Metonymy

Another lexical stylistic device – metonymy is created by a different semantic process. It is based on contiguity (nearness) of objects. Transference of names in metonymy does not involve a necessity for two different words to have a common component in their semantic structures as is the case with metaphor but proceeds from the fact that two objects (phenomena) have common grounds of existence in reality. Such words as “cup” and “tea” have no semantic nearness, but the first one may serve the container of the second, hence – the conversational cliche “Will you have another cup?”.

Metonymy as all other lexical stylistic devices loses its originality due to long use.

The scope of transference in metonymy is much more limited than that of metaphor, which is quite understandable: the scope of human imagination identifying two objects (phenomena, actions) on the grounds of commonness of their innumerable characteristics is boundless while actual relations between objects are more limited.

As a rule, metonymy is expressed by nouns (less frequently – by substantivized numerals) and is used in syntactical functions characteristic of nouns (subject, object, predicative).

Example:lands belonging to the crown

Synecdocheis a kind of metonymy: using the name of a part to denote the whole or vice versa. A typical example of synecdoche is the word hands used instead of the word worker.

E.g. Hands wanted. All hands on deck!

See also a hundred head of cattle A student is expected to know …

The whole may be used for a part:

E.g. Stop torturing the poor animal! (instead of poor dog)

Reading books when I’m talking to you!

Pun & Zeugma

In the stylistic tradition of the English-speaking countries only the two (pun and zeugma) are widely discussed. They perform the same stylistic function in speech and operate on the same linguistic mechanism. Namely, one word-form is deliberately used in two meanings. The effect of these lexical stylistic devices is humorous.

The formation of pun may vary. One speaker’s utterance may be wrong interpreted by the other due to the existence of different meaning of the misinterpreted word or its homonym. For example, “Have you been seeing any spirits?” “Or taking any?” The first “spirits” refers to supernatural forces, the second one – to strong drinks. Punning may be also the result of the speaker’s intended violation of the listener’s expectation.

Examples of pun:

1. The delicatessen is sandwiched, if you'll pardon the pun, between two stores.

2. She's a skillful pilot whose career has—no pun intended—really taken off.

 

We deal with zeugma when polysemantic verbs that can be combined with nouns of most varying semantic groups are deliberately used with two or more homogeneous members which are not connected semantically, as in such example: “He took his hat and his leave”. Zeugma is highly characteristic of English prose of previous centuries.

When the number of homogeneous members, semantically disconnected but attached to the same verb increases we deal with semantically false chains, which are thus a variation of zeugma. As a rule, it is the last member of the chain that falls out of the semantic group, producing humorous effect. The following case may serve an example: “A Governess wanted. Must possess knowledge of Rumanian, Italian, Spanish, German, Music and Mining Engineering”.

In most examples of zeugma the verb loses some of its semantic independence and strength being considered as member of phraseological unit or cliche.

 

Example: She opened the door and her heart to the homeless boy

 

In all previously discussed lexical stylistic devices we dealt with various transformations of the denotational meaning of words, which participated in the creation of metaphors, metonymies, puns, zeugmas, etc. Each of these lexical stylistic devices added expressiveness and originality to the nomination of the object. Their subjectivity relies on the new and fresh look at the object mentioned and shows the object from a new and unexpected side.

Irony

In irony subjectivity lies in the evaluation of the phenomenon. The essence of irony consists in the foregrounding not of the logical but of the evaluative meaning. Irony thus is a stylistic device in which the contextual evaluative meaning of a word is directly opposite to its dictionary meaning.

The context is arranged so that the qualifying word in irony reverses the direction of the evaluation and a positive meaning is understood as a negative one and (much rare) vice versa. “She turned with the sweet smile of an alligator”. The word ”sweet” reverse their positive meaning into the negative one due to the context. So, like all other lexical stylistic devices irony does not exist outside the context.

There are two types of irony: verbal irony and sustained irony. In the stylistic device of verbal irony it is always possible to indicate the exact word whose contextual meaning diametrically opposes its dictionary meaning. And we deal with sustained irony when it is not possible to indicate such exact word and the effect of irony is created by number of statements by the whole text. This type of irony is formed by the contradiction of the speaker’s (or writer’s) considerations and the generally accepted moral and ethical codes.

 

Examples:

· “What a beautiful view,” he said, his voice dripping with irony, as he looked outthe window at the alley.

· She described her vacation with heavy irony as “an educational experience.”

· The great irony of human intelligence is that the only species on Earth capable of reason, complex-problem solving, long-term planning and consciousness understands so little about the organ that makes it all possible—the brain. —Amanda Bower.