Difference of two meanings or transfer by contrast when the two objects are opposed – E.g.: You are so punctual!

Both Screbnev and Morokhovsky classify figures of substitution/ replacement into two groups:

1. figures of quantity

2. figures of quality

Figures of quantity are based on comparison of two different objects having one common quantitative feature: hyperbole and meiosis.

Figures of quality are based on comparison of two different objects, which have one common qualitative feature: metonymical group (metonymy, synechdoche, periphrasis, euphemism); metaphorical group (metaphor, antonomasia, allegory, metaphorical epithet ); irony.

As distinct from paradigmatic semasiology investigating the stylistic value of nomination and renaming (tropes), syntagmatic semasiology deals with stylistic functions or relationship of names in texts. It studies types of linear arrangement of meanings, singling out, classifying and describing what is called figures of speech. In Yu. Screbnev’s terminology “figures of co-occurrence ”, according to A.Morokhovsky “figures of combination”. The realisation of the figures of combination is possible only in context.

The basic, most general types of semantic relationships can be reduced to three: meanings can be either

- identical/similar

- opposite

- different

1. in case of similar / synonymous meanings the speaker combines within an utterance or text the units whose meanings he/she considers similar/identical – E.g.: My heart is like a singing bird. (Rosetti)

2. in case of opposite / contrasting meanings the speaker combines within an utterance or text two semantically contrasting units E.g.: His fees were high, his lessons were light. (O’Henry)

3. in case of different/ unequal meanings of the units the speaker combines within an utterance or text units which denote different but close notions – E.g.: She dropped a tear and her handkerchief. (Dickens)

Thus, these figures of speech are classified by Yu.Screbnev and A.Morokhovsky into three groups:

1. Figures of identity / equivalence

2. Figures of opposi­tion/ contrast

3. Figures of inequality / inequivalence

Figures of identity are created by combination of similar, synonymous, equivalent units, which refer to the same object (simile, substi­tuting and specifying synonyms).

Figures of opposition are based on the combination of units with opposite, contrasting, antonymous meanings (antithesis, oxymoron).

Figures of inequality are based on combination of the mean­ings of units, which differ in their emotive or logical intensity (climax, anticlimax, pun, and zeugma).

Figures of quantity

Figures of quantity demonstrate the most primitive type of renaming. Their basis is inexactitude of measurement, disproportion of the object and its verbal evaluation.

Hyperbole is created in case one common quantitative feature characterises an object in a greater degree. It is a deliberate overstatement, exaggeration that is used to intensify one of the features of the object. It is an expression of emotional evaluation of reality by a speaker who is either unrestrained by ethical conventions or knows that exaggeration would be welcome.

E.g. The coffee shop smell was strong enough to build a garage on. (R. Chandler)

His grey face was so long that he could wind it twice round his neck (R. Chandler)

It is an exaggerated or extravagant statement, used to express strong feelings or produce a strong impression, and is not intended to be understood literally.

Hyperbole soars high, or creeps too low;

Exceeds the Truth, Things wonderful to show.

There are two kinds of hyperbole: trite and genuine.

Trite hyperbole is stale or stereotype. It has lost its quality as a stylistic device through frequent repetition and has become a unit of the language-as-a-system, reproduced in speech in its unaltered form:

E.g. I could see my mother going in Spaulding’s and asking the salesman a million dopey questions. (J. Salinger)

Quite naturally, the main sphere of use of hyperbole is colloquial speech, in which the form is hardly ever controlled and the emotion expressed directly, without any particular reserve.

He was scared to death

I’ve told you fifty times

I beg a thousand pardons

In colloquial speech, expressions of this kind are the natural outcome of uncontrolled emotions or just habit. In any case, the listener is seldom affected by a stale/ trite hyperbole: nether the listener, nor sometimes even the speaker notice the exaggerations; no one takes the words at their face value.

But it is the other way round in works of poetry or fiction, where exaggerations serve expressive purposes and achieve their aim: they are noticed and appreciated by the reader.

Genuine hyperbole is original and fresh.

“Marlowe? We’d like to see you here, in the office.”

“Right away””

“Or sooner.” (R. Chandler)

He was one of those guys that think they’re being pansy of they don’t break around 40 of your fingers when they shake hands with you. (J. Salinger)

It is evident that paradoxical, illogical hyperboles are employed for humoristic purposes.

Linguistic means of expressing exaggeration are varied.

Hyperbole differs from mere exaggeration in that it is intended to be understood as an exaggeration. It is intended to sharpen the reader’s ability to make a logical assessment of the utterance.

Functions and stylistic effects

- to express the intensity of strong feelings

- to suggest the presence of the opposite quality

- to create a humorous effect

Meiosis is a figure logically and psychologically opposite of hyperbole. It is a deliberate understatement, the underestimating/diminishing of the features of the object in order to emphasise its insignificance. It is lessening, weakening, reducing the real characteristics of the object of speech.

E.g. He was a skinny little guy with wrists as big as pencils. (J.Salinger)

Meiosis has no definite formal expression; various linguistic means serve to express it:

I was half-afraid you had forgotten me.

I kind of liked it.

I am not quite too late.

A humorous effect is observed when meiotic devices (words and phrases called “downtoners” – maybe, please, would you mind, etc.) co-occur with rough, offensive words in the same utterance:

It isn’t any of your business maybe.

Would you mind getting the hell out of my way?

It is widely known that understatement / meiosis is typical of the British manner of speech, in opposition to American English in which hyperbole seems to prevail.

You have amazed me = Really?

A lavish praise = Not so bad? Not at all so bad!

A type of understatement, a specific form of meiosis is litotes. It presents an affirmative statement in the form of negation.

It is realised with the help of the negative particle not before a word with the negative meaning.

E.g: Love overcomes no small things.

It is an ironical understatement, especially expressing the affirmative by the negative of its contrary: not small = great; no coward = a brave man. The face wasn’t a bad one; it had what they called charm. (J. Galsworthy)

Thus two negatives make a positive meaning. E.g. He is not uncultured (J. Aldridge)

The result is double negation, and from mathematics we know that two minuses make a plus. The result is indeed affirmative, but the meaning obtained is weakened. That is why litotes produces a meiotic effect.

E.g. Cramer and I regarded him not without pity. (R.Stout)

Litotes does more Sense than Words include,

Дата добавления: 2014-01-11