Perkurtos frazeologijos žaismas žiniasklaidoje

R. KoženiausKienė. The Game of Reinvented Phraseology in the Media 149 REGINA KOŽENIAUSKIENĖ University of Vilnius PeRKuRTos FRaZeoLoGiJos Playing the news KEY WORDS: reconstructed phraseology, syntactic destructive figures, accumulation, hyperbaton, parcellation, parenthesis. INTRODUCTION All over the world, a living language, even as old as Lithuanian, is constantly renewed and adapted to the current situation. Phraseology reconstruction is one of the most striking examples of language renewal, when seemingly for centuries consolidated, solid, indivisible, constant lexical and grammatical structure statements, universally spread quotations are stylistically and semantically changed. most importantly, this renewal has no end: every time even the same statement is updated by the author, creatively changed in a different way, adapted to new conditions, new context1. This testifies to the language’s “health: it is dynamic, open, trying to adapt to living reality”2. This article follows a broad conception of phraseology3, the most important distinctive feature of which is the stagnation of the narrative, and according to which we would assign to phraseology not so much figurative phraseologies (in his article 1 For example, it is possible to find several completely different reworkings of the title of the well-known novel of Jonas Avižiūnas The Time of the Emptying of the Farms: from the lack of finances, the assessment of the situation of the “social security” system, the metamorphoses of television to the description of the behavior of politicians. Here are a few of them: Time of Money’s Decline, Time of the Final Emptiness of Television, Time of the Creation of Fences, Now is the Time of Flying Between Channels, Time of the Emptiness of the Social Security Fund, etc. (all reworkings are selected from texts by Skirmantas Valiulis, only the last one is by Eugenija Grižibauskienė). 2 http://www.delfi.lt/news/daily/lithuania/v-alisauskas-kalbininkas-turi-buti-sarnas-o-ne-dictatorius.d?id=61285085#ixzz2s6oiKFCG. 3 Juozas Pikčilingis in the section “Phraseology” of the Lithuanian language stylistics, in addition to phraseologisms, also included popular literary quotations, “winged” phrases, and biblical sayings (see Pikčilingis 1975: 361–370). Kazimieras Župerka, discussing the ways of actualizing the language of advertising, mentions not only phraseologisms, but also the stylization, paraphrase (reworking) of quotes from well-known texts, proverbs, sayings, sentences, phrases from poems, motifs from songs, well-known (advertising) slogans, which belong to the phenomenon of intertextuality (župerka 2008: 89–90). The author of this article shares this view (see Koženiauskienė 2013: 60–86). 150 KaLBos KuLTūRa | 86 not much), as in general widely used stable statements of various types, “as well as such small folklore units as proverbs, proverbs, riddles, puzzles, fairy tales, games, calculations, imitation elements, in addition, curses, various rituals, prayer words, phrases of etiquette and other politeness, aphorisms, sentences, quotes known to all or allusions to these quotations, slogans, warnings, verbal advertising elements and otherwise all kinds of sayings not included in the previous sections, provided that they are sufficiently consolidated, widely spread, reproduced from memory, and their missing links are easily guessed” (Marcinkevičienė 2001: 83). The relationship between traditional4 and reconstructed5 phraseology recalls ancient palimpsests6. Due to the lack of writing material, after the old text was shaved off on expensive papyri or parchments, new texts were written, sometimes the second was replaced by the third, and so on. The primary and secondary texts would come out and sometimes it would be possible to read what had been written in them before. Sometimes these texts randomly complemented each other, sometimes they dissonated, causing a smile, intrigue, wonder. Similarly, the re-created phraseology does not erase from the addressee’s memory the usual one, although it sometimes contradicts it, even more so: it and its context tell everything that the author did not say, but in a playful subtext wanted to say about other actors at a completely different time, under changed conditions and circumstances of life. Lithuanian and foreign scholars have written about the reconstruction of phraseology. In Lithuania, a doctoral dissertation (Butkutė 2010) was dedicated to her, which presents various ways of modifying phraseology: from expanding its composition, replacing components, omitting them to developing it into a broader context. However, there are still many unexplored and relevant aspects of this topic. In this article, we have tried to look at the re-created phraseology with a new eye for the first time: it is described and analyzed in the context of the syntactic figures that accompany it. Phraseology itself is usually figurative and meaningful, but in the stylistic aspect it is given even more playfulness and new content by the syntactic figures arranged around it. The object of the article – the most recent journalistic texts of 20137 (main source: online newspapers Lrytas.lt, Respublika.lt, Delfi.lt, 4 Dar: uzualiosios, įprastos. 5 Also: occasional, updated, paraphrased. 6 Gr. palimpsēstos – reshaved. 7 Critical, polemical, political commentaries and editorial articles of a publicistic style. R. KoženiausKienė. 151 15min.lt, TV antenna) is the context of the re-created phraseology and syntactic figures that accompany it. The aim is to show the playfully recreated phraseology and the most prominent destructive figures, the rhetorical function performed, the descriptive, stylistic-structural and semantic analysis. vietą pastraipos struktūroje ir atskleisti jų vartojimo priežastis. Tyrimo metoPeRKuRTos FRaZeoLoGiJos THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN DESTRUCTIVE FIGURES All syntactic figures – both constructive and destructive8 (Клюев 2001: 238–261) – transform the structure of normative syntax (of statements or sentences) and, by changing it, create new models, only in this case justifying the name of figures, i.e., performing a rhetorical function. The difference is that constructive figures – “more balanced” (Клюев 2001: 238), based on smooth, albeit excessive, repetition, enumeration – do not conflict with traditional phraseology, but draw equal parallels: Television is good manners, only its criticism is evil9. It can be seen that the syntactic structure has been preserved: The orphan has good manners, and her stepmother is angry (v. nėris). Article 8 is based only on the classification of macrofigures, whose essence is not the transformation of the word (they are called microfigures), but the transformation of the sentence structure, into constructive and destructive, presented by the rhetoric researcher E. V. Kliujev. Of the constructive figures this author mentions: parallelism, isocolon, epanalepsis (variant of repetition – R. K.), anaphora, epiphora, anadiplose, simploca, diafora, chiasm, epanodos (variant of chiasm – R. K.), asindeton, polisindeton, apokoinu (variant of chiasm – R. K.), kiklos (framing – R. K.), homoteleuton. from destructive syntactic figures: inversion, anastrophe (variation of inversion – R. K.), ellipse, parcellation, hyperbaton, obscurity (insertion, insertion – R. K.), accumulation, amplification, explection (more complex variation of accumulation and amplification – R. K.), concatenation (chain – R. K.) (Клюев 2001: 238–261). Lithuanian stylists have not presented such a division of figures, although all figures are described in stylistics and rhetorics, only because of their numerous variations sometimes under a different name, therefore in parentheses I have explained which figure is essentially meant. The author of these lines (Koženiauskienė 2001: 254–328) divides the figures listed according to the classification accepted in rhetoric: figurae per adiectionem (expansion), per detractionem (shortening) and per ordinem (composition). Most of the latter, due to the unusual change of the syntactic order (Latin ordo, inis – order), as well as the regrouping of syntactic units of several abbreviation figures, are called destructive figures by E. V. Kliuev. 9 s. Valiulis, TV antena, 1998 01 31–02 06. 152 Language Culture | 86 Due to the harmonic sounding characteristic of the constructive figure iscolon10, a rhythm, a certain periodicity appears in parallel sentences. there is no contradiction between the units of the changed lexicon. neglected, poorly financed television not only does not conflict, but also agrees with the orphan, criticism – with the stepmother. Destructive figures, on the contrary, not only lack order, but also obviously highlight syntactic disorder. Unlike constructive figures, they do not connect individual words, statements or entire sentences, but separate, isolate, split, unexpectedly (even inadmissibly from the point of view of natural syntax) separate them from each other. Destructive figures, like everyday colloquial style, are characterized by freedom, even not quite logical association of words or sentences, breakthrough of emotions, fragmentation, spontaneity. Syntactic discordance is deliberately created in the text, you can hear shaking, intonational pauses, short remarks, additions, complete stops, unfinished thought. Regarding the relationship between the re-created phraseology and the figures, it is necessary to emphasize that both constructive and destructive syntactic figures are suitable for change: The air whistles out of the mass psychosis balloon “The Path of Courage”, which N. V. has been blowing up in a devil’s clever way for several years. Sunset in Garliavos Valsčius. From the ambition to correctly govern Lithuania on the mountain of kedophilia, only a poorly smelling union with the judged prince of Kėdainiai remained11. The paragraph is made up of even three phraseological reworkings. First of all, from the traditional phraseology of blowing bubbles in the eyes, that is, to blow up a worthless thing with a lie, the author creates a confusing structure From the balloon of mass psychosis, which N. V. blew up with devil’s skill for several years. This is followed by another separated and updated rework, Sunset in Garliava village (a modification of Petr Cvirka’s work Sunset in Nyka village). The third reconstruction on the hill of kedophilia was bare, only the unflavored union with the prince of Kėdainiai remained – from the well-known lines of Anton Baranauskas’s poem “Anykščių šilelis”. The author leaves the homoteleuton12 as the original constructive figure, but uses also the distinctive dest10 Gr. isokolon - repetition of the same or very similar number of syllables, bars in a uniform parallel syntactic construction. 11 www.15min.lt/.../rimvydas-valatka-kedofilijos-saulelydis-500-325175. 12 Gr. homoiotéleuton – similarity of endings, consonants of grammatical forms bare / remained in syntactic structures of one type, in this example goes hand in hand with parallelism – the basis of constructive figures. R. KoženiausKienė. The game of re-created phraseology in the media 153 uses a rutic figure – hyperbaton13, throwing down grammatically related parts of the sentence over a huge distance (instead of three words, as many as eight words are inserted). the author creates a new text by ironizing – in a funny and humorous way. The constructive figure emphasizes the connection between the collar-wearing pine trees and the unparfumed union, but the effect of consciousness arises due to the comic discrepancy, due to a kind of dissonance between the context of the romantically described pine trees of nature and the new realities of kedophilia and the trial of the prince of Kėdainiai. poetic, albeit sad, words and things that are very far from poetry are in conflict, giving a new tone of mockery to the reworking (the contaminative new word kedophilia and the Russian foreign word with the Lithuanian ending kniazius help in this. The three playful reworkings and the accompanying destructive figures twist and confound the text in such a way that they further strengthen the ironizing function, better show the mass psychosis and the story that the heroine of Garliava has cleverly crafted. In this paragraph there is a clear parcellation14, a separate sentence distinguishing the semantically essential structure Sunset in Garliava village. and the parcellation draws after itself the hyperbaton that emphasizes dissonance. 2012-04-01 10:00:00 - 10:00:00 - 10:00:00 - 10:00:00 - 10:00:00 - 10:00:00 - 10:00:00 - 10:00:00 - 10:00:00 - 10:00:00 - 10:00:00 - 10:00:00 - 10:00:00 - 10:00:00 - 10:00:00 - 10:00:00 - 10:00:00 - 10:00:00 - 10:00:00 - 10:00:00 - 10:00:00 - 10:00:00 - 10:00:00 - 10:00:00 - 10:00:00 - 10:00:00 - 10:00:00 - 10:00:00 - 10:00:00 - 10:00:00 - 10:00:00 - 10:00:00 - 10:00:00 - 10:00:00 - 10:00:00 - 10:00:00 - 10:00:00 - 10:00:00 - 10:00:00 - 10:00:00 - 10:00:00 - 10:00:00 - 10:00:00 - 10:00:00 - 10:00:00 - 10:00:00 - 10:00:00 - 10:00:00 - 10:00:00 - 10:00:00 After the re-created phraseology has taken hold in the publicistic style texts, its tendency to go along with parcellation is noticeable: from the heading to the last paragraph. “In the publicistic style, the plotting (parceliation) is particularly common” (Bitinienė 2007: 57). The stylist conveys the ideas of the semiotician R. Bartes about a parceled, fragmented text, when the author does not show any “respect” for the natural fragmentation of the text, continuously pulling it in order to provide new information: “After all, the additional information of the fragmentation chains, having entered a new meaning space, changes the meaning of the whole statement” (Bitinienė 2007: 58). As the examples show, par13 Gr. hyperbaton – far thrown, rebuilt. A much more complicated variant of inversion, when the natural flow of speech is broken down and dismantled due to abundant insertions, long inconsistent enumerations, due to the confusion of the parts of the sentence, a certain confusion arises in the head of the addressee. It is called "one of the most commonly used and therefore most important figures" (Ziomek 1990: 221–222). 14 Lot. parcere – to consume sparingly (in portions). Partitioning is the intonational separation of a part from the whole, when the part acquires the value of an independent sentence. Each single phrase, called a parceliate, is meaningful. This figure is a means of distinguishing the most important semantic accents. 154 Languages Culture | 86 zeology information. celiacija taupia forma padeda išskirti papildomą potekstinę perkurtos fraapie parceliacijos paplitimą, apie šios stiliaus figūros aktyvaus vartojimo The fact, the tendency to change modern syntax, syntactic constructions not only in artistic but also in journalistic style (in advertising and other so-called mass media) is also written by foreign stylistics researchers. “Parcelation is not only an individual authorial manner of text division, but also a distinct sociolinguistic phenomenon reflecting the main tendencies of the change of contemporary living language” (Марышова 2011: 188). Parcelization reinforces the ironic play of language, the meaningful nuances of the text, “allows to present maximum information with minimum text volume” (Марышова 2011: 189). Partified speech approaches the colloquial style. The idea presented in short sentences without hurry with pauses becomes better understood by the recipient, easier to catch, and therefore more impressive and acceptable. The stylistic power of parcellation to activate phraseology is special. All syntactic figures are used in expressive syntax, but especially “parcelation, segmentation15, lexical repetitions, monologue fragments of questions and answers, chains of nominative sentences, insertions, some cases of word order” (Bitinienė 2007: 56). Thus, among the figures of expressive syntax listed above, parcellation and its variant segmentation are also mentioned first, and to them are added chains of nominative sentences16 and insertions that allow to strengthen the semantic and expressive nuances of the meaning of the statement. Some researchers even “fear that parcellation has now become an object of admiration, a fashionable game, an actively spreading phenomenon, a “linguistic passion” (Марышова 2011: 186). There are many illustrations of parcellation games in the media. Here is the headline of one of the most recent publications on the TV antenna: Television died. Long live television! (re-created phrase King died, long live the king) a prominent figure of parcellation. After it, in the first paragraph, it says: No matter how much people talk about the death of television, it still rises like that phoenix. Or a dragon. Here as you like17. 15 A variant of parcellation is segmentation. This is the most important point to be brought forward in the nominative vowel. 16 The same variation of parcellation is segmentation, only then several denominators are parcelled in a row. 17 smoky V. Television died. Long live television! – TV Antena, 14-20 September 2013 R. KoženiausKienė. 155 In this short paragraph, phraseology and two more figures of parcellation are slightly re-created. from the well-known saying: rise like a phoenix from the ashes by both shortening and lengthening: the pronoun tas is removed from the ashes, but the intriguing sentence, which begins with the conjunction Arba drakonas, is added separately. The last sentence of the secondary idea is called an addition18. In pursuit of the nuances of narrative expression, the authors create a fragmentarily lively, much more effective, original, and therefore memorable narrative with a deep subtext, by re-creating phraseology and by continuing parcellation. accumulation19 is a quite effective and destructive figure in media texts, accompanied by parcellation, whose syntax is sometimes quite overloaded and therefore confusing. A real Sodom and Gomorrah – the Lithuanians of London were called black workers by the English. [...] This is where the problem lies. Endless conspiracy theories, anger and open aggression mixed with sentimental tales of a state from sea to sea and a mystical pagan civilization, let alone movements a la N.V., are hardly compatible with the ability to make fun of oneself20. The very word Sodom and Gomorrah, which has been used extensively in the Bible, represents an impossible disorder: universal iniquity, terrible immorality and fornication. The phraseology used by the author, symbolising disorder, fits well with the accumulated syntax. The author further expands this phraseology and ironically reinforces it, saying that it is the Real Sodom and Gomorrah, although in fact he thinks the opposite: he does not see any English wickedness, because they say the truth. The author highlights a number of ridiculous negative traits of his compatriots with this reinterpretation of the Bible and overloaded syntax, when naming many almost unrelated details. accumulation even more 18 Another variant of parcellation is the addition, like a short note at the end. 19 The very name of this figure means overloading, disorder: lat. accumulare – to load, to accumulate. It is necessary to emphasize that there are several variants of accumulation: from overloaded, but relatively consistent naming of many details (as it is usually presented by Lithuanian stylists) to completely unorganized crushing of various aspects, when the author seeks to hide the whole picture with confusing and extremely abundantly named abstract elements, even deliberately obscuring it and thus showing in the subtext the real confusion in life itself. This type of accumulation is a typical destructive figure. 20 http://www.15min.lt/naujiena/ziniosgyvai/komentarai/rimvydas-valatka-tikra-sodoma-irgomora-- londono-lietuvius-anglai-isvadino-juodadarbiais-500-361948# ixzz2cPaJcocB. 156 KaLBos KuLTūRa | 86 reinforces two destructive figures hyperbatonas and parenthesis21: what to say of movements a la N. V. PaRenTeZės iR KiTŲ FiGūRŲ TaLKa PeRKuRTai FRaZeoLoGiJai Parentezė, kaip ir parceliacija, skiriama prie ryškiausių destrukcinių figūrų. In the list of figures enumerated by e. V. Klyuev, it corresponds perfectly to darkness22 (Клюев 2001: 256). These are various insertions of distant secondary thought, performing the rhetorical function of margins, annotations, clarification, creating an intriguing meaningful perspective. The parenthesis breaks up the thought, unexpectedly and sometimes aggressively interrupts it and pushes it aside. about this writes parenthesis researcher Gintautas akelaitis. “The parenthesis is a special means of language that allows to express at the same time another, even secondary, even fragmentary, thought (content). [...] The members of the parenthesis form one of the groups of expressive stylistic constructions. Therefore, the parenthesis is a phenomenon of the same syntactical stylistic sequence as the ellipse23, the parcellation, the anacolut24 and so on.” (akelaitis 2005: 30–31). As you can see, the author has listed the most prominent destructive figures quite accurately, and the parenthesis is measuredly entered into their line. It happens that the parenthesis (as with other figures) goes the phraseology itself: V. U., N. V., P. G., P. S., A. P. and – let’s not throw the words out of the song – V. L. himself are passengers of the same VU car. Incredibly, this is a real political union25. Juozas abaravičius writes that the authors use parentheses and free linear text to “peculiarly signify dialogicity, contradictions, inconsistencies, agreement 21 Gr. parenthesis, Latin. interpositio – the unexpected insertion of a secondary idea in parentheses (which can also be separated by periods, hyphens, commas). 22 Gr. tmesis – insertion, insertion (variation of parenthesis). 23 Gr. elleipsis – deficiency, omission. A dynamic ellipse shape can be used to omit any easily predictable part of a sentence. 24 Gr. anakoluthus – inconsistent. This figure is called "one of the most complicated destructive figures, when in a sentence there is a deliberate abuse and incompatibility of jokes, kinship, etc. V. Kliuev gives the following example of it: "Gamsachurdia, by the way, intelligentsia. This intelligentsia knew very well where it was going.” (Kluev 2001: 257). 25 www.15min.lt/.../rimvydas-valatka-kedofilijos-saulelydis-500-325175. R. KoženiausKienė. 157 and the interaction of disagreement, harmony and discordance” (Baravičius 2002: 229). In this accumulated text, it is precisely this chain of contradictions that is interrupted by a long parenthesis pause. Its aim is clear: to allow the reader to come to his senses after the strangely presented long list of political companions, to which another, seemingly completely unsuitable name of Vu26’s fellow traveller is added in parentheses. The form of the words of the popular saying “You won’t throw out the song” is retained here, but has acquired a completely different subtext. The binding chain is broken, broken, broken. As a result, a flow of associations, allusions or subtext in general is created or activated” (Baravičius 2002: 228). The most important destructive figures mentioned – parcellation, hyperbaton, accumulation, parenthesis – are rarely completely pure, they, depending on each other, usually form the most varied indistinguishable combinations, join with many other figures. Disasters don't come one by one. It was not enough that the policemen folded and packed P. G. several times, as they were taught to do with hooligans in the police school, but the fighter against gay mills was also thrown out by his wife. In the presence of all the people. In such a fight. And so ruthlessly – accusing him of not caring for the family27. The phraseology to fight windmills was updated by the author by changing only one sound. It is true that the verb fight has been replaced by the conjunctive noun fighter. a clever play with the similarly sounding words gay / winds (a figure of paranoia28) brings to mind a familiar saying: fighting windmills, i.e. an imaginary enemy. So it's a donkey fight. The statement is further reinforced by parcellation, hyperbaton and ellipse and its variant adjunction29. Such a distance from the normative syntax structure clearly shows the author’s ability to create a playful buzz effect: after all, this 26 in the media this abbreviation, marking the initials of a quarrelsome politician, is usually written with dots, but in this text they are not (perhaps deliberate irony is aimed at a sarcastic play by comparing with the abbreviation of Vilnius University). 27 http://www.15min.lt/naujiena/ziniosgyvai/komentarai/rimvydas-valatka-ikliuvo-kaip-musele-i-isrugas-500-358795#ixzz2b5QHnnv9. 28 Gr. paronomasia – next to call. This figure is in itself a language game, a means of humor, when a logical causal connection is found between words that sound similar but have nothing in common. Most often this figure performs the rhetorical function of sarcasm. 29. adiunctio – addition, addition. It is a variation of the ellipse, where several elements of the sentence are added to one point. Usually accompanied by inversion or hyperbaton. For more information on the adjunction and its types, see. Koženiauskienė 2001: 302–305. 164 KaLBos KuLTūRa | 86 and are parodied so intensively that new variants are sometimes heard much more often than the original proverbs” (Litovkina 2004: 295). Phraseology is often re-created as if by playing: it is ironized, parodied, criticized, and the lexicon and syntax are changed – “what is old, what is outdated, what is no longer suitable for these times” (Zaikauskienė 2008: 86). The proliferation of re-created phraseology and accompanying destructive figures in the media can also be linked to a fashionable tendency in various genres of journalistic style texts. on the other hand, this sociolinguistic phenomenon may have grown out of conflicts and contradictions in social, economic, political and cultural life. Destructive figures of the same nature as the re-created phraseology greatly help to reflect these contradictions, to create dynamics and tension: “to present the thought in a non-linear way, to change the intonation of the sentence, to redistribute the places of logical accents, in order to give meaning to the contradictory, dilemmatic development of the thought.” (Baravičius 2002: 223). By critically parodying, ironizing, and demolishing what is old, the authors well reflect the universal tension, the uncertainty of life. iŠVaDos 1.The effectiveness of phraseology reconstruction, the stylistic possibilities of its content updating and language activation increase when it intertwines with syntactic destructive figures. The effect of these figures then also becomes more pronounced. 2.Depending on the position of the paraphrased text in the syntactic structure, the phraseology of the beginning, middle and end of the paragraph can be distinguished. She is convinced that, regardless of the place of phraseology in the syntactic structure, in recent years in the media it is primarily associated with the universally established parcellation. Along with it go other striking destructive figures – hyperbaton, accumulation, ellipse, adjunction, parenthesis. The effectiveness of the re-created phraseology is particularly enhanced by the intertwining of destructive figures and performs rhetorical functions of attracting attention, intrigue, satirical irony, charm, humor and parody. playfully reconstructed statement attracts the attention of the recipient, instantly brings to his memory the original phraseology with all the usual lexicon and syntax, and only the context of the destructive figures dictates the true intention of reconstructing phraseology in the mind. R. KoženiausKienė. 165 abaravičius J. 2002: The stylistics of divorce, Vilnius: Mokslo ir enciklopedijų leidybos institutas. LiTeRaTūRa leidybos institutas. akelaitis G. 2005: Parenthesis in Poetry. – Man and Word 1, 29–34. Bitinienė a. 2007: Publicistic style, Vilnius: Vilnius Pedagogical University Press. Butkutė L. 2010: Stylistic powers of occasional phraseologisms in publicistic style. PhD dissertation, Vilnius: Vilnius University Press. Koženiauskienė R. 2001: Rhetoric: stylistics of speech, Vilnius: Institute of Science and Encyclopedia Publishing. Koženiauskienė R. 2013: Rhetorical and stylistic analysis of journalistic texts, Vilnius: Vilnius University Press. Litovkina a. T. 2004: old Proverbs never Die: anti-Proverbs in the Language Classroom. – Res Humanae Proverbium et Sententiarum. ed. Csaba Földes, Tübingen: Gunter Narr Verlag, 295–326. Marcinkevičienė R. 2001: Traditional Phraseology and Other Stable Word Combinations. – Lituanistica 4, 81–98. Mažylė J. 2012: Classification of genres of written expression (press): tradition and convergence. – Media, mass media, journalism in traditional and networked societies, Vilnius: Vilnius University Press, 160–178. Miliūnaitė R. 2009: Variants of the current Lithuanian language usage, Vilnius: Lithuanian Language Institute. 1975: The Language of the World, 2nd ed., New York: Routledge. Zaikauskienė D. 2008: Changes in form and content of Lithuanian proverbs. – Folklore Works XXXV, 84–93. Ziomek J. 1990: Descriptive Rhetoric, Wrocław-Warszawa-Kraków: National Institute of Language and Literature. Ossolińskich wydawnictwo. Hat K. 2008: Advertising text: pragmatics, style, language, Šiauliai: Šiaulių University Press. Клюев Е. В. 2001: Риторика. Инвеция. Диспозиция. Элокуция, Москва: Издателство ПРИОР. Marisova M. a. 2011: Stylistic function of parcellation in texts of different genres. – Stil: international journal, Beograd, 183–193. It is standing. 1999: „Hova“ Phraseology in the Language of Mass Media (on the риале русского языка). – Русский язык и русская литература в совреin a changing society. 335–340. Access via Internet: <http://www. rusian.slavica.org/article 657.html>. Received 09/10/2013 Adopted on 20 December 2013 166 Language Culture | 86 PLaY on ReCReaTeD PHRaseoLoGY in THe MeDia Summary The recreation of phraseology in the media relies on both the change of conventional and well-established lexis as well as syntactic order. First of all, phraseology itself is figure-based; stylistically, the figures around it are none the less important. The article shows how syntactic destructive figures help to highlight the meaning, implication and reasons of recreation of phraseology. as a result of the playful combination of recreated phraseology and destructive figures in the text, rhetorical functions of attraction of attention, intriguing, satirebased irony and parody become especially strong. in combination with phraseology, destructive figures, which simultaneously comment on it, help to explain and understand the recreation of traditional phraseology and to highlight the turn of thought. The effect of the figures themselves increases when they intertwine among themselves, support one another and go together with phraseology. it has been proven that irrespective of the place of phraseology in the syntactic structure, it first of all combines with parcellation and other accompanying destructive figures – hyperbaton, accumulation, parenthesis, adjunction, ellipsis. The domination of parcellation and other destructive figures is seen in a number of publicistic texts of the journalism of evaluative type of recent years. The phraseology of the beginning, centre and end can be distinguished by the place of the paragraph content structure in which the rephrased text is located. The wittily recreated phraseology positioned in the beginning immediately draws the addressee’s attention and makes an unexpected intriguing impression. Central phraseology, framed by destructive figures, becomes the culmination of the paragraph. The phraseology positioned at the end creates an impression of a strong logical highlight and a vividly formulated final conclusion. The growth in the number of recreated phrases conflicting with conventional phraseology and the accompanying destructive figures can be associated with the confusion in social, economic, political and cultural life as well as the increased competition within the media. Critically and ironically-minded authors with a negative and especially hyperbolic evaluation of topical life affairs, witty and ingenuous parody as well as brave destruction of the old try to attract the addressee and to grip his/her attention by any means possible. KEYWORDS: recreated phraseology, syntactic destructive figures, accumulation, hyperbaton, parcellation, parenthesis. ReGina KoženiausKienė Faculty of Philosophy, Vilnius University universiteto g. 5, LT-01513 Vilnius [email protected]t