Writing Help 129 | - ☆ Freelance Writer
Apr 04, 2013 | #1
Using Advanced Rhetorical Devices to Surprise and Delight
In a previous series, the idea of 'sound effects' as figurative and rhetorical devices was considered, and we explored the definitions and effects of such terms as alliteration, assonance, consonance, and onomatopoeia. Here, we turn to more obscure terms, which, despite their difficult appearance, actually describe concepts which are some of the easiest to understand, and which could have been included in the more basic series if they were more widely used and understood.
Once more we can look to the Greek fathers of rhetoric for the origins of these words, starting first with cacophony. Our modern English term comes from the very similar Greek word kakophonia, which translates roughly to bad-sounding. The roots of the word are telling, as the Greek word kakos means bad, while the phon means sound or voice, and is common in many English words like telephone, phoneme, and phonics. In normal English parlance, cacophony is used to describe a chaos of sound, like hundreds of different animals crying in unison or many industrial machines operating at once. In its use as a rhetorical term, cacophony can be applied to any linguistic construction that sounds displeasing to the ears, usually resultant from the arrangement of words next to others with which they clash, and featuring harsh sounds in general. The following example employs the device effectively: 'The clash of rocks whispered against his gizzard, crushing the trachea and smashing his voice forever.' Here, we first notice the presence of many sounds that exit harshly from the mouth or require some oral contortions to pronounce correctly, like cl, ck, g, cr, tr, ach, and sm. These sounds are somewhat cacophonous on their own, but in combination in such a concentration, the result is all the more unpleasant sounding. Note also the contrast between most of the words in this sentence and whispered; the former tend to grind themselves abruptly out of the throat and mouth, while whispered glides out in a breath of w- and vowel-driven air, making the sentence even more cacophonous.
Euphony, on the other hand, is precisely the opposite of cacophony, making them true antonyms. Turning once more back to the Greek, we can see that this word possesses the same suffix as cacophony, phon, which we know relates to sound. The prefix this time, however, is eu, which comes from the Greek word for good. So, we are left with good-sounding as a basic translation, and once more this is a good place to begin a discussion of euphony. Like cacophony, euphony can be used in general conversation to describe anything that sounds pleasant, although the word is so rare that it is used even less then cacophony in general conversation. In its role as a literary term, it is used to describe the placement of words in such an order that they create a pleasing sound. Meter, rhyme, alliteration, assonance, consonance, internal rhyme, and the whole family of sound effects can be employed to achieve euphonic effects, and the device is thus especially well suited to poetry, where sound is a major consideration.
It must be noted at this point that cacophony and euphony are not such strictly defined entities as many of the other rhetorical devices we have explored so far in this series and others, since they are not based on a particular arrangement or scheme. Further, making judgments regarding either of these terms will necessarily be somewhat subjective, and although you can support your claim with evidence of harsh sounds or pleasing patterns, ultimately it will be difficult to settle any arguments that arise over examples of these terms. That being said, I think both still have a place in literary discourse, and I recommend using these terms rather than their more widely known but less descriptive counterparts good-sounding and bad-sounding. So long as you can support your statements with good evidence, your claims will stand.
Cacophony and Euphony
In a previous series, the idea of 'sound effects' as figurative and rhetorical devices was considered, and we explored the definitions and effects of such terms as alliteration, assonance, consonance, and onomatopoeia. Here, we turn to more obscure terms, which, despite their difficult appearance, actually describe concepts which are some of the easiest to understand, and which could have been included in the more basic series if they were more widely used and understood.
Once more we can look to the Greek fathers of rhetoric for the origins of these words, starting first with cacophony. Our modern English term comes from the very similar Greek word kakophonia, which translates roughly to bad-sounding. The roots of the word are telling, as the Greek word kakos means bad, while the phon means sound or voice, and is common in many English words like telephone, phoneme, and phonics. In normal English parlance, cacophony is used to describe a chaos of sound, like hundreds of different animals crying in unison or many industrial machines operating at once. In its use as a rhetorical term, cacophony can be applied to any linguistic construction that sounds displeasing to the ears, usually resultant from the arrangement of words next to others with which they clash, and featuring harsh sounds in general. The following example employs the device effectively: 'The clash of rocks whispered against his gizzard, crushing the trachea and smashing his voice forever.' Here, we first notice the presence of many sounds that exit harshly from the mouth or require some oral contortions to pronounce correctly, like cl, ck, g, cr, tr, ach, and sm. These sounds are somewhat cacophonous on their own, but in combination in such a concentration, the result is all the more unpleasant sounding. Note also the contrast between most of the words in this sentence and whispered; the former tend to grind themselves abruptly out of the throat and mouth, while whispered glides out in a breath of w- and vowel-driven air, making the sentence even more cacophonous.Euphony, on the other hand, is precisely the opposite of cacophony, making them true antonyms. Turning once more back to the Greek, we can see that this word possesses the same suffix as cacophony, phon, which we know relates to sound. The prefix this time, however, is eu, which comes from the Greek word for good. So, we are left with good-sounding as a basic translation, and once more this is a good place to begin a discussion of euphony. Like cacophony, euphony can be used in general conversation to describe anything that sounds pleasant, although the word is so rare that it is used even less then cacophony in general conversation. In its role as a literary term, it is used to describe the placement of words in such an order that they create a pleasing sound. Meter, rhyme, alliteration, assonance, consonance, internal rhyme, and the whole family of sound effects can be employed to achieve euphonic effects, and the device is thus especially well suited to poetry, where sound is a major consideration.
It must be noted at this point that cacophony and euphony are not such strictly defined entities as many of the other rhetorical devices we have explored so far in this series and others, since they are not based on a particular arrangement or scheme. Further, making judgments regarding either of these terms will necessarily be somewhat subjective, and although you can support your claim with evidence of harsh sounds or pleasing patterns, ultimately it will be difficult to settle any arguments that arise over examples of these terms. That being said, I think both still have a place in literary discourse, and I recommend using these terms rather than their more widely known but less descriptive counterparts good-sounding and bad-sounding. So long as you can support your statements with good evidence, your claims will stand.