|Simile |Oxymoron |
|The intensification of some |Oxymoron is a combination of two|
|features of the concept in |words (mostly an adjective and a|
|question is realized in a device|noun or an adverb with an |
|called simile. S. must not be |adjective) in which the meanings|
|confused with ordinary |of the two clash, being opposite|
|comparison. They represent two |in sense, |
|diverse processes. C. means |E.g.: low skyscraper; sweet |
|weighing two objects belonging |sorrow; pleasantly ugly face |
|to one class of things with the |The essence of oxymoron consists|
|purpose of establishing the |in the capacity of the primary |
|degree of their sameness or |meaning of the adjective or |
|difference. To use S. is to |adverb to resist for some time |
|characterize one object by |the overwhelming power of |
|bringing it into contact with |semantic change which words |
|another object belonging to an |undegro in combination. The |
|entirely different class of |forcible combination of |
|things. C. takes into |non-combinative words seems to |
|consideration all the properties|develop what may be called a |
|of the two objects, stressing |kind of centrifugal force which |
|the one that is compared. S. |keeps them apart, in contrast to|
|excludes all the properties of |ordinary word combinations where|
|the two objects except one which|centripetal force is in action. |
|is made common to them. |In oxymoron the logical meaning |
|E. g. ‘The boy seems to be as |holds fast because there is no |
|clever as his mother |true word combination, only the |
|It is ordinary comparison. ‘Boy’|juxtaposition of two |
|and ‘Mother’ belong to the same |non-combinative words. But we |
|class of objects – human beings |may notice a peculiar change in |
|– and only one quality is being |the meaning of the qualifying |
|stressed to find the |word. It assumes a new life in |
|resemblance. |oxymoron, definitely indicative |
|‘Maidens, like moths, are ever |of assessing tendency in the |
|caught by glare,’ |writer’s mind. |
|It is simile. ‘Maidens’ and |E. g. (O. Henry) “I despise its |
|‘moths’ belong to different |very vastness and power. It has |
|classes of objects and Byron has|the poorest millionaires, the |
|found the concept ‘moth’ to |littlest great men, the |
|indicate one of the secondary |haughtiest beggars, the plainest|
|features of the concept |beauties, the lowest |
|‘maiden’, i. e., to be easily |skyscrapers, the dolefulest |
|lured. Concept ‘Maidens’ is |pleasures of any town I eve |
|characterized and the concept |seen.” |
|‘moths’ characterizing. |Even the superlative degree of |
|Similes have formal elements in |the adjectives fails to |
|their structure: connective |extinguish the primary meaning |
|words such as like, as, such as,|of the adjectives: poor, little,|
|as if, seem. |haughty, etc. But by some inner |
|Similes may suggest analogies in|law of word combinations they |
|the character of actions |also show the attitude of the |
|performed. In this case the two |speaker, reinforced, of course, |
|members of the structural design|by the preceding sentence: “I |
|of this simile will resemble |despise its very vastness and |
|each other trough the actions |power.” |
|they perform. Thus: |Oxymoron as a rule has one |
|“The Liberals have plunged for |structural model: adjective + |
|entry without considering its |noun. It is in this structural |
|effects, while Labour leaders |model that the resistance of the|
|like cautious bathers have put a|two component parts to fusion |
|timorous toe into the water and |into one unit manifests itself |
|promptly withdrawn it.” |most strongly. In the adverb + |
|The simile in this passage from |adjective model the change of |
|newspaper’s article is based on |meaning in the first element, |
|the simultaneous realization of |the adverb, is more rapid, |
|the two meanings of the word |resistance to the unifying |
|‘plunged’. The primary meaning |process not being so strong |
|‘to through oneself into the |Not every combination of words |
|water’ – prompted the figurative|which we called non-combinative |
|periphrasis ‘have put a timorous|should be regarded as oxymoron, |
|toe into the water and promptly |because new meaning developed in|
|withdrawn it’ standing for ‘have|new combinations do not |
|abstained from taking action’. |necessarily give rise to |
|In the English language, there |opposition. |
|is a long list of hackneyed | |
|similes pointing out the analogy| |
|between the various qualities, | |
|states or actions of human being| |
|and animals: busy as a bee, | |
|blind as a bat, to work like a | |
|hors, to fly like a bird, | |
|thirsty as a camel. These | |
|combinations have become | |
|cliches. | |

|Irony |Metonymy |
|Irony is stylistic device based |Metonymy is based on different |
|on the simultaneous realization |types of relation between the |
|of two logical meanings – |dictionary and contextual |
|dictionary and contextual, but |meanings, a relation based not |
|the two meanings stand in |on affinity, but on some kind of|
|opposition to each other. |association connecting the two |
|E.g. “It must be delightful to |concepts which these meanings |
|find oneself in a foreign |represent. |
|country |Thus the word “crown” may stand |
|without a penny in one’s |for “king or queen”, “cup or |
|pocket.” |glass” for the “drink it |
|The word “delightful” acquires a|contains” These examples of |
|meaning quite the opposite to |metonymy are traditional. In |
|its primary dictionary meaning, |fact they are derivative logical|
|that is “unpleasant”. |meanings and therefore fixed in |
|Irony must not be confused with |dictionaries, there is usually a|
|humor, although they have very |label “fig”. This shows that new|
|much in common. Humor always |meaning not entirely replaced |
|causes laughter. What is funny |the primary one, but, as it |
|must come as sudden clash of the|were, co-exists with it. |
|positive an the negative. In |Contextual metonymy is used in |
|this respect irony can be |speech. It is genuine metonymy |
|likened to humor. But the |and reveals a quite unexpected |
|function of irony is not |substitution of one word, or |
|confined to producing a humorous|even concept for another, on the|
|effect. In a sentence like “How |ground of some strong impression|
|clever of you” where, due to the|produced by a chance feature of |
|intonation pattern, the word |the thing. |
|“clever” conveys a sense |E.g. “Then they came in. Two of |
|opposite to its literal |them, a man with long fair |
|signification, the irony does |moustaches |
|not cause a ludicrous effect. It|and a silent dark man… |
|rather expresses a feeling of |Definitely, the moustache and I |
|irritation, displeasure, pity or|had nothing in common.” |
|regret |Here we have a feature of a man |
|Richard Altick says, “The effect|which catches the eye, in this |
|of irony lies in the striking |case his facial appearance: the |
|disparity between what is said |moustache stands for himself. |
|and what is meant.” This |The function of the metonymy |
|“striking disparity” is achieved|here is to indicate that the |
|trough the intentional interplay|speaker knows nothing of the |
|of the two meanings, which are |man, moreover there is a |
|in opposition to each other. |definite implication that this |
|We must also take into |is the first time the speaker |
|consideration that irony is |has seen him. |
|generally used to convey a |Metonymy and metaphor differs in|
|negative meaning. Therefore only|the way they are deciphered. In |
|positive concepts may be used in|this process of disclosing the |
|their logical dictionary |meaning in a metaphor, one image|
|meanings. |excludes the other, that is the |
| |metaphor “lamp” in the “The sky |
| |lamp of the night” when |
| |deciphered, means the moon, and |
| |though there is a definite |
| |interplay of meanings, we |
| |perceive only one object, the |
| |moon. This is not the case with |
| |metonymy. Metonymy, while |
| |presenting one object to our |
| |mind does not exclude the other.|
| |In the example given above the |
| |moustache and the man himself |
| |are both perceived by the mind. |
| |Mane attempts have been made to |
| |pinpoint the types of relation |
| |which metonymy is based on. |
| |Among them the following are |
| |most common: |
| |A concrete thing used instead of|
| |an abstract notion. In this case|
| |the thing becomes a symbol of |
| |the notion. E.g. “The camp, the |
| |pulpit and the law For rich |
| |men’s sons are free.” |
| |The container instead of the |
| |thing contained: E. g. “The hall|
| |applauded.” |
| |The relation of proximity: E. g.|
| |“The round game table was |
| |boisterous and happy.” |
| |The material instead of the |
| |thing made of it: E. g. “The |
| |marble spoke.” |
| |The instrument which the doer |
| |uses in performing the action |
| |instead of the action or the |
| |doer himself: E. g. “as the |
| |sword is the worst argument that|
| |can be used, so should it be the|
| |last.” |

|Chiasmus |Polysyndeton |
|Chiasmus belongs to the group of|Polysyndeton is the stylistic |
|stylistic devices based on the |device of connecting sentences |
|repetition of syntactical |or phrases or syntagms or words |
|pattern, but it has a cross |by using connectives (mostly |
|order of words and phrases. The |conjunctions and prepositions) |
|structure of two successive |before each component part. |
|sentences or parts of a sentence|E. g. “Should you ask me, whence|
|may be described as reversed |these stories? |
|parallel construction, the word |Whence these legends and |
|order of one the sentences being|traditions, |
|inverted as compared to that of |With the odours of the forest, |
|the other: |With the dew, and damp of |
|E. g. “Down dropped the breeze, |meadows, |
|The sails dropped down.” |With the curling smoke of |
|The device is effective in that |wigwams |
|it helps to lay stress on the |With the rushing of great |
|second part of the utterance, |rivers, |
|which is opposite in structure |With their frequent |
|Chiasmus can appear only when |repetitions,…” |
|there are two successive |The repetition of conjunctions |
|sentences or coordinate parts of|and other means of connection |
|a sentence |makes an utterance more |
|Syntactical chiasmus is somtimes|rhythmical; so much so that |
|used to break the monotony of |prose may even seem like verse. |
|parallel constructions. But |So one of the functions of |
|whatever the purpose of |polysyndeton is a rhythmical |
|chiasmus, it will always bring |one. In addition to this , |
|in some new shade of meaning or |polysyndeton has a |
|additional emphasis on some |disintegrating function. It |
|portion of the second part. |generaly combines homogeneous |
| |elements of thought into one |
| |whole resembling enumeration. |
| |But unlike enumeration, which |
| |integrates both homogeneous and |
| |heterogeneous elements into one |
| |whole, polysyndeton causes each |
| |member of a string of facts to |
| |stand out conspicuously. That is|
| |why we say that polysyndeton has|
| |a disintegrating function. |
| |Enumeration snows the things |
| |united: polysyndeton snows them |
| |isolated. |
| |Polysyndeton has also the |
| |function of axpressing sequence:|
| | |
| |E. g. “Then Mr. Boffin… sat |
| |staring at a little bookcase of |
| |Law Practic and Law Reports, And|
| |at a window, and at an empty |
| |blue bag…..” |

|Stylistic inversion |Antonomasia |
|Stylistic inversion aims at |The interplay between logical |
|attaching logical stress or |and nominal meanings of a word |
|additional emotional colouring |is called antonomasia. As in |
|to the surface meaning of the |other stylistic devices based on|
|utterance. Therefore a specific |the interaction of lexical |
|intonation pattern is the |meanings, the two kinds of |
|inevitable satellite of |meanings must be realized in the|
|inversion |word simultaneously. |
|Stylistic inversion in Modern |E. g. “Society is now one |
|English is the practical |polished horde, |
|realization of what is potential|Form’d of two mighty tribes, the|
|in the language itself. |Bores and Bored.” |
|The following patterns of |In this example of use |
|stylistic inversion are most |antonomasia the nominal meaning |
|frequently met in both English |is hardly perceived, the logical|
|prose and poetry: |meaning of the words “bores” and|
|The object is placed at the |“bored” being to strong. It is |
|beginning of the sentence: |very important to note that this|
|“Talent Mr. Micawber has; |stylistic device is mainly |
|capital Mr. Micawber has not.” |realized in the written |
|The attribute is placed after |language, because sometimes |
|the word it modifies. This model|capital letters are the only |
|is often used when there is more|signals of the stylistic device.|
|than one attribute: “With |But there is another point that |
|fingers weary and worn…” |should be mentioned. Most proper|
|The predicative is placed before|names are built in some law of |
|the subject: “A good generuos |analogy. Many of them end in |
|prayer it was” |“-son” (as Johnson) or “-er” (as|
|The predicative stands before |Fletcher). We easily recognize |
|the link verb and both are |such words as Smith, White, |
|placed before the subject: “Rude|Brown, Green, Fowler and others |
|am I in my speech…” |as proper names. But such names |
|The adverbial modifier is placed|as: Miss Blue-Eyes or Scrooge or|
|at the beginning of the |Mr. Zero may be called token |
|sentence: “My dearest daughter, |names. They give information to |
|at your feet I fall.” |the reader about the bearer of |
|Both modifier and predicate |the name. |
|stand before the subject: “Down |Antonomasia is intended to point|
|dropped the breeze…” |out the leading, most |
| |characteristic feature or event,|
| |at the same time pinning the |
| |this leading trait as a proper |
| |name to the person or event |
| |concerned. |
| |Antonomasia is much favoured |
| |device in the belles-lettres |
| |style. |

| | |
|Hyperbole | |
|Hyperbole is deliberate | |
|overstatement or exaggeration, | |
|the aim of which is to intensify| |
|one of the features of the | |
|object in question to such a | |
|degree as will show its utter | |
|absurdity. | |
|E. g. “And this maiden she lived| |
|with no other thought | |
|Than to love and be loved by | |
|me.” | |
|Like many stylistic devices, | |
|hyperbole may lose its quality | |
|as a stylistic device through | |
|frequent repetition and become a| |
|unit of the | |
|language-as-a-system, reproduced| |
|in speech in its unaltered form.| |
|Here are some examples of | |
|language hyperbole: ‘a thousand | |
|pardons’; ‘scared to death’; | |
|‘I’d give the world to see him’ | |
|Epithet |Litotes |
|The epithet is a stylistic |Litotes is a stylistic device |
|device based on the interplay of|consisting of a peculiar use of |
|emotive and logical meaning in |negative constructions. The |
|an attributive word, phrase or |negation plus noun or adjective |
|even sentence, used to |serves to establish a positive |
|characterise an object and |feature in a person or thing. |
|pointing out to the reader, and |This pisitive feature is however|
|frequently imposing on him, some|is somewhat diminished in |
|of the properties or features of|quality as compared with a |
|the object with aim of giving an|synonymous expression making a |
|individual perception and |straightforward assertion of the|
|evaluation of these features or |positive feature. |
|properties. The epithet is |E. g. 1. It’s not a bad thing – |
|markedly subjective and |It’s a good thing |
|evaluative. The logical |2. He is no coward – He is a |
|attribute is purely objective, |brave man |
|non-evaluating. It is |In both cases the negative |
|descriptive and indicates an |construction is weaker than |
|inherent or prominent feature of|affirmative one. But we can not |
|the thing or phenomenon in |say that the two negative |
|question. |constructions produce a lesser |
|Thus in green meadows, white |effect than the corresponding |
|snow, round table and the like, |affirmative ones. Moreover, it |
|the adjectives are more logical |should be noted that the |
|attributes than epithets. They |negative construction here have |
|indicate those qualities of the |a stronger impact on the reader |
|objects which may be regarded as|than the affirmative ones. So |
|generally recognized. But in |the negation in litotes should |
|wild wind, loud ocean, |not be regarded as mere denial |
|heart-burning smile, the |of the quality mentioned. |
|adjectives do not point to |The stylistic effect of litotes |
|inherent qualities of the |depends mainly on intonation, on|
|objects described. They are |intonation only. If compare two |
|subjective evaluative. |intonation patterns, one which |
|Epithets may be classified from |suggests a mere denial (It is |
|different standpoints: semantic |not bad as contrary to It is |
|and structural. Semantically – |bad) with the other which |
|divided into associated with the|saggests assertion of a positive|
|noun following and unassociated |quality of the object (It is no |
|with it. |bad = it is good) the different |
|Associated epithets are those |will become apparent. |
|which point out to a feature |A variant of litotes is a |
|which is essential to the |construction with two negations,|
|objects they describe: the idea |as in (not unlike, not |
|expressed in the epithet is to a|unpromising). Here accordingly |
|certain extent inherent in the |to general logical and |
|concept of the object. For e. g.|mathematical, principles, two |
|‘dark forest’, ‘careful |negatives make a |
|attention’ etc. |positive(Soames, with his lips |
|Unassociated epithets are |and his squared chin was not |
|attributes used to characterize |unlike a bull dog) |
|the object by adding a feature | |
|not inherent in it. For e. g. | |
|‘heart-burning smile’, | |
|‘voiceless sands’. The | |
|adjectives here impose a | |
|property on objects which is | |
|fitting only in the given | |
|circumstances. | |
| | |
|Structurally, epithets can be | |
|viewed from the angle of a) | |
|composition and b) distribution.| |
| | |
|Compositional – may be divided | |
|into simple, compound and phrase| |
|epithets. Simple epithets are | |
|ordinary adjectives (wild wind, | |
|loud ocean). Compound epithets | |
|are built like compound | |
|adjectives (heat-burning sigh, | |
|sylph-like figures). Phrase | |
|epithets: a phrase and even a | |
|whole sentence may become an | |
|epithet if the main formal | |
|requirement of the epithets is | |
|maintained i. e. its attributive| |
|use. But unlike simple and | |
|compound epithets, which may | |
|have pre- and post-position, | |
|phrase epithets are always | |
|placed before the nouns they | |
|refer to. (Freddie was standing | |
|on front of the fireplace with a| |
|‘well-that’s-the-story-what-are-| |
|we-going-to-do-about-it’ air | |
|that made him a local point) | |
|Phrase epithets are generally | |
|followed by the expression, air,| |
|attitude and others which | |
|describe behaviour or facial | |
|expression, | |
| | |
|Reversed epithet is composed of | |
|two nouns linked in an of – | |
|phrase. The subjective, | |
|evaluating, emotional element is| |
|embodied not in the noun | |
|attribute but in the noun | |
|described (the shadow of a | |
|smile; a devil of a sea rolls in| |
|that bay) | |
| | |
|From the point of view of the | |
|distribution of the epithets in | |
|the sentence, the first model to| |
|be pointed out is the string of | |
|epithets (a plump, rosy-checked,| |
|wholesome, apple-faced, young | |
|woman; a well-matched, | |
|fairly-balanced, give-and-take | |
|couple). The string of epithets | |
|gives a many-sided depiction of | |
|the object. | |
|Transferred epithets are | |
|ordinary logical attributes | |
|generally describing the state | |
|of a human being, but made to | |
|refer to an inanimate object | |
|(sleepless pillow, unbreakfasted| |
|morning) | |
|It remains only to say that the | |
|epithet is direct and | |
|straightforward way of showing | |
|the author’s attitude towards | |
|the things described. | |

|Zuegma and pun | |
|Zuegma is the use of the word in| |
|the same grammatical but | |
|different semantic relations to | |
|two adjacent words in the | |
|context, the semantic relations | |
|being on the one hand literal, | |
|and on the other, transferred. | |
|E. g. “Dora, plunging at once | |
|into privileged intimacy and | |
|into the middle of the room” | |
|Zuegma is a strong and effective| |
|device to maintain the purity of| |
|the primary meaning when the two| |
|meanings clash. By making the | |
|two meanings conspicuous in this| |
|particular way, each of them | |
|stands out clearly | |
|The pun is another stylistic | |
|device based on the interaction | |
|of well-known meanings of a word| |
|or phrase. It is difficult to | |
|draw a hard and fast distinction| |
|between zeugma and the pun. The | |
|only reliable distinguishing | |
|feature is a structural: zeugma | |
|is realization of two meanings | |
|with the help of a verb which is| |
|made to refer to different | |
|subjects or objects. The pun is | |
|more independent. There need not| |
|necessarily be a word in the | |
|sentence to which the pun-word | |
|refers. But this does not mean | |
|that the pun is entirely free. | |
|Like any other stylistic device,| |
|it must depend on a context. E. | |
|g. “Bow to the board – Said | |
|Bumble. Oliver brushed away two | |
|or three tears that were | |
|lingering in his eyes; and | |
|seeing no board but the table, | |
|fortunately bowed to that.” | |

Climax (gradation)
Climax is an arrangement of sentences which secures a gradual increase in significance, importance, or emotional tension in the utterance. E. g.” It was a lovely city, a beautiful city, a fair city, a veritable gem of a city.”
As it see from this e. g. each successive unit is perceived as stronger than the preceding one.

A gradual increase may be maintained in three ways: logical, emotional and quantitative.

Logical climax is base don the relative importance of the component parts look at from the point of view of the concepts embodied in them.

Emotional climax is based on the relative emotional tension produced by words with emotive meaning, as in the first example, with the words
“lovely”, “beautiful”, “fair”. Of course, emotional climax based on synonymous strings of words.

Quantitative climax

Ellipsis is a typical phenomenon in conversation, arising out of the situation. When it used as stylistic device, always imitates the common features of colloquial language, where the situation predetermines absence of the certain members

|Oxymoron |
|Oxymoron is a combination of two words (mostly an adjective and a |
|noun or an adverb with an adjective) in which the meanings of the |
|two clash, being opposite in sense, |
|E.g.: low skyscraper; sweet sorrow; pleasantly ugly face |
|The essence of oxymoron consists in the capacity of the primary |
|meaning of the adjective or adverb to resist for some time the |
|overwhelming power of semantic change which words undegro in |
|combination. The forcible combination of non-combinative words |
|seems to develop what may be called a kind of centrifugal force |
|which keeps them apart, in contrast to ordinary word combinations |
|where centripetal force is in action. |
|In oxymoron the logical meaning holds fast because there is no |
|true word combination, only the juxtaposition of two |
|non-combinative words. But we may notice a peculiar change in the |
|meaning of the qualifying word. It assumes a new life in oxymoron,|
|definitely indicative of assessing tendency in the writer’s mind. |
|E. g. (O. Henry) “I despise its very vastness and power. It has |
|the poorest millionaires, the littlest great men, the haughtiest |
|beggars, the plainest beauties, the lowest skyscrapers, the |
|dolefulest pleasures of any town I eve seen.” |
|Even the superlative degree of the adjectives fails to extinguish |
|the primary meaning of the adjectives: poor, little, haughty, etc.|
|But by some inner law of word combinations they also show the |
|attitude of the speaker, reinforced, of course, by the preceding |
|sentence: “I despise its very vastness and power.” |
|Oxymoron as a rule has one structural model: adjective + noun. It |
|is in this structural model that the resistance of the two |
|component parts to fusion into one unit manifests itself most |
|strongly. In the adverb + adjective model the change of meaning in|
|the first element, the adverb, is more rapid, resistance to the |
|unifying process not being so strong |
|Not every combination of words which we called non-combinative |
|should be regarded as oxymoron, because new meaning developed in |
|new combinations do not necessarily give rise to opposition. |