4. Stylistic functions of words having no lexico-stylistic paradigm

  To this group, we refer terms, nomenclature words, historical words, exotic words, and lexical neologisms. 

 Terms are words and word combinations expressing scientific and scholarly notions in which essential properties of the object or phenomenon are reflected. Terms are generally associated with a definite branch of science and, therefore, with a set of other terms belonging to that particular branch of science or humanities. For example, language and speech may be used as synonyms in everyday usage, but in de Saussure’s theory, they are opposed to each other as terms. 

Nomenclature words are very close to terms: they refer to a definite branch of human activity, mainly professional, e.g. names of minerals, chemical elements, types of cars etc. 

Historical words denote objects and notions referring to the past. 

Exotic words denote notions and objects unknown or rarely met in the given language community.  Lexical neologisms are new (or old) words denoting new notions.  

All the words mentioned above, being used in special texts, have no stylistic functions: their usage is determined by their nominative function, i.e. to define the denotate. In fiction, they may acquire connotative meaning due to their syntagmatic relations with both stylistically marked and neutral words. For example, in Live with Lightning, Say No to Death, The Citadel, Airport, they are used to create the life-like atmosphere of a laboratory, hospital etc. When used in monologues or dialogues, terms become a means of the speech characterisation. Sometimes, while incompatible with their context, terms may be used to create a satirical or humorous effect. 

5. Stylistic functions of phraseology

The question of the status of phraseological units (PhU) is very complicated. There are many phraseological units which are quite neutral: in fact, in turn, for instance, in order that, in principle. To this group we should also refer historical PhU: the secular aim, the Blue and the Grey, the common beam; lexical neologisms: oil crisis, energy crisis; and terminological PhU: supersentencial units, expressive meansetc. 

Additional (connotative) information of PhU, as that of any word, may be of four types, functional-stylistic, emotional, evaluative, and expressive-figurative. 

Accordingly, PhU may be divided into two similar classes: PhU having a lexico-stylistic paradigm, and those having no lexico-stylistic paradigms. 

PhU having a lexico-stylistic paradigm also fall into literary (be in accord with somebody, play upon advantage, most and least, bring to mould,; ad ovo, ad hoc, a la carte,; a heart of oak, Achilles heel) andconversational ones (Adams ale, slit the bat, ask me another, monkey's allowance, to get on the ball, admiral of the red, grab for altitude, gef the bird, sell one's back, get the wind up, a bit of jam, get somebody on his ears). 

Peculiar stylistic usage of PhU is accounted for the possibility of their structural and contextual transformations which are oriented to achieving a definite stylistic effect. 

Structural transformations of PhU may be represented by:

        1) expansion of PhU, e.g. When you had a weak case and knew it, Alan thought, even straws should be grasped at firmly (from to catch at a straw); 

        2) reduction of PhU as the result of the compression of proverbs, sayings, quotations etc, e.g. Howaden added severely: "Better too much too eariy than too little too late” (from better late than never); 

        3) inversion of the components of PhU. It implies the change of the PhU structure while preserving its original components, e.g. Fortunately, it's only the cat’s head and we still have a firm grip on the body(from to let the cat out of the bag). 

Contextual transposition of PhU presupposes that a PhU may be totally reconsidered and reinterpreted in context, e.g. Pooh goes visiting and gets into a tight place (from to be in a tight comer). 

STYLISTIC SYNTAX OF THE ENGLISH LANGUAGE     1. The study of the texts in terms of their syntactical organization is regarded as one of the crucial issues in stylistic analysis, though the peculiarities of syntactical arrangement are not so conspicuous as the lexical and phraseological ones.     Stylistic syntax deals with specific patterns of syntactic usage, i.e. syntactical expressive means (EM) and stylistic devices (SD). In stylistic syntax, EM are recognized by less rule-bound modeling of sentences. All the deviations from the stylistically unmarked sentence pattern (S - P - 0 - D) are treated as its transforms that may acquire stylistic connotations, in which cases they are regarded as EM, The transformation of the pattern in question into negative and interrogative sentences rarely leads to any stylistic changes. Other transformations might create stylistically marked sentence patterns. According to the type of transformation of the neutral syntactical pattern, all EM in English fall into three groups:      1.   EM based on the reduction of the syntactical pattern that results from the deliberate omission of some (s) of obligatory elementthe sentence structure. This group includes ellipsis,  aposiopesis, nominative sentences, and asyndeton.     2.   EM based on the redundancy of the syntactical pattern that results from the addition of some sentence elements or their deliberate repetition. To this group we refer repetition, enumeration, syntactic tautology, polysyndeton, emphatic constructions, parenthetical clauses or sentences.     3.    EM based on the violation of the grammatically fixed word order within a sentence or a deliberate isolation of some parts of the sentence. Here belong stylistic inversion, syntactical split, and detachment.     The stylistic effect in syntax may be created not only due to the intrasentential relations (those between the olornents of a sentence), but also due to the intersentential (i.e. the relations between several sentences) relations within paragraphs and other supraphrasal unities. The stylistic effect in supersyntax may be achieved by the use of SD, i.e. stylistically marked means and patterns of combination of sentences within a larger context. SD may also be created due to the transposition of the syntactical meaning of a sentence in context. In this case a sentence acquires an additional meaning which is not typical of the corresponding syntactical structure.     Thus, taking into account the character of the relations between syntactical structures, possible transpositions of meanings in a context, and the means and types of connection within a sentence, we distinguish the following groups of syntactical SD: 1. SD based on the peculiar formal and semantic interaction of syntactical constructions within a sentential or suprasentential context: parallelism, chiasmus, anaphora, epiphora. 2. SD based on the transposition of the syntactical meaning in context: rhetorical questions. 3. SD based on the transformation of the types and means of connection within or between sentences: parcellation, subordination instead of coordination, and coordination instead of subordination.