3) Political euphemisms (moral euphemisms) are widely spread in the press –
statements, the aim of which is to mislead public opinion and to express
what is unpleasant in a more delicate manner. Sometimes disagreeable facts
are even distorted with the help of euphemistic expression: starvation –
undernourishment; poor people – less fortunate elements; crisis – economic
tunnel.
4) Moral euphemisms: брехати – говорити неправду, вигадувати,
видумувати, заговорюватися; красти – забирати лишки; брати те, що
погано лежить; старий – людина похилого віку; проститутки –
працівники сфери сексуального обслуговування; горілка – зелений змій,
грішна вода, скляний бог, веселуха.
5) Medical euphemism: lunatic asylim – mental hospital; cripple – invalid;
insane – person of unsound mind; психіатрична лікарня – будинок для
душевно хворих, жовтий дім; тяжко хворіти –дихати на ладан.
Function: Euphemisms make speech more polite, cultured, delicate, acceptable
in a certain situation.
Euphemisms have their antipodes which might be called disphemisms
Disphemisms conspicuously rough, rude and impolite words and word-
combinations. The speaker resorts to disphemisms to express his negative emotions, such as
irritation, spite, hate, scorn, mockery, animosity.Here are some of them:
To die – to kick the bucket;
A German soldier( W.W.II ) – krauthead;
A Negro – kinky-head
To treat someone badly – to give someone the finger;
Обличчя - морда, рило, пика, будка
Померти – одубіти, дуба врізати, здохнути.
 7
Грубіян - хамло.
More examples: Political euphemisms :
revolt, revolution – tension;
absence of wages and salaries – delay in payment;
Medical euphemisms: idiots – mentally abnormal people.
Euphemisms as well as periphrasis have no direct reference to the denotate or
phenomenon which is known to both the author and the reader. Euphemistic transfer of the
name is often based on metaphor or metonymy. In fiction euphemisms are used to give a
new, more positive characteristic to the denotate. It is a means of allegory.
In colloquial speech they are typical for the cultured, educated people: E.g. Who the
thunder put that thing here? (J.K. Jerome). How the deuce should I get him to take the
money? (J. Galsworthy).
Metaphor is a secondary nomination unit based on the likeness or similarity of some
feature(s) of the two objects. Metaphor is usually realized in the predicate-group, because it
aims at individualization and characterization of the object.
Some linguists distinguish two communicative functions of metaphors:
1) The function of identification or nomination (theme) – subject, object, etc.
and concrete words;
2) The function of predication (theme) – predicate.
N.D. Arutyunova distinguishes 4 types of metaphors, and the stylistic value of each type

is different:

1) Nominative Metaphor (the transfer proper) – one name is substituted by the

other. In this case identifying lexical units undergo metaphorization.
Nominative Metaphor gives a new name to a class of objects. Such
metaphors serve as a mere technical device of extracting a new name from
the old word-stock: E.g. the apple of the eye; the leg of the table; the arm of
the chair; the foot of the hill; носик чайника.
Such metaphor is a resource of nomination, it doesn’t differentiate the shades of

meaning. It appeals to the eyesight rather than to intuition, it does not hint, it points out. Its

stylistic effect is rather weak, practically none

2) Cognitive Metaphor is created as a result of the shift in the combinability of

qualifying lexical units when their meaning becomes more abstract. In this
case objects that are being described acquire the features of quite different
objects that is alien qualities. E.g. black night, water, heat, despair; deep
knowledge; острый взгляд, критика.
More examples: One more day has died.
A witty idea has come to me.
The sight took John’s attention.
My heart bleeds for you.
He weighted the words carefully.
The shore began to empty itself of people.
 8
She lost patience.
It may be based on comparison connected with simile: Time flies (as a bird).

3) Generalizing Metaphor is a type of metaphor which leads to logical

polysemy. In this case predicative lexical units undergo the process of
metaphorization and they are transformed into identifying units:
восторгаться – восторг. This metaphor is of artificial character and
indicates not the qualities of the object but the feelings it can evoke in the
customer. Its stylistic effect is rather weak.
4) Figurative or image-bearing metaphor. In this case identifying lexical units
are transferred into the predicate (group) and as a predicate refer to some
other objects or a class of objects. Metaphor is a secondary nomination unit
based on likeness or similarity of some features of the two objects. Here M.
is a means of individualization and evaluation, discrimination of the shades
of meaning. M. appeals to the intuition of the reader, giving him chance to
interpret it creatively. Stylistic effect of M. is rather great. E.g. They were all
fledglings… They were all flowers. (Durrel) His mates at the factory said
Christie was only elevenpence – ha’penny in the shilling and had been ever
since the war (S. Barstow).
More examples: He was the fate, the soul, the brain of the ship.
Life is a true wonderland.
Bart was the world for her.
Patricia’s eyes were pools of still water.
Women are funny things.
According to the structure metaphor may be:

1. Simple or elementary, which is based on the actualization of one or some

features which are common for the two objects.
2. But in fiction and mainly in poetry very often metaphor is not confined to
one feature. With the aim of developing the image the author actualizes
some other features which are linked with the main central image. Such
metaphors are called prolonged. E.g. He was surprised that the fire which
flashed from his eyes did not melt the glasses of his spectacles. In this
example the words “flashed” and “melted” are connected with the main
image expressed by the word “fire”.
According to the peculiarities of its semantics, metaphor may be trite (traditional,
language) and genuine (speech). Y.M. Skrebnev considers that there is not much difference
between the two since the mechanism of transfer is the same.
The stylistic function of metaphor is twofold: ● it makes the author’s thought more
concrete, definite and clear; ● it reveals the author’s emotional attitude towards the
phenomenon he describes. So its sphere of application is poetry and fiction. Its function is
not communicative but esthetic. It does not give information, it evokes one’s imagination.
Antonomasia (Gr. antonomasia - renaming) – is a peculiar variety of metaphoric transfer
of the name. There are two types of antonomasia.
1. the usage of a proper name for a common noun (Othello, Romeo, Hamlet, etc.)
2. the usage of common as proper nouns (Mr. Snake, Lady R. Sharp, etc.)
 9
In both cases the secondary nomination is based on a similarity (real or imaginary)

between the two objects.

A. of the first type is mainly used in colloquial speech as a stock phrase to characterize
a person (He is a real Romeo; don’t be a Don Quixote!). the stylistic effect is weak as A. in
this case is a trite metaphor (“The Theatre” – the producer finding the actress in tears asks:
“Now what’s all this “Tosca” stuff about?”).
As well as metaphor, A. of this type is realized in the structure of the predicate, as a
subject it requires the use of actualizer before the proper name: Othello is quarrelling with
his wife (direct meaning of the proper name). This Othello is again quarrelling with his wife
(Transferred meaning).
The second type of A. is typical for fiction only. In a literary work, where all
components form a certain system, the name of a character is stylistically important and it is
one of the components of this system. The names of this type are called “speaking names”.
“Speaking names” characterize directly or indirectly the personages of a literary work.
(Sheridan: Mr. Backbite, Miss Careless, Mr. Snowman, Lady Sharp, Miss Waterfall, etc.)
In the literature of critical realism “speaking names” are rare but proper names still
characterize personages this way or another (Ch. Bronte: Lucy Snow; Meredit: Sir Pattern).
In Ch. Dickens’ and Thackerey’s novels proper names imply the characteristic of
personages: Mr. Grandgrind, Murdstone, Lady Sharp, etc.
In modern literature, especially in humorous and satirical works “speaking names” are
also often used (Durrell’s stories).
The main stylistic function of A. is to characterize a person simultaneously with naming
him.
Personification (Latin “persona”, “facere” - делать) is also a variety of metaphor. It is a
transfer of features and characteristics of a person to a thing or to abstract notions (love,
virtue, lie). E.g. “O sleep, o gently sleep, Nature’s soft nurse how have I frightened thee” (W.
Shakespeare).
Peculiarity is in the fact that:
1. Personification is used only in fiction while metaphor can be found
practically in every style;
2. P. can be realized only within a definite context no matter how short.
Allegory – is also a variety of metaphor. It differs from ordinary M. as it is used mainly
in fiction and differs from personification as it is realized only in a text, no matter how short
it may be (proverbs). Bigger texts are fairy tales.
Allegory is the expression of an abstract idea through some concrete image, some
concrete object. The aim of allegory as a stylistic means is to stress the logical meaning of
speech by adding to it some emotive colouring. Proverbs are most natural examples of
allegory: Still waters run deep; all is not gold that glitters.
The domain of allegory is not a sentence but the whole text( a logically completed
narration of facts or events).
There are allegoric tales and fables, stories and novels. Completely allegoric are such
fables by I.Krylov as “Elephant and Mongrel”, “Donkey and Nightingale”, “Monkey and
Spectacles”. Allegoric fables are not about elephants, dogs and monkeys. They are about
people who behave like these animals.
 10
Some genres of literature are exclusively based on allegory – medieval fables, didactical
poems (Poema Morale), The Owl and Nightingale, fairy tales, Gulliver’s Travels.
Allegory though much transformed, still exists in modern literature. It’s no rare case
when the plot of a novel is presented in two different manners: realistic and allegorical, the
latter is an interpretation of the first one (Updike – The Centaur).
Irony (Gr. eironeia – concealed mockery). The question of the status of irony is one of
the most complicated. The difficulty lies in the fact that it can be realized in very big speech
units and, losing its purely linguistic character, it acquires a more general semiotic
significance.
The difference between metaphor and metonymy on the one hand, and irony on the
other can be described as follows. In case of metaphor and metonymy the transfer is realized
on the basis of similarity of the two objects, in case of irony – on the relations of opposition.
The relations of opposition here are not of the objective but of the subjective character.
Irony suggests evaluation which is always subjective. It is positive in its form and negative in
the meaning.
Irony in the narrow sense of the word is the use of a word having a positive meaning to
express a negative one. In the real situation, in the context the word acquires an opposite
meaning. In a wider sense of the word irony is such a presentation of an utterance when it
shows a positive or neutral attitude of the speaker to the phenomenon (in question) but in fact
expresses a negative evaluation of it. Let’s consider such an example: E.g. They plonked you
out there in the mind… and your job was to get killed if the enemy attacked. You were not
allowed to retreat; you knew that nobody would be allowed to succour or reinforce you:… A
very pleasant prospect. A most jolly look out (R. Aldington. “Death of a Hero”).
The author describes a desperate situation for the character. The last two sentences
present the evaluation of this situation. The irony here lies in the striking disparity between
what is said and what is meant. In contrast to metaphor and metonymy, irony has no definite
syntactic structure neither any specific meaning of the lexical units. Irony is felt only if there
are some formal markers in the context pointing out the opposite meaning of the utterance.
In oral speech the word containing irony is strongly marked by intonation. Other
paralinguistic means are also used.
In written speech such markers are not easily defined.
EM of irony in the language are units which exist in the language (words and word-
combinations and some utterances) and due to regular usage acquired connotative ironic
meaning which is felt even out of context. (Russian: умник, вальяжный), (Eng.: orate,
oratorize, speechmaker, mutual admiration society).
The above words and word-combinations possess the seme of irony. They are marked
members of the opposition with neutral words and word-combinations.
e.g. too clever by half; a young hopeful; head cook and bottle washer; to lionize.
More often ironic meaning of the word or word-combination appears due to syntagmatic
relations between the meanings of different speech units in the macrocontext (a fragment of
the text) and megacontext (the whole text).
e.g. - I like the Duchess very much but I don’t love her.
- And the Duchess loves you very much but she likes you less, so you are excellently
matched.(O.Wilde)
e.g. It’s rather fashionable to marry Amaricans just now, Uncle George.(O.Walde)
 11
The ironic meaning appears when some lexical units having positive evaluation in a
certain context acquire a negative meaning: E.g. This naturally led to some pleasant chat
about … fevers, chills, lung diseases… and bronchitis (Jerome).
Ironic meaning of speech unit can be determined by the whole text (“An Ideal
Husband”, “A Devoted Friend”, etc.).
More examples: Cutting off chickens’ heads! Such a fascinating process to watch.
It must be delightful to find oneself in a foreign country without a
penny in one’s pocket.

Lecture 4

Stylistic Devices of Semasiology

 12
Phonetic Means of Stylistics

Figures of combination are stylistic devices based on combining in syntagmatic

sequence meanings of the language units of one level within the limits of the unit of another,

higher level. So, the realization of figures of combination is possible only in a certain

context.

There are three types of relations of the meanings of lexical units:

1. Relations of similar meanings of lexical units. In this case the speaker combines
in the utterance or text some units which he considers equal, so figures of identity
are formed.
2. Relations of opposite meanings of lexical units. In this case the speaker combines
in the utterance or text two semantically contrasting units, and as a result figures
of opposition are formed.
3. Relations of different meanings of lexical units. The speaker combines in the
utterance or text lexical units denoting different, not identical notions, and as a
result figures of inequality are formed.

Figures of Combination

Figures of Identity Figures of Opposition Figures of Inequality

Simile Antithesis Climax
Synonyms-substitutes Oxymoron Anticlimax
Synonyms-specifiers Paradox Pun
Zeugma

Figures of Identity

Relations of identity are realized in the context on the basis of similar, or synonymous

units referring to the same object, phenomenon or action. So semantically equal units are

used to denote the same referent in the given context. Here we refer simile, substituting and

specifying synonyms.

Simile (Lat. similis – similar) – is partial identification of two objects belonging to

different spheres. The compared objects are not identical, they only have some resemblance,
 13
some common features. The emphasizing of their partial identity gives new characteristics to
the object.
More examples: The sand on the seaside of the dunes glittered like fine white sugar in
the sun. (Bates H.)
Simile is a structure consisting of two components: the subject and the object of
comparison; and they may be united by formal elements of comparison, such as: like, as
though, as if, such as, as…as, and others.
If the formal element of comparison is absent but the relations between the two objects

are those of similarity and identity, we have implied simile. In such similies notional words

(verbs, nouns, etc.) express semantic relations between the elements of the utterance: to

resemble, to remind, to seem, resemblance, etc. E.g. He reminded Julia of an old dog lying in

the sun and gently beating his tail. (S. Maugham. Theatre).

We should distinguish simile (which is the subject of stylistics) and logical comparison.
The latter deals with the notions belonging to the same sphere stating the degree of their
similarity and difference. In case of comparison all qualities of the two objects are taken into
consideration, but only one is compared. E.g. He was a big man, as big as Simon, with sandy
hair and blue eyes. (D. Garnett. Letting Down the Side).
Simile usually excludes all other qualities of the two objects but one which is common
for both of them. E.g. I could see the roof as pink as a slice of salt ham. (V. Pritchett. The
Sailor).
Many similies became set-phrases or even proverbs: E.g. drunk as a lord, fit as a fiddle,
as old as hills, as cool as a cucumber, etc.
Many are found in proverbs: as like as two peas, as old as the hills.

The structure of simile diverse. Image-bearing similies are created by the authors who
quite unexpectedly bring into contact entirely different objects. E.g. A big wardrobe stood
open and the two white suits hung there like the last teeth in an old mouth. (G. Greene. The
Quiet American).
Simile may be based on metaphors and metonymy which in their turn imply

comparison. E.g. I cried in the voice of a lion (Durrell)

Both metaphor and simile are based on comparison. Metaphor is often called a
compressed simile which differs from simile structurally. However the difference between
the two is not only structural but semantic as well. Simile and metaphor are different in their
linguistic nature:
1. Metaphor aims at identifying the objects (She is a flower). Simile aims at finding

some point of resemblance by keeping the objects apart (She is as innocent as a flower).
 14
2. Metaphor only implies the feature which serves the basis for comparison; simile

indicates this feature, so it is semantically more definite.

More examples: The thought of her was like champagne itself.

His letter came like a thunderbolt.
He was as vain as a peacock.
He was looking like a million dollars.
Synonyms-substitutes – are words used to denote the mentioned object, phenomenon or
action and supplementing the given object in some new aspect. Besides lexical synonyms,
pronouns and periphrases are widely used to avoid monotonous repetitions. E.g. There on the
table lay a number of parcels. They were presents from his patients. Some of the gifts were
not wrapped at all. (A. Cronin. The Citadel).
Substituting synonyms are characterized by contextual similarity. This is why some
synonyms can be treated as such only in the given context, in the given situation.
Synonyms-specifiers. This stylistic device consists in using two or more synonyms
usually following one another to express one and the same or similar meaning. The
synonyms are used together for a better and more detailed description of a thing or a object,
the second synonym adds some new information to the first.
There are two ways of using specifying synonyms: 1) paired synonyms and 2)
synonymic variations. In the second case synonyms are used in succession. The speaker
chooses such linguistic means which seem to him more expressive for achieving a certain
pragmatic effect. E.g. It was Bart’s love and affection that compensated for everything else.
(D. Cusack. Say No to Death).
The synonyms specify the utterance, adding some more information. Though the given
synonyms are very close in their meaning still they are different in stylistic colouring.
Synonymic variation specifies the utterance intensifying the emotional value. Synonyms are
widely used in fiction and publicistic style. In scientific-prose style and official style their
usage is limited.

Figures of Opposition.

This group of stylistic devices is characterized by combining two or more words or

word-combinations with opposite meanings in one context. Their relations are either
objectively opposite or interpreted by the speakers as such. Here we refer antithesis and
oxymoron.
Antithesis (Gr. opposition) – is a stylistic device presenting two contrasting ideas in
close neighbourhood in order to stress this contrast.
There are several variants of antithesis based on different relations of the ideas
expressed:
1. Opposition of features possessed by the same referent . E.g. I had walked into that
reading-room a happy, healthy man. And I crawled out a decrepit wrack. (J.K.
Jerome).
2. Opposition of two or more different referents having contrasting characteristics .
E.g. Indeed, there is but this difference between us – that he wears fine clothes
while I go in rags… (O. Wilde. The Picture of Dorian Gray).
 15
3. Opposition of referents (having not only contrasting features) embracing a wider
range of features. E.g. New England had a native literature, while Virginia had
none; New England had numerous industries while Virginia was all agricultural.
(Th. Dreiser. Tragic America).
Syntactic constructions in which antithesis is realized are diverse: from simple

extended sentences to a combination of sentences, a paragraph. More often however it is

found in compound or complex sentences with the conjunction “but”. Antithesis is based as a

rule on parallel constructions whose components are expressed by the same members of the

sentence: E.g. Jack: When one is in town one amuses oneself. When one is in the country one

amuses other people. (O. Wilde. The Importance of Being Earnest).

Antithesis often goes along with other stylistic means: anaphora, parallelism, chiasmus

and epiphora. Antithesis is widely used in all kinds of speech: fiction, publicistic, scientific

and conversational English. It performs various stylistic functions: it stresses the contrast and

rhythmically organizes the utterance. Due to the last quality antithesis is widely used in

poetry in combination with anaphora, epiphora, alliteration.

More examples: While I am weak from hunger, Denis suffers from overeating.
Isabel’s salary was high; Isabel’s work was light.
Oxymoron (Gr. oxymoron – wittily-foolish) – is also a combination of opposite
meanings excluding each other. But in this case the two semantically contrasting ideas are
expressed by words syntactically dependent upon each other. E.g. Sweet pain, awfully nice,
etc. And – elegantly threadbare, roundabout and dapper – the two walked side by side. (J.
Galsworthy. The Broken Boot). The city ruined by civilization. I love you terribly.
The main structural pattern of oxymoron is “adjective + noun” (hot snow). The second
productive model is “adverb + adjective” (pleasantly ugly). Predicative relations are also
possible (Sophia’s beauty is horrible).
More examples: Painful pleasure.
I’m fearfully fond of you.
Oxymoron reveals the contradictory sides of one and the same phenomenon. One of the
components discloses some objectively existing feature while the other serves to convey the
author’s personal attitude towards the object (pleasantly ugly). Such semantic incompatibility
not only creates unexpected combinations of words violating the existing norms of
combinability, but reveals some unexpected qualities of the denotate as well.
The structure of oxymoron is extremely varied. Oxymoron is always expressed by a
word-combination rather than a sentence.
 16
Some oxymorons lose their stylistic value and become trite (a stock phrase): pretty
bad, awfully nice. Original oxymorons are created by the authors. E.g. a damned saint, an
able villain (W. Shakespeare), the littlest great man, the plainest beauty (O. Henry). Some
titles of the novels are based on oxymoron: “Fearful Joy”, “Живой труп”, etc.
Paradox – is a figure of speech in which a statement appears to be self-contradictory, but
contains something of a truth.
e.g. Cowards die many times before their death.
Paradoxically speaking, language study can be fun.
The child is father to the man.
Paradox contradicts an idea that seems to be right. Paradox can surprise because of its
originality and cleverness. Oscar Wilde is known as ‘a master of paradoxes’ or ‘Prince of
Paradoxes’.A very important feature of his individuality is paradoxality of his way of
thinking. In his opinion, the truth of life is revealed to us only in the form of paradoxes.
Paradox can be realized through language units of different language levels. Its
language realization can be varied: a word-combination, a sentence, a dialogical unit, a
paragraph.
e.g.The way of paradoxes is the way of truth. To test Reality we must see it on the tight-
rope. When the Verities become acrobats we can judge them. (O.Wilde).
Writers use different stylistic devices of semasiology to create a paradox. Linguistic
realization of a paradox goes along with antithesis, oxymoron, simile, climax, pun.
we.g. I like persons better than principles, and I like persons with no principles better
than anything else in the world. ( O.Wilde).
American girls are as clever at concealing their parents, as English women are at
concealing their past. (antithesis).
I’m afraid that women appreciate cruelty. They have wonderfully primitive instincts.
(oxymoron).
Beautiful sins, like beautiful things, are the privilege of the rich. (simile).
I’m not the champion of marriage, the real drawback to marriage is that it makes one
unselfish. And unselfish people are colourless. They lack individuality (climax).
Women have no appreciation of good looks; at least good women have not. (pun)
In this case the combination of incompatible ideas (which is a paradox ) is based on
polysemy. Here the mechanism of the paradox creation is very similar to the way of irony
creation: S1> S2> S3.Lexcal unit ‘good’ has two meanings; 1) the first meaning is ‘pleasing’
(about appearance). It is realized in the first part of the utterance; 2) the second meaning is
‘morally acceptable, virtuous’. This meaning is realized in the second part of the utterance.
Here we have combination of two meanings of the polysemantic word –„гарний(за
зовнішністю)” та „доброчинний”.Both semes realize the author’s irony, which shows
absence of the speaker’s respect to the given category of women.
Paradox was much used by the poets of the 17th century, of whom John Donne is
perhaps the best known. The following example is takenfrom one of his religious sonnets in
which he appears to God to strengthen his beliefs. He packs three paradoxes into the last four
lines:
Divorce mee, untie, or breake that knot again,
Take mee to you, imprison mee, for I
Except you enthrall mee, never shall be free,
Nor ever chast, except you ravish mee.
17
 18
Figures of Unequality.

Relations of unequality are the relations of meanings of words and word-combinations

which differ in their emotive intensiveness or logical importance. To this group we refer:
1) Figures based on actualizing emotional power of the utterance (climax, anticlimax),
and 2) Figures based on two different meanings of words and word combinations (pun,
zeugma).
Climax or gradation (Lat. gradatio – gradualness, Gr. climax – a ladder) – presents a
structure in which every successive word, phrase, or sentence is emotionally stronger or
logically more important than the preceding one. E.g. We got to Waterloo at eleven, and
asked where the eleven-five started from. Of course nobody knew; nobody at Waterloo ever
does know where a train is going to start from, or where a train when it does start is going to,
or anything about it. (J.K. Jerome. Three Men in a Boat).
Gradual increase in emotional evaluation is realized by the distribution of the
corresponding lexical units.
There are three types of climax:
1. The arrangement of some lexical units characterizing the object in the same
emotional direction. E.g. “Grand view”, said Harris, - “Magnificent”, I agreed, -
“Superb”, remarked George. (J.K. Jerome. Three Men…).
2. The arrangement of lexical units with logical widening of the notions. E.g. They
looked at hundreds of houses, they climbed thousands of stairs, they inspected
innumerable kitchens. (S. Maugham. The Escape).
3. In the third type gradation is a result of emphatic repetitions and enumerations.
E.g. Not to go back was awful! To go back – more awful still! (J. Galsworthy.
The Man of Property).
Gradation is widely used in fiction and publicistic style. It is one of the main means of
emotional and logical influence over the reader and listener.
Anticlimax presents a structure in which every successive word, phrase or sentence is
emotionally or logically less stronger than the preceding one: E.g. – Can’t you get a story out
of it? He asked – Some sort of a story… - Not a line, said I. (O. Henry).
We can distinguish two types of anticlimax:
1. Gradual drop in intensity;
2. Sudden break in emotive power. In this case emotive and logical importance is
accumulated only to be unexpectedly brought up to a sudden break. E.g. This was
appalling and soon forgotten. (J. Galsworthy). Early to rise, early to bed makes a
man healthy, wealthy and dead.
More examples: If John’s eyes fill with tears, you may have no doubt: he has been
eating raw onions.
Вовк – хижак, і хижак лютий, проте боятися його нема чого.
Anticlimax is often used as a means to achieve a humorous effect.
Pun is a stylistic device which uses a play of words based on polysemy, homonymy or
phonetic similarity to achieve a humorous effect.
 19
There are some kinds of puns:
1. Based on polysemy.

More examples: a) Visitor to a little boy:

- Is your mother engaged?
- Engaged? She is already married.
b) A young lady, weeping softly into her mother’s lap:
- My husband just can’t bear children!
- He needn’t bear children, my dear. You shouldn’t expect too much of
your husband.
2. On complete or partial homonymy:
Diner: Is it customary to tip the waiter in this restaurant?
Waiter: Why – ah – yes, sir.
Diner: Then hand me a tip. I’ve waited three quarters of an hour.
3. On phonetic similarity:
- I’ve spent last summer in a very pretty city in Switzerland.
- Berne? – No, I almost froze.
The pun is used for satirical and humorous purposes. Many jokes are based on puns.
Zeugma (Gr. zeugyana – to join, to combine) – is such a structural arrangement of an
utterance in which the basic component is simultaneously an element of a phraseological unit
and an element of a free word-combination. So it is a simultaneous realization within the
same short context of two meanings of a polysemantic unit. E.g. If the country doesn’t go to
the dogs or the Radicals, we shall have you Prime Minister some day. (O. Wilde). The verb
“to go” realizes two meanings: to go to the dogs (to perish) and to go to the Radicals (to pass
to…).
More examples: She lost her heart and her hat at the party.
Freddy got out of bed and low spirits.
Marry dropped a tear and her handkerchief.
Zeugma combines syntactical and lexical characteristics. Syntactically the same
structures – parallel constructions, semantically – different meanings. Zeugma is a means of
creating a humorous effect.
 20

Phonetic Means of Stylistics

The main unit of the phonological level is a phoneme, the main function of which is to
distinguish meaningful language elements. Unlike the units of the other language levels,
which have the aspect of form and the aspect of content, phonemes have only the aspect of
form. They are not double-sided signs. That’s why all the phonemes have the same function.
Any phoneme can’t be stylistically marked in respect to any other phoneme. And as a result
of it, expressive means are absent on the phonological level.
But in English there are ways of sound arrangement, the usage of which leads to the
creation of some acoustic effects. In other words, on the phonetic level some stylistic devices
can be created. Phonetic stylistic devices are some special sound combinations in their
syntagmatic succession.
There are 3 main devices of sound arrangement in English: alliteration, assonance, and
onomatopoeia.
Alliteration – is a deliberate repetition of similar consonant sounds in close succession.
This phonetic stylistic device aims at imparting a melodic effect to the utterance.
In English alliteration is used in proverbs, sayings and set-phrases: E.g. with might and
main, safe and sound, forget and forgive. The titles of some literary works are also based on
alliteration: “School for Scandal”, by Sheridan, “Of Many Man” by Aldridge, “Silver
Spoon”, “Swan Song” by Galsworthy, “Pride and Prejudice”.
Assonance is a deliberate repetition of the identical or similar vowels in close
succession aiming at sound and sense arrangement of an utterance.
Usually assonance is used in combination with alliteration. E.g. I bring fresh showers
for the thirsting flowers. (Shelly).
Once upon a midnight dreary while I pondered weak and weary. (Poe).
Onomatopoeia is a combination of speech sounds which aims at imitating sounds

produced in nature (the sound of sea, wind, thunder), sounds produced by things (machines

or tools, etc.), by people (sighing, laughter, patter of feet) and by animals. This device is

often realized by means of alliteration. E.g. And the silken, sad, uncertain rustling of each

purple curtain, thrilled me – filled me with fantastic terrors never felt before. (Poe). The

repetition of the sound [s] imitates the sound of the rustling of the silk curtains.

Литература:

1. Арнольд И.В. Стилистика современного английского языка – Л.,

Просвещение, 1981. – С. 139-159.
2. Стилистика английского языка / Мороховский… с. 163-194.
 21
Galperin I.R. Stylistics. – M: Higher School Publishing House, 1981. – P.
136-153; 157-177.
 22
Lecture 5.

Stylistic Lexicology of the English Language

I. Working Definitions of Principal Concepts.

1. Every notional word of a natural language carries some definite information. This
information may be basic, or denotative and additional or connotative.
The majority of words of the English language possesses only denotative information. So they are

stylistically neutral: “man”, “woman”, “house”, “to give”, “to run”, “red”, “very”, etc. It does not mean that

they cannot be used for stylistic purposes. When a word functions, it acquires new qualities depending on its

position and function. Practically any word depending on the context may acquire connotation.

In the English language there are many words which possess not only basic information
but additional one as well.
2. The additional information or connotative meaning may be of 4 types:
a) Functional-stylistic meaning is connected with the constant usage of the word in definite
speech spheres or situations: “foe”, “maiden”, “realm” are mostly used in poetry; terms,
nomenclature words are used in scientific prose style, official documents.
b) Evaluative meaning bears reference to things, phenomena or ideas through evaluation of
the denotate: “out-of-date method”, “time-tested method”; “firm ~ obstinate ~ pig-
headed”. One and the same denotate can be evaluated in different ways.
c) Emotional meaning expresses emotional attitude of the speaker to the denotate:
“scoundrel”, “villain”, “jade”.
d) Metaphorical expressive-figurative meaning has reference not directly to things or
phenomena of objective reality, but to the feelings and emotions of the speaker and is
based on transference of meaning (speaking of a man – “log” – чурбан, “brick” –
славный парень) – metaphorical meanings are always evaluative and figurative.
So, functional-stylistic meaning of a word is connected with a certain sphere of communication and is

limited in usage. But there is no strict borderline between functional-stylistic meaning and other connotative

meanings. Moreover, functional-stylistic meaning may serve a starting point for acquiring other connotative

meanings.

II. Stylistic classification of the vocabulary of any language is a very complicated problem. The

existing classifications are based on different criteria. Professor Y.M. Skrebnev draws a line of demarcation

between neutral words and stylistically coloured words. He admits the arbitrary character of the majority of

existing classifications, the impossibility of strict differentiation of linguistic units. In his opinion the

traditional classifications of the vocabulary (Galperin’s classification, in particular), which can be found in

handbooks on stylistics and lexicology are for the most part unsatisfactory, since their authors, copying or
 23
following one another, commit the same blunder: they intend their enumerations of word-groups to be as

comprehensive as possible, disregarding the incompability of the constituents, such as archaisms and

euphemisms or barbarisms and bookish words (Skrebnev, 2003, p. 52).

He proposes, in his turn, to take into account the social prestige of words, and to place
words with positive connotations above the neutral layer of words, and words with negative
connotations below it (p.53).
We cannot help seeing its too general character: it makes no provision for any gradation
of the elevated or degraded lexical units, yet there must be different degrees in both.
Professor A.N. Morohovsky believes that stylistic classification of the vocabulary should be
based on a common principle – some common characteristics of the words in the given
period of time. (synchronic approach). Besides, the principle question should be stylistically
oriented. Any word like any other language unit exists in two aspects – in paradigmatics and
in syntagmatics. That’s why we believe that there are two criteria that we use for
classification of the VC. They are:
1) paradigmatic criterion means absence or presence of the additional information
(evaluative, emotional, or expressive meaning);
2) syntagmatic criterion means the character of syntagmatic relations of the lexical or
lexical-stylistic meaning of the word with the context.
Both criteria are interconnected. So, proceeding from these criteria (and using some N.D.

Arutyunova’s ideas of the word content) we may divide all words of the English vocabulary into two

groups:

1. Words having lexico-stylistic paradigm are characterized by

a) indirect reference to the object: “foe” (poetic) – “enemy” (neutral) – denotate.
b) subjective evaluative connotations;
c) the referential borders of their meaning are not strict – these words are of qualifying
character, so they may be used with different references;
d) have synonyms;
e) may have antonyms.
To this group we refer: poetic diction; archaic words; barbarisms and foreign words; stylistic neologisms; slangisms; colloquial words; jargonisms
(social and professional); dialect words; vulgarisms.

2. Words having no lexico-stylistic paradigm are characterized by:

a) direct reference to the object;
b) absence of subjective-evaluative connotations;
c) strict referential borders;
d) absence of synonyms or synonyms are of “denotative” character;
e) absence of antonyms.
Here we refer: stylistically neutral words, terms, nomenclature words; historic words;
lexical neologisms, exotic words.
Words having lexico-stylistic paradigm are not homogeneous, they may enter the
following oppositions:
Colloquial vocabulary bookish vocabulary
Non-literary words literary words
 24
General literary is opposed social or dialect elements,
vocabulary to special vocabulary
archaic vocabulary
Contemporary
vocabulary
However, the mentioned groups of words are not closed, they are intersecting – one
and the same word may refer to two or more groups.

III. Stylistic Functions of the Words Having Lexico-Stylistic Paradigm.

Lexical Expressive means of the language are words which have not only denotative
meaning but connotative as well. Depending on the connotative meaning which may be of
diverse character, the words possessing this meaning fall into two groups: “high-flown”
words which traditionally are linked with poetic, bookish and written speech; and “low-
flown” words which are more often used in oral, colloquial speech.
High-flown words are more stable due to the traditions of the written type of speech.
Low-flown words undergo constant changes.
Stylistic functions of literary (high-flown) words. Poetic diction.
Poetic words form lexico-stylistic paradigm. In the XVII – XVIII th centuries they were
widely used in poetry as synonyms to neutral words. In modern poetry such a vocabulary
does not practically exist. In modern poetry any words are used: terms, common talk,
nomenclature words, slangisms, and so on. Poetic words are diverse; they include:
1) archaic words (affright - alarm)
2) archaic forms (betwix - between)
3) historic words (casque - helmet)
4) poetic words proper (alien, brine)
Their main function is to mark the text in which they are used as poetic, and in this way
distinguish it from non-fiction texts. In modern poetry they are seldom used. Their stylistic
meaning is vivid when they are contrasted to neutral words.
Archaic words.
We should distinguish “ageing” – “newness” of the word’s form and “ageing” –
“newness” of the denotate and then accordingly we may compare archaic words and historic
words on the one hand and lexical and stylistic neologisms – on the other.
Lexical neologisms denote new objects: “neutron bomb”, “teach-in”, “push-button
war”.
Stylistic neologisms denote already existing objects and notions: “know-how” – skills,
“hush-hush” – top secret, “look-see” – check up. They appear to give more expressiveness to
the old objects.
Examples.

Archaic words Stylistic neologisms

Benison – a blessing Know-how – skill
Bezonian – a raskal Egg-beater – helicopter
Buss – kiss Sky – mobil
Historic words Ageism- discrimination against a
 25
Existing words that denote old person
notions or objects that even do not exist Mole – a spy
now: Lexical neologisms
Стрелец, вече, сотня, гетман, Hippy
хорунжий, yeoman, vassal, falconet Teach-in
Bionics
Laser shopping
To hack
A hacker

Archaic words are contrasted, on the one hand, to stylistic neologisms and on the other
hand – to historic words. Archaic words and stylistic neologisms have lexico-stylistic
paradigm and consequently stylistic meaning.
Historic words and lexical neologisms do not form lexico-stylistic paradigm and have
no stylistic meaning.
Archaic words may be divided into two groups:
a) Archaic words proper (old words): antic – bizarre, to affright – to alarm, to assail - to
pardon.
b) Archaic forms of the words: “annoy” instead of “annoyance”, “bide” instead of “abide”,
“an’” instead of “and”. The stylistic function of them is the same as in the case of poetic
words – to mark the text stylistically, distinguish it from neutral, literary speech. Archaic
words are often used in poetry, in official documents, in oratorical style to make the
utterance official or solemn. In fiction archaic words are used with historic words to
create the effect of antiquity, giving true-to-life historical background, reminding of the
past habits, customs, dress, objects of everyday life, etc. the usage of archaic words is
sometimes incompatible with modern professional or colloquial words. In this case the
usage of archaic words creates humoristic or satirical effect.

Barbarisms and Foreign Words.

There are many borrowings in every language, some of them are assimilated. We may distinguish 4

groups of such words: foreign words, barbarisms, exotic words and borrowings.

Foreign words are close to barbarisms but they are characterized by occasional usage
mainly in literary speech. They are not Expressive Means of the given language because they
do not enter the system of oppositions of the language, though they may be used to create
some stylistic effect.
Barbarisms are borrowed words and expressions that have preserved their native
spelling and pronunciation and have synonyms in the language-borrower (form French:
parvenu – выскочка, protégé – протеже, à propos – кстати, beau monde - высший свет).
Exotic words are borrowed words denoting objects characteristic of a certain country
(спагетти, bistro, matador).
They have no synonyms in the language-borrower, do not form lexico-stylistic
paradigm and therefore, they are not Expressive Means of the language-borrower, but they
may be used for stylistic purpose.
 26
Borrowings do not differ much from native words if they are assimilated as far as their
stylistic aspect is concerned. They are usually high-flown synonyms of neutral native words
(“to commence” – “to begin”, “infant” – “child”).
Stylistic function of barbarisms and foreign words are similar. They are used to show foreign origin of

a speaker or his level of education, they may create an effect of local colouring. In the Russian language

barbarisms, mostly non-assimilated, became a source of creating the youth jargon.

Bookish (learned) words are used only in official or high-flown style (laureate,
disimprove, abode, absonant, paradigm). In Russian: аббревиатура, абориген,
авторитарный, адекватный. In official usage they are Expressive Means of the given style,
but when used in colloquial speech or in informal situation they may create a comical effect.

Stylistic Functions of Low-Flown (conversational) Words.

Here we refer colloquial words, general slang words, special slang words (social and professional

jargons), dialect words and vulgarisms. Some linguists differentiate slang and jargon but the difference being

vague in general is practically irrelevant for stylistics. Low-flown words may be divided into three big

groups:

1. Literary colloquial
2. Familiar colloquial
3. Low colloquial
Taking into consideration the criterion of mutual relations between the form and its meaning all

colloquial words may be divided into three subgroups:

a) Words which in colloquial speech change their phonetic form without changing their
lexical and stylistic meaning;
b) Words which in colloquial speech change both the form and lexico-stylistic meaning;
c) Words which in colloquial speech change lexical and/or lexico-stylistic meaning without
changing the form.
Let us analyse every subgroup:
1) In the first subgroup we may distinguish some varieties of changing of word phonetic form:

a) clipping (shortening): aggro – aggravation;

combo – combination;
trad(itional).
b) contamination of word combinations:
s’long – so long; c’mon – come on;
gimme – give me; gonna – going to;
kina – find of.
c) contamination of grammatical forms:
I don’t; he’s done it; I’d go; I’d like; we’re going.
 27
The usage of these forms in speech is conditioned by the following factors: tempo of speech, economy

of pronouncing efforts, situational context. These words have no lexico-stylistic paradigm. They have style

meaning.

2) In the second subgroup we may distinguish two different changes of lexico-stylistic

meaning caused by the change of the form:
a) the change of the grammatical form which brings the change of lexico-stylistic
meaning: the words “bags”, “heaps” in plural form acquire the meaning “very
many”, the noun “separates” in plural means отдельно продаваемые юбки, брюки,
блузки.
The usage of an indefinite article with the adjectives “beautiful” and “handful” converts
them into nouns with the meanings “красотка” and “кто-то или что-то, доставляющее
много хлопот”, E.g. “the child is a handful”.
b) the change of form of neutral or high-flown word according to different word-
building patterns causes another lexico-stylistic meaning.

The building patterns which cause change of the form of a neutral word are the
following:

Crammer (репетитор) – from the word “to cram”

Affixation Backbencher (парламентарий – “заднескамеечник”)
Scotty (шотландец), Welshie (уэльсец)
In Russian: работяга, общага, шоферить.

Compoundi Admass – публика, на которую рассчитана реклама,

ng bettlemania – битломания, backroom boy – засекреченный парень,
bubble car – микролитражный автомобиль, legman – репортёр.

To angel – тайно покровительствовать, to bag – взять без

Conversion спроса, be-in – встреча хиппи, sit-in – сидячая забастовка, teach-
in – диспут, семинар

Motel, smog, to dunch – толкать локтем

Telescopy
Ally-Pally – Alexander Palace, archie – from Archibald – вид
зенитного пулемёта, in Russian: раскладушка, коммуналка,
Shortening анонимка, продлёнка.
and affixation
Strap-hanger – висящий на ремне (о пассажирах гор.
транспорта), arty-crafty - художественный, brown-bagger – зубрила
Compoundi (по коричневому портфелю, с которым он никогда не расстаётся).
ng and
affixation
 28

All these words have lexico-stylistic paradigm, they have synonyms among neutral and
high-flown words and have stylistic meaning. They give additional characteristics to the
denotate.
3) The third subgroup is the most numerous and it is difficult to classify these words, as
the relations of basic (denotative) and additional (connotative) information of them are
complex. We may distinguish such cases here:
a) words having only emotional-expressive meaning: “oh”, “gee”, alas and others; and
word-combinations having special expressive function: Good heavens; Good God; God
forbid; damn it, and others. They have no denotative meaning.
b) words and word-combinations having both connotative and denotative meaning but the first prevails :

really; you don’t say so; awfully; terribly; what a nuisance.

c) words in which denotative and connotative meanings interplay . These words have synonyms (neutral or

high-flown words): beak – a teacher; cloth-cap - “матерчатая кепка”, которую обыкновенно носят

рабочие, символ простого происхождения; colt-team – “жеребячья команда”, молодёжная команда,

состоящая из перспективных игроков; in Russian: поплавок – значок об окончании вуза; стекляшка

– кафе, распивочная; ящик – телевизор; телега – жалоба. In these words connotative meaning brings

emotional-expressive characteristic of low tone.

d) words in which denotative meaning is connected with connotative meaning in certain contextual

conditions. Usually these words are stylistically neutral, their additional (in this case - colloquial)

meaning is conditioned not by the properties of the paradigm, but by the syntagmatic relations in an

utterance or a context: to ache (neutral meaning) - болеть; (colloq. meaning) – жаждать чего-нибудь - I

ached to see him; beggar (neutral meaning) - нищий; (colloq. meaning) – парень, малый, lucky beggar

– счастливчик; careful (neutral meaning) - заботливый; (colloq. meaning) – скуповатый – a ~

housewife.

e) words, denotative and connotative meanings of which are completely different from denotative and

connotative meanings of neutral and high-flown words they are connected with by origin: ambidexter

(neutral m.) – человек, свободно владеющий обеими руками; (colloq. m.) - присяжный, берущий

взятки с обеих сторон, участвующих в процессе; cerulean (poetical m.) - лазурь; “синий чулок”.

Slang is a layer of words of a highly colloquial character whose expressiveness and novelty make them

emphatic and emotive as compared to their neutral synonyms.

 29
The positions of slang in the language gave rise to many controversies. According to I.R. Galperin, we

can distinguish two varieties of slang: general slang (interjargon) and special slang (social jargons,

professional jargons) [See Galperin, pp. 96-113, ed. 1971.]

Some of the former slangisms entered colloquial or even neutral layer of the vocabulary (movies,

phone, photo, flu, sky-scraper). Their novelty is the most impressive feature, as it disappears they lose their

expressiveness.

Low-flown words are widely used for stylistic purposes. There are four speech spheres in which they

are used: everyday speech, newspaper language, poetry and fiction.

In newspaper language colloquial words and word combinations and sometimes general slang words

are used to give expressive evaluation of facts and events. In modern poetry words of all layers are widely

used. Lyrical poetry presenting personal monologue allows the usage of all non-poetic words to create the

atmosphere of sincerity and confidence.

Slang words in fiction (in dialogues) are used to reflect the informal and emotive character of speech,

to indicate social and speech peculiarities of characters.

IV. Stylistic Functions of Words Having No Lexico-Stylistic Paradigm

To this group we refer terms, nomenclature words, historic words, exotic words and lexical

neologisms.

Terms are words and word combinations expressing scientific notions, in which essential properties of

the object are reflected.

Terms are generally associated with a definite branch of science and therefore with a series of other

terms belonging to that particular branch of science. (for example, terms “language” and “speech” may be

used as synonyms in everyday usage, but in linguistics they are differentiated).

Nomenclature words are very close to terms, they refer to a definite branch of human activity, more

often professional, e.g. names of minerals, chemical elements, types of cars.

 30
Historic words denote notions referring to the past; the notions do not exist nowadays.

Exotic words denote notions and objects unknown and rarely met in objective reality of the given

speaking community.

Lexical neologisms are new (or old) words denoting new notions.

All above mentioned words being used in special texts have no stylistic function – their usage is

determined by their nominative function – to define the object. In fiction they may acquire stylistic meaning

due to their syntagmatic relations with the words having stylistic colouring and with neutral words. In such

novels as “Live with Lightning”, “Say No to Death”, “The Citadel”, “Airport”, “Money-changers” terms,

nomenclature words are used to create the true-to-life atmosphere of a laboratory, hospital, bank and so on.

When used in direct speech of personages terms become a means of their speech characteristics.

Sometimes terms may be used to create a satirical or humoristic effect.

V. Stylistic Functions of Phraseology

The question of phraseological units (Ph.U.) status is very complicated. There are many phraseological

units which are not connected with some certain sphere of speech communication and have no stylistic

meaning: e.g. point of view; come to the point; in position; without result. They form the group of Ph.U.

which are stylistically neutral. To this group we should also refer historical Ph.U.: Black Prince - “чёрный

принц”, the son of the king – Edward III was called so, because of the black…, armour which he wore; the

Black Belt – “чёрная зона”, the southern regions of the US, where the Negro population predominates.

Dust Bowl – “пыльные районы”, the names of some droughty regions in the west of the USA.

Lexical neologisms: energy crisis, SALT negotiations; oil crisis.

Terminological Ph.U.: deep and surface structure; 3d person singular; Present Perfect Continuous, etc.

Additional (connotative) information of a Ph.U. as well as additional information of a word may be of

4 types: functional-stylistic, emotional, evaluative, expressive-figurative.

 31
Phraseological units, like words, may be divided into 2 large classes: Ph.U. having lexico-stylistic

paradigm and Ph.U. having no lexico-stylistic paradigm.

Semantic characteristics of these classes are similar to those of the words having and having no lexico-

stylistic paradigm. Ph.U. having lexico-stylistic paradigm like the words of this class may be divided into

Ph.U. of high-flown style and Ph.U. of low-flown style.

Points for discussion.

1. Criteria for the stylistic differentiation of the English vocabulary.

2. Words which have lexico-stylistic paradigm. Words which have no lexico-stylistic paradigm.

3. Stylistic functions of literary words: poetic diction, archaic words, barbarisms, bookish words, stylistic

neologisms.

4. Stylistic functions of conversational words: colloquial words, general slang, special slang, stylistic

neologisms, vulgarisms.

5. Stylistic functions of words which have no lexico-stylistic paradigm: historic words, exotic words, terms,

lexical neologisms.

Литература:

1. Galperin I.R. Stylistics, 1981. – P. 70-119.

2. Кунин А.В. Замена компонентов фразеологизмов как стилистический приём // ИЯШ, - 1977. - №2.

3. Стилистика АЯ. / Мороховский…, С. 94-137.

4. Арнольд И.В. Стилистика современного АЯ, 1981. – С. 102-139.

5. Skrebnev Y.M. Fundamentals of English Stylistics. Москва, 2003. – p. 52-76.

 32
6. Єфімов Л.П. Стилістика англійської мови. – Вінниця, 2004. – p. 23-30.