In order to understand the linguistic nature of the SDs of this group it is necessary to clear 4up some problems, so far untouched, of d e f i n i-t i î ï as a philosophical category, Any definition can point out only one or two properties of a phenomenon* Therefore in building up a definition the definer tries to single out the most essential features of the object. These are pinned down by the definer through a long period of observation of the object, its functioning, its growth and its changes.
However, no definition can comprise all the inner qualities of the object and new combinations of it with other objects as well; a deeper penetration into the ontology of the object will always reveal some hitherto unknown qualities and features.
In the third group of stylistic devices, which we now come to, we find that one of the qualities of the object in question is made to sound essential, This is an entirely different principle from that on which the second
group is based, that of interaction between two lexical meanings simultaneously materialized in the context. In this third group the quality picked out may be seemingly unimportant, and it is frequently transitorv but for a special reason it is elevated to the greatest importance and made into a telling feature,