Lexical SDs and EMs

based on the interaction of the dictionary and contextual meanings (metaphor and its subtype (personification), metonymy and its subtypes (antonomasia, synecdoche), and irony);

based on the interaction of primary and derivative logical meanings (polysemy, zeugma, and pun);

based on the interaction of logical and emotive meanings (interjections, oxymoron, and epithet);

based on the interaction of logical and nominative meanings (simile, periphrasis, euphemism, hyperbole, and understatement);

syntactical SDs and EMs (climax, anticlimax, antithesis, attachment, asyndeton, polysyndeton, break-in-the-narrative, chiasmus, detachment, ellipsis, enumeration, litotes, parallel constructions, question-in-the-narrative, represented speech, rhetorical questions, suspense, inversion, and repetition).

V. A. Kukharenko classified all stylistic means into the following groups:

phono-graphical EMs (onomatopoeia, alliteration, assonance, and graphon);

graphical EMs (italics, capitalization, spacing of lines, and spacing of graphemes, such as hyphenation and multiplication);

lexical SDs (metaphor, metonymy, pun, zeugma, irony, epithet, hyperbole, understatement, and oxymoron);

syntactic SDs (sentence length, sentence structure, punctuation, rhetorical questions, repetition, parallel constructions, chiasmus, inversion, suspense, detachment, ellipsis, apokuinu construction, polysyndeton, asyndeton, and attachment);

lexico-syntactic SDs (antithesis, climax, anticlimax, simile, litotes, and periphrasis).

V. Arnold also dwells upon the violations of syntactic structure.

Yu. M. Skrebnev has a somewhat different view on the figures of speech nature. He doesn’t consider litotes to be an independent trope, but a type of meiosis. Periphrasis, epithet, question-in-the-narrative, break-in-the-narrative, represented speech, rhetorical questions, asyndeton, and suspense are not included into Yu. M. Skrebnev’s classification.

As for the rest of speech figures, he divided them into stylistic units (having paradigmatic nature) and stylistic sequences (having syntagmatic nature). Each of the above mentioned can be phonetic, morphological, lexical, syntactical, or semasiological. Thus Professor Skrebnev has the following classification of tropes:

paradigmatic phonetics units (graphon, grapheme multiplication, capitalization, and hyphenation);

syntagmatic phonetics units (assonance, alliteration, paronomasia, rhythm, and rhyme);

paradigmatic morphology units (morphemes and morphological meanings synonymy and variability);

syntagmatic morphology units (units of paradigmatic morphology co-occurrence);

paradigmatic lexicology units (professionalisms, terms, jargon, neologisms, barbarisms, and poetic, colloquial, official, vulgar, bookish, archaic words);

syntagmatic lexicology units (units of paradigmatic lexicology co-occurrence);

paradigmatic syntax units (ellipsis, aposiopesis, polysyndeton, nominative sentences, syntactic tautology (prolepsis), inversion, and detachment);

syntagmatic syntax units (repetition and chiasmus);

paradigmatic semasiology (onomasiology) units, or figures of replacement, subdivided into figures of quantity (hyperbole and understatement) and figures of quality (metonymy and its types (synecdoche and antonomasia), metaphor and its types (allusion and personification), and irony);

units of syntagmatic semasiology (onomasiology), or figures of co-occurrence, subdivided into figures of identity (simile), figures of inequality (climax, anticlimax, pun, zeugma, and tautology), and figures of contrast (oxymoron and antithesis).

Дата добавления: 2015-07-15