Literal and Figurative language in “Alice’s Adventures in Wonderland” by Lewis Carroll

     Puttenham implies here that there is a core of simple, literal language that can be distinguished from ornate, figurative language(which engages in a kind of unnatural double-dealing). There is, however, a paradox at the heart of the classical argument that Puttenham presents. The 18^th century Scottish rhetorician Hugh Blair touched on it when he wrote:

     “But, though Figures imply a deviation from what may be reckoned the most simple form of Speech, we are not thence to conclude, that they imply anything uncommon, or unnatural.”[3, 23]

In this paradox, figurative language succeeds, somehow, in being both natural and unnatural at then same time.

     The classical view was dominant at the end of the 19^th century, when the American rhetorician John F. Genung described figurative language as an “intentional deviation from the plain and ordinary mode of speaking, for the sake of greater effect”.[11, 93]

     In the late 20^th century, a change of approach was under way: for example, while referring to “an intentional deviation from the normal” (in the traditional way ), the American critic Joseph T. Shipley observed: “Figures are as old as language. They lie buried in many words of current use. They are the backbone of slang. They occur constantly in both prose and poetry”[34, 44]. Two recent dictionaries demonstrate more explicitly a shift in the perception of the term “figure of speech” away from linguistic deviance towards stylistic creativity, defining it as:

     1) “a form of expression (e.g. a hyperbole or metaphor) used to convey meaning or connotation familiar to the reader or listener”[44, 243];

     2) “An expression, such as a metaphor or hyperbole, in which a non-literal and intensive sense of a word or words is used to create a forceful, dramatic, or illuminating image”[45, 198].

      Figurative language appeals to our imagination- our ability to understand the creative power of words. When you search for the figurative meaning of an expression, be aware what the words suggest. 
 

      1.4 Different Scholars’ Definition of Figure of Speech.

     The precise definition of a figure of speech has proved to be as difficult as determining the limits of figurative usage. For centuries, rhetoricians have debated what each presumed figure refers to and how various figures relate to each other.

But first let us see the definition of the figure of speech. According the Concise Oxford Companion to the English Language[45, 210] , the figure of speech is a rhetorical device that achieves a special effect by using words in distinctive ways[figure of speech: a translation of Latin figura orationis, in turn a translation of the original Greek technical term skhễma tễs léxeōs].

     X. J. Kennedy gives the following definition, “a figure of speech may be said to occur whenever a speaker or writer, for the sake of freshness or emphasis, departs from the usual denotations of words.”[17,584] Figures of speech are not devices to state what is demonstrably untrue.  Indeed they often state truths that more literal language cannot communicate; they call attention to such truths; they lend them emphasis

     Knickerbocker noted that figures and symbol are images used in a particular way to explore the less known through the known.  He gives an example, that Joseph Conrad describes an old Chinese ship-owner as having “a face like an ancient lemon”. [19,366]The images in this figure are the face and the lemon, the first unknown to us, the second well known.  Our imagination will be required to transfer the relevant characteristics of the ancient lemon to the face, and we can see it as wrinkled, jaundiced, dried-up, oval-shaped, and toughened by time – but the irrelevant characteristics of the lemon we will allow to drop away.  That is why we must make the proper association between the face and the lemon.  If we transfer a figure into the purpose object it means we have reached one level in order to understand the figure of speech by for the people who have no any ability in interpreting figurative meaning it means that he has ‘an empty art’ to understand it and can not reach one level to understand it. 

     Scholars of classical Western rhetoric have divided figures of speech into two main categories: schemes and tropes.

     Schemes (from the Greek schēma, form or shape) are figures of speech in which there is a deviation from the ordinary or expected pattern of words. For example, the phrase, "John, my best friend" uses the scheme known as apposition.

Tropes (from the Greek tropein, to turn) involve changing or modifying the general meaning of a term. An example of a trope is the use of irony, which is the use of words in a way that conveys a meaning opposite to its usual meaning ("For Brutus is an honorable man; / So are they all, all honorable men").

         

       Some other  opinions on figures of speech:

• “The vast pool of terms for verbal ornamentation has acted like a gene pool for the rhetorical imagination, stimulating us to look at language in another way. The figures have worked historically to teach a way of seeing."[23, 64] 
  
• "The most excellent ornaments, exornations, lightes, flowers, and formes of speech, commonly called the figures of rhetorike. By which the singular partes of mans mind, are most aptly expressed, and the sundrie affections of his heart most effectuallie uttered."[28, 23] 
  
• Mr. Burns: Break a leg, everyone. [to a passing employee] I said break a leg.[Employee breaks his own leg with a hammer] 
  Mr. Burns: My God, man! That was a figure of speech. You're fired!² 
  
• "The figurings of speech reveal to us the apparently limitless plasticity of language itself. We are confronted, inescapably, with the intoxicating possibility that we can make language do for us almost anything we want. Or at least a Shakespeare can."[31,2]

     We need to learn, even a few of figures of speech, to enlarge our understanding and enjoyment of literary works. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

               
 
 

                  1.5 Kinds of Figurative Language.

     The English is a figurative language. In figurative language we employ words in such a way that they differ somewhat from their ordinary signification in common place speech and convey our meaning in a more vivid and impressive manner than when we use them in their every-day sense. Figures make speech more effective, they beautify it and emphasize it and give to it a relish and piquancy as salt does to food; besides they add energy and force to expression so that it irresistibly compels attention and interest. They are the special tools of our language, and as such, should be handled with care. If used skillfully they add strength and beauty, but if awkwardly used they make the user appear affected and makes him a subject of ridicule.

     There are four kinds of figures of speech: figures of speech of orthography which change the spelling of a word; figures of speech of etymology which change the form of words; figures of speech of syntax which change the construction of the sentence; figures of speech of rhetoric or of the art of speaking and writing effectively which change the mode of thought. We will only consider the last mentioned here as they are the most important, really giving to language the construction and style which make it a fitting medium for the intercommunication of ideas.

     Figures have been variously classified as well as the most important and those oftenest used are, simile, metaphor, epithet, personification, allegory, synecdoche, metonymy, exclamation, hyperbole, apostrophe, anastrophe, asyndeton, anaphora, vision, antithesis, climax, epigram, ellipsis, litotes, oxymoron, interrogation and irony, etc.

   A Simile (from the Latin similis, like), is the likening of one thing to another, a statement of the resemblance of objects, acts, or relations; as “In his awful anger he was like the storm-driven waves dashing against the rock.” A simile makes the principal object plainer and impresses it more forcibly on the mind. “His memory is like wax to receive impressions and like marble to retain them.” This brings out the leading idea as to the man’s memory in a very forceful manner. Contrast it with the simple statement—”His memory is good.” Sometimes Simile is prostituted to a low and degrading use; as “His face was like a danger signal in a fog storm.” “Her hair was like a furze-bush in bloom.” “He was to his lady love as a poodle to its mistress.” Such burlesque is never permissible. Mere likeness, it should be remembered, does not constitute a simile. For instance there is no simile when one city is compared to another. In order that there may be a rhetorical simile, the objects compared must be of different classes. Avoid the old trite similes such as comparing a hero to a lion. Such were played out long ago. And don’t hunt for farfetched similes. Don’t say—”Her head was glowing as the glorious god of day when he sets in a flambeau of splendor behind the purple-tinted hills of the West.” It is much better to do without such a simile and simply say—”She had fiery red hair.”

     A Metaphor (from the Greek metapherein, to carry over or transfer), is a word used to imply a resemblance but instead of likening one object to another as in the simile we directly substitute the action or operation of one for another. If, of a religious man we say,—”He is as a great pillar upholding the church,” the expression is a simile, but if we say—”He is a great pillar upholding the church” it is a metaphor. The metaphor is a bolder and more lively figure than the simile. It is more like a picture and hence, the graphic use of metaphor is called “word-painting.” It enables us to give to the most abstract ideas form, color and life. Our language is full of metaphors, and we very often use them quite unconsciously. For instance, when we speak of the bed of a river, the shoulder of a hill, the foot of a mountain, the hands of a clock, the key of a situation, we are using metaphors.

Don’t use mixed metaphors, that is, different metaphors in relation to the same subject: “Since it was launched our project has met with much opposition, but while its flight has not reached the heights ambitioned, we are yet sanguine we shall drive it to success.” Here our project begins as a ship, then becomes a bird and finally winds up as a horse.

     Epithet (from Greek language ἐπίθετον – epitheton, neut. of ἐπίθετος – epithetos, "attributed, added"⁾ expresses a characteristic of an object, both existing and imaginary. Its basic feature is its emotiveness and subjectivity: the characteristic attached to the object to qualify it is always chosen by the speaker himself. Our speech ontologically being always emotionally coloured, it is possible to say that in epithet it is the emotive meaning of the word that is foregrounded to suppress the denotational meaning of the latter. Epithet has remained over the centuries the most widely used figure of speech, which is understandable-it offers ample opportunities of qualifying every object from the author's partial and subjective viewpoint, which is indispensable in creative prose, publicist style, and everyday speech

     Personification (from the Latin persona, person, and facere, to make) is the treating of an inanimate object as if it were animate and is probably the most beautiful and effective of all the figures.

     “The mountains sing together, the hills rejoice and clap their hands.”

“Earth felt the wound; and Nature from her seat, 
Sighing, through all her works, gave signs of woe.”

     Personification depends much on a vivid imagination and is adapted especially to poetical composition. It has two distinguishable forms: (1) when personality is ascribed to the inanimate as in the foregoing examples, and (2) when some quality of life is attributed to the inanimate; as, a raging storm; an angry sea; a whistling wind, etc.

     An Allegory (from the Greek allos, other, and agoreuein, to speak), is a form of expression in which the words are symbolical of something. It is very closely allied to the metaphor, in fact is a continued metaphor.

     Allegory, metaphor and simile have three points in common,—they are all founded on resemblance. “Ireland is like a thorn in the side of England;” this is simile. “Ireland is a thorn in the side of England;” this is metaphor. “Once a great giant sprang up out of the sea and lived on an island all by himself. On looking around he discovered a little girl on another small island near by. He thought the little girl could be useful to him in many ways so he determined to make her subservient to his will. He commanded her, but she refused to obey, then he resorted to very harsh measures with the little girl, but she still remained obstinate and obdurate. He continued to oppress her until finally she rebelled and became as a thorn in his side to prick him for his evil attitude towards her;” this is an allegory in which the giant plainly represents England and the little girl, Ireland; the implication is manifest though no mention is made of either country. Strange to say the most perfect allegory in the English language was written by an almost illiterate and ignorant man and written too, in a dungeon cell. In the “Pilgrim’s Progress,” Bunyan, the itinerant tinker, has given us by far the best allegory ever penned. Another good one is “The Faerie Queen” by Edmund Spenser.

     Synecdoche (from the Greek, sun with, and ekdexesthai, to receive), is a figure of speech which expresses either more or less than it literally denotes. By it we give to an object a name which literally expresses something more or something less than we intend. Thus: we speak of the world when we mean only a very limited number of the people who compose the world: as, “The world treated him badly.” Here we use the whole for a part. But the most common form of this figure is that in which a part is used for the whole; as, “I have twenty head of cattle,” “One of his hands was assassinated,” meaning one of his men. “Twenty sail came into the harbor,” meaning twenty ships. “This is a fine marble,” meaning a marble statue.

     Metonymy (from the Greek meta, change, and onyma, a name) is the designation of an object by one of its accompaniments, in other words, it is a figure by which the name of one object is put for another when the two are so related that the mention of one readily suggests the other. Thus when we say of a drunkard—”He loves the bottle” we do not mean that he loves the glass receptacle, but the liquor that it is supposed to contain. Metonymy, generally speaking, has, three subdivisions: (1) when an effect is put for cause or vice versa: as “Gray hairs should be respected,” meaning old age. “He writes a fine hand,” that is, handwriting. (2) when the sign is put for the thing signified; as, “The pen is mightier than the sword,” meaning literary power is superior to military force. (3) When the container is put for the thing contained; as “The House was called to order,” meaning the members in the House.

     Exclamation (from the Latin ex, out, and clamare, to cry), is a figure by which the speaker instead of stating a fact, simply utters an expression of surprise or emotion. For instance when he hears some harrowing tale of woe or misfortune instead of saying,—”It is a sad story” he exclaims “What a sad story!”

Exclamation may be defined as the vocal expression of feeling, though it is also applied to written forms which are intended to express emotion. Thus in describing a towering mountain we can write “Heavens, what a piece of Nature’s handiwork! how majestic! how sublime! how awe-inspiring in its colossal impressiveness!”  This figure rather belongs to poetry and animated oratory than to the cold prose of every-day conversation and writing.

     Hyperbole (from the Greek hyper, beyond, and ballein, to throw), is an exaggerated form of statement and simply consists in representing things to be either greater or less, better or worse than they really are. Its object is to make the thought more effective by overstating it. Here are some examples:—”He was so tall his head touched the clouds.” “He was as thin as a poker.” “He was so light that a breath might have blown him away.” Most people are liable to overwork this figure. We are all more or less given to exaggeration and some of us do not stop there, but proceed onward to falsehood and downright lying. There should be a limit to hyperbole, and in ordinary speech and writing it should be well qualified and kept within reasonable bounds.

     An Apostrophe (from the Greek apo, from, and strephein, to turn), is a direct address to the absent as present, to the inanimate as living, or to the abstract as personal. Thus: “O, illustrious Washington! Father of our Country! Could you visit us now!”

“My Country tis of thee— 
Sweet land of liberty, 
Of thee I sing.”

     “O! Grave, where is thy Victory, O! Death where is thy sting!”

  This figure is very closely allied to Personification.

     Vision (from the Latin videre, to see) consists in treating the past, the future, or the remote as if present in time or place. It is appropriate to animated description, as it produces the effect of an ideal presence: eg. “The old warrior looks down from the canvas and tells us to be men worthy of our sires.”

     Anastrophe (from the Greek:  anastrophē, "a turning back or about") is a figure of speech involving an inversion of a language's ordinary order of words; for example, saying "smart you are" to mean "you are smart". In English, with its settled natural word order, departure from the expected word order emphasizes the displaced word or phrase: "beautiful" is emphasized in the City Beautiful urbanist movement; "primeval" comes to the fore in Longfellow's line "This is the forest primeval." Where the emphasis that comes from anastrophe is not an issue, "inversion" is a perfectly suitable synonym.

See the first line of the Æneid:

     Arma virumque cano, Troiæ qui primus ab oris .

     ("I sing of arms and the man, who first from the shores of Troy")

the genitive case noun Troiæ ("of Troy") has been separated from the noun it governs (oris, "shores") in a way that would be rather unusual in Latin prose. In fact, given the liberty of Latin word order, "of Troy" might be taken to modify "arms" or "the man", but it is not the custom to interpret the word that way.

     The word order of "his hand dropt he" is not the customary word order in English, even in the archaic English that Coleridge seeks to imitate. However, excessive use of the device where the emphasis is unnecessary or even unintended, especially for the sake of rhyme or metre, is usually considered a flaw; consider the clumsy versification of Sternhold and Hopkins's metrical psalter:

     The earth is all the Lord's, with all

     her store and furniture;

     Yea, his is all the work, and all

     that therein doth endure:

     For he hath fastly founded it

     above the seas to stand,

     And placed below the liquid floods,

     to flow beneath the land.

     However, some poets have a style that depends on heavy use of anastrophe. Gerard Manley Hopkins is particularly identified with the device, which renders his poetry susceptible to parody: