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 recog-
nized sign for an abstract notion designating a certain phenomenon or
object) 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. An-
other 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 contra-
dictory sense.

The stylistic device 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 contrary concepts is called irony.

Let us now proceed with a detailed analysis of the ontology, structure and functions of these stylistic devices.

Metaphor

The term 'metaphor', as the etymology of the word reveals, means transference of some quality from one object to another. From the times

of ancient Greek and Roman rhetoric, the term has been known to denote

the transference of meaning from one word to another. It is still widely
used to designate the process in which a word acquires a derivative mean-
ing. Quintilian remarks: "It is due to the metaphor that each thing
seems to have its name in language." Language as a whole has been figu-
ratively defined as a dictionary of faded metaphors.

Thus by transference of meaning the words grasp, set and see come to
have the derivative meaning of understand. When these words are used
with that meaning we can only register the derivative meaning existing
in the semantic structures of the words. Though the derivative meaning
is metaphorical in origin, there is no stylistic effect because the_primary
meaning is no longer felt.

A metaphor_becomes_a_stylistic device when two different phenomena
(things, events, ideas, actions) are simultaneously brought to mind by
the imposition of some or all of the inherent properties of one object on
the other which by nature is deprived of these properties. Such an im-
position generally results when the creator of the metaphor finds in the
two corresponding objects certain features which to his eye have some-
thing in common.

The idea that metaphor is based on similarity or affinity of two (cor-
responding) objects or notions is, as I understand it, erroneous. The two
objects are identified and the fact that a common feature is pointed to
and made prominent does not make them similar. The notion of similarity
can be carried on ad absurdum, for example, animals and human beings
move, breathe, eat, etc. but if one of these features, i.e. movement,
breathing, in pointed to in animals and at the same time in human beings,
the two objects will not necessarily cause the notion of affinity.

Identification should not be equated to resemblance. Thus in the
following metaphor:

"Dear Nature is the kindest Mother still" (Byron) the notion Mother
arouses in the mind the actions of nursing, weaning, caring for, etc.,
whereas the notion Nature does not. There is no true similarity, but there is a kind of identification. Therefore it is better to define metaphor as the power of realizing two lexical meanings simultaneously.

Due to this power metaphor is one of the most potent means of creat-
ing images. An image is a sensory perception of an abstract notion alrea-
dy existing in the mind. Consequently, to create an image means to bring
a phenomenon from the highly abstract to the essentially concrete. Thus
the example given above where the two concepts Mother and Nature are
brought together in the interplay of their meanings, brings up the image
of Nature materialized into but not likened to the image of Mother.

The identification is most clearly observed when the metaphor is
embodied either in an attributive word, as in pearly teeth, voiceless sounds,
or in a predicative word-combination, as in the example with Nature
and Mother.

But the identification of different movements will not be so easily
perceived because there is no explanatory unit. Let us look at this sen-
tence:

"In the slanting beams that streamed through the open window
the dust danced and was golden." (G. Wilde)

The movement of dust particles seem to the eye of the writer to be
regular and orderly like the movements in dancing. What happens prac-
tically is that our mind runs in two parallel lines: the abstract and the
concrete, i.e. movement (of any kind) and dancing (a definite kind).

Sometimes the process of identification can hardly be decoded. Here
is a metaphor embodied in an adverb:

"The leaves fell sorrowfully."

The movement of falling leaves is probably identified with the
movement of a human being experiencing some kind of distress—people
swing their bodies or heads to and fro when in this state of mind. One
can hardly perceive any similarity in the two kinds of movements which
are by the force of the writer's imagination identified.

Generally speaking, one feature out of the multitude of features of
an object found in common with a feature of another object will not pro-
duce resemblance. This idea is worded best of all in Wordsworth's famous
lines:

"To find affinities in objects in which no brotherhood exists to
passive minds."

Here is a recognition of the unlimited power of the poet in finding com-
mon features in heterogenous objects.

Metaphorization can also be described as an attempt to be precise,
as J. Middleton Murry thinks. But this precision is of an emotional and
aesthetic character and not logical. This is what Middleton Murry writes:

"Try to be precise and you are bound to be metaphorical; you
simply cannot help establishing affinities between all the provin-
ces of the animate and inanimate world"¹

Metaphors, like all stylistic devices, can be classified according to
their degree of unexpectedness. Thus metaphors which are absolutely
unexpected, i.e. are unpredictable, are called genuine
phors. Those which are commonly used in speech and therefore are some-
times even fixed in dictionaries as expressive means of language are t r i t e_
metaphors, or dead metaphors. Their predictability therefore is appar-
ent. Genuine metaphors are regarded as belonging to language-in-action,
i.e. speech metaphors; trite metaphors belong to the language-_:as-a-
system, i.e. language proper, and are usually fixed in dictionaries as
units of the language.

V. V. Vinogradov states:

"...a metaphor, if it is not a cliche, is an act of establishing an
individual world outlook, it is an act of subjective isolation...
Therefore a word metaphor is narrow, subjectively enclosed,...it
imposes on the reader a subjective view of the object or phenome-
non and its semantic ties." ²

¹ Op. cit., p. 83.

² Виноградов В. В. Стиль Пушкина. М., 1945, с. 89.

The examples given above may serve as illustrations of genuine met-
aphors. Here are some examples of metaphors that are considered trite,
They are time-worn and well rubbed into the language: 'a ray of hope',
'floods of tears', 'a storm of indignation', 'a flight of fancy', 'a gleam of
mirth', 'a shadow of a smile' and the like.

The interaction of the logical dictionary meaning and the logical
contextual meaning assumes different forms. Sometimes this interaction
is perceived as a deliberate interplay of the two meanings. In this case
each of the meanings preserves its relative independence. Sometimes,
however, the metaphoric use of a word begins to affect the source mean-
ing, i.e. the meaning from which the metaphor is derived, with the
result that the target meaning, that is, the metaphor itself, takes the
upper hand and may even oust the source meaning. In this case we speak of dead metaphors.

In such words as to melt (away), as in ''these misgivings gradually
melted away" we can still recognize remnants of the original meaning
and in spite of the fact that the meaning 'to vanish', 'to disappear' is
already fixed in dictionaries as one of the derivative meanings, the pri-
mary meaning still makes itself felt.

Trite metaphors are sometimes injected with new vigour, i.e. their
рrimary meaning is re-established alongside the new (derivative) mean-
ing. This is done by supplying the central image created by the meta-
phor with additional words bearing some reference to the main word.
For example: "Mr. Pickwick bottled up his vengeance and corked it down."
The verb to bottle up is explained in dictionaries as follows: 'to keep in
check' ("Penguin Dictionary"); 'to conceal, to restrain, repress' ("Cas-
sell's New English Dictionary"). The metaphor in the word can hardly be
felt. But it is revived by the direct meaning of the verb to cork down. This
context refreshes the almost dead metaphor and gives it a second life.
Such metaphors are called sustain e d or pro longe d. Here is
another example of a sustained metaphor:

"Mr. Dombey's cup of satisfaction was so full at this moment,
however, that he felt he could afford a drop or two of its contents, even
to sprinkle on the dust in the by-path of his little daughter." (Dick-
ens, "Dombey and Son")

We may call the principal metaphor the central image of the sustained
metaphor and the other words which bear reference to the central im-
age - contributory images. Thus in the example given the word cup (of
satisfaction) being a trite metaphor is revived by the following contrib-
utory images: full, drop, contents, sprinkle. It is interesting to note that
the words conveying both the central image (the cup) and the contributory
images are used in two senses simultaneously: direct and indirect. The
second plane of utterance is maintained by the key word— satisfaction. It
is this word that helps us to decipher the idea behind the sustained met-
aphor.

Sometimes, however, the central image is not given, but the string of words all bearing upon some implied central point of reference are
so associated with each other that the reader is bound to create the re-

quired image in his mind. Let us take the following sentence from Shake-
speare:

"I have no spur to prick the sides of my intent." The words spur, to
prick, the sides in their interrelation will inevitably create the image
of a steed, with which the speaker's intent is identified.

The same is to be seen in the following lines from Shelley's "Cloud":

"In a cavern under is fettered the thunder,
It struggles and howls at fits."

Here the central image—that of a captive beast—is suggested by the
contributory images— fettered, struggles and howls.

The metaphor is often defined as a compressed simile. But this de-
finition lacks precision. Moreover, it is misleading, inasmuch as the met-
aphor aims at identifying the objects, while the simile aims at find-
ing some point of resemblance by keeping the objects apart. That is why
these two stylistic devices are viewed as belonging to two different groups
of SDs. They are different in their linguistic nature.

True, the degree of identification of objects or phenomena in a meta-
phor varies according to its syntactic function in the sentence and to
the part of speech in which it is embodied.

Indeed, in the sentence 'Expression is the dress of thought' we can
hardly see any process of identification between the concepts expression
and dress, whereas in the lines.

"Yet Time, who changes all, had altered him
In soul and aspect as in age: years steal

Fire from the mind as vigour from the limb;
And Life's enchanted cup but sparkles near the brim.

(Byron, "Childe Harold")

The metaphors steal, fire, cup, brim embodied in verbs and nouns not
used predicatively can be regarded as fully identified with the concepts
they aim at producing.

Genuine metaphors are mostly to be found in poetry and emotive
prose. Trite metaphors are generallу used as expressive means in newspa-
per articles, in oratorical style and even in scientific language. The use
of trite metaphors should not be regarded as a drawback of style. They
help the writer to enliven his work and even make the meaning more
concrete.

There is constant interaction between genuine and trite metaphors.
Genuine metaphors, if they are good_and can stand the test of time,
may, through frequent гереtition, become trite and consequently easily
predictable. Trite metaphors, as has been shown, may regain their fresh-
ness through the process of prolongation of the metaphor.

Metaphors may be sustained not only on the basis of a trite meta-
phor. The initial metaphor may be genuine and may also be developed
through a number of contributory images so that the whole of the utte-
rance becomes one sustained metaphor. A skilfully written example of
such a metaphor is to be found in Shakespeare's Sonnet No. 24.

Mine eye hath play'd the painter and hath stell'd

Thy beauty's form in table of my heart;

My body is the frame wherein 'tis held,

And perspective it is best painter's art.

For through the painter must you see his skill,

To find where your true image pictured lies;

Which in my bosom's shop is hanging still,

That hath his windows glazed with thine eyes.

Now see what good turns eyes for eyes have done:

Mine eyes have drawn thy shape, and thine for me

Are windows to my breast, where-through the sun

Delights to peep, to gaze therein on thee;

Yet eyes this cunning want to grace their art,
They draw but what they see, know not the heart.

The central image—'The eye—the painter' is developed through a
number of contributory images: to draw, to stell, table, frame, hanging
(picture) and the like.

In conclusion it would be of interest to show the results of the inter-
action between the dictionary and contextual meanings.

The constant use of a metaphor gradually leads to the breaking up of
the primary meaning. The metaphoric use of the word begins to affect
the dictionary meaning, adding to it fresh connotations or shades of
meaning. But this influence, however strong it may be, will never reach
the degree where the dictionary meaning entirely disappears. If it did,
we should have no stylistic device. It is a law of stylistics that in a sty-
listic device the stability of the dictionary meaning is always retained,
no matter how great the influence of the contextual meaning may be.

Metonymy

Metоnуту is based on a different type of relation between
the dictionary and contextual meanings, a relation based not on iden-
tification, but on some kind of association connecting the two concepts
which these meanings represent.

Thus, the word crown may stand for 'king or queen ', cup or glass
for 'the drink it contains', woolsack for 'the Chancellor of the Excheq-
uer who sits on it, or the position and dignity of the Lord Chancellor',
e.g., "Here the noble lord inclined his knee to the Woolsack." (from Han-
sard).

Here also the interrelation between the dictionary and contextual
meanings should stand out clearly and conspicuously. Only then can
we state that a stylistic device is used. Otherwise we must turn our
mind to lexicological problems, i.e. to the ways and means by which
new words and meanings are coined. The examples of metonymy given
above are traditional. In fact they are derivative logical meanings and
therefore fixed in dictionaries. However, when such meanings are includ-
ed in dictionaries, there is usually a label fig ('figurative use'). This
shows that the new meaning has not replaced the primary one, but, as
it were, co-exists with it.

Still the new meaning has become so common, that it is easily pre-
dictable and therefore does not bear any additional information, which
is an indispensable condition for an SD.

Here are some more widely used metonymical meanings, some of
which are already fixed in dictionaries without the label fig: the press
for '(the personnel connected with) a printing or publishing establish-
ment', or for 'the newspaper and periodical literature which is printed
by the printing press'. The bench is used as a generic term for 'magis-
trates and justices'. A hand is used for a worker; the cradle stands for
infancy, earliest stages, place of origin, and the grave stands for death.

Metonymy used in language-in-action, i.e. соntextual metonуту, is genuine metonymy and reveals a quite unexpected substitution of one word for another, or оnе concept for another, on the ground of some strong impression produced by a chance feature of the thing, for example:

"Miss Tox's hand trembled as she slipped it through Mr. Dombey's

arm, and felt herself escorted up the steps, preceded by a cocked hat

and a Babylonian collar." (Dickens)

'A cocked hat and a Babylonian collar' stand for the wearer of the
articles in question. One can hardly admit that there is a special character-
izing function in such a substitution. The function of these examples
of genuine metonymy is more likely to point out the insignificance of
the wearer rather than his importance, for his personality is reduced to
his externally conspicuous features, the hat and red collar.
Here is another example of genuine metonymy:

"Then they came in. Two of them, a man with long fair mous-
taches and a silent dark man... Definitely, the moustache and I had
nothing in common." (Doris Lessing, "Retreat to Innocence")

Again 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 implica-
tion that this is the first time the speaker has seen him.
Here is another example of the same kind:

"There was something so very agreeable in being so intimate
with such a waistcoat; in being on such off-hand terms so soon with
such a pair of whiskers that Tom was uncommonly pleased with him-
self." (Dickens, "Hard Times")

In these two cases of genuine metonymy a broader context than that
required by a metaphor is necessary in order to decipher the true mean-
ing of the stylistic device. In both cases it is necessary to understand
the words in their proper meanings first. Only then is it possible to grasp

the metonymy. In the following example the metonymy 'grape' also requires a broad context:

"And this is stronger than the strongest grape
Could e'er express in its expanded shape." (Byron)

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 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.

Many attempts have been made to pin-point the types of relation which
metonymy is based on. Among them the following are most common:

1. A concrete thing used instead of an abstract notion. In this case
the thing becomes a symbol of the notion, as in

"The camp, the pulpit and the law
For rich men's sons are free." (Shelley)

The container instead of the thing contained:
The hall applauded.

The relation of proximity, as in:

"The round game table was boisterous and happy." (Dickens)

4. The material instead of the thing made of it, as in:
"The marble spoke."

5. The instrument which the doer uses in performing the action
instead of the action or the doer himself, as in:

"Well, Mr. Weller, says the gentl'mn, you're a very good whip,
and can do what you like with your horses, we know." (Dickens)
"As the sword is the worst argument that can be used, so should
it be the last." (Byron)

The list is in no way complete. There are many other types of rela-
tions which may serve as a basis for metonymy.

It must also be noted that metonymy, being a means of building up
imagery, generally concerns concrete objects, which are generalized.
The process of generalization is easily carried out with the help of the
definite article. Therefore instances of metonymy are very often used
with the definite article, or with no article at all, as in "There was per-
fect sympathy between Pulpit and Pew", where 'Pulpit' stands for the
clergyman and 'Pew' for the congregation.

This is probably due to the fact that any definition of a word may
be taken for metonymy, inasmuch as it shows a property or an essen-
tial quality of the concept, thus disclosing a kind of relation between
the thing as a whole and a feature of it which may be regarded as part
of it.

Irony

Irony is a stylistic device also based on the simultaneous reali-
zation of two logical meanings - dictionary and contextual, but the two
meanings stand in opposition to each other. For example:

"It must be delightful to find oneself in a foreign country without
a penny in one's pocket."

The italicized word acquires a meaning quite the opposite to its
primary dictionary meaning, that is, 'unpleasant', 'not delightful'.
The word containing the irony is strongly marked by intonation. It
has an emphatic stress and is generally supplied with a special melody
design, unless the context itself renders this intonation pattern unnec-
essary, as in the following excerpt from Dickens's "Posthumous Papers
of the Pickwick Club":

"Never mind," said the stranger, cutting the address very short,
"said enough—no more; smart chap that cabman—handled his fives
well; but if I'd been your friend in the green jemmy—damn me—
punch his head—, Cod I would—pig's whisper—pieman too,—no
gammon."

"This coherent speech was interrupted by the entrance of the
Rochester coachman, to announce that..."

The word 'coherent', which describes Mr. Jingle's speech, is incon-
sistent with the actual utterance, and therefore becomes self-contra-
dictory. In no other device where we can observe the interplay of the
dictionary and contextual meanings, is the latter so fluctuating, sug-
gestive, and dependent on the environment as is irony. That is why there
are practically no cases of irony in language-as-a-system.

Irony must not be confused with humour, although they have very
much in common. Humour always causes laughter. What is funny must
come as a sudden clash of the positive and the negative. In this respect
irony can be likened to humour. But the functional irony is not confined
to producing a humorous effect. In a sentence like "How clever of you!"
where, due to the intonation pattern, the word 'clever' conveys а sense
opposite to its literal signification, the irony does not cause a ludicrous
effect. It rather expresses a feeling of irritation, displeasure, pity or
regret. A word used ironically may sometimes express very subtle, al-
most imperceptible nuances of meaning, as the word 'like' in the following
lines from "Beppo" by Byron.

XLVII

/ like a parliamentary debate,
Particularly when 'tis not too late.

XLVIII

I like the taxes, when they're not too many;

I like a seacoal fire, when not too dear;
I like a beef-steak, too, as well as any;

Have no objection to a pot of beer;
I like the weather, when it is not rainy,

That is I like two months of every year.

And so God save the Regent, Church and King!
Which means that I like all and everything.

In the first line the word 'like' gives only a slight hint of irony.
Parliamentary debates are usually long. The word 'debate' itself sug-
gests a lengthy discussion, therefore the word 'like' here should be taken
with some reservation. In other words, a hint of the interplay between
positive and negative begins with the first 'like'.

The second use of the word 'like' is definitely ironical. No one would
be expected to like taxes. It is so obvious that no context is necessary
to decode the true meaning of 'like'. The attributive phrase 'when they're
not too many' strengthens the irony.

Then Byron uses the word 'like' in its literal meaning. 'Like' in com-
binations with 'seacoal fire' and 'a beef-steak' and with 'two months
of every year' maintains its literal meaning, although in the phrase "I
like the weather" the notion is very general. But the last line again
shows that the word 'like' is used with an ironic touch, meaning 'to like'
and 'to put up with' simultaneously.

Richard Altick says, "The effect of irony lies in the striking dispari-
ty_between what is said and what is meant."¹ This "striking disparity"
is achieved through the intentional interplay of two meanings, which
are in opposition to each other. Another important observation must be borne in mind when analys-
ing the linguistic nature of irony. Irony is generally used to convey
a negative meaning. Therefore only positive concepts may be used in
their logical dictionary meaning. In the examples quoted above, irony
is embodied in such words as 'delightful', 'clever', 'coherent', 'like'.
The contextual meaning always conveys the negation of the positive
concepts embodied in the dictionary meaning.

2. INTERACTION OF PRIMARY AND DERIVATIVE LOGICAL MEANINGS

Stylistic Devices Based on Polysemantic Effect, Zeugma and Pun

As is known, the word is, of all language units, the most sensitive
to change; its meaning gradually develops and as a result of this develop-
ment new meanings appear alongside the primary one. It is normal for
almost every word to acquire derivative meanings; sometimes the pri-
mary meaning has to make way for quite a new meaning which ousts
it completely.

In dealing with the problem of nonce-words and new meanings we
have already stated the fact that in the development of language units
we are constantly facing the opposing concepts of permanence and ephem-
erality. Some meanings are characterized by their permanence, others,
like nonce-words and contextual meanings, are generally ephemeral,
i.e. they appear in some contexts and vanish leaving no trace in the
vocabulary of the language. Primary and the derivative meanings are char-

¹ Preface to Critical Reading. N. Y., 1956, p. 270.

acterized by their relative stability and therefore are fixed in diction-
aries, thus constituting the semantic structure of the word.

The problem of polysemy is one of the vexed questions of lexicology.
It is sometimes impossible to draw a line of demarcation between a de-
rivative meaning of a polysemantic word and a separate word, i.e. a word
that has broken its semantic ties with the head word and has become a
homonym to the word it was derived from.

Polysemy is a category of lexicology and as such belongs to language-
as-a-system. In actual everyday speech polysemy vanishes unless it is
deliberately retained for certain stylistic purposes. A context that does
not seek to produce any particular stylistic effect generally materializes
but one definite meaning.

However, when a word begins to manifest an interplay between the
primary and one of the derivative meanings we are again confronted with
an SD.

Let us analyse the following example from Sonnet 90 by Shakespeare ¹
where the key-words are intentionally made to reveal two or more mean-
ings.

"Then hate me if thou wilt, if ever now.

Now while the world is bent my deeds to cross."

The word 'hate' materializes several meanings in this context. The
primary meaning of the word, according to the Shorter Oxford English
Dictionary, is 'to hold in very strong dislike'. This basic meaning has
brought to life some derivative meanings which, though having very
much in common, still show some nuances, special shades of meaning
which enrich the semantic structure of the word. They are: 1) 'to detest';
2) 'to bear malice to'; 3) the opposite of to love (which in itself is not so
emotionally coloured as in the definition of the primary meaning: it
almost amounts to being indifferent); 4) 'to feel a repulsive attitude'.
Other dictionaries fix such senses as 5) 'to wish to shun' (Heritage Dic-
tionary); 6) 'to feel aversion for' (Random House Dictionary); 7) 'to
bear ill-will against'; 8) 'to desire evil to (persons)'(Wyld's Dictionary).

There is a peculiar interplay among derivative meanings of the word
'hate' in Sonnet 90 where the lamentation of the poet about the calam-
ities which had befallen him results in his pleading with his beloved
not to leave him in despair. The whole of the context forcibly suggests
that there is a certain interaction of the following meanings: 2) 'to bear
malice' (suggested by the line 'join with the spite of fortune')—4) 'to
feel a repulsive attitude'—5) 'to wish to shun' (suggested by the line
'if thou wilt leave me do not leave me last' and also 'compared with
loss of thee')—7) and 8) 'to desire evil and bear ill-will against' (suggest-
ed by the line 'join with the spite of fortune' and 'so shall I taste the very
worst of fortune's might'). All these derivative meanings interweave
with the primary one and this network of meanings constitutes a sty-
listic device which may be called the polysemantic effect.

¹ See: Galperin I. R. An Essay in Stylistic Analysis. M., 1968, p. 25.

This SD can be detected only when a rather large span of utterance,
up to a whole text, is subjected to a scrupulous and minute analysis.
It also requires some skill in evaluating the ratio of the primary and
derivative meanings in the given environment, the ratio being dependent
on the general content of the text.

The word 'bent' in the second line of the sonnet does not present any
difficulty in decoding its meaning. The metaphorical meaning of the
word is apparent. A contextual meaning is imposed on the word. The
micro-context is the key to decode its meaning.

The past participle of the verb to bend together with the verb to
cross builds a metaphor the meaning of which is 'to hinder', 'to block',
'to interfere'.

The polysemantic effect is a very subtle and sometimes hardly per-
ceptible stylistic device. But it is impossible to underrate its significance
in discovering the aesthetically pragmatic function of the utterance.

Unlike this device, the two SDs—Zeugma and Pun lie, as it were,
on the surface of the text.

Zeugma is the use of a word in the same grammatical but dif-
ferent semantic relations tо two adjacent words in the context, the se-
mantic relations being, on the one hand, literal, and, on the other, trans-
erred

"Dora, plunging at once into privileged intimacy and into the middle
of the room." (B. Shaw)

'To plunge' (into the middle of a room) materializes the meaning
'to rush into' or 'enter impetuously'. Here it is used in its concrete, pri-
rnary, literal meaning; in 'to plunge into privileged intimacy' the word
'plunge' is used in its derivative meaning.

The same can be said оf the use of the verbs 'stain' and 'lose' in the
following lines from Pope's "The Rape of the Lock":

"...Whether the Nymph
Shall stain her Honour or her new Brocade
Or lose her Heart or necklace at a Ball."

This stylistic device is particularly favoured in English emotive
prose and in poetry. The revival of the original meanings of words must
be regarded as an essential quality of any work in the belles-lettres
style. A good writer always keeps the chief meanings of words from fad-
ing away, provided the meanings are worth being kept fresh and vig-
orous.

Zeugma 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 structure of zeugma may present variations from the
patterns given above. Thus in the sentence:

"...And May's mother always stood on her gentility; and Dot's
mother never stood on anything but her active little feet." (Dickens)

The word 'stood' is used twice. This structural variant of zeugma,
though producing some slight difference in meaning, does not violate
the principle of the stylistic device. It still makes the reader realize
that the two meanings of the word 'stand' are simultaneously expressed,
one primary and the other derivative.

The pun is another stylistic device based on the interaction
of two 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 re-
liable distinguishing feature is a structural one: zeugma is the reali-
zation of two meanings with the help of a verb which is made to refer
to different subjects or objects (direct or indirect). The pun is more
independent. There need not necessarily be a word in the sentence to
which the pun-word refers. This does not mean, however, that the pun
is entirely free. Like any other stylistic device, it must depend on a
context. But the context may be of a more expanded character, some-
times even as large as a whole work of emotive prose. Thus the title of
one of Oscar Wilde's plays, "The Importance of Being Earnest" has a
pun in it, inasmuch as the name of the hero and the adjective meaning
'seriously-minded' are both present in our mind.

Here is another example of a pun where a larger context for its real-
ization is used:

"'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.' (Dickens)

In fact, the humorous effect is caused by the interplay not of two
meanings of one word, but of two words. 'Board' as a group of offi-
cials with functions of administration and management and 'board' as
a piece of furniture (a table) have become two distinct words.¹

Puns are often used in riddles and jokes, for example, in this riddle:
What is the difference between a schoolmaster and an engine-driver?
(One trains the mind and the other minds the train.)

Devices of simultaneously realizing the various meanings of words,
which are of a more subtle character than those embodied in puns and
zeugma, are to be found in poetry and poetical descriptions and in spec-
ulations in emotive prose. Men-of-letters are especially sensitive to the
nuances of meaning embodied in almost every common word, and to make
these words live with their multifarious semantic aspects is the task of
a good writer. Those who can do it easily are said to have talent.

In this respect it is worth subjecting to stylistic analysis words ordi-
narily perceived in their primary meaning but which in poetic diction
begin to acquire some additional, contextual meaning. This latter mean-
ing sometimes overshadows the primary meaning and it may, in the
course of time, cease to denote the primary meaning, the derived mean-
ing establishing itself as the most recognizable one. But to deal with

¹ We shall here disregard the difference between polysemy and homonymy, it
being irrelevant, more or less, for stylistic purposes.

these cases means to leave the domain of stylistics and find ourselves in
the domain of lexicology.

To illustrate the interplay of primary and contextual meanings,
let us take a few examples from poetical works:

In Robert Frost's poem "Stopping by Woods on a Snowy Evening"
the poet, taking delight in watching the snow fall on the woods, con-
cludes his poem in the following words:

"The woods are lovely, dark and deep.
But I have promises to keep,
And miles to go before I sleep,
And miles to go before I sleep."

The word 'promises' here is made to signify two concepts, viz. 1) a
previous engagement to be fulfilled and 2) moral or legal obligation.

The plural form of the word as well as the whole context of the poem
are convincing proof that the second of the two meanings is the main
one, in spite of the fact that in combination with the verb to keep (to
keep a promise) the first meaning is more predictable.

Here is another example.

In Shakespearian Sonnet 29 there are the following lines:

"When in disgrace with fortune and men's eyes,
I all alone beweep my outcast state,
And trouble deaf heaven with my bootless cries
And think upon myself and curse my fate."

Almost every word here may be interpreted in different senses: some-
times the differences are hardly perceptible, sometimes they are ob-
viously antagonistic to the primary meaning.

But we shall confine our analysis only to the meaning of the word
'cries' which signifies both prayer and lamentation. These two meanings
are suggested by the relation of the word 'cries' to 'trouble deaf heav-
en'. But the word 'cries' suggests not only prayer and lamentation, it
also implies violent prayer and lamentation as if in deep despair,
almost with tears (see the word 'beweep' in the second line of the part
of the sonnet quoted).

It is very important to be able to follow the author's intention from
his manner of expressing nuances of meaning which are potentially
present in the semantic structure of existing words. Those who fail
to define the suggested meanings of poetic words will never understand
poetry because they are unable to decode the poetic language.

In various functional styles of language the capacity of a word to
signify several meanings simultaneously manifests itself in different
degrees. In scientific prose it almost equals zero. In poetic style this
is an essential property.

To observe the fluctuations of meanings in the belles-lettres style
is not only important for a better understanding of the purpose or inten-
tion of the writer, but also profitable to a linguistic scholar engaged in
the study of semantic changes in words.