Дипломная работа: Homonymy in the book of Lewis Carroll "Alice in Wonderland"

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 metaphoT, metonymy, epithet, repetition, inversion, suspense, etc. It does not seem quite just to place all cases of ellipsis, aposiopesis or represented speech among colloquial constructions.

II. 1 .4 Classification of expressive means and stylistic devices by Y.M.Skrebnev

One of the latest classifications of expressive means and stylistic devices is given in the book «Fundamentals of English Stylistics» by Y.M.Skrebnev published in 1994 . Skrebnev's approach demonstrates a combination of principles observed in Leech's system of paradigmatic and syntagmatic subdivision and the level-oriented approach on which Galperin's classification is founded. At the same time it differs from both since Skrebnev managed to avoid mechanical superposition of one system onto another and created a new consistent method of the hierarchical arrangement of this material.

Skrebnev starts with a holistic view, constructing a kind of language pyramid.

He doesn't pigeonhole expressive means and stylistic devices into appropriate layers of language like Leech and Galperin. Skrebnev first subdivides stylistics into paradigmatic stylistics (or stylistics of units) and syntagmatic stylistics (or stylistics of sequences). Then he explores the levels of the language and regards all stylistically relevant phenomena according to this level principle in both paradigmatic and syntagmatic stylistics.

He also uniquely singles out one more level . In addition to phonetics, morphology, lexicology and syntax he adds semasiology (or semantics).

According to Skrebnev the relationship between these five levels and two aspects of stylistic analysis is bilateral. The same linguistic material of these levels provides stylistic features studied by paradigmatic and syntagmatic stylistics. The difference lies in its different arrangement.

Paradigmatic stylistics < 1. Phonetics > Syntagmatic (Stylistics of units) < 2. Morphology > stylistics < 3. Lexicology > ( Stylistics of < 4. Syntax sequences) < 5. Semasiology >

Paradigmatic stylistics

Looking closer into this system we'll be able to distinguish specific units and their stylistic potentials or functions. Thus paradigmatic stylistics (stylistics of units) is subdivided into five branches.

Paradigmatic phonetics actually describes phonographical stylistic features of a written text. Since we cannot hear written speech but in our «mind» writers often resort to graphic means to reproduce the phonetic peculiarities of individual speech or dialect. Such intentional non-standard spelling is called «graphons» (a term borrowed from V.A. Kucharenko).

I know these Eye - talians ! (Lawrence) — in this case the graphon is used to show despise or contempt of the speaker for Italians.

In Cockney speech whose phonetic peculiarities are all too well known you'll hear [ai] in place of [ei], [a:] instead of [au], they drop «h's» and so on. It frequently becomes a means of speech characterisation and often creates a humorous effect.

The author illustrates it with a story of a cockney family trying to impress a visitor with their «correct» English:

«Father, said one of the children at breakfast.—I want some more 'am please».—You mustn't say 'am, my child, the correct form is 'am,— retorted his father, passing the plate with sliced ham on it. «But I did say 'am, pleaded the boy». «No, you didn't you said 'am instead of 'am». The mother turned to the guest smiling". «Oh, don't mind them, sir, pray. They are both trying to say 'am and both think it is 'am they are saying»

Other graphic means to emphasise the «unheard» phonetic characteristics such as the pitch of voice, the stress, and other melodic features are italics, capitalisation, repetition of letters, onomatopoeia (sound imitation).

E.g. I AM sorry; «Appeeee Noooooyeeeeerr» (Happy New Year); cock-a-doodle-doo.

Paradigmatic morphology observes the stylistic potentials of grammar forms, which Leech would describe as deviant. Out of several varieties of morphological categorial forms the author chooses a less predictable or unpredictable one, which renders this form some stylistic connotation. The peculiar use of a number of grammatical categories for stylistic purposes may serve as an ample example of this type of expressive means.

The use of a present tense of a verb on the background of a past-tense narration got a special name historical present in linguistics.

E. g. What else do 1 remember? Let me see.

There comes out of the cloud our house... (Dickens)

Another category that helps create stylistic colouring is that of gender. The result of its deviant use is personification and depersonification. As Skrebnev points out although the morphological category of gender is practically non-existent in modern English special rules concern whole classes of nouns that are traditionally associated with feminine or masculine gender. Thus countries are generally classed as feminine (France sent her representative to the conference.) Abstract notions associated with strength and fierceness are personified as masculine while feminine is associated with beauty or gentleness (death, fear, war, anger—Zie, spring, peace, kindness—she). Names of vessels and other vehicles (ship, boat, carriage, coach, car) are treated as feminine.

Another deviant use of this category according to Skrebnev is the use of animate nouns as inanimate ones that he terms «depersonification» illustrated by the following passage:

«Where did you find it?» asked Mord Em'ly of Miss Giiliken with a satirical accent.

«Who are you calling "it"?» demanded Mr. Barden aggressively. «P'raps you'll kindly call me "im and not it». (Partridge)