ANTONOMASIA AND THE STYLISTIC FUNCTIONS OF PROPER NOUNS IN FICTION: A HISTORICAL AND LITERARY PERSPECTIVE

Аннотация

This article explores the stylistic function of proper nouns and the rhetorical device of antonomasia in literary discourse, tracing their evolution from classical rhetoric to their artistic application inRussian and English literature. Keywords:antonomasia, proper nouns, onomastics, literary stylistics, character naming, Russianliterature, English literature, rhetoric, semantics, fictional discourse. The stylistic method of antonomasia as an independent trope was previously singled out in the ancient rhetoric of Greece and Rome. For example, M.F. Quintilian writes in his work “Twelve Books of Rhetorical Questions” that antonomasia is a trope when something of equal value is intended instead of a noun. He singles out a small area where antonomasia is used – poetry. Aristotlein “Poetics”notes thecharacteristicfunction ofnouns in drama: “Nouns should accurately reflect the features of the character of the character mentioned in the drama and thus ensure theauthenticity oftheactors’actions”[1]. Platon shows the important educational, “exemplary” role of nouns in the dialogue “Cratylus” /on the names of Homer’s works/: “a noun is a kind of educational tool (means) intended for distinguishing essence, justas ascythe is fordistinguishing thebasis” [2]. M.V.Lomonosov assessed antonomasia as one of the six most important tropes: “The most famous tropes of proverbs are six: metaphor, synecdoche, antonomasia, catachresis and metalepsis. Antonomasia is the mutual transformation of aproper noun and a cognate noun” [3]. Describing the essence of the stylistic method of antonomasia in this way, M.V.Lomonosov distinguishes four conditions under which a proper noun can pass into a cognate nounand viceversa. The issues of the genesis of proper nouns, the principles of their formation, as well as the stylistic functions of proper nouns in fiction have interested many linguists and literary critics. Linguists considered proper nouns as language elements with a certain function, literary critics were interested in proper nouns as part of an image, character, and a characteristic feature of acertain literary direction. However, these are often either private observations and small articles about individual names or groups of names in the works of individual writers, or works of historical and literary studies. For example, E.P.Karnovich in his book “Родовые прозвища и титулы в России и слияние иноземцев с русскими” (Genealogical nicknames and titles in Russia and the fusion offoreigners with Russians)analyzes the historyof surnames inRussiaand thespecific features oftheirformation [4]. The author dwells on the issue of the use of surnames in the works of writers, tries to characterize the stylistic features of names in the works of Griboyedov, Pushkin, Lermontov, Gogol. However, in general, this is a historical and literary study, in which the analysis of surnames in fiction is only asecondary task. page2305 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE ISSN:2692-5206,ImpactFactor:12,23 AmericanAcademicpublishers,volume05,issue06,2025 Journal: https://www.academicpublishers.org/journals/index.php/ijai G.Mandelstam in his book “The Character of Gogol’s Style” notes the expressive coloring of proper names used in fiction. He writes: “The surname to some extent inclines to the advantage or disadvantage of the person being described. A dull name either corresponds to the absence of pleasant qualities in a person, or makes him ridiculous, or forces one to treat him with contempt. This is often achieved by a strange combination of sounds that are not very pleasant to the ear, or by names that remind the subject of the name itself, which overly irritates theear”[5]. However, he does not develop this interesting idealater. A. Bem’s book “Proper Names in Dostoevsky’s Works” contains many interesting ideas and methodological rules [6]. A.Bem analyzes the linguistic nature of the proper noun, determines its role and function in society, and sets the task of determining the specifics of the proper noun in literature [7]. The author shows the difference between a simple noun and a noun with a meaning: “... unlike colloquial language, - writes A. Bem, - the poetics of the proper noun in a work of art is associated with the revival of the semantic aspects of the noun. In other words, the inclination of the proper noun in a work of art is the opposite of the inclination that exists in colloquial language. In creativity, the proper noun has the tendency to return to itself the connection between the word and the word and meaning”. A.Bem shows that the nouns created by writers rely on the linguistic material at their disposal and are integral elements ofthe entirecomplex structure of thework ofart. L.A.Bulakhovsky notes the subtle comic display of proper names in Gogol's works. The author gives examples of the names of Gogol's characters: Pyotr Ivanovich Dobchinsky, Pyotr Ivanovich Bobchinsky, Uncle Mityai and Uncle Minai, etc., where, accord