22. Semantic change (causes, results – extension, narrowing).

Semantic change, (also semantic shift or semantic progression) is the evolution of word usage — usually to the point that the modern meaning is radically different from the original usage. In diachronic (or historical) linguistics, semantic change is a change in one of the meanings of a word. Every word has a variety of senses and connotations, which can be added, removed, or altered over time, often to the extent that cognates across space and time have very different meanings. The study of semantic change can be seen as part of etymology, onomasiology, semasiology, and semantics. A number of classification schemes have been suggested for semantic change. The most widely accepted scheme in the English-speaking academic world is from Bloomfield (1933):

• Narrowing: Change from superordinate level to subordinate level. For example, skyline used to refer to any horizon, but now it has narrowed to a horizon decorated by skyscrapers.^[1]

• Widening: Change from subordinate level to superordinate level. There are many examples of specific brand names being used for the general product, such as with Kleenex.^[1] Such uses are known as generonyms.

• Metaphor: Change based on similarity of thing. For example, broadcast originally meant "to cast seeds out"; with the advent of radio and television, the word was extended to indicate the transmission of audio and video signals. Outside of agricultural circles, very few people use broadcast in the earlier sense.^[1]

• Metonymy: Change based on nearness in space or time, e.g., jaw "cheek" → "mandible".

• Synecdoche: Change based on whole-part relation. The convention of using capital cities to represent countries or their governments is an example of this.

• Hyperbole: Change from weaker to stronger meaning, e.g., kill "torment" → "slaughter"

• Meiosis: . Change from stronger to weaker meaning, e.g., astound "strike with thunder" → "surprise strongly".

• Degeneration: e.g., knave "boy" → "servant" → "deceitful or despicable man".

• Elevation: e.g., knight "boy" → "nobleman".

22. Metaphor (classification, examples). The term 'metaphor', as the etymology of the word reveals, means transference of some quality from one object to another. From the times of ancient Greek and Roman rhetoric, the term has been known to denote

the transference of meaning from one word to another. It is still widely used to designate the process in which a word acquires a derivative mean­ing. Quintilian remarks: "It is due to the metaphor that each thing seems to have its name in language." Language as a whole has been figu­ratively defined as a dictionary of faded metaphors. Classification. The nature of metaphor is versatile, and metaphors may be classified according to a number of principles.

1. According to the pragmatic effect produced upon the addressee met­ aphors are subdivided into trite (or dead) and genuine (or original). Dead metaphors are fixed in dictionaries. They often sound banal and hackneyed, like cliches:

to prick up one's ears; the apple of one's eye; to burn with desire;

seeds of evil; a flight of imagination; floods of tears; хмара запитань;

потік емоцій/сліз; братися за розум; перемивати кісточки;

загострювати увагу; лізти в голову; спадати на думку. Original metaphors are not registered in dictionaries. They are creat­ed in speech by speakers' imagination. They sound fresh and expressive, unexpected and unpredictable:

Some books are to be tasted, others swallowed, and some few to be

chewed and digested.

We all want a little patching and repairing from time to time.

The wind was a torrent of darkness among the gusty trees.

Золото мистецтва з переляком сплавити, добути з брехні -

ненадійна алхімія.

Де котиться між голубих лугів Хмарина ніжна з білими плечима,

Я продаю сонця - оранжеві, тугі. З тривожними музичними очима*.

Дим розгортає крила і пориває з собою вогонь. Се. вже не діти в.

червоних спідничках. Се щось велике, завзяте, сердитий звір,

що хоче скинуть з грудей вагу, що простягає спідсподу лапи Л

синіми жилами, душить й підгортає під себе. Роззявляє криваву.

пащу й жере. Рве зубом й лютує.

2. According to the degree of their stylistic potential metaphors are clas­ sified into nominational. cognitive and imaginative (or figurative). Nom- jnationaLmetaphors do not render any stylistic information. They are in­tended to name new objects or phenomena of the objective world. A nomina-metaphor is a purely technical device of nomination, when a new notion imed by means of the old vocabulary:

the arm of the chain the foot of the hill, ніжка столу, крило будинку. тюпатка, колінна чашечка, рукав річки, гребінь хвилі, глава книги, повірники автомобіля. Nominational metaphor is a source of lexical homonymy. When an object obtains a quality which is typical of another object, cog­nitive metaphor is formed: One more day has died.

rtty idea has come to me. The road lead Jack there. The sight took John's attention. The shore was drowning in the fog.

. чреслідувало відчуття, ніби за ним стежать. Навчання посувалося поволі, але все ж посувалося. Час ішов, сонне вставало і snoev еіоало на горизонті. Being a source of lexical polysemy, cognitive metaphors do not possess great stylistic value.

The most expressive kind of metaphor is imaginative metaphor. Imag­inative metaphors are occasional and individual. They are bright, image-bear­ing, picturesque and poetic:

Patricia's eyes were pools of still water.

Time was bleeding away.