Lecture 4

Lexical EMs and SDs

Plan:
I. Interaction of different types of lexical meaning:
1. Interaction of primary dictionary and contextually imposed meanings:
a) Metaphor
b) Metonymy
c) irony
2. Interaction of primary and derivative logical meanings:
a) Zeugma
b) Pun
3. Interaction of logical and emotive meanings:
a) Interjections and exclamatory words
b) The epithet
c) Oxymoron
II. Interaction of a certain feature of a thing or phenomenon:
a) Simile
b) Periphrasis
c) Euphemism
d) Hyperbole
III. Peculiar use of set expressions:
a) The cliché
b) Proverbs and sayings
c) Epigrams
d) Quotations
e) Allusions
f) Decomposition of set phrases

I. Interaction of different types of lexical meaning:

1. Interaction of primary dictionary and contextually imposed meanings:
The interaction or interplay between the primary dictionary meaning (the meaning which
is registered in the language code as an easily recognized sign) 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 SD 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 the contrary concepts is called irony.

a) Metaphor
It is the ‘transference of names based on the associated likeness between two objects. For
ex., ‘pancake’, ‘ball’, ‘volcano’ stand for the Sun, ‘silver dust’, ‘sequins’ (цехин, золотая
монета в Италии и Турции) – for stars, ‘vault’ (свод)blanket, ‘veil’- for the sky.
 It is natural that similarity between real objects or phenomena finds its reflection in the
semantic structures of words denoting them: both words possess at least one common semantic
component. In the above examples with the sun this common semantic component is ‘hot’ or
‘round’.
The wider the gap between the associated objects the more striking – the more expressive
– is the metaphor.
If a metaphor involves likeness between inanimate and animate objects, we deal with
personification, as in ‘the face of London’, or ‘the pain of the ocean’.
Metaphor, as all other SDs, is fresh, original, genuine, when first used, and trite,
hackneyed, stale when often repeated. In the later case it gradually loses its expressiveness
becoming just another entry in the dictionary, as in the ‘leg of a table’ or the ‘sunrise’, thus
serving a very important source of enriching the vocabulary of the language.
For example, such metaphors as ‘a ray of hope’, ‘floods of tears’, ‘a shadow of a smile’
are considered to be trite.
Metaphor can be expressed by all notional parts of speech, and functions in the sentence
as any of its members.
When the speaker or writer in his desire to present an elaborate image does not limit its
creation to a single metaphor but offers a group of them, each supplying another feature of the
described phenomenon, this cluster creates a sustained (prolonged) metaphor.

b) Metonymy
It is based on contiguity (nearness) of objects or phenomena. 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 linguistic (semantic) nearness, but the first one may serve the container of the
second, hence the conversational cliché “Will you have another cup?”, which is a case of
metonymy, once original, but due to long use, no more accepted as a fresh SD. They are trite.
Another type of metonymy is genuine or contextual metonymy. It reveals a quite unexpected
substitution of one word for another, or one concept for another, on the ground of some strong
impression produced by a chance feature of the thing, for example:
“Then they came in. Two of them, a man with long fair moustaches and a silent dark
man… Definitely, the moustache and I had nothing in common.” (Doris Lessing, “Retreat to
Innocence”) [1]
Here we have a feature of a man which catches the eye, in this case his facial appearance:
the moustache stands for the man himself. The function of the metonymy here is to indicate that
the speaker knows nothing of the man in question, moreover, there is a definite implication that
this is the first time the speaker has seen him.
Metonymy and metaphor differ also in the way they are deciphered. In the process of
disclosing the meaning implied in a metaphor, one image excludes the other, that is, the
metaphor ‘lamp’ in the ‘The sky lamp of the night’, when deciphered, means the moon and we
perceive only this object.
[2] Metonymy is based on the following types of relations:
1. A concrete thing used instead of an abstract notion. In this case the thing becomes a
symbol of the notion:
The camp, the pulpit and the law
For rich men’s sons are free.
2. The container instead of the thing contained:
The hall applauded.
3. The relation of proximity:
The round game table was boisterous and happy.
4. The material instead of the thing made of it:
The marble spoke.
5. The instrument which the doer uses in performing the action instead of the action or
the doer himself:
Well, Mr. Weller, says the gentl’mn, you’re a very good whip, and can do what you like with
your horses, we know.

If the SD is based on the relations between the part and the whole, it is often viewed
independently as synecdoche.

c) Irony
It is a SD based on a direct contrast of two notions: the notion named and the notion
meant.
For example, “It must be delightful to find oneself in a foreign country without a penny
in one’s pocket.” (but it is not delightful).
In other words, the writer says one thing, but really means the opposite to produce a
humorous effect, or to express a feeling of irritation, displeasure, pity, or regret.
E.g.: The food was so delicious that I took it home for my dog.
The word containing the irony is strongly marked by intonation.
The context in which irony exists varies from the minimum of a word combination to the
context of the whole book. Irony is usually used to convey a negative meaning.

2. Interaction of primary and derivative logical meanings:

a) Zeugma
It is the use of one word in the same grammatical but different semantic relations: on one
hand literal, and on the other, transferred. As a general rule, zeugma is employed in humorous
texts. The general formula of zeugma is as follows: somebody does a and b, where a and b do
not go grammatically together.
[1] E.g.: He took his hat and his leave. (Ch. Dickens)
She dropped a tear and her pocket handkerchief. (Ch. Dickens)

b) Pun
Pun, quibble, or paronomasia – a play on words – the use of one word in two different
meanings, or the use of two different words, which are pronounced alike.
[2] E.g.: There comes a period in every man’s life, but she is just a semicolon in his. (B.
Evans). We expect the second half of the sentence to unfold the content, understanding period
as an interval of time, while the author used the word in the meaning of punctuation mark,
which becomes clear from the semicolon, following it.
It is difficult to tell zeugma from pun. The only reliable distinction is a structural one:
Zeugma is the realization of two meanings with the help of a verb. Pun is more independent: It
depends on the context. E.g.
The title of a play by O. Wilde The Importance of Being Ernest. The context for this pun
is the whole book.

3. Interaction of logical and emotive meanings:

 a) Interjections and exclamatory words
Interjections are words used to express strong feelings. Interjections split into:
- Primary, devoid of any logical meaning.
E.g.: Oh! Ah! Bah! Hush!
- Derivative, which may retain some logical meaning, though always suppressed by the
volume of emotive meaning.
E.g.: God! God knows! Bless me! Heavens!
Interjections, like other words in the English vocabulary, bear features, which mark them
as follows:
- Bookish.
E.g.: Alas! Lo! Hark!
- Neutral.
E.g.: Oh! Ah! Bah!
- Colloquial.
E.g.: Gosh! Well! Why!
Neutral interjections as a rule have bookish and colloquial corresponding synonyms.
E.g.: Alas! (bookish) – Oh! (neutral) – Gosh! (colloquial)
Lo! (bookish) – Ah! (neutral) – Well! (colloquial)
Hark! (bookish) – Bah! (neutral) – Why! (colloquial)
Some adjectives and adverbs can also take on the function of interjections.
E.g.: Terrible! Great! Splendid! Awful! Wonderful! Fine!
Interjections may convey the following meanings: joy, delight, admiration, approval,
disbelief, astonishment, fright, regret, dissatisfaction, boredom, blame, etc.

b) The epithet
Epithet – an unusual description of a phenomenon.
E.g.: sweet thoughts, painful shoes, a heart-burning smile.
Semantically epithets split into two main groups:
1) affective (emotive) proper; they serve to convey the emotional
evaluation of the object by the speaker (ex, magnificent;
gorgeous)
2) figurative (transferred) epithets. They are formed of metaphors,
metonymies and similes expressed by adjectives (the smiling
sun; the frowning cloud; the sleepless pillow; a ghost-like face)
- Fixed, closely associated with the word they define through long and repeated use.
E.g.: Merry Christmas, merry old England, happy birthday.
Structurally epithets split into:
- Simple (Single), which are ordinary adjectives.
E.g.: sullen earth, careful attention.
- pair of epithets: wonderful and incomparable beauty; a tired old town
- Compound, which are compound adjectives.
E.g.: cloud-shapen giant, mischief-making monkey.
- Phrase, composed of a string of epithets linked with the help of dashes.
[3] E.g.: the sunshine – in – the – breakfast – room smell,
I – am – not – that – kind – of – girl look,
- Reversed (Inverted), composed of two nouns linked in an "of-phrase”.
E.g.: a fool of a policeman, an angel of a girl, a hook of a nose.
- Transferred (Figurative), describing inanimate objects like living beings.
 E.g.: sick chamber, sleepless pillow, merry hours.
- Two-step, in which the description passes two stages: the description of the object and
the description of the description itself. It is built on the model adverb plus adjective.
E.g.: a pompously majestic woman.
- String of epithets.
E.g.: You nasty, wicked, good for nothing brute.

c) Oxymoron
Oxymoron – two successive words (mostly an adjective and a noun, or an adverb and an
adjective), the meanings of which clash, being opposite in sense.
E.g.: O loving hate! Heavy lightness! Serious vanity! Feather of lead, bright smoke, cold
fire, sick health! (W. Shakespeare)
Oxymoron can also be based on the semantic discordance (несогласованность) of two
words.
E.g.: He had a face like a plateful of mortal sins (B. Behan) Plateful usually refers to
food, while sins, to the religious sphere of human life.
Structurally oxymorons split into:
- Attributive, consisting of an adjective and a noun or an adverb +adjective
E.g.: low skyscraper, sweet sorrow, open secret, best enemy, worst friend.
- Verbal, consisting of a verb and an adverb.
E.g.: to shout mutely, to cry silently.
Semantically oxymorons split into:
- Genuine (Poetic/Fresh/Original/Newly-created), i.e. fresh and absolutely unexpected.
E.g.: We were fellow strangers.
- Trite (Dead/Hackneyed/Stale/Banal/Stereotyped), in which the first component has
lost its primary logical meaning due to the overuse and is used only as an intensifier.
E.g.: awfully nice, terribly hungry, damn nice.
An oxymoron discloses the essence of an object full of seeming or genuine discrepancies.

Antonomasia [æntənə'meiziə] – a proper name used for a common one or vice versa.
[4] E.g.: A traitor may be referred to as Brutus.
A man who loves women deserves the name of Don Juan.
I don’t mean only myself, my partner, and the radiologist who does your X-rays; the
three I’m referring to are Dr. Rest, Dr. Diet, and Dr. Fresh Air. (R. Cussack)
Semantically antonomasia splits into genuine and trite.
Genuine (Poetic/Fresh/Original/Newly-created) antonomasia is fresh and absolutely
unexpected (see example about Dr. Rest, Dr. Diet, etc. above).
The original figurative meaning of trite (dead/hackneyed/ stale/banal/stereotyped)
antonomasia has been forgotten due to the overuse (see examples about Brutus and Don Juan).

II. Interaction of a certain feature of a thing or phenomenon:

a) Simile
Simile ['siməli] – the imaginative comparison of two unlike objects belonging to
different classes.
E.g.: He is as beautiful as a weathercock. (O. Wilde)
My heart is like a singing bird. (Ch. Rossetti)
 Each simile consists of the following three components: 1) the thing which is compared,
called the tenor; 2) the thing with which it is compared, called the vehicle; 3) link-words, such
as like, as, as though, as like, such as, as … as, as if, seem, etc.
Similes differ from metaphors: The comparison made between two things is indicated by
link words in simile, while there is not any connective in a metaphor. In this case, the metaphor
is a more forceful statement than the simile.
Cf.: My love is a rose (metaphor). My love is like a rose (simile).
Simile is different from simple comparison. Though structurally identical, they differ
semantically: In a comparison objects belong to the same class, while in a simile objects belong
to two different classes.
Cf.: Comparison: She (class of people) is like her mother (class of people). Simile: She
(class of people) is like a rose (class of plants).
Semantically similes split into:
- Genuine (Poetic/Fresh/Original/Newly-created), based on some fresh and absolutely
unexpected analogy between two things.
E.g.: What happens to a dream deferred? Does it dry up like a raisin in the sun? (L.
Hughes)
- Trite (Dead/Hackneyed/Stale/Banal/Stereotyped), the original figurative meaning of
which has been forgotten due to the overuse.
E.g.: as sick as a dog, as strong as a horse, blind as a bat.
Structurally similes split into:
- ordinary (see examples above);
- disguised, in which the link between the tenor and the vehicle is expressed by notional
verbs, such as to resemble, to seem, to look like, to appear, etc., and the likeness between the
objects seems less evident.
E.g.: The ball appeared to the batter to be a slow spinning planet looming toward the
earth. (B. Malamud)

b) Periphrasis
Periphrasis [pə'rifrəsis] – the use of a more or less complicated syntactical structure
instead of one word to convey a purely individual perception of the described object.
E.g.: 200 pages of blood-curdling narrative (i.e. a thriller);
alterations and improvements on the truth (i.e. a lie) (Ch. Dickens).
Periphrasis is decipherable only in the context. If a periphrastic locution can be
understood outside the context, it is not a SD but merely a synonymous expression (dictionary
periphrasis/periphrastic synonym).
E.g.: my better half (i.e. my wife), the fair sex (i.e. women), the cap and the gown (i.e. a
student).
Semantically periphrases split into:
- Genuine (Poetic/Fresh/Original/Newly-created), i.e. fresh and absolutely unexpected.
E.g.: Delia was studying under Rosenstock – you know his repute as a disturber of the
piano keys (i.e. a pianist). (O. Henry)
- Trite (Dead/Hackneyed/Stale/Banal/Stereotyped), called clichés. Their original
figurative meaning has been forgotten due to the overuse.
E.g.: After only a short marriage, he wasn’t prepared to offer advice to other youngsters
intending to tie the knot (i.e. to marry).
Depending on the mechanism of substitution of a word by a more complicated phrase,
periphrases are classified into:
 - Logical, i.e. synonymous phrases.
E.g.: She was still fat after childbirth; the destroyer of her figure (i.e. her child) sat at the
head of the table. (A. Bennett)
Naturally, I jumped out of the tub, and before I had thought twice, ran out into the living
room in my birthday suit (i.e. nude). (B. Malamud)
- Figurative, in fact phrase-metonymies and phrase-metaphors.
E.g.: The hospital was crowded with the surgically interesting products of the fighting in
Africa (extended metonymy for the wounded). (I. Show)
The punctual servant of all work (i.e. the sun). (Ch. Dickens)

c) Euphemism
Euphemism ['ju:fəֽmizəm] (from Greek εύ – “good/well”, and φημί – “speak”, i.e.
“speaking well”) – a variety of periphrases, “a whitewashing device” – a word/phrase used to
replace an unpleasant or tabooed word/expression by a conventionally more acceptable, mild,
or less straightforward one.
E.g.: to pass away, to be no more, to join the majority (i.e. to die);
a woman of a certain type (i.e. a prostitute);
mentally deficient person (i.e. an idiot, an imbecile).
Euphemisms can be joking.
E.g.: to go west, to give up the ghost, to kick the bucket (for to die).
The life of euphemisms is short: As soon as they become closely associated with the
object named, they give way to a newly coined word/combination of words to throw another
veil over an unpleasant or indelicate concept.

d) Hyperbole
Hyperbole [hai'pə:bəli] – a deliberate exaggeration/overstatement of an object feature to
such a degree that will show its utter absurdity.
E.g.: She was a giant of a woman.
The whole world greeted his latest invention with ridicule.
There I took out my pig … and gave him such a kick that he went out the other end of the
alley, twenty feet ahead of his squeal. (O. Henry)
It is used not to deceive, but to infect the reader with the writer’s enthusiasm, in other
words, for humoristic purposes.
Semantically hyperboles split into:
- genuine (poetic/fresh/original/newly-created), i.e. fresh and absolutely unexpected
(see examples above);
- trite (dead/hackneyed/stale/banal/stereotyped), the original figurative meaning of
which has been forgotten due to the overuse.
E.g.: I haven’t seen you for ages.
I have told you a thousand times.
I can eat a horse.
Jack-of-all-trades.
Hyperbole is aimed at exaggerating quantity or quality. When it is directed the opposite
way, when the size, shape, dimensions, characteristic features of the object are not overrated,
but intentionally underrated, we deal with understatement.