Vestergaard and Schrøder (1985)

Vestergaard and Schrøder (1985) not only introduced the basic concepts about advertising but also some popular devices adopted in daily advertisements. We only focus our discussion on the linguistic devices, which will be presented as follows.

2.5.5.1 Presupposition and expectation

Not all information is explicitly conveyed through advertisements. Instead, some can be implicitly expressed and then legitimately deduced from what is actually said.

32

These linguistic devices include entailment, presupposition, and expectation (Vestergaard and Schrøder 1985: 24).

Presupposition is a proposition which should be true to make the other proposition meaningful. One example commonly taken in the literature is the sentence

“When did you stop beating your wife”, which presupposes that “there was a time when you were in the habit of beating your wife”. This kind of linguistic strategy is also common in ads. Consider the following two examples, in which (a) presupposes (b).

(25a) Which of these continental quilt patterns will suit your bedroom best?

(Reader’s Digest, September 1977) (25b) One of these continental quilt pattern will suit your bedroom.

(26a) Why more and more men are turning to Flora? (Reader’s Digest, April 1977) (26b) More and more men are turning to Flora.

The other linguistic strategy conveying information implicitly is expectations, which is supported by the fact that addressees believe that there must be a reason for advertisers to say something. One type of examples for expectations is negative comparative sentences as follows.

(27) Beauty wise, value wise, you can’t buy better than Rimmel.

(She, October 1977) This sentence expects the following one:

(28) Rimmel is the best you can buy.

However, what is expected may not be the real case. The above sentence actually only asserts that “Rimmel is as good as anything else you can buy”. There are still many cases of expectations in which the advertisers claim that their products are free of some negative characteristics. In such cases, the expectation that other competing

products must have these unpleasant features is easily built up by consumers. One example is illustrated below.

(29) [X] is the light moisturizing cream. It’s not greasy or sticky.

(Cosmopolitan, July 1977)

Since there must be some reasons for the advertisers to lay emphasis on the characteristics of not being greasy or sticky, the viewers will have inclination to make an inference that it is common for other moisturizing cream to be greasy or sticky.

Such expectations may be cancelled by careful logical reasoning.

2.5.5.2 Metaphor and metonymy

Although the relationship between the linguistic form and its corresponding meaning is said to be arbitrary, in rhetoric both metaphor and metonymy do have iconic relationship with their references to a certain extent. In cases of metaphor, which is extremely common in advertising language, a word is replaced by another word which is similar to it semantically. An example illustrated in Vestergaard and Schrøder’s book is Esso’s campaign, which includes “put a tiger in your tank”. The word tiger here metaphorically refers to strength, one of the desirable characteristics of Esso petrol. Metonymy is another linguistic device in which the form bears relationship to what it actually means. In British ads, Whitehall is used to connote

“British government” since there is a part-whole relationship between them.

2.5.5.3 Connotation and denotation

Vestergaard and Schrøder (1985: 43) defined denotation as the information which can be read out without taking into consideration cultural conventions or other factors. Connotation, on the other hand, is what one can perceive from a message

34

depending on his or her cultural background or personal experiences. Thus, the connotations evoked by a text may vary among individuals. Leech (1966: 154) found that the most frequent word for the process of gaining a product is “get” but not “buy”

since the latter has negative connotations such as losing money, which is not connoted by “get”.

2.5.5.4 Synonym

The ultimate goal of ads is to persuade customers to take the action of purchasing.

Imperative sentences are found to be the most direct pattern to advise the costumers buy something. However, it is also crucial for advertisers not to be too imposing or aggressive while promoting their products. Therefore, a number of patterns which are more indirect and less imposing are also employed to persuade consumers into taking actions. Vestergaard and Schrøder’s (1985) definition of synonyms is broader than the traditional one: In addition to different words, all linguistic patterns used to denote the same meaning can be called “synonyms”. They pointed out that there are several obvious synonyms for “buy”, including “try”, “ask for”, “take”, “get”, etc.. Other patterns, when inserted into the contexts, appear to be similar to “buy”, such as “make X your toothpaste”, “introduce X to your family”, “let X solve your problems”, and so on. Still others are indirect ways of calling into actions. Examples are sentences in which imperative sentences are replaced by other constructions like declarative or interrogative ones. The strongest pattern among these alternative constructions, is negated interrogative sentence such as “Isn’t it time you came back to X?”. Another alternative pattern which is a little weaker is “why not question” such as “why not change to X?” An even softer synonym for imperatives is declarative sentences in which the addressee “you” is left unexpressed. Only the worthiness and advantages of the products are mentioned in the ads. In the following example, a declarative

sentence is read as a piece of advice.

(30) For those who agree that additives are best left out, there’s JOHNSON’s Baby Shampoo.

(Cosmopolitan, July 1977)

By only mentioning the positive features of the products instead of advising consumers buy it, the above ad is not as obtrusive and direct as imperative sentences.

Other synonyms for imperative sentences include the use of modal verbs like can and will, as shown below. Notice that the modal should is avoid to make the claim softer and both of them are equivalent to direct speech act of “buy something”.

(31) You can use it at the table as well as in your cooking. (She, August 1977) (32) You’ll find [X] on all good cosmetic counters. (Cosmopolitan, July 1977)