SIMILE and METAPHOR

SIMILE

A simile is a word that compares words in a sentence.  You can usually tell if a simile is present in a sentence when you see the words as or like. 

• I am as poor as a church mouse.
• He is hungry like a wolf.
• She sings like an angel.

Here are some similes by famous people:

·         A room without books is like a body without a soul.

(Roman philosopher Marcus Tullius Cicero, 106 BC - 43 BC)

·         Writing about music is like dancing about architecture.

(Credited to English singer-songwriter Elvis Costello)

·         Perhaps too much of everything is as bad as too little.

(American novelist Edna Ferber, 1887-1968)

Here are some funny similes:

·         He was as lame as a duck. Not the metaphorical lame duck, either, but a real duck that was actually lame, maybe from stepping on a land mine or something.

·         Duct tape is like the force — it has a light side, a dark side, and it holds the universe together. (Carl Zwanzig).

·         Dealing with network executives is like being nibbled to death by ducks. (Eric Sevareid).

·         I'm as pure as the driven slush. (Tallulah Bankhead, 1903-1968)

·         Her vocabulary was like, yeah, whatever.

Significance of Simile in Literature

Simile can be an excellent way for an author either to make an unusual thing seem more familiar or a familiar thing seem more unique. Good similes can also make readers think about things in a new way, and can sometimes create a lasting effect. Simile can also sometimes be used to show a comparison, though with the conclusion that these two things really are unalike or even at odds with each other.

Simile can help to make new connections for the reader. One of literature’s purposes is to help better explain the world around us, and the technique of simile is one of those ways in which we are able to see things in a new way. All types of analogies are cognitive processes of transferring meaning from one thing to another, and thus the use of simile in literature has real synaptic effects. For this reason, and for aesthetic purposes, simile has been a popular literary technique for many hundreds of years.

There are examples of Simile in Literature:

What happens to a dream deferred?

Does it dry up

like a raisin in the sun?
Or fester like a sore—
And then run?
Does it stink like rotten meat?
Or crust and sugar over—
like a syrupy sweet?
Maybe it just sags
like a heavy load.

Or does it explode?

(“Harlem” by Langston Hughes)

Langston Hughes uses five examples of simile in this short poem, “Harlem.” Each simile is one possibility that Hughes imagines for “a dream deferred.” The imagery was so striking in this poem that playwright Lorraine Hansberry named her famous play A Raisin in the Sun after the first simile in the poem. All of the similes in this poem share a sense of decay and burden, just like a dream that does not come to fruition.

My mistress’ eyes are nothing like the sun;
Coral is far more red than her lips’ red;
If snow be white, why then her breasts are dun;
If hairs be wires, black wires grow on her head.

(“Sonnet 130” by William Shakespeare)

This excerpt from Shakespeare’s “Sonnet 130” is an example of a negative simile. Shakespeare goes against the expectation praising his mistress’s beauty and instead says what she is not like. Her lips are not as red as coral, her skin is not pure as snow, and so on. This striking simile example plays with both the tradition of sonnets as well as the usual function of similes.

METAPHOR

A metaphor compares words in a sentence; however, instead of saying that one thing is like something else, a metaphor actually makes one thing become something very different by renaming it.  A metaphor can sometimes use words like is, are, or was (and other words) to signal that a metaphor is present.  However, a metaphor never uses the words like or as to compare.

• My brother was boiling mad. (This implies he was too angry.)
• The assignment was a breeze. (This implies that the assignment was not difficult.)
• It is going to be clear skies from now on. (This implies that clear skies are not a threat and life is going to be without hardships)
• The skies of his future began to darken. (Darkness is a threat; therefore, this implies that the coming times are going to be hard for him.)
• Her voice is music to his ears. (This implies that her voice makes him feel happy)

There are examples of Metaphor in Literary:

1.      “She is all states, and all princes, I.”

John Donne, a metaphysical poet, was well-known for his abundant use of metaphors throughout his poetical works. In his well-known work “The Sun Rising,” the speaker scolds the sun for waking him and his beloved. Among the most evocative metaphors in literature, he explains “she is all states, and all princes, I.” This line demonstrates the speaker’s belief that he and his beloved are richer than all states, kingdoms, and rulers in the entire world because of the love that they share.

2.      “Shall I Compare Thee to a summer’s Day”,

William Shakespeare was the best exponent of the use of metaphors. His poetical works and dramas all make wide-ranging use of metaphors.

“Sonnet 18,”also known as “Shall I Compare Thee to a Summer’s Day,” is an extended metaphor between the love of the speaker and the fairness of the summer season. He writes that “thy eternal summer,” here taken to mean the love of the subject, “shall not fade.”

PERSONIFICATION

Personification is the act of giving non-living things human characteristics. Here is a sample of a short paragraph that uses personification to describe a house.  

“Our house is an old friend of ours.  Although he creeks and groans with every gust of wind, he never fails to protect us from the elements.  He wraps his arms of bricks and mortar around us and keeps us safe.  He’s always been a good friend to us and we would never leave him”.

References:

http://grammar-monster.com/glossary/simile.htm

http://www.literarydevices.com/simile/

http://literarydevices.net/metaphor/

E-book of Level 5, Lesson 8 –Similes, Metaphors, and Personification

Ambiguity

AMBIGUITY

Ambiguity is to be distinguished, one must rely on the basic concepts of traditional semantics: meaning, denotation, and connotation. Meaning is cognitive meaning, in the sense of Alston (1964, p. 74), or conceptual meaning, in the sense of Leech (1974, pp. 10-13). The denotation of an expression is the set of objects to which it truly applies; and the connotation of an expression is the property, or properties, possession of which by an object licenses the application of an expression to it. These are, of course, the concepts of connotation and denotation found in J. S. Mill (1843, Bk I, chap. 2). In traditional semantics, these three concepts are related as follows: the meaning of an expression fixes its connotation, and its connotation, in turn, fixes its denotation.

1.      An expression is ambiguous iff the expression has more than one meaning.

An example of an ambiguous expression is the word 'pike': it can mean a kind of fish, or it can mean a kind of weapon. Indeterminacy is quite a different concept. It was stated above that the meaning of an expression fixes its connotation. The connotation of an expression must be possessed by each object in its denotation. In this way, an expression determines that the object in its denotation possess certain properties, namely, the properties which are its connotation, and not possess certain others, namely, those incompatible with its connotation. It does not determine any other properties. It is with respect to these last properties that an expression is indeterminate.

2.        An expression is indeterminate iff there is some property which neither is included in the expression's connotation nor is a species of any property included in its connotation.

For example, the word 'square' is indeterminate, since its connotation does not include or exclude being any particular size; and the word 'mother' is indeterminate, since its connotation does not include or exclude being of any particular ethnic origin. In fact, every common noun is, presumably, indeterminate inasmuch as, for any common noun, there is undoubtedly some property which its connotation does not either include or exclude. Yet, it need not be the case that every common noun be ambiguous. Therefore, one concludes that indetermi- nacy and ambiguity are distinct. Generality is distinct from both indeterminacy and ambiguity, though it is frequently confused with the former.

3.        An expression is general iff the expression's connotation is a genus of more than one species.

For example:

metal: gold, copper, silver, iron, mercury,...

color: red, green, blue,...

tree: birch, oak, maple,...

parent: mother, father.

Generality and ambiguity are distinct: an expression may be general without being ambiguous and an expression may be ambiguous without being general. An expression may be ambiguous, that is, have only one meaning, though its one meaning fixes a connotation in which there is a genus of distinct species. Generality and indeterminacy are also distinct, since every common noun is indeterminate but not every common noun is general. Other definitions of generality have been suggested. Consider the one which can be found in articles by Roberts (1984, pp. 300-301) and by Margalit (1983, p. 132):

4.      An expression is general iff a meaning of the expression is disjunctive.

If the meaning of an expression on the basis of which it is general is formulated, then the meaning would have the form of a disjunction. So, the formulation of the meaning of 'metal' whereby it is general with respect to being gold, being silver, etc., would be in the form of a disjunction. But this definition affords little theoretical insight into generality, since, without any formalization of meaning, the concept of disjunctive meaning remains completely obscure.

Inspiration has long been observed that there are semantic relations which obtain between lexical entries in the lexicon of a language. Synonymy and antonymy are two such relations. Another is hyperonymy, or super- ordination. This relation is used to explicate the fact that the lexicon of a language reflects taxonomies of various kinds.

5.      A word is general with respect to another word iff the conno- tation of the former is a genus of the connotation of the latter.

Considering the examples in (3), one sees that the word 'parent' is general with respect to the word 'mother' and that the word 'tree' is general with respect to the word 'maple'. The inspiration for the definition in (4) is that a general expression can be paraphrased by an expression made up of a disjunction of expressions. So, for example, the word 'parent' can be paraphrased by the expression 'mother or father'. The assumption, then, is that the meaning of a general expression will reflect the disjunction of its para- phrase.

(E-book of Ambiguity, Generality, and Indeterminacy: tests and definitions - Brendan S. Gillon)

Ambiguity is a word, phrase, or statement which contains more than one meaning. Ambiguous words or statements lead to vagueness and confusion, and shape the basis for instances of unintentional humor. For instance, it is ambiguous to say “I rode a black horse in red pajamas,” because it may lead us to think the horse was wearing red pajamas. The sentence becomes clear when it is restructured “wearing red pajamas, I rode a black horse”. Similarly, same words with different meanings can cause ambiguity, for example “John took off his trousers by the bank”. It is funny if we confuse one meaning of “bank” which is a building, to another meaning, being “an edge of a river”.

Below are some common examples of ambiguity:

1.      A good life depends on a liver – Liver may be an organ or simply a living person.

2.      Foreigners are hunting dogs – It is unclear whether dogs were being hunted or foreigners are being spoken of as dogs.

3.      Each of us saw her duck – It is unclear whether the word “duck” refers to an action of ducking or a duck that is a bird.

4.      The passerby helps dog bite victim – Is the passerby helping a dog bite someone? Or is he helping a person bitten by a dog? It’s not clear

Although ambiguity is considered a flaw in writing, many writers use this technique to allow readers to understand their works in a variety of ways, there are ambiguity examples in literature:

1.      The Catcher in the Rye by J. D. Salinger

“I ran all the way to the main gate, and then I waited a second till I got my breath. I have no wind, if you want to know the truth. I’a quite a heavy smoker, for one thing – that is, I used to be. They made me cut it out. Another thing, I grew six and half inches last year. That’s also how I practically got t.b. and came out here for all these goddam checkups and stuff. I’m pretty healthy though”.

The words “they” and “here” used by the speaker are ambiguous. But the readers are allowed to presume from the context that “they”might be proffesionals helping out Holden and “here” might be a rehabilitation centre.

2.      The Sick Rose by William Blake

“O Rose thou art sick.

The invisible worm,

That flies in the night

In the howling storm:

Has found out thy bed

Of crimson joy;

And his dark secret love

Does thy life destroy”.

Many of the words in the above lines show ambiguity. We can not say for sure what “crimson bed of joy” means: neither can we be exact about the interpretation of “dark secret love”. The ambiguous nature of such phrases allows readers to explore for deeper meanings of the poem.

Some of those who have analyzed this poem believe that “Has found out thy bed, Of crimson joy” refers to making love.

3.      Ode to a Grecian Urn by Keats

“Thou still unravish’d bride of quietness”.

The use of wors “still” is ambiguous in nature. “Still” here may mean “an unmoving object” or it may be interpreted as “yet unchanged”.

Ambiguity in literature serves the purpose of lending a deeper meaning to a literary work. By introducting ambiguity in their works, writers give liberty to the readers to use their imagination to explore meanings. This active participation of the readers involves them in the prose or poetry they read.

            (http://literarydevices.net/ambiguity/)

MORPHEME (Free and Bound Morpheme)

MORPHEME

L. Bloomfield says in his book, “Linguistics form which bears no partial phonetic – semantics resemblance to any other form is a simple form morpheme.” 

Charles F. Hockett says, Morphemes are the smallest individually meaningful elements in the utterances of a language.”

Then, Ramlan (1980:11) says, “Morpheme is the smallest element which cannot be divided into any other forms.”

Morpheme is the smallest element that cannot be divided into several elements and has a meaning. All the based form is Morpheme.

A morpheme can be defined as a minimal unit having more or less constant meaning and more of less constant form, “more and less” because, for example, linguists say that the word buyers is made up of three morphemes {buy}+{er}+{s}. The evidence for this is that each can occur in other combinations of morphemes without changing its meaning. We can find {buy} in buying, buys, and {er} in seller, fisher, as well as buyer.  And {s} can be found in boys, girls, and dogs.

The more combinations a morpheme is found in, the more productive it is said to be.

Note the terminology:  Braces, {  } indicate a morpheme. Square brackets, [  ] indicate a semantic characterization.  Italics indicate a lexical item.

1. Morphemes can vary in size: neither the number of syllables nor the length of a word can indicate what is a morpheme and what isn’t.  For example, Albatross is a long word but a single morpheme, -y (as in dreamy ) is also a single morpheme.

2. Just as linguists have had success dissecting phonemes into combinations of distinctive features, so they have viewed morphemes as made up of combinations of semantic features.  For example, we can analyze a word like girls in terms of both its morphological and its semantic structure:

Morphological: girls =  {girl} + {s}

Semantic: {girl} = [-adult; -male; +human, ...] + {s} = {PLU} = [plural]

3. Two different morphemes may be pronounced (and even sometimes spelled) the same way. For example, the –er in buyer means something like ‘the one who,’ while the –er in shorter means something like ‘to a greater degree than.’ The first –er  always attaches to a verb, while the second –er always attaches to an adjective. It makes sense to consider these two different morphemes that just happen to sound the same. (The first is called the agentive morpheme {AG} since it indicates the agent of an action; the second is called the comparative morpheme {COMP} since it indicates the comparative degree of an adjective.)

4. We can’t always hold to the definition of a morpheme as having unchanging form. For example, when we consider words like boys, girls, shirts, books, we conclude that –s is the plural morpheme (symbolized {PLU}.)  But what about words such as men or women?  Here plurality is indicated not by adding –s but by changing the vowel in the stem. Yet we still want to say that men is, morphologically, {man} + {PLU}, even though the form of {PLU} is quite different in this case.

In the same way, it seems sensible to say that went = {go} + {PAST}, just as walked = {walk} + {PAST}, even though in the first case {PAST} involves a morphological change in form  quite different from the usual adding of –ed.

5. Sometimes it is very difficult to identify morpheme boundaries.  For example, the word hamburger originally meant {Hamburg} = ‘a city in Germany’ + {er} = ‘originating from.’  But probably most people now understand the word as meaning {ham} = ‘ham’ + {burger} = ‘hot patty served on a round bun.’

LEXICAL AND GRAMMATICAL MORPHEMES LEXICAL

Morphemes are those that having meaning by themselves (more accurately, they have sense). Grammatical morphemes specify a relationship between other morphemes. But the distinction is not all that well defined.

Nouns, verbs, adjectives ({boy}, {buy}, {big}) are typical lexical morphemes.

Prepositions, articles, conjunctions ({of}, {the}, {but}) are grammatical morphemes.

A WORD

Based on the Oxford Advanced Learner’s Dictionary(1995:1374), “Word is  a sound or group of sounds that expresses a meaning and forms an independent unite of a language.”  From the statement above, we can conclude that word is the smallest free element or we can also say that every free element is a word.  There are some criterions that can be used to identify a word:

1. A word might consists of one free morpheme. For example : sick, sleep, fall, etc. These are called simple words.

2. A word might consists of one free morpheme and minimum one bound morpheme. For example: unlock, unreal, dismiss, etc. These are called complex words.

3. A word might consists of one bound morpheme or more with one more bound morpheme with it. From example : unbreakable, unfaithfully, etc. These are also called complex words.

4. A word might consists of one free morpheme and one free morpheme or one bound morpheme. For example in Bahasa we find the word: matahari, hulubalang, syahbandar. These are called compound word.

Each basic form is morpheme but not every morpheme can be classified as word and not all morphemes can be made into basic form.

Free and Bound Morphemes

Free morphemes are those that can stand alone as words. They may be lexical morphemes ({serve}, {press}), or grammatical morphemes ({at}, {and}).  For example : run, read, far, etc.

Bound morphemes can occur only in combination—they are parts of a word. They may be lexical morphemes (such as {clude} as in include, exclude, preclude) or they may be grammatical (such as {PLU} = plural as in boys, girls, and cats).

ALLOMORPHS

When a single morpheme takes more than one form, as the {-s pl} morpheme does, each form is called an allomorph. Here is another example: the indefinite article a also occurs as an in certain circumstances. There is only one morpheme {a} with two allomorphs /e/ (or /\/) and /æn/. Most allomorphs are phonemic variants; that is, they are slightly different pronunciations of the same morpheme. In many cases, the choice of allomorph depends on where the morpheme occurs in the word. For instance, in the present tense verb talks the {-s present tense} allomorph is /s/, but in begs it is /z/. In many cases the choice of allomorph is determined by the presence of another morpheme. For instance, in the word pronounce the allomorph of {nounce} (which means something like “say”) is /nauns/, but in pronunciation it is /n\ns/ because of the morphemes at the end of the word. (Many of my students in fact mispronounce and misspell the word pronunciation as pronounciation. This is an unconscious simplifying of the morpheme into only one allomorph.) Another example is the change of stress in words like átom and atómic (the “´” indicates which syllable is stressed). Not only does the stressed syllable change when you add {ic}, but some of the phonemes change. The morpheme {atom} in fact has two allomorphs: /´æt\m/ and /\t´øm/. 

The phenomenon of allomorphy (that is, the existence of multiple allomorphs for a single morpheme) occurs for a large number of reasons. Sometimes the reason is phonological assimilation (as in cats and dogs). Sometimes allomorphs were created by phonological processes that took place in the past. For instance, {wolf} has the allomorphs /w¨lf/ and /w¨lv/ (in the plural wolves). The reason is that sometime around five hundred years ago /f/ became /v/ before the {-s pl} morpheme: hence we have variants like wife/wives and leaf/leaves. The process is no longer active, which is why we say the Toronto Maple Leafs, not the Toronto Maple Leaves. About the same period in history, /e/ and /´/ changed to /i/ in stressed syllables, although we still spell these vowels as if they were pronounced the old way (in words like see, flee, etc.). However, the change did not occur if the stressed syllable was followed by two more syllables, so we end up with morphemes like {supreme} with two allomorphs /suprim/ and /supr´m/ (supreme/supremacy). A similar process also explains the allomorphy in words like divine/divinity and pronounce/pronunciation. We could also call the vowel changes in the past tenses of some verbs allomorphs of the normal past tense inflection, as in the forms talk/talked and run/ran. So we would transcribe them something like {talk} + {-ed past tense} and {run} + {-ed past tense}.

ZERO ALLOMORPH

A further abstraction is the concept of the zero-realisation (no visible affix, but a specific meaning) in plurals such as fish and deer and past tense forms such as cut and put.

Some linguists recognize a zero morph where a morpheme is expected in the grammatical system but no morph is there. The absence of a relative pronoun in a letter I wrote (compare a letter that I wrote) is noted by postulating a zero relative pronoun.

The plural of sheep  is identical with singular sheep, though the plural of cow is cows; the plural noun sheep has been said to have a zero morph.

More controversially, a zero article has been postulated for plural nouns and for non-count nouns (e.g. sugar)

References:

E-Book of Morphology

E-book of Morphology – Universitas Sumatera Utara

E-book of Morphology - Handout for Psy 598-02, summer 2001