4.3 Intensification and mitigation discourse strategies
5.1.2 Reiteration/repetition
One most significant feature associated with the application of the device of reiteration/repetition is its enrichment of the continuity of lexical meanings and foregrounding effects it exert in the texture of texts. The successes recorded by Adichie’s use of language in her narratives seem to have stemmed from her effective deployment of the lexical device of reiteration in her narratives. The application of reiteration has not only enhanced the realisation of textual cohesion in the texture of these novels but seem to be a foregrounding mean which Adichie uses to scheme the various topicalities that exemplify discursive features of group cohesion in her stories. Extract [13] below, which is drawn from Purple Hibiscus, demonstrates how the use of reiteration by Adichie does not only enhance textual cohesion but seems to be a discourse strategy that highlights linguistic features that amplify aspects of social solidarities in her narratives.
Extract [13]: [i] We went up stairs to change, Jaja and Mama and I.[ii] Our steps on the stairs were as measured and as silent as our Sundays: the silence of waiting until Papa was done with his siesta so we could have lunch; the silence of reflection time, when Papa gave us a scripture passage or a book by one of the early church fathers to read and mediate on; the silence of evening rosary; the silence of driving to the church for benediction afterwards. [iii] Even our family time on Sundays was quiet, without chess games or newspaper discussions, more in tune with the Day of Rest. (PH:
p.39-40)
The reiterated words in the above extract [13] are: ‘silence’, ‘Sundays’, ‘time’ and the repetition of first person plural possessive pronoun ‘our’ in the nominative cases as in
‘our steps’ [ii] and in ‘even our family’ [iii]. The lexical item: ‘silent’ [ii] first enters the discourse, in the second sentence marked as [ii], as an adjective and it occurs subsequently in the same sentence [ii] as a noun with a definite article: ‘‘the silence’’ [ii], and at its second occurrence has become a reference item, therefore, a referential link which constitute a tie to its repetitive use in the third, fourth and fifth appearances in the second sentence [ii] of the extract.
The other reiterated lexical item: ‘Sunday’, occurs just twice in the extract; in sentence [ii] and [iii]. And unlike in the case of ‘silence’, the second occurrence of
‘Sunday’ in: ‘Even our family time on Sundays…’, in the third sentence [iii] of the
UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN
extract contains no definite reference item; which makes it to have no referential link with its first occurrence in sentence [ii], but a lexical cohesive effect is established as its repetitive use in the third sentence [iii] itself constitute a tie with its earlier occurrence in the second sentence [ii].
Furthermore, aside from the cohesive effect existing between the lexical item:
‘silence’; which occurs five times in the extract [13], also shares polysemous semantic relation with ‘quiet’ which occurs in the first clause of sentence [iii] and therefore ties with it. The lexical item: ‘Sundays’ in sentence [ii], on the other hand, shares broader connotational sememe with ‘church’ and since their meanings overlap, the two items could be said to share synonymous relationship and therefore cohere with each other at that level.
Another linguistic instance that has facilitated lexical cohesion in extract [13] is the reiteration of the following pair of words: ‘siesta’ and ‘reflection time’ [ii],
‘benediction and scripture passage’, and ‘rosary’ [ii]. These lexical items share some level of meaning relation and their reiterative use in the text has enhanced lexical cohesive effect in sentence [ii] in which they occur. Though these lexical items, ‘siesta’, and ‘reflection time’, are not reiterated, it is worthy to note that the context in which these are used shows some level of semantic relation between them and the reiterated ‘silence’, and, therefore, creates textual cohesion. Apparently, on one hand, given the shared broader connotative semantic relations that exist between ‘siesta’, ‘reflection time’ and
‘silence’, Adichie seems to graciously, reiterate ‘silence’, through ‘siesta’ and ‘reflection time’ in this context which illustrates the importance attached to ‘our family time’. On the other hand, ‘time’ is reiterated in ‘reflection time’ and ‘family time’ and by extension of meaning, this suggests the existence of a synonymous semantic relation between the two reiterated items. The reiterative use of ‘time’ therefore foregrounds the solemnity with which ‘our family time’ is observed and creates a referential background of the scenery of catholic activities that go on the narrator’s family. In the above linguistic situation, therefore, the use of the possessive pronoun, ‘our’, in the nominal group, for instance, specifically foregrounds how atypical this particular ‘family time’ is observed in the narrator’s family and separates same from ‘other family times’ in question. The possessive pronoun, ‘our’, reiterated in ‘our steps’ and in ‘our family time’ is therefore a device to demonstrate the inclusion of ‘self’ as a member of a distinct family and separate
UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN
same from other families by amplifying the familial ties that exist within the narrator’s family and at the same time, the religious undertone in the narration.
What Adichie has achieved through the application of the lexical device of repetition is the foregrounding effects in which the reiterative use of lexical items resonate social solidarity in the texture of the novels. Apart from being a dominant narrative feature to project important phases in the lives of her characters and other aspects in her narration, Adichie’s application of reiteration foregrounds, strategically, some aspects of solidarity, like the familial relationships echoed in the reiterative use of first person plural pronouns. For instance, the first person plural pronoun ‘we’, in the initial position of sentence [i] in extract 13, resolves into the genitive plural ‘our’, which occurs in sentence [ii] and is finally reiterated as ‘our family time’ in sentence [iii]. The import of this repetition is the foregrounded effects with which familial relationship is played up. For instance, the second occurrence of the first person plural pronoun, ‘we’, which is subsequently reiterated as a genitive plural ‘our’ demonstrating the bond that still exists within the family in spite of the pervasive ‘silence’ that symbolises fear in this instance. The possessive plural pronoun, ‘our’, which is in the nominal group as a first person plural possessive adjective, ‘our Sundays’, is emphatic of the ‘Sundays’ in question; especially those particular Sundays in the lives of the family described simply as ‘our family’ in the discussion.
Furthermore, the reiterative occurrence of ‘silence’ in Adichie’s novels situates a perspectivational discourse strategy; a narrative style that facilitates harnessing of the point of view of characters in the novels. In HOAYS, for instance, Richard describes the University house on Imoke street which was reserved for visiting researchers and artists as being ‘…filled with suitable silence’ (HOAYS: p.72). In another narrative episode;
after Olanna reluctantly disclosed to Odenigbo that she had had sex with Richard, she resisted from telling him that his ‘…breadth smelt of brandy…’, because ‘…she did not want to ruin the silence that united them’ (HOAYS: p.246). In another narrative instance in HOAYS, as the Biafra war ravages on, Ugwu informs us that Odenigbo’s mood also changes and he develops the habit of always joining ‘Special Julius’ to drink ‘local gin’, an indulgence which instead forced him out of his usual habit in which he ‘…talked and talked and everybody listened’, instead he is sober hence ‘… this drinking here silenced him’ (HOAYS: p.379). Similarly, in AH, Adichie describes American migrants as being
‘…conditioned to fill silence…’ (p.4) and Ifemelu as having ‘…kept Obinze sealed in
UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN
silence…’ (AH: p.158). The application of this device foregrounds the reiterated use of
‘silence’ and has amplified perspectivisation discourse strategy, a discursive strategy that harnesses the various views of characters about events in the narratives. Yet at another instance in AH, the word ‘silence’ as reiterated, resonates and foregrounds familial relationships. This is illustrated in extract [14] below:
Extract [14]: He took her hand in his, both clasped on the table, and between them silence grew, an ancient silence that they both knew. She was inside this silence and she was safe. (AH: p.440)
In Extract [14], the reiterative use of ‘silence’ is with the intent to foreground and make it an important perspectivation strategy in the narration. Evidently, aside from the reiteration of ‘silence’ in Extract [14], its reiterative occurrence establishes a cohesive tie with other lexical items in a sequence. Apparently, the adjective ‘ancient’ qualifies
‘silence’, and gives it some describable semantic features that extend its meaning beyond the sentence level and, then, the said silence ‘grew’, and Adichie’s Ifemelu ‘…was rather safe inside this silence’ (AH: p.440). Similarly, reiteration of ‘silence’ and in which someone is said to be ‘safe’ in it, is an attempt to foreground the confidence one has in the familial bond that exist in the relationship between Obinze and Ifemelu. The bonds are so strong that, in spite of threat to peace, ‘one feels secure and safe inside silence’.
The above samples aside from explicating lexical ties; demonstrate how Adichie’s use of the lexical device of reiteration foregrounds ‘‘silence’’ and apparently extends its semantic properties to embrace other semantic trappings. The lexical item: ‘silence’ is like a character that is actively involved in the various episodes in the narration of these novels. Extract [15] drawn from PH, for instance, further demonstrates that the use of reiteration in the novels does not only achieve lexical cohesion but also serves as a discourse strategy to foreground vital information in the narrative structure of the novels.
Extract [15]: [i] I followed him. [ii] As he climbed the stairs in his red silk pyjamas, his buttocks quivered and shook like akamu, properly made akamu, jelly like.
[iii] The cream décor in Papa’s bedroom was changed every year but always to a slightly different shade of cream. [iv] The plush rug that sank in when you stepped on it was plain cream; the curtains had only a little brown embroidery at the edges; the cream leather armchairs were placed together as if two people were sitting in an intimate conversation. [v] All that cream blended and made the room seem wider, as if it never ended, as if you could not run even if you wanted to, because there was nowhere to run to. [vi] When I had thought of haven as a child I visualized Papa’s room, the softness, the creaminess, the endlessness. [vii] I would struggle
UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN
into Papa’s arms when harmattan thunderstorms raged outside, flinging mangoes against the window netting and making the electric wires hit each other and spark bright orange flames. [viii] Papa would lodge me between his knees or wrap me in the cream blanket that smelled of safety.
(PH: p.49)
In Extract [15], the reiteration of ‘akamu’ (‘…properly made akamu…’) in the third clause in the second sentence is without a reference item; therefore it appears there is no referential link with its first occurrence in the preceding clause, but rather its occurrence in the subsequent clause alone does not constitute a cohesive tie but nevertheless foregrounds its functions in the text. This claim becomes glaring with the insertion of
‘cream’ (the colour of akamu) which is reiterated severally. Though in its second occurrence in the second sentence, ‘cream’ has no reference item attached to it, though it cohesively ties with its first occurrence in the nominal position in the second sentence. In the third sentence [iii], it occurs twice and only once in the fourth [iv] and eight [viii]
sentences in the passage.
Apparently, as these linguistic elements co-occur within and across sentence boundaries, the resulting cohesive relation is fascinating as one lexical item foregrounds the other as it re-occurs. For instance: ‘cream décor’ is the hypernym of ‘plush rug’,
‘cream leather armchairs’ and ‘cream blanket’. Furthermore, the sense with which
‘thunderstorm’ is used seemed to synonymously tie it to a situation in the passage in which ‘…the electric wires hit each other and spark bright yellow flames’. Similarly,
‘plush rug’ is reiterated and tied in with ‘softness’ in a synonymic relation. However, the reiteration of ‘plush rug’ as ‘softness’, ‘cream’ in ‘creaminess’, and ‘end’ as
‘endlessness’ is a perspectivation discourse strategy that foregrounds the peaceful protective loving relationship that exists between father and child. The result of this cordial harmonious relationship between father and child is finally expressed in sentence VIII: ‘Papa would lodge me between his knees or wrap me in the cream blanket that smelled of safety’ (PH: p.49).
The lexical cohesive feature of reiteration is also employed in HOAYS to foreground focal linguistic items so as to draw readers’ attention to them. In this situation, repetition is made of one lexical item within a sequence for a number of times as in extract 16:
UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN
Extract [16]: Ugwu stood for a while before he began to edge closer and closer to the bookshelf, as though to hide in it, and then after a while, he sank down to the floor, cradling his raffia bag between his knees. (HOAYS: p.5)
The interpretation of the reiterated word: ‘closer’ in the structure: ‘…he began to edge closer and closer…’ in this ordered series foregrounds some vital information about Ugwu that is contained in the subsequent clause: ‘…as though to hide in it…’; this speaks volumes about a village boy coming into a university environment for the first time. The reiteration of ‘closer’ in such an ordered series has prompted the interpretation of Ugwu’s character traits.
The lexical item which occurs in a sequence is reiterated in series of utterances as a predicational strategy, with which Adichie attempts to lay emphasis on vital points in the narration as in the following: ‘…Ugwu turned off the tap, turned it on again, then off.
On and off and on and off…’ (HOAYS: p.6). The reiterated verbal group: ‘… on and off…’ projects the sequence with which the action occurred. Apparently, the reiteration of the verbal group has, aside from enhancing cohesion, also given rise to reinforcement of the character traits of Ugwu; a predicational discourse strategy that defines and allow us to know who the character is.
Furthermore, with reiteration, it becomes easy to determine the tune of the narration; hence reiterated lexical items foreground useful clues that pave way for deeper inferences of the textual networks in the novels. For instance, the lexical item: ‘second coup’, which is reiterated in ‘…everybody was saying it was second coup, second coup…’ (HOAYS: p.136), foregrounds the reasons as to why the coup occurs. And like extract [16], the lexical items, ‘reprisal killings’ are reiterated severally as shown in the next extract [17] to foreground the perspective ‘we are not like those Hausa people’ in the cause and effect in the structures:
Extract [17]: [i] She was talking about the Northerners in Onitsha who had been killed in reprisal attacks. [ii] He liked the way reprisal killings came out of her mouth… [iii] We are not like those Hausa people. [iv] The reprisal killings happened because they pushed us. [v] His reprisal killings came out sounding close to hers, he was sure. (HOAYS: p.177)
The lexical item ‘reprisal’ in Extract [17]: is repeated in ‘reprisal attacks’ and ‘reprisal killings.’ The other two lexical items: ‘attacks’ and ‘killings’ are in the subject-position in each case; the weight of the emphasis is therefore placed on ‘reprisal’ which is an adjective. Apparently, the two lexical items ‘attacks’ and ‘killings’; cohere with each
UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN
other as used in the above expression. Even though ‘attacks’ and ‘killings’ are near synonyms and they cohere as reiterated in the context; since the concern in the above tie is on the foregrounding effects achieved in the repetition of ‘reprisal’ in the tie. Since the declarant is using this to explicitly express her views as to why the ‘reprisal attacks’
occurred, renders the reiterative use of ‘reprisal’ to be considered as an intensification discourse strategy, a narrative technique to harness explicit comments soliciting support for one’s social solidarity.
Similarly, there is also the presentation of positive ‘self’ and the negative ‘others’;
which has been foregrounded with the aid of reiteration in extract [17]. The use of ‘they’
and ‘us’ in sentence [iv] (The reprisal killings happened because they pushed us), for instance, is a strategy which demonstrates group solidarity. Though, the use of the first person plural pronoun, ‘we’, in sentence [iii] of the abstract attempts to allocate the blame of the cause of the ‘killings’ to all groups involved, with the reiteration of ‘reprisal killings’ in sentence [iv]: ‘The reprisal killings happened because they pushed us’; the cause of these revenge killings of the Northerners in Onitsha is shifted to the other party by resulting to the use of the third person plural pronoun, ‘they’, in reference to Northerners, who have caused ‘us’ the Eastern group (Igbo) to resort to ‘reprisal killings’.
The use of the lexical items: ‘they’ and ‘us’, at this instance in the structure, together with the reiteration of ‘reprisal killings’, aside from enhancing lexical cohesion is an intensification discourse strategy, consequently highlighting the nature of solidarity of the character in this conversation.
Adichie’s reiteration of names of her characters has not only enhanced lexical cohesion but activates predicational discursive effects that amplify solidarity. Extract 18 demonstrates this literary exploit.
Extract [18]: [i] Olanna watched the swift movements of the masculine arm. [ii] They really had nothing in common, herself and his barely educated primary-school teacher from Eziowelle who believed in visions. [iii] Yet Mrs Muokelu had always seemed familiar.[iv] It was not because Mrs Muokelu plaited her hair and went with her to the Women’s Voluntary Services meetings and taught her how to preserve vegetables, but because Mrs Muokelu exuded fearlessness, a fearlessness that reminded Olanna of Kainene. (HOAYS: p.265)
In Extract [18] ‘Mrs Muokelu’ as reiterated in the third [iii] and fourth [iv] sentences. The other word: ‘fearlessness’ is repeated in the fourth sentence. The first appearance of ‘Mrs Muokelu’ in the second sentence [ii] does not only define ‘the masculine arm’ and ‘…
UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN
barely educated primary-school teacher…’ mentioned in the first and second sentences but ties in with its second and third occurrence in the fourth sentence [iv]. The third appearance of ‘Mrs Muokelu’ in the fourth clause of sentence [iv] foregrounds the essence of its reiteration as a predicational discursive strategy which is enclosed in yet another reiterated lexical item, ‘fearlessness’, which co-occur twice in the fourth clause in sentence [iv]. Apparently, with the repetition of ‘fearlessness’, the reason why the nominal, ‘Mrs Muokelu’, is reiterated becomes glaring; apparently, a predicational discourse strategy to describe the character traits of Mrs Muokelu and compare her with yet another character ‘Kainene.’ This is the same discursive strategy she employs to scheme Ugwu and the traits of some other characters in the novels. This is a discourse strategy that amplifies perspectives that earmarked the characters’ group affirmitives.
It is also significant to note that grammatical conditions are construed from Adichie’s use of reiteration in HOAYS; these include the lexical means of reiteration to project the nature and frequency of occurrence of the actions, which is sometimes repeated severally in a sequence, within a single stretch of an utterance. For instance, as shown in the repeated occurrence of ‘reprisal’ in extract [17] above. And also in order to project Ugwu’s character traits as demonstrated in extract [16], in which the action to
‘edge closer and closer’ is reiterated so as to reveal who Ugwu is. Similarly, instances of this application of reiteration as a predicational discourse strategy are observed in the following extracts [19-26]:
Extract [19]: He was welling up with a surge of recognition and waited to say; over and over, that he loved her. (HOAYS: p.296)
Extract [20]: They waited and waited and finally got up when they heard the revving of a car and rising voices from nearby, ‘My money is gone! My money is gone! (HOAYS: p.311)
Extract [21]: The news was broadcast over and over, and each time it ended, many of the neighbours joined the voices intoning, To save Biafra for the free world is a task that must be done! (HOAYS: p.339)
Extract [22]: Mama Adanna grasped Olanna. ‘Thank you, thank you, thank you…
(HOAYS: p.339)
Extract [23]: …he sat in the living room and talked and talked and everybody listened … (HOAYS: p.380)
Extract [24]: ‘Go on and drink’, Olanna said. ‘Drink and drink and don’t stop … (HOAYS: p.381)
Extract [25]: He went over and knocked and knocked. (HOAYS: p.383)
Extract [26]: She heard herself crying, her sobbing louder and louder until Baby stirred
… (HOAYS: p.392).
UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN
The reiterated lexical items in Extracts 19-26 are: ‘over and over’ [19], ‘waited and waited’, [20] ‘over and over’, [21] ‘thank you, thank you, thank you’, [22] ‘talked and talked’ [23] ‘drink and drink’, [24] ‘knocked and knocked’[25], and ‘louder and louder’ [26], which foregrounds Adichie’s actions that explicate the traits of the character in question, or the effect of the action. In all the instances, the descriptive verbs co-occur in a sequence to possibly foreground the occurrence of the action performed by the subject.
In AMERiCANAH, written in 2013, Adichie has again employed reiteration of lexical items to enhance textual cohesion and in some cases; these repetitions amplify social solidarity as she recreates the various episodes of social realities in the novel. Like in sequences of occurrence of these reiterated items illustrated in Extracts [16] to [26]
which are drawn from PH and HOAYS, the reiterated lexical words, in AH, aside from creating textual cohesion, are also used as pivots to foreground predicational and intensification and mitigation discourse strategies. The following Extract [27]
demonstrates this feature observed in the textual cohesive situation in the narration.
Extract [27]: [i] Princeton, in the summer, smelled of nothing, and although Ifemelu liked the tranquil greenness of many trees, the clean streets and stately homes, the delicately overpriced shops and the quiet, abiding air of earned grace, it was this lack of a smell, that most appealed to her, perhaps because the other American cities she knew well had all smelled distinctly. [ii]
Philadelphia had the musty scent of history. [iii] New Haven smelled of neglect. [iv] Baltimore smelled of brine, and Brooklyn of sun-warmed garbage. [v] But Princeton had no smell. [vi] She liked taking deep breaths here. [vii] She liked watching the locals who drove with pointed courtesy and parked their latest-model cars outside the organic grocery store on Nassau Street or outside the sushi restaurants or outside the ice cream shop that had fifty different flavours including red pepper or outside the post office where effusive staff bounded out to greet them at the entrance. [vii]
She liked the campus, grave with knowledge, the Gothic buildings with their vine-laced walls, and the way everything transformed, in the half-light of night, into a ghostly scene. [viii] She liked, most of all, that in this place of affluent ease, she could pretend to be someone else, someone specially admitted into a hallowed American club, someone adorned with certainty … [ix] but she did not like (AH: p.3)
In extract [27], ‘liked’ which is found in the first sentence [i] is homophorically reiterated in [vi], [vii], [viii], and [ix] sentences as an intensification discursive strategy. In the first instance of its use in sentence [i], it is preceded by a proper noun ‘...Ifemelu’, and in its subsequent reiteration, it is followed by the pronominal ‘she’ (she liked…), which ties
UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN
with ‘Ifemelu’; its anaphoric referential element. Similarly, on the one hand, the lexical item: ‘smelled’ found in the second clause in sentence [i] is reiterated in the twelfth clause in sentence. The sense with which ‘smell’ is used in the novel coheres with its super-ordinates ‘musty scent’, ‘brine’, ‘sun-warmed garbage’, and to some extent
‘neglect’. On the other hand, ‘smell’ and ‘scent’ are near synonyms. Furthermore, the super-ordinate ‘shops’ in ‘overpriced shops’ found in the fifth clause of the first sentence [i] is reiterated in sentence [vi] by means of anaphoric reference in ‘organic grocery store’, ‘sushi restaurants’ and ‘ice cream shop’. The reiterative use of these lexical items illuminates predicational discourse strategy; the items are mentioned then subsequently described in their reiterative appearance.
In a similar reiterative situation, the lexical item, ‘campus’, found in the first clause of the seventh sentence [vii] is reiterated in ‘…the Gothic buildings…’ as an anaphoric reference cited in the third clause of the same sentence [vii]. The sense relation expressed in ‘quiet’ reiterates ‘tranquil greenness’; these elements have all co-occurred in the seventh sentence [vii]. In the same way, ‘…in this place of affluent ease…’, found in sentence [viii], reiterates, in anaphorically referential relation, ‘stately homes’ which is situated in sentence [i] above just like ‘… the American cities’ in sentence [i] is being reiterated in ‘Philadelphia’ sentence [ii], ‘New Haven’ sentence [iii], ‘Baltimore’, which co-occurs with ‘Brooklyn’ in sentence [iv]. This reiterative situation to some extent is a perspectivational discourse strategy deployed so as to harness the character’s perspective and amplify as to why Ifemelu liked Princeton, and prefer this city to other American cities.
It is interesting to note that these reiterative lexical patterning’s have added new dimensions to novels’ semantic properties, and serve as constituents that build up an increasing complex context; since every new word, even if it is essentially repeating or paraphrasing the semantic properties of an earlier one, brings with it its own connotations and history of occurrence. Apparently, the reiteration of ‘she liked’ which appears in sentence [iv] in Extract 27, seems not only to foreground an introduction of a contrastive piece of information but coheres with ‘but she did not like…’ which occurs in sentence [ix]; to signal a parallel sequence of events and at the same time the speaker’s views about such an incident in the narration.
Furthermore, the reiterative episodes which occur in AH, apart from enhancing textual cohesion, foregrounds salient intensification and or mitigation discourse strategy
UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN
which radiates social solidarity in the structures. The following extract [28], below demonstrates this use.
Extract [28]: [i] The platform was crowded with black people, many of them fat, in short, flimsy clothes. [ii] It still startled her, what a difference a few minutes of train travel made. [iii] During her first year in America…she was struck by how mostly slim white people got off at the stops in Manhattan and, as the train went further into Brooklyn, the people left were mostly black and fat. [iv] She had not thought of them as ‘fat’, though. [v] She has thought of them as ‘big’, because one of the first things her friend Ginika told her was that ‘fat’ in America was a bad word, heaving with moral judgement like ‘stupid’ or ‘bastard’ and not a mere description like ‘short’ or ‘tall’.
[vi] So she had banished ‘fat’ from her vocabulary. [vii] But ‘fat’ came back to her last winter, after almost thirteen years, when a man in line behind her at the supermarket muttered, ‘Fat people don’t need to be eating that shit,’ as she paid for her giant bag of Tostitos. [viii] She glanced at him, surprised, mildly offended … how this stranger had decided she was fat. [ix] She would file the post under the tag ‘race, gender and body size’. [x] But back home, as she stood and faced the mirrors truth, she realized that she had ignored, for too long, the new tightness of her clothes, the rubbing together of her inner thighs, the softer, rounder parts of her that shook when she moved. [xi] She was fat.
[xii] She said the word ‘fat’ slowly, funnelling it back and forward, and thought about all the other things she had learned not to say aloud in America. [xiii]She was fat. [xiv] She was not curvy or big-boned; she was fat … (AH: p.5-6)
In Extract [28], the lexical item, ‘fat’, which occurs in the second clause of the first sentence [i] is subsequently reiterated once, in sentences [iv], [v], [vi], [viii], [xi], [xii], [xiii], [xiv] and twice in [vii]. As a discourse strategy, the reiteration of the lexical item:
‘fat’, foregrounds it with all semantic nuances in the context. One of such semantic relations that suggest an instance of mitigation discourse strategy is the insertion of
‘slim’; which occurs in sentence [iii]: ‘…she was struck by how mostly slim white people…’, has an antonymic relation that sets off the foregrounded effects of the reiterated ‘fat’ in the structure. Similarly, ‘slim white people’ reiterates antonymic significations with ‘black and fat’ which co-occur in sentence [iii] and resonates in ‘race, gender and body size’; one of the proposed title of Ifemelu’s blog. Consequently, the entire clauses in sentence [x]: ‘…the new tightness of her clothes…’, ‘…the rubbing together of her inner thighs…’ and ‘…the softer, rounder parts of her that shook when she moved’; reiterate the fact that ‘she was fat…’ This is a perfect way of strategising perspectives which ardently facilitates harnessing of social solidarity. With the reiterative
UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN
use of adjectives to describe ‘the black’ and ‘the white people’, Adichie explicitly earmarks Ifemelu’s preference and anchoring of ‘self’ as a member of the black race and implicitly detaches her from the whites.
The foregrounding effect with which reiteration is employed in Extract [28] is also replicated in the following Extract [29]:
Extract [29]: [i] That first summer was Ifemelu’ summer of waiting the real America, she felt, was just around the next corner she would turn. [ii] Even the days, sliding one into the other, languorous and limpid, the sun lingering until very late, seemed to be waiting. [iii] There was a stripped-down quality to her life, a kindling starkness, without parents and friends and home, the familiar landmarks that made her who she was. [iv] And so she waited … (AH: p.111)
The lexical item ‘waiting’ in the first sentence [i] which is the focus of analysis in this Extract [29] is reiterated in sentence [ii] and its appearance in sentence [iv]: ‘And so she waited…’; clearly demonstrates the foregrounding effects of its repeated occurrence in sentence [ii] and cast more light on the third sentence [iii]: ‘There was a striped-down quality to her life, a kindling starkness, without parents and friends and home, the familiar landmarks that made her who she was’. This in effect is a discourse strategy that demonstrates nostalgic feeling; a longing for one’s home, parents and friends, ‘and so she waited!’ to return home, a mitigation display of solidarity.
And like in PH and HOAYS, there are instances of reiteration of the verbal group and sometimes even the adjectives which usually co-occur in a sequence that foregrounds the nature of the occurrence of the actions in AH. This could also be likened to a stylistic characteristic feature of the influence of Nigerian languages on the use of English language by Adichie’s characters. Apparently, there are expressions like: ‘talked and talked’ (AH: p.58), ‘trouble … glamorous trouble’ (AH: p.54), ‘run and run’ (AH:
p.130), ‘not clearly enough … never enough’ (AH: p.131), ‘knocked and knocked’ (AH:
p.157), ‘they beat, beat, beat him’ (AH: p.187); which are some of the instances in which the verb used is repeatedly used in a sequence. On the other hand, reiterative expressions such as: ‘the world was big, big place’ (AH: p. 154), she was tiny, so insignificant’ (AH:
p.154), and ‘Sharp Guy’… ‘Sharp man’ (AH: p.246), ‘stolen goods! stolen goods’ (AH:
p.370, 371), ‘chummy, chummy hug’ (AH: p.427) demonstrate double use of adjectives in a reiterative relation which is the characteristic of the influence of Nigerian Languages