Style as Deviance

In linguistics, style as deviance refers to the deliberate, voluntary and

intentional departure from the norms and standards of language usage,
(i.e., grammatical rules, vocabulary choices, or sentence structures)
for expressive or communicative purposes: to achieve a specific
effect. These deviations can be subtle or dramatic, but they always
serve a purpose beyond simply breaking the rules.
Subtle deviations indicate those deviations which involve in-depth and
complex alterations, modifications and changes to grammar,
vocabulary, or sentence structure that might not immediately stand out
but still create a distinct effect. In sentence structure, for example,
instead of strictly adhering to and complying with the subject-verb-
object (SVO) order, writer may and do rearrange the elements of their
sentences for more emphasis or rhythm. With regard to the choice of
vocabulary, the use of uncommon (strange) or archaic words, the use
of specific jargons, or the incorporation of regional dialects can subtly
and inconspicuously (‫ بشكل ال يلفت النظر‬،‫ )بلباقة‬modify the tone and
conveys specific nuances and complexities.

As for grammatical rules, using ellipses, fragmented or choppy

sentences for effect, or making grammatical slightly flexible for
stylistic purposes, can shape and impact the reader's interpretation.
Dramatic deviations, on the other hand, involve more noticeable and
more conspicuous departures from standard usage. These deviations
are often used to achieve a more intensified impact or emphasis.
These deviations may include syntactic deviations, i.e., completely
restructuring sentences, as in what is referred to as anastrophe
(inverting the normal word order) or employing parallelism for
rhetorical effect. In vocabulary, dramatic deviations include the use of
unconventional or invented words, the introduction of slang, or the
deliberate use of words in non-standard ways to provoke a reaction
or convey a specific tone. (Yesterme, Yesterday; unchilding,
unfathering etc) In Grammar, dramatic deviations include
intentionally breaking grammatical conventions, such as double
negatives or irregular verb conjugations, to challenge reader
expectations and provoke thought. (He knows not, I don’t never
smoke, he goed to school). In both types subtle and dramatic
deviations, the key is intentionality (i.e., They are not random,
haphazard or accidental, but are carefully chosen). Writers
purposefully depart from standard usage to achieve a particular effect,
be it to evoke emotion, highlight a theme, create rhythm, or establish
a unique voice.

Writers or speakers resort to stylistic deviance for various reasons, as

is clear from the following examples:

Metaphors and Similes: These figures of speech deviate from literal

language to create a more vivid or impactful image. (E.g., "Her eyes
twinkled like stars").
Juxtaposition: Combining contrasting words or phrases to create
tension or surprise. (e.g., "Love is the noblest frailty).
Neologisms: Creating new words or using existing words in
unconventional ways. (e.g., staycation, brixit, unfather, unchild,
imposthil etc).
Stream of consciousness: Following the unfiltered thoughts of a
character, often disregarding grammatical rules and presenting
thoughts in a non-linear way.

VARIATION AT THE LEXICAL LEVEL:

Deviation at the lexical level refers to the deliberate or intentional

departure from standard vocabulary choices in written or spoken
language. Such deviations are motivated by the desire to create or
achieve a variety of effects, add emphasis, humour, creativity, or
obscurity to the message.
The word lexis or lexicon means the lexical items: words. At this
level, stylisticians investigate the vocabulary or lexical items
separately instead of an entire text. It is important to note that the
semantic structure of a word consists of different types of lexical
meanings, i.e., denotative meaning (which tells about the topic of
communication) and connotative or emotive meaning (which shows
other aspects or shades of meaning related mainly to emotional side of
cognition and perception), expressive ( which creates an image of the
object in question), stylistic meaning ( which indicates the type of
register to which the communication pertains).

Stylistic analysis of lexical items examines the function of direct

(literal) and indirect (figurative) meanings of words together with how
these words acquire another contextual meaning when used in a given
context or text. Denotative meaning expresses the conceptual content
of a word and it is the leading semantic component in the semantic
structure of a word. The additional aspects of meaning refer to what is
referred to as connotative meaning or connotations.

Lexical variation is also of great importance in the use of language.

When we examine words from a stylistic point of view, we look at
various things that might add to the conceptual content of lexical
items. First of all, we look at the Form of words, that is, are they
short or long. Long words are usually related to formal situations or to
formal registers and are associated with distance, while short words
are usually associated with informality, intimacy and solidarity. Let us
consider the following examples:

Long words: investigate, facilitate, deteriorate, disintegrate,

excursion

Short words: look into, make easy, get worse, fall apart, trip

The form of words also shows the origin of these words; usually, long
words are foreign or borrowed (loan words); they are: they are Latin
in origin; hence, their formality. They are also words learned at school
and are therefore part of educated language.

Another aspect we try to look at when we examine language variation

at the lexical level is the content of words. We consider if they are
abstract (freedom, love, happiness) or concrete words (car, laptop,
pen). Of course, just as in phonology, there are sequential restrictions,
there are also restrictions as the context in each abstract and concrete
words are used. If one is substituted for another, it is a deviation from
the norms and those words are foregrounded and they, as result,
acquire additional aspects of meaning besides their denotative
meaning.

Whether words are vague or specific is another thing that stylistic

analysis addresses. Consider the examples below:

Mohammed always goes to school by car.

Mohammed always walks to school

Mohammed always drives to school.

The verb ‘go’’ is vague because it does not inform the reader of how
Mohammed goes to school. The verbs ‘walk’ and ‘drive’, however,
are more specific because we know that Mohammed goes to school on
foot (walk) and by car (drive). However, in other contexts, the verb
‘walk’ itself is vague compared to the verbs which describe the
different ways of walking, such as stroll, stride, stagger, trudge,
wade.

The use of specific words is important in literature, especially when

the author describes characters. It helps authors to render their
description vivid and colourful, a fact which facilitates the readers’
task to conjure up or visualize what is being described.

In addition to the above, stylistic analysis addresses the origin of

words. As we have already stated, foreign words are the outcome of
the phenomenon of borrowing. They are used as a status symbol, in
so far as they reflect the actual status of the speaker and audience
alike, their level of education and also the type of power discourse
they want to establish. As an illustration, we may come across words
like per se, sine qua non, a priori, posteriori, ad hoc, de facto,
persona non grata. These are Latin words found in legal or scientific
discourse. Words, such Soupe du jour, menu à la carte, hors
d'œuvres, etc., are words and expressions borrowed from French
given that the French are known for their famous cuisine. We may
also find sentences like: He is a socialist par excellence or we will
analyse the data à la Chomsky.
Putsch

Coup d’état

Intifada

It is important to note that the choice of words is determined by a

variety of criteria or variables, such as the people using the language
(age, gender, education and intention), the audience. Simple language
is used to achieve clarity and simplicity, whereas sophisticated
language and flashing words convey the speaker’s or writer’s desire to
show their level of education, to intend or impress the audience; they
may also convey that the writer’s pedantic.

Linguistic -informedness

In literature, the lexical aspect of style is called diction (i.e., the

totality of lexical choices in a given text). It may also mean that some
words have greater inherent aesthetic or expressive potential than
others. Diction, then, is the correction of lexical choice. We have
seen that underlying this notion of diction is the idea that part of a
speaker’s (socio-pragmatic) competence involves knowing not only
what words mean, but also knowing the contexts they are associated
with since lexical items are not equally appropriate in all contexts. For
example, all the words below mean « to cause someone to die ».

Subcategorization rules

a. Commit homicide
b. Commits a blow

c. Commit a murder

However, they belong to different registers or different types of

discourse. While (a) belongs to legal discourse (legalese) and (b) is
slang, (c) is contextually unspecialized or unmarked (neutral)
because it represents the background, the known and the given,
whereas the others represent the foreground, the deviation from the
background to make something new or to bring to attention.

Archaisms:

The use of archaic words is another example of lexical choice or

deviance. They represent a second order meaning, in the sense that
in addition to their cognitive or denotative meaning, they show the
speaker’s or writer’s nostalgia, and tendency to invoke the glory and
grandeur of ancestors as a compensation for the current failures.
They also express speaker’s attitudes of seriousness, solemnity,
emotional intensity.

(make me thy lyre). Ode to the West Wind

Language of Holy books

Neologisms

So-called ‘Arab spring”

What is sometimes referred to as”

As it were, so to speak, if I may say so

Consensus:

People agree

People are agreed on

Up-to-date

‫تحيين‬updating

To update (verb): to make sth up-to-date (adj)

To give updates (Noun)

In addition to archaisms, we can also mention the notion of

neologisms; it is the coinage of new lexical items that are in vogue,
as it were (so to speak), or that better express the aspirations and
wishes of the new generation. For instance, the adjective "Orwellian»
is coined from George Orwell's novel "1984» and is used to describe
totalitarian control. New words are invented through combining
existing ones (blends or portmanteaus: (compound words: ‫كلمات‬
‫)منحوتة‬. prête nom: dummy company, dummy corporation

Call for tenders ‫طلب عروض‬

e.g.,"Smog" (smoke + fog) : smoggy:

"Brunch" (breakfast + lunch)

Brexit for (British+exit)
Staycation for (stay+ vacation)
Impostahil for (impossible + ‫)مستحيل‬
Maringle: married+ single
Maribataire : marié+ célibataire
Smartphone: (a phone with computer-like capabilities).
Hashtag: (a symbol used to categorize content) (social media)
Selfie" (a self-portrait photograph).
Laser" (Light Amplification by Stimulated Emission of Radiation)
Airborne Warning and Control System

Semantic Extension is another technique to create new words. It

involves using words in a new or unexpected way through stretching
its typical meaning. For instance, the word ‘drag’ normally means “to
pull someone”. Its use in a different context, as in "The meeting
dragged on for hours" represents a metaphorical way to describe a
slow and tedious (dull, laborious, boring) meeting.

According to Leech (1969: 42), neologisms, or the creation of new

words, are the most obvious ways in which a poet may exceed (go
beyond, transcend) the normal resources of language ». They are a
sign of the creativity and flexibility of human language.

These newly created words are also be referred to as «nonce-

formations» since they are coined solely for a particular and unique
situation rather than for enlarging the vocabulary of the language.
These are words created for a single use or a specific context and are
not intended to become part of the general vocabulary. Although they
may be commonly used in everyday life, they have yet to be formally
accepted as constituting mainstream (i.e., conventional) language.
They also reflect the evolving nature of languages, especially English
and give further evidence that language is not a static entity, but rather
a constantly changing and evolving one.
The key difference between neologisms and nonce words lies in their
intended longevity. Neologisms are created with the intention of
becoming part of the language, while nonce words are temporary
inventions for a specific purpose.
People in general, and poets in particular create new words to express
concepts or ideas previously expressed using other words or using
words that may not have existed at all.

Neologisms can be completely new words, new meanings for existing

words or new semes (i.e., linguistic signs, any of the basic
components of the meaning of a morpheme).

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

few to be chewed and digested; that is, some books are to be read
only in parts; others to be read, but not curiously; and some few are
to be read wholly, and with diligence and attention.

Just as the degree of flavour varies from one type of food to

another, the degree of importance varies from one book to another.

AIDA

Hook, clincher
In addition to poets, reporters and journalists are also known for the
use of neologisms for eye-catching effects. Most lexical deviations are
the result of affixation, compounding, or conversion.

Affixation, the most effective way of enriching languages, makes use

of prefixation and suffixation. Affixation is done in accordance with
‫ وفقا ل أو طبقا ل‬the morphological rules of the language in question
(inflection or derivation). The prefix « un » is a case in point
(Un+verb): Do: undo, tie: untie.

• To unfather, to unchild, to unhusband, to unwife

• Unbirthday party

• Fore: foresee: forecast, foreshadow

• foresuffer

• Xerox (n), to xerox (v): to photocopy

• Or the blending of two elements of compound words:

• Brexit , a portmanteau of « British » and"exit“, the withdrawal

of Britain from the EU.

• E.E. Cummings used it with an abstract noun. Should wrest the

rare unwisdom of thy eyse’ E.E. Cummings(1994).

• The word wisdom describes the state of eyes and unwisdom is

creatively coined by the poet as an abstract noun to describe the
property of haziness (the fact of having a blurred vision).

• Compounding: Adj+adj+ish childish

 • A Yellowandbluish cat

• Conversion: endowing words with new morphological functions

without changing the original form:

• Back (n), back (v)

• Do not ‘if’ me

• I am sick of your ‘buts’

• Dot your ‘Is’

• Homonymy is another example of lexical deviation:

• Puns or play on words.

• « a witticism which relies for its effect on playing with different

meanings of a word, or bringing two words with the same form,
but with different meanings »; they are instances of intentional
ambiguity, and they are most of the time auditory, especially in
drama, informal conversations or advertising:

• Our word is our bond

The phrase "Our word is our bond" typically conveys a sense of

trustworthiness and reliability, suggesting that the speaker or the entity
they represent will honour their commitments and promises. It can
also be interpreted metaphorically, in which case the phrase "our
word" symbolizes “integrity, reputation, trust and confidence.
Second, the word "bond" refers to a “financial instrument”, i.e., a
debenture or a bond issued by a corporation or government as a
means of borrowing money. In this context, a bond represents a
contractual agreement where the issuer (such as a corporation or
government) promises to repay the bondholder the principal amount
plus interest at a specified future date. Therefore, if we interpret "Our
word is our bond" with "bond" meaning a debenture or financial
instrument, the ambiguity arises in understanding whether the
statement lays emphasis on the reliability and trustworthiness of
verbal promises or if it suggests that the entity's financial obligations
are secure and trustworthy.

We go to a lot of pains

The phrase "go to a lot of pains" typically means putting in a

significant amount of effort or enduring considerable trouble to
accomplish something. It implies that the task or goal requires extra
care, attention, or difficulty to achieve. This expression emphasizes
the level of effort or hardship involved in completing a particular
action or achieving a certain outcome. For example, if someone says,
"We went to a lot of pains to organize this event," they are
emphasizing the considerable effort, time, and perhaps even sacrifices
made to make the event successful. On the other hand, the ad might
suggest that the painkiller is specifically designed or formulated to
address various types of pain, and it goes above and beyond to
provide relief. So, the phrase could imply that the painkiller is highly
effective and reliable in managing pain, even in challenging situations.

• You can count on us

 This sentence is an ad and it is deliberately formulated so that it can
have two different meanings depending on the context. First, it
denotes ‘reliability’, i.e., the speaker or the product they represent
are reliable, dependable and trustworthy. In this interpretation, the
sentence reassures the listener that they can rely on the speaker or
the organization to fulfil their promises or meet their expectations.
Alternatively, it can denote ‘Numerical Counting” since it is an ad
for a calculator.

They are used as a response to the change in circumstances and

values, especially in business or academic contexts. This is in keeping
with the fact that language is not a static entity, but an ever changing
one. Some other scholars have a different point of view; Romantic
poets, such as Wordsworth, for example, think that beauty lies in
common speech. (The notion of prestige SA, F, MA. e.g. Union
activism (prestige shifts). It follows from this that words might be
synonymous semantically, but different pragmatically depending on
the degree of technicality (salt-sodium, bruise, contusion, opening,
aperture, buy, purchase), the degree to which they convey attitudes
(government, regime, thin, slim, svelte). This is in keeping with the
notion of connotation, for, in addition to words that are neutral, as it
were, certain words can be marked as either positive, negative):

Economical, thrifty, mean, determined, stubborn, obstinate, cheap,

inexpensive

• Mad, mentally ill, insane, crackers, nut

 • To talk about a patient, a psychiatrist may for example say ‘off
his rocker’

• Nut means head: to be off one’s head, to be mad

• Die, pass away, kick the bucket,

4. Euphemisms:
 Replacing harsh or unpleasant words with milder or indirect

ones.
o Example: "Passed away" instead of "died"

o Example: "Let go" instead of "fired"

5. Dysphemisms: The opposite of euphemisms, using harsh or

negative language to create a stronger impact.
o Example: "Kick the bucket" instead of "die"

o Example: "Rip someone to shreds" instead of "criticize"

6. Jargon and Slang: Specialized vocabulary used by particular

groups (e.g., medical jargon, gamer slang)
o Example: "Scrub" (medical term for someone who is low-

ranking)
o Example: "Lit" (slang term for something exciting or cool)

7. Archaic Language:
 Using words or phrases that are no longer in common use.

o Example: "Forsooth" (meaning truly or indeed)

o Example: "Thou art" (a second-person pronoun no longer

used in everyday English)

 VARIATION AT THE SEMANTIC LEVEL: Semantic
deviation

Semantic deviance or deviation in language use refers to instances where the

meaning of a word or phrase is used in a way that goes against its typical or
expected meaning. This can create a variety of effects, from humour and
confusion to deeper layers of meaning. Here are some examples of semantic
deviance:

Free reins

Semantic deviance can be translated as non-sense or absurdity. In

other words, it is something that is part of the irrational; it does not
stand to reason if we judge it against our background knowledge. This
means that there are constraints as to how language can be used. By
virtue of their internalized knowledge (competence), native speakers
of a language know what is permissible and what is non-permissible.
These constraints are called selectional restrictions. In English, for
example, we know that ‘tall tower ‘or ‘long ribbon’ are perfectly
acceptable combinations. However, combinations, such as ‘long
tower’ or ‘tall ribbon’ are deviant combinations. This kind of
deviance is called « anomaly », which is the result of combining
things that are incompatible. Nouns like tree, tower, person are
specified as vertical; nouns like snake, rug, pencil are specified as
horizontal because they have length, not height. The adjective « tall »
combines only with inherently vertical nouns or nouns that can be
construed as « vertical » because of the selectional restrictions that
govern the selection of items in structures.
Another example of anomaly is contradiction, that is, saying « that X
is not X » or (not X is X).

• *My wife is not married. X is not X

• *My bachelor brother is married to a movie star: Not X is X

• This dog is not a dog : X is not X

Contradictions and anomalies are common in literature, and

especially children’s literature. Fables are a good example, where
we find anomalies.

Fables in sooth are not what they appear

Our moralist are mice, and such deer

We yawn at sermons, but we gladly turn

To moral tales, and so amused, we learn

Another kind of anomaly is what we call « tautology ». It is a

statement which is vacuous or void because it is self-evidently true.

• This dog is a dog

• My wife is married to me.

The problem of tautologies is that they provide no new information

and, therefore, violate the pragmatic rules which state that any
utterance should include information that is new and relevant.

• They can never be false. They empty or void of meaning

 Anomaly, contradiction, on the other hand, violate the organization
of sense in a message, since they provide something that is
absurd.

Absurdities: violate the organization of sense in a message, since

they provide something that is absurd.

Inanities: violate the pragmatic rules which state that any utterance
should include information that is new and relevant.

If we take the following statement by Wordsworth:

The child is father of the man.

From a semantic point of view, this statement is absurd, for based on

our knowledge of the world, it does not stand to reason. However, if
we apply the standards of poetic appreciation, the surface oddity or
absurdity gives this statement an abnormal power of significance.
Theoretically, it is not possible for X to be Y’s father while X is a
child (-adult) and Y is a man(+adult). The superficial absurdity of this
statement « forces the reader or hearer to go beyond the dictionary
definition for a more reasonable interpretation ». The reader has to
construe the term « father » in a sense other than that of « progenitor ».
This statement is a violation of Grice’s maxims as it is analytically
false. It is important to remember that « poetic foregrounding
presupposes some motivation on the part of the writer and some
explanation on the part of the reader ». There is always a question
mark which accompanies the foregrounded feature: What is the point?
What is it that we want to highlight?
Deviations are artistically motivated and artistically significant.
Foregrounded irregularities of content involve something odd in their
cognitive (logical) meaning. If we approach them with a literal mind,
we will be forced to conclude that they are just nonsense. We have to
rely on our imagination and interpretation to render meaningful
what is apparently meaningless. « Foregrounding irregularities of
content » are linguistic effects involving something odd in the
cognitive meaning of a word. Irregularity of content may also involve
vacuity of meaning or redundancy. Meaning, here, indicate «
cognitive information ». However, when we talk about what is
communicated, we use the term « significance or value »

In everyday communication, we expect some cognitive information to

be explicitly stated during an interaction. e.g. reveal an internal
state, (I feel lonely), tell something about the objective world (it is
a nice day), or give an evaluation of someone or something (this an
excellent research paper).

Given these expectations that language should contain explicit

information, we are surprised by the bizzareness of statements like «
My wife is married to me », Is your wife married » or « He climbed up
the surface of the sea ». Language has an « information-bearing
function »; it should always communicate something new and
relevant. Further illustrations of semantic deviance are as follows:

1. Literal vs. Figurative Language: This is a common form of semantic

deviance. We use figurative language all the time, like metaphors ("Her eyes
twinkled like stars") or similes ("He was as strong as an ox"). Here, the literal
meaning of the words deviates to create a more vivid comparison.
2. Puns: Puns rely on the existence of multiple meanings for a word or phrase.
For example, "I mustache you a question, « which is a play on words that
involves a pun. The word "mustache" resembles "must ask." Therefore, when
someone says "I mustache you a question, » they are substituting "mustache"
for "must ask," in a joking and humorous way (like saying: I have a question
to ask you."
3. Oxymorons: they are phrases that combine contradictory terms, and
ultimately creating a new meaning through the deviance. Consider the following
examples: "deafening silence" or "jumbo shrimp." The use of "deafening
silence" as an oxymoron creates a striking contrast between two contradictory
terms: "deafening," which implies an extremely loud sound, and "silence,"
which indicates the absence of sound. The meaning of the juxtaposition (or the
placing of these words side by side) serves to emphasize the intensity of the
silence being described, in so far as it suggests that the absence of noise is so
profound that it becomes almost tangible, filling the space with a powerful
sense of quietude or calm. This oxymoron is often used for dramatic effect,
drawing attention to moments of intense stillness or emotional weight in
literature, poetry, or everyday speech. The phrase "Jumbo shrimp" is also a
figure of speech which combines contradictory terms. In this case, the word
"jumbo" refers to something very large (as in Jumbo jet), whereas "shrimp»
refers to a small seafood. There is the idea of something large combine with
something small. (In everyday speech, it could be used to refer to a large shrimp
or prawn)

4. Irony:
Verbal irony occurs when someone says the opposite of what they mean. For
instance, saying "That's great" in a sarcastic tone when something bad happens.
Saying something nice while rolling your eyes in exasperation and anger.
Honest Deceptions:
Honest deceptions seem like lies at first glance, but they are ultimately used for
a positive or protective purpose. Honest deceptions can be used to spare
someone's feelings, to protect them from harm, or to achieve a greater good. A
parent tells their child there are no more cookies left when they're trying to limit
their sugar intake. While technically a deception, the intention is to promote the
child's health.
Hyperbole and Litotes
Hyperbole is an exaggeration used for emphasis. For example, "I'm starving"
when you're just a little hungry. The meaning deviates from the literal to create a
stronger impression.
 I am starving. I can eat a horse.

 I will love you my dear until the sea has gone dry

 It was so hot that I wanted to take off my skin and stay in my bones.

Litotes is a figure of speech where an affirmative is expressed by

negating its opposite. It is a form of understatement that emphasizes a
point by denying its opposite, as is clear from the examples below:

1. "She's not bad-looking." (implying she's attractive)

2. "It's not rocket science." (implying it's simple or easy)

3. "He's not the sharpest tool in the shed." (implying he's

unintelligent)

4. "The test wasn't a walk in the park." (implying it was difficult)

5. "I'm not as young as I used to be." (implying I'm old)

In each of these examples, the speaker is using negation to understate

the true meaning; it, therefore, conveys the intended message
indirectly.