Peculiarities of Hyperbole in J. Swift’s Works

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, and 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 materialized 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:

Clichés: 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 laws 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 Tux said it in. (Dickens)

Down dropped the breeze. (Coleridge)

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 as 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) [ Galperin   ]

     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 construction.

          In order to sum up the first paragraph I have to mention that Stylistics  is a branch of general linguistic and has two basic goals: to research the inventory of  special language and certain types of discourse. Many linguists interpreter the term Stylistics in different way but any way the main instrument of the Stylistics is language, especially synonymic language.

     Speaking about the classification of expressive means and stylistic devices; there are three groups which are: phonetic, lexical and syntactical expressive means and stylistic devices. Each group possess certain number of devices.

 

1.3 Definition of Style and its Classification.

     In order to acquire a clear idea of the aspects of language study, it is first necessary to identify the subject matter of the linguistic branch that studies the peculiarities of manner of expression. To ascertain the borders of stylistics it is necessary to define the concept of style.                                       There is big number of definitions of literary style. I. Galperin states that the word  style is derived from the Latin word ' stilus' 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.[2; 9] The word is applied to the teaching of how to write a composition (see below); 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 a depth" (Derbyshire); "Style is deviations" (Funkiest); "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 utterances 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 are some 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 Marry).

     “… 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 Marry)

     “Style is a contextually restricted linguistic variation.”

     “Style is simply synonymous with form or expression and hence superfluous term”.

(Benedetti Croce). 

     Some linguists consider the word 'style' and the subject of linguistic stylistics are 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". [Riffaterre  ] 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 means of communication, is regarded in the above quotation from 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. Stylistics must take into consideration the "output of the 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, sequence, and patterns which extend, or may extend, beyond the boundaries of individual sentences define style, and that the study of them is stylistics”. [Archibald]

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 use.           

     The most frequent definition of style is one expressed by Seymour Chatman: "Style is a product of individual choices and patterns of choices (emphasis added) among linguistic possibilities.” [Chatman]

     This definition indirectly deals with the idiosyncrasies 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 preference to non-individualistic forms in using language mean). 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 elsewhere, varying degrees of inclusion of a specific variant without complete elimination of competing features". [Werner ]

     The A. Gregorian expressed that the subject are the same. He says that “style cannot be taken apart from artistic method, the artist´s outlook or his personality, his understanding of that time in which he lives and notional characteristics of his art …. Style is the closest unity of all these.” Further A. Gregorian underlines that besides method and outlook, the writer´s own personality, national characteristics in his works and the very process of the artistic perception of the world around him, are very important. “Style, as the scholars writes “is an understanding of reality. But style is also a form of this understanding, a form which sometimes determines that understanding, form which sometimes determines that understanding and  becomes an integral part of it”[3;151].

     Kucharenko indicates that “a true master is distinguished by his ability to collate and digest his material, sorting the essential from the superficial and moulding it to his own ends. Through his style he has to blend the overall idea of the work with the differing elements existing side by side in the raw material that is his subject”[4; 106]       

     Many linguists, however, do not consider this view as correct, seeing style as means of depiction and expression, merged into one system, as an integral content-expressive form. For example V. Dneprov states that “style is a combination off all the alleged elements of form which manifests the unity of all the elements of artistic representation” [1; 302]

     Another definition is given by the Russian linguist V. Turbin who considers that “style is the word in its relationship to the image, the constant interaction of images and meanings that arise in the word in the poetic context. [6;133].

     In order to identify the term “Style “more concretely and deeply we compared the terms from different dictionaries, which helps to figure out the specific features of style. 

     Oxford Dictionary of Literary Terms gives the following definition of style:

“Style - is any specific way of using language, which is characteristic of an author, school, period, or *genre. Particular styles may be defined by their *diction, *syntax, *imagery, *rhythm, and use of *figures, or by any other linguistic feature. Different categories of style have been named after particular authors ( Ciceronian), periods ( Augustan), and professions (journalistic), while in the *renaissance a scheme of three stylistic 'levels' was adopted, distinguishing the high or 'grand' style from the middle or 'mean' style and the low or 'base' style. The principle of *decorum held that certain subjects required particular levels of style, so that an *epic should be written in the grand style whereas * satires should be composed in the base style. Since the literary revolution of *romanticism, however, this hierarchy has been replaced by the notion of style as an expression of individual personality [   ].

     Another Dictionary of Literary Terms and Literary Theory determine the term “Style” in a different way style is a characteristic manner of expression in Prose or verse; how a peculiar writer says things. The analysis and assessment of style involves examination of a writer's choice of words, his figures of speech, the devices (rhetorical and otherwise), the shape of his sentences (whether they be loose or periodic), the shape of his paragraphs- indeed, of every conceivable aspect of his language and the way in which he uses it. Style defies complete analysis or definition (Remy de Gourmont put the matter tersely when he said that defining style was like trying to put a sack of flour in a thimble) because it is the tone and 'voice' of the writer himself; as peculiar to him as his laugh, his walk, his handwriting and the expressions on his face. The style, as Buffon put it, is the man. However, styles have been roughly classified and these crude categories are sometimes helpful: (a) according to period: Metaphysical, Augustan, Georgian, etc.; (b) according to individual authors: Chaucerian, Miltonic, Gibbon Ian, James Ian; (c) according to level: grand, middle, low and plain; and (d) according to language: scientific, expository poetic, emotive, referential, journalistic [    ].

     One of the most well-known scientists Bernard Bloch identified the notion of the style. He suggests that “Style of a discourse is the message carried by the frequency – distributions and translational probabilities of its linguistic features, especially as they differ from those of the same features in the language as a whole”. This definition underlines that while linguistics deals with the description of a code, stylistics is concerned with dissimilarities among messages produced in accordance with the rules of that code. Processing the definition of Style it later on involves determination and classification of the various measurements among which messages may differ. Or to declare the same relationship in a different way, linguistics is interested in types, whereas stylistics with tokens. There is obvious difference between linguistics and stylistics. Usually stylistics may use frequencies and translational probabilities but these are large and inappropriate for the writing of grammars, where all processions are produced once. The largest unit in the linguistics is sentence; the text serves as the ground for stylistic analysis. [Sebeok;87-88 ]

      Professor J. Miller of linguistics and English language speaks about the verbal style in the references to”differences that exist among people”. The question of style is not clear because we can see this notion from different point of view. Speaking about the style as a characteristic of messages and style as a characteristic of an individual these two characteristics are not able to exist together [Sebeok; 87-88].

     In conclusion from all the definitions analyzed that style, in the sense of the means of expressing an imagistic understanding of reality, acting through ideas and emotions, cannot be identified with the form of a work. Indeed, this style the writer´s personality is expressed, along his overall view of life. By all means, the writer´s artistic perception is accordingly asserted, appearing the particular in the specific literary works.     

     In other words style is not mere a matter of stylistics: the images, themes, composition of a work of literature, its content, expressed through words are also essential elements of style, as they define the principles on which the vocabulary is based that is stylistics in the narrow sense of the word.

1.4Functional Styles of the English language      

     The   literary   standard of the English language is not as homogeneous as it may seem. Style has a big influence on the development of the language-as-a system. The members of the society recognize the variations of the language as variations of styles. Thus, the style acquires the name of a “functional” concept or it is also called “register” or discourse”. I. Galperin is the scholar that analyzed the main principles on which functional styles are based: he states that “a functional style is a system of interrelated language means which serves a definite aim in communication”[2; 33]. However style is a certain unity that consists of the elements to construct a language. Each style can be recognized by one or more leading features, which are especially conspicuous.  All elements follow the principles of the society in order to show an efficient way of communication.

     It is well-know that all the words of the English language are divided into stylistically neutral and stylistically colored.

      Prof. Galperin denies that fact that the colloquial style exists. He considers that functional style can be singled out in the written variety of language. He defines the style as the result of a deliberate careful selection of language means which in their correlation constitute this style.

     Different linguists have various points of view about functional styles as for instance Maltzev thinks that style is a choice but this choice is very often done unconsciously, spontaneously. He remarks that the main aim of a functional style is to facilitate communication in a certain sphere of discourse. But the rigid lay outs of business and official letters practically exclude the possibility of deliberate, careful choice, as for example the compression in the newspaper headlines where there is a tendency to abbreviate the language. Maltzev suggests two terms such as formal and informal and states that colloquial style is the part of the informal variety of English, which is used orally in conversation [malzev].

     Other scientists such as Kuznetz and Skrebnev give the definitions of bookish and colloquial styles.

    The bookish style is a style of a highly polished nature that expresses the norm of the national literary language. The bookish style can be used not only in the written speech but also in oral, official talk.

     The colloquial style is the type of speech, which is used in situation that allows certain deviations from the strict pattern of literary speech used not only in a private conversation, but also in private correspondence.

     So, according to this, the notion style is applicable both to the written and oral varieties of the terms bookish and colloquial.

I. Galperin   calls functional styles registers because they give the opportunity to distinguish the sub-system of the standard language, or to identify the impact of style in a particular language. Y. Skrebnev, basing on Galperin´s studies indicates that style creates the following major   groups:

      The main functional styles of the English language are:

Belles-lettres style,

Publicistic style,

Newspaper style,

Scientific prose style,

Official documents   

  The belles-lettres style has three sub-styles:

• Poetry (or simply verse)
• Emotive prose (or the language of fiction)
• Drama.

   Narrow characteristic of belles-lettres style and its peculiarities. The belles-lettres style has its purpose and specific functions. Speaking about the purpose, the main goal of the belles-lettres style is not to proof but only to suggest a possible interpretation of life phenomena by forcing the reader to see the writer’s viewpoint. The two crucial functions of the belles-lettres style are cognitive and aesthetic [    ].