Russian language

What is metonymy? Varieties of turns in speech

no comments

Metonymy from Greek translates as "renaming something". Metonymy is a type of phrase, speech turnover, in which the author replaces one word with another.

Another meaning denotes an object or phenomenon that is in a spatial or temporal connection with the replaced or denoted word. The substitute word has a figurative meaning.

People confuse metonymy with metaphor, but they are two different terms. The main difference between metonymy and metaphor is that when the former is used in the text, the similarity between objects is not provided. And nothing to do with .
In order for speech turns or phrases to contract, metonymy is used, for example:

• tableware made of gilding - table gilding;
• students in the audience are listening - the audience is listening;
• drink infusion of chamomile - drink chamomile.

What is metonymy in Russian? Modern writers regularly use this technique in their presentations. The main goal of metonymy is to create a model of semantics in a polysemantic word.

Metonymy is the result of a combination of several words combined according to the principle of semantic-grammatical and phonetic compatibility.

The regularity of occurrence is the result of elliptical contraction with a bunch of words.
The limitation remains, but a new word with a contextual character is not created. For example: There are two Aivazovskys in the exhibition hall(meaning two works by the artist), but one cannot say “One Aivazovsky depicts a golden autumn b”.

A strong connection of the metonymic context occurs when a specific situation is indicated. It must be based on the assertion in the subject: "What's wrong with you? - oh, head(the answerer meant a headache).

Where is metonymy used?

Metonymy is used as a method of situational nominations with individualization of appearance details, for example: What are you, Beard? In this case, the name is used in the form of the value of belonging - a noun and an adjective.

This form of metonymic turnover provokes the creation of nicknames and nicknames, for example: Little Red Riding Hood, White Bim Black Ear.

When metonymy indicates the typicality of an individual, then it will remain in Russian speech as the meaning of social positions. Such metonymic phrases do not have semantic stability.
In many historical records, the word "beard" was used to refer to wise men and peasants.

The advantages of metonymy are that they identify the subject of speech, associate it with a syntactic position (address, subject, object).

When should metonymy not be used?

Situational metonymy cannot be used in the position of a predicate. It does not perform a characterizing function.

If metonymy is used in a predicate, then it turns into a metaphor. The main goal is to aspect the subject, but the technique cannot be considered as metonymy.

Do not use metonymy in an existential sentence and its substitute forms. In this case, the described subject is introduced into the narrative world. Do not start the story with words “There was (one) old man. Thus, the reader perceives the subject in personified form, and not as a designated person.

Another limitation in the use of metonymy is to use a noun "soul" with meaning "Human"; “head” - “a unit of livestock”; "saber" - "cavalryman".
Metonymization of names is not reflected with the norm of its grammatical and semantic consistency, for example: gone black beard (man), black boots got excited (although the phrase indicates the action of one person).
Rarely is a metonymic turnover used in a definition that has a connection with the ellipsis.

Metonymy and its types

There are three main types in Russian. They are defined depending on close concepts, objects and actions.
Let's see how each of the types is used in writing, what matters with examples, so as not to make mistakes.

Spatial metonymy

Its meaning is in the spatial arrangement of objects or phenomena.
A common example is that the name of various institutions is transferred to the people who work in it, for example: in the phrases a spacious hospital and a bright store, the words hospital and store are used in their direct meaning, and if they are used in this context: the whole store took part in the cleanup and the hospital took part in the city competitions, then this is already a metonymic turnover. The reader perceives what is said in a figurative sense.

Spatial metonymy consists in transferring a vessel or utensil to its contents, for example, a pot is boiling, something is boiling in it.

Temporal metonymy

This technique is used when comparing objects that are in the same time period. For example, when an action (in the form of a noun) is transferred to its subsequent result (what occurs during the action).

Metonymy of logical form

It not only has an extensive meaning, but it has a difference from each other. Differences in specific transfer.

1. The author transfers the name of the vessel to what is in it. For example: broke the cup the phrase is used in its direct meaning, meaning the name of the vessel.
   Let's use them differently: broke a cup of tea, in which case the noun has a figurative meaning in order to denote the volume of the product that they contain.
2. The authors transfer the names of materials to the final product: team won gold(the team won the gold medal), put on a polar fox(put on a fox fur coat), disassemble papers(work with documents).
3. When, when writing, the author's name is transferred to his work, for example: read Yesenin(read Yesenin), admire Shishkin(admire the pictures) use Dahl(use the dictionary, which is published under his editorship).
4. Transferring the name of a process or action to the person who does it, for example: suspension(jewelry) putty(substance that eliminates defects), change(a group of people).
   Replacement of the current process at the place of its execution, for example: signs with the inscriptions “ transition”, “detour”, “stop”, “turn” and so on.
5. Cases when we transfer characteristic features to the phenomenon or object to which they belong. Let's take the following phrases as an example: tactless words, banal assessment- they have abstract features. If we redo them, we get: to commit tactlessness, to be banal. We have used a metonymic transfer.

What is the difference between metonymy and metaphor?

These two concepts are perceived as something similar, but this statement is incorrect.
Unlike metaphors, metonymic turnover replaces words not by similarity, but by contiguity of the concept.
In metonymic turnover there are connections:

• a substance involved in the process of making an object, the object itself, for example, drank two cups- the author meant that he drank the contents of two cups;
• relation between content and containing, for example: pot seething- in fact, it means what is seething in the pan;
• some action and its final result, for example: a sign with an inscription output- that is, a place to exit;
• the use of the name of the author, instead of his work, for example: the other day I read Yesenin, read his works;
• the relationship between people and the place they are in, for example: the capital fell asleep- the people who are in the capital fell asleep.

Variety of metonymy

There are certain types of metonymy in Russian that are in common use. Metonymic turnover is one of the most common.

1. General language menonymy

When talking, people do not notice that they use metonymic phrases in speech. This is especially true of general language metonymy. What can be attributed to this species? For example, the word gold, gilding, ceramics, porcelain- product, but gilding collector- a person who collects collections of gilded items.
The words store, hospital, factory- institutions, but if you use the phrase the hospital has qualified, implies that the hospital staff have confirmed their qualifications.
The words turn, detour, and so on - the scene of actions that imply that you need to turn, go around here. Instead of talking about a new thing, people use the name of the material that was used in the production, for example: instead of a fox fur coat, people prefer to just say: put on a fox.

2. General poetic metonymy

Refers to the expressive form, in other sources it can be found under the name of artistic metonymy. It is called so because it is used in artistic presentations, for example: transparent cold autumn the metonymy is the word transparent.
Russian poets in their works blue sky called glaze. In such cases icing - metonymy. The use of general poetic metonymy is typical for artistic presentations, then it has two names.

3. General newspaper metonymy

The list of such metonyms includes: fast (quick minute), golden (golden flights). Statements and phrases that publicists use in their work.

4. Metonymy individually type

The trails are of great variety. This is justified by the fact that they have forms, types, and metonymy is no exception. This is a technique in Russian when a phrase or phrase is used in the works of one author, that is, an individual one. They are not used everywhere.

Most people repeatedly encounter the use of metonymy when reading books, in writing and speaking, believing that this is an ordinary common language; at the same time, few people think what the meaning of the word "metonymy" really is. So what is it? The most understandable answer can be considered the following: this is a phrase in which one of the words can be replaced by another word.

In contact with

The ancient Roman thinker Mark Fabius Quintilian argued about metonymy in this way: its essence manifests itself in replacing the described object with its cause, which means that it is able to replace a word or concept with a related one.

(emphasis on the last syllable; "metonymia" - translated from ancient Greek "renaming"; from the meaning of the words "meto" - "above" in translation and "onyma" - "name") - a phrase, a kind of trail, in which one word can be replaced by another, denoting a phenomenon or an object that is in some (temporal, spatial, etc.) relationship with the object, which is indicated by a replacement word. In this case, the replacement word is used in a figurative sense.

Metonymy is different from metaphor, but it is often confused with it. The difference is that it is based on the substitution “by adjacency” (i.e., part of the whole instead of the whole whole, or, conversely, the whole class instead of the representative of the class, or vice versa, content instead of the container, or vice versa, etc.), and the metaphor is is based on the replacement "by similarity"; it is also easy to define a metaphor if you replace it with a word that answers the question: “what”. A special case of metonymy is.

Example:“All flags will visit us” (“flags” are “countries” (a part replaces the whole, from the Latin “pars pro toto » ). Metonymy in this case highlights the property in the phenomenon, while the property, by its characteristic quality, can replace other meanings. Thus, on the one hand, the metaphor becomes unlike metonymy in its essence, since it has a large real relationship of substituting members, and on the other hand, it is more limited and the features that are invisible in this phenomenon are eliminated.

The only thing likeness to metaphor- this belongs to the language (for example, such a word as "wiring" in the metonymic sense is common from the action of the word to the result, and in the artistic and literary direction it has a special meaning).

In the early literature of the Soviet period, the maximum attempts to use this method of expression were consolidated by the constructivists. They put forward a principle that they called the "principle of locality", meaning the motivation of verbal means by some theme of the work, i.e., limiting their current (real) dependence on the theme. But such an attempt turned out to be insufficiently substantiated for them, since it was considered illegitimate to put forward metonymy at the expense of metaphor, and these are two completely different ways in the connections between phenomena that do not exclude, but complement each other.

Types of metonymy

• spatial(transfer of the physical, spatial relative position of phenomena, objects or names to objects that are closely related to them; for example, “the audience applauded”; the meaning lies in the fact that people applauded, therefore, the action is transferred to the audience);
• temporary(the name of the action is transferred to the result of this action; for example, "new edition of the book"; in this case, the meaning of the word "edition" is used as a result, not an action);
• logical(the name of the author, the name of the action or the original substance, etc. is transferred to the final result, i.e. the final work, action and product relative to the above; in this case there should be a clear connection, for example, “I looked at Ozhegov” - available in mind obtaining information from Ozhegov's dictionary).

Types of metonymy

• general language metonymy - quite often used in speech; for example, beautiful porcelain (we are talking about porcelain products);
• general poetic (distinguished by popularity in poetry; for example, sky blue);
• Is it general media general newspaper (for example, an author's page);
• individually-author's (for example, chamomile Rus).

Synecdoche is a type of metonymy

Synecdoche (translated from the Greek "sinekdohe" - "correlation").

The peculiarity of this variety is that it is inherent in plural replacement to the word (meaning) of the singular, with the use of some part of it instead of the whole, or vice versa. Synecdoche is also called “quantitative metonymy”, because it is based on the strong use of replaced meanings, which enhances the expressiveness of the syllable, giving speech the greatest generalizing meaning.

Let's take the following sentences as an example:

“A detachment of a hundred bayonets” or “I won’t let him in on the threshold!” etc.

Examples in Russian

Metonymic transfers are quite diverse in the Russian language both in the nature of their transformations and in the state of phrases and expressions. They can be based on a sign and action, replacing content with containing, etc.

Consider a few examples in Russian:

• the conference made a decision (replacing part of the general with the general, since the meaning of the word "conference" means people);
• apple jam (transferring the process to an objective state, since it is clear that the jam was made from apples);
• eat another plate (the containing acts instead of the content, because it is not specified what is in the plate);
• he is in blue (here there is a sign instead of an object, because it is not indicated exactly what clothes are, while the meaning of what was said is clear)

Examples of metonymy in literature

Metonymy in literature is called literary trope, which is based on adjacent, adjacent, close and understandable connections of phenomena and objects.

For example, the words from the fable of I. A. Krylov "Demyanova's ear": “I ate three plates ...” or an expression in the poem “There is in the original autumn ...” F. I. Tyutchev: "Where the peppy sickle walked and the ear fell ...".

Let us recall such literary phrases as “the hungry years”, “the Bronze Age”, “we met at the opera”, “the stands froze”, “the theater applauded” and much more.

Opinion of scientific researchers

Modern science is convinced that the way of expressing thoughts, built in the form of metonymy, enhances expressiveness not only works and the Russian language, but also reveals the richness of vocabulary, helping to perceive the connection of related concepts that are not always homogeneous.

Metonymy is widely used in vocabulary, poetics, semantics, rhetoric and stylistics and is the most effective means of speech influence. Researchers argue that it has speech and logical qualities that help to reason more diversely, as well as cognitive properties, thanks to which a person deeply penetrates the process of cognition and thinking.

(traditional).

In the science of metonymy, the following definition is given. Metonymy (from the Greek word metonymia, "to rename") is a trope in which the base of the juxtaposition is absent in the text, but the image of the juxtaposition is present at the place and time in question.

For example, in a line from the poem "The Bronze Horseman" A.S. Pushkin “All flags will visit us” is used, in which the basis of comparison (foreign ships, guests) is not in the text, but there is an image of comparison (flags).

Differences between metonymy and metaphor

There are significant differences between metaphor and metonymy. So, in metaphor, the image of comparison is chosen arbitrarily, according to the author's internal associations, while in metonymy, the image of comparison is somehow connected with the depicted object or phenomenon.

Varieties of metonymy:

In literary criticism, the following types of metonymy are distinguished:

2. The material from which the object is made is called instead of the object itself. For example: “Not on silver, on gold I ate” (A.S. Griboyedov). In this case, we mean the dishes with which the hero ate.

3. The part is called instead of the whole. For example: “Farewell, unwashed Russia, a country of slaves, a country of masters, and you, blue uniforms, and you, a devoted people to them” (M.Yu. Lermontov). This passage refers to a detail characteristic of a person, through which the hero receives a characteristic.

4. The singular is used instead of the plural. For example: “And it was heard before dawn how the Frenchman rejoiced” (M.Yu. Lermontov). In this passage, the Frenchman refers to the entire French army.

FIGURATIVE AND EXPRESSIVE MEANS OF LANGUAGE

Lecture #8

I. Metaphor, metonymy, synecdoche.

II. BUT allegory, hyperbole, litote, personification, paraphrase, irony, oxymoron.

Metaphor- this is a word or expression that is used in a figurative sense based on the similarity in any respect of two objects or phenomena. Metaphors can rightfully claim the leading role among all tropes. Any metaphor is based on an unnamed comparison of some objects with others, connected in our mind with a completely different circle of ideas. So, the poet compared the fiery color of rowan clusters with a flame, and a metaphor was born: red rowan bonfire burns. But unlike the usual comparison, which is two-term, the metaphor is one-term, which creates compactness and figurativeness of the use of the word.

The possibility of developing figurative meanings in a word creates a powerful counterbalance to the formation of an infinite number of new words. “Metaphor rescues word creation: without metaphor, word creation would be doomed to the continuous production of more and more new words and would burden human memory with an incredible burden” (Parandovsky, 1972).

Let's consider these phenomena on specific examples.

Transfer of names by resemblance external signs, location, shape of objects, taste, as well as functions performed, occurs as a result of the emergence of similar figurative associations between an object that already has a name and a new one that needs to be named. It was in this way that, for example, the figurative meanings of words arose bottom (seabed - eye bottom, location similarity) apple (Antonov apple - eyeball, similarity of form), etc. A transfer of this type is called metaphorical.

The metaphorical type of transfer of names that arise as a result of assimilation by similarity are such meanings of words, the figurativeness of which is still quite palpable: boil- "get into a state of intense excitement", roll- “to reach a humiliating state”, as well as meanings, the figurativeness of which, as it were, “extinguished” and has not been felt for a long time. However, it exists in the word and lies in the very fact of the comparative transfer of the name from one subject to another, i.e. in those similar associations that arise when using the word in a figurative sense; compare: the nose of a man is the nose of a ship, the tail of a bird is the tail of an airplane, the foot of a bird is the foot of a sewing machine etc.

As you know, the term "metaphor" itself is used in two senses - as a result and - less often - as a process. It is this last, activity aspect of the metaphor that is most directly connected with the human factor in the language: thanks to it, all the national and cultural wealth that is accumulated by the linguistic community in the process of its historical development is imprinted in the language means.

There are fairly general principles according to which human consciousness, anthropocentric in nature, organizes non-objective reality by analogy with the space and time of the world given in direct sensations. Thus, spatial coordinates are understood as high or low in a person, what lies ahead is perceived as future, and what is left behind - as passed e: the manifestation of the noble beginning is indicated by the adjective tall (high feelings, aspirations, thoughts), bad intentions are denoted as low and base(low feelings, low impulses, thoughts); orientation to the right is thought of as the "true" path - righteous or right, like the truth; the top is perceived as the culmination of some (usually pleasant) state ( to be on top of bliss, in seventh heaven, at the zenith of glory), and the bottom - as a symbolic space of the "fall" (cf. readiness fall from shame, through the ground, cf. also overthrow, bring down, sink to the bottom of life etc.).

According to the anthropocentric canon, that “naive picture of the world” is created, which finds expression in the very possibility of thinking natural phenomena or abstract concepts as “objectified” constants, as persons or living beings that have anthropomorphic, zoomorphic, etc. qualities, dynamic and value properties, for example: It's raining. The worm of doubt gnaws at his will. Doubt gnaws at me. Joy filled my soul. He is a real bear.

The anthropometric principle, according to which "man is the measure of all things" is manifested in the creation of standards, or stereotypes, which serve as a kind of guide in the quantitative or qualitative perception of reality. So, in Russian the word bull also serves to denote a healthy, powerful person, but usually a man, not a woman or a child, hence the impossibility of expressions Katya is healthy as a bull; The child is healthy as an ox; donkey is used to characterize the stubbornness of a person, although the donkey itself is unlikely to have such a “stubborn” temper, etc.

Observations on the semantic neologisms of the latest time (80-90 years of the 20th century), which arose as a result of metaphorization, make it possible to distinguish two varieties of metaphorical meaning: new meanings due to the need to nominate new phenomena that have arisen in objective reality, or the need to develop synonymous means of language ( nominative-cognitive metaphor), and new meanings due to the need for emotional and expressive renewal of vocabulary (expressive metaphor).

In the process of studying the mechanism formation of nominative-cognitive metaphors the main regular models of metaphorical transfer, which are typical for the metaphorization of the present, are singled out.

In the field noun, which is characterized by the highest derivatogenic activity, three metaphorical models are most productive: metaphorical transfer based on on the similarity of functions(scenario visits, computer pirates, television bridge, drawing roles, washout population, laundering money, currency intervention similarity in appearance, sizes, sizes of objects and phenomena(trousers bananas, hat tablet, heel carrot, a bag bag, transport corridor and etc.); metaphorical transfer based on the similarity of the principle of internal structure, the number of constituent elements(production vertical, round negotiations, range activities, paradigm problems, etc.).

A less ramified system of metaphorical meanings is characteristic of an adjective and a verb.

In the field adjective two models are the most productive: metaphorical transfer based on on the similarity of the significance of the signs of objects and phenomena (genetic prerequisites for modernization, alive performance of the song, sleeping district, transparent boundaries, etc.) metaphorical transfer based on the similarity of the internal structure of objects and phenomena (diffuse fashion Style, hybrid clothing forms, centrifugal aspirations, vertical production control, horizontal business communications, etc.).

Metaphorical meanings verb are formed according to one regular pattern: a metaphorical transfer based on the similarity of functions(decide with a multi-party implant idea, review things, let go prices, unwind singer, etc.).

Expressive metaphor associated with the expressive function of language. The evaluative-figurative rethinking introduces a subjective factor into the process of metaphorization, which is reduced to a minimum in the nominative-cognitive metaphor, and in the expressive metaphor, it is precisely for the sake of its explication that the metaphorical transfer is carried out. Expressive metaphor appeals to the feelings of a person, evokes feelings, resonates in the soul and, therefore, creates an expressive effect. As a rule, expressive metaphor receives stylistic status- the ability to indicate that an innovation belongs to a certain functional style. Observations show that this type of metaphorical meaning prevails in journalistic and colloquial styles, and is also characteristic jargon.

The richness and limitless possibility of associative thinking of a person create figurative metaphorical meanings, comparing essentially different objects and phenomena. At the same time, expressive metaphors often arise when the connotative components of meaning are actualized. For example, on the basis of connotative features, a new meaning was formed for lexemes foam(any insignificant, transient phenomena), fat(reserve, stock) empire(huge wealth, possessions), crossword(something difficult to understand, mysterious), voiced(attractive, conspicuous) saddle(to know, to study something), etc.

Often, figurativeness is accompanied by emotional assessments, which in the semantic structure of an expressive word turn out to be interconnected, as well as the characteristics of a person, object or phenomenon and a person’s attitude towards it at the extralinguistic level are connected. Based on the close relationship of the figurative and emotional-evaluative components, new meanings are formed for the following lexemes: grandee(a person who has become famous, has achieved outstanding results in any field), ozone(something auspicious) anchor(something reliable, stable, durable), etc.

Negative emotional evaluation is realized in semantic innovations: kept woman(an organization funded by someone or something) subcutaneous(hidden, hidden) wooden rubles (rapidly depreciating due to inflation), etc.

A separate group of semantic derivatives is made up of determinologized lexemes of any special field of activity, which were formed as a result of the interaction of two semantic processes - metaphorization and expansion of the semantic scope of the word. The presence of a figurative-associative internal form, the similarity of functional significance make it possible to consider such lexical units primarily as a result of figurative metaphorical transfer. The change in the semantic volume in the direction species-genus testifies to the expansion of meaning that accompanies the metaphorical transfer. Thus, the expansive-metaphorical meaning is formed during the determination of, for example, medical terms ( arrhythmia production, nuclear infection, economic donor, spiritual doping, reanimate culture, etc.), technical terms ( dismantling ideas, political tandem, detonate views, etc.), chemical terms ( catalyst economic crisis, distilled living conditions, crystallize thought, etc.).

Word artists like to use metaphors, their use gives speech a special expressiveness, emotionality.

Metaphorization can be based on the similarity of the most diverse features of objects: their color, shape, volume, purpose, etc. Metaphors based on the similarity of objects in color are especially often used to describe nature: forests clad in crimson and gold (Push.), Purple roses in smoky clouds, a reflection of amber (Fet). The similarity of the shape of objects served as the basis for such metaphors: S. Yesenin called birch branches silk braids, and, admiring the winter outfit, wrote: On the fluffy branches with a snowy border, tassels of white fringe blossomed. The similarity in the purpose of the compared objects is reflected in the following image from the "Bronze Horseman": Here we are destined by nature to cut through a window to Europe ( Push.).

It is not always possible to clearly define what is the similarity underlying the metaphor. This is explained by the fact that objects, phenomena, actions can approach each other not only on the basis of external similarity, but also on the basis of the common impression they produce. Such, for example, is the metaphorical use of the verb in an excerpt from The Golden Rose by K. Paustovsky: The writer is often surprised when some long and completely forgotten incident or some detail suddenly bloom in his memory just when they are needed for work. Flowers bloom, delighting a person with their beauty; the same joy to the artist brings the detail that came to mind in time, necessary for creativity.

Even Aristotle noted that "to compose good metaphors means to notice similarities." The observant eye of the artist of the word finds common features in the most diverse subjects. The unexpectedness of such comparisons gives the metaphor a special expressiveness. So the artistic power of metaphors, one might say, is directly dependent on their freshness, novelty.

Some metaphors are often repeated in speech: Night quietly descended on the earth; Winter wrapped everything in a white veil etc. Being widely used, such metaphors fade, their figurative meaning is erased. Not all metaphors are stylistically equivalent, not every metaphor plays an artistic role in speech.

When a man came up with a name for a curved pipe - knee, he too used a metaphor. But the new meaning of the word that arose at the same time did not receive an aesthetic function, the purpose of transferring the name here is purely practical: name an object. For this, metaphors are used in which there is no artistic image. There are a lot of such (“dry”) (or dead) metaphors in the language: parsley tail, banana trousers, pillbox hat, ship prow, eyeball, vine whiskers, potato eyes, table legs. New meanings of words that have developed as a result of such metaphorization are fixed in the language and are given in explanatory dictionaries. However, "dry" metaphors do not attract the attention of artists, acting as the usual names of objects, signs, phenomena.

Of particular interest are extended metaphors built on various similarity associations. They arise when one metaphor entails new ones related to it in meaning. For example: The golden grove dissuaded with a cheerful birch tongue (Yesen.); Here the wind embraces a flock of waves with a strong embrace and throws them on a grand scale in wild anger on the rocks, breaking emerald bulks into dust and spray (Bitter.).

Expanded metaphors are a particularly vivid means of figurative speech.

Metaphorization is often abused by novice writers, and then the heap of tropes becomes the cause of the stylistic imperfection of speech. Editing the manuscripts of young authors, M. Gorky very often drew attention to their unsuccessful artistic images: “A clot of stars, dazzling and burning, like hundreds of suns»; “After the inferno of the day, the earth was as hot as pot, just now kilned skilled potter. But here in the heavenly furnace burned the last logs. The sky was cold, and the burnt one rang clay pot - earth».

The use of metaphors as a "decorative", "ornamental" means especially testifies to the inexperience and helplessness of the writer.

The best Russian writers saw the highest dignity of artistic speech in the noble simplicity, sincerity and truthfulness of descriptions. They considered it necessary to avoid false pathos, mannerisms. " Simplicity, - wrote V.G. Belinsky, - is a necessary condition for a work of art, which in its essence denies any external decoration, any refinement».

However, the vicious desire to “speak beautifully” sometimes even in our time prevents authors from expressing their thoughts simply and clearly. The inept use of metaphors makes the statement ambiguous, gives the speech an inappropriate comedy. So, for example, in school essays you can find: “Although Kabanikh and did not digest Katerina, this fragile flower that has grown in the "dark realm" of evil, but eat it day and night". Or: “Turgenev kills his hero at the end of the novel, giving him an infection on the finger."

Such “metaphorical” word usage causes irreparable damage to style, because the romantic image is debunked, the serious, and sometimes tragic sound of speech is replaced by a comic one. Thus, metaphors in speech should only be a source of its vivid imagery, emotionality.

Metonymy(from the Greek metonymia - “renaming”) is a word or expression that is used in a figurative sense on the basis of an external or internal connection between two objects or phenomena. This connection could be:

1) between content and containing: I three plates ate(Cr.);

3) between action and instrument of action: He doomed their villages and fields for a violent raid swords and fires(P.);

4) between the object and the material from which the object is made: Not that on silver - on gold ate(Gr.)

5) between a place and people in that place: All field gasped(P.).

Unlike metaphorical transfers, metonymic shifts in the semantic structure of words are more regular and productive.

As observations show, at the moment, metonymic transfer is most productive in the sphere of nouns and adjectives.

For nouns, the following two models are the most productive: content - containing ( structure– public or commercial institution, enterprise, for example: banking, economic, educational structures etc.; squirrels, bunnies- Belarusian banknotes, etc.); action - place of action ( space- a single set of any activities in a certain area, for example: single space, economic, legal, informational etc.; literary living room- holding evenings, debates on literary topics, etc.).

In the field of the adjective, high productivity is also characteristic of two models: a sign of an object is a sign of another object, somehow connected with the first object, made from it or using it ( pure technology, dirty production, ecological upbringing, computer literacy, etc.); attribute of the object - attribute of the action associated with the object ( laser surgery, building export, chemical death, etc.).

The semantic development of a word based on metonymy has a number of features. Thus, some semantic neologisms may be the result of a double metonymic transfer. For example, the new meaning of the noun visor- (jokingly) about a graduate of an aviation school starting service - arose in the process of the following transfers: headgear shield - headdress - a person wearing a headdress. At the same time, the transfer headgear - headgear carried out according to the part-whole model, acts only as an intermediate stage of the main transfer, the formation of a new meaning at the intermediate stage does not occur. Main transfer headdress - the person wearing it, is carried out according to the model object (cap) - subject (pilot) possessing this object. In addition, the designation of an aviation school graduate with the word visor actualizes in a new meaning the connotative semes “young”, “inexperienced”, “youngster”, giving a playful tone to the lexeme and testifying to the accompanying metaphorization of the metonymic meaning by creating imagery in its perception.

Due to the double metonymic transfer, the linguistic term is determined nomination, which in the new meaning has the following definition: a separate category, part, section of an event (usually a competition, concert, festival, etc.), which has its own name. For example: “Gazmanov has already won the Ovation National Popular Music Prize three times, the last of which was awarded to him last year in nominations"The best songwriter of the year" (Evening Moscow. 1995. March 10).

The new meaning of the noun arose as a result of double metonymization: action - the result of the action - the object associated with the result of the action. The designation of the process of naming any object or part of it is transferred to the very name of this object and at the same time to the object itself, which received the name.

Proper names can serve as a source for the formation of new meanings in the process of semantic derivation. In particular, the emergence of a new meaning based on the development of the semantics of the toponym Chernobyl occurs due to metonymic transfer according to the type of the name of the settlement - the event that occurred in it: Chernobyl - accident at the Chernobyl nuclear power plant on April 26, 1986, as well as its consequences. For example: " Chernobyl will make you remember yourself more than once ... Quietly, imperceptibly, the “liquidators” leave, and we gradually forget Chernobyl. Used to. But don't forget April 26th. This is not only their pain, but also ours ”(Smena. 1991. 26 April).

The given metonymic meaning of the noun Chernobyl, in turn, became the motivating base of two figurative usages:

1)Chernobyl- a nuclear power plant, the operation of which can lead to a major accident. For example: “We live on a land stuffed with Chernobyl. We are all hostages of nuclear power plants ”(Izvestia. 1990. November 8).

This use of the noun arose as a result of a metaphorical expansion of the meaning on a metonymic basis: the metonymic transfer of an accident - the place where it occurred, is accompanied by a generalization of a single (Chernobyl) nuclear power plant to any one where an accident is possible;

2) Chernobyl- about a catastrophe of a large scale. For example: "Everyone has their own Chernobyl… AND Chernobyl it is not external enemies who create for us ”(Soviet culture. 1990. November 17).

The second contextual meaning of the toponym arose due to the generalization of the differential specific component "accident at a nuclear power plant" to the generic component "large-scale disaster".

Appeals e, realizing two functions - characterization (subjective assessment) of the addressee and his identification as the recipient of speech, willingly accepts both metaphor and metonymy. In the first case, the appeal approaches a denominative (more precisely, “recalling”) sentence (cf. Gogol: Set aside, right? , Nizhny Novgorod crow ! - shouted a foreign coachman). In the second case, it approaches the identifying (subjective) name (cf. Gogol: Hey , beard! but how to get from here to Plyushkin without passing by the master's house?).

The functionally dual position of address is open both to metaphor and metonymy, of which the first implements the subjective-evaluative (predicate) possibilities of address, and the second - its ability to identify the addressee of speech. An example of metonyms in circulation:

-Hey, whiskers that you are in the back!

–Come on , hat! How where! There!

-String bag, you will tear off my whip !

- Oh, on the callus, beloved , beard!

- How, did not throw a penny! You , jeans, drop it!

–Briefcase, you crumpled the whole hairpiece for me!

-Hey , umbrella! Make way canes… with her and pince-nez sit down completely.

-Sheepskin coat, I can't hear the driver – Crack like a plucked instrument, Quiet a little - The intellectual himself! - I hear from an intellectual(from Lit.gazeta).

A variety of metonymy, as mentioned above, includes transfers that occur when naming an entire object according to its part, and vice versa. For example, the word beard has the main direct meaning "hair on the lower part of the face, below the lips, on the cheeks and on the chin." However, they are often called a person with a beard. Moreover, this word with a given metonymic meaning in contextual use can acquire other shades of meaning. So, beard in colloquial speech they call a person with great life experience: Here at the meeting it is necessary beard for chairmen(Smooth). In the works dedicated to Peter 1, who forbade the boyars and service people to wear a beard, this word figuratively refers to the opponents of his reform: Peter had to leave Moscow - they hissed against him beards (Bel.).

Metonymic substitutions make it possible to formulate an idea more briefly. For example, omitting the verb get sick, often ask: “What, the throat passed?”; "Got the head?" etc.

When designating time, metonymic substitutions also make it possible to express an idea as briefly as possible: We haven't seen each other since Moscow(I. Turg. "Noble Nest"); Mom continued to knit after tea(I. Bunin "Mitya's love").

Metonymy serves as a source of imagery. Let's remember Pushkin's lines:

Amber on the pipes of Tsaregrad, Porcelain and bronze on the table

And, feelings of pampered joy, d fish soup in faceted crystal.

Here the poet used the name of the materials to refer to the objects made from them when describing the luxury that surrounded Onegin. Of course, these textbook lines do not exhaust the cases of metonymy in A. Pushkin. This trope underlies many of his remarkable images. For example, creating pictures of Russian life, he writes: ... And it's a pity for the old woman's winter, And, after seeing her off with pancakes and wine, we make her a commemoration with ice cream and ice.

As a stylistic device, metonymy should be distinguished from metaphor. To transfer a name in a metaphor, the compared objects must necessarily be similar, but with metonymy there is no such similarity, the artist of the word relies only on the adjacency of objects. Another difference: a metaphor can easily be converted into a comparison using words. like, like, like. For example, fringe of hoarfrost - hoarfrost, like a fringe, pines whisper - pines rustle as if whispering. Metonymy does not allow such a transformation.

Metonymy can be found not only in works of art, but also in our everyday speech. We often say: the class listened, I love Blok, listened to Prince Igor. Isn't it sometimes necessary to answer "truncated questions": Have you been to Yermolova(meaning the theater named after Yermolova); Does the cashier work? And here are the same "truncated" messages: we met on potatoes (on cotton); The whole ship ran to see ....; Fantasy waltz is performed by the House of Culture. Such metonymic transfers are possible only in oral speech. However, in school essays, unsuccessful metonymic transfers of names give rise to annoying speech errors: “At this time, the writer created his “Mother”; "The hero decided to fly on crutches." Such "laconism" in the expression of thought leads to inappropriate puns, and the reader cannot help smiling where the text requires a completely different reaction ...

It is very close to metonymy and represents its variety synecdoche, based on the transfer of meaning from one phenomenon to another on the basis of a quantitative relationship between them. Usually used in synecdoche:

1) singular instead of plural: Everything sleeps - and Human, and beast, and bird; And it was heard before dawn how rejoiced Frenchman.

2) plural. number instead of units. numbers: We all look in Napoleons.

3) part instead of the whole: - Do you have any need? - AT roof for my family (Hertz.).

4) a generic name instead of a specific one: Well, sit down, light(instead of sun);

5) specific instead of generic: Most of all, take care a penny(instead of money).

For example, the expressiveness of speech is built on the use of synecdoche in an excerpt from A. T. Tvardovsky's poem "Vasily Terkin":

To the east, through everyday life and soot,

From one prison deaf

Goes home Europe,

Fluff of feather beds over her like a blizzard.

And on Russian soldier

French brother, British brother

Brother Poleand everything

With friendship as if to blame,

But they look with their hearts ...

Here is the generic name Europe used instead of the name of the peoples inhabiting European countries; singular nouns soldier, French brother and others are replaced by the plural. Synecdoche enhances the expression of speech and gives it a deep generalizing meaning.

However, this trope can also cause speech errors. How to understand, for example, such a statement: A serious search is underway in our circle: the guys create interesting models. But not enough workers: we only have them so far seven »?

Metaphor and metonymy

Metaphor and metonymy are among the most common tropes in fiction in both Russian and English. Both of them are based on the interaction of the logical and contextual meanings of a lexical item (or a group of lexical items), where the context is a work of art and the idea put into it by the author [Arutyunova, Zhurinskaya, 1990:48].

The fundamental difference between metaphor and metonymy is the very nature of the relationship between meanings. A metaphor is built on the basis of the “similarity” of two concepts, phenomena or objects, that is, at the linguistic level, two lexical units have at least one common semantic component. At the same time, only one of the involved referents is characterized by a metaphor, while the second is only a means of characterization, a comment [ibid]. Thus, the function of metaphor can be defined as predominantly subject-evaluative. The nature of the relationship between referents also explains the greater prevalence of metaphor compared to metonymy: given the many individual associations that are possible when only one common semantic component is involved, the number of specific combinations is almost unlimited: strong wind, strong mind, strong pressure.

Metonymic relations are made up of a real-life interaction between two concepts, phenomena or objects, that is, they exist on the basis of their “adjacency” in the extralinguistic sphere. At the linguistic level, there is no need for a common semantic component, although the image of one referent involved does not exclude the image of another. Therefore, the function of metonymy can be defined as predominantly symbolizing, characterizing two interrelated concepts. The extralinguistic basis of relations between referents explains the lower prevalence of metonymy compared to metaphor: in objective reality, there are certainly fewer connections than associative connections in the human mind:

1) I have eaten a full plate

2) I want to buy whodunit and adventure

3) I was reading Pushkin

From the foregoing, the conclusion follows that metonymy exists directly on an extralinguistic basis, while the extralinguistic basis for the existence of a metaphor is mediated through language. Thus, the traditional view of metaphor and metonymy as superficial rhetorical devices, considered exclusively from the point of view of language, is inferior in thoroughness to the presentation of these tropes as a kind of “intermediary” between objective reality and the author’s figurative consciousness, reflecting this reality [ibid.].

The connection between semantemes, which are the signifieds of a polysemantic word, is determined by the action of two associative mechanisms.

In one case, the formation of a derived meaning (a derivative of a semanteme) is determined by the action of the paradigmatic mechanism of associations by similarity. This is how metaphors- semantically derived names, mainly with a characterizing function. Therefore, names that are used in predicate (attributive) positions are more often metaphorical. Metaphorical and non-metaphorical names easily replace each other in the same context: kinded, money-making, high, fighting, hardy, generous spirit. In another case, the formation of a derivative semantheme is explained by the action of the syntagmatic mechanism of associations by contiguity.

This is how metonymy- semantically derived names, mainly with an identifying function. Therefore, metonymic names are more often found in subject positions. The interchange of metonymic and non-metonymic names involves context transformation: (The audience was applauding. The ship was impressed by the voyage.) The characterizing function of metaphors is most clearly manifested in verbs (the time is passing; soar in one "s thoughts; lull the conscience;), adjectives (witty reply, perplexed look, bad temper, mental anguish, stuped boy, sound mind;), but it can also be present in nouns (indigo-child).

An identifying function is observed in nominal formations in such cases: mouth of the river [ibid.].