E.g.: The hotel was a huge and splendid rubbish dump

Metaphor can be embodied in the following meaningful parts of speech: nouns, adjectives, verbs, and adverbs.

E.g. (accordingly): I am an island.

The human tide is rolling westward. (Ch. Dickens)

In the slanting beams that streamed through the open window, the dust danced and was golden. (O. Wilde)

The leaves fell sorrowfully.

Semantically metaphors split into the following types:

- genuine (poetic/fresh/original/newly-created/creative), based on some fresh and absolutely unexpected analogy between two things (see examples above);

- trite (dead/hackneyed/stale/banal/stereotyped), the original figurative meaning of which has been forgotten due to the overuse.

E.g.: to burst into tears, the eye of a needle, the foot of a mountain.

Structurally metaphors split into:

- Simple, which consist of one word or word-group.

E.g.: I hope that as the weather gets colder his heart gets warmer.

- Prolonged (Sustained/Chain), in which one word, used in a metaphoric sense, calls forth transference of meaning in the whole sequence of words related to it. In other words, it’s a logical development of a chain of metaphors.

E.g.: Mr. Dombey’s cup of satisfaction was so full at this moment, however, that he felt he could afford a drop or two of its contents, even to sprinkle on the dust of his little daughter. (Ch. Dickens)

- Mixed (Broken/Catachresis), which begin with one comparison, but change to another one in an illogical way.

E.g.: The cold hand of death quenched her thirst for life (a hand cannot quench one’s thirst).

Metonymy [mi'tŠnimi] (from Greek μετωυμία – “renaming”) – the substitution of one object by another on the basis of their common existence in reality.

E.g.: I am fond of Dickens.

I collect old China.

Metonymy can be based on the following relations between two objects (the list is incomplete):

- The name of a work instead of the author.

E.g.: to read Shakespeare.

- A container instead of its content.

E.g.: to drink a glass.

- A symbol instead of the thing symbolized.

E.g.: the British Lion (the symbol of British Empire).

- A material instead of the thing made of it.

E.g.: The marble spoke.

- A concrete thing instead of an abstract notion.

E.g.: The camp, the pulpit and the law

For rich men’s sons are free. (P. B. Shelley)

- An abstract notion instead of a concrete thing.

E.g.: The fish desperately takes the death (i.e. snaps at the fish-hook).

- The instrument used instead of the name of the action performed.

E.g.: Well, Mr. Weller, says the gentleman, you’re a very good whip, and can do anything you like with your horses, we know. (Ch. Dickens)

- The relation of proximity.

E.g.: The round game table was boisterous and happy. (Ch. Dickens)

- The consequence instead of the cause.

E.g.: You don’t ask Joe questions unless you want a new set of teeth. (Clifford)

Metonymy is an effective means to vividly visualize the objects/ideas discussed.

Onomatopoeia [ֽŠnəuֽmætəu'pi:ə] (from Greek όυοματοποιία – “making name”) – the combination of speech sounds imitating those produced in nature by things, people, or animals.

Onomatopoeia types:

- Direct, contained in words that imitate natural sounds.

E.g.: buzz, bang, ding-dong, flop.

- Indirect, which is a combination of sounds making the sound reflection of the meaning.

E.g.: And the s ilken, s ad, un c e r tain r u s tling of each pu r ple cu r tain. (E A. Poe) In the sentence above, the repetition of sound [s] produces the effect of softness, while the repetition of sound [r], the sound reflection of a rustling curtain.

Oxymoron [·Šksi'm‹:r‰n] (from Greek όζύμωρον – “wittily foolish”) – two successive words (mostly an adjective and a noun, or an adverb and an adjective), the meanings of which clash, being opposite in sense.

E.g.: O brawling love! O loving hate! Heavy lightness! Serious vanity! Feather of lead, bright smoke, cold fire, sick health! (W. Shakespeare)

Oxymoron can also be based on the semantic discordance of two words.

E.g.: He had a face like a plateful of mortal sins (B. Behan) Plateful usually refers to food, while sins, to the religious sphere of human life.

Structurally oxymorons split into:

- Attributive, consisting of an adjective and a noun.

E.g.: low skyscraper, sweet sorrow, open secret, best enemy, worst friend.

- Verbal, consisting of a verb and an adverb.

E.g.: to shout mutely, to cry silently.

Semantically oxymorons split into:

- Genuine (Poetic/Fresh/Original/Newly-created), i.e. fresh and absolutely unexpected.

E.g.: We were fellow strangers.

- Trite (Dead/Hackneyed/Stale/Banal/Stereotyped), in which the first component has lost its primary logical meaning due to the overuse and is used only as an intensifier.

E.g.: awfully nice, terribly hungry, damn nice.

An oxymoron discloses the essence of an object full of seeming or genuine discrepancies.

Paragraph ['pærəֽgra:f, 'pærəֽgræf] – a group of related sentences that develop a single idea. Sentences in a paragraph demonstrate unity (state or develop a single main idea) and coherence and are related to each other logically (the ideas they present are easy to follow).

Paragraph structure depends on the style: the scientific prose style paragraph is built on logical principles; the newspaper style paragraph, on psychological principles (sensational effect and capacity for quick reading); the belles-letters style paragraph, according to the author’s purpose; the publicistic style paragraph, according to the author’s purpose.

The length of a paragraph normally varies from eight to twelve sentences (in newspaper style, from one to three).

A paragraph usually has a topic sentence that states the main idea. It is as a rule placed at the beginning of a paragraph, but can also be positioned in some other parts of a sentence. The body of a paragraph presents the subordinate ideas that support or explain the main one in the topic sentence.

Parallel construction ['pærəlelkən'strk©n] – identical/similar syntactical structure in two or more successive sentences/clauses.

E.g.: There were real silver spoons to stir the tea with, and real china cups to drink it out of it, and plates of the same to hold the cakes and toast in. ”(Ch. Dickens)

Parallel constructions may be viewed as a purely syntactical type of repetition, as we deal with the reiteration of the structure of sentences, and not of their lexical “flesh”. Though it is true enough, parallel constructions are often backed up by repetition of words, conjunctions and prepositions (see example above).

Parallel constructions split into:

- Partial, consisting in the repetition of some parts of successive sentences/clauses.

E.g., in the following sentence all attributive clauses begin with conjunction who followed by a verb in the same tense form: There lives at least one being who can never change – one being who would be content to devote his whole existence to your happiness – who lives but in your eyes – who breathes but in your smile – who bears the heavy burden of life itself only for you. (Ch. Dickens)

- Complete (Balanced), maintaining identical structures throughout the corresponding sentences.

E.g.: The seeds ye sow – another reaps; the robes ye weave – another wears; the arms ye forge – another bears. (P. B. Shelley)

Parallel constructions have a semantic (suggest equal semantic significance of the component parts) and a structural (give a rhythmical design to the component parts) function.

Periphrasis [pə'rifrəsis] (pl. periphrases) (from Greek περίφρασις – “speaking around”) – the use of a more or less complicated syntactical structure instead of one word to convey a purely individual perception of the described object.

E.g.: 200 pages of blood-curdling narrative (i.e. a thriller);

the cups that cheer, but not inebriate (i.e. tea) (J. F. Cooper);

alterations and improvements on the truth (i.e. a lie) (Ch. Dickens).

Periphrasis is decipherable only in the context. If a periphrastic locution can be understood outside the context, it is not a SD but merely a synonymous expression (dictionary periphrasis/periphrastic synonym).

E.g.: my better half (i.e. my wife), the fair sex (i.e. women), the cap and the gown (i.e. a student).

Semantically periphrases split into:

- Genuine (Poetic/Fresh/Original/Newly-created), i.e. fresh and absolutely unexpected.

E.g.: Delia was studying under Rosenstock – you know his repute as a disturber of the piano keys (i.e. a pianist). (O. Henry)

- Trite (Dead/Hackneyed/Stale/Banal/Stereotyped), called clichés. Their original figurative meaning has been forgotten due to the overuse.

E.g.: After only a short marriage, he wasn’t prepared to offer advice to other youngsters intending to tie the knot (i.e. to marry).

Depending on the mechanism of substitution of a word by a more complicated phrase, periphrases are classified into:

- Logical, i.e. synonymous phrases.

E.g.: She was still fat after childbirth; the destroyer of her figure (i.e. her child) sat at the head of the table. (A. Bennett)

Naturally, I jumped out of the tub, and before I had thought twice, ran out into the living room in my birthday suit (i.e. nude). (B. Malamud)

- Figurative, in fact phrase-metonymies and phrase-metaphors.

E.g.: The hospital was crowded with the surgically interesting products of the fighting in Africa (extended metonymy for the wounded). (I. Show)

The punctual servant of all work (i.e. the sun). (Ch. Dickens)

Personification [pəֽsŠnifi'kei©n] (from Greek προσωποποιτα – “making face”) – the qualities of a living thing (either animal or human) given to an inanimate lifeless object to visualize it.

E.g.: Earth wears a green velvet dress.

My impatience has shown its heels to my politeness.

Semantically personifications split into:

- genuine (poetic/fresh/original/newly-created), based on some fresh and absolutely unexpected analogy between two things (see examples above);

- trite (dead/hackneyed/stale/banal/stereotyped), the original figurative meaning of which has been forgotten due to the overuse.

E.g.: lonely city streets, roar of traffic.

Polysyndeton [·pŠli'sinditən] (from Greek πολυσύνδετον – “many together”) – the excessive use (repetition) of conjunctions (conjunction and in most cases).

E.g.: I loved to take her hair down and she sat on the bed and kept very still, …, and I would take the pins and lay them on the sheet and it would be loose and I would watch her while she kept very still and take out the last two pins and it would come down and she would drop her head and we would both be inside of it, and it was the feeling of inside a tent or behind a falls. (E. Hemingway)

Polysyndeton makes an utterance more rhythmical. It also has a distinguishing function: It combines homogeneous elements of thought into one whole and makes each member of the string stand out.

Polysyndeton should be differed from enumeration, as the former isolates homogeneous things and the latter units heterogeneous ones.

Pun ['pn], quibble ['kwibl], or paronomasia [·pærənə'meiziə] (from Greek παράνομασία – “astray arrangement”) – a play on words – the use of one word in two different applications/meanings, or the use of two different words, which are pronounced alike.

E.g.: There comes a period in every man’s life, but she is just a semicolon in his. (B. Evans). We expect the second half of the sentence to unfold the content, understanding period as an interval of time, while the author used the word in the meaning of punctuation mark, which becomes clear from the semicolon, following it.

It is difficult to tell zeugma from pun. The only reliable distinction is a structural one: Zeugma is the realization of two meanings with the help of a verb. Pun is more independent: It depends on the context. E.g.

The title of a play by O. Wilde The Importance of Being Ernest. The context for this pun is the whole book.

Punctuation [·pŋ(k)t©u'ei©n], i.e. punctuation marks.

Exclamation and question marks show strong emotions.

E.g.: George: That’s good! Oh yes! And what about you?

Ruth (off her balance): What about me?

George: What are you doing here? All right, you’ve had your go at me. But what about yourself?

Ruth: Well?

George: Oh, don’t be innocent, Ruth! This house! This room! This hideous, God-awful room!

Dashes or three dots show emotional pauses caused by a person’s embarrassment, hesitation, uncertainty, or nervousness of.

E.g.: Pozzo: You took me for Godot.

Estragon: Oh, no, sir, not for an instant, sir.

Pozzo: You took me for him.

Estragon: That’s to say … you understand … the dusk … the strain … waiting … I confess … I imagined … for a second … (S. Becket)

Periods are used to describe events rapidly changing each other, as they break texts into short sentences. E.g.:

Stone, bronze, stone, steel, oak leaves, horses’ heels over the paving;

And the flags. And the trumpets. And so many eagles.

How much? Count them. And such a press of people. (“Triumphal March” by T. S. Eliot)

Modern authors do not use periods at all. E.g., the following poem by e. e. cummings contains neither periods nor capital letters, except O.

i'm

asking

you dear to

what else could a

no but it doesn’t

of course but you don’t seem

to realize i can’t make

it clearer war was just isn’t what

we imagine but please for god’s O

what the hell yea it’s true that was

me but that me isn’t me

can’t you see now no not

any christ but you

must understand

why because

i am dead

Question-in-the-narrative ['kwest©əninðə'nærətiv] – a question asked and answered in the narrative by one and the same person, usually the author.

E.g.: And, staring, she woke, and what to view? Oh, powers of Heaven. What dark eye meets she there? ‘ Tis – ‘tis her father’s – fixed upon the pair. (G.G. Byron)

These are not rhetorical questions, but answered by one who knows the answer, they assume a semi-exclamatory nature.

Question–in–the–narrative may also remain unanswered and contain only the hints of possible answers, as in the following example:

How long must it go on? How long must we suffer? Where is the end? What is the end? (Norris)

Such sentences show a gradual transition to rhetorical questions.

Question–in–the–narrative is very often used in oratory to chain the attention of the listeners to the matter the orator is dealing with, to give the listeners time to absorb what has been said and prepare for the next point. Sometimes question–in–the–narrative gives the impression of an intimate talk between the writer and the reader.

E.g.: Scrooge knew he was dead? Of course he did. How could it be otherwise? Scrooge and he were partners for I don’t know how many years. (Ch. Dickens)

Repetition [·repə'ti©n] – the reoccurrence of sentence units.

It is an EM when used to show the state of mind of a person under the stress of a strong emotion, which always manifests itself through intonation, suggested by the words, such as cried, sobbed, shrieked, told passionately in the written language.

E.g.: “Stop!” – she cried, “Don’t tell me! I don’t want to hear; I don’t want to hear what you’ve come for. I don’t want to hear. ”(J. Galsworthy)

It is a SD when aims not at making a direct emotional impact but at logical emphasis necessary to fix the attention of the reader on the key word of the utterance.

E.g.: She stopped, and seemed to catch the distant sound of knocking. Abandoning the traveller, she hurried towards the parlour, in the passage she assuredly did hear knocking, angry and impatient knocking, the knocking of someone who thinks he has knocked too long. (A. Bennett)

According to the repeated phenomenon, there may be the repetition of a phoneme (see Alliteration, Assonance, Rhyme), morpheme, word, phrase, or a syntactic structure (see Parallel construction).

According to the place, which the repeated unit occupies in a sentence, repetition is classified into the following types:

- Anaphora – the beginnings of some successive sentences/clauses/verse lines/stanzas/paragraphs are repeated to create the background for the non-repeated units, which through their novelty become foregrounded (A …, a …, a …).

E.g.: Always in Rome. Always with the girls. Always with the carabineri.

- Epiphora – the endings of successive sentences/clauses/verse lines/stanzas/paragraphs/clauses are repeated to add stress to the final words (… a, … a, … a.).

E.g.: The priest was good but dull. The officers were not good but dull. The king was good but dull. The wine was bad but not dull. (E. Hemingway)

- Framing repetition – the beginning of a sentence/clause/verse line/stanza/paragraph is repeated at the end to form the “frame” for the non-repeated part (A … … … a.). It explains the notion mentioned at the beginning of a sentence: Between two appearances of the repeated unit there comes the developing middle part of the sentence, which explains and clarifies what was introduced in the beginning.

E.g.: 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 dressmaker. (Ch. Dickens)

- Anadiplosis (Catch repetition/Linking repetition/Reduplication) – the end of one clause/sentence/verse line/stanza/paragraph is repeated at the beginning of the following one (… a, a …).

E.g.: And a great desire for peace, peace of no matter what kind, swept through her. (A. Bennett)

- Chain repetition – several successive anadiploses. The effect is that of the smoothly developing logical reasoning.

E.g.: Living is the art of loving.

Дата добавления: 2014-12-29