| . |
. |
. |
|
On the
Causal Mechanism of Hyperbole
|
|
|
|
Hyperbole
and lies are very similar in outward appearance, both being the result of exaggeration.
Because they are so similar yet so different language phenomena, honest people may
hesitate to employ an exaggeration to achieve the powerful rhetorical effect of hyperbole
for fear of being considered to be telling a lie. Their concern is justified.
The Harper Handbook of College Composition , (1981), labels exaggerated expressions
as misleading and ludicrous rather than appropriate or picturesque. It categorically
advises its readers to "avoid exaggeration." But though this advice may seem
reasonable, our students raise the following questions: Why did Shakespeare and Dickens
use exaggeration freely and receive critical acclaim? What factor makes an exaggeration a
hyperbole rather than a lie? This paper will try to answer the above questions.
|
|
|
|
To start our discussion,
two examples of successful hyperbole are provided to see how they achieve a desired
rhetorical effect:
|
|
|
Example I: I
haven't seen you for ages!
|
|
|
Although the word
"ages" (an obviously improper length of time) is used here by the speaker to
indicate the interval between two meetings, the listener would neither interpret the
statement as illogical nor accuse the speaker of telling a lie. On the contrary, the
listener would infer that the speaker regrets not seeing him/her more often and that there
is a degree of affection between them.
|
|
|
Why do we ignore what is
illogical? We think it is mainly because:
|
|
|
- Both the speaker and the listener know how long the interval
really is; and
- The statement is too far away from the truth for the listener to
believe it represents the literal meaning of what the speaker wished to convey.
|
|
|
On hearing the statement,
the listener may ponder a bit, albeit briefly, to work out the real meaning, and the
direct result would be the listener coming to the understanding that what the speaker is
conveying is his subjective feeling about an objective fact-"What a long time that
comparatively short interval seems to be!" Based on this understanding, the listener
will find in himself a similar feeling which echoes the speaker's. This echo signals that
the listener understood the speaker's emotional intent which in itself brings a degree of
positive bonding to their relationship. We think that is the best effect a successful
hyperbole can have.
|
|
|
Example II:
Lodovico, I could kill you forty times a day!
|
|
|
Because everybody knows
that people can die only once, the listener will realize immediately that what the speaker
wants to convey here is personal emotion-a hatred so strong that it reaches a degree where
the speaker could kill Lodovico forty times a day.
|
|
|
We see five variables
involved in successful transmission of a hyperbole: S (the speaker); E (the emotion of the
speaker); F (the fact); F1 (the exaggerated fact); L (the listener).
|
|
|
If we can successfully
find out their relationship and display them in a visible pattern, we may be able to
describe the causal mechanism of hyperbole and advance our understanding of its nature.
|
|
|
According to the order in
which the five variables exert their influence in transmitting a hyperbole, we designed
the following pattern to show their interrelationships:
|
|
|
The above pattern displays the following process: First, the speaker (S) perceives a
certain fact (F) which arouses a certain feeling or emotion (E). For the purpose of
expressing that personal emotion, the speaker exaggerates the fact (F1) and through the
medium of language, conveys the exaggerated fact to the listener (L). Because F1 is
obviously illogical, the listener starts to search his mind for the real fact (F). He/she
then starts to judge the real purpose of the speaker. Finally, as the result of the
workings of his/her mind, the listener comes to the understanding that what the speaker
wishes to convey is colored by his/her strongly subjective, personal emotion (E).
|
|
|
In Pattern I, there is a
circuit symbolizing the process wherein an illogical statement is understood as a
reasonable expression of emotion. We may say that this circuit reveals the causal
mechanism of hyperbole. Its completion is totally dependent on whether the fact (F) is
known or is able to be judged by the listener. Now if we change Pattern I into a pure
linear processing formula, we may get:
|
|
|
In the above formula, the circuit of pattern I is expanded with L->F->L->E to
represent the process by which the listener recalls the fact and works out in his/her mind
the real meaning the speaker wishes to convey, finding an echo of the speaker's emotion in
himself/herself. Therefore, theoretically the causal mechanism of hyperbole can be
symbolically indicated as the psychological process of L->F->L->E. The spark
behind this psychological processing is the substantial difference between the real fact
and the exaggerated fact. If our statement does not initiate that process, our listeners
will take F1 as a real fact. In this case, the consequence may be that we are considered
to be telling a lie, although that is not at all our intention.. This is the phenomenon
that The Harper Handbook labels as "misleading," but it occurs only when
there is not a big enough difference between F and F1 in our statement. We will analyze
this further at a later point.
|
|
|
The above discussion has
brought us to an understanding of the nature of a lie:
|
|
|
As indicated in Pattern II, the factual substance (F) of a successful lie is kept from the
listener by the speaker, the result being, that the listener accepts F1 as F. Nothing
emotional is involved in a successful lie. So its processing formula is:
|
|
|
Often people see through lies because they find out the hidden facts. In such cases,
because successful mental work is involved, a similar psychological circuit is formed with
modifications to Pattern II:
|
|
|
As indicated in Pattern III, once the listener has doubts about what he/she has been told,
and ultimately discovers the fact, negative feelings will be felt toward the speaker.
These feelings of disgust and contempt distinguish lies from hyperboles which are founded
upon facts known by both speaker and listener. We use "E1" to indicate this
negative emotion. Generally speaking, perception of lies is more or less accidental. That
is why dotted lines were used to indicate this process. The linear formula is:
|
|
|
Comparisons and differentiations
|
|
|
Based on the previous
discussion, comparisons can be made between hyperbole and lies in the following three
areas:
|
|
|
Structural
differences. As demonstrated in Patterns I and II, successful hyperbole and lies
have different inner structures. This difference is mainly reflected in the existence or
absence of the structure L->F->L->E. Although sometimes a similar structure, 1,
L->F->L->E1, may be present in a lie as Pattern III states, that is the symbol of
an even greater difference-the death of a lie. So L->F->L->E is the mechanism
which gives life to hyperbole, but death to a lie.
|
|
|
Different
preconditions and purpose. In hyperbole, exaggeration is used under the
precondition that the fact is known or can be deduced by the listener. The F1 here is
provided for the purpose of suggesting the degree of a very strong emotion which is so
particular that ordinary expressions are insufficient to convey the strength of emotion
felt by the speaker. By contrast, in telling a lie, exaggeration is used under the
precondition that the real fact is unknown and beyond inference. F1 in this case is simply
provided for direct acceptance by the listener as a fact.
|
|
|
Different degrees of
exaggerations: Since the difference between F and F1 is used to start the
psychological process of in hyperbole, it is essential to make that difference
substantial. So the fact is always exaggerated to the degree of almost infinite extremes.
The saying of "ages" in Example I and "forty times a day" in Example
II are good examples of extreme exaggerations. An additional example can be given which
extends to infinity:
|
|
|
Example III: The
day will finally come when every inch of the earth is populated with human beings.
|
|
|
"Every inch of the
earth" is obviously an infinite exaggeration. It successfully conveys the intensity
of concern about the explosive growth of the human population. But in telling a lie for
the purpose of making people believe (or at least temporarily accept) a false statement,
exaggeration can be used only to a limited extent. Usually F1 is quite close to F, or
within the allowance of common sense. Even a very slight excess can cause total failure of
the speaker's communicative purpose.
|
|
|
When we listen to a
comedian who uses hyperbole, we are often sealed into a momentary silence by his/her crazy
exaggerations. But all of a sudden, we burst into loud and happy laughter after working
out his/her real meaning and intention. But when hearing a lie, we do not sense an
exaggeration, and that is why we get so angry at having been fooled when we later find out
the truth.
|
|
|
The above discussion has
provided enough evidence to differentiate between hyperbole and lies. Now we can use that
powerful rhetorical device more confidently. Whenever we have a strong personal feeling or
emotion toward an objective fact, and we want others to share our feeling, we should
exaggerate that fact to such a degree that it is beyond the allowance of common sense-so
much so that others are shocked at our bold and even crazy ideas. We will have
successfully evoked in them the psychological process of L->F->L->E which
eventually enables them to share our emotion.
|
|
|
Twins
are a very common phenomenon. In the area of human language, hyperbole
and lies are another pair having the same mother-exaggeration.
They look similar, but they can still be differentiated. Hyperbole
depends on the existence of the L->F->L->E structure
while a lie rests its existence on the absence of this structure.
|
|
|
It is not very difficult
to employ hyperbole while avoiding a lie. The most successful deceiver in the world is not
benefited by using hyperbole, and the greatest writers in our history are held in esteem
not because they know how to deceive. Hyperbole provides an effective language device we
can use in conveying our special and personal ideas. We should teach our students how to
use it.
|
|
|
Liu Baiyi is head of the English Department and lecturer of
Changsha Professional and Normal College of Technology, People's Republic of China Xiao Aili is head and lecturer of the English Department of
Changsha Educational College, People's Republic of China. |
|
|
Return |
|
|
- Ebitt, W. R. and D. R. Ebitt. 1978. Writer's guide and index to
English. London: Foresman and company.
- Pace, R. W., D. Brent, M. Peterson, and D. Burnett. 1979.
Techniques for effective communication. New York: Addison-Wesley Publishing Company, Inc.
- Shaw, H. 1981. The Harper Handbook of College Composition. New
York: Harper and Row Publishing.
- Timmous, C. and F. Gibney. 1980. Britannica Book of English Usage.
London: Encyclopedia Britannica Inc.
- Zeiger, A. 1978. Encyclopedia of English. New York: Arco
Publishing Company, Inc.
|
|
|
. |
. |
