39
Thus in green meadows, white snow, round table,
blue skies, pale complexion,
lofty mountains and the like, the adjectives are more logical attributes than
epithets. They indicate those qualities of the objects which may be regarded as
generally recognized. But in wild wind, loud ocean, remorseless dash of billows,
formidable waves,
heartburning smile, the adjectives do not point to inherent
qualities of the objects described. They are subjectively evaluative.
The epithet makes a strong impact on the reader, so much so, that the reader
unwittingly begins to see and evaluate t hings as the writer wants him to. Indeed, in
such word combinations as destructive charms, glorious sight,
encouraging smile,
the interrelation between logical and emotive meanings may be said to manifest
itself in different degrees. The word destructive has retained its logical meaning to
a considerable extent, but at the same time an experienced reader cannot help
perceiving the emotive meaning of the word which in this combination will signify
conquering, irresistible, dangerous. The logical meaning
of the word glorious in
combination with the word sight has almost entirely faded out. Glorious is already
fixed in dictionaries as a word having an emotive meaning alongside its primary,
logical meaning. As to the word encouraging (in the combination encouraging
smile) it is half epithet and half logical attribute. In fact, it is sometimes difficult
to draw a clear line of demarcation between epithet and logi cal attribute. In some
passages the logical attribute becomes so strongly enveloped in the emotional
aspect of the utterance that it begins to radiate emotiveness, though by
nature it is
logically descriptive. Take for example, the adjectives green, white, blue, lofty (but
somehow not round) in the combinations given above. In a suitable context they
may all have a definite emotional impact on the reader. This is pro bably explained
by the fact that the quality most characteristic of the given object is attached to
it, thus strengthening the quality.
Epithets may be classified from different standpoints: semantic and
structural. Semantically, epithets may be divided into two groups: those associated
with the noun following and those unassociated with it.
Associated epithets are those which point to a feature which is essential to
the objects they describe: the idea expressed in the epithet is to a certain extent
inherent in the concept of the object. The asso ciated epithet immediately refers the
mind to the concept in question due to some actual
quality of the object it is
attached to, for instance 'dark foresf, 'dreary midnight", 'careful attention',
'unwearyingresearch', 'indefatigable assiduity', 'fantastic terrors', etc
From the point of view of their compositionalstructure epithets may be divided into
s i m p l e , c o m p o u n d and p h r a se e p i t h e t s . Simple epithets are ordinary
adjectives. Examples
have been given above. Compound epithets are built like compound adjectives.
Examples are:
'heart-burningsigh', 'sylph-like figures', 'cloud-shapengiant',
".. .curly-headedgood-for-nothing,
And mischief-making monkey from his birth." (Byron).
The tendency to cram into one language unit as much information as possible has led to
new compositional models for epithets which we shall call p h r a s e e p i t h e t s . A
40
phrase and even a whole sentence may become an epithet if the main formal requirement
of the epithet is maintained, viz. its attributive use. But unlike simple and compound
epithets, which may have pre- or post-position, phrase epithets are always placed
before the nouns they refer to.
Достарыңызбен бөлісу: