Стилистика английского языка

Учебное пособие для студентов и аспирантов

Stylistics of the English Language

 Рекомендовано к печати
Ученым советом
факультета международных отношений УрГУ

Автор:
О.Л.Кочева

Краткое пособие по стилистике английского языка предназначено для слушателей курсов

«Переводчик в сфере профессиональной коммуникации», но также может оказаться
полезным и для студентов и аспирантов, обучающихся по другим направлениям.

© Факультет международных отношений Уральского государственного

университета, 2005
© Уральский государственный университет, 2005
‘The misuse of language induces evil in the soul.’
Socrates
 The object of stylistics

Stylistics of language and speech. Branches of stylistics. Stylistic

function notion.

Some scholars claim that stylistics is a comparatively new branch

of linguistics, which has only a few decades of intense linguistic interest
behind it. The term stylistics really came into existence not too long ago.
The problem that makes the definition of stylistics a curious one
deals both with the object and material of studies. Another problem has
to do with a whole set of special linguistic means that create what we
call ‘style’. Style may be belles–letters or scientific or neutral or low
colloquial or archaic or pompous, or a combination of those. Style may
also be typical of a certain writer – Shakespearean style, Dickensian
style, etc. There is the style of the press, the style of official documents,
the style of social etiquette and even an individual style of a speaker or
writer – his idiolect.
Some linguists consider that the word “style” and the subject of
linguistic stylistics are confined to the study of the effects of the
message, its impact on the reader. Stylistics in this case is regarded as a
language science which deals with the results of the act of
communication.
Stylistics deals with styles. Different scholars have defined style
differently at different times. Out of this variety we shall quote the most
representative ones.
In 1971 Prof. I.R. Galperin offered his definition of style ‘as a
system of interrelated language means which serves a definite aim in
communication.’
According to Prof. Y.M. Skrebnev, whose book on stylistics was
published in 1994, ‘style is what differentiates a group of homogeneous
texts (an individual text) from all groups (other texts) … Style can be
roughly defined as the peculiarity, the set of specific features of a text
type or of a specific text.’
All these definitions point out the systematic and functionally
determined character of the notion of style.
The authors of handbooks on German, English and Russian
stylistics published in our country over the recent decades propose more
or less analogous system of styles based on a broad subdivision of all
styles into two classes: literary and colloquial and their varieties. These
generally include from three to five functional styles.
Some functional styles will be further specially discussed in a
separate lecture. At this stage I shall limit to only three popular
viewpoints in English language style classifications.

Prof. Galperin suggests 5 styles for the English language.

1) belles–lettres style: poetry, emotive prose, and drama;
2) publicist style: oratory and speeches, essay, articles;
3) newspaper style; brief news items, headlines, advertisements,
editorial;
4) scientific prose style;
5) official documents style.

Prof. Arnold distinguishes 4 styles:

1) poetic style;
2) scientific style;
3) newspaper style;
4) colloquial style.

Prof. Skrebnev suggests a most unconventional viewpoint on the

number of styles. He maintains that the number of sublanguages and
styles is infinite (if we include individual styles, styles mentioned in
linguistic literature such as telegraphic, oratorical, reference book,
Shakespearean, short story, or the style of literature on electronics,
computer language, etc.).

Of course, the problem of style definition is not the only one

stylistic research deals with.
Stylistics is that branch of linguistics, which studies the principles, and
effect of choice and usage of different language elements in rendering
thought and emotion under different conditions of communication.
Therefore, it is concerned with such issues as
1) aesthetic function of language (inherent in poetry and prose);
2) expressive means in language (with the purpose of effecting the
reader: poetry, fiction, oratory, rarely in technical texts);
3) synonymous ways of rendering one and the same idea;
4) emotional colouring in language (with the aim to make a text a highly
lyrical or satirical piece of description);
5) a system of special devices called stylistic devices;
6) splitting of the literary language into separate systems called style
(also with sub–standard speech as slang, barbarisms, vulgarisms, taboo,
etc.);
7) interrelation between language and thought (this is the subject of
decoding stylistics);
8) individual manner of an author in making use of the language (a
unique combination of language units, expressive means and stylistic
devices peculiar to a given writer, which makes the writer’s works or
even utterances easily recognizable).

Let’s look at the object of stylistic study in its totality.

One of the fundamental concepts of linguistics is the dichotomy of
‘language and speech’, introduced by F. de Saussure. So, language is a
mentally organized system of linguistic units. When we use these units
we mix them in acts of speech. As distinct from language speech is not a
purely mental phenomenon, not a system but a process of combining
these linguistic elements into linear linguistic units that are called
syntagmatic. The word ‘syntagmatic’ is a purely linguistic term meaning
a coherent sequence of words (written, uttered or just remembered).
Stylistics is a branch of linguistics that deals with texts, not with the
system of signs or process of speech production as such. But within
these texts elements stylistically relevant are studied both
syntagmatically and paradigmatically (loosely classifying all stylistic
means paradigmatically into tropes and syntagmatically into figures of
speech).

So, how the notion of stylistics of language and stylistics of speech

are separated?
The stylistics of language analyses permanent or inherent stylistic
properties of language elements while the stylistics of speech studies
stylistic properties, which appear in a context, and they are called
adherent.
Thus, the unexpected use of any of bookish or archaic words (these
are their inherent properties) such as соблаговолить or comprehend in a
modern context will be an adherent stylistic property.
So, stylistics of language describes and classifies the inherent
stylistic colouring of language units. Stylistics of speech studies the
composition of the utterance – the arrangement, selection and
distribution of different words, and their adherent qualities.

Branches of stylistics

Literary and linguistic stylistics, comparative stylistics, decoding

stylistics and functional stylistics.

I. According to the type of stylistic research we can distinguish literary

stylistics and lingua–stylistics. Both have common objects of research.
Both study the common ground of:
1) the literary language from the point of view of its variability;
2) the idiolect of a writer;
3) poetic speech that has its own specific laws.

But they differ in points of analysis. Lingua–stylistics studies

 functional styles and
 the linguistic nature of the expressive means of the language, their
systematic character and their functions.
The subjects of Literary Stylistics are:
 composition of a work of art
 various literary genres
 writer’s outlook.

II. Comparative stylistics deals with the contrastive study of more than
one language. It analyses the stylistic resources not inherent in a separate
language but at the crossroads of two languages, or two literatures and is
linked to the theory of translation.

III. Decoding stylistics

A comparatively new branch of stylistics is the decoding stylistics,
which can be traced back to the works of L.V. Shcherba, B.A. Larin, M.
Riffaterre, R. Jackobson and other scholars of the Prague linguistic
circle. A serious contribution into this branch of stylistic study was also
made by Prof. I.V.Arnold.
Each act of speech has the performer, or sender of speech and the
recipient. The former does the act of encoding and the latter the act of
decoding the information.
 If we analyze the text from the author’s (encoding) point of view we
should consider the epoch, the historical situation, and personal,
political, social and aesthetic views of the author.
But if we try to treat the same text from the reader’s angle of view, we
shall have to disregard this background knowledge and get the
maximum information from the text itself (its vocabulary, composition,
sentence arrangement, etc.). The first approach manifests the prevalence
of the literary analysis. The second is based almost exclusively on the
linguistic analysis. Decoding stylistics is an attempt to harmoniously
combine the two methods of stylistic research and enable the scholar to
interpret a work of art with a minimum loss of its purport and message.

IV. Functional stylistics

Functional stylistics is a branch of lingua–stylistics that

investigates functional styles, that is special sublanguages or varieties of
the national language such as scientific, colloquial, business, publicist
and so on.
However many types of stylistics may exist or spring into existence they
will all consider the same source material for stylistic analysis – sounds,
words, phrases, sentences, paragraphs and texts. That’s why any kind of
stylistic research will be based on the level–forming branches that
include:
 Stylistic lexicology
Stylistic Lexicology studies the semantic structure of the word and
the interrelation (or interplay) of the connotative and denotative
meanings of the word, as well as the interrelation of the stylistic
connotations of the word and the context.
 Stylistic phonetics (or phonostylistics) is engaged in the study of
style–forming phonetic features of the text. It describes the
prosodic features of prose and poetry and variants of pronunciation
in different types of speech (colloquial or oratory or recital).

 Stylistic grammar

 Stylistic morphology is interested in the stylistic potentials of

specific grammatical forms and categories, such as the number of
the noun, or the peculiar use of tense forms of the verb, etc.
  Stylistic syntax is one of the oldest branches of stylistic studies
that grew out of classical rhetoric. The material in question lends
itself readily to analysis and description. Stylistic syntax has to do
with the expressive order of words, types of syntactic links
(asyndeton – the omission of conjunctions, polysyndeton – the use
of a number of conjunctions in close succession), figures of speech
(antithesis – opposition or contrast of ideas, notions, qualities in
the parts of one sentence or in different sentences; chiasmus –
inversion of the second of two parallel phrases or clauses, etc.).

Stylistic differentiation of the English vocabulary.

According to Prof. I.R. Galperin the English vocabulary is divided

into neutral, literary and colloquial strata.

I. Literary stratum of words

1. Archaisms : anon – at once, haply– perhaps, befall – happen.

Historical words (knight, spear, lance). Poetic words (woe – sorrow,
hapless – unlucky, staunch – firm, harken – hear). Morphological or
partial archaisms (speaketh, cometh, wrought, brethren).
The main stylistic function of archaisms is to recreate the
atmosphere of antiquity. Not seldom archaisms are intentionally used by
the writer to cause humorous effect.

2. Barbarisms and foreign words.

They are used mainly to supply the narrated events with the proper local
colouring and to convey the idea of the foreign origin or cultural and
educational status of the personage.

3. Terms.
Their main stylistic function is to create the true–to–life atmosphere of
the narration but also may be used with a parodying function.

4. Neologisms (stylistically coloured individual neologisms or

occasional words, which have validity only for the given context).
Their major stylistic functions are the creation of the laconism or
witty humour and satire.
II. Colloquial stratum of words.

1. Slang (plus phraseology).

Occurs mainly in dialogues and serves to create speech
characteristics of personages.

2. Vulgarisms: hackneyed (cf. Russ. “чертовски “, or Engl. “devil”) and

proper.
The function of hackneyed ones is to show mere emotions as
through long usage they have lost their abusive character. The function
of proper ones is to insult and humiliate the addressee of the remark, or
to convey the speaker’s highly negative evaluation of the object in
question.

3. Jargonisms: professional (professionalisms) and social.

Professionalisms circulate within communities joined by
professional interests and are emotive synonyms to terms. Social ones
can be found within groups characterized by social integrity, they are
emotive synonyms to neutral words and conceal or disguise the meaning
of the expressed concept.

4. Dialectal words.
They are used to indicate the origin of personages. Their number
also indicates the educational and emotional level of the speaker.

Exercises.
Literary stratum of words
I. State the type and the functions of archaisms:
a) If manners maketh man, then manner and grooming maketh poodle.
(Steinbeck)
b) Anthony… clapped him affectionately on the back. “You’re a real
knight–errant, Jimmy,” he said. (Christie)
c) I was surprised to see Heathcliff there also. He stood by the fire, his
back towards me, just finishing a stormy scene to poor Zillah, who ever
and anon interrupted her labour to pluck up the corner of her apron, and
heave an indignant groan… (E.Brontë)
d) “He of the iron garment,” said Daigety, entering, “is bounden unto
you, MacEagh, and this noble lord shall be bounden also.” (W.Scott)
II. Give the English equivalents, state the origin and stylistic purpose of
barbarisms and foreign words:
a) “Tyree, you got half of the profits!” Dr. Bruce shouted. “You’re my
de facto partner.”
“What that de facto mean, Doc?..” “Papa, it means you a partner in fact
and in law,” Fishbelly told him. (Wright)
b) And now the roof had fallen in on him. The first shock was over, the
dust had settled and he could now see that his whole life was kaput.
(J.Braine)
c) Then, of course, there ought to be one or two outsiders – just to give
the thing a bona fide appearance. I and Eileen could see to that – young
people, uncritical, and with no idea of politics. (Christie)
d) When Danny came home from the army he learned that he was an
heir and owner of property. The viejo, that is the grandfather, had died
leaving Danny the two small houses on the Tortilla Flat. (Steinbeck)

III. State the nature and role of terms:

a) …he rode up to the campus, arranged for a room in the graduate
dormitory and went at once to the empty Physics building. (M.Wilson)
b) “…don’t you go to him for anything more serious than a pendectomy
of the left ear or a strabismus of the cardiograph.” No one save
Kennicott knew exactly what this meant, but they laughed… (S.Lewis)
c) At noon the hooter and everything died. First, the pulley driving the
punch and shears and emery wheels stopped its lick and slap.
Simultaneously the compressor providing the blast for a dozen smith–
fires went dead. (S.Chaplin)

IV. Define the pattern of creation and the function of the following
individual neologisms:
a) For a headful of reasons I refuse. (T.Capote)
b) “Mr. Hamilton, you haven’t any children, have you?”
“Well, no. And I’m sorry about that, I guess. I’m sorriest about that.”
(Steinbeck)
c) A college education is all too often merely sheepskindeep. (Esar)
d) Oh, it was the killingest thing you ever saw. (K.Amis)

Colloquial stratum of words

I. State the function of slang:
a) Bejees, if you think you can play me for an easy mark, you’ve come
to the wrong house. No one ever played Harry Hope for a sucker!
(O’Neill)
b) ”George,” she said, “you’re a rotten liar… The part about the peace of
Europe is all bosh.” (Christie)
c) “That guy just aint hep,” Mazzi said decisively. “He’s as unhep as a
box, I can’t stand people who aint hep.” (Jones)
d) “When he told me his name was Herbert I nearly burst out laughing.
Fancy calling anyone Herbert. A scream, I call it.” (Maugham)

II. Specify hackneyed vulgarisms and vulgarisms proper:

a) …a hyena crossed the open on his way around the hill. “That bastard
crosses there every night,” the man said. (Hemingway)
b) “Look at the son of a bitch down there: pretending he’s one of the
boys today.” (Jones)
c) “How are you, Cartwright? This is the very devil of a business, you
know. The very devil of a business.” (Christie)

III. Differentiate professional and social jargonisms. Suggest a

terminological equivalent where possible:
a) I’m here quite often – taking patients to hospitals for majors, and so
on. (S.Lewis)
b) The arrangement was to keep in touch by runners and by walkie–
talkie. (St.Heym)
c) “All the men say I’m a good noncom… for I’m fair and I take my job
seriously.” ( N.Mailer)
d) But, after all, he knows I’m preggers. (T.Capote)

IV. Observe the dialectal peculiarities of dialogue:

a) I wad na been surpris’d to spy
You on an auld wife’ flainen toy:
Or aiblins some bit duddie boy,
On’s wyliecoat (Burns)
b) “We’ll show Levenford what my clever lass can do. I’m looking
ahead, and I can see it. When we’ve made ye the head scholar of
Academy, then you’ll see what your father means to do wi’ you. But ye
must stick in to your lessons, stick in hard.” (A.Cronin)
V. Comment on the structure and function of the standard
colloquial words and expressions:
a) His expenses didn’t go down … washing cost a packet and you’d be
surprised the amount of linen he needed. (Maugham)
b) “Can we have some money to go to the show this aft, Daddy?”
(Hemingway)
c) I was the biggest draw in London. At the old Aquarium, that was. All
the swells came to see me… I was the talk of the town. (Maugham)
d) “Officers’ dance last night, Sir,” this tech said…
“Congrats.” (J.Hersey)

VI. Compare the neutral and colloquial (standard or with a limited

range of application) modes of expression:
a) There were … with a corner of the bar to themselves what I
recognized at once to be a Regular Gang, a Bunch, a Set. (Priestley)
b) “Get on a little faster, put a little more steam on, Ma’am, pray.”
(Dickens)
c) He tried these engineers, but no soap. No answer. (O’Hara)
d) “Big–Hearted Harry. You want to know what I think? I think you’re
nuts. Pure plain crazy. Goofy as a loon. That’s what I think.” (Jones)

VII. Compare the literary and colloquial modes of expression:

a) “I say old boy, where do you hang out?” Mr.Pickwick responded that
he was at present suspended at the George and Vulture. (Dickens)
b) I need the stimulation of good company. He terms this riff–raff. The
plain fact is, I am misunderstood. (D.du Maurier)
c) “Here she is,” said Quilp… “there is the woman I ought to have
married – there is the beautiful Sarah – there is the female who has all
the charms of her sex and none of their weakness. Oh, Sally, Sally.”
(Dickens)

VIII. Analyse the vocabulary of the following; indicate the type and
function of stylistically coloured units:
a) “Nicholas, my dear, recollect yourself,” remonstrated Mrs.Nickleby.
“Dear Nicholas, pray,” urged the young lady.
“Hold your tongue, Sir,” said Ralph. (Dickens)
b)”You’ll probably see me at a loss for one to–night.”
“I bet. But you’ll stick to me, won’t you?”
“Like a bloody leech, man.” (K.Amis)
c) “What the hell made you take on a job like that?”
“A regrettable necessity for cash. I can assure you it doesn’t suit
my temperament.”
Jimmy grinned.
“Never a hog for regular work, were you?” (Christie)

Stylistic devices ( Prof. Galperin’s classification)

The main constituting feature of a stylistic device (SD) is the

binary opposition of two meanings of the employed unit, one of which is
normatively fixed in the language and does not depend on the context,
while the other one originates within certain context and is contextual.
1. Stilistic devices based on the binary opposition of lexical meanings
regardless of the syntactical organization of the utterance – lexical
stylistic devices.
2. Stilistic devices based on the binary opposition of syntactical
meanings regardless of their semantics – syntactical stylistic devices.
3. Stilistic devices based on the binary opposition of lexical meanings
accompanied by fixed syntactical organization of employed lexical units
– lexico–syntactical stylistic devices.
4. Stilistic devices based on the opposition of meanings of phonological
and/or graphical elements of the language – graphical and phonetical
stylistic means.
When the opposition is clearly perceived and both indicated
meanings are simultaneously realized within the same short context we
speak of fresh, original, genuine stilistic devices.
When one of the meanings is suppressed by the other we speak of
trite, or hackneyed stilistic devices.
When the second, contextual, meaning is completely blended with
the first, initial one, we speak of the disappearance of stilistic devices
and its replacement by polysemy or phraseology.

1. Lexical stilistic devices

A. Stilistic devices based on the interaction between the logical and

nominal meanings of a word.
 Antonomasia (the use of a proper name in place of a common one
or vice versa to emphasise some feature or quality): Lady Teasle; Miss
Sharp; Mr.Credulous.

B. Stilistic devices based on the interaction between two logical

meanings of a word.
Metaphor (the application of a word or phrase to an object or
concept it does not literally denote, in order to suggest similarity and
association with another object or concept): …every hour in every day
she could wound his pride. (Dickens)
Metonymy (the transfer of name of one object onto another to
which it is related; or of which it is a part (synecdoche): I get my living
by the sweat of my brow. (Dickens)
Irony (the expression of a meaning that is often the direct opposite
of the intended meaning): Henry could get gloriously tipsy on tea and
conversation. (A.Huxley)

C. Stilistic devices based on the interaction between the logical and

emotive meanings of a word.
Hyperbole (the deliberate exaggeration of some quantity, quality,
size, etc.; if it is smallness that is being hyperbolized, we speak of
understatement): The little woman, for she was of pocket size, crossed
her hands solemnly on her middle. (Galsworthy)
Epithet (an adjective or descriptive phrase used to characterize a
person or object with the aim to give them subjective evaluation): She
gave Mrs.Silsburn a you–know–how–men–are look. (Salinger)
Oxymoron (when opposite or contradictory ideas are combined):
For an eternity of seconds, it seemed, the din was all but incredible.
(Salinger)

D. Stilistic devices based on the interaction between the free and

phraseological meanings of a word.
Zeugma (the context allows to realize two meanings of the same
polysemantic word without repetition of the word itself): There comes a
period in every man’s life, but she’s just a semicolon in his. (Evans)
Pun (the role of the context is similar to that of zeugma, while the
structure is changed, for the central word is repeated): Did you hit a
woman with a child? – No, Sir, I hit her with a brick. (Th.Smith)
 Violation of phraseological units (when phraseological meanings
of the components are disregarded and intentionally replaced by their
original literal meanings): Another person who makes both ends meet is
the infant who sucks his toes. (Esar)
 Exercise.
State a stylistic device used and classify its function in the context:

1. (The actress is all in tears). Her manager: “Now what’s all this Tosca
stuff about?” (Maugham)
2. Money burns a hole in my pocket. (T.Capote)
3. “You’ve got nobody to blame but yourself.”
“The saddest words of tongue or pen.” (I.Shaw)
4. Stoney smiled the sweet smile of an alligator. (Steinbeck)
5. God, I cried buckets. I saw it ten times. (T.Rawson)
6. It was an unanswerable reply and silence prevailed again. (Dickens)
7. “Where did you pick up Dinny, Lawrence?”
“In the street.”
“That sounds improper.” (Galsworthy)
8. She always glances up, and glances down, and doesn’t know where to
look, but looks all the prettier. (Dickens)

2. Syntactical stilistic devices

Syntactical stilistic devices deal with the syntactical arrangement

of the utterance which creates the emphasis of the latter irrespective of
lexical meanings of the employed units.
The principal criteria for classifying syntactical stylistic devices are:
- the juxtaposition of the parts of the utterance;
- the type of connection of the parts;
- the peculiar use of colloquial constructions;

Devices built on the principle of juxtaposition:

Inversion (deals with the displacement of the predicate – complete

inversion – or with the displacement of secondary members of the
sentence – partial inversion): Out came the chaise – in went the horses –
on sprung the boys – in got the travellers. (Dickens)
Detached constructions (through them secondary members of the
sentence acquire independent stress and intonation which leads to their
emphatic intensification): I have to beg you for money. Daily! (S. Lewis)
Parallel constructions (involve repetition of the whole structure of
the sentence): If you have anything to say, say it, say it. (Dickens)
 Chiasmus (also called reversed parallelism, when the second
sentence repeats the structure of the first sentence, only in reversed
manner): I looked at the gun, and the gun looked at me. (R.Chandler)
Repetition (depends on the position occupied by the repeated unit):
 ordinary repetition (offers no fixed place for the repeated unit –
aa…, ..a…, a.a., .aaa.., …a., etc.): …the photographs of Lotta Lindbeck
he tore into small bits across and across and across. (E.Ferber)
 anaphora (a word or phrase is repeated at the beginning of
successive clause or poetic line): He sat, still and silent, until his future
landlord accepted his proposals and brought writing materials to
complete the business. He sat, still and silent, while the landlord wrote.
(Dickens)
 epiphora (repetition of words or phrases at the end of
consecutive clauses or sentences): He ran away from the battle. He was
an ordinary human being that didn’t want to kill or be killed, so he ran
from the battle. (St.Heym)
 framing (the word at the beginning is repeated at the end – a…a,
b…b.): In those days men were men, and women were women.
 anadiplosis (repetition of the last word or phrase in one clause
at the beginning of the next): You know – how brilliant he is, what he
should be doing. And it hurts me. It hurts me every day of my life.
(W.Deeping)
 chain repetition (…a, a…b, b…c, c…d): Failure meant poverty,
poverty meant squalor, squalor led, in the final stages, to the smells and
stagnation of B.Inn Alley. (D.du Maurier)
 morphological repetition (a morpheme is repeated to achieve
humorous effect): Laughing, crying, cheering, chaffing, singing, David
Rossi’s people brought him home in triumph. (H.Caine)
Suspense (through the separation of predicate from subject or from
predicative, by the deliberate introduction between them of a phrase,
clause or sentence): All this Mrs.Snagsby, as an injured woman and the
friend of Mrs.Chadband, and the follower of Mr.Chadband, and the
mourner of the late Mr.Tulkinghorn, is here to certify. (Dickens)

Devices based on the type of connection:

Asyndeton (the omission of conjunctions): Through his brain,

slowly, sifted the things they had done together. Walking together.
Dancing together. Sitting silent together. Watching people together.
(P.Abrahams)
Polysyndeton (conjunctions or connecting words are repeated):
And they wore their best and more colourful clothes. Red shirts and
green shirts and yellow shirts and pink shirts. (P.Abrahams)
Gap–sentence link (seemingly incoherent connection of two
sentences based on an unexpected semantic leap): It was an afternoon to
dream. And she took out John’s letters. (Galsworthy)
Apokoinu construction (a blend of two clauses into one with the
purport to emphasize the irregular, careless or uneducated character of
the speech of personages): There’s no one enjoys good food more than
he does. (Maugham)

Figures united by the peculiar use of colloquial construction:

Ellipsis (all sorts of omission in the sentence): A poor boy… No

father, no mother, no any one. (Dickens)
Aposiopesis (sudden break in the narration): And it was so unlikely
that any one would trouble to look there – until – until – well. (Dickens)
Question in the narrative: Scrooge knew he was dead? Of course
he did. How could it be otherwise? (Dickens)

Exercises:

1. …Calm and quiet below me in the sun and shade lay the old house…
(Dickens)
2. But what words shall describe the Mississippi, great father of rivers,
who (praise be to Heaven) has no young children like him? (Dickens)
3. There was only a little round window at the Bitter Orange Company.
No waiting–room – nobody at all except a girl, who came to the window
when Miss Moss knocked, and said: “Well?” (K.Mansfield)
4. She narrowed her eyes a trifle at me and said I looked exactly like
Celia Briganza’s boy. Around the mouth. (Salinger)
5. “I still don’t quite like the face, it’s just a trifle too full, but –“ I swung
myself on the stool. (Leacock)
6. I have been accused of bad taste. This has disturbed me, not so much
for my own sake (since I am used to the slights and arrows of outrageous
fortune) as for the sake of criticism in general. (Maugham)
7. “This is a rotten country,” said Cyril. “Oh, I don’t know, you know,
don’t you know!” I said. (P.Wodehouse)
8. I know the world and the world knows me. (Dickens)
9. First the front, then the back, then the sides, then the superscription,
then the seal, were objects of Newman’s admiration. (Dickens)
 3. Lexico–syntactical stilistic devices

In the third group of stilistic devices the desired effect is achieved

through the employment of fixed syntactical structure and determined
scope of lexical meanings of words.

Climax (a row of relative synonyms placed in the

ascending/descending validity of their denotational or connotative
(emotive) meanings): It was a mistake… a blunder…lunacy…
(W.Deeping). Anticlimax (sudden reversal of expectations): This was
appalling – and soon forgotten. (Galsworthy)
Antithesis (opposition or contrast of ideas, notions, qualities in the
parts of one sentence or in different sentences: morphological A.
(opposition of morphemes); proper A. (opposition of antonyms and
antonymous expressions); and developed A. (opposition of completed
statements or pictures): In marriage the upkeep of woman is often the
downfall of man. (Esar)
Litotes (understatement for effect, with double negation): Joe Clegg
also looked surprised and possibly not too pleased. (Christie)
Simile (two unlike things are explicitly compared by the use of like,
as, resemble, etc.): Like a sigh, the breath of a living thing, the smoke
rose. (K.Prichard)
Periphrasis (renaming of an object by a phrase that emphasizes
some particular feature of the object. May be logical, euphemistic and
figurative): “The way I look at it is this,” he told his wife. “We’ve all of
us got a little of the Old Nick in us… The way I see it, that’s just a kind
of energy.” (Steinbeck)
Represented speech (uttered and unuttered or inner represented
speech): Over and over he was asking himself: would she receive him?
(Galsworthy)
Rhetorical questions (presupposes the possible answer): Who will be
open where there is no sympathy, or has call to speak to those who
never can understand? (W.Thackeray)

Exercises:

1. What courage can withstand the everduring and all besetting terrors of
a woman’s tongue? (W.Irving)
2. …as we passed it seemed that two worlds were meeting. The world of
worry about rent and rates and groceries, of the smell of soda and
blacklead and “No Smoking” and “No Spitting” and “Please Have the
Correct Change Ready” and the world of the Rolls and the Black Market
clothes and the Coty perfume and the career ahead of one running on
well–oiled grooves to a knighthood…(J.Braine)
3. “Funny how ideas come,” he said afterwards, “Like a flash of
lightning.” (Maugham)
4. Kirsten said not without dignity: “Too much talking is unwise.”
(Christie)
5. “I’ll smash you. I’ll crumble you, I’ll powder you. Go to the devil!”
(Dickens)
6. His arm about her, he led her in and bawled, “Ladies and worser
halves, the bride!” (S.Lewis)
7. I then found a couple of stale letters to reread, one from my wife…
and one from my mother–in–law, asking me to please send her some
cashmere yarn. (Salinger)

4. Graphical and phonetic expressive means

Graphical expressive means serve to convey in the written form

those emotions which in the oral speech are expressed by intonation and
stress. We speak here about the emphatic use of punctuation and
deliberate change of the spelling of a word.
All types of punctuation can be used to reflect the emphatic
intonation of the speaker. Emphatic punctuation is used in many
syntactical SD – aposiopesis, rhetorical question, suspense, and may be
not connected with any other SD: ‘And there, drinking at the bar was –
Finney!’ (R.Chandler)
The changed type (italics, bold type, etc.) or spelling
(multiplication –‘laaarge’, ‘rrruin’, hyphenation – ‘des–pise’, ‘g–rl’,
etc.) are used to indicate the additional stress on the emphasized word or
part of the word.
There is no correlation between the type of graphical means and
the type of intonation they reflect, for their choice is too inadequate for
the variety and quality of emotions inherent in intonation.
Phonetic expressive means – alliteration, onomatopoeia and others
deal with the sounds instrumenting of the utterance and are mainly
found in poetry.
 Alliteration (repetition of the same consonant or sound group at the
beginning of two or more words that are close to each other): …he
swallowed the hint with a gulp and a gasp and a grin. (R.Kipling)
Onomatopoeia (the formation of a word by imitating the natural
sound; the use of words whose sounds reinforce their meaning or tone,
esp. in poetry): The Italian trio… tut–tutted their tongues at me.
(T.Capote)
Graphical fixation of phonetic peculiarities of pronunciation with
the ensuing violation of the accepted spelling – graphon – is
characteristic of prose only and is used to indicate blurred, incoherent or
careless pronunciation, caused by temporary (tender age, intoxication,
ignorance of the discussed theme, etc.) or by permanent factors (social,
territorial, educational, etc. status).

Exercises:

1. He misses our father very much. He was s–l–a–i–n in North Africa.

(Salinger)
2. You lean, long, lanky lath of a lousey bastard… (O’Casey)
3. Cecil was immediately shushed. (H.Lee)
4. My daddy’s coming on a nairplane. (Salinger)
5. Now pour us another cuppa. (A. Wesker)
6. “You’ll probly be sick as a dog tomorra, Tills.” (Jones)
7. She mimicked a lisp. “I don’t weally know wevver I’m a good girl.”
(J.Braine)
8. You’re French Canadian aintcha? I bet all the girls go for you, I bet
you’re gonna be a great success. (J.Kerouac)
9. Streaked by a quarter moon, the Mediterranean shushed gently into
the beach. (I.Shaw)
10.”Now listen, Ed, stop that, now! I’m desperate. I am desperate, Ed,
do you hear? Can’t you see?” (Dreiser)
Stylistic analysis

In linguistics the purpose of close analysis is to identify and

classify the elements of language being used.
In literary studies the purpose is usually an adjunct to
understanding and interpretation.
 In both cases, an extremely detailed and scrupulous attention is
paid to the text.
Stylistic analysis is a normal part of literary studies. It is practiced
as a part of understanding the possible meanings in a text.
It is also generally assumed that the process of analysis will reveal
the good qualities of the writing. Let’s take, for example, the opening
lines of Shakespeare’s Richard III:
Now is the winter of our discontent
Made glorious summer by this sun of York;

A stylistic analysis might reveal the following points:

– the play is written in poetic blank verse
– that is – unrhymed, iambic pentameters
– the stresses fall as follows:
Now is the winter of our discontent
(notice that the stress falls on vowel sounds)
- the first line is built on a metaphor
- the condition of England is described in terms of the season
‘winter’
- the term ‘our’ is a form of the royal “we”
- the seasonal metaphor is extended into the second line
- …where better conditions become ‘summer’
- the metaphor is extended even further by the term ‘sun’
- it is the sun which appears, ‘causing’ the summer
- but ‘sun’ is here also a pun – on the term ‘son’
- …which refers to the son of the King
- ‘York’ is a metonymic reference to the Duke of York

In a complete analysis, the significance of these stylistic details would

be related to the events of the play itself, and to Shakespeare’s
presentation of them.

In some forms of stylistic analysis, the numerical recurrence of

certain stylistic features is used to make judgements about the nature and
the quality of the writing.
However, it is important to recognise that the concept of style is much
broader than just the ‘good style’ of literary prose. For instance, even
casual communication such as a manner of speaking or a personal letter
might have an individual style. However, to give a detailed account of
this style requires the same degree of linguistic analysis as literary texts.

Exercises:

Decide whether the following statements are true or false:

- Stylistic analysis of literary and non–literary texts has an identical

outcome
- Stylistic features are elements of the text which we admire
- Analysing fiction spoils the reader’s pleasure
- Non–literary texts are easier to analyse than literary texts
- Stylistic analysis is a procedure by which we prove a hypothesis
- In stylistic analysis of non–literary texts, we look at phonology,
graphology, vocabulary, grammar, and semantics
 Classification of stylistic devices by G. Leech

The above mentioned expressive means and stylistic devices are

based on Prof. Galperin’s classification.
A British scholar G. Leech in 1967 made his contribution into
stylistic theory in the book “Essays on Style and Language” (2, p.45).
His approach was an attempt to treat stylistic devices with reference to
linguistic theory that would help to analyse the nature of stylistic
function viewed as a result of deviation from the lexical and
grammatical norm of the language.
According to his theory a linguist should approach literature with
the degree of generality of statement about language. One of the types of
generalization is implicit and would be appropriate in the case of
language and dialect. The description of this sort would be composed of
individual events of speaking, writing, hearing and reading. In this
connection Leech maintains the importance of distinguishing two scales
in the language: ‘register scale’ and ‘dialect scale’. ‘Register scale’
distinguishes spoken language from written language, the language of
respect from that of arrogance, advertising from science, etc. The term
covers linguistic activity within society. ‘Dialect scale’ differentiates
language of people of different age, sex, social strata, geographical area
or idiolect.
So, the literary work of any author must be studied with reference
to both scales.
Leech points out that writers and poets use language marked by a
number of deviant features. He builds his classification on the principle
of distinction between the normal and deviant features in the language of
literature.
Among deviant features he distinguishes paradigmatic and
syntagmatic deviations. Linguistic units are connected syntagmatically
when they combine sequentially in a linear linguistic form.
Paradigmatic figures give the author a choice from equivalent
items, which are contrasted to the normal range of choices. For instance,
the author’s choice of a noun may create a paradigmatic deviation in
literary and poetic language:
Farmyards away, a grief ago, all sun long.
The contrast between deviation and norm may be accounted for by
metaphor or, for instance, personification (the use of inanimate noun in a
context appropriate to a personal noun).
 e.g. As Connie has said, she handled just any other aeroplane,
except that she had better manners than most. (Shute)
This sort of paradigmatic deviation Leech calls “unique deviation” – it
comes as an unexpected and unpredictable choice that defies the norm.
He compares it with what Prague school of linguistics called
“foregrounding”.
Unlike paradigmatic figures based on the effect of gap in the
expected choice of a linguistic form syntagmatic deviant features result
from the opposite (the same kind of choice in the same place):
“Robert Rowley rolled a round roll round.”

Basically the difference drawn by Leech between syntagmatic and

paradigmatic deviations comes down to the redundancy of choice in the
first case and a gap in the predicted pattern in the second.

Classification of stylistic devices by Y.M. Skrebnev

One of the latest classifications of EM and SD is given by Y.M.

Skrebnev in his book “Fundamentals of English Stylistics”, 1994 (6).
The author’s approach demonstrates a combination of principles
observed in Leech’s system of paradigmatic and syntagmatic
subdivision and the level–oriented approach on which Galperin’s
classification is founded. But it differs from both since Skrebnev
managed to avoid mechanical superposition of one system onto another
and created a new consistent method of the hierarchical arrangement of
the material.
Skrebnev subdivided stylistics into paradigmatic stylistics (of
units) and syntagmatic stylistics (of sequences.) He also adds one more
level to phonetics, morphology, lexicology and syntax – semasiology
(semantics).

I. Five branches of paradigmatic stylistics:

a) Phonetics (intentional non–standard spelling: graphons): I know these
Eye–talians! (Lawrence)

b) Morphology (the use of one tense instead of another): What else do I

remember? Let me see. There comes out of the cloud our house…
(Dickens)
c) Lexicology (neutral; positive/elevated: poetic, official, professional;
negative/degraded: colloquial, neologisms, jargon, slang, nonce–words,
vulgar words)

d) Syntax: four types.

– Completeness of sentence structure: ellipsis, aposiopesis, one–member
nominative sentences, redundancy
– Word order: inversion
– Communicative types of sentences:
quasi–affirmative/interrogative/negative/imperative sentences
– Type of syntactic connection: detachment, parenthetic elements,
asyndetic subordination and coordination

e) Semasiology (transfer of names or tropes (by Skrebnev “figures of

replacement”): two groups: figures of quality and figures of quantity.
Figures of quantity: hyperbole: Tom was conducted through a
maze of rooms and labyrinths of passages (Dickens); meosis
(understatement, litotes): He was laughing at Lottie but not unkindly.
(A.Hutchinson)
Figures of quality: metonymy (synecdoche and periphrasis): She
was a sunny, happy sort of creature. Too fond of the bottle. (Christie);
metaphor (allusion, personification, antonomasia, allegory): Death is at
the end of that devious, winding maze of paths…(Fr.Norris); Christ, it’s
so funny I could cut my throat. Madame Bovary at Columbia Extension
School!” (Salinger); irony (explicit and implicit): Try this one, “The Eye
of Osiris.” Great stuff. All about a mummy. Or Kennedy’s “Corpse on
the Mat” – that’s nice and light and cheerful, like its title. (D.Sayers)

II. Syntagmatic stylistics:

a) Phonetics (alliteration, assonance, paronomasia, rhythm and meter,

rhyme): As good as gold, Sense and Sensibility (J.Austen)

b) Morphology

c) Lexicology
d) Syntax (parallelism, anaphora, epiphora, framing, anadiplosis,
chiasmus): There are so many sons who won’t have anything to do with
their fathers, and so many fathers who won’t speak to their sons.
(O.Wilde)

e) Semasiology: figures of identity (simile, synonymous replacement):

And then in a moment she would come to life and be as quick and
restless as a monkey. (Galsworthy); figures of inequality (clarifying
synonyms, climax, anti–climax, zeugma, pun, disguised tautology): A
young girl who had a yellow smock and a cold in the head that did not
go on too well together, was helping an old lady… (Priestley); and
figures of contrast (oxymoron, antithesis): Of course, it was probably an
open secret locally. (Christie)

This contribution into stylistic theory made by modern linguistics

has inspired exploration of other areas of research such as decoding
stylistics that will be discussed further.

Decoding stylistics

One of the most recent trends in stylistic research is decoding

stylistics.
Events, characters, ideas, emotions, and an author’s attitude
towards imaging object are encoded in literature by the literary devices.
Thus, they are turned into a text. For a reader to reconstruct
information, the text should reincorporate ideas and images. Decoding
stylistics investigates the mechanisms of the author’s vision of the world
with the help of concrete text elements and their interaction throughout
the text.
The term ‘decoding stylistics’ came from the application of the
theory of information to linguistics by such authors as M. Riffaterre, R.
Jacobson, P. Guiraud, F. Danes, Y. Lotman, I. Arnold and others.
One of the fundamental concepts of decoding stylistics is
foregrounding.

The notion of foregrounding comes originally from the visual arts

and refers to those elements of a work of art that stand out in some way.
According to Russian formalist scholars working at the beginning of the
last century, the purpose of art and literature is to defamiliarize the
familiar, and by defamiliarizing a work of art or a text we make it stand
out from the norm – it becomes foregrounded.
Foregrounding in linguistics was first postulated by Murakovsky.
The term was adopted by a number of Prague scholars studying literary
texts in the early twentieth century and was introduced to academics in
the West, through translations, by Garvin.
Foregrounding theory was seen as a means of explaining the
difference between poetic and everyday language. It has become widely
accepted as one of the foundations of stylistics.

The principles of foregrounding theory are observable in the work

of Gestalt psychologists of the early 1900, particularly in Rubin’s work
on the distinction between figure and ground. Rubin proposed that our
visual field is organized in such a way that we make distinction between
figures and backgrounds, and that we are able to distinguish the contours
of separate objects when there is a strong contrast between their
respective colours and degrees of brightness. For example, a particularly
bright object will stand out against a dull background and will
consequently be perceived as figural and therefore prominent. It is easy
to see how this concept is employed in the visual arts and, by analogy,
how the notion of a figure equates to the linguistically foregrounded
elements of texts.

Foregrounding can be achieved in one of two ways: via parallelism

or by deviation.
And the important point here is that anything that is foregrounded is
highly interpretable and arguably more memorable. As Leech puts it:
“Foregrounding, or motivated deviation from linguistic or other socially
accepted norms, can be claimed to be a basic principle of aesthetic
communication.”

a) To begin with the first method of achieving foregrounding, linguistic

parallelism can be defined as unexpected regularity within a text, as can
be seen in the example from President George W. Bush’s address to a
joint session of Congress on 20 September 2001:

‘We have seen the state of our union in the endurance of rescuers
working past exhaustion. We’ve seen the unfurling of flags, the lighting
of candles, the giving of blood, the saying of prayers in English, Hebrew
and Arabic. We have seen the decency of a loving and giving people who
have made the grief of strangers their own.’

The extract from President Bush’s speech is composed of three

sentences that are syntactically similar. Firstly, each sentence is in the
present perfect tense, the effect of which is to emphasize the fact that
although what Bush is talking about took place in the past, it is still
relevant to events in the present. (The choice of tense here is in itself
unusual, since American English does not make use of the present
perfect as much as British English does.)
Secondly, each sentence begins with the subject “we” and the
predicator “have seen”, after which there follows a noun phrase, or
string of noun phrases, within which are embedded prepositional
phrases. The last sentence differs slightly in that embedded within the
noun phrase is a non–defining relative clause (“who have made the grief
of strangers their own”).

The parallelism sets up a pattern between the three sentences and

invites the reader to look for parallel meaning between them. As a result
of the parallelism the positivity expressed by the noun phrase “the
decency of a loving and giving people…” is carried over onto the
previous two sentences. The regularity of the syntactic pattern thus
creates a foregrounding effect whereby the three sentences can all be
seen to have the same positive overtones. And, of course, the rhetorical
effect of the parallelism is to foreground the three sentences, and to
make the message being conveyed stand out further.
Linguistic parallelism is a particular kind of syntactical affinity of
textual elements, but S. Levin (Linguistic Structures in Poetry, 1962)
introduced the notion of coupling which deals not only with the
syntactical, but also can be found on any level of the language.
Coupling – is the affinity of elements that occupy a similar position
and contribute to the cohesion, consistency and unity of the text form
and content. Coupling may be different in nature; it may be phonetic,
structural or semantic.
The phonetic expressive means are cases of alliteration, assonance
(resemblance of sounds), paranomasia (words similar in sound but
different in meaning), and such prosodic features as rhyme, rhythm and
meter.
 Syntactical affinity is achieved by all kinds of parallelism (as in
the example from President Bush’s speech) and syntactical repetition –
anadiplosis, anaphora, framing, chiasmus, epiphora, etc.
Semantic coupling is achieved by the use of synonyms and
antonyms, both direct and contextual, root repetition, paraphrase,
sustained metaphor, semantic fields, recurrence of images, connotations
or symbols.
Illustrations of the coupling technique are found in the composition
of proverbs and sayings, bywords and catch–words: Hedges have eyes
and walls have ears; Like father, like son…
Coupling contributes to memorization.

It is important to say that all types of foregrounding may be

arranged and united in the text.

b) Foregrounding can also come about as a result of linguistic deviation

(unexpected irregularity).
The normal arrangement of the text both in form and content is based on
its predictability which means that the appearance of any element in the
text is prepared by the preceding arrangement and choice of elements,
e.g. the subject of the sentence will normally be followed by the
predicate, you can supply parts of certain set phrases or collocation after
you see the first element, etc.
Deviating from accepted norms also produces a foregrounding
effect. This type of foregrounding is called defeated expectancy (R.
Jacobson).
We can take, for example, the title of Dylan Thomas’s poem “A Grief
Ago”. G. Leech (5, p.30–31) provides a detailed discussion of this
example, pointing out that it is linguistically deviant because the word
grief, an uncountable noun of emotion, is used where we would
normally expect a countable noun of time–measurement, such as day or
week.
The deviation gives rise to a foregrounding effect, the consequence
of which is to make us think about time as being measured in emotion.
Defeated expectancy may come up on any level of the language. It
may be unusual word or unusual suffix. Among devices that are based
on this principle are pun, zeugma, paradox, oxymoron, irony, anti–
climax, etc.
 Paradox is a fine example of defeated expectancy. It is interesting
to see how paradox works in such highly predictable cases as proverbs
and phraseology. Let’s take, for instance, the proverb Marriages are
made in Heaven. Oscar Wilde introduces an unexpected element and the
phrase acquires an inverted implication Divorces are made in Heaven.
The unexpected ironic connotation is enhanced by the fact that the
substitute is actually the antonym of the original element. The reader is
forced to make an effort at interpreting the new maxim so that it would
make sense.

c) Another principal method that ensures the effect of foregrounding in a

literary text is convergence of expressive means (M. Riffaterre).
Convergence – a combination or accumulation of SD promoting the
same idea, emotion or motive. Stylistic function is not the property and
purpose of expressive means of the language as such. Any type of EM
will make sense stylistically when treated as a part of a bigger unit, the
context, or the whole text. There is no immediate dependence between a
certain stylistic device and a definite stylistic function.

Constituents of convergence may be quite manifold. In the novel

The Horse’s Mouth by J. Gary the main character interprets the role of
his wife Rozzi and his mistress Sara in his life: Sara was a menace and
a tonic, my best enemy; Rozzi was a disease, my worst friend.
Convergence here is formed by the parallel constructions,
antithesis enemy–friend, worst–best and antonymic metaphors tonic–
disease. Convergence is particularly noticeable due to the deviation of
usual compatibility: instead of best friend, worst enemy we read best
enemy, worst friend. Such paradoxical compatibility serves not as a
device for a witty decoration, but demonstrates deep antipathy in the
relations embodied in the eternal triangle.

However, foregrounding effects do not have to be linguistically

based. For example, if you were to turn up to university one morning to
find your lecturer dressed as a clown and singing loudly, you would no
doubt conclude that his or her behaviour was deviant, and thus
foregrounded.
And since anything that is foregrounded is highly interpretable you
would be forced to look for an explanation for his or her deviant
behaviour; perhaps the stress of the job might have finally driven your
lecturer over the edge.
The given example concentrates on how the lecturer’s behaviour
deviates from what students expect, and in stylistics a distinction is
made between internal and external deviation.
The Dylan Thomas example is an instance of external deviation,
since the poet’s choice of the word grief deviates from a norm external
to that particular text; i.e., we would expect Thomas to have chosen a
countable noun of time–reference. Internal deviation, on the other hand,
is what happens when we get deviation from some norm set up by the
text itself.
Again, this notion of internal and external deviation is not confined
to texts. Returning to the example of arriving at the university to find
your lecturer singing his or her heart out in a clown’s costume, if your
lecturer did this on a regular basis, you would soon come to expect this
behaviour – in a sense, it would become the norm, even though it would
deviate from the behaviour we typically expect from lecturers. However,
if he or she then arrived one day dressed in a somber gray suit and
quietly got on with the work, you would now find this to be deviant
behaviour, since it would deviate from the norm that the lecturer had
established for him or herself.

The role and purpose of decoding analysis was summed up by I.V.

Arnold in her book on decoding stylistics; “Modern stylistics is not so
much interested in identification of separate devices as in discovering
the common mechanisms of tropes and their effect.” (1, p.155).

Exercises:

a) Comment on the type of deviation in the following.

1. I think cards are divine, particularly the kings. Such naughty old
faces! (E.Waugh)
2. Ask Pamela; she’s so brave and manly. (E.Waugh)
3. It was Granny whom she came to detest with all her soul… her Yvette
really hated, with that pure, sheer hatred which is almost a joy.
(Lawrence
b) How is the effect of defeated expectancy achieved in the examples
below? What are the specific devices employed in each case?

1. St. Valentine’s Day, I remembered, anniversary for lovers and

massacre. (B. Shaw)
2. When we visited Athens, we saw the Apocalypse. (Maleska)
3. I think that, if anything, sports are rather worse than concerts, said Mr.
Prendergast. They at least happen indoors. (E.Waugh)

c) State what other stylistic means are used alongside with the following
cases of parallelism.

1. It’s only an adopted child. One I have told her of. One I’m going to
give the name to. (Dickens)
2. Talent Mr. Micawber has. Capital Mr. Micawber has not. (Dickens)
3. You missed a friend, you know; or you missed a foe, you know; or
you wouldn’t come here, you know. (Dickens)
 Sources

1. Арнольд И.В. Стилистика современного английского языка:

Стилистика декодирования. М.: Просвещение, 1990.
2. Знаменская Т.А. Стилистика английского языка. Основы курса.
М.: Едиториал УРСС, 2004.
3. Galperin I.R. Stylistics. Moscow: Higher school, 1997.
4. Kukharenko V.A. Seminars in Style. Moscow: Higher School
Publishing House, 1971.
5. Leech G.A. A Linguistic Guide to English Poetry. London, 1973.
6. Skrebnev Y.M. Fundamentals of English stylistics. Moscow, 1994.
 CONTENTS

The object of stylisticsОШИБКА! ЗАКЛАДКА НЕ ОПРЕДЕЛЕНА.

Branches of stylistics..................................................................6

Stylistic differentiation of the english vocabulary...................9

stylistic devices ( prof. Galperin’s classification)....ОШИБКА!

ЗАКЛАДКА НЕ ОПРЕДЕЛЕНА.

stylistic analysis.........................................................................24

classification of stylistic devices by g. LeechОШИБКА! ЗАКЛАДКА

НЕ ОПРЕДЕЛЕНА.6

classification of stylistic devices by y.m. skrebnev..ОШИБКА!

ЗАКЛАДКА НЕ ОПРЕДЕЛЕНА.7

decoding stylisticsОШИБКА! ЗАКЛАДКА НЕ ОПРЕДЕЛЕНА.

sources.............ОШИБКА! ЗАКЛАДКА НЕ ОПРЕДЕЛЕНА.7

Подписано в печать 10.06.2005.
Формат 60 х 84 1/16. Бумага для множительных аппаратов.
Усл. печ. л. 2. Тираж: 100
Уральский государственный университет. 620083 Екатеринбург, пр.
Ленина, 51.
Опечатано на факультете международных отношений УрГУ.
620083 Екатеринбург, ул. Тургенева, 4, к. 464.