One of the first linguists who tried "to modernize" traditional rhetoric system was a British scholar G. Leech. In 1967 his contribution into stylistic theory in the book "Essays on Style and Language" was published in London (39). Paying tribute to the descriptive linguistics popular at the time he tried to show
how linguistic theory could be accommodated to the task of describing such rhetorical figures as metaphor, parallelism, alliteration, personification and others in the present-day study of literature.
Proceeding from the popular definition of literature as the creative use of language Leech claims that this can be equated with the use of deviant forms of language. According to his theory the first principle with which a linguist should approach literature is the degree of generality of statement about language. There are two particularly important ways in which the description of language entails generalization. In the first place language operates by what may be called descriptive generalization. For example, a grammarian may give descriptions of such pronouns as I, they, it, him, etc. as objective personal pronouns with the following categories: first/third person, singular/plural, masculine, non-reflexive, anunate/inanimate.
Although they require many ways of description they are all pronouns and each of them may be explicitly described in this fashion.
The other type of generalization is implicit and would be appropriate in the case of such words as language and dialect. This sort of description would be composed of individual events of speaking, writing, hearing and reading. From these events generalization may cover the linguistic behaviour of whole populations. In this connection Leech maintains the importance of distinguishing two scales in the language. He calls them "register scale" and "dialect scale". "Register scale" distinguishes spoken language from written language, the language of respect from that of condescension, advertising from science, etc. The term covers linguistic activity within society. "Dialect scale" differentiates language of people of different age, sex, social strata, geographical area or individual linguistic habits (ideolect).
According to Leech the literary work of a particular author must be studied with reference to both - "dialect scale" and "register scale".
The notion of generality essential to Leech's criteria of classifying stylistic devices has to do with linguistic deviation.
He points out that it's a commonplace to say that writers and poets use language in an unorthodox way and are allowed a certain degree of "poetic licence". "Poetic licence" relates to the scales of descriptive and institutional delicacy.
Words like thou, thee, thine, thy not only involve description by number and person but in social meaning have "a strangeness value" or connotative value because they are charged with overtones of piety, historical period, poetics, etc.
|
|
|
The language of literature is on the whole marked by a number of deviant features. Thus Leech builds his classification on the principle of distinction between the normal and deviant features in the language of literature.
Among deviant features he distinguishes paradigmatic and syntagmatic deviations. All figures can be initially divided into syntagmatic or paradigmatic. Linguistic units are connected syntagmatically when they combine sequentially in a linear linguistic form.
Paradigmatic items enter into a system of possible selections at one point of the chain. Syntagmatic items can be viewed horizontally, paradigmatic - vertically.
Paradigmatic figures give the writer a choice from equivalent items, which are contrasted to the normal range of choices. For instance, certain nouns can normally be followed by certain adverbs, the choice
dictated by their normal lexical valency: inches/feet/yard + away, e. g. He was standing only a few feet away.
However the author's choice of a noun may upset the normal system and create a paradigmatic deviation that we come across in literary and poetic language: farmyards away, a grief ago, all sun long. Schematically this relationship could look like this
| inches | normal | away |
| feet | ||
| yards | ||
| farmyard | deviant | away |
The contrast between deviation and norm may be accounted for by metaphor which involves semantic transfer of combinatory links.
Another example of paradigmatic deviation is personification. In this case we deal with purely grammatical oppositions of personalI impersonal; animateIinanimate; concreteIabstract.
This type of deviation entails the use of an inanimate noun in a context appropriate to a personal noun.
As Connie had said, she handled just like any other aeroplane, except that she had better manners than most. (Shute). In this example she stands for the aeroplane and makes it personified on the grammatical level.
The deviant use of she in this passage is reinforced by the collocation with better manners, which can only be associated with human beings.
| aeroplane train car | normal inanimate neuter | it |
| aeroplane | deviant animate female | she |
This sort of paradigmatic deviation Leech calls "unique deviation" because it comes as an unexpected and unpredictable choice that defies the norm. He compares it with what the Prague school of linguistics called "foregrounding".
Unlike paradigmatic figures based on the effect of gap in the expected choice of a linguistic form syntagmatic deviant features result from the opposite. Instead of missing the predictable choice the author imposes the same kind of choice in the same place. A syntagmatic chain of language units provides a choice of equivalents to be made at different points in this chain, but the writer repeatedly makes the same selection. Leech illustrates this by alliteration in the furrow followed where the choice of alliterated words is not necessary but superimposed for stylistic effect on the ordinary background.
This principle visibly stands out in some tongue-twisters due to the deliberate overuse of the same sound in every word of the phrase. So instead of a sentence like "Robert turned over a hoop in a circle" we have the intentional redundancy of "r" in "Robert Rowley rolled a round roll round".
|
|
|
Basically the difference drawn by Leech between syntagmatic and paradigmatic deviations comes down to the redundancy of choice in i lie first case and a gap in the predicted pattern in the second.
This classification includes other subdivisions and details that cannot all be covered here but may be further studied in Leech's book.
This approach was an attempt to treat stylistic devices with reference to linguistic theory that would help to analyse the nature of stylistic function viewed as a result of deviation from the lexical and grammatical norm of the language.
2,2.3. I. R. Galperin's classification of expressive means and stylistic devices
The classification suggested by Prof. Galperin is simply organised and very detailed. His manual "Stylistics" published in 1971 includes the following subdivision of expressive means and stylistic devices based on the level-oriented approach:
1. Phonetic expressive means and stylistic devices.
2. Lexical expressive means and stylistic devices.
3. Syntactical expressive means and stylistic devices".
1. Phonetic expressive means an d stylistic devices To this group Galperin refers such means as:
1) onomatopoeia (direct and indirect): ding-dong; silver bells... tinkle, tinkle;
2) alliteration (initial rhyme): to rob Peter to pay Paul;
* To avoid repetition in each classification definitions of all stylistic devices are given in the glossary
3) rhyme (full, incomplete, compound or broken, eye rhyme, internal rhyme. Also, stanza rhymes: couplets, triple, cross, framingIring);
4) rhythm.
2. Lexical expressive means and stylistic devices
There are three big subdivisions in this class of devices and they all deal with the semantic nature of a word or phrase. However the criteria of selection of means for each subdivision are different and manifest different semantic processes.
I. In the first subdivision the principle of classification is the interaction of different types of a word's meanings: dictionary, contextual, derivative, nominal, and emotive. The stylistic effect of the lexical means is achieved through the binary opposition of dictionary and contextual or logical and emotive or primary and derivative meanings of a word.
A. The first group includes means based on the interplay of dictionary and contextual meanings:
metaphor: Dear Nature is the kindest Mother still. (Byron) metonymy:
The camp, the pulpit and the law For rich man's sons are free.
(Shelly)
irony: It must be delightful to find oneself in a foreign country without a penny in one's pocket.
B. The second unites means based on the interaction of primary and derivative meanings:
polysemy: Massachusetts was hostile to the American flag, and she would not allow it to be hoisted on her State Bouse;
zeugma and pun: May's mother always stood on her gentility; and Dot's mother never stood on anything but her active little feet. (Dickens)
C. The third group comprises means based on the opposition of logical and emotive meanings:
interjections and exclamatory words:
All present life is but an interjection
An 'Oh' or 'Ah' of joy or misery,
Or a 'Ha! ha!' or 'Bah!'-a yawn or 'Pooh!'
Of which perhaps the latter is most true.
(Byron)
epithet: a well-matched, fairly-balanced give-and-take couple. (Dickens)
oxymoron: peopled desert, populous solitude, proud humility. (Byron)
D. The fourth group is based on the interaction of logical and nominal meanings and includes:
antonomasia: Mr. Facing-Both-Ways does not get very far in this world. (The Times)
II. The principle for distinguishing the second big subdivision according to Galperin is entirely different from the first one and is based on the interaction between two lexical meanings simultaneously materialised in the context. This kind of interaction helps to call special attention to a certain feature of the object described. Here belong:
|
|
|
simile: treacherous as a snake, faithful as a dog, slow as a tortoise.
periphrasis: a gentleman of the long robe (a lawyer); the fair sex. (women)
euphemism: In private I should call him a liar. In the Press you should use the words: 'Reckless disregard for truth'. (Galsworthy)
hyperbole: The earth was made for Dombey and Son to trade in and the sun and the moon were made to give them light. (Dickens)
III. The third subdivision comprises stable word combinations in their interaction with the context:
cliches: clockwork precision, crushing defeat, the whip and carrot policy.
proverbs and sayings: Come! he said, milk's spilt. (Galsworthy)
epigrams: A thing of beauty is a joy for ever. (Keats)
quotations: Ecclesiastes said, 'that all is vanity'. (Byron)
allusions: Shakespeare talks of the herald Mercury. (Byron)
decomposition of set phrases: You know which side the law's buttered. (Galsworthy)
3. Syntactical expressive means and stylistic devices
Syntactical expressive means and stylistic devices are not paradigmatic but syntagmatic or structural means. In defining syntactical devices Galperin proceeds from the following thesis: the structural elements have their own independent meaning and this meaning may affect the lexical meaning. In doing so it may impart a special contextual meaning to some of the lexical units.
The principal criteria for classifying syntactical stylistic devices are:
- the juxtaposition of the parts of an utterance;
- the type of connection of the parts;
- the peculiar use of colloquial constructions;
- the transference of structural meaning.
Devices built on the principle of juxtaposition
inversion (several types): A tone of most extravagant comparison Miss Tox said it in. (Dickens)
Down dropped the breeze. (Colerigde)
detached constructions: She was lovely: all of her - delightful. (Dreiser)
parallel constructions:
The seeds ye sow - another reaps, The robes ye weave - another wears The arms ye forge - another bears.
(Shelley)
chiasmus:
In the days of old men made manners Manners now make men.
(Byron)
repetition: For glances beget ogles, ogles sighs, sighs wishes, wishes words, and words a letter. (Byron)
enumeration: The principle production of these towns... appear to be soldiers, sailors, Jews, chalk, shrimps, officers, and dock-yard men. (Dickens)
suspense:
Know ye the land where the cypress and myrtle... Know ye the land of the cedar and vine...
'Tis the clime of the East - 'tis the land of the Sun.
(Byron)
climax: They looked at hundred of houses, they climbed thousands of stairs, they inspected innumerable kitchens. (Maugham)
antithesis: Youth is lovely, age is lonely; Youth is fiery, age is frost. (Longfellow)
Devices based on the type of connection include
Asyndeton: Soams turned away; he had an utter disinclination for talk, like one standing before an open grave... (Galsworthy)
polysyndeton: The heaviest rain, and snow, and hail, and sleet, could boast of the advantage over him in only one respect. (Dickens) gap-sentence link: It was an afternoon to dream. And she took out Jon's letters. (Galsworthy)
Figures united by the peculiar use of colloquial constructions Ellipsis: Nothing so difficult as a beginning, how soft the chin which bears his touch. (Byron)
Aposiopesis (break-in-the-narrative): Good intentions but -; You just come home or I'll...
Question in the narrative: Scrooge knew he was dead? Of course he did. How could it be otherwise? (Dickens)
Represented speech (uttered and unuttered or inner represented speech):
Marshal asked the crowd to disperse and urged responsible diggers to prevent any disturbance... (Prichard) Over and over he was asking himself: would she receive him? Transferred use of structural meaning involves such figures as Rhetorical questions: How long must we suffer? Where is the end? (Norris)
|
|
|
Litotes: He was no gentle lamb (London); Mr. Bardell was no deceiver. (Dickens)
Since "Stylistics" by Galperin is the basic manual recommended for this course at university level no further transposition of its content is
deemed necessary. However other attempts have been made to classify all expressive means and stylistic devices because some principles applied in this system do not look completely consistent and reliable. There are two big subdivisions here that classify all devices into either lexical or syntactical. At the same time there is a kind of mixture of principles since some devices obviously involve both lexical and syntactical features, e. g. antithesis, climax, periphrasis, irony, and others.
According to Galperin there are structural and compositional syntactical devices, devices built on transferred structural meaning and the type of syntactical connection and devices that involve a peculiar use of colloquial constructions. Though very detailed this classification provokes some questions concerning the criteria used in placing the group 'peculiar use of colloquial constructions' among the syntactical means and the group called 'peculiar use of set expressions' among the lexical devices. Another criterion used for classifying lexical expressive means namely, 'intensification of a certain feature of a thing or phenomenon' also seems rather dubious. Formulated like this it could be equally applied to quite a number of devices placed by the author in other subdivisions of this classification with a different criteria of identification, such as metaphor, metonymy, epithet, repetition, inversion, suspense, etc. It does not seem quite just to place all cases of ellipsis, aposiopesis or represented speech among colloquial constructions.
