• Ol'viya Vysotska Ivan Franko National University of Lviv
Keywords: stylistic figures, functional role of metaphor, semantic potential metaphor, generalized sign, semantic invariant, metonymy, categorical transition


The article deals with the word-forming role of stylistic figures (metaphors and metonymy) in the formation of polysemantic words-terms. The common regularities of the use of stylistic figures in various spheres of the humanities, ways of their change (semantic landslides), especially the semantic filling of terms in professional texts are revealed. It is noted that the semantic paradigm of metaphor is a complex system-forming unit that forms a set of derivatives motivated by the same sign. A metamorphic nominative function, capable of forming new concepts, is also traced. It is generalized that the metaphor is a semantic shift in meaning, and metonymy is a semantic shift in the reference. The stylistic figure of a metaphor performs both a figurative and an effective speech function and can be represented by a set of semantic markers or sems. The article argues that a stylistic figure, as a result of a combination of heterogeneous components of content that arose in the context, is singled out implicitly from it, realized both in the metaphor and in metonymy, providing a proper understanding of the speakers of the language. It is highlighted that metaphor is a semantic process, where the form of a linguistic unit is transferred from one referent to another based on the similarity of subjects / concepts in the mind of the speaker. The mechanism of the functioning of stylistic figures by the main regular models of the metaphorical semantic transition, which is a complicated multifaceted process of “generation” of new meanings, is shown. It is proved that penetrating into a professional language, the metaphor gradually loses its imagery, associativity and acquires a strict terminological meaning. It is argued that the semantic structure of the metaphor is formed in close interaction between the main and the auxiliary components, and the meaning that causes the metaphor is the structural component of the extensional meaning and determines the perception of the main subject of the metaphor. It is generalized that stylistic figures (metaphor, metonymy) are capable of creating new meanings in both semantic and cognitive dimensions, and their free combination enables the emergence of a new meaning that is actualized in a particular speech act.


Alekseeva, Larisa M. 1996. The metaphorical nature of the term. Perm.

Gak, Vladimir. 1988. “Metaphor: universal and specific.” Metaphors in language and text. Moscow 11–26.

Dudok, Roman I. 2006. Stylistic figures and their semantic function. Kharkiv: V. N. Karazin Kharkiv National University.

Lakoff, George. 1981. “On generative semantics.” New in foreign linguistics.

Leichyk, Volodymur M. 1987. “The term and its definition.” Terminology and Terminography in Indo-European languages 135–145. Vladivostok.

Paducheva, Elena V. 1999. “Methonimic and Methaphoric Transitions in the Verb Paradygm “to assign.” The Kibric A. B 60th anniversary. Moskwa.

Petrov, V.V. 1990. “Metaphor: from semantic representations to cognitive analysis.” Questions of linguistics 3: 439.

Podkolzina, T. A. 1994. Metaphor and paradox in English terminology. PhD diss. Moskwa.

Teliya, Veronika N. 1988. “Metaphor as a model of semantic production and its expressive and evaluative function.” In Metaphor in language and text. Moskwa.

Darmesteter, Arsène. 1899. La vie des mots etudiee dans leurs significations. Paris.

Langacker, Ronald N. 1987. “A View of Linguistic Semantics.” Foundation of Cognitive Grammar 1: 48–95. Stanford: Stanfors University Press.

Whately, Richard. 1846. Elements of Rhetoric. London.

Quine, Willard Orman. 1977. “Natural Kinds.” In Naming, necessity and natural kinds. London.

Weinreich, Uriel. 1963. Lexicographic definition in descriptive semantics.