.

Expressive means and stylistic Devices

Язык: русский
Формат: дипломна
Тип документа: Word Doc
3 13863
Скачать документ

MINISTRY OF HIGHER AND SECONDARY SPECIAL EDUCATION

OF THE REPUBLIC OF UZBEKISTAN

GULISTAN STATE UNIVERSITY

The English and Literature Department

______________’s qualification work on speciality 5220100, English
philology on the theme:

“Expressive Means and Stylistic Devices”

Supervisor: ___________

Gulistan 2008

Contents

I. Introduction

1.1. About style

1.2. Expressive means and stylistic Devices

II. Main part

2.1. Lexical Expressive Means and Stylistic Devices

2.2. International mixing of the stylistic aspect of words

2.3. Interaction of different types of lexical meaning

2.4. Interaction of primary dictionary and contextually imposed meaning

2.5. Stylistic Devices Based on the Interaction of Logical and Emotive
Meaning

2.6. Stylistic Devices Based on the Interaction of Logical and Nominal
Meanings

III. Conclusion

IV. Bibliography

I. Introduction

Theme actuality. In order to improve the training and provide better
knowledge of foreign languages we have to accelerate the realization of
the National Programmer of Personnel Training in the country. As in many
other aspects of life the situation changed in a language policy. That
requires creation of new textbooks, dictionaries, manuals. In order to
fulfill this goals one must know every field of linguistics. In my
opinion the theme of the work is very actual because there is not any
manual which compare the lexical stylistic devices of the Uzbek and the
English language.

The aims and purposes of the work. Main goal of the work is to compare,
analyze and find examples which belong to lexical stylistic device.

The scientific novelty of the work. The analyses of the lexical
stylistic device of both languages have done in comparing the works done
by Galperin I.R, Kukharenko.V.A, and Bobohonova L.T.

The practical value. The practical value of the research is that the
material and the results of the given qualification work can serve the
material for theoretical courses of lexicology , stylistics, typology as
well as can be used for practical lessons in translations, home reading
,conversational practice and current events.

Literature overview. The methodic base on the work became the works of
Galperin I.R., Kucharenko V.A., Bobohonova L.T, materials from Internet,
different types of dictionaries,World Book Encyclopedia .

The structure of the work . The qualifications work consists of
Introduction, Main Part an conclusion , which are followed by the list
of the literature used in the course of research.

1.1 About style

The word s t y l e is derived from the Latin word `s t y l o s` which
meant a short stick sharp at one end and flat at the other used by the
Romans for writing on wax tablets. Now the word `style` is used in so
many senses that it has become a breeding ground for ambiguity. The word
is applied to the teaching of how to write a composition; it is also
used to reveal the correspondence between thought and expression; it
frequently denotes an individual manner of making use of language; it
sometimes refers to more general, abstract notions thus inevitably
becoming vague and obscure, as, for example, “Style is the man himself”
(Buffon), “Style is depth” (Derbyshire); “Style is deviations”
(Enkvist); “Style is choice” and the like.

All these ideas directly or indirectly bear on issues in stylistics.
Some of them become very useful by revealing the springs which make our
utterance emphatic, effective and goal-directed. It will therefore not
come amiss to quote certain interesting observations regarding style
made by different writers from different angles. Some of these
observations are dressed up as epigrams or sententious maxims like the
ones quoted above. Here some more of them.

Style is a quality of language which communicates precisely emotions or
thoughts, or a system of emotions or thoughts, peculiar to the author”.
(J Middleton Murry) “… a true idiosyncrasy of style is the result of an
author’s success in compelling language to conform to his mode of
experience”. (J. Middleton Murry).

“Style is a contextually restricted linguistic variation”. (Enkvist).

“Style is a selection of non-distinctive features of language”. (L.
Bloomfield).

“Style is simple synonymous with form or expression and hence a
superfluous term”. (Benedetto Croce)Riffaterre, M. The Stylistic
Function. Proceedings of the 9-th International Congress of Linguists,
The Hague, 1964, p.p. 316-317. .

“Style is essentially a citational process, a body of formulae, a memory
(almost in the cybernetic sense of the word). A cultural and not an
expressive inheritance”. (Roland Barthes) Chatman, Seymour. Stylistics;
Quantitative and Qualitative, 1967, V. 1, p.30.

Some linguists consider that the word `style` and the subject of
linguistic stylistics is confined to the study of the effects of the
message, i.e. its impact on the reader. Thus Michael Riffaterre writes
that “Stylistics will be linguistics of the effects of the message, of
the output of the act of communication, of its attention –compelling
function”. This point of view has clearly been reached under the
influence of recent developments in the general theory of information.
Language being one of the means of communication or, to be exact, the
most important mans of communication, is regarded in the above quotation
from a pragmatic point of view. Stylistics in that case is regarded as a
language science which deals with the results of the act of
communication.

To a very considerable degree this is true. Stylistic must take into
consideration the “output of the act of communication”. But stylistics
must also investigate the ontological, i.e. natural, inherent, and
functional peculiarities of the means of communication. Which may ensure
the effect sought?

Archibald A. Hill states that “A current definition of style and
stylistics is that structures, sequences, and patterns which extend, or
may extend, beyond the boundaries of individual sentences define style,
and that the study of them is stylistics”

The truth of this approach to style and stylistics lies in the fact that
the author concentrates on such phenomena in language as present a
system, in other words, on facts which are not confined to individual
choices and patterns of choices (emphasis added) among linguistic
possibilities.” Hill, Archibald A. Poetry and Stylistics.—in; “Essays in
Literary Linguistics”, p.54

This definition indirectly deals with the idiosyncrasies peculiar to a
given writer. Somehow it fails to embrace such phenomena in text
structure where the `individual` is reduced to the minimum or even done
away with entirely (giving preferences to non-individualistic forms in
using language means). However, this definition is acceptable when
applied to the ways men-of-letters use language when they seek to make
it conform to their immediate aims and support. A somewhat broader view
of style is expressed by Werner winter who maintains that “A style may
be said to be characterized by a pattern of recurrent selections from
the inventory of optional features of a language. Various types of
selection can be found; complete exclusion of an optional element,
obligatory inclusion of a feature optional else where, varying degrees
of inclusion of a specific variant without complete elimination of
competing features.” Winter, Werner. Styles as Dialects. Proceeding of
the Ninth International Congress of Linguists, p.324.

The idea of taking various types of selection as criteria for
distinguishing styles seems to be a sound one. It places the whole
problem on a solid foundation

Of objective criteria, namely, the interdependence of optional and
obligatory features..

There is no point in quoting other definitions of style. They are too
many and heterogeneous to fall under one more or less satisfactory
unified notion. Undoubtedly all these diversities in the understanding
of the word `style` stem from its ambiguity. But still all these various
definitions leave an impression that by and large they all have
something in common. All of them point to some integral significance,
namely that style is a set of characteristics by which we distinguish
one author from another or members of one subclass from members of the
same general class.4 *What are these sets of characteristics typical of
a writer or of a subclass of the literary language will be seen in the
analysis of the language means of a given writer and of the subclasses
of the general literary standard.

1.2 Expressive means and stylistic Devices

All stylistic means of the English and Uzbek languages can be divided
into expressive means (EM) and stylistic devices (SD). “The expressive
means of a language are those phonetic, morphological, word building,
lexical, preseological or syntactical forms which exist in language
as-a-system for the purpose of logical and various dictionaries.

Among lexical EM we must mention words with emotive meanings,
interjections, polysemantic words, vulgar words, slang etc. The fact
that polysemantic words retain their primary and secondary meanings is
of great importance for stylistics. It is quite easy to understand the
meaning of the following phrases; He grasped the main idea; a burning
question; pity melted her heart. The italicized words are used in their
secondary transferred dictionary meanings. But the primary and secondary
meanings are realized simultaneously. The expressiveness of these words
becomes obvious when compared with neutral equivalents; He understood
the main idea; an important question; pity softened her heart. This
expressiveness exists in the vocabulary of the Uzbek and any language.
For example: Suv yuz gradus issiqlikda qaynaydi; gap qaynaydi.
Ustaraniqayramoq. Ikki yoshni bir-biriga qayramoq. Dalalarda ish
qaynaydi kimlar teradi, kimlar beda o`radi, kimlar shudgar qiladi.

In this short survey it is impossible to give a complete analysis of all
E.M. of the both language. My task was to show some lexical EM of the
English and Uzbek languages.

According to Prof I.R. Galperin`s definition Stylistic Devise is a
conscious and intentional intensification of some type structural or
semantic property of a language unit promoted to a generalized status
and thus becoming a generative model.

SD must always have some function in the text, besides they bring some
additional information. The conception that words possess several
meanings gives rise to such SDS as metaphor, metonymy, irony, epithet
and others. Thus, a metaphor is a conscious and intentional
intensification of typical semantic properties of a word: “Oh,
Rain”-said Mor. He enveloped her in a great embrace. (I. Murdoch). The
dictionary meaning of the verb “envelope” is “to wrap up, coer on all
sides”. The contextual meaning is “to embrace” Here we can give example
of the Uzbek: Imtixonda u sayrab ketdi. The dictionary meaning of the
verb “sayramoq” is “qushlarning sayrashi, yoqimli yoki yoqimsiz ovoz
chiqarishi” The contextual meaning is” tinmasdan so`zladi, yaxshi javob
berdi”.

The typical features of proverbs and sayings serve as the foundation for
an SD which is called epigram, i.e. brevity, rhythm and other properties
of proverbs constitute a generative mo0del into which new content is
poured

A thing of beauty is a joy for ever. (J. Keats)

Sweet is pleasure after pain (J. Dryden)

If youth knew, if age could (Tl. Estienne)

What the eye does not see, the stomach doesn’t get upset (J.K. Jerome).

O`zing tashna bo`lsang, obi juy etar

Ko`zing tashna bo`lsa, obro`y ketar (X.Dexlaviy)

Aytur so`zni ayt, aytmas so`zdan qayt. (A.Navoiy)

These phrases are not proverbs; they are the creations of individual
writers and poets. When such phrases are used in the text they
accumulate great emotive force and function. They acquire a generalized
status and thus easily become an SD while proverbs remain EM of the
language.

The some may be said about syntax. The typical structural features of
oral speech (violation of word order, omission of some parts of the
sentence, repetition of certain words etc) may be intensified and
promoted to a generalized status. Such SDs as inversion, parallel
constructions, chiasmus is the result of these stylistic
transformations.

It is important to know that the stylistic use of EM must not
necessarily lead to the formation of an SD. For example, repetition is
widely used in folk song and poetry and in oral speech to make our
speech emotional and expressive, but we can’t say that in such cases we
use a SD.

When the weather is wet

We must not fret,-

When the weather is cold

We must not scold

When the weather is warm

We must not storm.

“Oltin edim, chuyan bo`ldim

Dono edim, somon bo`ldim

Qimmat edim, arzon bo`ldim

G`amga qolgan, ravshan bo`ldim.

Thus we may draw the conclusion that EM are the facts of the language,
while SDs are the property of the speech. They are the creation of
individuals (writers and poets) and are based on the peculiarities of
existing EM of the language. This is in short the difference between EM
and SD.

While speaking about SD we must always remember: the force of one and
the same SD may be different. In some cases the emotive charge may be
very strong, in others it may be weak. It depends on the use of a SD in
one and the same function. Due to the overuse of the SD it may become
hackneyed, trite and looses its freshness and brightness;

1. The best pens of the world

A sweet smile

Stly as a fox

Buloqning ko`zi

Tog`ning yon bag`ri

Oq oltin, zangori ekran

2. with his mousing walk

Buttoned strictness of his coat

O`ychan oqshomlar

Erning oppoq ko`rpasi

Solsovuldek yuzlar

In the first case we have trite SDs, in the second-fresh, genuine SD.

Speaking about SDs we must mention the cases when two or more EM or SD
meet at one point, it one utterance. Such clusters of SDs are called
convergence. “Together each SD adds its expressivity to that of the
others. In general, the effects of these SDs converge into one
especially striking emphasis” (M. Riffaterre) For example: When everyone
had recovered George said; “She put in her thumb and pulled out a plum”.
Then away we were into our merciless hacking-hecking laughter again.
(S.M.Maugham).

Mushtipar opalarimiz, fidoyi yanga va singillarymiz tiriklikningtuganmas
yumushlary deb o`n besh-yigirma yoshlaridayoq “Qush uyqu”, o`ttiz
yoshlarida esa o`tin bo`lib qolmoqdalar…(Saodat jurnalidan)

In this Uzbek examples mushtipar, fidoyi, yumush, qush uyqu, o`tin is
convergence.

In English examples we find the convergence of several SDs:
decomposition of a proverb (to put one’s thumb into smth), a bring case
of an onomatopoeia in the function of an epithet (Hacking-hecking),
inversion (adverbial modifier stand before the subject).

“ … and heaved and heaved still unrestingly heaved the black sea as if
its vast tides were a conscience. Here the convergence comprises
repetition, inversion and simile”. See “Style in Language”, ed. By T.
Sebeok. N. Y., 1960, p.427.

II. Main part

2.1 Lexical Expressive Means and Stylistic Devices

Transferred meaning is the interrelation between two types of the
lexical meaning: dictionary and contextual. The contextual meaning
always depends on the dictionary meaning. But when the deviation is very
great that it ven causes an unexpected turn in the logical meaning, we
register a stylistic device. In other words we may say: when we witness
two meanings of the word realized simultaneously we are confronted with
a SD, where two meanings interact.

2.2 International mixing of the stylistic aspect of words

Heterogeneity of the component parts of the utterance is the basis for a
stylistic device called bathos. Unrelated elements are brought together
as if they denoted things equal in rank or belonging to one class, as if
they were of the same stylistic aspect. By being forcibly linked
together, the elements acquire a slight modification of meaning.

“Sooner shall heaven kiss earth—(here he fell sicker)

Oh, Julia! What is every other woe? —

(For God’s sake let me have a glass of liquor;

Pedro, Battista, help me down below)

Julia, my love!—(you rascal, Pedro, quicker)—

Oh, Julia!—(this curst vessel pitches so)—

Beloved Julia, hear me still beseeching!”

(Here he grew inarticulate with retching.)

Such poetic expressions as ‘heaven kiss earth’, ‘what is every other
woe’; ‘beloved Julia, hear me still beseeching’ are joined in one flow
of utterance with colloquial expressions—’For God’s sake; you rascal;
help me down below’, ‘this curst vessel pitches so’. This produces an
effect which serves the purpose of lowering the loftiness of expression,
inasmuch as there is a sudden drop from the elevated to the commonplace
or even the ridiculous.

As is seen from this example, it is not so easy to distinguish whether
the device is more linguistic or more logical. But the logical and
linguistic are closely interwoven in problems of stylistics.

Another example is the following—

“But oh? ambrosial cash! Ah! who would lose thee?

When we no more can use, or even abuse thee!”

(“Don Juan”)

Ambrosial is a poetic word meaning ‘delicious’,- ‘fragrant’, ‘divine’.
Cash is a common colloquial word meaning ‘money’, ‘money that a person
actually has’, ‘ready money’.

Whenever literary words come into collision with non-literary ones there
arises incongruity, which in any style is always deliberate, inasmuch as
a style presupposes a conscious selection of language means.

The following sentence from Dickens’s “A Christmas Carol” illustrates
with what skill the author combines elevated words and phrases and
common colloquial ones in order to achieve the desired impact on the
reader—it being the combination of the supernatural and the ordinary.

“But the wisdom of our ancestors is in the simile; and my unhallowed
hands shall not disturb it, or the Country’s done for.”

The elevated ancestors, simile, unhallowed, disturb (in the now obsolete
meaning of tear to pieces) are put alongside the colloquial contraction
the Country^ (the country is) and the colloquial done for.

This device is a very subtle one and not always discernible even to an
experienced literary critic, to say nothing of the rank-and-file reader.
The difficulty lies first of all in the inability of the inexperienced
reader to perceive the incongruity bf the component parts of the
utterance. Byron often uses bathos, for example,-

“They grieved for those who perished with the cutter

And also for the biscuit-casks and butter.”

The copulative conjunction and as well as the adverb also suggest the
homogeneity of the concepts those who perished and biscuit-casks and
butter. The people who perished are placed on the same level as the
biscuits and butter lost at the same time. This arrangement may lead to
at least two inferences:

1) for the survivors the loss of food was as tragic as the loss of
friends who perished in the shipwreck;

2) the loss of food was even more disastrous, hence the elevated grieved
… for food.

It must be born in mind, however, that this interpretation of the subtle
stylistic device employed here is prompted by purely linguistic
analysis: the verbs to grieve and to perish, which are elevated in
connotation, are more appropriate when used to refer to people—and are
out of place when used to refer to food. The every-day-life cares and
worries overshadow.the grief for the dead, or at least are put on the
same level. The verb to grieve, when used in reference to both the
people who perished and the food which was lost, weakens, as it were,
the effect of the first and strengthens the effect of the second.

The implications and inferences drawn from a detailed and meticulous
analysis of language means and stylistic devices can draw additional
information from the communication. This kind of implied meaning is
derived not directly from the words but from a much finer analysis
palled sup rali near or suprasegmental.

Almost of the same kind are the following lines, also from Byron:

“Let us have wine and women, mirth and laughter, .

Sermons and soda-water—the day after.”

Again we have incongruity of concepts caused by the heterogeneity of the
conventionally paired classes of things in the first line and the
alliterated unconventional pair in the second line. It needs no proof
that the words sermons and soda-water are used metonymically here
signifying ‘repentance’ and ‘sickness1 correspondingly. The decoded form
of this utterance will thus be: “Let us now enjoy ourselves in spite of
consequences.” But the most significant item in the linguistic analysis
here will, of course, be the identical formal structure of the pairs I.
wine and women; 2. mirth and laughter and 3. sermons and soda-water. The
second pair consists of words so closely related that they may be
considered almost synonymous. This affects the last pair and makes the
words sermons and soda-water sound as if they were as closely related as
the words in the first two pairs. A deeper insight into the author’s
intention may lead the reader to interpret them as a tedious but
unavoidable remedy for the sins committed.

Byron especially favors the device of bathos in his “Don Juan.” Almost
every stanza contains ordinarily unconnected concepts linked together by
a coordinating conjunction and producing a mocking effect or a realistic
approach to those phenomena of life which imperatively demand
recognition, no matter how elevated the subject-matter may be.

Here are other illustrations from this epoch-making poem:

“heaviness of heart or rather stomach;”

“There’s nought, no doubt, so much the spirit calms

As rum and true religion”

“…his tutor and his spaniel”

“who loved philosophy and a good dinner”

“I cried upon my first wife’s dying day

And also when my second ran away.”

We have already pointed out the peculiarity of the device, that it is
half linguistic, half logical. But the linguistic side becomes
especially conspicuous when there is a combination of stylistically
heterogeneous words and phrases. Indeed, the juxtaposition of highly
literary norms of expression and words or phrases that must be classed
as non-literary, sometimes low colloquial or even vulgar, will again
undoubtedly-produce a stylistic effect, and when decoded, will
contribute to the content of the utterance, often adding an element of
humour. Thus, for instance, the following from Somerset Maugham’s “The
Hour before Dawn”:

“‘Will you oblige me by keeping your trap shut, darling?’ he retorted.”

The device is frequently presented in the structural model which we
shall call heterogeneous enumeration

2.3 Interaction of different types of lexical meaning

Words in context, as has been pointed out, may acquire additional
lexical meanings not fixed in dictionaries, what we have called
con-textual meanings. The latter may sometimes deviate from the
dictionary meaning to such a degree that the new meaning even becomes
the opposite of the primary meaning, as, for example, with the word
sophisticated. This is especially the case when we deal with transferred
meanings.

What is known in linguistics as transferred meaning is practically the
interrelation between two types of lexical meaning: dictionary and
contextual. The contextual meaning will always depend on the dictionary
(logical) meaning to a greater or lesser extent. When the deviation from
the acknowledged meaning is carried to a degree that it causes an
unexpected turn in the recognized logical meanings, we register a
stylistic device.

The transferred meaning of a word may be fixed in dictionaries as a
result of long and frequent use of the word other than in its primary
meaning. In this case we register a derivative meaning of the word. The
term ‘transferred’ points to the process of formation of the derivative
meaning. Hence the term ‘transferred’ should be used, to our mind, as a
lexicographical term signifying diachronically the development of the
se-, mantic structure of the word. In this case we do not perceive two
meanings.

When, however, we perceive two meanings of a word simultaneously, we are
confronted with a stylistic device in which the two meanings interact.

2.4 Interaction of primary dictionary and contextually imposed meaning

The interact ion or interplay between the primary dictionary meaning
(the meaning which is registered in the language code as an easily
recognized sign for an abstract notion designating a certain phenomenon
or object) and a meaning which is imposed on the word by a micro-context
may be maintained along different lines. One line is when the author
identifies two objects which have nothing in common, but in which he
subjectively sees a function, or a property, or a feature, or a quality
that may make the reader perceive these two objects as identical.
Another line is when the author finds it possible to substitute one
object for another on the grounds that there is some kind of
interdependence or interrelation between the two corresponding objects.
A third line is when a certain property or quality of an object is used
in an opposite or contradictory sense.

The stylistic device based on the principle of identification of two
objects is called a metaphor. The SD based on the principle of
substitution of one object for another is called metonymy and the SD
based on contrary concepts is called irony.

Let us now proceed with a detailed analysis of the ontology, structure
and functions of these stylistic devices.

The relations between different types of lexical meanings may be, based
on various principles:

1) The principle of affinity-metaphor,

2) The principle of contiguity-metonymy

3) The principle of opposition-irony.

As it has been stated above the lexical meanings of a word comprise
various meanings. But the difference between these meanings not be great
and unexpected. In most cases these meanings appear on the principal of
affinity existing between the notions and objects surrounding us.

The interaction or interplay between the primary dictionary meaning-the
meaning which is registered in the language code as an easily recognized
sign for an abstract notion designating a certain phenomenon or
object-and a meaning which is imposed on the word by a micro-context may
be maintained along different lines. One line is when the author
identifies two objects which have nothing is common, but in which he
subjectively sees a function, or a property, or a feature, or a quality
that may make the reader perceive these two objects as identical.
Another line is when the author finds it possible to substitute one
object for another on the grounds that there is some kind of
interdependence or interrelation between the two corresponding objects.
A third line is when a certain property or contradictory sense.

The stylistic device based on the principle of identification of two
objects is called a metaphor. The SD based on the principle of
substitution of one object for another is called metonymy and the SD
based on contrary concepts is called irony.

Metaphor. The term “metaphor”, as the etymology of the word reveal means
transference of some quality from one object to another. From the times
of ancient Greek and Roman rhetoric, the term has been 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. Quintilian remarks: It is due to the metaphor that each thing
seems to have its name in language. “Language as a whole has been
figuratively defined as a dictionary of faded metaphors.

Thus by transference of meaning the words grasp, get and see come to
have the derivative meaning of understand. When these words are used
with that meaning we can only register the derivative meaning existing
in the semantic structures of the words.

Though the derivative meaning is metaphorical in origin, there is no
stylistic effect because the primary meaning is no longer felt.

A 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
.Such an imposition generally results when the creator of the metaphor
finds in the two corresponding objects certain features which to his eye
have something in common .

The idea that metaphor is based on similarity or affinity of two objects
or notions is erroneous .The two objects are identified and the fact
that a common feature is pointed to and made prominent doesn’t make them
similar .The notion of similarity can be carried on ad absurdum ,for
example ,animals and human beings move , breathe ,eat ,but if one of
these features ,i.e. movement ,breathing, is pointed to in animals and
at the same time in human beings the two objects will not necessarily
cause the notion of affinity.

Metaphor is not merely an artificial device making discourse more vivid
and poetical. It is also necessary for the apprehension and
communication of new ideas. It is the way in which creative minds
perceive things.

Metaphors like many SDs must be classified according to three aspects:

1) The degree of expressiveness,

2) The structure i.e. in what linguistic form it is presented or by what
part of speech it is expressed,

3) The function, i.e. the role of SD in making up an imagine.

The expressiveness of a SD depends on various aspects. Different authors
and literary trends or movements have different sources where they
borrow the material for images. Favourite images in oriental poetry are:
nightingale, rose, moon. Nature, art, war, fairy tales and myths,
science may also serve as sources for metaphorical images.

We distinguish genuine and trite metaphors. The metaphors in which
images are quite unexpected are called genuine. Those which are commonly
used-are called trite or dead metaphors. Genuine metaphors are also
called speech metaphors .Genuine metaphors can easily become trite if
they are frequently repeated.

There is an opinion that a metaphor is a productive way of building up
new meanings and new words. Language can be called the “dictionary of
faded metaphors”.

Examples of trite metaphors: The salt of life; a flight of imagination:
the ladder of fame; to burn with passion (anger). The following
metaphors enriched English phraseology; foot of a bed, leg of a chair,
head of a nail, to be in the same boat, blind window, to fish for
complements. Here Uzbek examples o`q yomg`iri, o`lim do`li buloq ko`zi.

Examples of genuine metaphors: The lips were tight little traps the
whole space was a bowl of heat; this virus carried a gun; the dark
swallowed him;

Mrs. Small`s eyes boiled with excitement; the words seemed to dance ….
Xademay, ularning safari qoridi. Daryo oqar, vaqt oqar, umr oqar
paydar-pay. Boshimdan kaptarlardekuchdi ming-minglab xauol. Gullar go`yo
eshitar ta`zim.

Very often trite metaphors are given new force and their primary dead
meaning is created a new. It is achieved by introducing new additional
images. Such metaphors are called sustained or prolonged: “Our family
rivulet joined other streams and the stream was a river pouring into St.
Thomas Church” (J. Steinbeck).

Jimjitlik bor joyda xayot so`nadi. Jimjitlik toshni xam, ko`ngilni xam
emiradi. Tingan suvni qurt bosadi.

Thus, trite metaphors regain freshness due to the prolongation.
Metaphors may have a sustained form in cases with genuine metaphors as
well.

Usually a metaphor may be expressed by any part of speech.

The main function of the metaphor is to create images. Genuine metaphors
create bright images in poetry and emotive prose. Trite metaphors are
widely used in newspaper and scientific style. Here it is not a
shortcoming of style. They help the author make the meaning more
concrete and brighten his writing as it is an indispensable quality of
human thought and perception.

There is an opinion according to which metaphor is defined as a
compressed simile. Prof. I.R. Galper in considers this approach as
misleading because metaphor identifies objects while simile finds some
point of resemblance and by this keeps the objects apart. He says their
linguistic nature is different.

When likeness is observed between inanimate objects and human qualities,
we have the cases of personification:

Slowly, silently, now the moon

Walks the night in her silvery shoon

This way and they and that the she peers and sees

Silver fruit upon silver trees

Here the examples of personification (jonlantiruvchi) of Uzbek
languages. Xozir Farg`ona bog`larida to`kin kuz. O`rikzorlar tukini
o`zgartirib boshiga olov rang qip-qizil durra bog`lagan. Tutzorlar
boshida malla qalpoq.

Metonymy—is a transfer of meaning based upon the association of
contiguity-proximity. In metonymy the name of one thing is applied to
another with which it has some permanent or temporary connection: He
felt as though he must find a sympathetic intelligent ear (Th drieser).

Guldur etib, bulut tarqab

Yalt-yult etib chaqmoq chaqdi,

Ishchi bobo seskansang-chi!

Sharqqa quyosh chinlab chiqdi!

In this Uzbek example the word “sharq” means countries and notions of
East.

The transfer of meanings may be based on temporal spatial, casual,
functional, instrumental and other relations.

Like metaphors metonymy can be divided into trite metonymy-i.e. words of
metonymic origin and genuine metonymy.

In trite metonymy the transferred meaning is established in the semantic
structure of the word as a secondary meaning. In the course of time its
figurativeness and emotional colouring fades away.

Eg: nickel, the coin of the US and Canada worth 5cent: hand, a workman;
bench, a judge; cradle, the place where something begins; grave,
death;house, the people voting after a debate. Qo`l-ishchi kuchi, beshik
boshlang`ich joy

If the interrelation between the dictionary and contextual meanings
stands out clearly then we can speak about the expressiveness of
metonymy and in this easy we have genuine metonymy .In order cases we
have only one of the lexicological problems –how new words and meanings
are coined .In most traditional metonymies the contextual meanings are
fixed in dictionaries and have a note –fig .Metonymy may be divided into
figures of speech established in the language and individual speech.
Metonymy established in the language is frequent in colloquial speech.
E.g. the whole table was stirring with impatience .e.g. the people
sitting round the table were impatient.Terim paytida ko’p qo’l kerak
buladi.Uning qalami qasos o’ti bilan yonardi .Green fingers ,people who
have skill for growing gardens blue –collars-workers, a symbol of
non-manual labor .

Metonymy is based on different relations of contiguity.

1) a leading significant feature of a person can be used instead of its
possessor:Whois the moustache ?-(who is the man?). Olive uniforms (young
men); cotton prints (women ) .’’Tantanali majlis zalida “a’lo “,
“yaxshi” qator o’tirdi.

2) a symbol can be used for an object : Then I think of taking silk ( to
become a lawyer). Nicolay zamonida ostonam tuyoq ko’rmagan .

3) The name of the place can be used for somebody or something connected
with it; It was too late for the river (a picnic on the riverside )
.Majlisga butun qishloq keldi. Auditoriya kuldi.

4) A concrete noun may stand for an abstract one: My mother’s voice had
the true.

5) An abstract notion may stand for a concrete one: Subservience sprang
round the counter (weak and mild people were standing round the
counter).

6) An abject may denote an action; When I awakened old sleepy Mary was
up and gone … and coffee and bacon were a foot (the break fast was
ready).

Certainly the types of metonymy are not limited. There may appear new
types of relations for the origin of metonymy. A metonymy differs from a
metaphor by the fact that a metaphor may be periphrased into a simile by
the help of such words as: as if, so as, like etc. With metonymy you
cannot do so.

The sources where images for metonymy are borrowed are quite different:
features of a person, an object, facial appearance, names of writers and
poets, names of their books, name of some instruments, etc.

The expressiveness of metonymy may be different. Metonymy used in
emotive prose is often called contextual and in this case is considered
to be genuine and unexpected.

Eg: The brown suit gaped at her. The blue suit grinned, might even have
winked. But the big nose in the gray suit stared-and he had small angry
eyes and even did not smile (J. Preistley). Qo`shiq kuylar qizaloq

Tinglar uni dala, bog`

Prof Galperin states that in order to decipher the true meaning of a
genuine metonymy a broader context is necessary ( not the same with a
metaphor). Though for trite metonymy the case is not the same. We can
see this from the following examples: fifty sails (instead of fifty
ships), smiling year (for spring). In the morning old Hitler-face
questioned me again (S. Sillitoe). I get my living by the sweat of my
brow (with difficulty); to earn one’s bread lone`s means of living); to
live by the pen (by writing); to keep one’s mouth shut (be silent).

Synecdoche is the case when the part of an object is called instead of
the whole object. It has given rise to many phraseological units under
one’s roof (in one’s house); not to lift a foot (do not help, when help
is needed);

Usually metonymy is expressed by nouns or substantivized numerals or
attributive constructions; she was a pale and fresh a eighteen.

The functions of metonymy are different. The general function of
metonymy is building up imagery and it mainly deals with generalization
of concrete objects. Hence nouns in metonymy are mostly used with the
definite article, or without it at all (definite and zero articles have
a generalizing function).

Besides, metonymy have a characterizing function when it is used to make
then character’s description significant or rather insignificant (by
mentioning only his hat and collar. It ahs the function of introducing a
new person into the book.

Irony is based on the realization of two logical meanings (dictionary
and contextual). Which stand in opposition? It is the clash of two
diametrically opposite meanings. Eg: The man they had got now was a
jolly, light-hearted, thick-headed sort of a chap, with about as much
sensitiveness in him. (J.K.)

Mana shu uchun ko`pchilik Yaponlar bunday “yoqimly”taasurotlaridan
ko`raishlash ming marta afzal deydilar.

In this utterance two words: “thick-headed” means a stupid, dull person
and “sensitiveness” means of sensitive person who is easily hurt in the
spirit easily offended. And “yoqimli” means “yoqimsiz”.

Sometimes irony is mixed up with sarcasm. Sarcasm is a bitter or
wounding remark, taunt, especially ironically worded. Usually socially
or politically aimed irony is also called sarcasm: once upon a time in a
sceptered island ruled a Great white Queen and enchantress…

Beloved by her subjects, she ruled with a stern, but loving hand,
disallowing anything that was not good for them…

In fact the majority of people did not have to work at all, only the
rich, were punished, left with the worries that money brings.

In this text the author gives a sarcastic description of the former
prime minister of Great Britain-M. Thatcher. Sarcasm appears due to the
use of contradictory notions: a stern, but loving hand; a Queen and
enchantress disallow anything that was not good for them, only rich
people were left with worries etc. Sarcasm is kept whole due to the use
of such devices as periphrasis: “a sceptered island” instead of Great
Britain; litotes- disallowing anything that was not good for them;
epithets-a sceptered island, a stern and loving hand.

Irony largely depends on the environment. We ought to distinguish
between irony and humour. Humour causes laughter. But the function of
irony is not to produce a humorous effect only. In some cases it can
express a feeling of irritation, displeasure, pity or regret. Richard
Attick says: “The effect of irony lies in the striking disparity between
what is said and was meant “Eg: Stoney smiled the sweet smile of an
alligator. “Xali uyga kelsang, boshingni silab, qo`yaman”. “Imtixonga
juda “yaxshi” tayorlanib kelibsiz, qizim, baxongiz “ikki”-dedi
o`qituvchi.

To mark out ironically used words in written language such graphic means
as inverted commas and italicized words are used. Sometimes it is only
the situation that can prompt the use of irony. In oral speech the main
role in recognition of irony belongs to intonation and situation. The
following phrase “There is gratitude for you!” (Thanks for you) may be
said ironically, depending on the situation and the intonation with
which you use it.

In the Uzbek language irony can be expressed by morphological form of
plurality for example.

Saboxat xonaga sinchkov ko`z ugurtirarkan, nimadandir xursand bo`lganday
og`zini tanobi qochib, ixtexzo bilaniljayardi.

-Nega aqalli qizlaringizniyo`qlab bormaysiz, desam turishlaringiz
shoxona ekanda,-dedi nixoyatkesatiq bilan.

2.5 Stylistic Devices Based on the Interaction of Logical and Emotive
Meaning

The emotive meaning of a word can be clearly understood if we introduce
the notion of neutral meaning. It denotes the unemotional communication:
Stylistic of emotional word and constructions are easily sensed when
they are set against the non emotional words and constructions.

Interjections. Usually these words express our feeling such as regret,
despair, sorrow, woe, surprise, astonishment etc. In the previous parts
we have spoken about interjections which were defined as expressive
means of the language. Emotionally coloured features of interjections
after conscious and intentional intensification of their structural and
semantic properties move up to a generalized status and become a
stylistic device.

Interjections may be divided into simple and derivative.

Simple interjections: Oh! Ah! Bah! Pooh! Gosh! Hush! Alas! Voy! Eh! Oh!
Be! Ie! Iy! Voey! E-ha! xa! Voy-bo`y! Xaya! I-i! Yop! Ey! Xax! Obbo!

Derivative interjections:Heavens! Good gracious!

Dear me! Good! By the lord! God knows! Bless me! Hum bug! Yopiray!
Tavba! Alvido! Yopirim! Parvardigor! Barakalla!, “Xe, mayli-da, uka,
buyam endi qirq yilda bir eshak o`yin deganday gap-da. Voy,
Xushomadgo`y-ey!” Voy, otasi tushgur-ey, dedi kula-kula Musa, -men sizni
so`fi, bunday ishlarga r`tabor qilmaydi deb yursam, sizda gap ko`p ekan.
Voy, otasi tushkur-ey!

There are a number of adjectives and adverbs which may be classified as
interjections. Among them are the following: terrible, awful, great,
wonderful, splendid. When they are used as interjections they are not
used in their logical dictionary meanings. In most cases they are used
in their emotive meanings as intensifiers.

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— the 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 or even sentence used to
characterize an object and pointing out to the reader, and frequently
imposing on him, some of the properties or features of the object with
the aim of giving an individual perception and evaluation of 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 the
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 qualities of
the objects which may 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 word 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
°f 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 prob-ably
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! y, epithets may be divided into two groups: those
associated with the noun following and those an associated 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’, ‘in-defatigable 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 does 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 flavor. Such epithets are called fixed 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’.

The epithet is a SD which is built on the interplay of two meanings of
words: emotive and logical. It denotes a permanent or temporary quality
of a person, thing, idea, phenomenon and characterizes it from the point
of view of subjective perception: gooseberry eyes, cat-like eyes, proud
boxing gloves, iron hate, waiting silence, silver hair, rose berry blond
hair.

Qorli tog`lar orqasidan

Atlas sochin tarab quyosh

Gox mo`ralab o`ynashar quyosh

Xanda sochar dudog`idan.

(G`ayratiy)

The degree of individual subjective evaluation is clearly seen if we
compare these word combinations with the traditional logical founded
word combinations: black, green, small, large, eyes, siyrak, quyuq,
to`zg`igan, kalta, o`rilgan jilvar, oq, sariq soch.

A comparison of such word combinations as “iron gate” and “iron will”,
“temir darvoza” and “temir iroda”. In the first case “iron” is logical
attribute denoting a special type of gates, whereas in “iron will”
“temir iroda”- iron serves as an epithet and denotes an “unyielding
will”. The same refers to “green meadow” “green old age”, “green
thoughts”, Steel weapon, steel will,ham tarvuz ,xom yigit, polat sim,
polat qala ets.

An erithet has always an emotional meaning or connotation. This meaning
may be combined with denotatinal meaning or it may exist independently.

After the long usage epithets form fixed word combinations which
established in the language and enter the group of set expressions;
true-love, merry mind, lagy gay, sweet smile, heated discussions, ogir
yigit, engiltak juvon, ogir yuk, qora quzgun.

Individual epithets depend on the authors stile and his artistic
purpose. Eg; He looked shy and embarrassed and wild hope came to me (G.
Green) Oyni kutgan oqshomgi kokda beshik-beshik bulut yurardi. (Oybek)

Semantic criterion gives us the right to distinguish associated and
unassociated epithets. Associated epithets single out a feature which is
essentially typical, inherent in the concept of the object they
describe; the red sunset, the towering woods, dark clouds, pokiza
yoshlik, ola chipor koylak, ochilgan guncha. Unassociated epithets
characterize the object through a feature which is not typical and alien
for this object. Such association immediately brings surprising effect,
attracts the readers attention. Eg; elegant books, smiling year, dim
roar, the wild moon, osmon upar uylar, shaftoli gul kuylak, sargaygan
dunyo, ichakuuzdi latifalar. These adjectives indicate properties which
are associated with other notions; elegant manners, smiling child, dim
light, qiziq latifalar.

In present day English epithets can be by various morphological and
syntactical categories. Very often and epithet is expressed in the form
of an adjective in the attributive function. Eg; Bold shadows, shallow
sorrows, golden autumn day.

Adjectival epithets are expressed by compounds consisting of;

1) Noun+adjective; Stone-cold water, steel-grey cloud.

2) Noun+participle: The house had a snow-beaten look.

3) Adjective (adverb+participle: much-traveled cousin.

4) Noun+adjective (derived from a noun): the key-eyed boy, her high,
long-legged dreams, pot-bellied man, gun-coloured overalls.

5) Very often an epithet is expressed by a participial attributes: the
gray boiling sea burst on to the sand.

In the examples given above epithets are expressed by nouns in the
function of a prepositive attribute which denotes qualities such as
colour, shape, consistency etc.

While speaking about epithets we must distinguish different structural
types such as: simple compound, string, phrase, sentence epithets and
reversed epithets. Here are the illustrations:

Simple epithets: a brainless animal, a sensible. Stroke, buyuk xasis,
tengsiz mumlik, qarsillagan kulgu, mexmondo`st odam, sofdil kishilar.

Compound epithets stand very close to compound adjectives: weak-minded
ideas, cast-iron opinion, a shamed-looking dog, a carefully thought out
curses

String epithets, the structural attributes describe the object from
different points of view. Very often string epithets constitute
gradation. Eg: Moving magically to fresh and strange and exciting
places; a miserable, long-nosed, dirty-looking scoundrel.

Prase epithets (sentence epithets): a life-and-death struggle; Her
mother ran up, and came into the bad-room with a worrid-end-of-the-world
frown on her face (E. O`. Brien). Baxtingga tasadduq zaminu olam,
ko`ngli oq va o`zi qora qoshyurtim!

Such constructions serve to the reversed epithet consists of two nouns
connected by an “of phrase”, a claw of fear, a day of happiness. These
are called metaphorical epithets.

The essence (nature) of transferred epithets lies in the fact that it is
associated with a noun other than to which it grammatically belongs: She
put her careful, not her foot.) Mr. Baker stirred with a thoughtful
spoon. (Mr. Baker was thoughtful, not his spoon) (Azizbek) Boshlab
fuqaroga salom berdi, so`ngra siniq va ojiz qolgan bir tovush bilan
xalqqa uzr aytdi.

From what have been said above it is quite clear that the stylistic
function of epithets is to give subjective evaluation of things and
notions. In most cases it is the writer’s subjective attitude to what he
describes.

Oxymoron. Oxymoron is lexical device the syntactic and semantic
structures of which come to clashes eg: “cold fire”, brawling love”
“ishbilarmon dangasa” “achiq kulgi”. Oxymoron is the use of an epithet
or in attributive phrase that is contradictory to the noun it modifies.
Chopin’s beautiful sorrow, a generous miser, busy idleness, a
beautifully ugly face.

An Oxymoron is used to give a figurative characterization of a notion to
reveal its inner complicated nature. It may serve to denote a temporary
feature of a notion.

Eg: It was with an almost cruel joy. Suddenly she felt the need to
speak. The wordy silence troubled her: It was a relief to be on board
and no longer alone together.

Of course an oxymoron always expressed the author’s subjective attitude:

Come to me in the silence of the night

Come in the speaking silence of a dream.

Uyg`on, ey malagim, tur o`rningdan tur,

Otashin muzlarda isinaylik yur

Yong`inli daryoda quloch otaylik,

Bu erdan ketaylik, faqat ketaylik.

The stylistic effect is based on the fact that the denotational meaning
of the attribute is not entirely lost. If it had been lost the word
combination would resemble those attributes with only emotional meaning
such as: It’s awfully nice of you, I’m terrible glad. Oxymoron as a rule
has the following structural model: adjective+noun or adverb adjective.

2.6 Stylistic Devices Based on the Interaction of Logical and Nominal
Meanings

Antonomasia. Antonomasia is lexical stylistic device in which a proper
name is used instead of a common noun or vice versa. This SD is based on
the immediate interplay between logical and nominal meanings of a word
which is realized in the text. The realization of only one meaning does
not give a SD. Here are some illustrations of antonomasia widely used in
emotive prose and drama:

Mclash, one who strikes violently (compare with the verb to lash). Mr.
McFaul (compare with the verb to fail, Mr. Pinch wife, one who hurts his
wife by pinching; Mr. Sparkish, a dandy, a man who pays too much care to
his clothes and personal appearance. Sir Fidget, a person who moves
about restlessly, shows of impatience. The same refers to Mcfission.
This kind of names exists in the Uzbek language also: To`lqin-primary
meaning is qattiq chayqalib turgan suv betidagi ko`rtana. Second meaning
is his-tuyg`u, ichki kechinma, jo`shqin xarakat va jamiatdagi,
xayotdagikuchli xarakat; Erkin

1) Xar qanday to`siq, g`ov, monelikdan xoli bo`lgan bemalol;

2) Siyosiy, iqtisodiy xuquqiy mustaqillikka ega bo`lgan, ozod, xur.
Oydin 1) oy chiqib, xamma yoq oy nuri bilan yorigan, oydinli (oydin
kecha)

2) aniq, ko`rinib, bilinib turgan, ravshan.

Sometimes in the English language capital letters are the only marks
maks of the use of antonomasia and the implication which such
antonomasia carries in the text. Eg. Lord Nobody, Dr. Good fell.
Traditionally proper name are built according to certain morphological
patterns: noun+suffixes; -son, er, ard. Eg. Jon son, Morison, Chaster,
Herbert, Howard, Bernard.

Antonomasia stands close to epithets. This closeness is traced in
nature, not in form. From the semantic point of view the authors stress
the prominent features of a person and stick these features to his name:
Miss Sharp, Mr. Backbite, Miss. Murdstone. Mr. Choakumchild (one who can
stop the breath of a child) Aka-uka baliqchilar tolmas va qo`rqmas
qaytmasovlar.

Antonomasia is associated with other SDs. For example, it is often used
together with epithets. Speaking about epithets we have underlined that
it denotes certain qualities of a person. Many Nicknames of historical
or public characters are based on the use of such characterization. Eg.
The Iron Duke (the first Duke of Wellington). Old Hickory (Andrew
Jackson, the seventh President of the USA), the Iron Lady (M. Thacher,
the former prime Minister of Great Britain. Here are Uzbek examples.
Qovoq Devona, Atala Maxsum (Bo`shashgan, lalaygan, lanj odam xaqida).

Another type of antonomasia is metonymic antonomasia which is based on
the relation of contiguity. A product can be named after the inventor,
manufacturer or after the place where it is produced: Channel, Nina
Ricci (French scent), Bordeaux (white or red wine from the Bordeaux
region of France). The name of a painter, writer, and sculptor can be
used to denote his work: “A Titian-haired girl”, the reference is made
to the paintings of the world’s greatest Italian painter Titian, women
in his pictures are generally red-haired. Wall street, the chief
financial center of the USA, the white House, the US President’s
residence and office; the Pentagon, the building where US Army head
quarters are placed; Downing street, street in London with official
residences of the Prime Minister, the Government. Here are Uzbek
examples.

Tonnalab paxta terib

Tursunay bo`lay deyman.

Yosh oybeklar, zamonamiz farxodlari, don kixotlar. Shunisi muximki, endi
bu zo`larning ba`zilari kichik xarf bilan yoziladi. Umumiy tushunchani
ifodalovchi avvaldan mavjud bo`lgan va qo`llanib keladigan tilningbu
xususiati antonomasiaga xosdir.

We distinguish metaphoric antonomasia which is usually considered to be
a clichй. Eg. What will Mrs. Grundy say, what is conventional; He is a
regular Sherlock Holms, may be said about an observant person; Romeo and
Juliet, yong people who love each other.

Here Uzbek examples. Sherlok Xolmsning o`zginasi sinkov kishi xaqida;
Jiblajibon-mayda qadam tashlab, noz-qarashma qilib yuradigan nozik,
xipcha ayol;

Oradan ych-to`rt kun o`tdi. Abdulla xech kim kutmagan gapni topib keldi.
–Yangilikdan xabaring bormi, olqindi?-so`radi u omontoydan, -xali
jiblojibon boru, ja-a, amali kattami deyman-da?

Stylistic Devices of Descriptive Character.

In order to understand the linguistic nature of the SDs of this group it
is necessary to clear up some problems, so far untouched, of definition
can point out only one or two properties of a phenomenon. Therefore in
building up a definition the definer tries to single out the most
essential features of the object. These are pinned down by the definer
through a long period of observation of the object. its functioning, its
growth and its changes.

However, no definition can comprise all the inner qualities of the
object and new combinations of it with other objects as well; a deeper
penetration into the ontology of the object will always reveal some
hither to unknown qualities and features. In the fourth group of
stylistic devices, which we now come to, we find they one of the
qualities of the object in question is made to sound essential.

Simile. Things are best of all learned by simile

V.G. Belinsky.

Simile reveals the most essential features of an object or person and
draws a comparison between two different things.

Such formal elements as; like, as, such as, as if, seem etc. introduce
similes and comparison. We must not confuse ordinary comparison and
simile as a SD. Comparison implies estimation of two objects which
belong to one class of object. Its purpose is to show the features which
bring these objects together; if he is like his mother he must be a
good-looking boy.

1. Stylistics. I.R.Galperin.M “H.S.”. 1977.

Two human being are compared. Eshik ochilib, shop mo`ylov, go`shtdor
yuzidan zaxar tomchilagan Mocholov bilan birga, uning kabi pochonli,
yarog`-aslaxali ikki tora zinada qaqqaydi.

The nature of simile is to compare two (or several) objects which belong
to different class of things. Simile finds one or several features which
are common to the objects compared: The sun was as red as ripe new
blood. (J. Steinbek). Men seni olganimda, oftobda qurigan turshakdek
butishgan, qop-qora eding. Endi to`lishib, tuxumdek silliq tortib
ketding …, dedi Jamoliddin Nuriga.

Different features may be compared in simile: the state, actions,
manners, Eg. My heart is like a singing bird; I crawled like a mole onto
my bed; the body was tensed as a strong leaf spring. U quyosh nurida
cho`g`dek lovillab turardi. Boshimdan laptarlardek uchdi ming-minglab
xayol.

If we compare a simile with a metaphor we can see that a metaphor is
also based on the similarity of two ideas, but in simile both ideas are
denoted by word used in their direct meaning: Della’s beautiful hair
fell about her ripping and shining like a cascade of brown water … Arbab
quyning mayib bo`lganini ko`tib qaynar qozondek toshdi. In a metaphor an
idea is expressed by a word used in a figurative meaning. Down rippled
the brown cascade of her hair. (Down fell in ripples her hair). Shamol
kuchaygan sari, dengiz chayqalar, qaynar, ko`pirar. In the first
sentence the word “cascade” “qaynar” has retained its direct meaning, in
the second examples it is used in a figurative meaning as a metaphor.

Similes enrich English phraseology: like a squirrel in a cage; as clear
as crystal; to sleep like a dog; like a streak in lighting, busy as a
bee, blind as a bat, qo`yday yuvosh, it olgan tulkiday, qutirgan
bo`riday, suvga tushgan mushukday, muzday sovuq, bolday shirin, tulkiday
ayyor, qora qarg`aday. These phraseological units are trite similes and
have become clichйs. The stylistic function of simile may be different:

1) Imaginative characterization of a phenomenon.

2) To produce a humorous effect by its unexpectedness. A nice old man,
hairless as a boiled onion. …boshi oshlangan teriday silliq, qoshlari
quay tushgan po`stakdeksiyrak sex boshlig`i

Periphrasis. Periphrasis is the nomination of an object or action
through exhibiting certain features of this object or action. Such
periphrasis is based on one of the original features of the object: The
sun was beginning to yawn and edge towards his bed, behind the far
mountains (S. Maugham), the sun was setting. She wondered a little to
and fro, perhaps clumsily, but still with marked success, maintaining
her balance on those two tiny supports (A.Bennett), standing on her
little feet.

Biroq qizi tushmagurning xusnimi, shirin so`zlarimi, xar qalay
G`iyossiddinning til-jag`ini bog`lab, qulog`ni kar, ko`zini ko`r qilib
qo`ygan edi.

Periphrases are divided into to group: logical and figurative. In the
first group of periphrasis the logical notion prevailes while in the
second group-the figurative notion is leading and periphrasis is based
on some image. The logical periphrasis constitutes the essence of
traditional dictionary periphrasis: to turn over a new leaf (make a new,
a better start), one’s better half (one’s wife), to tie the knot (to
marry); the House of God (the church or chapel) “til jag`ini bog`lab”
gapira olmaydigan, “qulog`ini kar”xech narsani eshita olmaydigan, “ko`zi
ko`r”xech narsa ko`rmaydigan. All these word combinations are synonyms
by nature and have become phraseological units. Many of such word
combinations are used in the language of mass media. Some of them are
spread in the language of official style because they have become
clichйs.

Figurative periphrasis is often based on the use of a metaphor or
metonymy; Five weeks of perfect liberty … would have prepared her for
the day of bells (for the day of wedding). He jumped to his feet,
rattled his throat, planted firmness on his brows and mouth … that his
blood might be lively at the throne of understanding (his brains).

“Yoz bo`yi elpig`an elpig`ichini,

Erga yo`shab soldi qishga ko`rpacha”

“Oppoq mo`ylovini burab kelar qish”

One of the stylistic functions of periphrasis is to produce a satirical
or humorous effect sarcastic description. In “Come on”, said Miss Hand
forth, “has the cat got your tongue?” (Can you speak?).

Euphemism is a periphrasis, which is used to rename an unpleasant word
or expression. Eg. Death: the journey’s end; to die; to cross the bar;
to join the majority, to hop off the twig, “aqli qisqa” instead of
“axmoq” qulog`I og`ir instead of kap, qo`li egri instead of o`g`ri;
olamdan o`tmoq, qurbon bo`moq, jon bermoq instead of o`lmoq. Usually
euphemisms are defined as words or phrases which produce some mild
effect. Instead of saying “to lie” people usually use such expressions
as: to tell stories, to possess a vivid imagination.

The origin of the term “euphemism” discloses the aim of the device very
clearly. I.e. speaking well—from Greek –eu=well+-pheme=speaking.

Euphemisms do not live for a long time. We trace periodic changes in
terminology: the madhouse, lunatic asylum, and mental hospital;
“qizamiq” “gul, oymoma, xaymoma”; “chayon” “oti yo`q, benom, besh
bo`g`in”;

We distinguish the following groups of euphemisms; religious, moral,
medical, poetical. The political euphemisms always delude public
opinion, distort the political events. Instead of saying “a liar” in the
political sphere we usually come across such expressions as;
terminological inexactitudes; “ishsizlar” ijtimoiy-foydali mexnat
soxasida band bo`magan kishilar.

In emotive prose euphemisms are usually expressed by metonymy, metaphors
or periphrases.

One of the stylistic functions of euphemisms-is to produce a humorous
effect or to distort the truth, to make the statement milder. Eg.
Intoxication drunkenness; perspiration-sweat; tomog`ini moyladi-pora
berdi, kesilib ketdi-qamaldi.

Hyperbole. Hyperbole as a SD must be distinguished from exaggeration as
every exaggeration cannot be regarded as a SD. For example, the
following expressions: Haven’t seen you for ages; I`m dying to see it;
Immensely obliged, Seni deb o`lib turibdi, osmonga ustun bo`1armiding;
osmondan kelmoq, bir dunyo narsa oldik. Are common colloquial phrases
used in every day speech. Usually individual hyperboles constitute a
SD;I ought to be shot for not recognizing it. My mother was shocked to
morrow of her bones by the thought. Toychoqqinam, kolxoz
osnginatuzilmagan, qon to`kkanmiz.

A hyperbole is employed for direct quantitive exaggeration: “Do you
think we have anything to say one another?”-She asked quickly-“miles”. I
don’t know any of my relations, are they many? –“Tons”

Hyperbole may be expressed in a periphrastic descriptive way: What I
suffer in that way no tongue can tell. (K.Jerome). “No tongue can tell”
means “it is very difficult to express by means of the language”. In
this case hyperbole is based on metonymy (tongue) Hyperbole may be used
in combination with other SD, hyperbolic similes: His mind began to move
like lighting. She was as grace full as a meridian of longitude;
hyperbolic metaphors; Gradually he was becoming acclimatized to the
strange town, primitive and isolated entombed by the mountains.
Hyperbole may be found in repetition. I’d have been out there days
ago-days ago. Mendek dangalchiga xam shunaqa tuxmat qilasizlarmi
oshnalar? Menman degan xo`kizning shoxini sindirishga xam kuchim
etadi-ya.

III. Conclusion

In the conclusion section I’d like to write brief in formations about
lexical stylistic devices of the Uzbek and English languages with
examples.

The stylistic device based on the principle of identification of two
objects is called a metaphor. The SD based on the principle of
substitution of one object for another is called metonymy and the SD
based on contrary concepts is called irony.

There is an opinion that a metaphor is a productive way of building up
new meanings and new words. Language can be called the “dictionary of
faded metaphors”.

Examples of trite metaphors: The salt of life; a flight of imagination:
the ladder of fame; to burn with passion (anger). The following
metaphors enriched English phraseology; foot of a bed, leg of a chair,
head of a nail, to be in the same boat, blind window, to fish for
complements. Here Uzbek examples o`q yomg`iri, o`lim do`li buloq ko`zi.

Examples of genuine metaphors: The lips were tight little traps the
whole space was a bowl of heat; this virus carried a gun; the dark
swallowed him;

Mrs. Small`s eyes boiled with excitement; the words seemed to dance ….
Xademay, ularning safari qoridi. Daryo oqar, vaqt oqar, umr oqar
paydar-pay. Boshimdan kaptarlardekuchdi ming-minglab xauol. Gullar go`yo
eshitar ta`zim.

SD based of the interaction of dictionary and contextual Logical
Meanings.

a) The epithet is a stylistic device which is built on the interplay of
two meanings of a word: emotive and logical. Eg. Eng. green old age.

Uzb. Pokiza yoshlik.

b) Oxymoron joins two antonymous words into one syntagm, most frequently
attribute or adverbial, less frequently of other patterns.

Ex: Eng. Shouted silently

Uzb. Ishbilarmon dangasa.

SD. Based on the interaction of lexical and emotive meaning. The
interplay between the logical and nominal meanings of a word is called
antonomasia

Ex: Eng. Lord Nobody; Miss Careless

Uzb. Tolmas, qo`rqmas.

Eng. The Iror Lady (M.Tcatcher, the former Prime Minister of G.B)

Uzb. Atala Maxsum Qovoq Devona.

SD of descriptive character. Sometimes for a specialreason one of the
features of the thing is made the most essential, describes some detail
and intensifies it.

Periphrasis is the nomination of an object or action through exhibiting
certain features of this object or action. Such periphrasis is based on
one of the original features of the object.

Ex: Eng. He showed satisfaction as he took possession of his well-earned
reward; instead of “He grinned as he” pocketed the coin.

Uzb. Onasini chizgan chizig`idan chiqmaydi. “Onasini aytganini
bajaradi”o`rniga

In conclusion I’d like to say that in many cases lexical E.M. and SD of
both languages are similar in many cases.

IV. Bibliography

1. I.R. Galperin. Stylistics. M. “Higher school” 1977.

2. V.A. Kukharenko.A Book of Practice in Stylistics. M.”Высшая
школа”1987

3. V.A. Kukharenko. Seminar in style. M. 1971

4. I.V. Arnold. The English Word. M. 1973.

5. L.T. Boboxonova, Ingliz tili stilistikasi.

6. I.Mukarramov. Xozirgi o`zbek audacity tilining ilmiy stili. T.Fan.
1984.

7. I.Toshaliev. O`zbek tili stilistikasi. T. Tash.G.U. 1988.

8. U.E. Qilichev. O`zbek tilining praktik stilistikasi T.O`qituvchi.
1985.

9. Х. ?. ?аршибоев Битирув малакавий ишларни бажариш ва ?имоя ?илишга
доир услубий кўрсатмалар. Гулистон 2003.

10. Турсунов, Мухторов Ш, Ра?матуллаев. ?озирги ўзбек адабий тили. Т.
“Ўзбекистон”. 1992. 216 б

11. E. Nida. Morphology University of Michigan. Press. 1976.

12. Т.М. Беляева «Вопросы английского языка в синхронии и диахронии». Л.
1967. стр. 89.

13. Мюллер. В.К. «Англо – Русский словарь» М. 1962.

14. The World Book Encyclopedia. USA. 1994. №. G.G. Volume p/ 905/

15. М. Эшниёзова ?ўшма сўз Микросинтагматик муносататига доир. 2004. №1
24-26 бб

16. Internet. Khan M.A. Liggt. Privacy Policy. Terms of Use.
www.amjbot.org. 2003. № 90 р

17. Адмони В. Г. Типологня тфедложення.— В сб.: Исследованяя по обшсй
кюрнн грамматики. М., 1968.

18. Азнаурова Э. С. Очерки по стилистике слова. Ташкент, 3973. Арнольд
И. В. Стилистика современного английского язьша. Л., 1973.

19. Арутюноеа Н. Д. О синтаксических типах художественной прозьг.— В
сб-: Обшее и романское язукознание. М., Изд. МГУ, 1972.

20. Арутюнова Н. Д. Некоторне типн дналогических реакций н
«почему»-репликн в русском язьше. «Филологические науки», 1970, № 3.

21. Арутюнова Н. Д. Предложение и его смьюл. М., 1976-

Ахманова 0. С. О стилистической дифференциации слов. «Сборнмк статей по
язикознанию». М., Изд. МГУ, 1958.

22. Ахманоеа 0. С. Словарь лингвнстических терминов. М., 1966.

Ашурова Д. У. Лингвистическая природа художественного сравнення. АКД.
М., 1970.

23. Балли Ш. Французская стилистика. М., .1961,

24. Будаеов Р. А. В зашнту понятия «стиль художественной литературн».
«Вестник МГУ», 1962, №4.

25. Будагов Р. А. В. И. Ленин о научном стиле язьша. «Филологические
наукн», 1970, № 1.

Нашли опечатку? Выделите и нажмите CTRL+Enter

Похожие документы
Обсуждение

Оставить комментарий

avatar
  Подписаться  
Уведомление о
Заказать реферат!
UkrReferat.com. Всі права захищені. 2000-2020