Morphosyntactic Analysis and Metaphorization of Functional Shift in James Joyce’s Ulysses
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
Abstract
James Joyce is renowned for using functional shifts creatively to add new words and meanings to his novels. Converting words through altering their classes is considered as Joyce’s distinct method of playing with words, which reflects his capability of linguistic creativity. The problem that should be tackled in this study the reader is neither able to determine the grammatical class of the word after converting it nor he is able to perceive its meaning after converting it, which is also wrapped up with metaphor. Accordingly, this study aims to figure out words which underwent functional shifts in the selected novel. It is postulated that converting the class of the word brings about semantic change in that word as it might undergo metaphoric extension which should be examined precisely. Methodologically, (8) converted words were selected randomly from this novel for the purpose of qualitative analysis. Brinton and Brinton’s Model (2010) has been applied as a tool to analyze functional shifts on morphological and syntactic levels. The merit of this approach is that it identifies the morphosyntactic change that occurs to the word when converting it. Lakoff and Johnson’s Approach (1980) Conceptual Metaphor Theory was adopted to uncover the metaphoric meaning that accompanies any functional shift. The results indicate that the syntactic pattern ‘noun changes into verb’ was the main pattern of functional shift recruited by Joyce in Ulysses. The meanings of converted words are also changed whose meanings cannot be grasped from their individual forms unless they are interpreted within their contexts. Joyce converted words of different fields including body parts, abstract, concrete and physical objects.
Metrics
Article Details
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
References
Aronoff, Mark & Fudeman, Kirsten (2011). What is morphology? Massachusetts: Wiley-Blackwell.
Bauer, Laurie.(2004). A Glossary of morphology. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.
Booij, G. (2007). The Grammar of words: An Introduction to linguistic morphology. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Brinton, L. and Brinton, D. (2010). The Linguistic structure of modern English: A linguistic introduction. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Co.
Burgress, Anthony. (1973). Joys Prick: An Introduction to the language of James Joyce. New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich Publishers.
Carstairs-McCarthy, Andrew. (2002). An Introduction to English morphology: Words and their structures. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.
Geeraets, D. (2010). Theories of lexical semantics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Gramley, S., and Pätzold, k. (2004). A Survey of modern English. London: Routledge.
Hamawand, Z. (2011). Morphology in English: Word formation in cognitive grammar. New York: Continuum International Publishing Group.
Harley, Heidi. (2006). English Words: A Linguistic introduction. Blackwell Publishing Ltd.
Hurford, J., Brendan, M., and Michael, B. (2007). Semantics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Joyce, J. (1921). Ulysses. Alice & Books. Retrieved August 4, 2024, from https://www.aliceandbooks.com/search?q=Ulysses&from=0
Knowles, M. and Moon, R. (2006). Introducing metaphor. London: Routledge.
Kövecses, Z. (2020). Extended conceptual metaphor theory. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Lakoff, G. and Johnson, M. (1980). Metaphor we live by. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
Lee, M., Noh, Y., Kim, H. S., & Kim, S. Y. (2024). Processing of Shakespearean functional shift as a semantic anomaly in L2 English: Evidence from an ERP study. Cortex, 172, 271–283. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cortex.2023.11.010
Leech, G. (1981). Semantics. Harmondsworth: Penguin Books.
Semino, E. (2008). Metaphor in discourse. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Wilkinson, P. (2002). Thesaurus of traditional English metaphors. London: Routledge.
Yanow, D. (2008). Cognition meets action: Metaphors as models of and models for. In Carver, T., and Pikalo, J. (eds.), Political language and metaphor: Interpreting and changing the world. London: Routledge, pp. 225–237.