Profil Expert of Discourse Analysis

 Douglas Biber

 

Douglas Biber is Regents’ Professor of English (Applied Linguistics) at Northern Arizona University. His research efforts have focused on corpus linguistics, English grammar, and register variation (in English and cross-linguistic; synchronic and diachronic).
His publications include three books published by Cambridge University
Press (Variation Across Speech and Writing, 1988; Dimensions of Register Variation: A Crosslinguistic Comparison, 1995; and Corpus Linguistics: Investigating Language Structure and Use, 1998, with Susan Conrad and Randi Reppen) and most recently the co-authored
Longman Grammar of Spoken and Written English (1999). douglas.biber@nau.edu

 

Elizabeth Couper-Kuhlen

 Elizabeth Couper-Kuhlen is Professor of English Linguistics in the Department of Linguistics at the University of Konstanz, Germany. Her research interests include language use in interaction, prosody and conversation, and clause combining in spoken discourse. Among her major publications are English Speech Rhythm: Form and Function
in Everyday Verbal Interaction (Benjamins, 1993); Language in Time: The Rhythm and Tempo of Spoken Interaction (co-authored with Peter Auer and Frank Müller; Oxford University Press, 1999); Prosody in Conversation: Interactional Studies (co-edited with
Margret Selting; Cambridge University Press, 1996); Cause,Condition, Concession, Contrast:
Cognitive and Discourse Perspectives (co-edited with Bernd Kortmann; Mouton,2000); and Studies in Interactional Linguistics (co-edited with Margret Selting; Benjamins,
in press). Elizabeth.Couper@uni-konstanz.de

conversation analysis

Conversation analysis (commonly abbreviated as CA) is an approach to the study of social interaction, embracing both verbal and non-verbal conduct, in situations of everyday life. As its name implies, CA began with a focus on casual conversation, but its methods were subsequently adapted to embrace more task- and institution-centered interactions, such as those occurring in doctors' offices, courts, law enforcement, helplines, educational settings, and the mass media. As a consequence, the term 'conversation analysis' has become something of a misnomer, but it has continued as a term for a distinctive and successful approach to the analysis of social interactions.

Paul ten Have©, University of Amsterdam

On December 1st, 2002, I retired as a part-time Associate Professor in the Department of Sociology and Antropology, Faculty of Social  and Behavioural Sciences, University of Amsterdam.  I was also a staff member of the Dutch Graduate School in Science & Technology Studies: Science, Technology and Modern Culture.

Interests

My research interests can be indicated by the concepts of ethnomethodology, conversation analysis, medical interaction, technology and research practices. I have a long-standing interest in qualitative research methods, as evident in most of my teaching, a number of publications, and some of my research. My general orientation has been shaped mostly by ethnomethodology, which I most often apply in the form of Conversation Analysis. Since the late 1970's, I have done research on doctor-patient interaction in the context of the general practice consultation, i.e. in general medicine. Or, to say it a bit differently, I have studied the local order of the consultation as a collaborative achievement of the parties concerned. For the last 15 years or so, I have also developed an interest in the study of local practices involving various kinds of technology, such as ICT as in word processing or web page design. For these studies I have mostly used a variety of 'reflexive methods', i.e. my personal experiences with such technologies in doing various kinds of tasks. Recently, I have turned my ethnomethodological eye (and ear) to one of my leisure persuits, burding (seen my last publication in my selective bibliography).

Publications

 Bibliography

A selective bibliography of my publications in English and German is available.

 Books

I have written two books in Dutch, on field research (1977) and GP consultations (1987) respectively, and two in English, Doing Conversation Analysis: A Practical Guide (SAGE Publications, 1999; Second edition, 2007) and Understanding qualitative research and ethnomethodology (SAGE Publications, 2004). I have also co-edited two collections of papers in Dutch, one on medical technology (1994) and one on qualitative medical sociology (1997), and two in English. The first was a book edited with George Psathas: Situated Order: Studies in the social organization of talk and embodied activities.  This is a collection of papers, originally presented at the conference on "Current Work in Ethnomethodology and Conversation Analysis" which I co-organized at the University of Amsterdam in 1991. It is, of course, strongly recommended. The second was a  special issue of Discourse Studies (vol. 6, issue 1; February 2004) on the theme of 'scripted practices', in honour of the late Hanneke Houtkoop-Steenstra.

definition of discourse analysis

WHAT IS DISCOURSE?

 Discourse

“Discourse is language-in-action, and investigating it requires attention both to language and to action.“ (Hanks, 1996)

“Wacana adalah bahasa dalam tindakan, dan untuk meneliti hal itu membutuhkan perhatian yang dalam, baik dari aspek untuk berbahasa dan maupun aspek untuk pertindak.” (Hanks, 1996)

• "Discourse in context may consist of only one or two words as in stop or no smoking. Alternatively, a piece of discourse can be hundreds of thousands of words in length, as some novels are. A typical piece of discourse is somewhere between these two extremes."
  (Eli Hinkel and Sandra Fotos, New Perspectives on Grammar Teaching in Second Language Classrooms. Lawrence Erlbaum, 2002)
• "Discourse is the way in which language is used socially to convey broad historical meanings. It is language identified by the social conditions of its use, by who is using it and under what conditions. Language can never be 'neutral' because it bridges our personal and social worlds."
  (Frances Henry and Carol Tator, Discourses of Domination. University of Toronto Press, 2002)

• "Discourse can also be used to refer to particular contexts of language use, and in this sense it becomes similar to concepts like genre or text type. For example, we can conceptualize political discourse (the sort of language used in political contexts) or media discourse (language used in the media). In addition, some writers have conceived of discourse as related to particular topics, such as an environmental discourse or colonial discourse (which may occur in many different genres). Such labels sometimes suggest a particular attitude towards a topic (e.g. people engaging in environmental discourse would generally be expected to be concerned with protecting the environment rather than wasting resources. Related to this, Foucault (1972: 49) defines discourse more ideologically as 'practices which systematically form the objects of which they speak.'"
  (Paul Baker and Sibonile Ellece, Key Terms in Discourse Analysis. Continuum, 2011)

• Discourse
  "'Discourse' is sometimes used in contrast with 'text,' where 'text' refers to actual written or spoken data, and 'discourse' refers to the whole act of communication involving production and comprehension, not necessarily entirely verbal. . . . The study of discourse, then, can involve matters like context, background information or knowledge shared between a speaker and hearer."
  (Meriel Bloor and Thomas Bloor, The Practice of Critical Discourse Analysis: an Introduction. Routledge, 2013)

branches of discourse analysis

Markers and cohesion

 
Halliday and Hasan’s (1976) seminal work on cohesion in English provided an important
framework for analyzing text by addressing a basic question stemming from
the very inception of discourse analysis: what makes a text different from a random
collection of unrelated sentences? Although Halliday and Hasan did not speak directly
of discourse markers, their analysis of cohesion (based primarily on written texts)
included words (e.g. and, but, because, I mean, by the way, to sum up) that have since
been called markers and suggested functions for those words partially paralleling
those of markers.
Halliday and Hasan propose that a set of cohesive devices (reference, repetition,
substitution, ellipsis, and conjunction) help create a text by indicating semantic relations
in an underlying structure of ideas (see Martin, this volume). A range of expressions
(including, but not limited to, conjunctions) conveys conjunctive relations. Whereas
most cohesive features establish cohesion through anaphoric or cataphoric ties to the
text, conjunctive items “express certain meanings which presuppose the presence of
other components in the discourse” (Halliday and Hasan 1976: 236).
The meanings conveyed by conjunctive items are relatively straightforward:
additive, adversative, causal, and temporal. Within these general meanings, however,
are specific subtypes: a causal relation, for example, includes general causal (with

simple and emphatic subtypes), and specific causal (with reason, result, and purpose
subtypes). Each (sub)type of cohesive meaning can be conveyed through a variety of
words: a general causal simple conjunctive relation, for example, can be conveyed
through so, then, hence, and therefore. Multiplicity is found not just in a function (e.g.
causal relation) → form (e.g. so, hence) direction, but also in a form → function
direction. Thus a single word [form] can convey more than one conjunctive relation
[function]: then, for example, can convey temporal, causal, and conditional relations,
between clauses (cf. Biq 1990; Hansen 1997; Schiffrin 1992).
Whereas many analyses of conjunctions argue for either a simple semantic interpretation
or a set of polysemous meanings (e.g. Posner 1980), Halliday and Hasan
allow variation in the degree to which meaning results from the semantics of a
word itself or from the propositions in a text. For example, although and is a texturecreating
device that can contribute an additive meaning, its meaning can also reflect
the semantic content of a text: thus, if and prefaces an upcoming proposition whose
meaning contrasts with that of a prior proposition, and would then convey an
adversative relation (comparable to but and on the other hand).
Just as contributions to meaning can vary in source – word meaning and/or propositions
– so too, meanings can fluctuate between “external” and “internal” sources.
External meaning is “inherent in the phenomena that language is used to talk
about” (Halliday and Hasan 1976: 241); it is roughly analogous to referential meaning
and the domain of semantics. Internal meaning is nonreferential pragmatic meaning:
it is “inherent in the communicative process” (1976: 241), e.g. the speaker’s choice
of speech role, rhetorical channel, attitude (1976: 240). Rather than separate external
and internal meanings, however, Halliday and Hasan posit a continuity. The additive
meaning of and, for example, may be viewed “as an extension of the underlying
patterns of conjunction into the communication situation itself, treating it, and thereby
also the text . . . as having by analogy the same structure as ‘reality’” (1976: 267).
Although meaning can be reshuffled – between word and propositions, between
internal and external sources – the boundary between sentence and text is less permeable.
The systemic-functional grammar in which Halliday and Hasan’s analysis is
located draws a sharp distinction between sentence and text: thus, the structural role
of words like and (to coordinate clauses at a sentential level) is qualitatively different
from its cohesive role (to mark interpretive dependencies between propositions, and
thus create texture).

Markers and pragmatics

 
Like the work reviewed thus far, Fraser’s (1990, 1998) perspective on discourse markers
is embedded within a larger framework that impacts upon the analysis of markers.
In contrast to Halliday and Hasan – whose main interest was the cohesion of text
– Fraser’s theoretical framework concerns the meaning of sentences, specifically how
one type of pragmatic marker in a sentence may relate the message conveyed by that
sentence to the message of a prior sentence. And in contrast to my approach in Schiffrin
(1987a) – whose starting point was to account for the use and distribution of markers
in everyday discourse – Fraser’s starting point is the classification of types of pragmatic
meaning, and within that classification, the description of how some pragmatic
commentary markers (discourse markers) dictate an interpretation of “the message
conveyed by S2 [S = segment] vis-a-vis the interpretation of S1” (Fraser 1998: 302).
Fraser’s framework depends upon a differentiation between content and pragmatic
meaning. Content meaning is referential meaning: “a more or less explicit representation
of some state of the world that the speaker intends to bring to the hearer’s

attention by means of the literal interpretation of the sentence” (1990: 385). Pragmatic
meaning concerns the speaker’s communicative intention, the direct (not implied)
“message the speaker intends to convey in uttering the sentence” (1990: 386). It is conveyed
by three different sets of pragmatic markers: basic pragmatic markers (signals
of illocutionary force, e.g. please), commentary pragmatic markers (encoding of another
message that comments on the basic message, e.g. frankly), and parallel pragmatic
markers (encoding of another message separate from the basic and/or commentary
message, e.g. damn, vocatives). Discourse markers are one type of commentary pragmatic
marker: they are “a class of expressions, each of which signals how the speaker
intends the basic message that follows to relate to the prior discourse” (1990: 387).
Fraser’s more recent work (1998) builds upon the sequential function of discourse
markers, such that discourse markers necessarily specify (i.e. provide commentary on)
a relationship between two segments of discourse: this specification is not conceptual,
but procedural (it provides information on the interpretation of messages; see also
Ariel 1998).
As suggested earlier, Fraser’s framework presumes a strict separation between
semantics (his content meaning) and pragmatics (his pragmatic meaning): speakers’
use of commentary pragmatic markers – including, critically, discourse markers – has
nothing to do with the content meaning of the words (cf. Halliday and Hasan 1976;
Schiffrin 1987a; see also Norrick, this volume). Similarly, although discourse markers
may be homophonous with, as well as historically related to, other forms, they do not
function in sentential and textual roles simultaneously: “when an expression functions
as a discourse marker, that is its exclusive function in the sentence” (1990: 189).
One consequence of these disjunctive relationships is that multiple functions of
markers – including, critically, social interactional functions – are downplayed (if noted
at all) and not open to linguistic explanation. What some scholars (e.g. Ariel 1998;
Halliday and Hasan 1976; Schiffrin 1987a, 1992; Maschler 1998; Schwenter 1996) suggest
is an interdependence (sometimes clear, sometimes subtle) between content and
pragmatic meaning – explained by well-known processes such as semantic bleaching
(Bolinger 1977) or metaphorical extensions from a “source domain” (Sweetser 1990)
– becomes, instead, a matter of chance (e.g. homophony). Likewise, what scholars
working on grammaticalization (Brinton, this volume; Traugott 1995) and particularly
pragmaticization (e.g. Fleischman 1999; Onodera 1992, 1995) have found to be
gradual changes in form/function relationships would have to be viewed, instead, as
a series of categorical and functional leaps across mutually exclusive classes of form
and meaning.
Fraser’s classification of types of pragmatic meaning also has the important effect
of redefining the set of expressions often considered as markers. Different markers are
excluded for different reasons: whereas oh, for example, is considered akin to a separate
sentence, because is viewed as a content formative or an interjection, and y’know is
identified as a parallel pragmatic marker. These classifications create sets that end up
containing tremendous internal variation. The large and varied group of interjections
(Fraser 1990: 391), for example, includes not only oh, but also ah, aha, ouch, yuk (what
Goffman 1978 has called response cries), uh-huh, yeah (what Yngve 1970 calls back
channels and Schegloff 1981 calls turn-continuers), hey (a summons, see DuBois 1989),
and because (which is an interjection when it stands alone as an answer (Fraser 1990:
392), and elsewhere a content formative (but see Schlepegrell 1991; Stenstrom 1998)).

Slide Share Semantics

http://www.slideshare.net/dasridarwis/semantics-dasri-63326523 

  as a Lecturer

 as a Student

Idiom

 

Idiom Definition

The term refers to a set expression or a phrase comprising two or more words. An interesting fact regarding the device is that the expression is not interpreted literally. The phrase is understood as to mean something quite different from what individual words of the phrase would imply. Alternatively, it can be said that the phrase is interpreted in a figurative sense. Further, idioms vary in different cultures and countries.

Idiom Examples

Example #1

“Every cloud has its silver lining but it is sometimes a little difficult to get it to the mint.”

The statement quoted above uses “silver lining” as an idiom which means some auspicious moment is lurking behind the cloud or the difficult time.

Example #2

“American idioms drive me up the hall!”

Here, the word “idioms” is used as an idiom.

Example #3

“I worked the graveyard shift with old people, which was really demoralizing, because the old people didn’t have a chance in hell of ever getting out.”

In the extract quoted above, “graveyard shift” is employed as an idiom.

Example #4

Kirk: If we play our cards right, we may be able to find out when those whales are being released.
Spock: How will playing cards help?
(Captain James T. Kirk and Spock in Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home, 1986)

Here, “if we play our cards right” means “if we avail our opportunities rightly”.

Example #5

“Shakespeare is credited with coining more than 2,000 words, infusing thousands more existing ones with electrifying new meanings and forging idioms that would last for centuries. ‘A fool’s paradise,’ ‘at one fell swoop,’ ‘heart’s content,’ ‘in a pickle,’ ‘send him packing,’ ‘too much of a good thing,’ ‘the game is up,’ ‘good riddance,’ ‘love is blind,’ and ‘a sorry sight,’ to name a few. (David Wolman, Righting the Mother Tongue: From Olde English to Email, the Tangled Story of English Spelling. Harper, 2010.)

This passage highlights the collection of idioms used by Shakespeare in his works and these idioms are now used in everyday writing.

Example #6

“Idioms vary in ‘transparency’: that is, whether their meaning can be derived from the literal meanings of the individual words. For example, make up [one’s] mind is rather transparent in suggesting the meaning ‘reach a decision,’ while kick the bucket is far from transparent in representing the meaning ‘die.’” (Douglas Biber et al., Longman Student Grammar of Spoken and Written English. Pearson, 2002)

The extract quoted above explains that idioms vary in their degree of transparency that is the extent to which an idiom reveals its true meaning varies.

Example #7

“Modal idioms are idiosyncratic verbal formations which consist of more than one word and which have modal meanings that are not predictable from the constituent parts (compare the non-modal idioms kick the bucket). Under this heading we include have got [to], had better/best, would rather/sooner/as soon, and be [to].”

The extract quoted above highlights the use and significance of modal idioms.

Functions of Idiom

Writers and public speakers use idioms generously. The purpose behind this vast use of idioms is to ornate their language, make it richer and spicier and help them in conveying subtle meanings to their intended audience.
Not only do idioms help in making the language beautiful, they also make things better or worse through making the expression good or bad. For example, there are several idioms that convey the death of a person in highly subtle meanings and some do the same in very offensive terms. They are also said to be exact and more correct than the literal words and sometimes a few words are enough to replace a full sentence. They help the writer make his sense clearer than it is, so that he could convey maximum meanings through minimum words and also keep the multiplicity of the meanings in the text intact.
It has also been seen that idioms not only convey subtle meanings but also convey a phenomenon that is not being conveyed through normal and everyday language and also they keep the balance in the communication. Furthermore, they provide textual coherence, so that the reader could be able to piece together a text that he has gone through and extract meanings the writer has conveyed

Proveb

What it's Proveb

Proverb 

 

Definition of Proverb

Proverb is a brief, simple and popular saying, or a phrase that gives advice and effectively embodies a commonplace truth based on practical experience or common sense. A proverb may have an allegorical message behind its odd appearance. The reason of popularity is due to its usage in spoken language as well as in the folk literature. Some authors twist and bend proverbs and create anti-proverbs to add literary effects to their works. However, in poetry, poets use proverbs strategically by employing some parts of them in poems’ titles such as Lord Kennet has written a poem, A Bird in the Bush, which is a popular proverb. Some poems contain multiple proverbs like Paul Muldoon’s poem Symposium.

Homonymy, homophone and homographs

 Defintiion homonymy, homophone and homographs

homonym

A homonym is a word that is said or spelled the same way as another word but has a different meaning. "Write” and “right” is a good example of a pair of homonyms.

Homonym traces back to the Greek words homos, meaning “same,” and onuma, meaning “name.” So a homonym is sort of like two people who have the same name: called the same thing but different. A homonym can be a word that sounds the same as something else — like by (“near”) and buy (“purchase”) — or it can be spelled exactly the same way and pronounced differently — like minute (unit of time) and minute (“tiny”).

 

homophone

A homophone is a word that sounds the same as another word but has a different meaning and/or spelling. “Flower” and “flour” are homophones because they are pronounced the same but you certainly can’t bake a cake using daffodils.

.

Other common homophones are write and right, meet and meat, peace and piece. You have to listen to the context to know which word someone means if they’re spoken aloud. If they say they like your jeans (genes?), they’re probably talking about your pants and not your height and eye color — but you’d have to figure it out from the situation!

 

homograph

Use the noun homograph to talk about two words that are spelled the same but have different meanings and are pronounced differently — like "sow," meaning female pig, and "sow," to plant seeds.

The word homograph merges homos, the Greek word for "same," with graph, "to write." If two words are written identically but don't share a meaning, they are homographs. Some examples are close ("to shut") and close ("nearby"); and bass ("deep") and bass ("the fish"). Homographs are confusing at first glance, but once you read them in the context of a sentence or hear them spoken aloud, you'll easily figure out which word is intended

 SUMMARY CHART

 

HOMONYM WORDS SOUND	HOMOPHONE WORDS type of homonym
same sound	same sound
same OR different spelling	different spelling
fair (county fair)   fair (reasonable)   pear (fruit)   pair (couple)   Buzzy Bee Riddle #6; boo bee, booby   Buzzy Bee Riddle #14; hum bug, humbug   Buzzy Bee Riddle #13: cell, sell	pear (fruit)   pair (couple)   Buzzy Bee Riddle #6; boo bee, booby   Buzzy Bee Riddle #14; hum bug, humbug   Buzzy Bee Riddle #13: cell, sell

HOMOGRAPH WORDS SPELLING	HETERONYM WORDS type of homograph
same OR different sound	different sound
same spelling	same spelling
lie (untruth)   lie (lie down)   tear (in the eye)   tear (rip)   Buzzy Bee Riddle #4; spelling bee, spelling bee	tear (in the eye)   tear (rip)

DETAIL CHART

	Same Sound / different meanings				Same Spelling / different meanings
	Homonyms		Homophones		Homographs	Heteronyms
			Different Spelling			Different Sound
see  (with your eye) sea  (the ocean)	see sea		see sea		n/a	n/a
to  (preposition) too  (as well) two  (2)	to too two		to too two		n/a	n/a
there their  (possessive) they're  (contraction)	there their they're		there their they're		n/a	n/a
bough  (tree limb) bow  (front of a boat) bow  (at the waist) bow  (tied with ribbon) bow  (shoots arrows)	bough bow bow	bow bow	bough bow	bough bow	bow bow bow bow	bow bow	bow bow
lead  (to guide) lead  (the metal) led  (guided)	lead led		lead led		lead lead	lead lead
lie  (untruth) lie  (lie down)	lie lie		n/a		lie lie	n/a
fair  (appearance) fair  (county fair) fair  (reasonable)	fair fair fair		n/a		fair fair fair	n/a
bass  (fish) bass  (low note)	n/a		n/a		bass bass	bass bass
tear  (in the eye) tear  (rip)	n/a		n/a		tear tear	tear tear

Polysemy

polysemy (words and meanings)

Definition

Polysemy is the association of one word with two or more distinct meanings. A polyseme is a word or phrase with multiple meanings. Adjective: polysemous or polysemic.
In contrast, a one-to-one match between a word and a meaning is called monosemy. According to William Croft, "Monosemy is probably most clearly found in specialized vocabulary dealing with technical topics" (The Handbook of Linguistics, 2003).

According to some estimates, more than 40% of English words have more than one meaning. The fact that so many words (or lexemes) are polysemous "shows that semantic changes often add meanings to the language without subtracting any" (M. Lynne Murphy, Lexical Meaning, 2010).

Hiperbola

Definition

Hyperbole is a figure of speech (a form of irony) in which exaggeration is used for emphasis or effect; an extravagant statement. Adjective: hyperbolic. Contrast with understatement.

In the first century, Roman rhetorician Quintilian observed that hyperbole is "commonly used even by ignorant people and peasants, which is understandable, as all people are by nature inclined to magnify or to minimize things and nobody is content to stick to what is really the case" (translated by Claudia Claridge in Hyperbole in English, 2011).

Hyperbole

I. What is Hyperbole?

Hyperbole (pronounced hahy-pur-buh-lee, not hyper-bowl) is an exaggeration which is obvious, extreme, and intentional. Hyperbole is used in order to stir up a strong emotion or response in the reader. It is important to note, though, that hyperbole should not be taken literally. Rather, it is used to emphasize a certain statement or characteristic.

For example:

That suitcase weighed a ton!

This would mean that the suitcases weighed two thousand pounds! Of course, the person does not mean that the suitcase actually weighed a ton. He is using hyperbole in order to point out the heavy weight.
The word hyperbole is derived from the Greek word hyperbolḗ meaning “over-casting.”

II. Examples of Hyperbole

Below are a few more common examples of hyperbole often used in everyday conversation.

Example 1
A girl wants to point out the embarrassment her friend will feel:

She’s going to die of embarrassment!

This does not mean that the girl will be sick or her heart will stop due to embarrassment. Instead, hyperbole is used to emphasize how embarrassing the situation is.

Example 2
A student is eagerly waiting for spring break:

 Spring break will never come.

This example, like “I haven’t seen you in a million years!” serves to emphasize a length of time. When looking forward to vacation, sometimes it seems as if time has slowed down or as if the final ring of the bell will never come. We know that this is not true, but we use hyperbole to point out how slow time seems to move.

III. The Importance of Hyperbole

Hyperbole is often used in day-to-day speech to show emotion. For example, upon seeing your friend after a long absence, you may say, “I haven’t seen you in a million years!” This is not the case in reality. But, hyperbole is used to describe how long it felt since the last time you saw your friend. It shows different emotions such as happiness or excitement. Meanwhile, a situation with carrying a heavy suitcase like in section 1, shows emotions of annoyance or even pain!

IV. Examples of Hyperbole in Literature

We often use hyperbole in everyday speech, but we also use this figure of speech in prose and poetry. For example, in love poetry, the speaker uses hyperbole to emphasize intense passion and admiration for the beloved.
Example 1
American poet W.H. Auden writes in “As I Walked Out One Evening,”

I’ll love you, dear, I’ll love you
Till China and Africa meet,
And the river jumps over the mountain
And the salmon sing in the street.

When will China and Africa meet? How can a river jump over a mountain? And when will salmon be intelligent enough to sing or evolved enough to walk the streets? Of course, none of these are literal projections for our future. W.H. Auden is using hyperbole to emphasize how long his love will last for his beloved.

Example 2
Joseph Conrad emphasizes the passing of time in the novel “Heart of Darkness”:

I had to wait in the station for ten days– an eternity.

Ten days is, by no definition, an eternity, but it felt like one. To describe ten days as an eternity– forever– is to use hyperbole.

V. Examples of Hyperbole in Pop Culture

Example 1
One place in which you’ll see exaggeration and hyperbole is in commercials and advertisements. For example, see this slogan from Altoids:

Mints so strong they come in a metal box.

This description of Altoids peppermints implies that the mints are so strong that they must be contained in a metal box rather than paper or plastic packaging. Of course this isn’t literally true, but this hyperbole serves to emphasize how strong this breath mint is. This description is funny in its exaggeration but may also serve to attract those looking for a stronger mint.

Example 2
For another set of hyperboles, take a glance at Apple iPhone advertising:

The new iPhone is ‘bigger than bigger.’

We know this isn’t possible. Advertisers are using hyperbole to emphasize that the new iPhone is really, really big!
On the new iPad:

Let them choreograph a recital. Explore the North Pole. Organize a food drive. And take their entire songbook caroling.

Most likely, the average iPad user does not have such great ideas for what to do with the device. The use of hyperbole though, links inspiring, charitable, and artistic ideas with the product in the buyer’s mind. Good advertisers use good hyperbole. The truth doesn’t matter in advertising. It is the big idea, fun, and excitement that comes from hyperbole that attracts paying customers.
Hyperbole is in our daily conversation, advertisements, movies, TV shows, and music. It is a figure of speech that colors our world in a way that is much more exciting than what is literally true.

Example 3
In “Blank Space,” Taylor Swift claims:

Boys only want love if it’s torture.

Swift is not claiming that men actually want torture in romantic relationships. She is using hyperbole to claim that men prefer relationships that are difficult and dramatic.
Like the romantic poets that came before him, Sam Smith uses hyperbole to emphasize the strength and depth of his love in “Latch”:

How do you do it? You got me losing every breath. What did you give me to make my heart bleed out my chest?

What love could possibly cause Smith to lose his breath and to begin bleeding from his chest? A love that has been hyperbolized. Here, Smith uses the hyperbole to explain that he has been taken over with strong, passionate love.

VII. Hyperbole: The Power of Exaggeration

In closing, hyperbole is a figure of speech which uses exaggeration to emphasize a certain characteristic. Hyperbole can be used to stir up emotion or a response in the reader, whether it is happiness, inspiration, romance, sadness, or laughter.

Metonymy

Definition of Metonymy

Metonymy is a figure of speech in which something is called by a new name that is related in meaning to the original thing or concept. For example, it’s common practice to refer to celebrity life and culture in the United States as “Hollywood,” as in “Hollywood is obsessed with this new diet.” The meaning of this statement is not that the place itself has any obsession, of course, but instead refers to the celebrities and wannabe celebrities who reside there.

Common Examples of Metonymy

As noted above, “Hollywood” can act as a metonym for celebrity culture. There are many other place names that act metonymically in the same way, such as “Wall Street” for the financial sector and “Washington” for the United States government. However, there are many more words in common usage that are metonyms. Here are more examples of metonymy:

• The big house—Refers to prison
• The pen—Can refer to prison or to the act of writing
• Stuffed shirts—People in positions of authority, especially in a business setting
• The crown—a royal person
• The Yankees/The Red Sox/The Cowboys, etc.—any team name is regularly used as a metonym for the players on the team. This is a less obvious metonym because often the team name is a group of people (the Cowboys, for instance), yet of course the football players who make up the Dallas Cowboys are not, in fact, cowboys.
• The New York Times/Morgan Stanley/Wells Fargo, etc.—any organization or company name is often used to stand in for the people who work there, such as “The New York Times stated that…” or “Wells Fargo has decided….”

Difference Between Metonymy and Synecdoche

Metonymy and synecdoche are very similar figures of speech, and some consider synecdoche to be a specific type of metonymy. Synecdoche occurs when the name of a part is used to refer to the whole, such as in “There are hungry mouths to feed.” The mouths stand in for the hungry people. The definition of metonymy is more expansive, including concepts that are merely associated in meaning and not necessarily parts of the original thing or concept.

♦

♦

♦

Significance of Metonymy in Literature

Scholars have long been interested in metonymy as a literary and rhetorical device. Ancient Greek and Latin scholars discussed the way in which metonymy changed words and meanings by providing new referents and connections between concepts. Authors have used metonymy for millennia for many different reasons. One primary reason is simply to address something in a more poetic and unique way. Authors can also add more complexity and meaning to ordinary words by using metonymy, thereby drawing the reader’s attention to what otherwise would not be noticed. Sometimes metonymy is also helpful to make statements more concise.

Examples of Metonymy in Literature

Example #1

Their ocean-keel boarding,
they drove through the deep, and Daneland left.
A sea-cloth was set, a sail with ropes,
firm to the mast; the flood-timbers moaned;
nor did wind over billows that wave-swimmer blow
across from her course.

(Beowulf—Tr. John Crowther)
In the Old English epic poem Beowulf there are many examples of metonymy. In this particular excerpt, the author uses the terms “ocean-keel” and “wave-swimmer” to refer to the entire ship. The author goes on to describe other parts of the ship very poetically, calling the sail the “sea-cloth” at first and referring to the boards of the ship “as flood-timbers.” This was a very popular technique in Old English works, and the use of metonymy here draws the reader’s attention to the different ways to understand the form and function of the ship and its parts. Thus metonymy creates new connections in this example.

Example #2

MARCELLUS: Something is rotten in the state of Denmark.

(Hamlet by William Shakespeare)
Shakespeare used metonymy in many of his plays and poems. This line from Hamlet is often repeated. We are made to understand that “the state of Denmark” stands in for the whole royal system and government. The rottenness is not widespread over the entire country, but instead is limited to the dealings of those in power. In this case, the character Claudius has come to power in a suspicious way, and those surrounding him feel unease at the new order.

Example #3

The party preserved a dignified homogeneity, and assumed to itself the function of representing the staid nobility of the countryside—East Egg condescending to West Egg, and carefully on guard against its spectroscopic gayety.

(The Great Gatsby by F. Scott Fitzgerald)
This metonymy example from F. Scott Fitzgerald’s The Great Gatsby is similar to the Shakespeare example in that it uses a place name to stand in for the people in that place. The difference in social standing between the narrator Nick Carraway and Jay Gatsby’s friends is a central theme in the novel. Nick lives in West Egg, while Jay and his friends live in the much fancier East Egg. In fact, to the outside observer there is not much different between the two places, but the inhabitants of East Egg find it very important to establish the distinctions between them. In the above sentence, “East Egg” refers to the posh citizens of the place, while “West Egg” refers to the more middle-class citizens there.

Example #4

He tried to remember in what year he had first heard mention of Big Brother. He thought it must have been at some time in the sixties, but it was impossible to be certain. In the Party histories, of course, Big Brother figured as the leader and guardian of the Revolution since its very earliest days. His exploits had been gradually pushed backwards in time until already they extended into the fabulous world of the forties and the thirties, when the capitalists in their strange cylindrical hats still rode through the streets of London in great gleaming motor-cars or horse carriages with glass sides. There was no knowing how much of this legend was true and how much invented. Winston could not even remember at what date the Party itself had come into existence.

(1984 by George Orwell)
The “Party” in George Orwell’s novel 1984 stands in for the highest officials of this new government. By using the metonymy to refer to the individuals, Orwell further separates the governing class from any sense of humanity; no one in the society seems to know the name of any actual ruling member. Even “Big Brother,” who seems to start out as an individual, comes to represent the ubiquitous surveillance of the government and not an actual man. The term “Big Brother” has entered the English lexicon as a metonym for government that interferes too much in private life.

collocation

collocation (words)

Definition

A collocation is a familiar grouping of words, especially words that habitually appear together and thereby convey meaning by association.
Collocational range refers to the set of items that typically accompany a word. The size of a collocational range is partially determined by a word's level of specificity and number of meanings.

The term collocation (from the Latin for "place together") was first used in its linguistic sense by British linguist John Rupert Firth (1890-1960), who famously observed, "You shall know a word by