Macrostructural and microstructural stylistic figures based on legal vocabulary describing the form and content of social relations as a means of expressing the author's irony in the third volume of M. Proust's novel "In Search of Lost Time" ("la recherche du temps perdu") "At Guermantes" ("Le Côté de Guermantes")

Savina Elena PhD in Philology Associate Professor, the department of Foreign Languages, the faculty of Law, M. V. Lomonosov Moscow State University 119991, Russia, g. Moscow, GSP-1, Leninskie Gory, 1, stroenie 13 (4-i uchebnyi korpus), aud. 503 A savinaelena2006@yandex.ru Other publications by this author

The article analyzes microstructural (metaphor and figurative comparison) and macrostructural (allusion) stylistic figures, including legal vocabulary, through which the author ironically describes both the essence and the form of social relations, primarily between representatives of the aristocracy and the bourgeoisie. Legal terms from the field of criminal procedure, as well as administrative, constitutional, criminal, civil and commercial law used as a figurative part of these figures were selected as the object of the study. Traditionally, terms are divided into commonly used, i.e. used in everyday life; terms used in many branches of knowledge, not only in jurisprudence, but, say, also in logic, and special legal terms that indicate phenomena peculiar to law. In this work we use the methods of lexical, semantic and stylistic analysis. For the analysis of stylistic figures, we turn to the classification of J. Molyneux, who divides them into macrostructural (not having any pronounced features; not always noticeable in the text and may not be understood: in our case, this is an allusion to the situation from constitutional law) and microstructural (immediately noticeable in the text; used to create them vocabulary cannot be replaced by another; they are understood unambiguously; in our case, these are metaphors and figurative comparisons). Through the use of these figures, the author's irony is expressed at all levels: both when describing the social relations of aristocrats and bourgeois among their own kind, and when they interact with each other. In the contexts under consideration, the "sublime" vocabulary also sometimes coexists with the vocabulary of a more "low" style, which allows you to create a contrast between how certain social relations are seen by the characters and what they really are.

Currently, legal terms are usually understood as "verbal designations of concepts used in the presentation of the content of a law (other normative legal act)." Traditionally, there are three types of terms: "commonly used, i.e., terms in the generally accepted, well-known sense; specially technical, i.e. having a meaning that is accepted in the field of special knowledge – technology, medicine, economics, biology; specially legal, i.e. having a special legal meaning expressing the uniqueness of one or another legal concept". At the same time, the fact is particularly emphasized that "special legal terminology cannot be limited to a set of particularly complex legal expressions and words" ^{[1, p. 213]}. A similar point of view is shared by the French lawyer J. Cornu, the author of a fundamental monograph on French legal linguistics, who defines French legal vocabulary as "all terms of the French language that receive one or more meanings in law" ("Le vocabulaire judique fran?ais est l'ensemble des termes de la langue fran?aise qui re?oivent du droit un ou plusieurs sens"). The researcher also draws attention to the fact that the legal vocabulary is not limited only to terms that have exclusively legal meaning, but also includes all the words that the law uses in a special sense peculiar to it, and it also includes all polysemous words that have at least one meaning in the general literary language and one meaning in the language of law; at the same time, there are many more such words than terms that have exclusively legal meaning ("Il appara?t d'embl?e que le vocabulary juridique ne se limite pas aux seuls termes d'apparenance juridique exclusive. Il s’?tend ? tous les mots que le droit emploie dans une acception qui lui est propre. Il englobe tous les termes qui, ayant au moins un sens dans l’usage ordinaire et au moins un sens diff?rent au regard du droit, sont marqu?s par la polys?mie, plus pr?cis?ment par cette polys?mie que l’on pourrait nommer externe (en raison du chevauchement des sens d’un m?me mot dans le droit et en dehors du droit, par opposition ? la polys?mie interne). Ces termes de double appartenance sont beaucoup plus nombreux que les termes d'apparenance judique exclusive." ^{[4, p. 14]}. For us, these provisions are of fundamental importance, because we will analyze the features of the stylistic functioning of legal vocabulary in a literary text, namely in the third volume of a novel by M. Proust, an author whose prose, at first glance, is far from legal issues and is not associated with legal terminology.

A large number of works are devoted to M. Proust's biography, his novel, views on art and aesthetic principles, the relationship of the real and imaginary world in his concept, evil and sadism ^{[3, 8, 9, 10, 13, 14, 15]}. At the same time, it is also impossible not to take into account some special aspects that have influenced the writer's life, creativity and perception of the world as a whole, for example, the role of illness, treatment and doctors in his life ^[2]. In our opinion, the same aspects include law, which the writer studied for three years at the Law Faculty of the Sorbonne. We will turn further to stylistic figures, first of all to comparisons and metaphors, but not only, which include legal vocabulary related to various areas of law, and consider how M. Proust uses them to describe a variety of social relations, primarily among the aristocracy and the bourgeoisie.

Numerous works are devoted to individual problems related to stylistic figures: repetition ^[6], the use of metaphor in cinema ^[7], their functions in various fields of communication ^[5]. We will stick to the definition of the figure given by J. Molyneux as a situation when a meaning appears in speech that is different from the meaning resulting from a simple lexico-semantic combination of elements ("Nous posons: il y a figure quand, dans un segment de discours, l'effet de sens produit ne se r ? duit pas ? celui qui r ? sulte du simple arrangement lexico-syntaxique." (italics by J. Molyneux) ^{[12, p. 82]} and its division of figures into microstructural and macrostructural, which differ from each other in that microstructural figures are immediately noticeable in speech, mandatory for understanding the meaning of the text, and they can be distinguished based on specific formal elements that cannot be replaced with others (metaphor, comparison, syllepsis). Macrostructural figures are less obvious, are not necessary for understanding the meaning (and even sometimes they themselves may not be understood); it is either impossible to distinguish their formal elements in the text, or they can be arbitrarily replaced with others (allegory, allusion, irony) ^{[11, p. 218]}. (See also ^{[12, pp. 84-85]}: «La figure macrostructurale n’appara?t pas a priori ? la r?ception; ne s’impose pas pour qu’un sens soit imm?diatement acceptable; n’est pas isolable sur des ?l?ments formels, ou ceux-ci sont modifiables. La figure microstructurale se signale de soi, est obligatoire pour l’acceptabilit? s?mantique, est isolable sur des ?l?ments formels qui sont inchangeables.»). In our case, we will talk about one macrostructural figure (allusion) and microstructural figures, metaphor and figurative comparison, which we, following J. Molyneux, will not share, since the difference between them is often exclusively formal and is based only on the presence or absence of the comparative union comme or other synonymous bundles ^{[11, p. 213-214]}.

We will further classify the terms we have identified depending on the branches of law to which they relate (administrative, criminal, constitutional, civil and commercial, as well as legal terms from the field of criminal procedure). To study our material, we will apply the methods of lexical, semantic, stylistic and contextual analysis. To clarify the semantics of legal terms, we will turn to the dictionaries of the French language, both general vocabulary and special legal ones.

1. A term from the field of administrative law

Mairie "city hall"

The noun "mairie" is defined in J. Cornu's Legal Dictionary as "b?timent dans lequel se tiennent normalement les s?ances du conseil municipal et o? sont install?s les bureaux du maire et de l'administration communale" ^{[18, p. 634]}. In M. Proust 's novel , this term is ironically used as part of a figurative comparison in the following context:

<...> Suivant une habitude qui ?tait ? la mode ? ce moment-l?, ils pos?rent leurs hauts de forme par terre, pr?s d’eux. L’historien de la Fronde pensa qu’ils ?taient g?n?s comme un paysan entrant ? la mairie et ne sachant que faire de son chapeau. Croyant devoir venir charitablement en aide ? la gaucherie et ? la timidit? qu'il leur supposait: "Non, non, leur dit-il, ne les posez pas par terre, vous allez les ab?mer." ^{[16, pp. 203-204]}.

In this example, we are talking about coming to a reception organized by Madame de Villeparisis, to which Marcel and a historian specializing in the history of the Fronde, a group of aristocrats, are invited, among others. In the figurative part of the comparison under consideration, the peasant is contrasted with representatives of administrative services by his ignorance of the habits of this environment. By comparing representatives of the highest aristocracy with ordinary peasants, in the historian's view, the author expresses his irony towards this character, since he believes that they are not aware of certain manners, while he himself does not really know that it is the manners they demonstrated that are currently in use among aristocrats. The author's irony is expressed, in addition to the above-mentioned comparison, through the use of such vocabulary indicating alleged timidity or awkwardness and embarrassment, as the expressions e tre g e n e, the nouns la gaucherie and la timidit, which function in this passage in combination with the verbs croire and supposer, which clearly indicate the historian's error, which unequivocally contradicts the explanation given earlier by the author is "suivant une habitude qui ?tait ? la mode ? ce moment-l?". This context is also ironic due to the fact that the historian specializes in the Fronde, which means that he must be aware of the manners and habits of aristocrats.

2. Terms from the field of criminal procedure

Proc?s Zola "the Zola trial in the Dreyfus case"

The noun "proc?s" in the legal meaning of "process, trial, case" is defined in the dictionary "Le Nouveau Petit Robert" as "litige soumis, par les parties, ? une jurisprudence" ^{[19, p. 1785]}. Bloch's presence at the Zola trial (initiated by the military against the writer for libel after his publications) is compared to passing a difficult exam:

<...> Bloch avait pu, gr?ce ? un avocat nationaliste qu’il connaissait, entrer ? plusieurs audiences du proc?s Zola. Il arrivait l? le matin, pour n’en sortir que le soir, avec provision de sandwiches et une bouteille de caf?, comme au concours g?n?ral ou aux compositions de baccalaur?at, et ce changement d’habitudes r?veillant l’?r?thisme nerveux que le caf? et les ?motions du proc?s portaient ? son comble, il sortait de l? tellement amoureux de tout ce qui s’y ?tait pass? que, le soir, rentr? chez lui, il voulait se replonger dans le beau songe et courait retrouver dans un restaurant fr?quent? par les deux partis des camarades avec qui il reparlait sans fin de ce qui s’?tait pass? dans la journ?e et r?parait par un souper command? sur un ton imp?rieux qui lui donnait l’illusion du pouvoir, le je?ne et les fatigues d’une journ?e commenc?e si t?t et o? on n’avait pas d?jeun?. L'homme jouant perp?tuellement entre les deux plans de l'exp?rience et de l'imagination voudrait approfondir la vie id?ale des gens qu'il conna?t et conna?tre les ?tres dont il a eu ? imaginer la vie. <...> ^{[16, p. 225]}.

In this case, Bloch's presence at the Zola trial in the Dreyfus case is compared with the bachelor's degree exam and with the general competition of French high school students. This comparison, on the one hand, is extremely specific (the text mentions sandwiches and coffee that Bloch took with him to court sessions, because he attended them all day, and, obviously, his experiences during this process were as painful as when passing the exam by graduates and their participation in a school competition); on the other hand, thanks to him, an important contrast is introduced for M. Proust between the real and the ideal, imaginary, world, because at the end of the day, despite fatigue and hunger, Bloch can meet with his like-minded people in a cafe and enjoy a sense of solidarity.

Juger "to consider in court, to bring to trial, to judge", le jugement "verdict", juger par contumace "to consider the case in absentia"

The verb juger, the noun jugement derived from it, and the expression juger par contumace have the first legal meaning, referring primarily to the field of criminal procedure ^[20]. The first two lexemes also have a derivative meaning in the general literary language, "to make a judgment" and "judgment", respectively. The second expression can also be used metaphorically, for example, to describe a heavenly judgment (see the example from Chateaubriand in the dictionary "Tr?sor de la langue fran?aise": "M. de Talleyrand, appel? de longue date au tribunal d'en haut, ?tait contumax" ^[20]). In M. Proust 's text , the three words above are ironically used in relation to the caretaker of a street toilet:

« <...> Comme j’ai des clients tr?s aimables, toujours l’un ou l’autre veut m’apporter une petite branche de beau lilas, de jasmin, ou des roses, ma fleur pr?f?r?e.»

L’id?e que nous ?tions peut-?tre mal jug?s par cette dame en ne lui apportant jamais ni lilas, ni belles roses, me fit rougir, et pour t?cher d’?chapper physiquement – ou de n’?tre jug? par elle que par contumace – ? un mauvais jugement, je m’avan?ai vers la porte de sortie. Mais ce ne sont pas toujours dans la vie les personnes qui apportent les belles roses pour qui on est le plus aimable, car la «marquise», croyant que je m’ennuyais, s’adressa ? moi:

"Vous ne voulez pas que je vous offre une petite cabine?" ^{[16, p. 300]}.

In the case under consideration, the described object – the stall of the outdoor toilet on the Champs–Elysees, where Marcel and his grandmother often went during walks, and his caretaker - are ironically described by means of "sublime" vocabulary. So, the flowers that, according to the woman, are given to her by some visitors (lilac, jasmine, roses) with their fragrance contrast with the smell that is associated with the described object. The lady herself is designated by the word "marquise" - according to Marcel's grandmother, before the revolution she was a noblewoman. Legal vocabulary is also used to create this contrast, because Marcel is afraid of the "verdict" of the caretaker, because they never gave her flowers.

Juge d'instruction "investigating judge"

The noun juge d'instruction is defined in the Legal Dictionary of J. Cornu as "magistrat du tribunal de grande instance, d?sign? par d?cret pour trois ans, dont la mission est de rechercher, dans le cadre d'une information p?nale ouverte ? la demande du Parquet ou de la victime, s'il existe contre un inculp? des charges suffisantes pour que celui-ci soit traduit devant une jurisprudence de jugement; parfois nomm? juge informateur" ^{[18, p. 585]}. In M. Proust's novel, this expression is used as part of the figurative part of the comparison, when ironically describes the behavior of a relative of Marcel's grandmother, a clergyman who came to her during her agony to say goodbye and pray for her soul before death.:

<...> Il fut tacitement convenu que je n’avais pas remarqu? qu’il m’?piait. Chez le pr?tre comme chez l’ali?niste, il y a toujours quelque chose du juge d’instruction. D’ailleurs quel est l’ami, si cher soit-il, dans le pass?, commun avec le n?tre, de qui il n’y ait pas de ces minutes dont nous ne trouvions plus commode de nous persuader qu’il a d? les oublier? ^{[16, p. 329]}.

In the context under consideration, a grieving and constantly praying priest at the bedside of a dying woman, nevertheless, stealthily watches Marcel to understand how sad he is. In this passage, a cult minister and a psychiatrist are compared on the grounds that both, each in their own way, are trying to heal the human soul. It is also pointed out that both the clergyman and the psychiatrist have some common features with the investigating judge. Here we are also talking about a metaphor, because a psychiatrist is entrusted, in fact, with two main tasks: to alleviate the suffering of mentally ill people as much as possible, on the one hand (and from this point of view he is close to a priest), and to ensure the observance of public order, on the other (from this point of view he performs the same functions like the investigating judge). Just as the investigating judge in the investigation of criminal cases on behalf of the prosecutor's office must reveal the truth, so here the minister of worship, fulfilling his duty towards a dying relative, simultaneously examines and judges the soul of Marcel.

3. Allusion and comparison from the field of constitutional law

An allusion, according to J. Molyneux's classification, is a macrostructural figure, which consists in the fact that a word has both a literal meaning in a phrase and refers to another situation from the field of culture ("Elle consiste en ce que, dans un segment de discours s'?tendant en g?n?ral sur plusieurs phrases, un terme a un sens ? l'?gard d'un autre terme de la phrase, et un sens diff?rent par rapport ? la situation d'?nonciation ou ? l'univers de culture...") ^{[11, p. 44]}. As can be understood from this definition, the figure in question is based on a certain general cultural context, implicitly present in the representation of both the speaker and the addressee. M. Proust resorts to this figure in the following context:

<...> «Enfin en tout cas, personnellement, on sait que je pense tout le contraire de mon cousin Gilbert. Je ne suis pas un f?odal comme lui, je me prom?nerais avec un n?gre s’il ?tait de mes amis, et je me soucierais de l’opinion du tiers et du quart comme de l’an quarante, mais enfin tout de m?me vous m’avouerez que, quand on s’appelle Saint-Loup, on ne s’amuse pas ? prendre le contrepied des id?es de tout le monde qui a plus d’esprit que Voltaire et m?me que mon neveu. Et surtout on ne se livre pas ? ce que j'appellerai ces acrobaties de sensibilit? huit jours avant de se pr?senter au Cercle! <...> ^{[16, p. 229]}.

In the passage in question, we are talking about the Duke of Guermantes' indignation at the fact that his nephew contacted an actress of Jewish origin, Rachel, who set him up in favor of Dreyfus, while opposing views prevailed in the aristocratic environment. This allusion refers to the speech of the French politician Talleyrand, who defended the freedom of the press in the Chamber of Peers on July 24, 1821 with the following speech: "Il y a quelqu'un qui a plus d'esprit que Voltaire, [...] c'est tout le monde" ^{[16, p. 692]}. In this passage, the Duke of Guermantes ironically plays off the above phrase (because Talleyrand, being an aristocrat by birth, utters it in the upper house of parliament, in which aristocrats also sat, being a liberal oppositionist towards them). The Duke of Guermantes, on the contrary, says that the ancient aristocratic surname imposes certain obligations on the person bearing it, and his behavior must comply with certain norms that society expects from him. Thus, this allusion, being placed in the opposite communicative context, indicates the Duke's conservative views and his skeptical attitude towards democratic values.

Pr ? sident de la R ? publique "President of the Republic", pr ? sident du Conseil "President of the Council of Ministers"

In the following context, the narrator ironically says that in Bloch's view, an unambiguous and indisputable political truth, despite the fact that some enlightened people can comprehend it, is mostly contained in the secret materials of the President of France and the Chairman of the Council of Ministers, who then acquaint ministers with it:

<...> Certes, Bloch pensait que la v?rit? politique peut ?tre approximativement restitu?e par les cerveaux les plus lucides, mais il s’imaginait, tout comme le gros du public, qu’elle habite toujours, indiscutable et mat?rielle, le dossier secret du pr?sident de la R?publique et du pr?sident du Conseil, lesquels en donnent connaissance aux ministres. Or, m?me quand la v?rit? politique comporte des documents, il est rare que ceux-ci aient plus que la valeur d’un clich? radioscopique o? le vulgaire croit que la maladie du patient s’inscrit en toutes lettres, tandis qu’en fait, ce clich? fournit un simple ?l?ment d’appr?ciation qui se joindra ? beaucoup d’autres sur lesquels s’appliquera le raisonnement du m?decin et d’o? il tirera son diagnostic. Aussi la v?rit? politique, quand on se rapproche des hommes renseign?s et qu'on croit l'atteindre, se d?robe. <...> ^{[16, p. 232]}.

In this example, a comparison from the field of medicine is also involved. Rare official documents from which political truth could be extracted are compared with an X-ray, and a person who is not connected with politics, who seeks to comprehend it, with a layman in medicine who believes that when a doctor looks at an X-ray, he actually reads what is written on it not visible to everyone in addition to him, in letters, the name of the disease, while in fact this is only one of the details necessary for making a correct diagnosis. These comparisons express the author's irony towards Bloch, because he is trying to understand the position of the Marquis de Norpois on the Dreyfus case and accepts it in advance as a kind of political truth in the last instance, since the retired diplomat is familiar with the ministers who, according to Bloch, own it. In this case, Bloch's ideas about political truth are compared with the ideas of an ignorant person about medicine, who thinks that it is only about knowledge of an unknown language.

4. Vocabulary from the field of criminal law

Marchan d e plein air "street vendor", la Rousse "police"

The expression "marchand en plein air" and the argot "la Rousse", indicating the police, are ironically used by M. Proust as part of a figurative comparison in the following context:

<...> Je n’avais pas os? le saluer, car il ne m’avait fait aucun signe. Or, bien qu'il ne f?t pas tourn? de mon c?t?, j'?tais persuad? qu'il m'avait vu; tandis qu'il d?bitait quelque histoire ? Mme Swann dont flottait jusque sur un genou du baron le magnifique manteau couleur pens?e, les yeux errants de M. de Charlus, pareils ? ceux d'un marchand en plein air qui craint l'arriv?e de la Rousse, avaient certainement explor? chaque partie du salon et d?couvert toutes les personnes qui s'y trouvaient. M. de Ch?tellerault vint lui dire bonjour sans que rien d?cel?t dans le visage de M. de Charlus qu'il e?t aper?u le jeune duc avant le moment o? celui- ci se trouva devant lui. <...> ^{[16, p. 260]}.

In the passage under consideration, Baron de Charlu is compared with a street vendor who fears the appearance of the police, which is in sharp contrast to the fact that even among the representatives of the aristocracy, he turns out to be one of the most difficult to reach. This comparison correlates with a series of similar comparisons, through which the baron is compared with a thief and a crook, on the one hand, and with a policeman performing a secret mission, on the other, in the second volume of the novel. Such habits are connected with the fact that, as the reader will find out later, Baron de Charlu is a homosexual and tries, as far as possible, not to give away this tendency once again at receptions in high society.

Viol "rape"

The noun viol is defined in the Legal Dictionary of J. Cornu as "crime consistent en tout acte de p?n?tration commis sur la personne d'autrui par violence, contrainte, menace ou surprise" ^{[18, p. 1077]}. In M. Proust's novel, Marcel's behavior is compared with attempts to protect himself from rape, who seeks to isolate himself from the inappropriate behavior of the Duke of Guermantes, who came to visit his family during the agony of his grandmother:

<...> J’aurais voulu le cacher n’importe o?. Mais persuad? que rien n’?tait plus essentiel, ne pouvait d’ailleurs la flatter davantage et n’?tait plus indispensable ? maintenir sa r?putation de parfait gentilhomme, il me prit violemment par le bras et malgr? que je me d?fendisse comme contre un viol par des: «Monsieur, Monsieur, Monsieur» r?p?t?s, il m’entra?na vers Maman en me disant: «Voulez-vous me faire le grand honneur de me pr?senter ? madame votre m?re?» en d?raillant un peu sur le mot m?re. Et il trouvait tellement que l'honneur ?tait pour elle qu'il ne pouvait s'emp?cher de sourire tout en faisant une figure de circonstance. ^{[16, p. 327]}.

The concept of rape includes, first of all, such concepts as cruelty and physical force on the part of the aggressor ("il me prit violemment par le bras"), and on the part of the victim – lack of consent ("malgr? que je me d?fendisse par des: "Monsieur, Monsieur, Monsieur" r?p?t?s"), loss of honor, fear, shame ("J'aurais voulu le cacher n'importe o?"), helplessness, humiliation, and, subsequently, psychological trauma. In the case under consideration, due to the above vocabulary, the described scene is really presented as rape. The arrogance of the Duke of Guermantes (who is convinced that even in such a situation, the family should, first of all, appreciate the honor rendered to them) is conveyed by such vocabulary that is not associated with visiting the relatives of a dying person as "flatter", "indispensable ? maintenir sa r?putation de parfait gentilhomme", "l'honneur". It should also be noted that the noun viol also has derived meanings "violation", "penetration", "invasion", "desecration", which are also implicitly implied here, but the actualization of the first, literal meaning gives special expressiveness to this passage.

5. A term from the field of civil law

Fian ? ailles "engagement"

The noun "fian?ailles" is defined in the Legal Dictionary of J. Cornu as "promesse mutuelle de mariage, g?n?ralement entour?e d'un certain c?r?monial (familial ou mondain) qui ne constitution pas un engagement contractuel civilement obligatoire, mais dont la rupture abusive (par ex. intempestive) engage la responsabilit? d?lictuelle de son auteur et qui cr?e une situation parfois dot?e d'effets judiques (ex. le d?c?s accidentel du fianc? ouvre ? la fianc?e un droit ? r?paration contre le tiers responsable; la s?duction par fian?ailles ouvre l'action en recherche de paternit? naturelle, C. civ., a. 340, etc. anc.); ne se confondent pas avec les formalit?s officielles n?cessaires ? la c?l?bration d'un mariage posthume (au sens de l'a. 171 C. civ.)." ^{[18, p. 457]}. M. Proust uses it as part of a figurative comparison in the following context:

<...> Elles avaient d?couvert un artiste qui leur donnait des s?ances d’excellente musique de chambre, dans l’audition de laquelle elles pensaient trouver, mieux qu’au chevet de la malade, un recueillement, une ?l?vation douloureuse, desqules la forme ne laissa pas de para?tre insolite. Mme Sazerat ?crivit ? Maman, mais comme une personne dont les fian?ailles brusquement rompues (la rupture ?tait le dreyfusisme) nous ont ? jamais s?par?s. En revanche Bergotte vint passer tous les jours plusieurs heures avec moi. ^{[16, p. 315]}.

The passage in question deals with the agony of Marcel's grandmother and the indifference shown by her family and friends. Thus, the refusal of her sisters to come to say goodbye with bitter irony is explained both by ideas related to the field of art ("un artiste", "des s?ances d'excellente musique de chambre") and religious, while in fact they do not fulfill their Christian duty to the dying ("un recueillement", "une ?l?vation douloureuse"). The change in Ms. Sazra's relationship with Marcel's family is figuratively compared to the unexpectedly broken preliminary marriage contract (because she supported Dreyfus, and Marcel's family, like most of the bourgeoisie, was opposed to him). The variety of this vocabulary indicates the variety of prepositions that relatives and close friends of the family resorted to in order not to look at the dying woman. It goes on to say that only the philosopher Bergot, in fact an outsider in relation to a dying woman, came to the family in order to support her at such a difficult moment.

6. A term from the field of commercial law

Fournisseur "supplier"

The noun fournisseur is defined in the Legal Dictionary of J. Cornu as "celui qui procure la marchandise ou les services ? celui qui la distribue ou les utilise, dans le contrat de fourniture" ^{[18, p. 478]}. M. Proust uses this legal term as part of a detailed figurative comparison in order to characterize the arrogant attitude of the Duke of Guermantes in relation to one of the most outstanding doctors of his time, Georges Dielafois, ^{[16, p. 706]}, who, according to him, readily responds to a request to come and examine him, while refusing a similar request to other dukes and duchesses, and thereby put him on a par with food suppliers, who were proud of the opportunity to serve their products to the duke's table:

<...> Son conseil du reste ne m’?tonnait pas. Je savais que chez les Guermantes on citait toujours le nom de Dieulafoy (avec un peu plus de respect seulement) comme celui d’un «fournisseur» sans rival. Et la vieille duchesse de Mortemart, n?e Guermantes (il est impossible de comprendre pourquoi d?s qu’il s’agit d’une duchesse on dit presque toujours: «la vieille duchesse de» ou tout au contraire, d’un air fin et Watteau, si elle est jeune, la «petite duchesse de») pr?conisant presque m?caniquement en clignant de l’?il dans les cas graves «Dieulafoy, Dieulafoy» comme si on avait besoin d’un glacier «Poir? Blanche» ou pour des petits fours «Rebattet, Rebattet». Mais j'ignorais que mon p?re venait pr?cis?ment de faire demander Dieulafoy. ^{[16, p. 327]}.

In this example, an outstanding doctor is compared with well-known suppliers of ice cream and cookies ^{[16, p. 706]}. Here the author's irony in relation to the Dukes of Guermantes is expressed in the fact that ice cream and cookies are not necessary for human life and are even, rather, harmful to health, while Georges Dielafois has saved many human lives during his practice and his scientific research in the field of medicine. In this context, the relationship characteristic of supply contracts is emphasized, first of all, between the supplier and the customer. Thanks to such a comparison, M. Proust points out that in the eyes of the Duke of Guermantes, even outstanding scientists and doctors are only "merchants" from whom you can buy the offered goods.

So, in the third volume of M. Proust's novel, the legal vocabulary relating to various branches of law (administrative, constitutional, criminal, civil, commercial, as well as to the field of criminal procedure) is used as part of microstructural (metaphor, figurative comparison) and macrostructural figures (allusion) to describe a variety of both formal and the essential aspects of social relations primarily between representatives of the bourgeoisie and the aristocracy. These figures allow us mainly to express the author's irony when describing such relations: as to the aristocracy (customs incomprehensible to the uninitiated look as inappropriate as the arrival of a peasant at the mayor's office; the Duke of Guermantes completely paraphrases the allusion so that it points to the exact opposite phenomenon; perceives outstanding doctors as suppliers of ice cream and cookies to his table and is compared with a rapist; Palamed, one of the most inaccessible representatives of the aristocracy, is depicted as a street vendor who is afraid of the appearance of the police), and to the bourgeoisie (Marcel compares the opinion of the lady in charge of the toilet stall about them with her grandmother in importance with the jury passing a guilty or acquittal verdict against a suspect in the commission of a crime; Bloch considers notable political figures are the bearers of the truth in the highest instance, which is inaccessible to ordinary mortals; a priest grieving at the bedside of a sick relative simultaneously pronounces a verdict on the "degree of grief" of other relatives; Mrs. Sazra breaks off relations with the Marcel family due to their perception of the Dreyfus case as if they themselves had deceived her expectations by breaking off the engagement). The reference to these figures in the description of social relations allows us to contrast the form of the latter (often existing exclusively in the eyes of the aristocracy) with their real life content. This contrast is also created due to the fact that within the same context, "sublime" vocabulary can coexist with more "lowly", which clearly indicates the gap between what it seems and real life.