Part VI. Functional Styles of the English Language 5 страница

It is very important to be able to follow the author's intention from his manner of expressing nuances of meaning which are potentially present in the semantic structure of existing words. Those who fail to define the suggested meanings of poetic words will never understand poetry because they are unable to, decode the poetic language.

In various functional styles of Language the capacity of a word to signify several meanings simultaneously manifests itself in different degrees. In scientific prose it almost equals zero to poetic style this is an essential property.

To observe the fluctuations of meanings in the belles-lettres style is not only important for a better understanding of the purpose or intention of the writer, but also profitable to a linguistic scholar engaged in the study of semantic changes in words.

3. Interaction of logical and emotive meanings

The general notions concerning emotiveness have been set out in Part I, § 6—"Meaning from a Stylistic Point of View" (p. 57). However, some additional information is necessary for a better understanding of how logical and emotive meanings interact.

It must be clearly understood that the logical arid the emotive are built into our minds and they are present there in different degrees when we think of various phenomena of objective reality. The ratio of the two elements is reflected in the composition of verbal chains, i.e. in expression.1

Different emotional elements may appear in the utterance depending oh its character and pragmatic aspect.

The emotional elements of the language have a tendency to wear out and are constantly replaced by new ones (see examples on p. 101—the word dramatic and others). Almost any word may acquire a greater or a lesser degree of emotiveness. This is due to the fact that, as B. Tomashevsky has it, "The word is not only understood, it is also experienced."'1

There are words the function of which is to arouse emotion in the reader or listener. In such words emotiveness prevails over intellectuality. There are also words in which the logical meaning is almost entirely ousted. However, these words express feelings which have passed through our mind and therefore they have acquired an intellectual embodiment. In other words, emotiveness in language is a category of our minds and, consequently, our feelings are expressed not directly but indirectly, that is, by passing through our minds. It is therefore natural that some emotive words have become the recognized symbols of emotions; the emotions are, as it were, not expressed directly but referred to.

"The sensory stage of cognition of objective reality is not only the basis of abstract thinking, it also accompanies it, bringing the elements of sensory stimuli into the process of conceptual thinking, and thus defining the sensory grounds of the concepts as well as the combination of sensory images and logical concepts in a single act of thinking.'"'

We shall try to distinguish between elements of language which have emotive meaning in their semantic structure and those which acquire this meaning in the context under the influence of a stylistic device or some other more expressive means in the utterance.

A greater or lesser volume of emotiveness may be distinguished in words which have emotive meaning in their semantic structure. The most highly emotive words are words charged with emotive meaning to the extent that the logical meaning can hardly be registered. These are interjections and all kinds of exclamations. Next come epithets, in which we can observe a kind of parity between emotive and logical meaning. Thirdly come epithets of the oxymoronic type, in which the logical meaning prevails over the emotive but where the emotive is the result of the clash between the logical and illogical.

Interjections and Exclamatory Words

Interjections are words we use when we express our feelings strongly and which may be said to exist in language as conventional symbols of human emotions. The role of interjections in creating emotive meanings has already been dealt with (see p. 67). It remains only to show how the logical and emotive meanings interact and to ascertain their general functions and spheres of application.

In traditional grammars the interjection is regarded as a part of speech, alongside other parts of speech, as the noun, adjective, verb, etc. But there is another view which regards the interjection not as a part of speech but as a sentence. There is much to uphold this view. Indeed, a word taken separately is deprived of any intonation which will suggest a complete idea, that is, a pronouncement; whereas a word-interjection will always manifest a definite attitude on the part of the speaker towards the problem and therefore have intonation. The pauses between words are very brief, sometimes hardly perceptible, whereas the pause between the interjection and the words that follow is so long, so significant that it may be equalled to the pauses between sentences. However, a closer investigation into the nature and functions of the interjection proves beyond doubt that the interjection is not a sentence; it is a word with strong emotive meaning. The pauses that frame interjections can be accounted for by the sudden transfer from the emotional to the logical or vice versa. Further, the definite intonation with which interjections are pronounced depends on the sense of the preceding or following sentence. Interjections have no sentence meaning if taken independently.

Let us take some examples of the use of interjections:

Oh, where are you going to, all you Big Steamers? (Kipling)

The interjection oh by itself may express various feelings, such as regret, despair, disappointment, sorrow, woe, surprise, astonishment,;-lamentation, entreaty and many others. Here it precedes a definite sentence and must be regarded as a part of it. It denotes the ardent tone of the question. The Oh here may be regarded, to use the terminology of theory of information, as a signal indicating emotional tension in the following utterance.

The same may be observed in the use of the interjection oh in the following sentence from "A Christmas Carol" by Dickens:

"Oh! but he was a tight-fisted hand at the grind-stone, Scrooge."

The Oh here is a signal indicating the strength of the emotions of the author, which are further revealed in a number of devices, mostly syntactical, like elliptical sentences, tautological subjects, etc. The meaning of the interjection Oh in the sentence can again be pinned down only from the semantic analysis of the sentence following it and then it becomes clear that the emotion to be understood is one of disgust or scorn.

So interjections, as it were, radiate the emotional element over the whole of the utterance, provided, of course, that they precede it.

It is interesting to note in passing how often interjections are used by Shakespeare in his sonnets. Most of them serve as signals for the sestet which is the semantic or/and emotional counterpart to the octave,1 or example:

"0, carve not with thy horns..."

"0, Let me, true in love, but..."

"0, therefore, love be of thyself..."

"0, let my books be, then, the..."

"0, then vouchsafe me..."

"0, absence, what a torment..."

"0, no! thy love, though much..."

"0, fearful meditation..."

"0, if I say, you look..."

"0, lest your true love..."

"0, know, sweet love..."

"Ah, do not, when my heart..."

(Sonnet 19) (21) (22) (23) (32) (39) (61) (65) (71) (72) (76) (96)"

Interjections can be divided into primary and derivative. Primary interjections are generally devoid of any logical meaning. Derivative interjections may retain a modicum of logical meaning, though this is always suppressed by the volume of emotive meaning. Oh! Ah\ Bah\ Pooh! Gosh! Hush\ Alas! are primary interjections, though some of them once had logical meaning. 'Heavens!', 'good gracious!', 'dear me!', 'God!', 'Come on!', 'Look here!', 'dear!', 'by the Lord!', 'God knows!', 'Bless me!', 'Humbug!' and many others of this kind are not interjections as such; a better name for them would be exclamatory words and word-combinations generally used as interjections, i.e. their function is that of the interjection.

It must be noted here that some adjectives, nouns and adverbs can also take on the function of interjections—for example, such words as terrible!, awful!, great!, wonderful!, splendid!, fine!, man!, boy! With proper intonation and with an adequate pause such as follows an interjection, these words may acquire a strong emotional colouring and are equal in force to interjections. In that case we may say that some adjectives and adverbs have acquired an additional grammatical meaning, that of the interjection.

Men-of-letters, most of whom possess an acute feeling for words, their meaning, sound, possibilities, potential energy, etc., are always aware of the emotional charge of words in a context. An instance of such acute awareness is the following excerpt from Somerset Maugham's "The Razor's Edge" where in a conversation the word God is used in two different senses: first in its logical meaning and then with the grammatical meaning of the interjection:

"Perhaps he won't. It's a long arduous road he's starting to travel, but it may be that at the end of it he'll find what he's seeking."

"What's that?"

"Hasn't it occurred to you? It seems to me that in what he said to you he indicated it pretty plainly. God."

"God\" she cried. But it was an exclamation of incredulous surprise. Our use of the same word, but in such a different sense, had a comic effect, so that we were obliged to laugh. But Isabel immediately grew serious again and I felt in her whole attitude something like fear.

The change in the sense of the word god is indicated by a mark of exclamation, by the use of the word 'cried' and the words 'exclamation of incredulous surprise' which are ways of conveying in writing the sense carried in the spoken language by the intonation-Interjections always attach a definite modal nuance to the utterance. But it is impossible to define exactly the shade of meaning contained in a given interjection, though the context may suggest one. Here are some of the meanings that can be expressed by interjections: joy, delight, admiration, approval, disbelief, astonishment, fright, regret, woe, dissatisfaction, ennui (boredom), sadness, blame, reproach, protest, horror, irony, sarcasm, meanness, self-assurance, despair, disgust and many others.

Interesting attempts have been made to specify the emotions expressed by some of the interjections.

Interjections, like other words in the English vocabulary, bear features which mark them us bookish, neutral or colloquial. Thus oh, ah, Bah and the like are neutral; alas, egad (euphemism for 'my God'), la, Hark are bookish i; gash, why-, well are colloquial. But as with other words in any stratum of vocabulary, the border-line between the three group is broad and flexibly. Sometimes therefore a given interjection may be considered as bookish by one scholar and as neutral by another, or colloquial by one and neutral by another. However, the difference between colloquial and bookish will always be clear enough. In evaluating the attitude of a writer to the things, ideas, events and phenomena he is dealing with, the ability of the reader to pin-point the emotional element becomes of paramount importance. It is sometimes hidden under seemingly impartial description or narrative, and only an insignificant lexical unit, or the syntactical design of an utterance, will reveal the author's mood. But interjections, as has been said, are direct signals that the utterance is emotionally charged, and insufficient attention on the part of the literary critic to the use of interjections will deprive him of a truer understanding of the writer's aims.

The Epithet

From the strongest means of displaying the writer's or speaker's emotional attitude to his communication, we now pass to a weaker but still forceful means—t he epithet. The epithet is subtle and delicate in character; it is not so direct as the interjection. Some people even consider that it can create an atmosphere of objective evaluation, whereas it actually conveys the subjective attitude of the writer, showing that he is partial in one way or another.

The epithet is a stylistic device based, on, the interplay of emotive and logical meaning in an attributive word, phrase pr even stance used to, characterize an object and, pointing out to the reader, and frequently imposing on him some of the properties pr features of the object with the aim of giving an individual perception and evaluation pf these features or properties. The epithet is, markedly subjective and evaluative. The logical attribute is purely objective, non-evaluating. It is descriptive and, indicates, an inherent or prominent feature of a thing or phenomenon in question.

Thus, in 'green meadows, - -white snow', round table', blue skies, 'pale complexion', 'lofty mountains' and the like, the adjectives are more logical attributes than epithets. They indicate those qualifies of the objects which way be regarded as generally recognized|. But in wild wind, loud ocean, ‘remorseless dash of billows', 'formidable waves ' 'heart-burning smile', the adjectives do not point to inherent qualities of the objects described, They are subjectively evaluative.

The epithet makes a strong impact on the reader, so much so, that he, unwittingly begins to see and evaluate things as, the writer wants him to. Indeed, in such word-combinations as 'destructive charms', glorious sight', 'encouraging smile', the interrelation between logical and emotive meanings may be said to manifest itself in different degrees. the destructive has retained its logical meaning to a considerable extent, but at the same time an experienced reader cannot help perceiving the emotive meaning of the word which in this combination will signify “conquering, irresistible, dangerous'. The logical meaning of the word glorious in combination with, the word, sight has almost entirely faded out. Glorious is already fixed in dictionaries as a word having an emotive meaning alongside its primary, logical meaning. As to the word encouraging (in the combination 'encouraging smile') it is half epithet and half logical attribute. In fact, it is sometimes difficult to draw a clear line of demarcation between epithet and logical attribute. In some passages the logical attribute becomes so strongly enveloped in the emotional aspect of the utterance that it begins to radiate emotiveness, though by nature it is logically descriptive. Take, for example, the adjectives green, white, blue, lofty (but somehow not round) in the combinations given above. In a suitable context they may all have a definite emotional impact on the reader. This is probably explained by the fact that the quality most characteristic of the given object is attached to it, thus strengthening the quality.

Epithets may be classified from different standpoints: semantic and structural. Semantically, epithets may be divided into two groups: those associated with the noun following and those unassociated with it.

Associated epithets are those which point to a feature which is essential to the objects they describe: the idea expressed in the epithet is to a certain extent inherent in the concept of the object. The associated epithet immediately refers the mind to the concept in question due to some actual quality of the object it is attached to, for instance, 'dark forest', 'dreary midnight', 'careful attention', 'unwearying research', 'indefatigable assiduity', 'fantastic terrors', etc.

Unassociated epithets are attributes used to characterize the object by adding a feature not inherent in it, i.e. a feature which may be so unexpected as to strike the reader by its novelty, as, for instance, 'heartburning smile', 'bootless cries', 'sullen earth', 'voiceless sands', etc. The adjectives here do not indicate any property inherent in the objects in question. They impose, as it were, a property on them which is fitting only in the given circumstances. It may seem strange, unusual, or even accidental.

In any combination of words it is very important to observe to what degree the components of the combination are linked. When they are so closely linked that the component parts become inseparable, we note that we are dealing with a set expression. When the link between the component parts is comparatively close, we say there is a stable word-combination, and when we can substitute any word of the same grammatical category for the one given, we note what is called a free combination of words.

With regard to epithets, this division becomes of paramount importance, inasmuch as the epithet is a powerful means for making the desired impact on the reader, and therefore its ties with the noun are generally contextual. However, there are combinations in which the ties between the attribute and the noun defined are very close, and the whole combination is viewed as a linguistic whole. Combinations of this type appear as a result of the frequent use of certain definite epithets with definite nouns. They become stable word-combinations. Examples are: 'bright face', 'valuable connections', 'sweet smile', 'unearthly beauty', 'pitch darkness', 'thirsty deserts', 'deep feeling', 'classic example', 'powerful influence', 'sweet perfume' and the like. The predictability of such epithets is very great.

The function of epithets of this kind remains basically the same: to show the evaluating, subjective attitude of the writer towards the thing described. But for this purpose the author docs not create his own, new, unexpected epithets; he uses ones that have become traditional, and may be termed "language epithets" as they belong to the language-as-a-system. Thus epithets may be divided into language epithets and speech epithets. Examples of speech epithets are: 'slavish knees', 'sleepless bay'.

The process of strengthening the connection between the epithet and the noun may sometimes go so far as to build a specific unit which does not lose its poetic flavour. Such epithets are called ft x ed and are mostly used in ballads and folk songs. Here are some examples of fixed epithets: 'true love', 'dark forest', 'sweet Sir', 'green wood', 'good ship', 'brave cavaliers'.

Structurally, epithets can be viewed from the angle of a) composition and b) distribution.

From the point of view of their compositional structure epithets may be divided into simple, compound, phrase and sentence epithets. Simple epithets are ordinary adjectives. Examples have been given above. Compound epithets are built like compound adjectives. Examples are: 'heart-burning sigh', 'sylph-like figures', 'cloud-shapen giant',

"...curly-headed good-for-nothing,

And mischief-making monkey from his birth." (Byron)

The tendency to cram into one language unit as much information as possible has led to new compositional models for epithets which we' shall call phrase epithets. A phrase and even a whole sentence may become an epithet if the main formal requirement of the epithet is maintained, viz. its attributive use. But unlike simple and compound epithets, which may have pre- or post-position, phrase epithets are always placed before the nouns they refer to.

An interesting observation in this respect has been made by O. S. Akhmanova. "The syntactical combinations are, as it were, more explicit, descriptive, elaborate; the lexical are more of an indication, a hint or a clue to some previously communicated or generally known fact, as if one should say: 'You know what I mean and all I have to do now is to point it out to you in this concise and familiar way'."

This inner semantic quality of the attributive relations in lexical combinations, as they are called by O. S. Akhmanova, is, perhaps, most striking in the phrase and sentence epithets. Here the 'concise way' is most effectively used.

Here are some examples of phrase epithets:

"It is this do-it-yourself, go-it-alone attitude that has thus far held back real development of the Middle East's river resources." (N. Y. T. Magazine, 19 Oct., 1958.)

"Personally I detest her (Gioconda's) smug, mystery-making, come-hither-but-go-away-again-because-butter-wouldn't-melt-in-my-mouth expression." {New Statesman and Nation)

"There is a sort of 'Oh-what-a-wicked-wortd-this-is-and-how-I-wish-I-could-do-something-to-tnake-it-beller-and-nobler' expression about Montmorency that has been known to bring the tears into the eyes of pious old ladies and gentlemen." (Jerome K. Jerome, "Three Men in a Boat")

"Freddie was standing in front of the fireplace with a well-that’s-the-story-what-are-we-going-to-do-about-it air that made him a focal point." (Leslie Ford, "Siren in the Night")

An interesting structural detail of phrase and sentence epithets is that they are generally followed by the words expression, air, attitude and others which describe behaviour or facial expression. In other words, such epithets seem to transcribe into language symbols a communication usually conveyed by non-linguistic means.

Another structural feature of such phrase epithets is that after the nouns they refer to, there often comes a subordinate attributive clause beginning with that. This attributive clause, as it were, serves the purpose of decoding the effect of the communication. It must be noted that phrase epithets are always hyphenated, thus pointing to the temporary structure of the compound word.

These two structural features have predetermined the functioning of phrase epithets. Practically any phrase or sentence which deals with the psychological state of a person may serve as an epithet. The phrases and sentences transformed into epithets lose their independence and assume a new quality which is revealed both in the intonation pattern (that of an attribute) and graphically (by being hyphenated).

Another structural variety of the epithet is the one which we shall term r e v e r s e&. The reversed epithet is composed of two nouns linked in an of-phrase. The subjective, evaluating, emotional element is embodied not in the noun attribute but in the noun structurally described, for example: "the shadow of a smile"; "a devil of a job" (Maugham); "...he smiled brightly, neatly, efficiently, a military abbreviation of a smile" (Graham Green); "A devil of a sea rolls in that bay" (Byron); "A little Flying Dutchman of a cab" (Galsworthy); "...a dog of a fellow" (Dickens); "her brute of a brother" (Galsworthy); "...a long nightshirt of a mackintosh..." (Cronin)

It will be observed that such epithets are metaphorical. The noun to be assessed is contained in the of-phrase and the noun it qualifies is a metaphor (shadow, devil, military abbreviation, Flying Dutchman, dog). The grammatical aspect, viz. attributive relation between the members of the combination shows that the SD here is an epithet.

It has been acknowledged that it is sometimes difficult to draw a line of demarcation between attributive and predicative relations. Some attributes carry so much information that they may justly be considered bearers of predicativeness. This is particularly true of the epithet, especially genuine or speech epithets, which belong to language-in-action and not to language-as-a-system. These epithets are predicative in essence, though not in form.

On the other hand, some word-combinations where we have predicative relations convey so strongly the emotional assessment of the object spoken of, that in spite of their formal, structural design, the predicatives can be classed as epithets. Here are some examples:

'Fools that they are'; 'Wicked as he is.'

The inverted position of the predicatives 'fools' and 'wicked' as well as the intensifying 'that they are' and 'as he is' mark this border-line variety of epithet.

Some language epithets, in spite of opposition on the part of orthodox language purists, establish themselves in standard English as conventional symbols of assessment for a given period. To these belong words we have already spoken of like terrible, awful, massive, top, dramatic, mighty, crucial (see p. 66).

From the point of view of the d i s t r i b u t i o n of the epithets in the sentence, the first model to be pointed out is the s t r i n g of epithets. In his depiction of New York, O. Henry gives the following string of epithets:

"Such was the background of the wonderful, cruel, enchanting, bewildering, fatal, great city;"

Other examples are: a plump, rosy-cheeked, wholesome apple-faced young woman (Dickens); "a well-matched, fairly-balanced give-and-take couple." (Dickens)

As in any enumeration, the string of epithets gives a many-sided depiction of the object. But in this many-sidedness there is always a suggestion of an ascending order of emotive elements. This can easily be observed in the intonation pattern of a string of epithets. There is generally an ascending scale which culminates in the last epithet; if the last epithet is a language epithet (great), or not an epithet (young), the culminating point is the last genuine epithet. The culminating point in the above examples is at fatal, apple-faced and give-and-take.

Another distributional model is the transferred epithet. Transferred epithets are ordinary logical attributes generally describing the state of a human being, but made to refer to an inanimate object, for example: sick chamber, sleepless pillow, restless pace, breathless eagerness, unbreakfasted morning, merry hours, a disapproving finger, Isabel shrugged an indifferent shoulder.

As may be seen, it is the force contributed to the attribute by its position, and not by its meaning, that hallows it into an epithet. The main feature of the epithet that of emotional assessment is greatly diminished in this model; but it never quite vanishes. The meaning of the logical attributes in such combinations acquires a definite emotional colouring.

Language epithets as part of the emotional word-stock of the language have a tendency to become obsolescent. That is the fate of many emotional elements in the language. They gradually lose their emotive charge and are replaced by new ones which, in their turn, will be replaced by neologisms. Such was the fate of the language epithet good-natured. In the works of Henry Fielding this epithet appears very often, as, for example, 'a good-natured hole', 'good-natured side'. The words vast and vastly were also used as epithets in the works of men-of-letters of the 18th century, as in 'vast rains', 'vastly amused'.

The problem of the epithet is too large and too significant to be fully dealt with in a short chapter. Indeed, it may be regarded as the crucial problem in emotive language and epithets, correspondingly, among the stylistic devices of the language.

It remains only to say that the epithet is a direct and straightforward way of showing the author's attitude towards the things described, whereas other stylistic devices, even image-bearing ones, will reveal the author's evaluation of the object only indirectly. That is probably why those authors who wish to show a seeming impartiality and objectivity in depicting their heroes and describing events use few epithets. Realistic authors use epithets much more sparingly, as statistical data have shown. Roughly speaking, Romanticism, on the other hand, may to some extent be characterized by its abundant use of epithets. In illustration we have taken at random a few lines from a stanza in Byron's "Guide Harold's Pilgrimage":

The horrid crags, by toppling convent, crowned, The cork-trees hoar that clothe the shaggy steep,

The mountain-moss by scorching skies imbrown'd, The sunken glen, whose sunless shrubs must weep, The orange tints that gild the greenest bough...

Oxymoron

Oxymoron is a combination of two words (mostly an adjective and a noun or an adverb with an adjective) in which the meanings of the two clash, being opposite in sense, for example:

'low skyscraper', 'sweet sorrow', 'nice rascal', 'pleasantly ugly face', 'horribly beautiful', 'a deafening silence'.

If the primary meaning of the qualifying word changes or weakens, the stylistic effect of oxymoron is lost. This is the case with what were once oxymoronic combinations, for example, 'awfully nice', 'awfully glad', 'terribly sorry' and the like, where the words awfully and terribly have lost their primary logical meaning and are now used with emotive meaning only, as intensifiers. The essence of oxymoron consists in the capacity of the primary meaning of the adjective or adverb to resist for some time the overwhelming power of semantic change which words undergo in combination. The forcible combination of non-combinative words seems to develop what may be called a kind of centrifugal force which keeps them apart, in contrast to ordinary word-combinations where centripetal force is in action.

Дата добавления: 2014-12-24