OR PHENOMENON

In order to understand the linguistic nature of the SDs of this group
it is necessary to clear up some problems, so far untouched, of d e f i n i-
t i о п as a philosophical category. Any definition can point out only one
or two properties of a phenomenon. Therefore in building up a definition
the definer tries to single out the most essential features of the object.
These are pinned down by the definer through a long period of observation
of the object, its functioning, its growth and its changes.

However, no definition can comprise all the inner qualities of the
object and new combinations of it with other objects as well; a deeper
penetration into the ontology of the object will always reveal some hither-
to unknown qualities and features.

In the third group of stylistic devices, which we now come to, we find
that one of the qualities of the object in question is made to sound essen-
tial. This is an entirely different principle from that on which the second

group is based, that of interaction between two lexical meanings simulta-
neously materialized in the context. In this third group the quality picked
out may be seemingly unimportant, and it is frequently transitory, but
for a special reason it is elevated to the greatest importance and made into
a telling feature.

Simile

Things are best of all learned by simile. V. G. Belinsky

The intensification of some one feature of the concept in question is
realized in a device called s i m i l e. Ordinary comparison and simile
must not be contused. They represent two diverse processes. Comparison
means weighing two objects belonging to one class of things with the
purpose of establishing the degree of their sameness of difference. To use a
simile is to characterize one object by bringing it into contact with anoth-
er object belonging to an entirely different class of things. Comparison
takes into consideration аll the properties of the two objects, stressing
the one that is compared. Simile excludes all the properties of the two ob-
jects except one which is made common to them. For example, 'The
boy seems to be as clever as his mother' is ordinary comparison. 'Boy' and
'mother' belong to the same class of objects—human beings—so this is
not a simile but ordinary comparison.

But in the sentence:

"Maidens, like moths, are ever caught by glare" (Byron), we have a
simile. 'Maidens' and 'moths' belong to heterogeneous classes of objects
and Byron has found the concept moth to indicate one of the secondary fea-
tures of the concept maiden, i.e. being easily lured. Of the two concepts
brought together in the simile—one characterized (maidens), and the
other characterizing (moths) — the feature intensified will be more in-
herent in the latter than in the former. Moreover, the object characterized
is seen in quite a new and unexpected light, because the writer, as it were,
imposes this feature on it.

Similes forcibly set one object against another regardless of the fact
that they may be completely alien to each other. And without our being
aware of it, the simile gives rise to a new understanding of the object
characterizing as well as of the object characterized.

The properties of an object may be viewed from different angles, for
example, its state, actions, manners, etc. Accordingly, similes may be
based on adjective-attributes, adverb-modifiers, verb-predicates, etc.

Similes have formal elements in their structure: connective words
such as like, as, such as, as if, seem. Here are some examples of similes
taken from various sources and illustrating the variety of structural de-
signs of this stylistic device.

"His mind was restless, but it worked perversely and thoughts
jerked through his brain like the misfirings of a defective carburettor."
(Maugham)

The structure of this simile is interesting, for it is sustained. Let us
analyse it. The word 'jerked' in the micro-context, i.e. in combination_
with 'thoughts' is a metaphor, which led to the simile 'like the misfir-
ings of a defective carburettor' where the verb to jerk carries its direct
logical meaning. So the linking notion is the movement jerking which
brings to the author's mind a resemblance between the working of the
man's brain and the badly working, i.e. misfiring, carburettor. In other
words, it is action that is described by means of a simile.

Another example:

"It was that moment of the year when the countryside seems to
faint from its own loveliness, from the intoxication of its scents
and sounds." (J. Galsworthy)

This is an example of a simile which is half a metaphor. If not for the
structural word 'seems', we would call it a metaphor. Indeed, if we drop
the word 'seems' and say, "the countryside faints from...," the clue-word
'faint' becomes a metaphor. But the word 'seems' keeps apart the notions
of stillness and fainting. It is a simile where the second member—the
human being—is only suggested by means of the concept faint.

_The semantic nature of the simile-forming elements seem and as if
is such mat they only remotely suggest resemblance. Quite different are
the connectives like and as. These are more categorical and establish quite
straightforwardly the analogy between the two objects in question.
Sometimes the simile-forming like is placed at the end of the phrase
almost merging with it and becoming half-suffix, for example:

"Emily Barton was very pink, very Dresden-china-shepherdess
like."

In simple non-figurative language, it will assume the following form:

"Emily Barton was very pink, and looked like a Dresden-china-
shepherdess.”

Similes may suggest analogies in the character of actions performed.
In this case the two members of the structural design of the simile will
resemble each other through the actions they perform. Thus:

"The Liberals have plunged for entry without considering its
effects, while the Labour leaders like cautious bathers have put a
timorous toe into the water and promptly withdrawn it."

The simile in this passage from a newspaper article 'like cautious
bathers' is based on the simultaneous realization of the two meanings
of the word plunge. The primary meaning 'to throw oneself into the wat-
er'—prompted the figurative periphrasis 'have put a timorous toe into
the water and promptly withdrawn it' standing for 'have abstained from
taking action.'

In the English language there is a long list of hackneyed similes point-
ing out the analogy between the various qualities, states or actions of a
human being and the animals supposed to be the bearers of the given
quality, etc., for example:

treacherous as a snake, sly as a fox, busy as a bee, industrious
as an ant, blind as a bat, faithful as a dog, to work like a horse, to
be led like a sheep, to fly like a bird, to swim like a duck, stubborn as
a mule, hungry as a bear, thirsty as a camel, to act like a puppy,
playful as a kitten, vain (proud) as a peacock, slow as a tortoise and
many others of the same type.

These combinations, however, have ceased to be genuine similes and
have become cliches (see p. 177) in which the second component has be-
come merely an adverbial intensifier. Its logical meaning is only vaguely
perceived.

Periphrasis

Periphrasis is a device which, according to Webster's diction-
ary, denotes the use of a longer phrasing in place of a possible shorter
and plainer form of expression. It is also called circumlocution
due to the round-about or indirect way used to name a familiar object or
phenomenon. Viewed from the angle of its linguistic nature periphrasis
represents the renaming of an object and as such may be considered along
with a more general group of word designations replacing the direct
names of their denotata. One and the same object may be identified in
different ways and accordingly acquire different appelations. Thus, in
different situations a certain person can be denoted, for instance, as
either 'his benefactor', or 'this bore', or 'the narrator', or 'the wretched
witness', etc. These names will be his only in a short fragment of the dis-
course, the criterion of their choice being furnished by the context. Such
naming units may be called secondary, textually-confined designations
and are generally composed of a word-combination.

This device has a long history. It was widely used in the Bible and in
Homer's Iliad. As a poetic device it was very popular in Latin poetry
(Virgil). Due to this influence it became an important feature of epic and
descriptive poetry throughout the Middle Ages and into the Renaissance.
It is due to this practice of re-naming things that periphrasis became one
of the most favoured devices in the 17th and 18th centuries giving birth
even to a special trend in literature in France and other countries called
periphrastic. There exists in English a whole battery of phrases which are
still used as periphrastic synonyms (see below) for ordinary denominations
of things and phenomena.

V. N. Yartseva quotes S. K. Workman, an English literature scholar
who states that "the most pervasive element in the aureate style—and the
most vitiating—was periphrasis." Prof. Yartseva states that the use of
periphrasis in the 16th century was in the nature of embellishment, thus
justifying the attribute aureate, and that periphrasis became a feature of a definite literary style.¹

As a SD, periphrasis aims at pointing to one of the seemingly insignif-
icant or barely noticeable features or properties of the given object, and

¹ See: Ярцева В. И. Развитие национального литературного английского языка.
М., 1969, с. 89.

intensifies this property by naming the object by the property. Periphra-
sis makes the reader perceive the new appellation against the background
of the one existing in the language code and the twofold simultaneous
perception secures the stylistic effect. At the same time periphrasis, like
simile, has a certain cognitive function inasmuch as it deepens our know-
ledge of the phenomenon described. The essence of the device is that it is
decipherable only in context. If a periphrastic locution is understandable
outside the context, it is not a stylistic device but merely a synonymous
expression. Such easily decipherable periphrases are also called tradi-
tional, dictionary or language periphrases. The others are speech periphra-
ses. Here are some examples of well-known dictionary periphrases (pe-
riphrastic synonyms):

the cap and gown (student body); a gentleman of the long robe
(a lawyer); the fair sex (women); my better half (my wife).

Most periphrastic synonyms are strongly associated with the sphere,

of their application and the epoch they were used in. Feudalism, for

example, gave birth to a cluster of periphrastic synonyms of the word

king, as: the leader of hosts; the giver of rings; the protector of earls; the

victor lord. A play of swords meant 'a battle'; a battle-seat was 'a saddle';

a shield-bearer was 'a warrior'.

Traditionally, language or dictionary periphrases and the words they
stand for are synonyms by nature, the periphrasis being expressed by a
_word-combination. Periphrasis as a stylistic device is a new, genuine
nomination of an object, a process which realizes the power of language
to coin new names for objects by disclosing some quality of the object,
even though it may be transitory, and making it alone represent the ob-
ject. Here are some such stylistic periphrases:

"I understand you are poor, and wish to earn money by nursing
the little boy, my son, who has been so prematurely deprived of
what can never be replaced" (Dickens)

The object clause 'what can never be replaced' is a periphrasis for
the word mother. The concept is easily understood by the reader within
the given context, the latter being the only code which makes the deci-
phering of the phrase possible. This is sufficiently proved by a simple
transformational operation, viz. taking the phrase out of its context. The
meaning of 'what can never be replaced' used independently will bear no
reference to the concept mother and may be interpreted in many ways.
The periphrasis here expresses a very individual idea of the concept.

Here is another stylistic periphrasis which the last phrase in the sen-
tence deciphers:

"And Harold stands upon the place of skulls,

The grave of France, the deadly Waterloo." (Byron)

In the following:

"The hoarse, dull drum would sleep,
And Man be happy yet." (Byron)

the periphrasis can only be understood from a larger context, referring
to the concept war. 'The hoarse, dull drum' is a metonymical periph-
rasis for war.

In some cases periphrasis is regarded as a demerit and should have no
place in good, precise writing. This kind of periphrasis is generally called
circumlocution. Thus Richard Altick states that one of the
ways of obscuring truth "...is the use of circumlocutions and euphe-
misms."¹

A round-about way of speaking about common things sometimes has
an unnecessarily bombastic, pompous air and consequently is devoid of
any aesthetic value. That is why periphrasis has gained the reputation of
leading to redundancy of expression. Here is an example of the excessive
use of periphrasis by such an outstanding classic English writer as
Dickens:

"The lamp-lighter made his nightly failure in attempting to bright-
en up the street with gas (= lit the street lamps)."

In spite of the danger of being called "blasphemer", I venture to state
that Dickens favoured redundant periphrastic expressions, seeing in them
a powerful means to impose on his readers his own assessment of events
and people. Here is another of his periphrases:

"But an addition to the little party now made its appearance
(= another person came in)."

In characterizing the individual manner of a bad writer, V. G. Be-

linsky says:

"One is particularly struck by the art he displays in the use
of periphrasis: one and the same thought, simple and empty as,
for example, 'wooden tables are made of wood', drags along in a
string of long sentences, periods, tropes and figures of speech; he
turns it around and around, extends it pages long and sprinkles it
with punctuation marks. Everything is so flowery, everywhere
there is such an abundance of epithets and imagery that the inex-
perienced reader marvels at these 'purple patches' of jewelled prose,—
and his fascination vanishes only when he puts a question to him-
self as to the content of the flamboyant article: for to his surprise
in lieu of any content he finds mere woolly phrases and fluffy self-
conceit. This kind of writing often appears in the West, particularly
since the West began to rot; here in Russia where authorship has
not yet become a habit, such phenomena are hardly possible."²

The means supplied to enable the reader to decipher stylistic pe-
riphrasis are very subtle and have aesthetic value. In the following ex-
ample the word of address is the key to the periphrasis:

"Papa, love. I am a mother. I have a child who will soon call
Walter by the name by which I call you." (Dickens)

¹ Preface to Critical Reading. N. Y., 1956, p. 91.

² Белинский В. Г. Собр. соч. в трех томах. Госиздат, 1948, т. II, с. 407.

In some cases the author relies entirely on the erudition of the reader
to decipher the periphrasis. Thus in the following example:

"Of his four sons, only two could be found sufficiently without
the 'e' to go on making ploughs." (Galsworthy)

The letter 'e' in some proper names is considered an indirect indi-
cation of noble or supposed noble descent, cf. Moreton and Morton,
Smythe and Smith, Browne and Brown, Wilde (Oscar) and Wyld (Cecil).
The italicized phrase is a roundabout way of stating that two of his sons
were unaristocratic enough to work at making ploughs.

Genuine poetical periphrasis sometimes depicts the effect without
mentioning the cause, gives particulars when having in view the general,
points out one trait which will represent the whole. Stylistic periphrasis,
it must be repeated, like almost all lexical stylistic means, must effi-
ciently and intentionally introduce a dichotomy, in this case the dichoto-
my of two designations for one object or idea. If it fails to do so, there is
no stylistic device, only a hackneyed phrase.

Periphrases, once original but now hackneyed, are often to be found
in newspaper language. Mr. J. Donald Adams, who has written a number
of articles and books on the use of English words in different contexts,
says in one of his articles:

"We are all familiar with these examples of distended English,
and I shall pause for only one, quoted by Theodore M. Bernstein,
who as assistant managing editor of this newspaper acts as guardian
over the English employed in its news columns. It appears in his
recent book, "Watch Your Language", and reads "Improved finan-
cial support and less onerous work loads." Translation (by Clifton
Daniel): "High pay and less work."¹

Here is another example of a well-known, traditional periphrasis
which has become established as a periphrastic synonym:

"After only a short time of marriage, he wasn't prepared to offer
advice to other youngsters intending to tie the knot... But, he said,
he's looking forward to having a family." (from a newspaper article)

Here we have a periphrasis meaning to marry (to tie the knot). It has
long been hackneyed and may be called a cliche. The difference between
a cliche and a periphrastic synonym lies in the degree to which the periph-
rasis has lost its vigour. In cliches we still sense the dichotomy of the orig-
inal clash between the words forming a semantic unity; in periphrastic
synonyms the clash is no longer felt unless the synonyms are subjected
to etymological analysis.

In such collocations as 'I am seeing things', or 'I'm hearing bells'
we hardly ever perceive the novelty of the phrases and are apt to under-
stand them for what they stand for now in modern colloquial English,
i.e. to have hallucinations. Therefore these phrases must be recognized as

¹ The New York Times Book Review, Nov. 23, 1958.

periphrastic colloquial synonyms of the concepts delirium or hallucina-
tions.

Stylistic periphrasis can also be divided into logical and fig-
urative. Logical periphrasis is based on one of the inherent properties
or perhaps a passing feature of the object described, as in instruments of
destruction (Dickens) = 'pistols'; the most pardonable of human weaknesses
(Dickens) ='love'; the object of his admiration (Dickens); that proportion
of the population which... is yet able to read words of more than one syl-
lable, and to read them without perceptible movement of the lips ='half-
literate'.

Figurative periphrasis is based either on metaphor or on metonymy,
the key-word of the collocation being the word used figuratively, as in
'the punctual servant of all work' (Dickens) ='the sun'; ' in disgrace with
fortune and men's eyes' (Shakespeare) ='in misfortune'; 'to tie the knot'
= 'to marry'.

There is little difference between metaphor or metonymy, on the
one hand, and figurative periphrasis, on the other. It is the structural
aspect of the periphrasis, which always presupposes a word-combination,
that is the reason for the division.

Euphemisms

There is a variety of periphrasis which we shall call euphemistic.

Euphemism, as is known, is a word or phrase used to replace an
unpleasant word or expression by a conventionally more acceptable one,
for example, the word 'to die' has bred the following euphemisms: 'to
pass away, to expire, to be no more, to depart, to join the majority, to be
gone, and the more facetious ones: to kick the bucket, to give up the ghost,
to go west. So euphemisms are synonyms which aim at producing a deli-
berately mild effect.

The origin of the term 'euphemism' discloses the aim of the device
very clearly, i.e. speaking well (from Greek— eu = well + -pheme =
speaking). In the vocabulary of any language, synonyms can be found
that soften an otherwise coarse or unpleasant idea. Euphemism is some-
times figuratively called "a whitewashing device". The linguistic pecul-
iarity of euphemism lies in the fact that every euphemism must call up
a definite synonym in the mind of the reader or listener. This synonym,
or dominant in a group of synonyms, as it is often called, must follow
the euphemism like a shadow, as 'to possess a vivid imagination', or
'to tell stories' in the proper context will call up the unpleasant verb to
lie. The euphemistic synonyms given above are part of the language-as-a-
system. They have not been freshly invented. Тheу are expressive means
of the language and are to be found in all good dictionaries. They cannot
be regarded as stylistic devices because they do not call to mind the key-
word or dominant of the group; in other words, they refer the mind to the
concept directly, not through the medium of another word. Compare
these euphemisms with the following from Dickens's "Pickwick Papers":

"They think we have come by this horse in some dishonest manner."

The italicized parts call forth the word 'steal' (have stolen it).

Euphemisms may be divided into several groups according to their
spheres of application. The most recognized are the following: 1) reli-
gious, 2) moral, З) medical and 4) parliamentary.

The life of euphemisms is short. They very soon become closely as-
sociated with the referent (the object named) and give way to a newly-
coined word or combination of words, which, being the sign of a sign.
Throws another veil over an unpleasant or indelicate concept. Here is an
interesting excerpt from an article on this subject.

"The evolution over the years of a civilized mental health service
has been marked by periodic changes in terminology. The mad-
house became the lunatic asylum; the asylum made way for the
mental hospital —even if the building remained the same. Idiots,
imbeciles and the feeble-minded became low, medium and high-grade
mental defectives. All are now to be lumped together as patients
of severely subnormal personality. The insane became persons of
unsound mind, and are now to be mentally-ill patients. As each phrase
develops the stigmata of popular prejudice, it is abandoned in
favour of another, sometimes less precise than the old. Unimportant
in themselves, these changes of name are the signposts of prog-
ress."¹

Albert C. Baugh gives another instance of such changes:

"...the common word for a woman's undergarment down to the
eighteenth century was 'smock'. It was then replaced by the more
delicate word 'shift'. In the nineteenth century the same motive
led to the substitution of the word 'chemise' and in the twentieth
this has been replaced by 'combinations', 'step-ins', and other
euphemisms."²

Today we have a number of words denoting similar garments, as
'briefs', and others.

Conventional euphemisms employed in conformity to social usages
are best illustrated by the parliamentary codes of expression. In an
article headed "In Commons, a Lie is Inexactitude" written by James Fe-
ron in The New York Times, we may find a number of words that are not
to be used in Parliamentary debate. "When Sir Winston Churchill, some
years ago," writes Feron, "termed a parliamentary opponent а 'purveyor
of terminological inexactitudes', every one in the chamber knew he meant
'liar'. Sir Winston had been ordered by the Speaker to withdraw a strong-
er epithet. So he used the euphemism, which became famous and is still
used in the Commons. It conveyed the insult without sounding offensive,
and it satisfied the Speaker."³

The author further points out that certain words, for instance, t raitor
and coward, are specifically banned in the House of Commons because еаr - lier Speakers have ruled them disorderly or unparliamentary. Speakers

¹ New Statesman and Nation, June 15, 1957.

² Baugh, Albert С. Op. cit., p. 375.
³ New York Times, Nov. 6, 1964.

have decided that jackass is unparliamentary but goose is acceptable;
dog, rat and swine are out of order, but halfwit and Tory clot are in order.

We also learn from this article that "a word cannot become the sub-
ject of parliamentary ruling unless a member directs the attention of the
Speaker to it."¹

The changes in designating objects disclose the true nature of the re-
lations between words and their referents. We must admit that there is
a positive magic in words and, as Prof. Randolph Quirk has it,

"...we are liable to be dangerously misled through being mes-
merized by a word or through mistaking a word for its referent."²

This becomes particularly noticeable in connection with what are call-
ed political euphemisms. These are really understatements, the aim
of which is to mislead public opinion and to express what is unpleasant
in a more delicate manner. Sometimes disagreeable facts are even distorted
with the help of a euphemistic expression. Thus the headline in one of
the British newspapers "Tension in Kashmir" was to hide the fact that
there was a real uprising in that area; "Undernourishment of children in
India" stood for 'starvation'. In A. J. Cronin's novel "The Stars Look
Down" one of the members of Parliament, referring to the words "Under-
nourishment of children in India" says: "Honourable Members of the
House understand the meaning of this polite euphemism." By calling under-
nourishment a polite euphemism he discloses the true meaning of the
word.

An interesting article dealing with the question of "political euphe-
misms" appeared in "Литературная газета"³ written by the Italian jour-
nalist Entzo Rava and headed "The Vocabulary of the Bearers of the
Burden of Power." In this article Entzo Rava wittily discusses the euphe-
misms of the Italian capitalist press, which seem to have been borrowed
from the American and English press. Thus, for instance, he mockingly
states that capitalists have disappeared from Italy. When the adherents
of capitalism find it necessary to mention capitalists, they replace the
word capitalist by the combination 'free enterprisers', the word profit is
replaced by 'savings', the building up of labour reserves stands for 'unem-
ployment', 'dismissal' ('discharge', 'firing') of workers is the reorganiza-
tion of the enterprise, etc.

As has already been explained, genuine euphemism must call up the
word it stands for. It is always the result of some deliberate clash between
two synonyms. If a euphemism fails to carry along with it the word it is
intended to replace, it is not a euphemism, but a deliberate veiling of the
truth. All these building up of labour reserves, savings, free enterprisers
and the like are not intended to give the referent its true name, but to
distort the truth. The above expressions serve that purpose. Compare these
word-combinations with real euphemisms, like a_ four-letter word (= an
obscenity); or a woman of a certain type (= a prostitute, a whore); to

¹ Ibid.

² Quirk, Randolph. The Use of English. Longmans, 1962, p. 118.
3 «Литературная газета», 1965, 22/VI.

glow (— to sweat), all of which bring to our mind the other word (words)
and only through them the referent.

Here is another good example of euphemistic phrases used by Gals-
worthy in his "Silver Spoon."

"In private I should merely call him a liar. In the Press you
should use the words: 'Reckless disregard for truth' and in Parlia-
ment—that you regret he 'should have been so misinformed.'"

Periphrastic and euphemistic expressions were characteristic of cer-
tain literary trends and even produced a term periphrastic sty l e.
But it soon gave way to a more straightforward way of describing things.

"The veiled forms of expression," writes G. H. McKnight, "which
served when one was unwilling to look facts in the face have been
succeeded by naked expressions exhibiting reality."¹

Hyperbole

Another SD which is also has the function of intensifying one certain
property of the object described is h y p e r bole. It can be defined as
a deliberate overstatement or exaggeration of a feature essential (unlike
periphrasis) to the object or phenomenon. In its extreme form this exagger-
ation is carried to an illogical degree, sometimes ad absurdum. For
example:

“He was so tall that I was not sure he had a face" (O. Henry) or, "Those three words (Dombey and Son) conveyed the one idea of
Mr. Dombey's life. The earth was made for Dombey and Son to
trade in and the sun and moon were made to give them light. Riv-
ers and seas were formed to float their ships; rainbows gave them
promise of fair weather; winds blew for or against their enterprises;
stars and planets circled in their orbits to preserve inviolate a sys-
tem of which they were the centre." (Dickens)

In order to depict the width of the river Dnieper Gogol uses the follow-
ing hyperbole:

"It's a rare bird that can fly to the middle of the Dnieper."

Like many stylistic devices, hyperbole may lose its quality as a styl-
istic device through frequent repetition and become a unit of the lan-
guage-as-a-system; reproduced in speech in its unaltered form. Here
are some examples of language hyperbole:

'A thousand pardons'; 'scared to death', 'immensely obliged;' 'I'd
give the world to see him.'

Byron says:

"When people say "I've told you fifty times"
They mean to scold, and very often do."

¹ McKnight, G. H. Modern English in the Making. Ldn, 1930, p. 543.

Hyperbole differs from mere exaggeration in that it is intended to
be understood as an exaggeration. In this connection the following quo-
tations deserve a passing note: "Hyperbole is the result of a kind of intoxication by emotion, which prevents a person from seeing things in their true dimensions... If the reader (listener) is not carried away by the emotion of the writer (speaker), hyperbole becomes a mere lie."¹

V. V. Vinogradov, developing Gorki's statement that "genuine art
enjoys the right to exaggerate," states that hyperbole is the law of art
which brings the existing phenomena of life, diffused as they are, to the
point of maximum clarity and conciseness.²

Hyperbole is a device which sharpens the reader's ability to make a
logical assessment of the utterance. This is achieved, as is the case with
other devices, by awakening the dichotomy of thought and feeling where
thought takes the upper hand though not to the detriment of feeling.