Authors

  • Saidova Iroda Anvar Kizi
    Tashkent State Named After Alisher Navoi University Of Uzbek Language And Literature Foundation Doctoral Student, Uzbekistan

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.37547/ajps/Volume03Issue09-05

Keywords:

wordplay pun phonological structure

Abstract

In this article we provide information about the phenomenon “wordplay”. Moreover, the phonological and graphological structure and analysis of it is presented. Wordplay can be employed among friends as well as in media. The aim of wordplay here is to capture the reader’s or viewer’s attention via the unusual formulations used in the titles of the newspaper articles or in the news on television.


background image

Volume 03 Issue 09-2023

23


American Journal Of Philological Sciences
(ISSN

2771-2273)

VOLUME

03

ISSUE

09

P

AGES

:

23-26

SJIF

I

MPACT

FACTOR

(2022:

5.

445

)

(2023:

6.

555

)

OCLC

1121105677















































Publisher:

Oscar Publishing Services

Servi

ABSTRACT

In this article we provide information about the phenomenon “wordplay”. Moreover, the phonological and

graphological structure and analysis of it is presented. Wordplay can be employed among friends as well as in media.

The aim of wordplay here is to capture the reader’s or viewer’s attention via the unusual formulations used in the titles

of the newspaper articles or in the news on television.

KEYWORDS

wordplay, pun, phonological structure, humour, paronymy, homonymy.

INTRODUCTION

Wordplay is a frequent and common phenomenon and

an inseparable part of communication. Delabastita

(1997, 1-2) describes wordpl

ay as “a deliberate

communicative strategy, or the result thereof, used

with a specific semantic or pragmatic effect in mind”.

Wordplay can be employed among friends as well as in

media. The aim of wordplay here is to capture the

reader’s or viewer’s atte

ntion via the unusual

formulations used in the titles of the newspaper

articles or in the news on television.

Literature review. As mentioned above, wordplay is

often related to humour. The Oxford Advanced

Learner’s Dictionary provides the definition of

wordplay in which the aspect of humour is already

included: Wordplay - making jokes by using words in a

clever or amusing way, especially by using a word that

Research Article

WORDPLAY AND ITS PHONOLOGICAL AND GRAPHOLOGICAL
STRUCTURE

Submission Date:

September 15, 2023,

Accepted Date:

September 20, 2023,

Published Date:

September 25, 2023

Crossref doi:

https://doi.org/10.37547/ajps/Volume03Issue09-05


Saidova Iroda Anvar Kizi

Tashkent State Named After Alisher Navoi University Of Uzbek Language And Literature Foundation Doctoral
Student, Uzbekistan

Journal

Website:

https://theusajournals.
com/index.php/ajps

Copyright:

Original

content from this work
may be used under the
terms of the creative
commons

attributes

4.0 licence.


background image

Volume 03 Issue 09-2023

24


American Journal Of Philological Sciences
(ISSN

2771-2273)

VOLUME

03

ISSUE

09

P

AGES

:

23-26

SJIF

I

MPACT

FACTOR

(2022:

5.

445

)

(2023:

6.

555

)

OCLC

1121105677















































Publisher:

Oscar Publishing Services

Servi

has two meanings, or different words that sound the

same Nevertheless, the success of a joke is affected by

various factors.

One of them is the environment in which it is uttered.

The joke-teller must consider the cultural, political,

social and other backgrounds of the environment in

which he/she occurs. Chiaro (1992, 15) explains: […]

not everydiv is amused by the same things, and what

is more, over and above shared knowledge of

whatever type, finding something funny relies on a

number of subjective variables. What may appear

amusing under the influence of a few drinks may not

appear quite so funny in the cold light of the morning

after. A homosexual is hardly going to enjoy being

insulted by someone’s idea of a witty remark at his or

her expense, any more than the Irish are amused by the

thousands of jokes which depict them as imbeciles.

Some people are offended by sexual innuendo, while

others by political references contained in a joke.

There are different ways to produce wordplay. Almost

every linguistic phenomenon possible is used

not

only lexical means such as idioms and polysemy, but

also grammar or phonetics. Delabastita (1996, 130)

suggests the following categorization, according to

the linguistic means used to achieve wordplay:

• Phonological and graphological structure

• Lexical structure (polysemy)

• Lexical structure (idiom)

• Morphol

ogical structure

• Syntactic structure

Delabastita (1996, 131) also claims that “often two or

more of the above features of language are harnessed

simultaneously in order to obtain one single pun.”

Sometimes it can be very hard to decide to which

category the given wordplay should be classified.

Phonological and graphological structure. The number

of phonemes and graphemes in a language is limited.

Moreover, each language has its rules according to

which they can be employed and so they can create

only certain combinations. Delabastita (1996, 130) uses

the term ‘sound

-

play’ which “ borders on alliteration,

assonance and consonance”. He goes on to say that “

in sound-play sound provides the basis for the verbal

association, whereas anagrammatic wordplay is based

on spelling.” As an example of sound

-play, Delabastita

provides: ( 1 ) Love at first bite. The sentence in ( 1 ) is

based on the expression love at first sight in whoch the

noun sight was replaced by its paronym, i.e. a word

whose pronunciation is very similar.

Paronymy. According to Attardo (1994, 110-

111) “two

words

are

paronyms

when

their

phonemic

representations are similar but not identical.”

Nevertheless, this definition is not complete. Let me

provide a more complex definition provided by Marcu


background image

Volume 03 Issue 09-2023

25


American Journal Of Philological Sciences
(ISSN

2771-2273)

VOLUME

03

ISSUE

09

P

AGES

:

23-26

SJIF

I

MPACT

FACTOR

(2022:

5.

445

)

(2023:

6.

555

)

OCLC

1121105677















































Publisher:

Oscar Publishing Services

Servi

(2010, 202) who claims that “in linguistics, paronym

may refer to: a word related to another word and

derived from the same root - e.g. cognate words; this

types of paronyms often lead to confusion” or “words

almost homonyms but having slight differences in

spelling or pronunciation

different prefixes or

suffixes and added word syllables can change stress

and elements of pronunciation - and having different

meanings.” By way of illustration, Marcu (2010, 203)

suggests the examples of law and low or breath and

breathe.

Homonymy. Apart from ‘true homonymy’, i.e. words

whose phonological and graphological structure

match, there are two more types of homonymy to be

distinguished: homophony and homography.

Homophony is a type of homonymy in which two

words are identical in pronunciation, but different in

spelling. Meyer et al. (2005, 149) provides the example

of [θru:] signifying either through or threw.

Homography. While homophones are words with an

identical pronunciation and a different spelling,

homographs are the opposite. Peprník (2001, 33) offers

the word lead as an illustrative example. It can be

understood either as a verb meaning “to go with or in

front of a person or an animal to show the way or to

make them go in the right direction” (OALD) or “a

chemical element. Lead is a heavy soft grey metal, used

especially in the past for water pipes or to cover roofs”

(OALD). The pronunciation in the first meaning is [li:d]

whereas in the second meaning it is pronounced as

[led].

Homonymy vs. polysemy While senses of a

homonymous word are not related, in case of

polysemy, arguably, they are. Peprník (2001, 26) inserts

the distinction between polysemy and homonymy into

his definition of polysemy: Polysemy, i.e. having two or

more meanings, that is referring to two or more items

of extralinguistic reality, but at the same time sharing

at least one element of meaning

without this link, the

shared meaning, it would be a case of homonymy The

difference is illustrated in the following example

provided by Atkins et al. (2008, 280):

a) She gave him a punch in the stomach. (a hard blow

with the fist)

b) It lacks the emotional punch of French cinema. (a

forceful, memorable quality)

c) Glasses of punch were passed around. (an alcoholic

drink mixed from several ingredients)

Atkins et al. (2008, 280) point out that meanings of the

noun punch in ( 2a ) and ( 2b ) are more related than

the meaning expressed in ( 2c ). In ( 2b ) it can be

considered to be “a metaphorical extension of the

physical punch” expressed in (2a),

while ( 2c ) is

semantically different

it occupies a “different

semantic area”, despite the fact that it shares the


background image

Volume 03 Issue 09-2023

26


American Journal Of Philological Sciences
(ISSN

2771-2273)

VOLUME

03

ISSUE

09

P

AGES

:

23-26

SJIF

I

MPACT

FACTOR

(2022:

5.

445

)

(2023:

6.

555

)

OCLC

1121105677















































Publisher:

Oscar Publishing Services

Servi

orthographic quality. The meaning of punch in ( 2c ) has

the origin in the Sanskrit word panch meaning five

the punch drink was originally mixed from five

ingredients. To conclude, punch in ( 2a ) and ( 2b ) are

polysemous words (or ‘polysemes’) whereas punch in

( 2c ) is their homonym

CONCLUSION

According to the analysis, wordplays is mostly created

by using morphological means, especially conversion

and blending. Puns based on syntactic structure were

not recognized. As far as the translation is considered,

the most problematic cases of wordplay were based

on polysemy. In the translation, one of the meanings of

a polysemous word is often omitted. A different

language typology can be one of the reasons of

problems with the translation. On the other hand,

idiomatic expressions were, surprisingly, easier to

translate because of the existence of a equivalent. The

translation is not always identical, however the formal

and functional aspects are mostly maintained.

REFERENCES

1.

Chiaro, Delia. 1992. The Language of Jokes:

Analysing Verbal Play. New York: Routledge.

2.

Cruse, Alan. 2011. Meaning in Language: An

Introduction to Semantics and Pragmatics.

New York: Oxford University Press.

3.

Delabastita, Dirk. 1997. Traductio: Essays on

Punning and Translation. Manchester: St.

Jerome Publishing

4.

Makkai, Adam. 1972. Idiom Structure in English.

The Hague: Mouton & Co. N.V. Newmark, P

5.

Murphy, Lynne M. 2010. Lexical Meaning. New

York: Cambridge University Press.

References

Chiaro, Delia. 1992. The Language of Jokes: Analysing Verbal Play. New York: Routledge.

Cruse, Alan. 2011. Meaning in Language: An Introduction to Semantics and Pragmatics. New York: Oxford University Press.

Delabastita, Dirk. 1997. Traductio: Essays on Punning and Translation. Manchester: St. Jerome Publishing

Makkai, Adam. 1972. Idiom Structure in English. The Hague: Mouton & Co. N.V. Newmark, P

Murphy, Lynne M. 2010. Lexical Meaning. New York: Cambridge University Press.