Lexico-semantic expressive means and stylistic devices.
Figures of substitution
Figures of substitution are subdivided into the figures of quality – metaphor, antonomasia, personification, allegory, epithet, metonymy, synecdoche, periphrasis, euphemism and irony; and figures of quantity – hyperbole, meiosis, litotes.
Figures of quality
Metaphor
Metaphoris the transference of the name of one object into another object based on the similarity of the objects. From the times of ancient Greek and Roman rhetorics, the term was known to denote the transference of meaning from one word to another. It is still widely used to designate the process in which a word acquires a derivative meaning. Metaphor becomes a stylistic device when two different phenomena (things, events, ideas, actions) are simultaneously brought to mind by the imposition of some or all of the inherent properties of one object on the other which by nature is deprived of these properties. The creator of the metaphor finds in the two corresponding objects certain features which to his eye have something in common. It is the creator of the metaphor who “takes the responsibility for transplantation” of the features of one object into another as if he wants to cross over the logical boundaries in order to provide a deep insight into the nature of the object and to create images. When W. Shakespeare in one of his sonnets said: I never say that I was false of heart/Though absence seemed my flame to qualify he used the word flame metaphorically to denote love and to highlight its ardour and passion. Metaphoric lines of Lina Kostenko Двори стоять у хуртовині айстр are the most economic and condensed way to create the visual image of petals blown with the wind, their movement, colour, odour.
Metaphor can be represented by any notional part of speech:
Ішов ночей повільний караван (Л. Костенко).
Застерігає доля нас зрання, що калинова кров така густа (В. Стус).
The leaves were falling sorrowfully.
We all want a little patching and repairing from time to time.
Simple metaphor that expresses indiscrete notion may comprise a word, word combination or sentence. Prolonged or sustained metaphor is metaphor that consists of a number of sentences or even a paragraph. In this case the word that has been used metaphorically makes other words of the sentence or paragraph to realize their figurative meaning and unfold the meaning of the first, initial metaphor. Below there are examples of sustained metaphors that create visual landscape images:
There is a patch of old snow in a corner
That I should have guessed
Was a blow away paper the rain
Had brought to rest
It is speckled with grime as if
Small print overspread it,
The news of the day I’ve forgotten –
If I ever read it (R. Frost).
Двору невдалий пейзаж
заґрунтовано наново,
тільки в куточку залишено чорного пса.
Вчора гуляла зима
із циганами п’яними,
все побілила
і блудить тепер в небесах (А. Криштальський).
Metaphor that unfolds within the boundaries of the whole text or the whole literary work is known under the term compositional metaphor (композиційна або сюжетна метафора). Having being raised to the symbolic status these metaphors designate key notions for the development of the plot and idea of the literary work. For example, “the bridge” in Hemingway’s novel For whom the bell tolls means not only special installations but also a military mission, threat, human character, obligation; “fog” in J. Galsworthy’s Man of property is a symbol of misfortune and disaster.
The nature of metaphors is versatile. According to the pragmatic effect produced upon the addressee metaphors are subdivided into dead or trite and genuine or original. Original metaphors always have a definite author and are fresh and unpredictable. They may describe not only the objects of real or unreal world but represent such complex notions as time, love, feeling and emotions or even life itself:
They walked along, two continents of experience and feeling, unable to communicate (W.S. Gilbert).
My life had been a poem I should have writ
But I could not both live and utter it (B. Thoreau).
Тільки і вимовиш “осінь!” – коли ідучи тротуаром,
Втомлені очі зведеш на облетілий каштан.
Так у півсні пролетять наші дні і літа повносилі,
І зачорніє в душі старості голе гілля (М. Зеров).
Dead metaphors are metaphors that have become subjected to the process of lexicalization; they have lost their novelty and vigour due to the long and frequent usage. In the sentences He is still green for this job the metaphor to be green means to be too young and inexperienced; she was bright, learned languages quickly and sailed through her exams the metaphor to sail through means to avoid difficulties, to cope with the task easily. All these metaphors are perceived automatically as cliché. Most of the trite metaphors are registered in special dictionaries and have become rank and file members of idiomatic language: to pick up one’s ears, the apple of one’s eye, floods of tears, нашорошити вуха, зіниця ока, потік сліз тощо. It is this very part of the stylistic resources of any language that is of great importance for contrastive study because they specify the national – cultural peculiarities of communication.
Very often metaphoric associations connected with the same words in both languages do not coincide, i.e. are quite unpredictable for the representatives of the other culture. For example yellow colour is associated in English culture with the notion of timidity – yellow streak, yellow-bellied, yellow-livered – or with the notion of jealousy – to wear yellow hose/stockings – whereas in Ukrainian this colour is associated with young age and lack of experience – жовторотий. English word cat can mean a malignant woman thus highlighting psychological and behavioral aspects of the notion while Ukrainian кішка – movement and flexibility or independence. More examples of this kind are:
guinea pig – піддослідний кролик; Заєць – безбілетний пасажир
shark – шахрай; акули бізнесу, акули пера
cuckoo – божевільний; зозуля– мати, що покидає дітей
chicken – hearted – боязливий; заяче серце
bear garden - балаган
owlish – придуркуватий; сова – символ мудрості
mackerel sky – небо в баранчиках
red herring – відволікаючий маневр
According to the degree of their stylistic potential metaphors are classified into nominational, cognitive, conceptual and imaginative.
Nominational metaphor does not render any stylistic value; it is a purely technical device to name new objects by means of old vocabulary: the arm of the chair, the foot of the hill, ніжка столу, крило будинку, двірники автомобіля. Nominational metaphor is an efficient tool to create scientific terms – flood of neutrons, stream of consciousness, точка кипіння, силова лінія тощо.
Very close to the function of nominative metaphor is conceptual metaphor. But the latter is created to denote highly abstract notions or concepts of human life which cannot be expressed in any but metaphoric way. For example – generation gap, field of activity, a shadow of a smile, a grain of truth, поліфонічний роман, лінія долі, хвиля гніву, книга життя. Being in fact trite (or lexicalized) conceptual metaphors still retain their imaginative ground and are sometimes injected with new vigour, i.e. their primary meaning is re-established alongside a new (derivative) one. This is done by supplying the central image created by the metaphor with additional words which bear some reference to the main word. For example:
Mr. Pickwick bottled up his vengeance and corked it down (Ch. Dickens).
The metaphor in the expression to bottle up can hardly be felt. But it is revived by the direct meaning of the verb to cork down. This context refreshes the almost dead metaphor and gives it a second life. Here is another example of the same kind:
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 in the by-path of his little daughter." (Ch. Dickens).
When an object obtains qualities characteristic of another object (inanimate objects or things – the characteristic of living beings) cognitive metaphor is formed.
E.g. a witty idea came to me.
The road leads Jack there.
Його переслідували спогади з минулого.
Being a source of lexical polysemy, cognitive metaphor has lost its stylistic value. This type of metaphors is frequently used in everyday speech, political, economic and scientific discourses. It is also worth mentioning that utterances based on the cognitive metaphors are more characteristic for English than for Ukrainian. Let us compare:
У майбутньому такі звичні відносини можуть змінитися.
The future may change this customary relationship.
Завдяки цьому приватизаційна вартість компанії збільшиться.
This will raise the company privatization value.
Унаслідок прибуття значної кількості небілих громадян, утворилась група, яка помітно відрізнялась від решти британського суспільства.
The arrival of the substantional number of coloured emigrants introduced a group of people that were visibly different from the rest of the British community.
Imaginative metaphor is the most expressive type of metaphor. It makes a much bigger demand on our imagination and on our willingness to step outside the rational thinking: The sun is a big yellow duster; polishing the blue, blue sky. In this utterance the sun is being compared to a duster. This idea is interesting because dusters are usually yellow like the sun. Further, like the sun appears to move in the sky, removing gray clouds, a duster moves to polish a surface and clear it of dust.
Metaphor is one of the oldest and the most powerful way to create images and to represent different concepts or ideas most vividly and poetically.
Personification
When the speaker ascribes human behaviour, thoughts and actions to inanimate objects, he resorts to the stylistic device of personification (уособлення, персоніфікація). Personification is a special type of metaphor. Personified inanimate objects or things are substituted by personal pronouns he or she and in most cases are written in capital letters:
Думи мої, думи мої.
Лихо мені з вами!
Нащо стали на папері
сумними рядами… (Т. Шевченко)
Personification is the most ancient trope among the elements of metaphoric language. It is deeply rooted in the tradition of folklore: tales, ballads, songs, proverbs and sayings reflect our forefathers’ believes in which the world was inhabited by good or bad spirits and creatures, in which beasts, plants, rivers and stones spoke and felt, favoured or put obstacles on the way of the man. Having come over the centuries unchanged metaphor-personification has not lost its stylistic value and continues to spur the imagination of poets and writers. It makes the image more understandable, visually and acoustically perceptible:
Away, then, my dearest,
O! Hie thee away
To spring that lies clearest
Beneath the moon ray –
To lone lake that smiles,
In the dreem of deep rest,
At the many star isles
That enjewel its breast (E. Poe).
На конвертики хат літо клеїть віконця, як марки (Л. Костенко).
Allegory
Allegory - (circumlocution (іносказання), parable (притча)) is another type of metaphor. Allegory, unlike metaphor, and personification can be understood only within the whole text, i. e. the domain of allegory is not a sentence but the whole literary text or a logically completed narration in which all described things, characters, events have figurative meaning. A lot of folk tales, ballads, fables, riddles and proverbs are based on allegory. The literary tradition of parabolic mode of expression dates back to the times of ancient Greece, in particular - the famous fables of Aesop where animals, things or natural phenomena are endowed with human characteristics and find one in different situations that symbolize certain aspects of life. The function of allegory is to generalize and to expose various sides of reality and vice of human nature.
Such allegoric characters of Ukrainian literature as коник-стрибунець, лисиця-жалібниця, ведмежий суд, вовк та ягня will never lose their topicality because they are not about animals but about people and their behaviour. The bright examples of allegoric writing in English and Ukrainian literature are O. Wild’s Fairy tales, J. Joyce Ulliss , J. Updike’s Centaur, I. Franko Лис Микита and Каменярі, L. Ukrainka Досвітні вогні and Лісова пісня .
According to the scholars who treat the problem of poetic discourse, the stylistic device of allegory has been evolving and changing its shape gradually together with the development of new genres and literary currents in different historic periods. Both English and Ukrainian literature of XXth century are characterized by the considerable semantic and structural changes of allegory. The function of allegory in literary text has enhanced: it does not necessarily describe, generalizes and exposes but reflects writer’s moral principles and outlook. The following lines of R. Frost can exemplify the above-mentioned statements:
Some say the world will end in fire,
Some say in ice.
From what I’ve tested of desire
I hold with those who favour fire.
But if it had to perish twice,
I think I know enough of hate
To say that for destruction ice
Is also great
And would suffice.
The cited poem is the expression of eternal poetic motive about the essence of life: life is a constant burning, activity, cold and passiveness lead to death and oblivion.
Most Ukrainian writers resorted to allegory in the time of totalitarian regime with the aim of hiding the real sense of their literary works. The well-known P. Tychyna’s lines Трактор в полі дир, дир, дир/Я у полі бригадир – are, in fact,imbued with irony and mockery of soviet collective farm reality.
Antonomasia
Antonomasia (or renaming – перейменування) is a lexical stylistic device that lies in the interplay between the logical and nominal meanings of a word. In other words antonomasia is a kind of metaphor in which the nominal meaning of a proper noun is suppressed by its logical meaning or the logical meaning of a common noun acquires the new nominal component.
As most stylistic devices antonomasia may assume different shapes.
The first type of antonomasia is the usage of proper noun in the function of a common one. In the following sentence a proper noun Mary has lost its nominal meaning and turned into a common noun denoting any female:
E.g. He took little satisfaction in telling each Mary shortly after she arrived something… (Th. Dreiser).
Another type of antonomasia we meet when a common noun serves as an individualizing name. In this case a certain concept that is associated with this common noun is transferred on the person or phenomenon named. The role of the common noun is to name and to qualify:
E.g. In the moon-landing year what choice is there for Mr. and Mrs. Average – the programme against poverty or the ambitious NASA project from a newspaper).
There are three doctors in the illness like yours. I don’t mean only myself, my partner or the radiologist who does your X-rays, the three I am referring to are Dr. Rest, Dr. Diet and Dr. Fresh Air (D. Cusack).
This type of antonomasia can be encountered both in literary writing and in everyday speech. Poets and writers resort to it in order to create vivid, precise and memorable names for their personages: as Lady Teazle, Mr. Surface, Miss Languish, Mr. Credulous, Mr. Snake, Пузир, Калитка, Часник, Марко Безсмертний, Тарас Трясило, Триндипляшка, Обіцяйло or location: село Деркачі, Недогарки, Задрипайлівка. In everyday speech this type of antonomasia is the basis of different nicknames, pet-names, pseudonyms, aliases, pen-names etc.
I haven’t seen the Pimple of late.
Now let me introduce you - that’s Mr. What’s-his-name, you remember him, don’t you? And over there in the corner, that’s the Major, and there’s Mr. What-d’you-call-him, and that’s an American (E. Waugh).
Лазар ненавидів тюремного смотрителя, якому тюрма дала прізвище Морда.
One more type of antonomasia is the usage of well-known names of literary, folk, mythological personages or famous personalities to characterize different people. For example a loving couple can be named Romeo and Juliet, a jealous husband – Othello, an ambitious person – Napoleon, as in Sam is the Napoleon of crime.
Epithet
Epithet is a figurative, expressive attribute that emphasizes the most prominent, leading feature of a thing or phenomenon. The term epithet originated from the Creek phrase “epiteton onoma” which meant an additional name, borrowed, artificial, extra or supplementary nomination, for indeed the function of epithet is not only to describe the object but also to add new features to it.
Epithet has remained over the centuries the most widely used stylistic device, that offers ample opportunities to qualify the object from the speaker’s partial or subjective point of view and is indispensable in creative prose, publicistic style and everyday speech.
The structure and semantics of epithets are extremely variable.
From semantic point of view epithets are fixed (or associated), effective (or emotional proper) and figurative (transferred or unassociated).
Fixed epithets are epithets which due to the long and frequent usage have become inseparable unities, fusions that are deeply rooted in folk poetic traditions and that remain in modern language unchanged: dark forest, deep ocean, true love, merry Christmas, dead silence, a trembling maiden, fairy lady, буйний вітер, вірная дружинонька, кінь вороненький, чисте поле, гірка доля, золотий вінець, срібне весельце, жива вода, чорний день тощо.
Emotional epithets are qualifying words that convey the emotional evaluation of the object: gorgeous, nasty, magnificent, atrocious, шалений, страшенний чудовий.
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, voiceless sands, comfortable mind, furnished souls, вітри спантеличені, кришталева музика, солоні сутінки 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.
A special structural and semantic type of epithet is so called transferred epithet (зміщений епітет). 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; or cases of attributive constructions in which semantic relations do not coincide with the syntactic relations:
E.g. I will make a palace fit for you and me
Of green days in forest and blue days at sea (R. L. Stevenson).
If we reconstruct the logical norms in the last line of the above-cited example we will get the meaning – days in green forest, days at blue sea instead of blue days and green days.
Structurally, epithets can be viewed from the angle of a) composition and b) distribution.
As to the structural composition of epithets they are divided into simple, compound, phrasal and clausal. Simple epithets are expressed by a single adjective or adverb. Compound epithets are expressed by a compound adjective, as in turned-nosed peacock, блакитно-срібний сон. Phrasal and clausal epithets are expressed by a phrase or a sentence the sunshine-in-the-breakfast-room smile, do-it-yourself command, темно-сірі з грозою і цвітом очі, чутка одна баба сказала, моя хата з краю підхід. An interesting structural detail of phrase and sentence epithets is that they are generally followed by the words expression, air, attitude and others that describe behaviour or facial expression. Here is an example of clausal epithet:
There is a sort of 'Oh-what-a-wicked-world-this-is-and-how-I-wish-I-could-do-something-to-make-it-better-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).
Another structural variety of the epithet (characteristic only for English) is the one which we shall term reversed (or inverted). 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). All reversed epithets are easily transformed into epithets of a more habitual structure: the giant of a men – the gigantic man; the prude of a woman – the prudish woman, etc). When meeting an inverted epithet we should not mix it up with an ordinary of-phrase. Here the article with the second noun will help in doubtful cases: the toy of the girl – the toy belonging to the girl; the toy of a girl – a small, toylike girl.
From the point of view of the distribution of the epithets in the sentence, epithets are used singly, in pairs, in chains, in two-step structures. Pairs are represented by two epithets joined by a conjunction or asyndetically: wonderful and incomparable beauty, a tired old town. The next model to be pointed out is the string of epithets: a plump, rosy-cheeked, wholesome apple-faced young woman (Ch. Dickens); a well-matched, fairly-balanced give-and-take couple (Ch. 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.
In the overwhelming majority of examples epithets in English and Ukrainian are expressed by adjectives, participles or adverbs in pre- or postposition, by nouns (the brightness of the sun, the deepness of her eyes, шлях зневіри) and predicative structures:
She was a faded white rabbit of a woman (A. Cronin).
Душа моя – дно без джерельне й сухе(О. Олесь).
Легкі і прозорі стали печалі й турботи (О. Олесь).
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. Alongside with its expressive function it also contributes to our perception of the world, to the development of our knowledge of the things described and opens new sides of well-known objects and phenomena.
Metonymy
Metonymy is transference of the name of one object into another object, based on the principle of contiguity of the two objects. Both associated objects do not necessarily posses common semantic features but should have common ground of existence in reality. The word press stands for all printed or broadcasted information as well as people working in this sphere, the word crown substitutes the notion of royal power, because crown is its symbol, the word cradle is associated with infancy, earliest stages or place of origin because cradle is an indaspebsable attribute of these notions; the bench is used as a generic term for 'magistrates and justices', a hand is used for a worker.
Metonymy used in speech or in literary texts is genuine metonymy and reveals a quite unexpected substitution of one word for another, or one concept for another, on the ground of some strong impression produced by a chance feature of the thing, for example:
Miss Tox's hand trembled as she slipped it through Mr. Dombey's arm, and felt herself escorted up the steps, preceded by a cocked hat and a Babylonian collar (Ch. Dickens).
'A cocked hat and a Babylonian collar' stand for the wearer of the articles in question. The function of these examples of genuine metonymy is to point out the insignificance of the wearer rather than his importance, for his personality is reduced to his externally conspicuous features, the hat and red collar.
The scope of transference in metonymy is rather limited and can be described as follows:
1. A concrete thing used instead of an abstract notion. In this case the thing becomes a symbol of the notion, as in The camp, the pulpit and the law For rich men's sons are free (P. B. Shelley).
2. The container instead of the thing contained: The hall applauded. Зібралася вся школа.
3. The relation of proximity, as in: The round game table was boisterous and happy (Ch. Dickens).
4. The material instead of the thing made of it, as in: The marble spoke. Золото у вухах, кришталь на столі.
5. The instrument which the doer uses in performing the action instead of the action or the doer himself, as in: Well, Mr. Weller, says the gentleman, you're a very good whip, and can do what you like with your horses, we know (Ch. Dickens).
6. The relation between the part and the whole. This special type of metonymy is referred to as synecdoche: to live under the same roof (where roof means the whole house), сюди ще не ступала людська нога (нога means people).
The list is in no way complete. There are many other types of relations which may serve as a basis for metonymy, as in the following Ukrainian expressions: заробляти копійки, немати й крихти в роті, ділитися шматком хліба, язик до Києва доведе, читати Шевченка etc.
As a rule metonymy is expressed by nouns (less frequently by substantivized numerals) and performs the syntactic function of subject, object and predicative.
Periphrasis and Euphemism
Periphrasis is a type of metonymy. Periphrasis is the replacement of a direct name of a thing or phenomenon by the description of its quality, most conspicuous features. It is a kind of figurative renaming of an object:
weapons – instruments of destruction; love – the most pardonable of human weaknesses; woman – the better sex; oil – black gold; артист – служитель Мельпомени, Київ – мати городів руських, etc.
Periphrasis aims at pointing to one of the seemingly insignificant or barely noticeable features or properties of the given object, and intensifies this property by naming the object by the property. Periphrasis makes the reader perceive the new appellation against the background of the one existing in the language code and the twofold simultaneous perception secures the stylistic effect.
This device has a long history. It was widely used in the Bible and in Homer's Iliad. As a poetic device it was very popular in Latin poetry (Virgil). Due to this influence it became an important feature of epic and descriptive poetry throughout the Middle Ages and into the Renaissance. The use of periphrasis in the 16th century was in the nature of embellishment, where it became a feature of a definite literary style. It is due to this practice of re-naming things that periphrasis became one of the most favoured devices in the 17th and 18th centuries giving birth even to a special trend in literature in France and other countries called periphrastic.
Euphemism is a word or word combination which is used to replace an unpleasantly sounding word or word combination.
The semantic characteristics of English and Ukrainian euphemisms have much in common. Both languages contain the group of moral and religious euphemisms among which the largest layer is roundabout ways of naming death, God, Devil.
To die, to be dead: to pass away, to breath one’s last, to go west, to join the majority, to go the way of all flesh, піти за вічну межу, спочити, навіки заснути, the deceased, the departed, покійний, спочилий.
God: The Lord, the Supreme Being, Творець, Спаситель, Всевишній.
Devil or evil creatures: The Prince of Darkness, the Deus, the Evil One, лукавий, нечистий, домовик, годованець.
These euphemisms emerged as a result of taboos to use direct names to denote different phenomena the ancient people could not understand and explain. To use the direct nomination of certain mysterious phenomenon meant to materialize it, because the name of the thing was equal to the thing itself and was prohibited. The euphemistic periphrasis caused by ancient people’s fair in face of the unknown. It concerned different natural phenomena or even names of beasts. For example, the Ukrainian words ведмідь and змія are old euphemisms that described the frightful beast and the reptile: медђдь – той, що їсть мед; змія – та, що повзає по землі.
Common group of euphemisms are groups of
1. colloquial expressions:
to hit the bottle, заглядати в чарку, to tell stories, вигадувати, not right in the head, недоумкуватий, недалекий, loo, одне місце etc;
1. medical euphemisms:
lunatic asylum – mental hospital, притулок для душевно хворих, idiot – mentally abnormal, insane, person of unsound mind, не сповна розуму; cripple – handicapped, invalid, disabled, неповносправний;
2. political euphemisms:
starvation – undernourishment, revolt – tension, poor people – less fortunate elements, absence of wages and salaries – delay in payment, страйк – демонстрація протесту, жебрак – прохач, вигнати – вказати на двері, бідність – нестаток, скрута.
English and Ukrainian nowadays contain a considerable number of euphemisms that are related to the socially and culturally urgent notions and reflect the tendency to make the language socially and politically correct towards the different social, demographic, racial and professional groups: black, Afro-American instead of Negro, Ameriasian instead of Asian American, senior citizens instead of the aged, elderly, the needy, low-incomed or Ill-provided instead of the poor, team assistant instead of secretary, interior care provider instead of cleaning lady, sanitary engineer instead of garbage collector, facility manager instead of janitor; люди з функціональними обмеженнями замість інваліди, соціально неадаптовані замість бомжі, незайняте населення замість безробітні, асоціальна сім’я замість неблагополучна, робітник комплексного прибирання замість двірник, оператор машинного доїння замість доярка. Most recent euphemisms are aimed at increasing the importance of some profession or finding a way to name newly emerged occupations: content manager, innovation manager, multimedia designer etc. The euphemistic tendency of modern English is in some cases so unnatural that it becomes the object of humor and satire. As an example the euphemistic substitutions of such words as blind, fat, short, stupid, wicked, old may be quoted: optically-challenged, differently sized, vertically-challenged, wisdom-challenged, kindness-impaired, chronologically-gifted etc.
This overwhelming “whitewashing device” has become so hypertrophied for the last decades that it is not perceived as stylistic innovation but as lies and a cast of a new veil over the socially unpleasant facts instead of a more straightforward way of describing things. It is this very aspect of euphemisms that under the artful pen of men of letters is the means to disclose and generalize:
In private I should merely call him a liar. In the Press you should use the words: 'Reckless disregard for truth' and in Parliament—that you regret he 'should have been so misinformed’ (J. Galsworthy).
The life of euphemisms is short. They very soon become closely associated with the referent (the object named) and give way to a newly coined word or combination of words.
E.g. I used to think I was poor. Then they said that it was self-defeating to think of myself as needy, that I was culturally deprived. Then they told me deprived was a bad image, that I was underprivileged. Then they told me that underprivileged was not used, that I was disadvantaged. I still don’t have a dime but I have a great vocabulary (Harper Dictionary of Contemporary Usage).
Irony
Irony is a stylistic device also based on the simultaneous realization of two logical meanings-dictionaries and contextual, but the two meanings stand in opposition to each other. For example:
It must be delightful to find oneself in a foreign country without a penny in one's pocket.
The word in italic acquires a meaning quite the opposite to its primary dictionary meaning, that is, 'unpleasant', 'not delightful'. This figure of quality is realized when the speaker intentionally breaks the principle of sincerity in speech and evaluate the phenomenon or the object named not directly but subjectively. Thus irony is generally used to convey negative meaning or emotion: irritation, regret, dissatisfaction, disappointment, displeasure.
Cutting off chickens’ heads! Such a fascinating process to watch!
Він такий розумний, що й “два плюс два” не второпає.
The essence of this stylistic device consists in the foregrounding not of the logical but of the emotive and/or evaluative meaning of the word. The context is arranged so that the qualifying word or phrase used ironically reverses the direction of the evaluation, and the word positively charged is understood as negative qualification and (much-much rarer) vice versa, as in the phrase, for example, От іще герой!, where the word герой which is charged with positive evaluative connotation is used in the opposite sense.
There are also very many cases in which the effect of irony is created not by a single word or word-combination but by a number of statements or by the whole of the text. We unmistakably decode the ironic sense of the whole text due to the obvious contradiction of the speaker’s (writer’s) considerations the text is based on and the generally accepted moral and ethical codes.
E.g. When the war broke out she took down the signed photograph of the Keiser and, with some solemnity, hung it in the men-servants’ lavatory; it was her one combative action (E Waugh).
Квартира, де живе Іван Іванович зі своєю симпатичною сім’єю складається тільки (тільки!) з чотирьох кімнат... Словом, квартирна криза дала себе знати, і мій герой свідомо пішов їй назустріч. Іван Іванович, наприклад, ніколи не вимагав окремої кімнати для кухаворки, і Явдоха спить на ліжкові на підлозі в коридорі. Бо й справді: яке має право вимагати ще одну кімнатиу?... він же цілком свідомий партієць і добре знає як живуть інші. Іншим ще й гірше становище: буває й так, що мають не чотири, а тільки три кімнати...(М. Хвильовий).
Though irony is a contextual stylistic device, there exist words and word combinations which convey ironical meaning outside the context: too clever by half, a young hopeful, head cook and bottle washer, to orate, to oratorize.
Figures of quantity
Hyperbole
Hyperbole is stylistic device in which emphasis is achieved through deliberate exaggeration of a certain quality of an object or phenomenon. Hyperbole is one of the most common expressive means of our everyday speech, of literary discourse: to be scared to death, thousand pardons, чекати цілу вічність, вмирати від цікавості, робити з мухи слона, etc.
The exaggeration the hyperbole is based on is aimed not at the presenting the real quality or dimension of the object but is intended as such and signals the emotional background of the utterance. The main function of hyperbole is to attract listener’s attention towards the object, emphasize either its positive or negative sides. Hyperbole may be the final effect of other stylistic devices (metaphor, epithet, simile, irony, etc), as we have in the following sentences: Every single rascal tries to cheat the public here or the man was like the Rock of Gibraltar.
It is also the oldest stylistic device and the most characteristic feature of primeval worldview embodied in folk literature heroes that were endowed with incredible power: Котигорошко, Кирило Кожум’яка, Beowulf, etc.
Hyperbole may be expressed by all notional parts of speech:
The girls were dressed to kill (J. Braine)
The papers are the organs of individual men who have jockeyed themselves to be party leaders, in countries where a new party is born every hour over the glass of beer in the nearest café (J. Reed).
Ви завжди забуваєте про час і ніколи не поспішаєте.
Не дружина – прямий нащадок іспанської інквізиції (О. Чорногуз).
Не хмара сонце заступила,
Не вихор порохом вертить,
Не галич чорна поле вкрила,
Не буйний вітер се шумить:
Се військо йде всіма шляхами,
Се ратне брязкотить збруями,
В Ардею-город поспіша.
Стовп пороху під небо в’ється,
Сама земля, здається, гнеться ... (І. Котляревський).
Meiosis and Litotes
Meiosis is deliberate diminution of a certain quality of an object. It is opposite to hyperbole. Meiosis underlines the insignificance of such qualities as size, time, volume, distance, and shape. Its main communicative function is the same as in hyperbole – it is not the actual diminishing of the object but a transient subjective impression that finds its realization in this stylistic device.
There is a drop of water left in the bucket.
It was a cat-size pony.
Зачекайте хвилинку
Ні гроша в кишені.
Litotes is a special type of meiosis. It has a spercific syntacticstructure that consists in double negation. Such combination generally has positive sense and makes judgments and statements more delicate and diplomatic:
Martin is not without sense of humour.
The venture was not impossible.
Бачу, що ви обурені, і не без причини.